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.

 

Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation

Finally, news is leaking out about what Rockefeller, Buffett, Soros, Bloomberg, Turner, Gates, and Oprah were up to two weeks ago:


SOME of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.

They gathered at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, a British Nobel prize biochemist and president of the private Rockefeller University, in Manhattan on May 5. The informal afternoon session was so discreet that some of the billionaires’ aides were told they were at “security briefings”.

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said.

Some details were emerging this weekend, however. The billionaires were each given 15 minutes to present their favourite cause. Over dinner they discussed how they might settle on an “umbrella cause” that could harness their interests.

The issues debated included reforming the supervision of overseas aid spending to setting up rural schools and water systems in developing countries. Taking their cue from Gates they agreed that overpopulation was a priority.

This could result in a challenge to some Third World politicians who believe contraception and female education weaken traditional values.


The last paragraph of the article pretty much sums it up:


Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said.


I'm glad they all agree the "overpopulation problem" needs to be "addressed".





posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
I've stated repeatedly in this forum that overpopulation is the #1 problem facing humans. It's not surprising that the smartest most powerful people are discussing ways to control it. If people aren't willing to consciously change themselves, then the people in charge will do it for you, and it probably won't be pretty.

If the cretins won't stop breeding you have to take drastic measures, we all know thats what this meeting was really about.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I'm interested in the fact that they are citing education and socially progressive avenues for the dissuasion of population growth. While I think that the rich are inherently different than the common man in that they are concerned with how to run the various societies and their interactions, it is comforting to see that there may actually be a plan to globalize the First World Standard Of Living. Which can't be all bad.



At a conference in Long Beach, California, last February, he had made similar points. “Official projections say the world’s population will peak at 9.3 billion [up from 6.6 billion today] but with charitable initiatives, such as better reproductive healthcare, we think we can cap that at 8.3 billion,” Gates said then.


I am very interested in how these numbers were arrived at and what factors were decided to be most relevant...and what happens if the measures taken today do not work.

This topic always makes me uncomfortable...especially since ATS has done a more than adequate job of painting the negative possibilities...



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 





it is comforting to see that there may actually be a plan to globalize the First World Standard Of Living. Which can't be all bad.


not all bad, only to the first world, which has built it's standards on the backs of the third world....



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
I've stated repeatedly in this forum that overpopulation is the #1 problem facing humans. It's not surprising that the smartest most powerful people are discussing ways to control it. If people aren't willing to consciously change themselves, then the people in charge will do it for you, and it probably won't be pretty.

If the cretins won't stop breeding you have to take drastic measures, we all know thats what this meeting was really about.




Good for a laugh, thanks.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
not all bad, only to the first world, which has built it's standards on the backs of the third world....


I understand that...but at least there is concern and attention towards positive and constructive cultivation. It does smack of elitism and social engineering, which demonstrates an obvious dichotomy, but is better than cold indifference...



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
hmmmm....was just wondering how this many powerful people can coordinate a meeting together that is so secret that many of their own aids aren't in on it?

How can they make that happen unless they have some avenue that they reach each other at, and probably meet or communicate regularly, tho perhaps not in such numbers.

Is there a super elite version of facebook or something that you can only sign up to if you have 10 billion dollars?



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
but is better than cold indifference...


I'd take cold indifference than an authoritarian caretaker any day, thank you very much.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 


Exactly! It does make sense, the majority of countries under the replacement percentage for births are countries with high literacy, socialized healthcare and cultures that are not based around the ideas of "go forth and be fertile".

I do agree with these people however that overpopulation is a major issue. We really have two options, control our numbers or expand to other planets. In the end I believe we will do both, however that's a long long time from now.

When I took a look at the countries with the highest birth rates right now though, my heart sank. The top 5 are as follows:

Mali
Niger
Uganda
Somalia
Afghanistan

Now I really don't think that many of us would ever choose to live in any of these countries, but more children are born per woman there than anywhere else on earth. These kids need the kind of education and social programs that are being talked about here if they are ever going to survive. Just because the people making these plans are in a different socio-economic class does not mean they are by default evil, or that their ideas are bad. The rich have hearts too. We should be working together for a better world, not just dismissing ideas.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I also agree overpopulation is something to be concerned about. What I don't agree on is how the elite will do this. From what I hear they plan to murder most of the population (FEMA camps, man made diseases etc).

I don't want children myself, but others breed like rats. No doubt people need to control themselves. A friend of a friend of mine has 9 children. Nine. Just on her own. Our population will continue to grow, doubling it's numbers. It doesn't take a genius to realize what impact it will have on our planet.

I'm not rooting for the NWO. I'll most likely will be killed in the concentration camps refusing to obey TPTB with millions of others. The only reasonable solutions I can think of is simply this;

-Stop people from having children. It's the quickest way apart from murdering everyone.

-Or, control it by only letting 1 out of 3/ 1 out of 5 etc people can have children. And even then only allow them to have 1 child. If you were lucky enough to be chosen to have a child, but you don't want a child you could give your pass to someone else who would.

-Or, release all the technologies being suppressed such as free energy etc to the public. Only then, would we become truly united. We would grow as a more conscious beings and would live amongst the stars where we are destined to be. (HA! as if that would happen).

-Or, World War III. The short straw in my suggestions. It would be the biggest war in history. Many casualties, at the end possibly the implantation of my other suggestions.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidsmoke206
 


...it's probably called a contacts list. I think I also probably know the nefarious and sinister method by which the set up and coordinated this meeting too, the telephone.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
liquidsmoke206 says: “not all bad, only to the first world, which has built it's standards on the backs of the third world.... “

****Built it’s standards on the backs of the third world? This is oft repeated meaningless rhetoric.

Memoryshock says: ““It does smack of elitism and social engineering, “

****When was there Not social engineering?

8 billion is still too many. They have to do better than that.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 


if you think about how much cheap merchandise, and cheap labor we can get from 3rd world countries then it seems to me that our standards owe something to that.


I have no problem with social engineering so long as the engineers I agree with are in charge.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
I have no problem with social engineering so long as the engineers I agree with are in charge.


Well, I'm sure most every ideology in the world aside from strict Libertarians would agree with you on that one. It just so happens that the one with the most resources and support of those with resources is the one that gets to do it.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I thought this might add a bit to the discussion:
upload.wikimedia.org...
That's a pretty strong inverse relationship between fertility and GDP we have going on on our little planet.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
I was blessed to have two children, my youngest now 20. My husband and I made the decision that two was plenty for us and I told my doctor that I wanted a tubal ligation. He argued with me...he said that I was young and that I might change my mind later...I had to defend my decision by telling him that we thought it would be unresponsible to have more than we could afford to take care of...he finally relented and did it...of course if he hadn't I would have gone elsewhere. I never understood people having baby after baby after baby...especially when they had no hope of providing for them!

[edit on 24-5-2009 by Greenize]



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Ian McLean
 


I think there is one VERY ominous part of the article that noone has noticed:


They gathered at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, a British Nobel prize biochemist and president of the private Rockefeller University


Although it doesn't say he was there or involved, I think we can assume he was, and a Nobel Prize winning biochemist would be an expert in say, mass population culling using viral agents, or poisoning of some type-Codex Alimentarius style.

I just think it's odd. But that's just me!



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Over population is such a sham. You could fit all 6.5 billion people in an area the size of Texas. Be it one big subdivision, a small house for each and every person on the planet. If you built two story duplexes we have enough room for 13 billion people. This leaves the entire planet available for resources. It amazes me how so many people buy into what you hear.

People in third world countries are starving because of the governments that oppress them and sell out the resources they do have.

edit to add: this would be a bit of a small house, but if you added say, an area the size of TX, OK, AR, and LA. You would be comfortable. You see a small area in comparison to the world.

[edit on 24-5-2009 by timewalker]



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Great! I am glad they see the problem just as we do. I am waiting for the people to come in and say "who are they to dictate how many children I can have". I am all for depopulation, non-harmful style.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by timewalker
 


so you're saying, maybe we should just not worry about population increases, we should all learn to get along, double our population, and live as one big happy family in a sprawling texas sized condo complex?

You would be an example of the kind of social engineer I would NOT want in charge.




top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join