Featured Stories World News Commentary Money Watch Multimedia Prison Planet U.S. News Science And Technology

Copenhagen: Global Population Control Program Suggested To Stop Climate Change

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Copenhagen: Global Population Control Program Suggested To Stop Climate Change 101209population

Communist Chinese delegates cite concept as key to saving the planet

Steve Watson,
Prisonplanet.com
Thursday, Dec 10, 2009

The Chinese government delegation at the Copenhagen climate change conference has argued that the Communist dictatorship’s one child policy should “serve as a model for integrating population programs into the framework of climate change adaptation.”

Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) population program told other delegates at the summit that China “has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society” by instituting population control.

“Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture,” said Zhao.

The Chinese delegate also cited the UN’s own 2009 State of World Population report, which suggests that if the global population remains at 8 billion by the year 2050 instead of increasing to just over 9 billion, as projected, “it might result in 1 billion to 2 billion fewer tons of carbon emissions”.

As a result of the family planning policy, China has seen 400 million fewer births, which has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions a year, Zhao bragged.

She also suggested that financing family planning is the most cost effective way of reducing climate change in comparison to clean technologies and reduced deforestation.

“Some 85 percent of the Chinese women in reproductive age use contraceptives, the highest rate in the world. This has been achieved largely through education and improvement of people’s lives,” Zhao said.

Not forced abortions, infanticide and compulsory sterilization then? No no no, just good old fashioned “education” has ensured success for China’s one child policy.

Copenhagen: Global Population Control Program Suggested To Stop Climate Change FOTR 340x1692

Of course, the fact that somewhere in the region of twenty-five million men in China are unable to find brides because so many girls are murdered shortly after birth was somewhat glossed over by the Chinese delegate:

“I’m not saying that what we have done is 100 percent right, but I’m sure we are going in the right direction and now 1.3 billion people have benefited,” she said.

The explosion in the illegal sex trade in Asia as a direct result of the shortage of women is also, presumably, another benefit, as is the fact that China now has a vastly imbalanced population in terms of age.

Suggestions that China’s population control should be integrated globally are insipid, patently ludicrous and downright insulting you may cry. However, not so according to our leaders, who seemingly adore the prospect.

Forced abortions, mass sterilization and a“Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death were all core concepts put forth by John P. Holdren, the man now in control of science policy in the United States, in his co-authored 1977 book, Ecoscience.

In fact, Holdren’s ideas pre-date the inception of China’s one child policy by two years.

In the United Kingdom, top government aides have lauded China’s method of population control, ignoring the fact that it has been the primary source of the most human rights abuses of any government policy on the planet.

Two days ago, a national newspaper in Canada implored the delegates at Copenhagen to implement a global program of population control in the guise of the Chinese.

It is no surprise that China’s population genocide is being tolerated at the UN led Copenhagen summit, given that The United Nations Population Fund directly supports the Communist State’s policy.

In 2002 Secretary of State Colin Powell stated in a letter to Congress:

“Regrettably, the People’s Republic of China has in place a regime of severe penalties on women who have unapproved births. This regime plainly operates to coerce pregnant women to have abortions in order to avoid the penalties and therefore amounts to a ‘program of coercive abortion.’ Regardless of the modest size of UNFPA’s budget in China or any benefits its programs provide, UNFPA’s support of, and involvement in, China’s population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion.”

Yet The UNPFA seem to think this is a great thing:

“China has had the most successful family planning policy in the history of mankind in terms of quantity and with that, China has done mankind a favour,” United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) representative Sven Burmester said last week. —10/11/99 Agence France-Presse

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Under the Reagan Administration legislation sponsored by then-Rep. Jack Kemp (NY) and then-Sen. Bob Kasten (WI) ensured funding to the UNPFA was cut off for these very reasons. Yet is was no surprise when In 1993, the Clinton Administration dramatically revised the official interpretation of the “Kemp-Kasten amendment” in order to facilitate U.S. funding of UNFPA, thus making available $14.5 million.

In May 2003, the House Committee on International Relations narrowly adopted an an amendment by Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-NY) revoking the ban on such participation with the UNPFA. The amendment earmarked $100 million for UNFPA over the next two years.

All this is being disturbingly tied in to the climate change debate by hijackers of the environmental movement who have spuriously associated fears over global warming with over-population, suggesting that the solution is to implement depopulation policies and punishments for those who flout them.

The connection is an appealing one to advocates of the anthropological global warming theory because, if you believe humans are to blame for dangerous alterations in the climate, eventually the conclusion of less humans = less warming is reached.

However, there is a fundamental flaw in associating climate change with overpopulation.

Populations in developed countries are declining and only in third world countries are they expanding dramatically. Industrialization itself levels out population trends and even despite this world population models routinely show that the earth’s population will level out at 9 billion in 2050 and slowly decline after that. “The population of the most developed countries will remain virtually unchanged at 1.2 billion until 2050,” states a United Nations report. The UN’s support for depopulation policies is in direct contradiction to their own findings.

Once a country industrializes there is an average of a 1.6 child rate per household, so the western world population is actually in decline. That trend has also been witnessed in areas of Asia like Japan and South Korea. The UN has stated that the population will peak at 9 billion and then begin declining.

In addition, as highlighted by the Economist recently, global fertility rates are falling.

Since radical environmentalists are pushing to de-industrialize the world in the face of the so called carbon threat, this will reverse the trend that naturally lowers the amount of children people have. If climate change fanatics are allowed to implement their policies, global population will continue to increase and overpopulation may become a real problem – another example of how the global warming hysterics are actually harming the long term environment of the earth by preventing overpopulated countries from developing and naturally lowering their birth levels.

Even if you play devils advocate and accept that humans do cause catastrophic warming and there are too many of us, and if you can skip past the Nazi eugenics connotations of population control and depopulation policies, those methods are fundamentally still not a valid solution to the perceived climate change threat.

The real solution would be to pour funds into increasing the standards of living of the cripplingly poor third world, allowing those countries to industrialize, and seeing the population figures naturally level out.

Instead, the third world has seen a doubling in food prices owing to climate change policies such as turning over huge areas of agricultural land to the growth of biofuels.

In addition, the leaked Copenhagen text that emerged earlier this week highlighted the fact that developed nations are planning to take on less of a burden than anticipated and that more would be demanded of poorer countries despite the fact that any further cuts in CO2 emissions will further cripple their flimsy economies and poverty-stricken people.

The draft agreement would allow people in developed countries to emit twice as much carbon per head than those in poorer countries, who have not caused the rise in emissions said to be threatening our existence on the planet. The revelations have led third world leaders to accuse the developed world of “climate colonialism”.

Another revelation from the summit reveals that under a plan tabled by Britain, money earmarked for education or health in poorer countries would be diverted into projects such as solar panels and wind farms, again diverting much needed aid away from efforts to increase the standard of living.

Linking environmental policy to depopulation agendas opens the door to eugenics and it is no surprise that through that door have come pouring hordes of elitist filth just begging to be on the front line of the extermination policy.

One example is UK-based public policy group The Optimum Population Trust (OPT), which has launched a new initiative urging wealthy members of the developed world to participate in carbon offsets that fund programs for curbing the population of developing nations.

In 2007, the group also published a report announcing that children are ‘bad for planet and ‘having large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags.

The same talking point has been re-iterated again and again by public policy groups and environmentalists, as well as the most influential scientists in the US government.

While you may think ideas of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized by some as the way forward for humanity.

The reality is that the summit in Copenhagen and it’s attendees are providing a platform, and in some cases actively pushing for a policy enforced by a dictatorship that actively hunts down mothers who become pregnant with their second child, abducts them off the street and takes them to government controlled hospitals where they are drugged and their baby is killed – all in the name of saving the planet.

Alex Jones’ Films Endgame and Fall Of The Republic address the hijacking of the environmental movement by elite social Darwinists in more detail.

This article was posted: Thursday, December 10, 2009 at 11:27 am





Infowars.com Videos:

Comment on this article

Comments are closed.

Watch the News

FEATURED VIDEOS
The Truth About U.S. Air Strikes on Syria With Syrian Girl See the rest on the Alex Jones YouTube channel.

Mysterious Georgia Guidestones Get Strange '2014' Update See the rest on the Alex Jones YouTube channel.

© 2013 PrisonPlanet.com is a Free Speech Systems, LLC company. All rights reserved. Digital Millennium Copyright Act Notice.