Is any of this true? Obama Science Czar’s Plan To Sterilize Population Through Water Supply Alre

www.infowars.com...


I saw it on Alex Jones Infowars

are they true? Alex didn't put up the source,l actually don't know what to believe.

I remember when Alex Jones aid "UN wants a Global Government to take action against swine flu, you can google this if you want"

and i did and nothing came up

EDIT : does Alex Jones have any source to this , it really scared me

[edit on 15-7-2009 by dino1989]

[edit on 15-7-2009 by dino1989]

My common-sense detector tells me that (and after having researched much of Mr. Jones commentary for myself) that Mr. Jones makes a great deal of money off of keeping people frightened.

Does that mean everything he says or states is boohockey. Of course not! But a good deal of what Alex Jones is good at is finding small "snippets" of fact and then drawing lots of GRAND and DRAMATIC conclusions from those.

There are LOTS of things wrong with the distribution of water - not the least of which is the fact that there is actually VERY LITTLE sustainably clean/healthy water left out there at all thanks to industry and technology. I cannot say whether or not the info he presents is true - but in all my searches on the topic, I find no evidence of intentional, grand conspiracy by the government to sterilize the US population's drinking water.

Look, people can't agree on whether the tree hanging over the fence is their responsibility or their neighbors'. Do you REALLY believe that the thousands of people that would need to be complicit to enact such a scheme (without anyone whistle blowing or developing a conscious along the way mind you) is very likely? Apply the Occam razor theory and my guess would be that while many individual states, cities and townships do some not-so-healthy things to their water supplies (mostly driven by for-profit goals and personally beneficial agendas) which ultimately do endanger large sections of the US population, it is highly unlikely a mass effort by our government (most of whom don't even like each other at all - much less could agree on something this scale) to sterilize the entire population could or would be even marginally successful.

(Btw, posting a link without at least a quick summary of the topic being discussed smells a lot like a way to get people to click a link to me, rather than an honest attempt to discuss a concern.)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6e5e3c972ed0.jpg[/atsimg]

Based on this, and based on our way of living (poor food practices and stupid people breeding like rabbits), the pressure is on the Elite power players to reduce the world population by any means required to preserve their power beyond 2050 or 2110.

Since people are locked onto this planet by the technology-hoarding Elites we cannot colonize another moons or planets.

Yes, the only way out is death.

The target is 500 million people (500 million survivors including all of the Elites of course- they will be very well equipped in surviving underground for many, many years)

Will you be one of the survivors?

[edit on 15-7-2009 by star in a jar]

reply to post by star in a jar


and where is your source for this

[edit on 15-7-2009 by dino1989]

reply to post by dino1989
Google the population map. It's there in plain view.

Our population is climbing, nonstop, because condoms are a sin in some religions and it has to be brought, at that too. It's not free for people too embarrassed to buy it at the counter.

The Elite have been in power for many hundreds of years and technology, especially the internet, has the growing ability to destroy their power because people find sites like ATS, going around mainstream Elite-controlled media, waking up in the process. This troubles the Elites greatly their power depends on people's ignorance.

Why haven't we gone back to the moon since the early 70's? Our transportation technology hasn't really changed much for decades, well, officially at least.

The brutal truth is that we must stay on this planet because we will not be controllable when we are released to the cosmos to learn the truth about life beyond that on Earth.


[edit on 15-7-2009 by star in a jar]

reply to post by dino1989


Ignore skeptical seeker. He trashes alex jones (says alex jones grand dramatic conclusions, is a fearmonger, etc) but then says alex jones' conclusions are correct (that our water is in fact contaminated). confused much?

reply to post by star in a jar


No i meant where is your evidence 500 million people will be left on earth?

reply to post by dino1989


The Georgia Guidestones

Here you go!

reply to post by star in a jar


Hahah your one of those who believe everything you hear on the net

reply to post by dino1989
Sure, stay in denial until it's too late

I sometimes don't believe it too but that's only because the truth is too horrible to accept IMO.

I don't know how long you've surrounded yourself with conspiracy theories but I can tell you right now, that quite a few of 'Conspiracy theories' are no longer, that it is literally fact at this time.


[edit on 15-7-2009 by star in a jar]

the BS that Jones will inject into a story is directly correlated with the amount of fear that said story can generate. In other words, dude is not a reliable source

The eugenics and sterilization program is moving forward as we speak. Even though it's happening their are and will continue to be many who ignore it and laugh at anyone who does. Do some research yourself and you will soon find that men are already almost 80 percent less feritle than they were in the past. All this is not an accident.

reply to post by dino1989


In short, it does appear there is at least a shred of truth to this. In 1977 Holdren co-Authored a book called Ecoscience in which these types of measures were called for. One can find a related article here. Yes its infowars, however they are simply quoting the book and to provide proof, I am providing an online link to the book itself. Look at the pages and quotes in question, its real, and in print. First Infowars quotes,


“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

“One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.”

“Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”

Toward a Planetary Regime

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”

“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

www.infowars.com...

There are more quotes in the article but for now thats enough. If one still wants more proof you can read the book itself here.

www.questia.com...

reply to post by jdl79


with my previous statement, i will also say that yes, there is SOME truth behined it but at the same time, i believe that he blows it out of proportion

reply to post by BrainPower


I agree Jones has a tendency to blow things up to keep his listeners tuning in. My position was simply to show that Holdren does indeed lean that way, and more often than not, these type of leopards don't change their spots. Now that he has been appointed to the high post of science advisor it does make one scratch their head, and wonder if he may have been appointed because of these types of views. The idea of population reduction is not a new one, however it is firmly supported by many governmental agencies, including the UN among others. I have also seen the 500 million number thrown out a lot as ideal population level, if in fact this type of a plot does exist, and those in power wished to begin implementation, Holders appointment would make absolute sense. This is something many may want to watch because if indeen this is the plan, a lot of people could be dying very early deaths.

roger that, i have seen the 500 million number as well. if something like this does happen, the best thing, i think, would be to keep fear in check and fight back. really, what do you think the average person would do in a situation like this besides simply run? think about it though, over 6 billion people on the planet, around, what, 3-4 hundred million in america alone....how do they decide who dies then?