The Most Important Thing I Have Ever Written

The Beginning Of The End - The New Novel About The Future Of America By Michael T. Snyder
Kindle Version Of The Beginning Of The End
Survive After Collapse
The Mystery Of The Shemitah
Blood Moons Mark Biltz
Soul Deceiver
Power Companies HATE This Man...
Power companies are scared that people will learn how to slash their bill and beat Obama's electricity monopoly using this 47-year-old patriot's "weird" trick. See how before they shut it down.
The End of Obama? Approaching Obama scandal could change the White House Administration and our country overnight... Click Here
Gold Buying Guide: Golden Eagle Coins

Archives

Young Living Thieves Oil Spray

They Want To Sterilize American Women: Sterilization Won’t Cost Women A Penny Under Obamacare

Did you know that sterilization will not cost women a penny under Obamacare?  A new regulation that goes into effect on August 1st requires that health plans cover sterilization for all women with “reproductive capacity”.  That includes teenage girls.  According to the new regulation, women must have access to sterilization “without having to pay a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible.”  So women will not have to pay a single penny out of pocket if they want to get sterilized.  Of course this sterilization mandate will make health insurance more expensive for all of us, but the social engineers in Washington D.C. feel that increasing access to sterilization is a very important public policy goal.  So why are they doing this?  They are doing this because they love death.  They truly believe that they are saving the planet by reducing human numbers.  That is why “family planning” is always at the very heart of the “green agenda”.  They want to sterilize women because that will help keep the population down.  And if there are less people running around, there will be less of us to ruin “their planet” with all of our pollution.

The new Obamacare regulation requires health insurance policies to offer 100% coverage for all “approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.”

But to fully understand what is going on, you have to look at this in context with what is being implemented all over the globe.

Have you heard of Agenda 21?  It is an international effort coordinated by the United Nations to make the world a more “sustainable” place in the 21st century.

To the social engineers at the forefront of this effort, the number one threat to “sustainable development” is overpopulation.  That is why population control is one of the central pillars of Agenda 21.

So all over the globe, family planning programs are being pushed and funded by the United Nations.  In many UN-funded family planning facilities all over the planet sterilizations are being offered for free.

The United Nations seems absolutely obsessed with population issues.  In particular, they seem quite determined to get women in poorer countries to have less children.  For example, the March 2009 U.N. Population Division policy brief began with the following statement….

What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?

A statement like that should be setting off all kinds of alarm bells in your head.

Questions like that are only a few steps away from all-out genocide.

But the social engineers at the United Nations are so obsessed with “saving the earth” that the fact that human lives are being destroyed in the process does not seem to bother them.

Many in the environmental movement believe that the number one problem facing the earth is climate change, and many of them also believe that carbon emissions being produced by human activity are the number one cause of climate change.

So that makes all of us the number one enemy of the planet.

This disturbing philosophy was clearly reflected in a 2009 report released by the United Nations Population Fund entitled “Facing a Changing World: Women, Population and Climate“.  The following are three quotes that were pulled directly out of that report….

1) “Each birth results not only in the emissions attributable to that person in his or her lifetime, but also the emissions of all his or her descendants. Hence, the emissions savings from intended or planned births multiply with time.”

2) “No human is genuinely “carbon neutral,” especially when all greenhouse gases are figured into the equation. Therefore, everyone is part of the problem, so everyone must be part of the solution in some way.”

3) “Strong family planning programmes are in the interests of all countries for greenhouse-gas concerns as well as for broader welfare concerns.”

So the goal is to reduce the human population by as much as possible in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

That is why those associated with this movement like abortion and absolutely LOVE sterilization.

When a woman has an abortion, she might get pregnant again.

But when a woman is sterilized, her “problem” is gone for good.

And guess what?

Your tax dollars go to pay for abortions and sterilizations all over the planet.  The following is an excerpt from an article entitled “The Population Control Holocaust” by Robert Zubrin…..

Of the billions of taxpayer dollars that the U.S. government has expended on population control abroad, a portion has been directly spent by USAID on its own field activities, but the majority has been laundered through a variety of international agencies. As a result of this indirect funding scheme, all attempts to compel the population control empire to conform its activities to accepted medical, ethical, safety, or human rights norms have proven futile. Rather, in direct defiance of laws enacted by Congress to try to correct the situation, what has and continues to be perpetrated at public expense is an atrocity on a scale so vast and varied as to almost defy description. Nevertheless, it is worth attempting to convey to readers some sense of the evil that is being done with their money.

If you have not read the rest of that article yet, you really should.  You can find the rest of that article right here.

Developing nations all over the planet are often coerced into participating in these population control schemes through financial aid programs.  For example, a recent article by Jurriaan Maessen detailed how the World Bank is actually using “financial assistance” as leverage to get developing nations to implement “family planning programs” in their countries….

According to two subsequent documents put out by the World Bank, its guidelines dictate that in order to qualify for World Bank lending, sovereign nations must implement population reduction objectives as outlined by the World Bank and UN Population Fund. If they refuse, lending will be withdrawn.

Already pre-tested and implemented in Yemen and Niger, these guidelines are destined for global implementation within the next decade, says the World Bank.

In very poor countries, money can be a very powerful motivational tool.

In fact, in some nations money is actually being directly offered to women in an attempt to get them to agree to be sterilized.  As I have written about previously, health officials in India are offering motorcycles, televisions and even new cars to women in an attempt to get them sterilized.

In other countries, darker methods of coercion are used.

In Uzbekistan, the government has decreed that “surgical contraception should be provided free of charge” to all Uzbek women who volunteer for the procedure.

That kind of sounds like what the new Obamacare regulation is going to do in the United States.

But what starts off as “voluntary” often becomes “mandatory” eventually.

The following is from an article in the Independent that detailed the horrible forced sterilizations that are going on in many parts of Uzbekistan….

Saodat Rakhimbayeva says she wishes she had died with her newborn baby. The 24-year-old housewife had a cesarean section in March and gave birth to Ibrohim, a premature boy who died three days later.

Then came a further devastating blow: She learned that the surgeon had removed part of her uterus during the operation, making her sterile. The doctor told her the hysterectomy was necessary to remove a potentially cancerous cyst, while she believes he sterilized her as part of a state campaign to reduce birthrates.

“He never asked for my approval, never ran any checks, just mutilated me as if I were a mute animal,” the pale and fragile Rakhimbayeva said through tears while sitting at a fly-infested cafe in this central Uzbek city. “I should have just died with Ibrohim.”

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.

Sadly, Uzbekistan is not an isolated example.  The truth is that forced sterilizations (often funded by the UN) have been happening all over the globe.  This was detailed in length in a great article by Jurriaan Maessen.  If you have not read it yet, I encourage you to go check it out right here.

Of course one of the biggest offenders of all is China.  The Chinese have been enforcing their brutal “one child policy” for many years.

In China, if a woman tries to have a second child she is in danger of being arrested and dragged off to a clinic for a forced abortion.  Often a sterilization is done on top of the forced abortion.

As the Epoch Times recently noted, enforcement of this one child policy can be absolutely brutal….

“Pregnant women lacking birth permits are hunted down like criminals by population planning police in China and forcibly aborted.”

One recent case of forced abortion in China made headlines all over the globe.  The following is from a story that appeared in a New Zealand news source….

The family of a woman forced to undergo an abortion because she ran afoul of China’s one-child policy has accepted a cash settlement, apparently ending a controversy that caused a public uproar and embarrassed the government.

Feng Jianmei’s husband, Deng Jiyuan, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the family accepted the settlement of 70,600 yuan ($11,200) because they wanted to return to a normal life.

Feng was beaten by local officials and forced to abort her baby last month, seven months into her pregnancy, because she did not have 40,000 yuan ($6,300) to pay the fine for having a second child.

Local authorities have often violently imposed abortions and sterilizations in an effort to meet birth quotas set by Beijing, but photos of Feng lying on a hospital bed with the blood-covered baby, reportedly stillborn after a chemical injection, set off a public outpouring of sympathy and outrage after they were posted online.

Will we see scenes like this in the United States someday?

The new Obamacare regulation gets us another step closer.

The sad thing is that overpopulation is a myth.  If resources were distributed more efficiently and there was not so much evil and corruption in the world, the earth could easily hold a lot more people than it does today.

Unfortunately, the social engineers that are running things do not see things that way.

In fact, this sick population control philosophy is represented at the very highest levels of the U.S. government.

For example, Barack Obama’s top science adviser, John P. Holdren, actually co-authored a book in 1977 in which he advocated mass sterilization of American women.  The following is just one of the incredibly shocking quotes in Holdren’s book….

“A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”

Please keep in mind that Holdren is the number one “science adviser” to Barack Obama.

So what do these social engineers hope to achieve?

Well, the eventual goal is to reduce the population of the earth from 7 billion to about 500 million.

There seems to be a consensus among the “scientists” that write about these things that a global population of 500 million humans would be a “sustainable” level for the planet.

So how are they going to get rid of more than 90 percent of us and get the population down to just 500 million?

Please feel free to post a comment with your opinion on the matter below….

Instantly Add To The Conversation Using Facebook Comments

comments

  • Tim

    “So how are they going to get rid of more than 90 percent of us and get the population down to just 500 million?”

    I often wonder if that’s why they’re spraying Chemtrails.

    • Alyssa

      “Population control” simply will not be enough. This crowd is advocating genocide on an unprecedented scale.

      • http://www.youtube.com/user/ATRAINC Chris

        Yep, they want to cut down on the population.
        Cull The Masses while at it. Bill Gates and all of these scumbag
        Eungenists are following the laws of the Georgia Guidestones.

  • Ken

    F(ascist)DR’s income tax withholding scam started off as “voluntary”.

  • HecatesMoon

    Is there somewhere I can get a full copy of Agenda 21?

    • marK

      Dr. Henry Lamb at World Net Daily has written a lot about Agenda 21 for a long time. You should check out his stuff.

      • HecatesMoon

        Thank you, Mark. :)
        I am not getting all the comments through my reader for some reason.

  • Colin

    Okay, I need clarity. I don’t see the United Nations as a threat to our country. They don’t have a standing army, and, to the best of my knowledge, the UN has never stated an intent to invade our country. So, why do people on the right harbor an animus toward this institution?

    Obamacare may cover the costs for sterilization; however, it is the responsibility of the physician to counsel the woman who requests this procedure. There are ethical guidelines on sterilization in this country. A woman who requests this procedure has the right to change her mind. The people who perform sterilization have to follow strict guidelines set by their profession. Here are the guidelines:

    http://www.acog.org/Resources_And_Publications/Committee_Opinions/Committee_on_Ethics/Sterilization_of_Women_Including_Those_With_Mental_Disabilities

    Here is information on the association that published this document:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Congress_of_Obstetricians_and_Gynecologists

    This is not the same as what is happening in Uzbekistan, where the woman has been deprived of her rights as a patient.

    I think equating what happens in our country to what is happening in Uzbekistan is a mistake on your part, Michael. It is fear-mongering and I expect better of you.

    • marK

      Colin, Many people on the right believe that our Constitution and our freedom from rule by others outside of this country is important. We did fight a revolution in order to have that freedom. The UN wants to control our lives through taxation. Just like the Federal Governments new power to tax us if we do not buy government approved health insurance the UN wants to impose carbon taxes to spread the wealth to the countries that are running the different boards within the UN. That means that they want to enrich themselves with your labor and your hard earned money. You should read what they have in store for you with Agenda 21. They do not need an army to invade when many local governments force you to live by the UN’s rules. I do hope that this will give you some clarity.

    • Alyssa

      The UN is pure evil and acts against USA at every opportunity. They want their own army so badly they can taste it. Get the US out of theUN and the UN out of the US.

      After the USA goes through it’s USSR-style divorce, I will migrate to any area that is not a UN member.

      • Tara

        seriously, how do you not see that it’s the USA that starts all the wars and is the stereotypical “Super-Villian”

    • Steve

      The UN DOES have a standing army; ask the military personnel that refused to wear their powder blue and insignia and were charged accordingly! If nothing else they have NATO! Also, everything that ends up mandatory is done as voluntary for the good of somebody!

  • Cleo

    The whole damn bill is full of nefarious stuff…..and it’s all about eugenics to save Mother Earth. We had to pass it to see what was in it. We like it even less now. And the scarey thing is that the HHS Sect pretty much has carte blanc authority to make rules and regulations as the bill moves forward. Do we love our Congress or what? And I’ll bet $100 to a $.10 that eventually it will be illegal to pay for a medical service on you’re own if it isn’t covered (was part of Hillarycare I believe) because there aren’t enough Dr’s.

    Of course, they’re exempt from it.

  • Kitiem

    As long as it remains voluntary I don’t really care.
    I want to be outraged at what they are doing in other nations, but it becomes too much. People are screwing up everything everywhere and I can’t do anything about it. I have to reserve outrage at what happens within reach, to people I care about. And then I STILL can’t do anything about it.
    I felt awful typing that, but it’s true. In the end I feel and am helpless against these things. Do feel free giving out suggestions on what I can personally do if you have them, and I’ll gladly follow them.

  • triumphator

    Please, do not blame me, but if the woman is asking for sterilization – she has a solid reason for that and we go for sterilization. There must be some great concern competing with maternal instinct.

    Thr thing that bothers me most in this story – is the first signs of Obamacare at work. So, what does he mean? – sterilization “without having to pay a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible”? Sterilization (tubal ligation) is a surgical procedure that involves participation of a surgical team, anesthesiology service, post-operative nursing etc. It is done laparoscopically (mind the price of disposable laparoscopic tools!) with general anesthesia (mind the cost of anesthetic). In addition, it is not an ambulatory procedure – a woman will have to stay in the hospital for a day, at lest. So, my question – who is going to pay for all this, and to me as a doctor? How much the government will pay me? Will I and my family, my office rent and my school debts be interested in doing that procedure? You, good people, must know that doctors are now trying to avoid Medicaid patients since the government is paying almost 20 times less than private insurances for the same procedure, same consultation. I am getting (no kidding) – $15.00 for seeing a Medicaid patient with back pain (patient visit usually takes about 45 mins with all the paperwork harassment). It is a legalized fraud! What is the value of 15 dollars? Why would doctors be interested? I do not understand that…
    Getting back to sterilization – my question – do those guys in government know how to count money at all? Don’t they think it is much cheaper to distribute free condoms in the subways, than performing numerous sterilization surgeries? Prophylaxis is so much cheaper than treatment!

  • Elk Thuringer

    I agree with much of what you say Michael but I think you’re way off base here. We cannot support infinite growth in a world with finite resources currently. I do agree that resources are unjustly hoarded and inequality and inhumanity run rampant in this world. What I would like you to understand is that at least to some extent this is a WOMEN’s rights issue. For thousands of years, women have been more or less forced into having children due to a husband’s sexual desires. Isn’t it then a good thing that women have domain over their own bodies? This really is an issue of freedom. You want the freedom to have 22 children? Fine, give me the freedom not to pay taxes to support your economic poor decisions. In a truly CONSERVATIVE society, bringing children into the world is done with much thought and foresight.

  • Nexus789

    I don’t disagree that you can have more people give the total basket of resources. However, overpopulation is NOT a myth if you CANNOT distribute resources more efficiently and have the wealthy within nations and indeed wealthy nations give up control of the Earth’s resources so we can all ‘share’. As this will NOT happen without conflict and force we have to observe that we have too many people on the planet given the current distribution of resources. Americans are keen parrot on about individuality and consumption but this is in total and absolute conflict with a world where you want to evenly allocate resources Chairman Mao style so that we can breed more. The argument against the overpopulation myth is fatuous given the realities that will not change.

  • Jodi

    The more I read about Obamacare the more I get angry, this is so incredibly evil. This is why Nancy Pelosi was babbling about “we have to pass it to find out what’s in the bill”. These control freaks knew that this bill was hideous right from the beginning. Let’s pray that they never force abortions. I just got done reading a chapter out of COWARDS by Glenn Beck the chapter I just finished was about Education. Liberals are literally brainwashing our kids and one of those things that they are doing is making the youth believe abortions are normal. It’s clear, we are being run control freak cowards.

  • Andrew

    no love no future…
    Pope JPII gave it a proper name “Civilization of Death”

  • Michael

    Overpopulation may not, in fact, be a myth. Mass unemployment especially among young people, cheap labour incapable of earning enought to support a family, and the inability of governments to commit to full employment, suggest that we have many more people than we need to run the economy.

  • Karen

    Yes the world elite what most of us gone they blame us regular folks for the earth dieing which she is the rain forest is all but gone the lungs of the world but the elite are the main cause of earths problems they spray the skies with toxic chemicals which we breath they cut down forest for there black gold all for greed they are by far the worst than we come into play for so called progress acres of trees each minute are destroyed for malls and such so you can spend money and become part of the debit problem and most don’t give a darn Texas lost 500million shade tress lungs of the world to drought and the Midwest is al but becoming a dust bowl the sun just Thursday fired off an x flare headed are way even the sun is upset with are life styles we have become a selfish bunch of humans we care not about the earth nor mankind

  • Michelle

    Medicaid has been covering female sterilizations 100% for years.

  • Dave Webb

    I think they are full of it. Untruths is what I mean. What we really need here is a lot of good engineering to substain the populations we have. That will be a challenge. Obviously more of a challenge than our governments are capable of handling.
    6/7ths of the planet is covered by oceans. This territory is completely unused except for fishing rights. In the middle of the Atlantic there is a mountain range under water that goes almost from pole to pole. Completely useless right now. Why? No funds for development. There has got to be trillions of dollars worth of metals in those mountains completely unaccessible by ocean water.
    There is a desert in Africa called the Sahara. At one point in time, it was a fertile plain similar to the one in our Midwest part of our country. The problem is water. 5,000 years or so ago the entire dessert was supplied with rainfall from a lake on the western side of Africa. Geological changes dumped the shallow fresh water lake into the Atlantic Ocean. End of story. That is why the average rainfall in the Sahara is so low. It also has 120-130 degree heat. I call it the world’s largest liter box. Yes, it stinks. There were fairly advanced civilizations all over that desert at one point in our past. Yet with advanced engineering techniques that entire desert could be turned around in the next hundred years with waters from our Indian and Atlantic oceans. The key here is the intense sunshine. I propose first we engineer that lake back into existence. Then, using solar furnaces in conjunction with steam generators, we produce fresh water from ocean water and pump it back into the lake area. Within a few years, the rainfall will start the retardation of that dessert. That would take a lot of resources. China has those resources. So does India. I speak of labor.
    The lowering of Atlantic waters does concern me a little. But the melting of the poles that is now occuring could raise those levels by as much as 60 feet in the next 50 years. It could set off Africa as the new food belt for the world.
    Yes we are dealing with increased methane, increased carbon dioxide, and temperature changes. The only thing missing is a reversal of the poles for a revolutionary change in geology. The carbon dioxide temperature change works like a sheet of aluminum on your stove. What that means is it levels the temperatures world wide from the equator to the poles. The poles get hotter. The equator will get colder. The gas changes the basic equation. You are likely to see snow on the equator and melting polar caps at the same time.
    Who gains from population control and reducing entire populations down to a fraction of their current size? That might be the key to figuring out the entire genocide projects.

    • HecatesMoon

      Dave, don’t you think we’ve tinkered with things enough? People always think they are in control, then we find that we aren’t in control, and it just leads to more and more tinkering which eventually leads to policies that slowly inch us closer and closer, bit by bit, to a global government, forcing everyone to be vegetarian, removing the right to own property, and a population cap of 500,000,000 decided by a select group of people who think they are gods.
      We are facing the mess we are facing, because we didn’t act respectfully to begin with, and you’re talking about tinkering some more!

  • Seen

    “Did you know that sterilization will not cost women a penny under Obamacare?”

    I honestly overlooked it when I summarized through the Affordable Healthcare Act ‘Obamacare'; I was rather distracted through the rather stated governmental fiefdoms who will make high profits through forced customers to governmental approved (read governmental fiefdoms) insurance providers. Essentially, Obamacare opens the door through taxes to not only compel commerce in which savings, capital structure, and capital accumulation is forced to be consumed or penalized for failed compliance and creates a past precedent across various industries such as governmental approved banking institutions for the population to possess governmental approved bank accounts with institutions umbrella of Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and etc.
    In a manner of speaking, it makes sense since abortions and death care are covered in Obamacare, and there does indeed seemed to be enhanced mental competency challenges within the signed document on top of the technocrat body passed and signed approximately three months after Obamacare in which determines the cost and value of quality of life that the treatment being offered or declined.

    “So why are they doing this? They are doing this because they love death.”

    Well, this is certainly strongly seems to be the core underlining. It’s essentially a power trip in which social engineers and policy makers effectively control life and death itself, and this is a very essential pillar of any given civilization. Effectively, if you control: food, shelter, and medium of exchange or bargain, you effectively control the civilization as a whole in abstract. Historically, the abstract doesn’t really work; the civilization effectively implodes/explodes.
    Sadly, the core ignores that according to Engelman’s “Population & Sustainability” states in 1992 UN Summit in Cairo over 100+ nations created an agreement to create population control in particularly ‘through education women will limit the number of children and collectively control population by pursuing self-interests’ (Population & Sustainability by Engelman is featured in Global Issues 10/11).

    “They truly believe that they are saving the planet by reducing human numbers. That is why “family planning” is always at the very heart of the “green agenda”. They want to sterilize women because that will help keep the population down. And if there are less people running around, there will be less of us to ruin “their planet” with all of our pollution.”

    It’s often the ignored aspect that many overlook. People are not people in the Green Movement’s officials; this is why we are constantly referred to as human capital and resources. Capital and resources are commodities capable of being owned/purchased; the principle difference is that in this era the policies effectively by controlling the pillars of civilization are owned by the civilization’s social engineers, policy makers, or simply governance. This is why through globalization national ordinances, laws, and legislation are being harmonized globally or to be technical supranational.
    While control of life and death is effectively the objective, the progress is derived by convincing people through their education; this objective is Utopia and in the West derived by their government’s implementation mostly at their beckoning (aka Democratically) and in the East through governmental decree.

    I highly doubt that. Social Engineers and Policy Makers are essentially two breeds of politicians who are effectively interested in controlling pillars of civilization through their new breed of bureaucrats technocrats to convince the populace that it’s for the greater good and social welfare to drastically reduce standards of living to dystopian standards. This is why rights are transitioning to privileges derived by governmental decree, and this frees up resources, capital, and etc for vested interests be it Big Industries and Big Unions, which technical politicians are both Big Industry and Big Unions.

    “Have you heard of Agenda 21?”

    Yes, I’m familiar with Sustainable Development derived by land-use and environmental accounting or in Venus Project’s terms Resource Based Economy and Cybernation (Yes, Venus Project is a UN backed project to popularize Forum’s of the Future devised sustainable cities).

    “To the social engineers at the forefront of this effort, the number one threat to “sustainable development” is overpopulation. That is why population control is one of the central pillars of Agenda 21.”

    To put it bluntly, the social engineers or to be technical Eugenicists are losing patience with the 1992 UN Summit agreement made in Cairo, and this is why China’s population control measures are highly praised. Overpopulation’s main concept is that humanity is stupid sheep who left to their own devices and educational rather than governmental regulation and procedures and indoctrination would effectively effect Governmental ambitions, Big Industries’, and Big Union’s interests.
    This is one of the reasons why the West is implementing Crony Capitalism in which profits are privatized, loses are socialized, and civil rights transition into privileges. The West effectively no longer seeks capital structure, capital creation, and through regulation and inflation and deflation destroy capital accumulation for 80-90% of the populace. This isn’t capitalism; it’s a hybrid of national socialism derived by harmonizing the public-private partnerships of Big Government and Big Industries aka Fascism/Corporatism and Big Government and Big Unions aka Communism (the Neo-Public-Private Partnership merges the two forms into one through Crony Capitalism).

    “The United Nations seems absolutely obsessed with population issues. In particular, they seem quite determined to get women in poorer countries to have less children.”

    If I recall correctly, the United Nations underwent an overhaul to offer the world an supranational institution of governance. The UN is several think-tanks go to deference of global governance particularly with the Club of Rome and its sister clubs Madrid and Vienna whose memberships includes many very popularized politicians and social engineers. Control food and water, shelter/land, and life and death, you control the civilization be it national or supranational.
    The general abstract is that population=the amount of resources consumed. By curbing population, nations are less inclined to seek to expand. Interestingly, nations marked for regime change in “Which Way to Persia” are also most resistant to supranationalism and globalization. The secondary abstract concept is national sovereignty or in simple terms nationalism as opposed to supranational sovereignty and supranationalism. The third concept is religion; the general abstraction here is the popularized attitude religion causes war much like nationalism and scarcity of resources derived by ‘overpopulation’. The reality is that the nation’s government official’s ambitions are directly derived by attaining the oldest goal of conquerors that of Global Empire, which expanded and more ambitious as the world was further expanded. These are merely tools used by ambitious governmental officials throughout the history of civilizations. Classic isn’t it that the symptoms are always sought to be cured or solved rather than the heart of the issue? ‘Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it’ should be a quote that many of us should take heed of as politicians, social engineers, and etc appear to view themselves quite exempt of any and all intellectual influences are usually the slaves of some defunct economist and repeatedly attempt failed policies believing this time is different and thus expecting a different result.

    “A statement like that should be setting off all kinds of alarm bells in your head.

    Questions like that are only a few steps away from all-out genocide.”

    Very narrow steps. Progressives regardless of being Progressive Republican/Democrat seem to fail to understand that we’re not in an era of progress but an era of digression. With the war on terror, enlarging and expanding government, and transition of civil rights to privileges, we are not only not far away from outright genocide but also the Dark Ages. The parallels are ominous.

    “Many in the environmental movement believe that the number one problem facing the earth is climate change, and many of them also believe that carbon emissions being produced by human activity are the number one cause of climate change.

    So that makes all of us the number one enemy of the planet.”

    It’s also why the focus of the curriculum focuses on the youth-young adults. This creates the transitional generation necessary to not only enable implementation but to believe that it’s for the greater good.

    “That is why those associated with this movement like abortion and absolutely LOVE sterilization.”

    Actually, they seem to love abortion, sterilization, and euthanasia. Abortion and Sterilization limits the number of births while euthanasia would eliminate the elderly who is very much viewed as over stayed their usefulness and effectively a drain on the system.
    In simple terms:
    Abortion eliminates unwanted or undesired youth.
    Sterilization eliminates populations that social engineers and Eugenicists do not many of by controlling who can and cannot have children.
    Euthanasia eliminates people who consume more than they produce aka the Fabian Society’s definition of a useless eater.

    In the West, the curriculum focuses on the youth-young adult, so the policies implementation can be phased in with greater and greater acceptance per generation. After approximately 90% of the population finds it acceptable, the freedom of choice is replaced with mandatory decree:
    Taxes are now capable of compelling individual participation:
    Car Insurance is mandatory and often used to parallel the constitutionality decision of Obamacare, yet this parallel fails to take into consideration one can choose not to drive let alone purchase a car but due to one being born will eventually participate in the healthcare system enables the taxation through individual mandate (It also means that the reverse must be true, so the Green Movement’s Green Economy can now be through taxation become individual mandates as well as governmental approved banking, purchases, and etc effectively making 100% of one’s respective gross/net income and credit lines can now be individually mandated through taxation, welfare, commerce, supremacy, and national security determined by the Federal Government the legal past precedent is set).

    “Your tax dollars go to pay for abortions and sterilizations all over the planet.”

    Much of which was and is claimed to be Voluntary Family Planning programs for the respective nations and in particular regions despite ample evidence to the contrary.

    “Will we see scenes like this in the United States someday?

    The new Obamacare regulation gets us another step closer.”

    Sadly, we probably will.
    Overpopulation, man-made climate change, and much more are deeply embedded in the curriculum in the US even though there’s ample evidence of falsified science and abuse of positions of authority remains largely used to indoctrinate the youth-young adults that these are issues necessary to be addressed by the government in which justifies Big Government expansionism and transition civil rights to civil privileges.

    Since these seem to be seem to be issues in the comments:
    Roe V Wade was simply the transitional case that enables Eugencisms remolded image through reproductive choice by advocating it’s perverse view of natural selection through unnatural selection developed by a relative (cousin ?) of Charles Darwin. Eugencism advocates unnatural selection in which it had and does encourage national and supranational governments to pursue unnatural selection while simultaneously encourages the general populace especially women to pursue the same (here is a pdf on the topic http://www.cardozolawandgender.com/uploads/2/7/7/6/2776881/14-2_ziegler.pdf by Mary Ziegler). What natural selection refers to is the biological, genetical, environmental, and sociological aka predator-prey-reproduction relationship found in the natural world, unnatural selection focuses on acquiring influence and/or control of the reproduction, life and death (balance between predator and prey), and the artificial environment civilization itself creates. What unnatural selection effectively advocates is seizing control of the pillars of civilization: food and water, shelter and land, medium of exchange/barter, and life and death.
    Does quite a bit of those DHS, FBI, and etc lists of potential terrorist/criminal activity and political philosophies make much more sense now that it is no longer a stretch from returning to the Eugenicist Golden Age of central state run unnatural selection with Eugenicists at the helm of governance. (Put two and two together, we have a Eugenicist as the Science Adviser among other positions in the US, we have supranational institutions advocating real and imagined global issues advocating Eugenicist solutions, and we have a healthcare reform bill that effectively makes death medicine, treatment, and counsel more affordable than life sustaining medicine, treatment, and counsel.

  • James

    “So how are they going to get rid of more than 90 percent of us and get the population down to just 500 million?”

    Two words: Stuxnet Fukushima

  • Gary2

    Michael–I think you are throwing red meat to your mostly conservative base. Obamacare also mandates many other things like preventative care etc. There is no part of the ACA that mandates sterilization just that that along with other birth control be covered such as bc pills. This is a good thing.

    For anyone who thinks over population is a myth all they need do is try driving ion rush hour traffic. There are WAY too many people. Yes I know the entrie population of the earth could fit into Texas but who would want to live like that. There is a reason “fly over” country has low population–we need it to grow food.

  • Cinderella Man

    LOL Im getting to be pro-death. I can think of quite a few types of people that gotta go. Dont worry the time of the great culling is about to begin. Something major is going to happen this year and hopefully it will ********** most of the elitist pigs with it.

  • Gay Veteran

    “…Of course this sterilization mandate will make health insurance more expensive for all of us….”

    repeated pregnancies would raise the price of health insurance even more

    nature WILL limit our population, one way or another

    • HecatesMoon

      “nature WILL limit our population, one way or another”
      It won’t be pretty, but yep, I agree.

  • BigFoot

    If anyone wants more information about UN Agenda 21, this is a good place to start: http://web.idrc.ca/openebooks/448-2/

    • HecatesMoon

      Thank you, BigFoot!

  • HecatesMoon

    Here are some earth friendly options they could consider!
    Instead of using money on food stamp campaigns that aren’t really needed, because we all know the option is there if we really need it, why don’t they run advertisements encouraging people to grow gardens.
    An edible garden should be legal no matter where you live so long as it is kept tidy if communities are concerned about eyesores. Denying people the right to grow food should be illegal.
    If the government is going to throw its weight around, why don’t they throw it around at the companies making solar panels? Make them affordable for the average Joe, and plenty more people will step away from the coal powered electric grid.
    Promote rain harvesting a lot more.
    Kick Monsanto out of government and start a full on hard campaign promoting eco friendly techniques to crop farmers.
    The rest, when it comes down to it, is really up to us. People have to decide they want electric cars if they can afford them. They have to want to conserve and recycle. They have to want to use alternative energy if they can afford it.
    Promote, promote, promote!
    Voluntary sterilization? O.k. Good.
    The only problem is that things always go farther and farther and farther than originally intended…and you get Uzbekistan….and then China.

    • klutz

      I really don’t think they’d even need to make it forced if they’re worried about population. The average women wants to be able to decide when/if they start a family and would rather use contraception or get fixed, the services just aren’t available to them.

      • EnlightenedIllumination

        I’m starting nursing school next week. During my prerequisites “the average woman” didn’t even know her reproductive system. People don’t even understand their own bodies so how can they make informed decisions about sex? But in all actuality their are whole sections in Wal-Mart, Rite-Aid, etc on condoms and contraceptive films. It’s available. And don’t forget the internet.

  • Bruce smith

    why don’t they sterilize men instead? One guy can impregnate many women??

    • Barbara

      Bruce, simply put, because the majority of those making these rules are men. And, believe me, I am not a feminist!

    • Gary2

      agreed!

    • klutz

      because the people more likely to get the procedure (and asking for it usually) are women. I’ve been trying to get fixed for 8 years and keep being told that because I’m not 30 or have 2 kids I’m not mature enough to make that decision that I don’t want any

    • szolins

      As any animal breeders know, the number of offspring your can produce is directly related to the number of viable fertile females you have. I breed horses and probably close to 99% of our males are gelded which has no effect on the number of foals the breed I raise can produce. What does effect a breed population growth is the number of fertile females. If I have 100 mares and only 1 viable stallion, I can still have 100 foals a year but if I have only 1 viable mare and 100 stallions, I can only have 1 foal. The same is true of people. If you want to control the birth rate, you have to control sterility of women, not men.

  • http://christnotreligion.blogspot.com DL.

    Yep, at first sterilization will be “voluntary” like the income “is”. Put that together with so-called death panels, and let’s not forget birth control methods that could very well be developed into sterilization methods, and maybe in twenty or thirty years the stupid elites will have let the genie out of the bottle, so instead of a Hunger Games scenario we’ll have a “Children of Men” scenario…where women are no longer fertile. More “predictive programming”?

  • http://christnotreligion.blogspot.com DL.

    * income TAX that is

  • Guido

    I’m sorry, Michael, but what’s wrong with making sterilization available, as long as it isn’t mandatory?

    Actually, I think it might be a good idea if you make chemical sterilization a provision of public aid. Not necessarily mandatory-just a requirement if you want free gov’t money.

    If you’re on welfare, SNAP, and other programs, why shouldn’t you be denied the ability to create children until you’re capable of taking care of yourself?

    I mean, at this point, no one is willing to let a child starve to death, even if its parents are completely incapable, or even unwilling, to support themselves, let alone the kid. At least if you require chemical sterilization while on public aid, you prevent the recipients from adding more people to the dole and you even prevent them from adding to their financial woes.

    It seems perfectly fair to me. Why reward the less-productive and less responsible? If you want public assistance, you get the Depo Provera, or whatever the current chemical is called, and you get it removed once you’re back on your feet.

    It may not sound fair to the more liberal among us, but let me point out my wife and I waited to have children until we felt stable enough and economically capable of providing for them. Life is about being responsible and making intelligent choices, not expecting others to bail you out.

    The kind of people who would opt in for sterilization are probably the kind of people you don’t want having kids, anyway.

    I wonder, though, how much free sterilization on demand aids and abets promiscuous sex? It’s easier to get sterilized than to go through painful surgical procedures, toxic pills, free insurance-provided abortions, and those pesky prophos.

    If anyone needs sterilization, it’s the 3rd world where most of the population increase and, strangely, most of the world’s grinding poverty exist. While I won’t advocate murdering human beings, offering free birth control, lots of rubbers, free sterilization meds-maybe tied to food aid or some kind of free home appliance, and generally getting them to stop producing too damn many kids to adequately support would help the planet.

    What if the aid agencies just added saltpeter and sterilization drugs to the food aid and clean water they deliver? They could knock out two birds with one stone-feeding those already with us and preventing them from adding additional mouths. Is that inhumane? I don’t think so. I think the current situation is much more inhumane.

    If you don’t believe me, look at West Africa, where the nation state as we know it has collapsed, and masses of incredibly poor people are living in endless toxic slums with no food, no water, no garbage or waste collection, endemic Malaria, tottering governments that only rule during the day, violent guerrilla groups, and an overall existence you wouldn’t wish on your worst enemies. It’s a humanitarian disaster that stretches across the entire region-and that’s only one place. You could also look at Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mali, Bangladesh, Burma, Mexico, Egypt, Somalia, etc.

    • EnlightenedIllumination

      I’ve been reading your comments for a while Guido. I don’t agree with all that you say but i have to give credit when it is due. I agree 100% on this post.

  • liberranter

    Looking and listening to those around me, the cynic in me thinks that mass sterilization is a WONDERFUL IDEA. But seriously, what starts out as “voluntary” doesn’t stay that way for very long. There is indeed reason to be VERY concerned about this.

  • Ds8

    I agree that the world is overpopulated, and that the current population is causing massive pollution. But they should limit to only sterilizing people with double digit IQs.

  • Anonymous Amobea

    Okay, first off, it will NEVER be forced. There would be an uprising if that happened. Second, have you actually ever thought how cramped the world is? We’re running out of resources! And how come anytime population control comes up, the word “genocide” is always thrown about. I don’t want to go out and shoot people. I would just like you to STOP CRAPPING OUT KIDS!!! As an asexual, I find that most people are just drones, following their every hormones’ every command. I guess I wouldn’t know, but is it really that hard to just have ONE kid, or better yet, none?

  • Virginia

    Women of childbearing age in the USA are having a heck of a time conceiving these days. When they do achieve pregnancy, it is usually in multiples because of the fertility pills they take. Nature has a way of taking care of “over population” but fertility pills are not helping the over-population problem. The burden falls on society. One in 4 children in America lives at or below poverty today in America. Not something you would wish on your worst enemy. Do women just not get it or do they feel it their duty to have off spring. We need to educate young women today to feel it is not their duty but a tremendous burden on society.

  • http://www.j.com j

    America is not the largest bastard nation on Earth. It has around 11 million single mothers.

    Single mothers are mostly single mothers by choice, and children without two parents have a much more difficult time.

    At the least, single mothers should be sterilized so they don’t become serial bastard breeders.

  • http://www.j.com j

    America is now the largest bastard nation on Earth. It has around 11 million single mothers.

    Single mothers are mostly single mothers by choice, and children without two parents have a much more difficult time.

    At the least, single mothers should be sterilized, so they don’t become serial bastard breeders.

    Daughters of single mothers should be sterilized, because they are likely to become single mothers themselves.

  • EnlightenedIllumination

    Now as much as i disagree with any of the bull**** that government does… i agree with the increase in sterilizations of women and it should also be brought up amongst men. my wife and i have a daughter with a son on the way. She will be getting her tubes tied and when i get the money i will be getting a vasectomy. i do not want to have 10 kids just because i love sex. my wife personally knows someone who is 24 years old and is without a job and has SEVEN children. how else is she “providing for these kids”. on the taxpayers dime. that’s how. i do not want to support someone else and their family just because they don’t like condoms or the pill. i say bring on the sterilizations because it seems only the poor and uneducated are breeding like rats.

  • jamesblunt

    “…the eventual goal is to reduce the population of the earth from 7 billion to about 500 million.”
    FUD (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt), with no evidence to back up such a ridiculous claim.

  • http://www.facebook.com/vicki.childress.9 Vicki Childress

    If we are concerned about over population….and that seems to be the driving force to this agenda….Why not sterilize men?
    Listen to me…the logic is there…..
    A man can impregnate several women in one night and continue to do so every night of every week if he so desires and is lucky. Once a woman is pregnant she cannot get MORE pregnant for 1-2 months if she has an immediate abortion and 10-11 months if she carries the pregancy to full term…
    So to be cost effective on this agenda I think the sterilization effort should be geared towards men.
    Agree?

    • Zeloma Rogers

      I absolutely agree that’s why this theory makes no since.

  • http://www.facebook.com/vicki.childress.9 Vicki Childress

    Another request is to please give womens sex organs and hormones a reprive……Please…healthcare system …..stop messing with us.Just leave us alone. Women stay away from medical doctors…they are dangerous and will take full adantage of the finanicial incentive /green light they will have with Obama care. What is usually thought of as good for medicine and healthcare is bad for women..Women beware……..

  • No

    you sound like a religious nut.

    The population rate is growing out of control. Why do you want more unwanted babies? (yay for kids being abused in the foster system, that’s what you want isn’t it. Or do you want more kid soldiers in countries too poor to feed kids? Oh no? You just want them all to starve..? cool)

    You’re probably against abortions too.

  • Ariel Rainault

    Religious nut they are pushing for ECO-Spirituality–sounds like a One World CULT to me!

  • Ariel Rainault

    BTW Prostitution is Sustainable! Good going FEMINISM!

  • steve

    I fully agree that women get possibility to sterilize themselves. I wish the same would be offered for men. I am long time searching for the required money in order to sterilize myself.
    yes the world is a f… overcrowded place and it is to reduce the population. I would even go further and cut off the support for the elderly, because they are draining with pensions and continuous healthcare demands on the welfare system.

    • Christopher Marsh

      I also don’t want an Asperger kid. You cannot guarantee in advance a fetus will be free of Asperger or autism genes (along with my family’s intelligence), and abortion would be stopping a beating heart. I do not think he or she would be happy, nor do I think I can sustain a stable income level (I mean in the real world with its problems and human egos, although it could work out theoretically with enlightened management, and it has.). Also the sound of a baby crying would be a shrill noise I cannot stand.

  • Susan Borden

    This is a long way from when I had a hysterectomy at 34 years old. My husband had to come to the doctor’s office in person, show identification, then sign a waiver giving his permission for me to have the procedure.

    • Christopher Marsh

      What year was that? Sorry I am asking a woman to essentially give her age….

  • korilla

    I don’t know if the author has considered this possibility, so I want to introduce it quickly–maybe some women WANT sterilization!!!!!

    As a childless 33 year old I have tried for over a decade to get access to sterilization only to be turned away. The reason? Because I don’t have children. That’s ludicrous. I don’t have children because I don’t WANT them–hence my wish for sterilization. The stupidity I have encountered in pursuit of this goal is unbelievable. “If you have 3 or 4 kids first I’ll approve the procedure no problem” one doctor said. (So he trusts my judgement better if I’m 20 and have 4 kids–yeah that’s always a mark of maturity.) Another asked “what if your husband dies & you meet someone who wants kids?” as if it was a profound thought. (If he wants kids, he’s not for me. Wow. Wasn’t that complicated.) “What if you regret it later?” (of all the stupid questions! What if I regret a tattoo, a job, or a mortgage? Every choice has potential for regret and that’s a stupid reason to not make choices.)

    If “social engineers” are trying so hard to curb the population they sure missed this boat. This is only one barrier removed, but it’s about time.

  • Christopher Marsh

    I see you object vehemently to this policy. I am sure you know that our food is grown in oil in mechanized agriculture (literally in oil-based fertilizer and pesticide, less directly with regard to fuel and lubricants for tractors, trucks, harvesters, crop duster planes to create and haul food to factories and then to stores, even less directly in the form of energy to cook, heat, and cool the food and the styrofoam and plastic wrap food comes in. About ten petro calories per food calorie worth. Now understand that the oil output is dwindling while population overall and demand by people with money (China, India, USA, Europe, maybe 3 billion plus worth) is increasing. First food will be expensive as oil gets expensive. Then food will get scarce as simply there is not enough oil to make enough food to feed everybody at any price. The poor nations, people making less than one U.S. dollar a day, maybe a billion people, will starve to death first, especially their kids, who are susceptible to marasmus (simple calorie deficiency) and kwashiokor (protein deficiency given enough calories). People will be ill because malnourished people are susceptible to infection, and there will probably be wars for food, water, oil at that point. Eventually one day even the “rich” nations (3 billion people, maybe more by that point) won’t have enough to eat. Simply put, we have structured our agriculture and society around oil, it is feeding billions but only while it lasts. We can’t substitute human and animal power to make enough food for eight plus billion people, last time we fed people without oil technology, the world numbered a billion or two. There are also problems with alternative energy: nuclear and natural energy require oil-based industry to supply them with turbines et cetera. So, cutting population volunatrily would be a great idea. Eventually, we may have to coerce people somewhat like China is doing. Make parents pay for school and health care for children in excess of one. The tax credit for kids would have been gradually phased out long before that.