The other night, Ron Patton did a show about the concern some people have about Hillary Clinton and her health and whether or not she is physically capable of leading the country. The debate angered many people who of course support Hillary Clinton. Beyond this debate of who is sicker, who is crazier, and who is the most qualified to run the country, I was reading about policies and ideas that were proposed by the elite that after 100 years haven’t changed a bit.
Well into the mid-1900’s, there were a number of elites that considered themselves the ruling class and had plans to deal with those individuals that they did not agree with or identified with. In a time of class warfare there is always a division where a certain group of people are somehow under the impression that they are superior. As I was studying the history of the United States dating back 100 years, I found documents and historical accounts of how the elite wanted to dispose of the indigent, the mentally retarded, the handicapped and even women.
The overall attitude of the elite had given way to the use of eugenics to eliminate types of people that were considered undesirables. Anymore when one has to search the internet for eugenics stories in America you have to go through the delicate word salad that makes it palatable for researchers because no one wants to admit that while we called ourselves a country that believed in human rights we all secretly had plans for those we felt deserved to be eliminated from the gene pool.
Surprisingly, the reason for the eugenics programs again was to insure that resources would be used by those who would benefit society. Those who were thought to be a burden were conveniently removed.
Of course, the hypocritical and of course secretly sickly President Woodrow Wilson supported eugenics directives prior to 1913.
When Wilson was Governor of New Jersey, his support of eugenics programs should have been fair warning about the type of individual he was. On April 21st, 1911 just two years before becoming President Wilson passed into law an act to authorize and provide for the “sterilization of feeble-minded (including idiots, imbeciles and morons), epileptics, rapists, certain criminals and other defectives.” It was overturned by the New Jersey Supreme Court on November 18, 1913.
Many attitudes about culling the undesirables were fomented during World War I. One admirer of the eugenics programs in the United States was a young Adolf Hitler.
Much of Hitler’s attitudes towards the nation-state, war, eugenics, race superiority, community and obligation came from his participation in the First World War, where 6,000 men died every day. Contrast that with the 3,000 that died in one day in the U.S. on 9/11, but not day after day for four years.
Hitler of course, believed in the idea that those who did not follow the rules of the government deserved to be culled. In his book, Mein Kampf, he stated that it is important to “sift the human material” for those who support decisions of the leaders and those who do not support these decisions. He also believed in culling those who were a burden on society.
Perhaps we can make a comparison to what Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-founder of Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller and puppet master of Barack Obama, who once said: “In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people; literally it was easier to control a million people, than physically to kill a million people. Today, it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.”
Of course, he can openly discuss how easy it is to kill people because he seems to be untouchable. He is the man who co-founded with David Rockefeller the very organization that recently released their slick little public service announcement where many elite publishers, authors, actors and statesmen speak about over-population; specifically, how the world will be facing some big decisions and that it will take the Council of Foreign Relations to handle the dirty task of somehow rectifying the problem of things like climate change and over-population.
It is no surprise and is quite obvious that fossils like David Rockefeller still think population is the problem, and of course, the Rockefeller Foundation is nefarious for funding the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz. Much of the devout ideological guidance and political campaigning for the American eugenics movement came from California’s quasi-autonomous eugenic societies, such as the Pasadena-based Human Betterment Foundation and the California branch of the American Eugenics Society, which coordinated much of their activity with the Eugenics Research Society in Long Island. These organizations, which functioned as part of a closely-knit, network–published racist eugenic newsletters and pseudoscientific journals, such as Eugenical News and Eugenics, and propagandized eugenics programs for the Nazis.
The eugenics programs that existed were a byproduct of politics, urging science to provide a reason to eliminate what were seen as unfit humans in order to guarantee worldwide sustainability.
The American eugenics programs inspired the Nazi’s programs and were extensively extensive financed by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America’s most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Stanford, Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These scientists espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims.
Oh, and we shouldn’t forget that it was the Rockefeller Foundation that patented the Zika Virus in 1947.
The question is, why are they now pushing their globalist ideals in public service announcements?
During its first fifty years of existence, the CFR was almost never mentioned by any of the moguls of the mass media. And when you realize that the membership of the CFR includes top executives from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Knight newspaper chain, NBC, CBS, Time, Life, Fortune, Business Week, U.S. News, Wand Report, and many others, you can be sure that such anonymity is not accidental; it is deliberate.
The question now is why has the CFR and their elite policy makers are stepping out of the shadows and acting as if their organization is going to save us when it can be said that much of their saving solutions include finding better and more stealthy ways of eliminating us for global sustainability.
Last June, CFR member James Traub wrote “It’s Time for the Elites to Rise Up Against the Ignorant Masses.” He portrayed Donald Trump and the E.U. Brexit as symptoms of mindless and dangerous insanity.
Traub wrote for Foreign Policy Magazine: “It is necessary to say that people are deluded and that the task of leadership is to un-delude them,” “Is that ‘elitist’? Maybe it is; maybe we have become so inclined to celebrate the authenticity of all personal conviction that it is now elitist to believe in reason, expertise, and the lessons of history. If so, the party of accepting reality must be prepared to take on the party of denying reality, and its enablers among those who know better. If that is the coming realignment, we should embrace it.”
So Traub is saying that those who are not playing by their rules should be ready to be realigned in order for them to have a taste of the reality they want for us. I am sure this includes having fellow CFR member Hillary Clinton as our leader and I am curious as to what kind of reality we are awaiting to be realigned to.
I can actually give you an idea of what is coming and how they are literally poisoning us, little by little, so they can manage the remaining few who have decided to adapt to the elitist reality to avoid being sifted out.
If we take a step back in time to the 1960s and ’70s, there was a book that was published called, The Population Bomb. It was written by Stanford University Professor Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich. It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth. Fears of a “population explosion” were widespread in the 1950s and 1960s, but the book brought the idea to an even wider audience.
In answer to the question, “what needs to be done?” he wrote, “We must rapidly bring the world population under control, reducing the growth rate to zero or making it negative. Conscious regulation of human numbers must be achieved. Simultaneously we must, at least temporarily, greatly increase our food production.”
Ehrlich described a number of “ideas on how these goals might be reached” He believed that the United States should take a leading role in population control, both because it was already consuming much more than the rest of the world, and therefore had a moral duty to reduce its impact, and because the US would have to lead international efforts due to its prominence in the world. In order to avoid charges of hypocrisy or racism it would have to take the lead in population reduction efforts.
Ehrlich actually proposed the idea of modifying foods in order to render the population sterile and to add chemicals to the water supply to make the population passive.
This became the junk science that was endorsed by a lot of scientists and was actually becoming as settled as climate change is today.
Arguably Ehrlich’s idea of modifying food has already become a reality as genetically modified food go from farm to table on a daily basis and people are willing to believe that these foods pose no problem to the public health.
However, glyphosate, already labeled as a “probable human carcinogen” by the World Health Organization in 2015 – has now been identified inside most Americans. In the first-ever, comprehensive, and validated testing project carried out across America, this toxic chemical was found in the urine of 93 percent of subjects tested.
Children had the highest levels of the toxin in their systems. Overall, higher levels were found in the West and Midwest, regions known for their agricultural production.
The testing project was carried out by a University of California San Francisco laboratory, with preliminary results showing glyphosate in well over 90 percent of all urine samples analyzed during early phases of the study n 2015. The study involves more urine samples than any other such study for the toxin in the U.S. Results released to date cover the first 131 test subjects, with remaining results expected to be made public later in 2016.
Known best as the primary ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, glyphosate has become the world’s most widely used herbicide as high-input conventional agriculture production has advanced. It is a broad-spectrum, non-selective chemical that is used to kill vegetation in farm fields, as well as gardens, roadsides, playgrounds, parks and other areas likely to present exposure to food, water, animals and humans.
Since 1996, Monsanto has marketed “Roundup Ready” seeds for crops including soy, corn, canola, alfalfa, cotton and sorghum. These genetically modified seeds make the food and feed crop resistant to the deadly effects of Roundup, which encourages the overuse of the chemical for the control of weeds in the farm field.
So, most Americans don’t realize that when they eat these foods that they have been marinating in Roundup while they grow.
Now we see the consequences of genetically modified foods.
Meanwhile a series of shocking new reports reveal that 45,000 acres of California crops are being irrigated with recycled fracking water, with some samples showing levels of petrochemicals higher than those found at oil spill sites. This is being done even though no one has bothered to verify if the practice is safe or not. There are big profits for oil companies – at the expense of the public health.
The ability for oil companies to earn a profit off their wastewater is extremely similar to the way the phosphate fertilizer industry sells their byproduct, hydrofluorosilicic acid or fluoride, to be added to public drinking water.
Several international studies to date have demonstrated that fluoride added to water is causing numerous health complications, including reduced IQ ratings among children. The notion that drinking fluoridated water contributes to healthier teeth has not been proven, and is slowing disintegrating into thin air. As a matter of fact, there is more evidence that fluoride is harmful rather than helpful.
There has been controversy over the activity of adding fluoride to municipal water supplies and elsewhere, but not enough. The seriousness of this issue is more than what most realize, which is why most developed nations refuse to fluoridate their water. Actually, Israel is the latest nation to completely halt water fluoridation, mandatory and voluntary.
Fluoridation ranks with GMO’s, chemically tainted toxic foods, and vaccinations as an effective way of slowly reducing the population. Much like what Paul Ehrlich proposed in the book, Population Bomb.
Another author with a familiar name has also given his opinion on how the planet can become more sustainable.
Dr. John Holdren, current Obama administration Science Czar, co-authored a book called Ecoscience, where he argued that in order for the planet to be sustainable forced sterilization and mass abortions might be necessary, and even viable under the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
Furthermore, according to a recent Washington Times article, climate-change activists are mobilizing to cut the birthrate, arguing that richer nations should discourage people having children in order to protect them from the ravages of global warming and reduce emissions.
Travis Rieder, assistant director of the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University, says that bringing down global fertility by half a child per woman “could be the thing that saves us.”
He proposed procreation disincentives such as government tax breaks for poor people and tax penalties for rich people, a kind of “carbon tax on kids.”
Poor nations would be cut slack because they’re still developing, and because their per capita emissions are a sliver of the developed world’s.
He will be publishing a paper he wrote along with two Georgetown University professors called “Population Engineering and the Fight Against Climate Change” in October.
If you read the news of other countries we are seeing calls for one or two child policies to be implemented to ensure global sustainability.
The economic hardship that the world faces is also creating a climate favorable to population and eugenics policies.
The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Program that was issued for global sustainability gave a timeline that began in 2007 and runs through 2036. The report outlines a grim economic future of middle class rebellion amidst falling standards of living. Now keep in mind that this is all planned and issued as a blueprint for future world planning that also includes the implementation of eugenic directives brain chip implants, and other forecasts. One scenario in particular states that youth in western societies could see the growing elderly population as a burden, opening the doorway to euthanasia for the elderly.
In the agendas of world economic and environmental sustainability, your economic burden on society cannot be tolerated during unprecedented economic times. The growing population of elderly individuals will be an incredible burden on a faltering system. Some governmental think tanks see younger generations pursuing euthanasia policies as an option. While we are asked to recycle waste, there are those who wish to recycle or remove human life for world sustainability.
As the global planners hook you with “climate change” and the socially engineered “saving the planet from the environmental cataclysmic model” we could very well see in the future an urgency to justify laws requiring euthanasia, eugenic infanticide, futile care provisions, and weeding out those with undesirable genetic propensities through the mapping of an infant’s genome literally marking them genetically for a “predisposed outcome.”
The growing economic crisis, and numerous other crises both real and manufactured, will be held as an example of the need for a new army of social workers and bureaucracy to manage the affairs of average men and women. So as you can see, the coming realignment proposed by the CFR in concert with the United Nations Summit 2030 proposals is inevitable.
The question is whether or not the world’s problems can be solved by the Council on Foreign Relations or were they caused by them; after all, the idea of world governance has always been a conspiracy theory, but now with their choice for president making inroads to the Oval Office, the new efforts to sell themselves to the public with their cadre of elitist politicians, publishers, media owners, and paid off scientists – it looks as if the only fix will be world governance.
By Ron Patton, Ground Zero Media
Other Survival Solutions:
Lost Ways (Special Discount) (Learn the special recipe for a SUPER FOOD that will last for years without any special storing conditions!)
Surviving the Final Bubble – Free Shipping (Limited Time Special) (A blueprint to surviving and thriving during the coming Big Bank Derivatives collapse. )
Survive The End Days (The final prophecy for America is about to unfold… )
Alive After The Fall (According to 4 major biblical prophets something truly terrifying is coming our way, and it will hit homeland before the 1st of January 2017...)
World War: Water (The only proven-to-work guide on how to survive America's tough 100-years long drought)