It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Global War On Women.

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Are women being targeted by vaccination campaigns in an attempt to control the population?

Thats the gist of an article i came across.Its a very interesting read and an equally interesting theory.



....We also know that minimizing a population must target women, not men. Only by reducing the number of females can you reduce the amount of offspring. One man can fertilize thousands of women. One woman can not be fertilized by thousands of men....

In 1972, another commission, The Rockefeller Commission on Population Growth, completed a two years study on population growth, on request of then President Nixon. The commission concluded:

"After two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that, in the long run, no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the Nation's population, rather that the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means would contribute significantly to the Nation's ability to solve its problems. We have looked for, and have not found, any convincing economic argument for continued population growth. The health of our country does not depend on it, nor does the vitality of business nor the welfare of the average person".


Just two years later, in 1974, came the well known Henry Kissinger National Security Study Memorandum 200 about "the consequences of the global population growth for the US security and overseas interests".


The memo states that:

• We have unprecedented growth rates
• Lesser Developed Countries are growing faster
• Required US imports could be threatened
• Risk of global destabilization
• Urgent immediate measures must be taken to reduce fertility.

And the memo recommends these goals:

• Zero rate growth in the developed countries by 1985.
• Zero rate growth in Lesser Developed Countries by 2000....


Concerning the tools, the memo lists:

• Reproductive health (abortion, condoms)
• Sex education
• Improved health
• Women' equality
• Day care
• Government participation
• Improve social security
• Reduce infant mortality....

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...



Further links.
www.popcouncil.org...
video.google.com...
www.population-security.org...
www.population-security.org...




posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   
It's a stealth war on women...

It's all to get them to stop reproducing; the media plays a major role in this. They make having children absolutely horrible, too expensive, too stressful, etc. They would rather have women put their careers first above all else. The feminist movement contributes as well, under the disguise of equality.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I posted this article yesterday.

It very well might show your theory in action.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Ah yeah, and this...

Why go to all this trouble?

Why not change policy and get rid of this abstinence rhetoric?

Encouraging sexual responsibility instead would go billions of miles towards reducing the population if that's indeed what they want.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I don't think they are targeting just women, men are being target too, if not by vaccines by toxins in the food supply and the water. Even something like a bad reference design for laptop cooling fans could have the intention of hurting male fertility (I never actually use a laptop on my lap btw).

It's a global war on humanity by those amongst us who pathologically see themselves as above it.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
You all might be interested to know that XenoEstrogen s are found in plastic and that the modern man's sperm count is lower by half than the man of 20 years ago. Also, some doctor's speculate though can not confirm that these xenoestrogen s are helping along the breast/prostate cancer epidemic. Xenoestrogen's were 'banned' in the use of pesticides, but crop up other not so nice places too. Xenoestrogens mimic the natural occuring hormone, causing a decrease in sperm, more cases of fibroid tumors (which does impare fertility I know I lost my reproductive organs to it) and is blamed for, in part, the rise of breast and prostate cancer--both cancers start off being fed either by estrogen or testosterone, then become refractory to hormones, and feed on other things.
War on women, or not we put things in our bodys that kill us and screw us up. Read Beethoven's hair. The whole reason he died was from lead poisoning, a common ingreadiant in plum wine, and tableware. We never learn from our history do we?



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Zepherian



I don't think they are targeting just women, men are being target too, if not by vaccines by toxins in the food supply and the water.


True.
But as the article says,its easier to target women.




asmeone2



Encouraging sexual responsibility instead would go billions of miles towards reducing the population if that's indeed what they want.


They could never trust us with such a thing.Its all about the power that comes from being in control of billions of lives and believing that they know what is best for the world.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jakyll

The commission concluded:

"After two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that, in the long run, no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the Nation's population, rather that the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means would contribute significantly to the Nation's ability to solve its problems.

I notice that this doesn't even bring the following issue into consideration (even though the "report" from Kissinger only addressed US population growth in the statement): That the US Government has been allowing illegals to cross the border & stay on US soil for about the past 20 years...If they intend to reduce the US population growth, start by getting the illegals out of the US! That should reduce the population growth by a substantial margin!



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nowayreally
 


I Concur.
Since the utilization of a resource based economy is still a ways off, I guess that as long as there is money there will always be competition for it.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Reminds me of the movie Children of Men, maybe that was the after effect of heavy sterilization chemicals being put into medicines, food, water etc.

The sad thing...at this point it would not surprise me.

[edit on 22-10-2008 by SEEWHATUDO]



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   
I think it may be indirect sterilization.

Consider how it's less and less common to conceive a boy.

Over time there simply aren't enough men to go around, and there goes humanity!

Ingenious really.... very hard to lay the blame...



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:16 PM
link   
asmeone2 posted on 22-10-2008 @ 10:01 PM

I think it may be indirect sterilization.

Consider how it's less and less common to conceive a boy.

Over time there simply aren't enough men to go around, and there goes humanity!

Ingenious really.... very hard to lay the blame...



Yes, which is why, when I heard of the 'flu shot' I thought of it more in terms of the whole 'mark of the beast'/'tracking implant issue - not necessarily as a death via flu vac.! Too many people would notice. Why not be indiscreet about our methods, therefore they get under the radar.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:19 PM
link   
uhm, aren't women the ones pushing for the right to not produce? I would feel sorry for my fellow gender except that I think that we have brought this on ourselves (when I say ourselves, I don't mean me
... I love children and would love to have been eve, able to produce and raise as I saw fit).



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma
uhm, aren't women the ones pushing for the right to not produce? I would feel sorry for my fellow gender except that I think that we have brought this on ourselves (when I say ourselves, I don't mean me
... I love children and would love to have been eve, able to produce and raise as I saw fit).


Yeah, on the individual level.. but the average woman isn't saying we have too many people, let's sterilize!

I said a few posts up, it would seem that the best way to reduce the population would be to stop the cr@p about birth control useage.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


I think the best idea to population control would be to let nature run its course. Stop medicines altogether.

I am not saying this lightly either. My life is centered on a drug as is my best friends (his more so than mine).. but we both understand that if these drugs were not around, then nature would take care of itself. We both still likely would have been here actually which is the ironic thing.

Just too much of man's input into nature. Doesn't seem to be working out for us, let alone working out BETTER for us.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I'm not sure what context you mean your life is centered around a drug?

You're presecribed to it?
Selling it?
Addicted to it?

Anyways. Although it might sound callous to say there's somethign to be said for the idea that dieases are natural population checks... which we have mostly subverted, getting us where we are.



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma
...let nature run its course.

Yes! Yes! A voice of reason! Let Nature take its course! Nature has a way to handle overpopulation & we (humanity as a whole, that is) have been violating the Laws of Nature for far too long. Bring the Government back to Constitutionally-imposed limitations & there will be no more of this "NWO agenda" crap shoved down our throats! Unfortunately, the Constitution's only enforcement mechanism lies squarely in the hands of We the People...The nature of government is that it will always seek to extend its boundaries & violate the very laws that keep it in check from too much power.

The Founding Forefathers themselves had the Laws of Nature as Set Forth by the Creator very firmly fixed in their minds when they wrote the Constitution & Bill of Rights...This is clear when you look at the historical documents that led up to the Constitution in the first place: Magna Carta of 1215; Declaration of Independence; The Continental Congress & Articles of Confederation.

These are the very same people who've been violating Nature's Laws all along & manipulate the masses into following suit! They're not "helping" Nature in any way, except as to how they can maintain their "power-grid" through the problems that they themselves cause!

I'd like to apologize in advance to the ATS Owners & Staff...If we ever really do succeed in such a monumental task, we'll be putting you out of business...


[edit on 22-10-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 10:17 AM
link   


Let Nature take its course! Nature has a way to handle overpopulation & we (humanity as a whole, that is) have been violating the Laws of Nature for far too long.


Yep,nature can always take care of itself,it has done for millions of years.
Its amazing how many people do not realize this.






Stop medicines altogether.


I don't think you'd like that if you were in pain on a daily basis,or if you were mentally ill.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


My mother tried to bare sons but she was too acidicky (as she called it). Her body was naturally killing off any chances of having a son. I know that the blame rests not only on the woman. It can be either and/or both.

Wouldn't that be something if their plans failed and no females could produce a son. What then?

PARTY!!!!!!!! Just joking
The world would be far less interesting. I for one would never even want to imagine what it would be like.

I can remember when I was in school, hearing talk about how scientists were trying to come up with the superhuman. Only a select few would be allowed to have children. Everything preplanned. Right down to a 't'. The mother would have to be of a certain health, with certain skills and so would the father - in order to produce an heir who would suit a specific purpose in the world. Anyone else ever hear of that? That would mean the rest of us would be like worker ants only. Unable to reproduce, having families of our own.

But since then it has been discovered that embryos can be grown and nurtured out of the womb, in labs. So then it is possible that reproducing will be carried out this way. Of course sperm and embryos will be needed. Sex may be off limits to avoid any risks if this is the case. So whoever would be selected for this use, will become property of 'whomever' and will not be able to lead a life of their own. They would have to follow a strict diet, health regime and so forth. Not that the rest of us wouldn't become property of whomever - as workers. Because we would. My gosh this is depressing to think such a thing could happen. The only comforting thought I have about this possible scenario is that there would be groups of us hidden sporatically away from these cities building up armies and strength to take on these bleep bleepin bleeps.

~Crawls back into coffee cup. Should have stayed in bed!~



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join