Experts predict a dramatic aging of the population by 2100

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | AUGUST 23, 2012

While globalist organizations and philanthropic foundations supported by the most dangerous eugenicists in history warn us about the ‘time bomb’ of overpopulation (a blatant lie), new research conducted by Washington University in the United States has added another reason to start worrying about the opposite scenario.

The research is based on a statistical model used by the University, who completed the study together with the United Nations, one of those alarmist organizations that generally pushes for one-child policies and practices to reduce the world’s population.

“The aging of the population will be even more drastic than expected by 2100”, concluded the study, as  researchers explained at the University of Washington. According to a new statistical model developed by the two institutions, the number of people over 85 years will be more substantial than expected upon completion of the first century of the new millennium.

This study published in the Journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), and collected by the SINC agency, concludes that in the coming decades, the number of people with working ages will drastically decrease, which “will be a detriment to support programs social security for the elderly “, manifested specialists.

“This trend will affect both developing countries and developed” notes Dr. Adrian Raftery, Professor of Statistics and Sociology at the University of Washington and lead author of the study. Do you notice anything interesting? Right. The study’s impact is measured in terms of how the aging of the population will impact the current plantation system supported by international organizations and most elected governments, that see their people as generators of income which they can later milk off. However, it is important to know that two visible organizations are showing some kind of concern regarding the accelerated aging of the population.

For any well-informed reader it will be repetitive to say that not only is the world not overpopulated, but that it is in fact moving towards being unable to support current living standards — especially in Europe — in places where people have decided not to have children, or to have less than what is necessary to guarantee the natural substitution rate of about 2.1 children (at least).

The study conducted by Washington University also considers that the largest declines in the proportion of workers to retirees “will be in the countries where the ratio between the two groups is larger right now.” In this sense, and stratifying the data, the experts calculate that for example in Brazil the proportion of the number of workers per retiree will be 0.7 / 1.8, while in China will be reduced to 1.6 / 2. China is the globalists preferred live experiment reference to figure out how to stop natural birth rates, because the communist regime has a clear one child policy, which in most cases it enforces by carrying out forced abortions on women who have a second child.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., Netherlands and UK figures will also be markedly reduced. Therefore Raftery shows concerns about the situation and considers it necessary to review the current models of care for the elderly. “You have to plan to support retirees in the future,” he concludes.

More important to review are current policies to prevent the populations from naturally replacing themselves. If at the current birth rates the world is forecast to having a decaying population by 2100, perhaps it is time that the United Nations, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and Planned Parenthood stopped murdering people all around the planet, for the purposes of saving us all from the so-called overpopulation ‘time bomb’.

The World Bank’s 28 year-old Depopulation Plan

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 14, 2012

Plans to drastically reduce the world’s population aren’t new. Many organizations and members of the oligarchy have manifested their intention to promote and carry out plans to dramatically reduce — between 80% and 90% — the number of humans that inhabit the Earth. Last week, we presented proof of now the United Nations and well-known philanthropists divest and invest billions of dollars to support campaigns that threaten the lives of millions of people every year. According to the cited sources and documentation in our article UN Pushes for a Global Tax to Finance its Global Socialist System, the UN alone, and in many cases its alliances with rich corporatists or partner organizations spend their budgets implementing programs in third world nations to avoid human reproduction and the development of those nations. In many cases, the application of eugenics or population control programs are a condition to receiving financial aid.

But the UN is not the only corporate-controlled organization that pushes for population reduction. Together with the UN are the World Health Organization, the IMF, and the World Bank, among others. In the case of the World Bank, the record reveals that some of the most recent initiatives date to 1984, when a report was written and presented to the controllers of the Bank. Among other things, it suggests the immediate start of population reduction policies in order to maintain economic growth; mainly for the developed nations. The document titled “World Development Report 1984”, also includes analysis and commentary about issues such as the Recovery or Relapse in the World Economy, Population Change and Development, Population Data Supplement and World Development Indicators. Notice how three of the 4 most important topics have to do directly with population.

The 300-page report from 1984 was the seventh of its kind, meaning that the World Bank’s elite’s thoughts on how to reduce or manage the world’s population was at least that old. We know today that the actual plan to reduce the population to around 500 million people is much older than that, and that this plan has been channeled through several other organizations whose work is to create policies that support the move to get rid off billions of people. Along with these organizations, the elites have partnered with their own corporations to implement policies in fields such as education, resource management, war (civil and otherwise), peace, financial aid, development, commerce, trade and so on, to enforce those policies. In essence, the corporate oligarchy has always controlled all sides.

The report is very clear from the beginning as to how important depopulation is in their plans to control the masses. “What governments and their people do today to influence our demographic future, will set the terms for the development strategy well into the next century. Failure to act now to slow growth is likely to mean a lower quality of life for millions of people.” Note that the World Banks’ strategy is one for the long term. Depopulation policies are being applied and will continue to be applied progressively, not at once. That is exactly what the elites have been doing for decades. They have been using slow-kill weapons such as chemical products in the food supply and other products we consume on a daily basis, but whose effects are only seen years later (fluoride, GMO’s, pesticides, herbicides, BPA, vaccines and others).

The report continues trying to reinforce a fallacy: That poverty and hunger are a consequence of overpopulation. As we have reported in numerous occasions, poverty and hunger have little to do with overpopulation, but have everything to do with monopolistic practices, price speculation, war and political corruption. “The experience of the past decade shows that education, health, and other development measures that raise parents’ hopes for their children, along with widespread access to family planning services, create a powerful combination in reducing fertility.” This last two words describe the main goal of the World Bank. But let’s review the complete quote and re-format it to reflect what the Bank really means. Indoctrination through the current educational system, eugenics through the use of highly toxic medicines along with the promotion of abortion results in reduced fertility.

The humanity hating statements start on page 50 of the report. “Lower GDP growth makes it more difficult for countries to finance programs in education and family planning, for example –that reduce population growth.” This statement is very important, because education or indoctrination through the public education system in developed and not developed countries together with the so-called family planning practices are two of the most effective tools to carry out eugenics today. In many countries, children are taught to hate humanity and that the most important thing is the well-being of animals, insects and mother nature or GAIA. Some NGO’s have even published articles or produced PSA’s that promote the salvation of insects and animals above humans and that humans and animals are equal. Legislation being worked out in Congresses around the world intend to officially consider humans as equals to animals and to have the United Nations as official spokesperson of the voiceless animals. All of this, of course, to save the planet. But in reality the sought outcome is to equal humans to animals in order to rip our humanity from us. If people are like animals, then people are not people, but animals. With this, the elites can legally argue that it is time to end with all the inherent rights we have as people, because we are not longer people. No more right to life, no right to freedom and the pursuit of happiness, etc.

Neither does poverty or hunger have anything to do with overpopulation, nor there is an overpopulation problem, as the World Bank says in its report. The report goes on to ask whether governments should promote and apply campaigns to reduce fertility and therefore reduce their population. The answer, the text reads, requires an understanding of high fertility and population growth. ” It is the poor with little education and poor health and family planning services who have many children, yet it is also the poor who lose out as rapid population growth hampers development.” This statement is very revealing, as many of the policies for sterilization and population control implemented for the past 50 years are pointed to the poor in both wealthy and developing countries.

The World Bank’s then goes to say that one of the main reasons why poor people choose to have many children is because they want to secure help when they become old; someone to take care of them. The report also cites other reasons such as income, infant mortality, family encouragement of high fertility and limited information about contraceptives, which the report says “are safe”. Of course, this last claim is not true. But that is a discussion for another article.

What the report fails to say is that the real cause of high fertility in poor countries is the welfare-state. Although in many countries some of the reasons cited by the 1984 report may be applicable, the reason why most people have several children in poor and rich countries is because there are socialist programs in place that promote free care and services for those who cannot pay for it. The reason why those people cannot pay for care and health services is because they don’t have jobs to earn a living and depend on their governments to provide care for themselves and their children.

If there is a strong reason why poor people decide to have more than 2 children, which is near the optimum average of 2.1 per family, is because there is an incentive to keep having more. But this is just an unintended consequence of public policies. The real issue is that governments use welfare to keep people dependent, as supposed to help them be self-sufficient and independent. So the Bank not only lies about the real cause of high fertility, but it also supports government intervention to maintain the welfare-state.

Further down on the report, it says that collectivism should be the model to follow, because government control of population fertility has “longer time horizons than its individual constituents, and the government can weigh better the interests of the future generations against of those of current citizens.” This couldn’t be further from the truth, as most countries where governments intervene heavily in all aspects of life are places where — due to people’s dependence of government — its citizens don’t get to enjoy their lives freely. The report blames the family as a unit, for the government’s lack of action. Governments must, says the report, invest more on the poor.” With this, the World Bank reinforces public perception that it does support socialist policies and the welfare-state as models to govern a dumbed-down, poor and dependent population. “Health and education costs of children are heavily subsidized by the public sector as are roads, communications and other public services that boost jobs and income.” This could not be further from the truth. No socialist program could ever spur economic growth and higher incomes better and more effectively than entrepreneurship in the private sector. What government-sponsored programs do, besides keeping people dependent, is to limit the people’s opportunities as it doesn’t offer incentives to detach themselves from the ever existent government nipple. Also, it is important to remember where government funds come from. In most countries, money is taken from the middle class to give it to the poor in exchange for nothing. The middle class effectively subsidizes poverty. Unfortunately, most of the income stolen from the middle class does not even make it to the poor. It stays inside the government corruptocrazy to finance the its out-of-control spending.

Although the report does not recognize it explicitly, it is visible in many of the claims made in it, that history shows how population growth and decline has always been (except under situations like war or major natural disasters) “automatically” controlled by human progress and how it never needed government intervention. It is not a coincidence that war is one of tools of choice the globalists use to keep the poor countries from developing. That is what is stated on the White House Memorandum 200 prepared by Mr. henry Kissinger.

How does the World Bank implement population control

On page 160, the report states clearly how governments and private institutions can coerce their populations into becoming infertile. “ensuring that people have only the children they want, might not be enough to bring private and socially desired fertility into balance. Economic and social policies are indispensable. Eliminating subsidies to large families, offering financial incentives for smaller families, imposing disincentives for larger families…” The report praises the quota system imposed to the chinese by its government and the fact that China “gives permission” to its citizens to have or not to have children.  “The system quotas and the accompanying pressure to have an abortion when a woman becomes pregnant without permission, are an additional policy step over and above the system of incentives and disincentives.” In other words, governments should implement any and all measures available to prevent people from having children and cause them to become infertile, including poverty and starvation, bribery, violently killing babies right out of the mothers’ wombs and imposing penalties on people who do not attend to government population control policies.

In addition to imposing sterilization policies and methods as well as bribing people so they don’t have children, the World Bank’s report also suggests that offering low interest rate loans to communities and schools can be a good incentive to keep population growth down and to reduce fertility. “Incentives that offer schools, low interest loans, or a tubewell to communities where contraceptive use is high, also directly link lower fertility to increased welfare.

But all of these suggestions seem mild when it comes to enforcing sterilization policies. The 1984 report also adds that “Male and female sterilization and IUDs can be made more readily available through mobile facilities (such as sterilization vans in Thailand) or periodic “camps” (such as vasectomy and tubectomy-camps in India and IUD “safaris” in Indonesia).”

“Population policy has a long lead time; other development policies must adapt in the meantime. Inaction today forecloses options tomorrow, in overall development strategy and in future population policy. Worst of all, inaction today could mean that more drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom, will seem necessary tomorrow to slow population growth.”

The authors also promote the creation of concentration camps where people can be taken to be sterilized.

As we have informed before, the World Bank’s policies and suggestions to reduce population are in complete accordance with those of other organizations, philanthropists, NGO’s and well-known personalities who donate their monies to reduce the human population. Those include the UN, the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, World Health Organization and IMF. So the next time your country receives aid from a foreign foundation, an NGO, the World Bank or the IMF, remember: this aid comes at the cost of human lives.


Can Indoor Farms Feed Humanity?

Is indoor farming a healthy alternative to the mass production of Genetically Modified Organisms? Given GMO toxicity, will governments adopt indoor farming instead?

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
July 22, 2011

Depending who you talk to, scientists and trend forecasters believe that in 30 years time, most people will live in urban centers -so much for Arthur C. Clarke’s rural communities prediction-. Also in 30 to 40 years, food will be one of the most, if not the most valuable commodity. The one characteristic that all commodities have in common to make themselves valuable is its scarcity. Diamonds are not valuable because of how easy they can be harvested. Water does not spur conflict because of its transparent color. These two commodities are valuable because overall they are scarce or are becoming scarce.

Scarcity is a trait that diamonds and water are beginning to share with food. The reasons for this varies in different parts of the world, but my educated guess is that the main cause is food price speculation. Given this fact, does it not make sense to look for ways to guarantee food availability for all? Well, not if it is for food speculators to decide. Fortunately, each of us has the power to decide for ourselves.

The next great thing when it comes to food supply is having our own food greenhouses. Food greenhouses can vary in size, and that is one of their beauties. They can be small enough to feed an individual, a family, a small community or a whole city. But greenhouses are not the novelty here. The new great alternative -at least for me- is vertical farming, that is, having our own greenhouses where we can plant our own food in the middle of the city we live in. It is its verticality what gives this kind of farming its charm. Since more and more people decide to move to the large urban centers, and food there is usually less available than, say, the countryside, vertical farming becomes a space efficient, alternative for those who have the space in their homes or communities.

On a personal note, vertical farming is all urban humans need in order to be food independent, much like farmers are in rural areas. But a key point here is that since we have the choice -no matter what the government says- to feed ourselves with our own food, it is a great opportunity to choose healthy food. In other words, clean seeds, clean vegetables and fruit instead of GMO seeds and GMO agricultural products. Depending on what your urgency for food is and where you are located, it is urgent that you go out and scout for clean, organic seeds before they are just a thing of the past. That’s right. With a handful of companies pushing for bans on organic farming and food monopolies, it only makes sense to be food independent while we can. Here is where vertical farming comes in.

Population Growth vs Food Availability

Although many people relate food scarcity to overpopulation and say the planet is running out of food and space, research shows that at current levels, the planet could feed its whole population in an area the size of Texas. Because some researchers believe human population will grow out of control in the next decades, they estimate that there will not be enough food for everyone. However, studies done by organizations like the Population Research Institute show that the world’s population will grow to 9 billion to then stabilize and decrease to a healthy level, naturally. Studies also show that there is currently enough food to feed everyone on the planet.

So why are some researchers and politicians sounding the alarms of overpopulation and food scarcity on the wrong tones? My own research by talking to people in those two groups show that it is a combination of economics, corruption and ignorance. In fact, overpopulation has been profoundly unmasked as a lie and although food scarcity is a problem in many parts of the world, it is not a result of overpopulation, but food price speculation, food monopolies and war.

Going back to Vertical Farming, according to the Spiegel Online, urban agriculture may be a solution to feed more people, in more places in the world. “Agricultural researchers believe that building indoor farms in the middle of cities could help solve the world’s hunger problem. Experts say that vertical farming could feed up to 10 billion people and make agriculture independent of the weather and the need for land. There’s only one snag: The urban farms need huge amounts of energy.”

But despite any snags, people in countries where space is a luxury are already planning and executing vertical farming projects. In South Korea, independent researchers are already cultivating food in indoor greenhouses. “Heads of lettuce are lined up in stacked layers. At the very bottom, small seedlings are thriving while, further up, there are riper plants almost ready to be picked.”

In his book The Vertical Farm, Dr. Dickson Despommier explains how vertical farming may be the solution to world hunger with or without overpopulation.

“An entirely new approach to indoor farming must be invented, employing cutting edge technologies. The Vertical Farm must be efficient (cheap to construct and safe to operate). Vertical farms, many stories high, will be situated in the heart of the world’s urban centers. If successfully implemented, they offer the promise of urban renewal, sustainable production of a safe and varied food supply (year-round crop production), and the eventual repair of ecosystems that have been sacrificed for horizontal farming.”

How does vertical farming compare to traditional outdoor farming. Here is a list of reasons why vertical, indoor farming is an option to be food independent and plant your own fruit and vegetables regardless of whether you have a five story building available for planting or not.

Advantages of Vertical Farming (From TheVerticalFarm.com)

  • Year-round crop production; 1 indoor acre is equivalent to 4-6 outdoor acres or more, depending upon the crop (e.g., strawberries: 1 indoor acre = 30 outdoor acres)
  • No weather-related crop failures due to droughts, floods, pests
  • All VF food is grown organically: no herbicides, pesticides, or fertilizers
  • VF virtually eliminates agricultural runoff by recycling black water
  • VF returns farmland to nature, restoring ecosystem functions and services
  • VF greatly reduces the incidence of many infectious diseases that are acquired at the agricultural interface
  • VF converts black and gray water into potable water by collecting the water of
    evapotranspiration
  • VF adds energy back to the grid via methane generation from composting non-edible
    parts of plants and animals
  • VF dramatically reduces fossil fuel use (no tractors, plows, shipping.)
  • VF converts abandoned urban properties into food production centers
  • VF creates sustainable environments for urban centers
  • VF creates new employment opportunities
  • We cannot go to the moon, Mars, or beyond without first learning to farm indoors on
    earth
  • VF may prove to be useful for integrating into refugee camps
  • VF offers the promise of measurable economic improvement for tropical and subtropical
    LDCs. If this should prove to be the case, then VF may be a catalyst in helping to reduce or even reverse the population growth of LDCs as they adopt urban agriculture as a strategy for sustainable food production.
  • VF could reduce the incidence of armed conflict over natural resources, such as water
    and land for agriculture

Dr. Dickson Despommier believes we are at the doors of another farming revolution. Although this new way of being food independent may not be available to everyone at an industrial level, people can take the methods and techniques and adapt them to their corner of the world. Humans had to experiment for hundreds or even thousands of years to understand how farming techniques could play to their benefit. However, growing crops is now taken for granted. Masses of land that were once used to feed ourselves before are now unused or turned into wastelands mainly because of government or corporate intervention.

That is why vertical indoor farming is such a great alternative to attain food security.

See a complete photo gallery of vertical farming prototype projects here.

Eugenics in Uzbekistan courtesy of the U.N., U.S. and World Bank

Jurriaan Maessen

The British Independent featured an AP article last Saturday, detailing suspicions that health officials in the Republic of Uzbekistan are widely involved in involuntary sterilization-practices. At first glance, the story may seem wild and baseless. Nothing however is further from the truth.

The AP-reporter spoke with a 24-year old housewife named Saodat Rakhimbayeva, an extremely brave woman who tells a heart-wrenching tale of state-sponsored eugenics in her home country of Uzbekistan. After giving birth to a premature boy, she had to witness her son dying just three days later.

“Then”, states the article, “came a further devastating blow: She learned that the surgeon had removed part of her uterus during the operation, making her sterile.”

“According to rights groups, victims and health officials, Rakhimbayeva is one of hundreds of Uzbek women who have been surgically sterilized without their knowledge or consent in a program designed to prevent overpopulation from fueling unrest. (…). The order comes from the very top,” said Khaitboy Yakubov, head of the Najot human rights group in Uzbekistan.”

This statement by Yakubov has more significance that he himself probably realizes. By “the very top” he likely refers to the central Uzbek government. As it turns out, the order came from even higher up.

An official communiqué from the embassy of Uzbekistan in New Delhi gives us more insight in a remarkable initiative by the Uzbek state and the different partners with which it collaborates:

The complex of measures for the “Mother’s and Child’s Screening”, directed to prevent the childbirth with the hereditary diseases, accompanying with intellectual backwardness as well as inspection of pregnant women is carried out in the Republic with the purpose of revealing anomalies of development of a child-bearing. (…). Within the framework of the State Programs the cooperation is continuing with the WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, USAID, JICA, KfW Bank, World Bank, Asian Development Bank (…).”

The United Nations Population Fund concurs. It admits helping Uzbek authorities screen its citizens:

“In Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, UNFPA worked to strengthen national capacities to collect, analyse and disseminate gender disaggregated data on population, development and reproductive health and to integrate population variables and gender concerns into development and environmental planning.”

Now what this really mean? A Japanese International Corporation Agency, profiling Uzbekistan’s disability policies, states the following in regards to the Uzbek national screening program (page 11):

“By 2001, 124.000 of new-borns had been examined, 2.800 children in at-risk groups had been identified; and 160 had been registered in health clinics. For genetic reasons, 1.381 pregnancies were terminated.”

Furthermore, an Uzbek government-website acknowledges receiving generous funding for its eugenic programs and restates the UN-funded mission:

“Up-to-date medical technologies help detect possible defects in the development of a fetus at an early stage of pregnancy. To preclude birth of children with genetic disease accompanied by mental abnormalities and to detect fetus abnormality (…).”

Another Uzbek government website gives a description of the ultimate goal of the “Mother and Child screening” program as follows:

“(…) reducing the birth of disabled children.”

In the same publication, the above-mentioned “screening” of possible “intellectual backwardness” serves to “prevent childbirth with hereditary diseases”. Needless to say, these practises constitute eugenics in its purest form. And transnational organizations like the UN, World Bank and the German KfW Bank are directly and fanatically involved in the funding of these “screening”-programs conducted by Uzbek health authorities.

The UN itself admits in its own publications to its “long-standing partnership and track-record working in Uzbekistan.”:

“The UN’s mandate in supporting the implementation and monitoring of the MDGs (UN Millennium Development Goals) at the country level is a substantial comparative advantage in assisting the Government (of Uzbekistan) to enhance living standards, and achieve higher levels of human development. As a credible and trusted partner of the Government, we provide policy advice, technical assistance and programmatic support, drawing on best global practices.”

An important item of the UN’s “programmatic support” is their ideas on population-screening and control, making sure that Uzbek women:

“… have access, as and when they require, to what we call reproductive health.- family planning, contraception, and medical care during pregnancy, at delivery and afterwards.”

In a publication by USAID, the largest US aid institution paid for by US tax dollars, reference was made to the contributions of the United Nations Population Fund:

“UNFPA provided IUD’s, injectables and pills. Health facilities hold at least 3 different methods, though their quantities are not sufficient.”

In regards to USAID’s own contributions, which include training local Uzbek health officials, the document lists a training-course:

“The two week-training included theory and extensive practise. Each participant passing the course received a set of instruments for minilaporotomy. During training courses 39 clients were sterilized. 88 clients have been sterilized by trained providers to date.”

Another USAID-document from 1993 recommends some actions to be taken in regards to Central European nations, such as Uzbekistan (page 10):

“New contraceptive technologies should be offered, with training in their application and in the counseling of clients on the choices available to them. Policy change will be required in some countries to permit sterilization to be included among available options for both women and men. To assure the commitment of health sector leadership, study tours in the united States would be useful, as would inclusion of the heads of medical training institutions in the redesign of medical and nursing curricula to integrate family planning into health care.”

Remember the reports from the Uzbek woman reporting involuntary sterilization practises by Uzbek doctors. It seems it is being done with your dollars, and with additional donations from the World Bank, German development bank, the United Nations Population Fund- and let’s not leave out another important contributor, the World Health Organisation. The WHO reports on their own website:

“Uzbekistan and WHO: A close relationship exists between WHO and the Ministry of Health (MOH).”

Listed under “Opportunities”, the WHO mentions that:

“Uzbekistan now receives substantial funding for health programmes with contributions from many key partners.”

As the money continues to flow into Uzbekistan, the eugenicists at the very top are going all-out . It’s high time they are stopped on their blood-stained path of destruction.

Forced abortions and sterilization to ‘save planet’

Sovereign Independent

John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, in a Book he authored in 1977 advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control theJohn P. Holdren population.  The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both?

These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology — informally known as the United States’ Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who “contribute to social deterioration” (i.e. undesirables) “can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility” — in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational “Planetary Regime” should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans’ lives — using an armed international police force.

Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.

Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich. The scans and photos are provided to supply conclusive evidence that the words attributed to Holdren are unaltered and accurately transcribed.

[UPDATE: Make sure to read the new statements issued by the White House and by John Holdren’s office in response to the controversy raised by this essay — you can see them below following the Ecoscience excerpts, or you can jump directly to the statements by clicking here.]

This report was originally inspired by this article in FrontPage magazine, which covers some of the same information given here. But that article, although it contained many shocking quotes from John Holdren, failed to make much of an impact on public opinion. Why not? Because, as I discovered when discussing the article with various friends, there was no proof that the quotes were accurate — so most folks (even those opposed to Obama’s policies) doubted their veracity, because the statements seemed too inflammatory to be true. In the modern era, it seems, journalists have lost all credibility, and so are presumed to be lying or exaggerating unless solid evidence is offered to back up the claims. Well, this report contains that evidence.

Of course, Holdren wrote these things in the framework of a book he co-authored about what he imagined at the time (late 1970s) was an apocalyptic crisis facing mankind: overpopulation. He felt extreme measures would be required to combat an extreme problem. Whether or not you think this provides him a valid “excuse” for having descended into a totalitarian fantasy is up to you: personally, I don’t think it’s a valid excuse at all, since the crisis he was in a panic over was mostly in his imagination. Totalitarian regimes and unhinged people almost always have what seems internally like a reasonable justification for actions which to the outside world seem incomprehensible.

Direct quotes from John Holdren’s Ecoscience

Below you will find a series of ten short passages from Ecoscience. On the left in each case is a scanned image taken directly from the pages of the book itself; on the right is an exact transcription of each passage, with noteworthy sections highlighted. Below each quote is a short analysis by me.

Following these short quotes, I take a “step back” and provide the full extended passages from which each of the shorter quotes were excerpted, to provide the full context.

And at the bottom of this report, I provide untouched scans (and photos) of the full pages from which all of these passages were taken, to quash any doubts anyone might have that these are absolutely real, and to forestall any claims that the quotes were taken “out of context.”

Ready? Brace yourself. And prepare to be shocked.