They want to kill us all !!!! Are you sure ?

Originally posted by gYvMessanger
reply to post by halfoldman

 

Ok so you feel you are in a country that is receiving some fairly "heavy pruning", what do you think the reasons for that is in your countries case ? Arent native Africans viewed as generally being physically superior humans to the other types (I dont mean this in a racist way, speaking very broadly here), wouldn't it better serve the agenda to keep Africans healthy if uneducated if you where looking for a workforce ?

Try reading up about NSSM 200 if you want an answer to that.
It is official American government policy, signed by Nixon and Ford, one for the preparation and the other for the finished document.
This document specifies ways to decrease population in countries such as those in Africa, where America wants free rein to steal the natural resources.

Yes, Africans have proven in the past they can be strong, intelligent, determined, formidable foes. Rather than being valued for their abilities, they have been ground down until TPTB no longer has to fear them.

The elites don't care about the health of their workers. Germany did quite well in WWII using prisoners as slave labour, overworking and underfeeding them until they dropped dead, then bringing in fresh replacements. Africa is a modern day Auschwitz in more ways than one.

Originally posted by gYvMessanger
reply to post by halfoldman

 

Ok so you feel you are in a country that is receiving some fairly "heavy pruning", what do you think the reasons for that is in your countries case ? Arent native Africans viewed as generally being physically superior humans to the other types (I dont mean this in a racist way, speaking very broadly here), wouldn't it better serve the agenda to keep Africans healthy if uneducated if you where looking for a workforce ?

Yes, they are being kept healthy enough, and there is a degree of foreign and local effort in the HIV/Aids situation. Conservatively estimated, under shady Mbeki's Presidency 350 000 people died unnecessarily from Aids. The drugs were offered (virtually for free), but since 1998-2008 they did not reach anyone in the public sector. It's a lengthey topic, but basically they were officially stalled.
By and large SA has an old infastructure that cannot supply enough water, electricity or health-care. Then it also carries an increasing number of immigrants from other African countries. So if the big mining houses (Oppenheimers, De Beers, Anglo-American) want to keep a degree of cohesion, the population must be pruned.
Consider Apartheid. It certainly kept black education low to minimal, but it built the biggest hospitals in Africa (which the black ANC brought to ruin). The black population increased manifold under apartheid. So strangely they did what you suggest: keep education low and health up.
The demand for uskilled manual mine labor was so high until the 1970s that SA had virtual full-employment. It's hard to imagine now.

[edit on 12-12-2009 by halfoldman]

reply to post by Kailassa

I second the points in the post. However, seconding the last points on African success, creativity and tenacity let us not dwell on one continent as the "disaster zone".
Colonial genocides and dispossession are going on every where.
Even in the richer nations people often have inferior public health-care.
Soon, if you cannot afford private health-care and other private companies for security, organic foods, education - your life won't mean squat!

And yet even with these problems the population of South Africa is steadily growing according to offical records.

Is the plan then to actually reduce population or is to ensure only a young work force survive ?

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by Kailassa

 

I second the points in the post. However, seconding the last points on African success, creativity and tenacity let us not dwell on one continent as the "disaster zone".
Colonial genocides and dispossession are going on every where.
Even in the richer nations people often have inferior public health-care.
Soon, if you cannot afford private health-care and other private companies for security, organic foods, education - your life won't mean squat!

Very true.
When Bush said, "you are either with us or against us," he was echoing a century old American sentiment. The NSSM was aimed at all of what Kissinger considered "lesser" countries. I suspect SARS was an experiment in targeting Asians, following on from the research in reducing population in Asian countries carried out by Macfarlane Burnet, a famous Australian who had an institute for researching infectious diseases named after him.

Terrible things have been done to countries all over the world using food, disease, trade and possibly even weather as weapons.

Originally posted by endisnighe
Okay, from another thread I was just on, I came across some documents that are blowing my mind.

I do not even know where to begin.

OP, these people have an agenda. I do not even know yet, if it would be a detriment to the US. This definitely has nothing to do with saving the environment. It is an agenda to usher in globalization on a grand scale.

Like I said, a couple of documents were pointed in my way that I am in the middle of.

If anyone is interested here are their names-Google, I found them pretty easy.

2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf
strat_trends_23jan07.pdf
23839029-Draft-The-Copenhagen-Agreement.pdf


Things that we have been discussing, about what is behind the curtain, is in these docs.

Welcome the the rabbit hole and we have been right all along, about EVERYTHING.

This is from another thread, on the climate change issue, but it is relevant here, i have not seen all the pdf, documents yet, but i have seen some of them, and its right, there is a global conspiracy and its nothing to do with global warming, it has everything to do with world domination and population culling.

just read what they write... their number one problem is too many people.
2nd line they are unanomus.

I might point out that they don't want to kill us outright - yet - because as long as we're living (but sick and dying), we spend money, enriching them all the more. But at some pioint we'll become too cumbersome to control fully, and it is that eventuality that they're planning for in their efforts to rule the world.

And, of course, they are making it more socially acceptable to choose death - which will be of use in the near future.

So... that is what I think is going on.

reply to post by gYvMessanger

Perhaps they want you to suffer before you die and not just die so easily.
Never know.



[edit on 12-12-2009 by Tormentations]

Originally posted by gYvMessanger
And yet even with these problems the population of South Africa is steadily growing according to offical records.

Is the plan then to actually reduce population or is to ensure only a young work force survive ?

At least a few years back we had a negative growth rate. Since we have no real border control the amount of foreign immigrants from places like the Congo, Angola, Somalia, Nigeria and especially Zimbabwe is unknown. Let's just say that in certain towns they well outnumber the locals, and I wouldn't be surprised if more than half of Zimababweans are here.
With issues like birth rate it is not really possible to divide locals from foreigners for many reasons.
Of course things like mother-to-child HIV prevention drugs were eventually rolled out after much activism. Birth rates may be high even with HIV, but not necessarily survival rates.
At any rate, HIV prunes slowly but consistanly, and as one Aids generation has died off, the slow HIV cycle begins again.
HIV affects mainly the economically active age group, however, one cannot just speak of a "work-force", since much of the youth is unemployed, and because of ANC disasters in education, often unemployable.
More direct pruning, like civil war and further xenophobic violence may well lurk in South Africa's future.

reply to post by halfoldman


Another way to describe this is culling the herds,kill the old,the sick and
the weak.

reply to post by mamabeth

For sure, depending on what they're worth.
They can also kill the excess of any generation, the gullible or brainwashed, whatever is regionally required.
They can also kill ideas and political movements by targeting the right people. I think this is often overlooked by skeptics. Although many Native American tribes survive, their shamen and holders of culture, medicine and language often died-out with much knowledge.
So, if one can just prune ten percent over a decade, then so much resistance, and knowledge is gone. The wider impact of disease also stifles people politically - People may be too lethargic to vote or agitate because caring for the ill is draining.
Just one person with AIDS for example, may affect a whole community.
It was telling enough that activists from the Christian right used a slogan in the 1980s: "AIDS: It kills all the right people"!

reply to post by mamabeth

Then one also has the sometimes applauded culling of the "immoral" with drugs, particularly crack, heroin and meth (although alcohol and nicotine still dominate as the majority killers).
I mean in which region are the biggest opium fields today? And smokable heroin is appearing in African townships.



[edit on 16-12-2009 by halfoldman]