David Attenborough: Stop Feeding Third World Nations to Reduce Population

Don't ever just take anyone's word for it...even from those who claim they know.

reply to post by Eryiedes


Ironic

I upset my political representative (a woman) when I asked her what was the point of vaccinating third world children who would die of starvation or get shot in internecine warfare? I did not get a coherent answer.
Yes, it is brutal, life is brutal, Ashcanistan, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, etcetera.

I'm afraid this thread is terribly misguided, it starts with a link to an article that says somebody has been saying some terrible things, and then there is a link to the Telegraph article where it is apparent the original article the OP is up in arms about has completely made things up and put words in Attenborough's mouth that he never actually said.

Very irresponsible website writing.

Should this not all be moved to the Hoax forum now?

reply to post by Eryiedes


I recall something about Prince Charles saying "get rid of the useless eaters".
Perhaps he and Attenborough had a chat.

AthlonSavage
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

Well, it turns out that the ‘sensitivities’ blocking the decimation of the world’s human population include ‘the right to have children’. How truly horrible. Instead, it seems Attenborough thinks that we should revoke the right of citizens to even have children, let alone feed the existing humans in hungry nations. In the interview, Attenborough states:

Revoking right for people to have children sounds ok in a world which is suffering population starvation problems. Do you have a better idea?

I can't advocate it when that starvation is being foisted upon them. We are FORCING them into that starvation with "trade agreements".
We are forcing that starvation upon them so they can have "carbon sinks" on the land they used to grow their food on.
The wars the U.N. and Africom run create famine and death.
Maybe if we STOPPED doing that and actually gave them the food we waste by dumping it into the oceans the situation wouldn't be one where people felt that letting them starve was the only solution.
The seed they need to grow food has artificially high prices designed to wipe out populations.
THAT is why they are starving.
WE are slowly killing them and then denying them the opportunity to help themselves.
Barbaric doesn't even begin to scratch the surface.
Diabolical is an understatement.
What if we just stopped messing with them? What about that?

But if the buddha has taught me anything, it's that I know nothing.

-Peace-

Cynic
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

I recall something about Prince Charles saying "get rid of the useless eaters".
Perhaps he and Attenborough had a chat.

Indeed he did sir....Indeed he did.

-Peace-

reply to post by Eryiedes


All that, I agree with. There are better answers than 'kill-em-all' or rampant population growth. Little on Earth is black and white. (Feel free to post pictures of black and white things)

Cynic
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

I recall something about Prince Charles saying "get rid of the useless eaters".
Perhaps he and Attenborough had a chat.

When you think about, it each spent a considerable time dealing with "The House of Lords" so that is probably not far from the truth. These people don't all have these ideas simultaneously.
Even amongst the elite theres only a few of them that are TRUELY intelligent.
The rest are just following rank and file with some other smart persons plan.

-Peace be with you-

To make it simple what Attenborough said is that there are too many people been born , the land cannot support the birth rate, becouse of this its pointless trying to feed all the people all the time by giving them food from another country, but the people must be educated in birth control so as to have a chance of there country been able to feed its own people and to give them a higher standerted of living. What he said is not about starving the people already alive, but getting the problem under control by education.

reply to post by Eryiedes


If you mean he has been dealing with the House of Lords as in this article or maybe as a witness in a science and technology report, you are right. That is not your insinuation though.

Also Elite !=Intelligent, so that was an irrelevant statement.

You presume to much with little to no information. Please be more accurate with your slander

imod02

To make it simple what Attenborough said is that there are too many people been born , the land cannot support the birth rate, becouse of this its pointless trying to feed all the people all the time by giving them food from another country, but the people must be educated in birth control so as to have a chance of there country been able to feed its own people and to give them a higher standerted of living. What he said is not about starving the people already alive, but getting the problem under control by education.

Yes...BUT the birth control he speaks of is on par with the Gates plan.
You want food?
We have to clip your bags.
You want medicine?
We have to kill your ovaries.
What happens when they stop doing it to "just those terribly burdensome brown people" and figure out they can do it to you? Even manipulate the information to make you believe that its the right thing for you to do?
I'm fighting for their right to live their lives free of our tyranny so I don't have to fight to protect my OWN from the same tyranny.
The problems with the population and food are simple problems to fix...if the rich were not so blatantly greedy and wasteful.
How much food does an average city waste in a single day?
All the restaurants....supermarkets....dinner tables.
How many people could be fed if Starbucks wasn't preoccupied with firing their underpaid employees for just for snagging a sandwich earmarked for disposal out of a garbage can?
For just ONE city...that waste is STAGGERING, and that's just ONE city.
Now think of ALL the cities in North America.
Now think of all the cities in the world.
You mean to tell me that we can't stop hunger in the world with all the waste we have in a single day?
How about a month?
How about a year?
There is MORE than enough to feed and assist EVERY SINGLE PERSON without having Attenborough starve someone just to prevent the third world from advancing and becoming a competitor for the resources that the first world has and controls with the false dichotomy of scarcity.
It is a crime against humanity.
But if the buddha has taught me anything it's that I know nothing.

-Peace be with you-

Painterz
I'm afraid this thread is terribly misguided, it starts with a link to an article that says somebody has been saying some terrible things, and then there is a link to the Telegraph article where it is apparent the original article the OP is up in arms about has completely made things up and put words in Attenborough's mouth that he never actually said.

Very irresponsible website writing.

Should this not all be moved to the Hoax forum now?

I will be the first to admit I started out making a mistake and then proceeded to compound it.
It is your right to report it to the mods and I would not think less of you for it but it's not as misguided as you alude and I don't base my response on just that article as I have been following Agenda 21 for a while.
You are entitled to your opinion and I thank you for your input.

-Peace-

reply to post by Eryiedes


Theres a lot of humanoid shaped agricultural by-product there, did you have to use a tractor to get that here ?

You like to keep attacking David with no evidence to support your claims, not very Buddhist of you to attack anyone really.
Have you seen his birth control plan, what does it say ? Or is it easier to just equate it with someone elses to support your argument ?

He is also involved with this group Population Matters

The evil birth control plan of Dave

The broadcaster, who is a patron of the charity Population Matters, which promotes family planning and campaigns for sustainable consumption, also appeared to express qualified support for the one-child policy in China. He said: "It's the degree to which it has been enforced which is terrible, and there's no question it's produced all kinds of personal tragedies. There's no question about that. On the other hand, the Chinese themselves recognise that had they not done so there would be several million more mouths in the world today than there are now." He added: "If you were able to persuade people that it is irresponsible to have large families in this day and age, and if material wealth and material conditions are such that people value their materialistic life and don't suffer as a consequence, then that's all to the good. But I'm not particularly optimistic about the future. I think we're lucky to be living when we are, because things are going to get worse."

Hmm not much about starving people or vaccinating them to death in there, seems to be about family planning and sensible consumption in a fast growing population.

Maybe in your mind the world is of infinite size and can support humanity for ever and ever regardless of how many mewling fleshbags we dump into it and expect it to support. (I love the smell of inflammatory vitriol in the morning)

I will re-iterate, wear a (free) johnny

Using Trans-humanist rhetoric to validate your position on Agenda 21 in a bit like using Goebels to validate Hitler. I'm sorry but there is no excuse for mass murder no matter how you polish it up.

-Peace-

reply to post by Eryiedes


Plus you are now just speculating and fabricating tenuous links to other things to support your attack on this man.

Make a new topic or continue in one about population control and discuss it there, this is no longer a viable topic for this discussion.

It is just slander of Davey-boy

Tidnabnilims
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

Plus you are now just speculating and fabricating tenuous links to other things to support your attack on this man.

Make a new topic or continue in one about population control and discuss it there, this is no longer a viable topic for this discussion.

It is just slander of Davey-boy

Now you are denying he's even a eugenicist so there's no point in engaging you in further discussion.

-Good Day-

reply to post by Eryiedes


A fantastic example of Aunt Sally's use of Godwins law.

You are being deliberately obtuse and very daft at this point.

reply to post by Eryiedes


You clearly dont know what Eugenics as it is clearly not what Population Matters is about. There is no genetic purity through selective breeding here. Just a realistic view of how many people can the planet support.

So please answer this question for me

Do you think with the current population growth on this planet there will be enough fresh water for everyone in 20 years time ?

reply to post by Eryiedes


So who really is a D-bag here?

A guy promoting sustainable population in poorer nations?

Or irresponsible parents popping out more kids than they can feed?