.

A 1973 document has emerged called Mass Media, Family Planning and Development: Country Case Studies on Media Strategy, wherein we learn something about the strategies to be implemented in the eugenics-based family planning project of the future. Based on case studies in third world countries, the document proposes the creation of a ‘family planning communication resource unit’ for every nation concerned. The reason being, so the report states, that “culturally, there is an emphasis on fertility, and the birth of children to the family is celebrated, as a symbol of prosperity and for status for women.” Because the Unesco-chieftains can’t have that, the reduction of a population should be accomplished through an elaborate media campaign, utilizing all possible avenues. Ancient tribal instincts, revolving around procreation and creativity, become suspect- as does religion and tribal mythology.

The writers however, mean not to destroy these human tendencies, they mean to use them to their own advantage and that of their masters instead. “The religion”, they say, “supports the idea that children are ‘God’s Greatest Blessing’ but can also be used to encourage the idea that every child should be given the best opportunities parents can offer. There is also a favourable attitude to economic development, a desire to raise living standards, and a desire for education. These factors are helpful in the development of a Preliminary Media Strategy.”

“A Communication Resource Unit”, the document continues, “is responsible for the implementation of media policy for one, or more than one field.” The document proceeds with outlining the functions of such a unit in regards to family planning messages: “The integration of messages is a matter which concerns the Communication Resource Unit, in that an integrated approach to family planning needs to be worked out. (…) These (messages) may be ‘family planning for maternal health’, ‘family planning for family prosperity’, ‘family planning for your figure’, ‘family planning for national prosperity’, family planning for child development.’ These messages will be pretested to find those which seem to appeal most to the eligible age groups.”

One of the many case studies (country case study nr.1) involves an unnamed “small island”, total population 3,000,000. Describing the current situation, the report states: “Mass media approaches to family planning are wholly financed by the Government and, since 1968, radio, television and the press have been used to give information about family planning and to create an awareness of the need for population control.” One of the chief objectives for the ‘resource unit’, will be to “extend(ing) the family planning coverage to 90% of the eligible population. The aim at this point is to bring the number of children per family nearer to three rather than four, and to gradually reduce this to two children per family at a later stage.”

As one of the first proposed ‘phases’ of the programme, the document describes several messages to be embedded within television commercials. “A couple are shown over one of the new Government flats. They are unable to take it, because the accommodation provided is for families with two or three children. Preference is given to smaller families. They (the large family) will have to wait longer.” Another example: “The picture shows a married woman with one child. She is stopped by a voice saying “Do you know about family planning?” “Your local clinic has all the information.”" Or: “(Picture changes to a smiling woman with clinic appearing) “Family planning is free in all clinics (…)”". How about this one: “Don’t put off family planning. Tomorrow may be too late. See your clinic today.” You gotta also love this one: “A picture on the screen could show a woman talking to a consultant about family planning. She turns to the viewers and says: “I’m glad I made up my mind about family planning.””

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars
Read Entire Article

Alongside John P. Holdrens advocacy for a global planetary regime to enforce forced abortion, government `seizure of children born out of wedlock, and mandatory bodily implants designed to prevent pregnancy, Obamas top advisor also called for, “Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.”

In a revealing interview with the New York Times, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says abortion should be used to control useless eaters and unwanted populations.

She does not say it like that, but she might as well have.

Asked out “reproductive choice” — that is, the choice to kill a fetus — Ginsburg said the Supreme Court ruling on Medicaid surprised her. In 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.

“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of,” said the Justice (emphasis added).

In other words, Ginsberg says abortion is a eugenics tool designed to weed out the undesirable and useless eaters, to specifically control the number of people the ruling elite “don’t want to have too many of,” i.e., the poor and specifically people of color.

“Those least fit to carry on the race are increasing most rapidly,” declared Margaret Sanger, a member of both the American Eugenics Society and the English Eugenics Society and founder of Planned Parenthood. “Funds that should be used to raise the standard of our civilization are diverted to maintenance of those who should never have been born.”

Sanger was a follower of Francis Galton, the “humanist” who believed that inferior races and people should cease to breed or “be considered enemies of the State” and exterminated. The American and British Eugenics Societies were founded on Galton’s writings. Sanger became a member of the American Eugenics Society in 1930, and a member of the International Congress of Eugenics in 1932.

Elmer Carter, an editor of Sanger’s The Birth Control Review, wrote in 1932 about the “Negro Problem.” He said “that the race problem in America is infinitely aggravated by the presence of too many unhappy born, sub-normals, morons, and imbeciles of both races. Therefore, those fighting for birth control must take eugenics into consideration.”

Roe v. Wade was instituted primarily for eugenics, as James R. Weddington admitted in 1992. Weddington was one of the co-counsels for Roe v. Wade. “But you can start immediately to eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country,” Weddington wrote to then president Clinton. “Even if we make birth control as ubiquitous as sneakers and junk food, there will still be unplanned pregnancies” and the need for abortion.
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
Read Entire Article