Depopulation plan on Fox News

fairly old video (3+ year old video) that shows not all fox news reporters are for the elites plan, as you will see. the news reporter rips this guy a new rectum for even suggesting that depopulation was any sort of a good idea. the person in the interview tries to make it seem like the issue is on for immigrants though its obvious, and even obvious to the reporter, thats not what hes just talking about.

if its been posted already i apologize.



enjoy.

p.s.: this isnt fear mongering for those of you who dont know the definition of the term

I am all for depopulation, not on racial, religious or ethnic grounds but for political, corporate, criminal and intellectual grounds.
It has been done before and not too long ago and it needs to be done again.

Even if the video is about a "higher" plan for depopulation, I do agree with the point being made about immigration. Its not that we don't have the room for the people, its the fact that we aren't creating ANY jobs and a lot of the jobs we do have (even if Americans won't do them, but that's another subject) are being done by immigrants for a fraction of the cost and its "under the table" which means the neither the employer or employee are paying any taxes. I'm not against letting people in the country but it's getting out of control. If we had jobs for all of them and they weren't receiving free health care when MILLIONS of AMERICANS dont have it, I might be a little less cynical about it.

Idk if it's been posted here or not but I have seen it before.
UN Agenda 21 is all about population and resource control. Scary stuff.
Check out the Georgia Guide Stones if not familar. They suggest a maxium population of half a billion. We are almost at 7 Billion now.

reply to post by TriForce


One of those.... I think you should rephrase, YOU are all for population control IF it is someone else getting population controlled.

Kinda sickening if you think about it.... genocide or infanticide with forced abortions like in China.


See, your view changes quickly if population control starts with YOU and your loved ones.

Line up for the train! Please put your baggage in the other car which will not be moving to your destination.

For those who do not know Thomas Malthus (1766--1834), he was basically the first person to bring the question of overpopulation to the public's attention.

His detractors through the years have pointed out how far off the mark were his calculations on population growth and food distribution and other observations which formed his perspective on this problem.

However if we want to take a broader look at the overpopulation problem, we could do much worse than to start our study with Malthus.

The Reverend[1] Thomas Robert Malthus FRS (14 February 1766 – 29 December 1834)[2] was a British scholar, influential in political economy and demography.[3][4] Malthus popularised the economic theory of rent.[5]

Malthus has become widely known for his theories concerning population and its increase or decrease in response to various factors. The six editions of his An Essay on the Principle of Population, published from 1798 to 1826, observed that sooner or later population gets checked by famine and disease. He wrote in opposition to the popular view in 18th-century Europe that saw society as improving and in principle as perfectible.[6] William Godwin and the Marquis de Condorcet, for example, believed in the possibility of almost limitless improvement of society. So, in a more complex way, did Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose notions centered on the goodness of man and the liberty of citizens bound only by the social contract—a form of popular sovereignty.

If you wish to find out more on Malthus, here is a wiki link.

Thomas Malthus

reply to post by TriForce


I truly hope you are first in the queue - you know just to set an example to others of how much empathy you have toward your fellow man!

Originally posted by TriForce
I am all for depopulation, not on racial, religious or ethnic grounds but for political, corporate, criminal and intellectual grounds.
It has been done before and not too long ago and it needs to be done again.

You're for depopulation on the grounds of political, corporate, criminal, and intellectual (policy or something else)!?!? I can understand the ground that when we are unable to provide for the population that we should ASK for people to be responsible in the sense that they hold back on having children .... but you are basically advocating genocide and what's worse is that you are advocating genocide without the populations consent!

So you must be for eugenics! PLEASE!

I can guarantee you that there is a reasonable and logical view that many would accept if the effects of over-population WAS MADE KNOWN (in the sense of education). And many would voluntarily choose to have less children.

If the truth was made known and money was made available to those who have children just to make ends meet we wouldn't have to take such extreme circumstances!

Genocide makes me sick because I believe that the human species can do better!! There is a better answer!!

SnF for the topic.

Peace,

AS

reply to post by Seekeye2


If i am first in queue then so be it, I wouldnt go down without a fight though.

Regarding my "fellow man" i lost faith in them a long time ago.
Remember, our politicians, CEO's and Bankers are also our "fellow man"

reply to post by infolurker


I took Triforce's post to mean, let the politicians and corrupt bankers and business leaders etc go first..
I tend to agree..

the earths soon to be depopulated according to schedule (December 12, 2012) its all good, it will start over again with cooler folks from a different genetic strain just as it does every 12,000 years or so

To be honest, there does seem to be too many people on the planet to be sustainable over the coming years, how the "useless eaters" will be decided on I don't know. My viewpoint is having worked in the oil industry since 97 I have seen just how remote the locations are and will become just to extract oil and gas to just sustain current demand, if all the Chinese and Indian people really think that they can have a car, and a home with a dishwasher etc, they are going to be in for a shock.

There seems to be a consensus amongst a few people I have spoken to in the industry that, once oil derived products become way too expensive (and I am not talking about todays or next years prices) that a new source of energy will magically appear from the oil companies, however because it will be a new source of energy it wont be cheap, as the oil and gas producers have gotten used to a simple formula, the less they produce the more they get paid.

The other consensus is that in a 100 years people will look back at us thinking how utterly retarded we were just have burned our oil and gas reserves, when we could have done much more with it than just burned it, but oh well.

I wonder what the criteria is for those alleged 20% left remaining? I dunno, chance perhaps?

Originally posted by DarkOutlook
To be honest, there does seem to be too many people on the planet to be sustainable over the coming years, how the "useless eaters" will be decided on I don't know. My viewpoint is having worked in the oil industry since 97 I have seen just how remote the locations are and will become just to extract oil and gas to just sustain current demand, if all the Chinese and Indian people really think that they can have a car, and a home with a dishwasher etc, they are going to be in for a shock.

There seems to be a consensus amongst a few people I have spoken to in the industry that, once oil derived products become way too expensive (and I am not talking about todays or next years prices) that a new source of energy will magically appear from the oil companies, however because it will be a new source of energy it wont be cheap, as the oil and gas producers have gotten used to a simple formula, the less they produce the more they get paid.

The other consensus is that in a 100 years people will look back at us thinking how utterly retarded we were just have burned our oil and gas reserves, when we could have done much more with it than just burned it, but oh well.

I wonder what the criteria is for those alleged 20% left remaining? I dunno, chance perhaps?

I totally agree that the world is over populated. However, at this point in time, I believe that we can change things around. I do think that we are upon a tipping point though.

Sigh, let me explain my opinion, ( like it matters)

For a while, i didnt understand why the Russians and Chinese purged millions of their population.
I could understand why they would kill off he political portions of the population.
But I wasnt sure why they would kill of their intellectual population, since they would be the base that a new country would be built on.
Then I realized, they were considered to be part of what made that particular country what it was and in their view, whatever made that country what it was, needed to be eradicated.

China was weak, so weak that a country the size of California invaded and pretty much ruled it.
What they did after WW2 was cruel but look at them now, it took a few generations but they straightened crap out right?

After a while, the toilets full and needs to be flushed.

Originally posted by TriForce
I am all for depopulation, not on racial, religious or ethnic grounds but for political, corporate, criminal and intellectual grounds.
It has been done before and not too long ago and it needs to be done again.

You would be!
I'm all for the population and cultivation of the lands that have been stolen from the People of The Various Nations by Their Governments and Big Businesses.
We don't need to kill anyone else.
Not a single person needs to die because of these scare tactics and fear-mongering campaigns.
We need even distribution over approximately 15,641,597,556 habitable acres.
We have the technology to create a global distribution system of goods and services for an Industrial Utopia.

Sources:
www.learner.org...
www.learner.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
pages.prodigy.net...

I find it interesting that on a conspiracy website, where everything that is spoken and/or written by the media and TPTB is questioned and analysed stringently by the membership here, so readily believe the figures the same people give us for the worlds population. Are there really 7 billion people on this planet?

Or maybe. Just maybe. They're lieing about that too. And therefore, the "problems" they say it presents.

China, Russia and Cambodia systematically destroyed thier intellectuals because they were capable of independent thought and might start to question the ruling governments, to a degree the very same systematic and organised destruction of the middle class is going on in the Western world, especially in the US and UK. They want a basic poverty stricken unthinking and more importantly a unquestioning population that deeply need the involvement of government because they are so basic. The remaining class will be the ruling elite, who regard the "useless eaters" as a form of cattle who can be moulded and controlled to suit thier current agenda.

Well lets see here,.
possible plausibility?
earthquake followed by a killer tsunami that kills about 140,000
(in a 3rd world area)
Katrina
Hurricane that hits a part of the US mostly inhabited by those (living off the system)
earthquake in Haiti
A very impoverished nation.
probably just a coincidence, cause there just couldn't be a way to manipulate weather or seismic
events,. right

Note that many countries, especially aside from immigration, are poised to experience net population losses, especially in Europe.

Think about it: how many couples do you know in your country that produce more than two children? It is becoming the norm, especially in so-called first-world countries, for couples to produce one or two children (and the trend is toward one). This results in a gradual population loss - two people, producing only one child are not even replacing themselves.

Of course we all know this is not the case in India, Indonesia, many counties in Africa, Brazil, China, etc.

But also consider the rates at which technology and cultural shifts flow - it is at an exponential rate. A generation ago, many, many families in the US had many children. Now, they do not. For many areas, this change took less than fifty years, more or less.

No one can stop the spread of information to these "overpopulated" countries, particularly in this day, this age, nor the self-empowerment (for better or worse) of women when they realize that they can control their reproductive abilities, rather than leave them to whim. Also many of these countries will very, very rapidly adapt modern mechanisms that minimize the once typical need to have many children, for example, to work the fields.

In other words, it is possible that the population explosion in so many countries can very rapidly reverse itself.

Not to mention that as religion continues to lose control, additional inane reasons for having many children are left behind.

Not saying there is not an issue with population - just suggesting that there are many facets to it and that demographic changes that can really turn an issue upside down can happen with lightning speed in the modern era ... and it will only get faster and faster.

Originally posted by TriForce
I am all for depopulation, not on racial, religious or ethnic grounds but for political, corporate, criminal and intellectual grounds.
It has been done before and not too long ago and it needs to be done again.

Those in favor of this policy to the front of the line.
How strong is your conviction to the cause?