12/20/95

Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS (22 June 1887 – 14 February 1975) was a British evolutionary biologist, eugenicist, and internationalist. He was a proponent of natural selection, and a leading figure in the mid-twentieth century modern synthesis. He was secretary of the Zoological Society of London (1935–1942), the first Director of UNESCO, a founding member of the World Wildlife Fund, the president of the British Eugenics Society (1959–1962), and the first president of the British Humanist Association.

In his 1957 book New Bottles for New Wine, Julian Huxley writes:

TRANSHUMANISM

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.

This cosmic self-awareness is being realized in one tiny fragment of the universe – in a few of us human beings.

Perhaps it has been realized elsewhere too, through the evolution of conscious living creatures on the planets of other stars.

But on this our planet, it has never happened before.

Evolution on this planet is a history of the realization of ever new possibilities by the stuff of which Earth (and the rest of the universe) is made – life:

• strength
• speed
• awareness

the emergence of mind, long before man was ever dreamt of, with the production of:

• color
• beauty
• communication
• maternal care

and the beginnings of intelligence and insight.

And finally, during the last few ticks of the cosmic clock, something wholly new and revolutionary, human beings with their capabilities for conceptual thought and language, for self-conscious awareness and purpose, for accumulating and pooling conscious experience.

For do not let us forget that the human species is as radically different from any of the microscopic single-called animals that lived a thousand million years ago as they were from a fragment of stone or metal.

The new understanding of the universe has come about through the new knowledge amassed in the last hundred years – by:

• psychologists
• biologists
• other scientists
• archaeologists
• anthropologists

and historians.

It has defined man’s responsibility and destiny – to be an agent for the rest of the world in the job of realizing its inherent potentialities as fully as possible.

It is as if man had been suddenly appointed managing director of the biggest business of all the business of evolution – appointed without being asked if he wanted it, and without proper warning and preparation.

What is more, he can’t refuse the job.

Whether he wants to or not, whether he is conscious of what he is doing or not, he is in point of fact determining the future direction of evolution on this Earth.

That is his inescapable destiny, and the sooner he realizes it and starts believing in it, the better for all concerned. 

SOCIALISM

“We will build the New World Order piece by piece right under their noses” (the American people).

“The house of the New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down.

An end run around sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal attack.”

Richard Gardner, leading American Socialist, Foreign Affairs – The Journal of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), April 1974, quoted from John Coleman’s new book Socialism: The Road to Slavery [WIR, 2533 N. Carson St., #J118, Carson City, NV 89706 – 800-942-0821].

Continuing to quote from Coleman’s book:

There is an account of the various Socialists’ goals set by the British Fabian Society, whose motto is, “Make Haste Slowly.”

When asked to explain Communism, Lenin replied,

“Communism is Socialism in a hurry.”

Socialism has nowhere to progress but to Communism.

Socialism is revolution without openly violent methods but nevertheless does the utmost violence to the psyche of the nation.

It is a movement governed by stealth.

Its slow advance on the United States from its home base in England was almost imperceptible up to the 1950s.

The Fabian Socialist movement remains distinct from so-called Socialist Party groups and its forward crawl was thus almost imperceptible to the majority of Americans.

“When you wound a Communist, a Socialist bleeds”

is a saying that dates back to the early days of Fabian Socialism.

Socialism ardently welcomes proliferation of central government power which they strive to secure for themselves, always pretending it to be for the common good.

The United States and Britain are full to the brim with false prophets pushing the New World Order.

These Socialist missionaries preach peace and humanitarianism and common good.

Fully aware that they could not overcome the resistance of the American people to Communism by direct means, the insidious Fabian Socialists knew they had to move silently and slowly and avoid alerting the people to their real objectives.

Thus was “scientific Socialism” adopted as the way to overcoming the United States and making of it the leading Socialist country in the world.

How far Fabian Socialism has succeeded, and where we stand today is told in this book [Socialism: The Road to Slavery].

Presidents:

• Wilson
• Roosevelt
• Eisenhower
• Carter

Kennedy and Johnson were eager, willing servants of Fabian Socialism.

Their mantle was passed to President Clinton.

Democracy and Socialism go hand-in-hand.

All United States presidents since Wilson have repeatedly stated that the United States is a Democracy, when in fact, it is a Confederated Republic.

Fabian Socialism directs the destiny of the world in a way which is disguised to render it unrecognizable.

Socialism is the author of the graduated income tax, the destroyer of nationalism, the author of so-called “free trade.”

JULIAN HUXLEY

Quoting again from New Bottles for New Wine, written in 1957:

But man does not live by bread alone.

He needs power and shelter and clothing, and in addition to all material requirements he needs:

• space and beauty
• sport and recreation
• interest and enjoyment

Excessive population can erode all these things.

Up till now, rapid population increase has led to hyper-trophied cities, so big that they are beginning to defeat their own ends; they are producing discomfort, inefficiency and nervous strain as well as cutting off millions of people from any real contact or sense of unity with nature.

Population increase also threatens the world’s open spaces and the beauty of unspoilt nature.

In small countries with high population density, like England, the pressure on mere space is becoming acute.

But even in newer and less densely inhabited countries the process of erosion and destruction is going on, often at an alarming rate.

Everywhere, even in Africa, wildlife – not merely big game, but wildlife in general – is shrinking and often being exterminated:

the world’s mountains are being invaded by hydroelectric projects, its forests cut down or commercialized, its wilderness infiltrated by farmers and miners and tourists and other invaders. 

Even the cultural richness of the world is being impoverished.

The pressure of population is being translated into economic and social pressures, which are forcing mass-produced goods into every corner of the globe, pushing people into Western dress and Western habits, sapping ancient cultural ideals and destroying traditional art and craftsmanship.

Indeed, once we start looking at the population problem as a whole and in all its implications, we find ourselves being pressed into a reconsideration of human values in general. 

First of all, we must reject the idea that mere quantity of human beings is of value apart from the quality of their lives.

Then, after realizing that all existence is a process of transformation or evolution, that the human species in its cultural evolution is continuing and extending the process of biological evolution from which it arose, that the well-rounded and developed human personality is the highest product of the evolutionary process of which we have any knowledge, but that the human individual cannot achieve full development except in the environment provided by an adequate society, we find ourselves inevitably driven to the ideal of fulfillment – greater fulfillment for more fully developed human individuals.

Accordingly, the values we must pursue are those which permit or promote greater human fulfillment.

Food and health, energy and leisure are its necessary bases:

its value-goals are:

• knowledge and interest
• beauty and emotional expression
• inner integration and outer participation
• enjoyment and a sense of significance

In practice these values often come into competition and even conflict; so to achieve greater fulfillment we need a pattern of compromise and mutual adjustment between values.

The space and the resources of our planet are limited.

Some we must set aside for the satisfaction of man’s material needs – for food, raw materials, and energy.

But we must set aside others for more ultimate satisfactions – the enjoyment of unspoilt nature and fine scenery, the interest of wildlife, travel, satisfying recreation, beauty in place of ugliness in human building, and the preservation of the variety of human culture and of monuments of ancient grandeur.

In practice this means limiting the use to which some areas are put.

You cannot use ploughed fields to land aircraft on, you cannot grow crops in built-over areas, you cannot permit exploitation or unrestricted “development” in National Parks or nature sanctuaries. 

In the long run, you cannot avoid paying the price for an unrestricted growth of human numbers:

and that price is ruinous.

It is often asserted that science can have no concern with values.

On the contrary, in all fields of Social Science, and (in rather a different way) wherever the applications of Natural Science touch social affairs and affect human living, science must take account of values, or it will not be doing its job satisfactorily.

The population problem makes this obvious.

As soon as we recall that population is merely a collective term for aggressions of living human beings, we find ourselves thinking about relations between quantity and quality-quantity of the human beings in the population and quality of the lives they lead:

in other words, values.

Though I may seem to have painted the picture of world population in gloomy colors, there is hope.

Just as the horrible destructiveness of atomic warfare is now prompting a reconsideration of warfare in general, and seems likely to lead to the abandonment of all-out war as an instrument of national policy, so I would predict that the threat of over-population to human values like health, standard of living, and amenity will prompt a reconsideration of values in general and lead eventually to a new value-system for human living.

But time is of the essence of the contract. 

If before the end of the century the rate of human increase is not lowered, instead of continuing to rise, so many values will have been damaged or destroyed that it will be difficult to recreate them, let alone to build a new and better system.

VIETNAM

The Vietnam War may have ended, but it continues to claim its victims.

Veterans, who were at the peak of their physical condition when they fought in Vietnam, are now sick and dying – not from lingering enemy wounds but from an insidious, poisonous herbicide that was sprayed over the countryside of that war-torn nation.

During the war, U.S. airplanes dumped an estimated twelve million gallons of the defoliant Agent Orange over nearly five million acres of Vietnam in an attempt to deny the enemy protective cover.

United States soldiers below – often surrounded by a fog of the herbicide – were told that it was harmless. 

It was not.

Quoting from Fred Wilcox’s 1989 book Waiting for an Army to Die – The Tragedy of Agent Orange:

In 1970 when the order to stop using Agent Orange in South Vietnam was issued, the U.S. military was left with thousands of fifty-five-gallon drums containing this herbicide.

Some of these barrels were stored on Johnston Island in the Pacific, while others went to the Naval Construction Battalion Center at Gulfport, Mississippi.

But the drums started to rust, and their contents began leaking, making it imperative that something more “final” be done about the surplus stocks of herbicide Orange. 

In February 1972, the Mississippi Air and Pollution Control Commission ordered that the Agent Orange stored at Gulfport be removed immediately. 

Faced with this, the Air Force tried returning the remaining stocks of Agent Orange to its manufacturers, who refused to accept the offer. 

Air Force officials also suggested that the surplus herbicide be disposed of

“By the prudent disposition of herbicide Orange for use on privately owned or governmentally owned lands.”

This plan also failed and, seven years after the barrels were removed from Vietnam, the EPA finally granted the Air Force a permit to incinerate the remaining stocks of Agent Orange on the German-built ship Vulcnus in the South Pacific.

By the time the permit was granted, more than 5,000 drums containing over a quarter million gallons of Agent Orange had rotted through.

At the first “Defoliation Conference“ sponsored by the Department of Defense and attended by several chemical companies (including Dow and Monsanto), General Fred J. Delmore, commanding general, U.S. Army, Edgewood Arsenal, told the companies’ representatives that the DOD wanted to make sure that whatever it used for defoliants would be

“Perfectly innocuous to man and animals and at the same time will do the job.”

Albert Hayward, chief of the program coordination office at Fort Detrick, told the conference that 

“It goes without saying that the materials must be applicable by ground and air spray, that they must be logistically feasible, and that they must be nontoxic to humans and livestock in the area affected.”

In a 1964 press release, Dow asserted that its 2,4,5-T was absolutely nontoxic to humans or animals, but by 1965 the company confirmed that it contained TCDD.

Dow also admitted that it had not informed the USDA or the DOD that it had discovered 2,4,5-T to be contaminated with TCDD.

The class action [suit by Vietnam veterans] is not only unique but ironic in many ways:

2.5 million Vietnam veterans suing chemical companies that were, theoretically, manufacturing a product that would save American lives in Vietnam; the chief attorney for the veterans confiding that he gets his most incriminating information on the effects of dioxin from scientists who work for one of the plaintiff war contractors; and the chemical companies arguing they were just “following orders“ when they made Agent Orange, some of which was 15 to 15,000 times more contaminated with dioxin than the 2,4,5-T sold for domestic use.

Although the class action suit has been filed on behalf of all veterans who served in Vietnam, the number of veterans who were listed as sick or dying at the time of the interview was approximately 40,000.

More veterans will undoubtedly be added to this list in the future.

CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL

In Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman’s book A Higher Form of Killing – -The Secret Story of Chemical and Biological Warfare, we read:

The secret story of chemical and biological warfare demonstrates few things so clearly as the way in which discoveries made in the cause of human welfare can be used to devise ever more sophisticated instruments of death.

Discoveries in veterinary science are tuned to the development of new biological weapons.

A potential pesticide is transformed into a nerve agent.

Yet the present generation of weapons is based upon scientific discoveries made up to fifty years ago:

until the late 1970s British and American chemists were still attempting to produce an antidote to soman, an agent which had first been developed in the laboratories of Nazi Germany.

Horrific though the effects of today’s weapons may be, however, they are capable of infinite refinement.

The present arsenals are huge:

the “inadequate” stock of nerve gas in the United States is sufficient to kill the entire population of the world four thousand times over.

It is in the field of biological warfare that the most frightening possibilities present themselves.

It is now nearly thirty years since Crick and Watson made their momentous discovery of the “double helix” structure of DNA, the molecule which controls heredity.

The discovery has not yet as far as is known, been applied to the business of war.

But in the civilian laboratories of Europe and North America biologists are regularly tampering with the nature of life itself through “gene splicing” or recombinant DNA. 

It has been called the most awesome discovery since man split the atom. 

Should the breakthrough, like atomic physics, come to be applied to warfare the implications scarcely bear thinking about.

As long ago as 1962, forty scientists were employed at the U.S. Army biological warfare laboratories on full-time genetics research.

“Many others”, it was said, “appreciate the implications of genetics for their own work.”

The implications were made more specific seven years later, when a Department of Defense spokesman claimed that genetic engineering could solve one of the major disadvantages of biological warfare, that it is limited to diseases which occur naturally somewhere in the world.

Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective micro-organism which could differ in certain important respects from any known disease-causing organisms.

Most important of these is that it might be refractory [i.e., not yielding to treatment] to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.

The possibility that such a “super germ” may have been successfully produced in a laboratory somewhere in the world in the years since that assessment was made is one which should not be too readily cast aside.

In Phoenix Journal #65, The Last Great Plague Upon Man: AIDS And Related Murder Tools, Hatonn writes [quoting:]

AIDS is, by all definition, a “plague”! 

It will affect society in ways that you cannot now even imagine. 

There is no cure within your grasp as a people and no prospects of a vaccine – both of which will be thoroughly discussed as we move along. 

Even by scientific optimistic projections it is not even hoped for within the next fifteen to twenty years, at best. 

It is projected by Public Health experts that over 2.4 billion people, half the world’s population, will die from AIDS viruses and mutations by those viruses within that period of time.

Not a pretty picture by any standard.

Economic devastation is impending for the medical health systems, insurance facilities and all related services within the next decade.

Now, some shocking information for most of you newly interested readers who feel safe and secure with your singular relationships and the comfort of a cozy condom. If things do not change radically and immediately, what you are really destined for is extinction.

• AIDS is NOT prevented, nor hardly even impacted, by use of condoms
• AIDS is NOT a venereal disease
• AIDS is NOT a homosexual disease
• AIDS did not come from any monkey bite in far off Africa

It came right out of a man-organized laboratory by cross breeding cattle and sheep viruses.

The AIDS virus was specifically requested, produced, deployed, and now threatens extinction of the species.

You are headed for the worst catastrophe in the history of your world.

The first officially diagnosed case of AIDS was in San Francisco in 1981.

Actually, it went something like this:

The AIDS virus appeared in New York in 1978, San Francisco and Los Angeles in 1980.

It appeared in young, white, male homosexuals who were between the ages of twenty and forty and promiscuous in behavior.

Simultaneously with its appearance, there was conducted a Hepatitis B vaccine study in New York in 1978 and in San Francisco and Los Angeles in 1980 – among young white male homosexuals who were between the ages of twenty and forty.

You must surely ask yourself if there is a relationship between the Hepatitis B vaccine study in the United States and the subsequent outbreak of AIDS in the same population groups and at exactly the same time.

Further, this followed right on the steps of the outbreak of the disease in Third World areas such as Africa and Haiti in the 1970s.

West Coast gays, particularly in San Francisco, made Haiti a main playground and vacation spot during that ensuing period of time, thereby being hit from two directions.

In your mid 1970s the outbreak of smallpox in Africa was epidemic and spreading into many other sectors.

An organization was created called the World Health Organization (WHO), which made an all-out effort to inoculate thousands and thousands of people, among which were some 15,000 Haitians who were working in Africa at the time.

You have to have some understanding of viruses, bacteria, human cell origin, tissue culture and manipulation of all those things within the laboratory.

In addressing what the AIDS virus is, the virus has a morphology which is actually a D-type retrovirus.

So, what are viruses?

Some of you people are convinced, and I shall not confuse you, that viruses are the smallest replicating micro-organism.

That means they are thought to be the smallest replicating organism that require other cells in which to grow themselves.

That viruses are not capable of reproducing themselves on their own, outside of living tissue, is the conviction of the scientists today.

Viruses must inhabit another cell for potential growth and reproduction.

Bacteria, fungus, and some other organisms are actually capable of growing outside of tissue, in other words, they don’t have to inhabit other tissue to reproduce themselves.

They can grow on tissue culture plates such as bacteria.

The viruses must grow inside of tissue which requires that there be living human or animal tissue in which they may replicate.

Retrovirus means that it is a small replicating organism which grows inside of living tissue.

So, what does the term “retro” mean?

In the case of this particular virus, it stands for the fact that contained within the AIDS virus, and other so-called human retroviruses, or other animal retroviruses, are small enzymes known as reverse transcriptase.

That is where the word “retro” comes from.

The reverse transcriptase, which is where the “re” comes from “reverse” and the “tro” from transcriptase.

That is an enzyme in the AIDS virus which actually is responsible for duplication of the genes of the AIDS virus which are in an RNA form, different from human form.

Human genetic material grows in a DNA form.

If the AIDS virus is to insert itself into human material, somehow after infection of the cell, what happens is this enzyme duplicates the RNA of the AIDS virus into a DNA form and actually inserts that into the human DNA.

The AIDS virus genes get in and are actually duplicated into DNA form, copied by the reverse transcriptase.

That information is then inserted into the genetic makeup of the human cell.

This is now an AIDS virus residing within the human genes which then sends out a signal for production of a NEW AIDS virus.

Read carefully – NEW AIDS VIRUS!

Beyond AIDS the genetic information of all retroviruses is copied into the DNA form by the reverse transcriptase inserted into the genes and subsequent production of new viruses.

Let me generalize a bit of information here for better understanding.

Virology is the study of viruses which deals with tiny living organisms visible only with the use of the most powerful electron microscopes on your planet as you now recognize the scientific limitations.

Millions of AIDS viruses can easily fit onto the head of a small pin.

The AIDS virus is particularly deadly to you humans because of its ability to not invade and neutralize human cells, but the virus’s ability to put its own genetic material inside the human cell’s genetic structure, thereby allowing the virus to use the human cell as a kind of virus factory, reproducing from a human cell’s raw materials.

DR. EVA SNEAD

In her courageous and well documented two volume book Some Call It AIDS – I Call It Murder, Dr. Eva Snead writes:

According to Robert Lederer’s Chemical-Biological Warfare, Medical Experiments, and Population Control,

“U.S. CBW [chemical-biological warfare] has been used primarily for counter-insurgency operations against Third World peoples struggling for self-determination, and destabilization of Third World governments which have thwarted U.S. domination.

It has been directed in direct attack against various adversaries; early records take us back to as early as 1763, when white colonial settlers gave smallpox-infected blankets to Native Americans who sought friendly relations.

Many died as a result.”

The tactic was repeated during the “Trail of Tears” of the 1800s.

The examples are numerous and abhorrent, and my mind entertains the possibility that even the great flu pandemic that swept the planet in 1917-1919 was a result of deliberate or accidental biologic accidents:

soldiers as carriers of innumerable and unpredictable microorganisms, transmitted by what was called serum therapy and prophylaxis, crude vaccines administered to people who were immune-suppressed by the administration of so many antigens, as well as by host vs. graft reactions to the serums, and by the use of lindane (Kwell) and other parasite-killers.

Not only is CBW unhealthy for its victims, but can seriously endanger those who tell the ugly truth.

“In 1958 the Eisenhower administration pressed sedition charges against three North Americans who had published the germ warfare charges in China Monthly Review, John W. Powell, Sylvia Powell and Julian Schuman, but failed to get convictions.”

An interesting connection between CBW and vital illnesses, including AIDS is derived from the reported infestation of Cuban pigs with African Swine fever in 1971 and 1980.

African Swine Fever virus was found in some AIDS cases and the researchers that worked in the perusal of such connections found themselves attacked by academia.

Some researchers believe that one of the most dangerous places on Earth, because of its biologic weapons against livestock and food plants is Plum Island, N.Y., where exercises in bio-warfare as described above, are allegedly practiced.

Lederer describes the fantasies of the military in their search for an ultimate weapon.

In 1969, a military official testified before Congress:

Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective micro-organism which could differ in certain important respects from any known disease-causing organisms.

Most important of these is that it might be refractory [resistant] to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.

Before the coining of the acronym AIDS, Porton Down Laboratories, the CBW of the British Army reported the successful transmission of genes between different strains of plague bacillus.

The 1985 U.S. government study reported to the President’s Chemical Warfare Review Commission

“The predictable likelihood of new agents being developed for which no vaccines or counteragents are known or available.”

In November 1970, Carl A. Larson reportedly wrote in Military Review that,

“Ethnic chemical weapons … would be designed to exploit naturally occurring differences in vulnerability among specific population groups.”

Reportedly South Africa pioneered research into diseases which afflicted only black people.

The pretense that AIDS exists as an independent reality, and that it is sexually transmitted has been used to convince people to use condoms.

Besides the overt purpose of such practice, condoms are contraceptives that reduce birth rate.

People who would not voluntarily practice birth control because of their religious persuasion, may be seduced by a belief in hygiene, to practice involuntary family planning.

“Population control of the Third World has been a policy goal of U.S. officials for many years.

In 1977, Ray Ravenhott, director of the population program for the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID), publicly announced his agency’s goal was to sterilize one quarter of the world’s women. 

He admitted, in essence, that this was necessary to protect U.S. corporate interests from the threat of revolutions spawned by chronic unemployment.”

The agency’s acronym AID seems to be a Freudian slip to tell us that AID begat AIDS!

From the beginning, those groups listed as primary targets and disseminators of AIDS

“Have published articles proposing CBW-AIDS theories with varying degrees of thoughtfulness and documentation.”

Accusations and denials went back and forth, most of them indicating that the best candidate location for the creation of a harmful virus might be Fort Detrick, Maryland, and that the covert actions was called “Operation Firm Hand”.

This last tidbit of information, so ironical since people tend to refer to gay men as limp-wristed, was provided by an anonymous letter by someone purporting to be an ex-employee of the U.S. Army Biological Warfare Laboratory at Fort Detrick.

Scientists deal with very strange plans, at times.

Although not at Fort Detrick (’The Trick,’ as I like to call it), but at Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, N.Y., scientists have written and done work on a MMMV (Multiple Monster Malignant Virus).

This was an analysis of what would be necessary to create such a monstrosity.

Still quoting from Dr. Snead’s Some Call it AIDS – I Call It Murder:

The role of the CIA in theBelgian Congo has been previously discussed.

In addition to the information which surfaced at the Frank Church Committee Hearings in 1976, Lederer tells us that,

“Serge Mukendi, U.S. representative of the Workers and Peasant Party of the Congo, the country now known as Zaire, points out that the CIA’s attempted poisoning of Lumumba and its MK-ULTRA experiments render reasonable the possible later use of CBW in Congo-Zaire.

He noted the Agency for International Development commissioned a study by the School of International Studies at Columbia University to examine the possibilities of limiting the Congo-Zaire’s population growth ’to prevent famine’.”

As one example, he cited the dumping of highly toxic radioactive wastes in the Congo-Zaire. AIDS, he charged, may have been the ultimate population measure.

I was informed that The New York Times of Jan. 29, 1987, published a story about the fact that Zaire was supporting immunization tests against the AIDS virus.

This test, the details of which were carefully kept in secret, was administered to twelve European and Congolese, including the medical Director Dr. Daniel Zagury.

Allegedly he had injected himself with the product. Inoculations have the advantage of direct targets who can easily be identified and studied, and who have no way of controlling or knowing what substance they are receiving.

The researcher has enormous latitude to administer any substance of his choosing and calling it by any name he wants to.

Vaccination campaigns are not only an excellent decoy for biological warfare, they themselves can be lethal bioweapons.

Lederer’s theories as to the origin of AIDS can be summarized as:

Theory number one is presented by two East German researchers in microbiology, Jacob and Lilli Segal, who accept the existence of AIDS, and its causation by HIV, but insist that it was a military blunder.

Similar theories have been presented by Robert Strecker and Sir John Scale, who in turn blame the Soviet Union for such an invention.

Ultimately, Lederer himself points out that the whole artificial HIV theory rests on the assumption that in fact HIV is the virus which causes AIDS, a theory which has become increasingly questionable.

The second theory:

Dioxin is one of the components of the sadly famous Agent Orange, and also a by-product of PCP when this substance is burned.

A couple of Vietnam veterans are mentioned by the author (Dave Bergh and Eal Zela Tex Aldredge) as proponents of a toxic origin of AIDS.

According to EPA studies mentioned by Lederer, sites of dioxin dumping closely parallel areas of high AIDS incidence.

Susan Cavin, a journalist for a lesbian magazine, quotes up to

“23 symptoms of indirect dioxin exposure parallel those of AIDS.”

The author cites,

“Soft tissue sarcomas (cancerous tumors), weight loss, lung disorders, thymus and spleen depletion, liver damage, brain disorders, and personality changes – dramatically decreased resistance to infection – severe depletion of T-lymphocytes and leukocytes – fungus infections – lymphomas.”

The article reports that,

“Vietnam veterans are experiencing lymphomas at a rate one-third higher than expected.”

Little did anybody realize that the victims had previously been inoculated with SV40 and abenoviruses which became activated with the dioxin!

Interestingly enough,

“The CDC uses the Hepatitis-B model to explain AIDS, that is, both diseases affect very similar groups”.

Has it occurred to anyone to follow the trails of the Hepatitis vaccine, the gamma-globulins, the other vaccines, the vaccinated animal products, etc., and study how they overlap with AIDS?

Lederer’s third theory,

“Was developed by Mark E. Whiteside, M.D., and Caroline MacLeod, M.D., M.P.H., co-directors of the Institute of Tropical Medicine in Miami, Florida.”

Their main areas of research were Miami and Belle Glade (the town with the highest per-capita incidence of AIDS in the United States).

Whiteside vehemently disagrees with the heterosexual transmission theory, offered for the spread of AIDS in Belle Glade, Fl., where the population that is highly afflicted mimics a swath cut through Third World populations.

He says that those studies are, 

“Seriously flawed by overwhelming bias, inadequate controls, and lack of prospective data”

particularly questioning relationship between the high percentage of childhood AIDS in children whose mothers test negative in African distribution (mostly heterosexual) of AIDS cases, and the dogmatic affirmations by the government of the sexual transmission theory, and the unusual confinement of Belle Glade AIDS to just one neighborhood.

Some of the facts simply cannot be reconciled with the existing conventional wisdom.

These researchers believe, Lederer reports,

“That AIDS is a tropic-based, environmental disease, caused by at least two arbor-viruses (insect-borne viruses) called maguari and dengue, both endemic to tropical regions – the primary means of transmission being re-posted bites by blood-sucking insects – mosquitoes or ticks – carrying the virus from person to person.”

Other means of blood exchange are also implicated by these researchers.

AIDS corresponds to the insect belt in many parts of the world. Before modern day AIDS, the region of greatest density of Kaposi’s Sarcoma was on the border of Zaire and Uganda.

Such tropical tumors of Kaposi’s Sarcoma and Burkitt’s lymphoma were always linked to environmental conditions – the distribution of these tumors correlated with malaria and the insect-borne virus (arbor-virus) infection.

A correlation between antibodies to HTLV-III/LAV (HIV) and antibodies to malaria is also noted. 

Another correlation noticed by these researchers, is the striking similitude between the distribution of AIDS and that of TB.

When Whiteside and MacLeod tested Florida patients for over 50 arbor-virus, they found that a very high percentage tested positive to dengue and maguari viruses.

The first one causes a painful disease similar to a severe flu (Dengue is the name of a tropical dance characterized by body contortions similar to those the victims of this disease suffer due to spasms and pain), the second had not been known to cause diseases in animals or humans but belongs to a family of viruses associated with Kaposi’s Sarcoma.

The Dengue antibodies found were two types of Dengue viruses: Dengue I and Dengue II, which have done quite a bit of suspicious international traveling.

“Dengue type I – had been limited to S.E. Asia and Africa until 1977, when it appeared in Jamaica, Cuba and Puerto Rico.

It later spread to Haiti and other Caribbean Islands.”

An epidemic occurred in Cuba in 1977 that was not only the first Dengue I, but the first Dengue epidemic since 1944.

Dengue type II was fairly common in a mild form, but in 1981 Cuba had an unprecedented epidemic of type II in the:

“hemorrhagic shock form, with internal bleeding and shock – which resulted in 300,000 illnesses and 158 fatalities, including 101 children under 15.”

The authors suspect that the movement of troops from Cuba into Angola in 1977 might have caused some of this transoceanic viral leap.

A 1982 CAIB investigation concluded that the 1981 hemorrhagic Dengue type II epidemic in Cuba and another in 1977 were,

“Almost certainly the result of U.S. biological warfare.

The U.S. Army’s Biological Warfare Laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland, has for years done experiments with insect-borne disease in general and Dengue in particular.

In the 1950s, the Army carried out ’field tests’ releasing huge quantities of mosquitoes in Black communities in Georgia and Florida.”

It was also reported that Dengue type I had been isolated in the South Pacific in 1974.

This report appeared in the Bulletin of The World Health Organization in 1980.

It is also worth mentioning, that Russia allegedly produced the ultimate CBW weapon in the form of a mutant Dengue virus known as D7, which might have found its way into different countries by troop movements or other means.

If an epidemic like this is of such great concern, why does it take 6 years to make this information public?

Lederer questions the validity of the Dengue-Maguari AIDS link, because the countries with high levels of Dengue have low levels of AIDS.

However, some researchers are satisfied that arborviruses and insect transmission are co-factors, at least, to the AIDS epidemic.

MORE ON AIDS

In Prof. Robert O’Driscoll’s new book Corruption in Canada, appears an article written by J. L. Read titled New World Order Strategy for Population Reduction: AIDS:

In 1938 The National Resources Subcommittee on Population Problems (NRS) recommended in its report to President Roosevelt that appropriate legislative action should be taken regarding global population problems.

The NRS stated that,

“Transition from an increasing to a stationary or decreasing population may on the whole be a benefit to the life of the nation.”

In 1970 microbiologist Dr. MacArthur solicited the Appropriations Committee of the House for money for molecular biological research with these words,

“Within the next 5 to 19 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective micro-micro-organism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organism.

Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.”

What is a virus?

In his book Virus Hunting, AIDS, Cancers and the Human Retrovirus, Dr. Robert C. Gallo (the doctor who is credited with the discovery of AIDS) states that viruses are “obligate cellular parasites”.

This means they need another medium in which to grow and reproduce, therefore they invade a living cell and use it as their new home.

Viruses are the smallest known living organism, needing an electron microscope or similar device at 50,000X magnification to be seen.

Viruses can live outside of living tissue in crystal form indefinitely.

AIDS is also known at HTLV-III or Human T-Cell Lymphotrophic Virus.

It is a retrovirus that attacks the T-4 cells of the immune system.

A retrovirus is a virus that has a special enzyme, reverse transcriptase, that is able to incorporate itself into the DNA of the host cell, thereby using the DNA of that cell to reproduce more virus, B cells are the part of the immune system that help to produce protective antibodies.

The T-4 cells of the immune system are lymphocytes, or small white blood cells, acted upon by hormones in the thymus gland before they reach the blood stream.

T-4 cells help speed up the production of anti-bodies by the B cells.

Therefore, if the T-4 cells are destroyed the body is unable to aid the B cells in antibody production and will die of any opportunistic infection.

Viruses are also known to lie latent in the infected organism.

Thus, though they are present and potentially harmful, they are dormant, not seeking cells for reproduction.

AIDS is known to have a 3 to 5 years incubation time before the virus begins actively reproducing and impairing the immune system to infection.

In 1972 at the Biological Warfare Convention, it was decided to dismantle our biological warfare arsenals.

Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman point out in A Higher Form of Killing,

“With the decision to renounce germ warfare for all time, Fort Detrick had been handed over to the civilian National Cancer Institute.

But part of the camp remained secret.

Here the Pentagon established the Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, where a small group of biologists would continue to work on those diseases which plague mankind…”

According to Dr. William C. Douglass in his news-letter The Cutting Edge,

“The National Cancer Institute in collaboration with the World Health Organization made the AIDS virus in their laboratories at Fort Detrick.”

Fort Detrick, Maryland had been the leading laboratory responsible for all biological warfare testing for the U.S. Government. Dr. Douglass goes on to state,

“They combined the deadly retroviruses, bovine leukemia virus and sheep visna virus, and injected them into human tissue cultures.”

Dr. Robert Strecker has studied the AIDS virus extensively.

In his video The Strecker Memorandum he reveals that in the early 70s,

“The Danish Cancer Registry (an international panel of experts) noted that it is possible to visualize the mutation of a virus into variety of high contageosity to man resulting in a pandemic of neo-plastic disease before we could develop a vaccine.”

Dr. Strecker concurs with the concept that AIDS was created in a laboratory from the bovine and visna virus through recombinant DNA.

Not only was the World Health Organization (WHO), via Fort Detrick, responsible for the creation of AIDS, but there is overwhelming evidence that it was also responsible for the deliberate, initial introduction of AIDS into the world population.

In 1987 Science Editor Pearce Wright wrote an article:

“Small pox vaccine triggered AIDS virus”

The World Health Organization began a 13-year smallpox vaccination program in Third World countries ending in 1981.

The smallpox vaccine was contaminated with the AIDS virus.

Though WHO has admitted through its own investigation that the vaccine was contaminated, it has suppressed its findings.

Wright’s article, which linked the vaccination program and the increase of AIDS victims in the Third World, especially Africa, was given no press in the United States.

A further connection is pointed out by Lt. Col. T.E. Bearden in his book Aids Biological Warfare. He states,

“The smallpox vaccine theory would account for the position of the Central African states as the most afflicted countries, why Brazil became the most affected Latin American country, and how Haiti became the route for the spread of AIDS to the U.S.; Brazil, the only South American country covered in the eradication campaign, has the highest incidence of AIDS in that region.”

The pollution of vaccine, including the Salk vaccine for polio is extensively covered in a video by Dr. Eva Snead entitled AIDS: The Other Side Of The Story.

She reveals how the polio vaccine prior to 1962 was known to be contaminated with SV-40 (simian virus 40).

This virus contaminated the vaccine because the polio vaccine was grown on the kidney cells of monkeys and simian or monkey virus contaminated the vaccine that was given to the public.

Dr. Snead also points out that research has shown that SV-40 is ideally suited for genetic manipulation, splicing and the creation of hybrids or mutants.

Since it is known that the AIDS virus, or HTLV-III has created many mutant strains since its original discovery, there is a possible connection between the SV-40 virus, and contamination of the widely – and mandatorily – given polio vaccines.

Again, the information of the contamination of the polio vaccine with a dangerous simian virus was withheld from the public, though the government was well aware of this fact.

The government would have us believe that AIDS started in the homosexual population and has been spread likewise.

To help create this reality, The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) set up an inoculation program in 1978 that targeted the homosexual population.

Dr. W. Szmuness, head of the New York City blood bank, devised rules for a hepatitis vaccine study.

It was to be administered to non-monogamous homosexual males between the ages of 20 and 40.

There were over 1000 inoculated.

Dr. Alan Cantwell reports in his book AIDS And The Doctors of Health that,

“Newly liberated homosexuals were anxious to cooperate with the government in matters of gay health … Within a decade, most of the men in the experiment would be doomed to die.”

The CDC admitted in 1984 that at least 60 percent of those who received the hepatitis vaccine were infected with AIDS.

They have since refused to give any more information on the subject.

ALDOUS HUXLEY

In a 1959 lecture delivered in Santa Barbara, California, Aldous Huxley said, in part:

“In general, one can say that it is only when human beings are threatened by somebody else that they are ready to unite and to accept short-range privations for long-range goods; they are ready to unite under the threat of war and catastrophe.

Undoubtedly, the best thing for world government under law would be invasion from Mars.

Unfortunately, this is rather unlikely to take place.

But is it possible to persuade ourselves that after all human beings are their own Martians, that with over-population and over-organization and over-technicalization, we are committing immense aggressions against ourselves?

Can we unite against ourselves for our own higher interest?

It might be possible, that what we regard as a piping time of peace is not, in fact, a piping time of peace, but that there is a real threat overhanging us all the time against remote speculation, but it is possible that some such argument might finally persuade people to take the step of getting together and forming a government in which all should live together under law.”

THE GLOBAL 2000 REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT

ENTERING THE 21ST CENTURY

[Quoting, through several subsections:]

COMMISSION ON POPULATION GROWTH AND THE AMERICAN FUTURE (1970)
In July 1969 President Nixon sent to Congress a historic first population message, recommending the establishment by legislation of a blue-ribbon commission to examine the growth of the nation’s population and the impact it will have on the American future.

John D. Rockefeller III, who had started the Population Council, had been urging since the early days of the Eisenhower Administration that such a commission be established.

Lyndon Johnson had refused to see Rockefeller in 1964, but by 1968, he was ready to yield to pressure and established the President’s Committee on Population and Family Planning: The Transition from Concern to Action, suggested the establishment of a presidential commission to give the problem further study.

It recommended that family planning services be extended to every American woman unable to afford them.

It also recommended an increase in the budgets of HEW and the Office of Economic Opportunity for the purpose of population research.

The report was released without publicity in January 1969, just before Johnson left office.

He did not meet with the Committee to receive the report, nor make a statement on it.

In early 1969, Rockefeller’s pressure for a presidential commission was abetted by presidential counselor Moynihan, who convinced Nixon that the time had come to face the problems of population.

The President asked in his message to Congress that a Commission be assigned to develop population projections and estimate the impact of an anticipated 100 million increase in U.S. population by the year 2000.

For the interim, the President called for more research “on birth control methods” and for the establishment, as a national goal, of,

“The provision of adequate family planning services within the next five years for all those who want them but cannot afford them.”

In his message to Congress, Nixon stated:

One of the most serious challenges to human destiny in the last third of this century will be the growth of the population.

Whether man’s response to that challenge will be a cause for pride or for despair in the year 2000 will depend very much on what we do today.

If we now begin our work in an appropriate manner, and if we continue to devote a considerable amount of attention and energy to this problem, then mankind will be able to surmount this challenge as it has surmounted so many during the long march of civilization.

When the Congress passed a bill in March 1970 creating the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, President Nixon named John D. Rockefeller III chairman of the 24-member group.

The Commission’s conclusion was that no substantial benefits would result from continued growth of the nation’s population.

“The population problem, and the growth ethic with which it is intimately connected, reflect deeper external conditions and more fundamental political, economic, and philosophical values.

Consequently, to improve the quality of our existence while slowing growth, will require nothing less than a basic recasting of American values.”

The more than 60 Population Commission recommendations included:

• Creation of an Office of Population Growth and Distribution within the Executive Office of the President
• Establishment, within the National Institutes of Health, of a National Institute of Population Sciences to provide an adequate institutional framework for implementing a greatly expanding program of population research
• Legislation by Congress establishing a Council of Social Advisers, with one of the main functions the monitoring of demographic variables
• The addition of a mid-decade census of the population
• National planning for a stabilized population

These recommendations were overshadowed, at least in the publicity given them, by the recommendations that states adopt legislation permitting minors,

“To receive contraceptive and prophylactic information and services in appropriate settings sensitive to their needs and concerns”

and

“That present state laws restricting abortion be liberalized along the lines of the New York statute, such abortion to be performed on request by the duty licensed physicians under conditions of medical safety.”

The Commission also recommended that abortion be covered by health insurance benefits, and that established:

• federal
• state
• local

governments make funds available to support abortion in states with liberalized statutes.

President Nixon was unhappy with the Commission report, released in March 1972 at the beginning of his re-election campaign, largely because of the recommendations on liberalized abortion and the furnishing of contraceptives to teenagers (which in 1972 was a bigger issue than abortion).

The President met only a few minutes with Mr. Rockefeller.

He perfunctorily received the Commission report but issued a statement repudiating it.

No word of support was forthcoming for the stabilized population concept that he had backed in 1969.

Although all members of the Commission showed their support for the report by signing it, several members wrote minority statements about certain recommendations, especially the one on abortion.

The Commission debated whether to finesse the two controversial issues, since these recommendations were not of major demographic importance.

But Chairman Rockefeller felt it was only right that the majority of the Commission be able to state an opinion on all relevant issues.

The timing of the report was unfortunate in that during the three years since Nixon’s population message, the public had come to agree on stabilizing population growth, and the goal of the two-children family was already being achieved in the statistics.

No recommendations were made by the Commission in the resources and environment areas.

The deputy director of the Population Commission staff, Robert Parke, felt that the report and the research volumes made a strong base for future efforts at meeting population growth problems.

And he believed the Commission and its staff had learned at least one valuable lesson: A commission studying a controversial subject should not publish its report during a presidential campaign.

NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MATERIALS POLICY (1970)
Congress legislated a New National Commission on Materials Policy in the fall of 1970 as a part of the Resources Recovery Act.

The Materials Policy Commission did not attempt a materials resources inventory and update of the Paley Commission but rather concentrated its attention on the policy area and emphasized the environmental aspects of resources problems, an area which the Paley Commission had ignored. The new Commission contracted for a study of the estimated demand for 10 commodities by the year 2000.

The major recommendations of the Commission, when it reported to the President and Congress in June 1973, were mostly general policy directives:

“Strike a balance between the need to produce goods and the need to protect the environment by modifying the materials system so that all resources, including environmental, are paid for by users.

Strive for an equilibrium between the supply of materials and the demand for their use by increasing primary materials production and by conserving materials through accelerated waste recycling and greater efficiency-of-use of materials.

Manage materials policy more effectively by recognizing the complex interrelationships of the materials-energy-environment system so that laws, executive orders, and administrative practices reinforce policy and not counteract it.”

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSIS (1972)

A unique institute with a holistic approach to common problems that cannot be solved by any single country alone is the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA).

The Institute is situated near Vienna, Austria, and supports about 100 research scientists.

It is considered non-governmental because its members are scientific institutions from the participating nations and not the political entities of the governments themselves.

It was founded in October 1972 on the initiative of the academies of science or equivalent institutions in 12 industrial nations, both East and West (institutions from five other countries have since joined the Institute).

The Academy of Science of the U.S.S.R. and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (funded through the National Science Foundation) contribute the largest part of the financial support, and private sources such as philanthropic or corporate foundations contribute about $1 million a year.

IIASA’s programs are classified as either “global” (programs that affect and can be resolved only by the actions of more than one nation) and “universal” (those that affect and can be resolved by actions of individual nations but which all nations share). 

As the name of the Institution indicates, its scientific research and study concentrate on applying modern methods of analysis to contemporary problems of society, using the tools of modern management, such as systems theory, operations research, and cybernetics.

Emphasis is placed on attempting to bridge the gap between scientists and decision-makers.

The results of studies are widely communicated through publications distributed by members scientific institutions, and an effort is made to inform the non-expert of the results of studies of international problems.

Two current major global projects are on energy systems and on food and agriculture.\

The energy project is concentrating on finding strategies for the transition over the next 15 to 50 years from an energy economy based on oil, gas, and conventional coal to an economy based on the virtually inexhaustible resources:

• solar
• nuclear
• geothermal

as well as to some extent on new sources of coal.

Research activities include studying systems implications of the exploitation of scarce energy resources; energy demand studies, such as one that projects global energy demand with regard to the development of regions, world population growth, and changes in lifestyle; and a study of strategies relating the nuclear-risk problem to decision-making.

The final energy project report is expected in 1979.

Although IIASA is composed of scientific representatives from industrial nations, the food and agriculture program are concerned also with a number of less developed countries (LDCs) that have agricultural economies. 

The program objectives are to evaluate the nature and dimensions of the world food situation, to study alternative policy actions at the national, regional, and global level that may alleviate existing and emerging food problems, and to determine how to meet the nutritional needs of the growing global population.

Typical projects include developing a model of the dynamic interdependence between migration and human settlement patterns and agricultural technology, identifying and measuring the environmental consequences of water use in agriculture as constraints on agricultural structures of some pilot LDCs – describing their agricultural policy objectives and devising planning models suitable for estimating the consequences of alternative national policies.

NATIONAL COMMISSION ON SUPPLIES AND SHORTAGES

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL GROWTH POLICY PROCESSES (1975)

Another Nixon-Ford era initiative in the materials field with a major institutional objective was the National Commission on Supplies and Shortages and its separate Advisory Committee on National Growth Policy Processes.

These activities, like the 1971-73 National Commission on Materials Policy, were conceived by Congress.

The Commission did not attempt any new data collection or make supply-and-demand projections into the future. 

Instead, it analyzed available information, concluding that:

“We see little reason to fear that the world will run out of natural resources during the [next] quarter century.”

The Commission’s report, Government and the Nation’s Resources, was released the first week of 1977.

In its report to the President and Congress, the Advisory Committee urged that the nation become not a planned society, but a planning society.

Adequate and open planning for the future would result in less government interference, and the necessary government intervention would be more considered, timelier, and less heavy-handed. 

The report’s prime recommendation was for the institutionalization of the planning process in an independent executive branch agency to be created by Congress and called the National Growth and Development Commission.

The new Commission would have the mandate:

“To examine emerging issues of middle-to-long-range growth and development, and to suggest feasible alternatives for the Congress, the President, and the public.”

[Still quoting from The Global 2000 Report to the President of the United States – Entering the 21st Century, published in 1980:]

Global 2000 Revisited – Library of Rickandria

SOME OBSERVATIONS

For the past 70 years the nation’s leadership has perceived periodically a need for long-term analysis of problems relating to:

• natural resources
• population
• the environment

For the most part, these issues have been addressed on an ad hoc basis by appointing presidential commissions and other temporary groups to study the situation, make their reports, and then disband.

As a result, decision-makers continue to deal primarily with immediate problems, while consideration of how to prepare for conditions that might exist:

• 10
• 20
• 30

years in the future is postponed for lack of adequate or systematic information on the options available and on the:

• social
• economic
• environmental

impacts of alternative choices.

Future-oriented commissions or study groups have generally studied natural resources problems separately from problems related to population and the environment.

There has been insufficient recognition of the interrelation of these three issues.

Each succeeding year, as the problems become more complex and the interrelationships more involved, the need for a holistic approach to decision-making becomes more urgent.

Most analyses of future problems in:

• population
• natural resources
• the environment

have been made only on a national basis.

President Truman recognized the need for assessing global implications of natural resources when he constructed his Materials Policy Commission in 1951 to make its study of materials policy international in scope, at least to the extent of considering the needs and resources of friendly nations.

But while the harmful effects of:

• population growth
• resource consumption
• pollution spread

across borders and oceans, the international approach to long-range planning for solutions to these problems continues to be neglected.

When commissions or other bodies have been formed to consider long-term problems in population, natural resources, and the environment, their effectiveness has been hampered by lack of provisions for following up on their recommendations.

In several cases the heads of commissions felt so strongly about the need for ongoing institutions that they set up private organizations on their own to follow up with their group’s recommendations, which have led to some efforts of ongoing analysis.

One recommendation has been made by virtually every presidential commission on:

• population
• natural resources
• the environment

the establishment of a permanent body somewhere high in the executive branch for performing continuous future research and analysis.

Although ideas for location of such a permanent group have varied, proposals have generally indicated that a statutorily created institution with access to the President could explore potential goals, watch for trends, and look at alternative possibilities for accomplishing stilted objectives.

A permanent institution would have much more freedom in choosing the moment to present new ideas, and thus avoid the timing and politics-related problems that have often hindered activities of temporary presidential commissions.

The interest of a President or Congress or the public proved to be much greater at the time a study is started than when it is completed – The Materials Policy Commission was appointed by President Truman in January 1951, when military involvement in Korea had reintroduced fears of shortages that were still fresh in the minds of administrators and the public following World War II.

But when the Commission’s report went to the President in June 1952, the scarcity issue had lost its priority and public concern.

When President Nixon sent a message to Congress in 1969 asking for creation of a commission to study population growth, the subject was politically attractive inasmuch as people were concerned about rising birthrates.

But by the time the Population Commission’s report was submitted, statistics showed that the birthrate in the nation had already declined to a stability rate – two children per family – and the subject had less political importance.

Another unfavorable timing factor was that the report was sent to the President at the start of his 1972 re-election campaign; some of the Commission’s recommendations raised controversy, causing the President to repudiate the Commission’s work.

On the other hand, the release of the report of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission came at a time when the popularity of outdoor recreation was booming, and Congress welcomed help in devising solutions to the problems connected with the growing recreation use of:

• public lands
• national parks
• national forests

Another problem of timing was the frequent long delays between the request for a commission and its creation, or between the time the law was passed, and the President appointed the public members.

Sometimes the period allowed for a study was too short, as with the preparation of Toward a Social Report.

That study also ran into a frequent timing problem: having been started by one President, the study is then submitted either at the end of his term or to his successor.

For all these reasons, many observers have urged the establishment by law of a permanent group in Executive Office of the President to institutionalize the coordination of long-term global and holistic considerations of:

• population
• resources
• environment

and their related issues.

MAJOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE GLOBAL 2000 REPORT

If present trends continue, the world in 2000 will be more crowded, more polluted, less stable economically, and more vulnerable to disruption than the world we live in now.

Serious stresses involving population, resources, and environment are clearly visible ahead.

Despite greater material output, the world’s people will be poorer in many ways than they are today.

For hundreds of millions of the desperately poor, the outlook for food and other necessities of life will be no better.

For many it will be worse. Barring revolutionary advances in technology, life for most people on Earth will be more precarious in 2000 than it is now – unless the nations of the world act decisively to alter current trends.

This, in essence, is the picture emerging from the U.S. Government’s projections of probable changes in world population, resources, and environment by the end of the century, as presented in the Global 2000 Report.

Global 2000 Revisited – Library of Rickandria

They do not predict what will occur.

Rather, they depict conditions that are likely to develop if there are no changes in public policies, institutions, or rates of technological advance, and if there are no wars or other major disruptions.

A keener awareness of the nature of the current trends, however, may induce changes that will alter these trends and the projected outcome.

Rapid growth in world population will hardly have altered by 2000.

The world’s population will grow from 4 billion in 1975 to 6.35 billion in 2000, an increase of more than 50 percent. Ninety percent of this growth will occur in the poorest countries.

World food production is projected to increase 90 percent over the 30 years from 1970 to 2000. 

At the same time, real prices for food are expected to double.

Arable land will increase only 4 percent by 2000, so that most of the increased output of food will have to come from higher yields.

Most of the elements that now contribute to higher yields:

• fertilizer
• pesticides
• power for irrigation
• fuel for machinery

depend heavily on oil and gas.

During the 1990s world oil production will approach geological estimates of maximum production capacity, even with rapidly increasing petroleum prices.

The Study projects that the richer industrialized nations will be able to command enough oil and other commercial energy supplies to meet rising demands through 1990.

With the expected price increases, many less developed countries will have increasing difficulties meeting energy needs.

For the one-quarter of humankind that depends primarily on wood for fuel, the outlook is bleak. 

Needs for fuelwood will exceed available supplies by about 25 percent before the turn of the century.

While the world’s finite fuel resources:

• coal
• oil
• gas shale
• tar sands

and uranium are theoretically sufficient for centuries, they are not evenly distributed; they pose difficult economic and environmental problems; and they vary greatly in their amenability to exploitation and use.

Non-fuel mineral resources generally appear sufficient to meet projected demands through 2000, but further discoveries and investments will be needed to maintain reserves.

In addition, production costs will increase with energy prices and may make some non-fuel mineral resources uneconomic.

The quarter of the world’s population that inhabits industrial countries will continue to absorb three-fourths of the world’s mineral production.

Regional water shortages will become more severe.

In the 1970-2000 period population growth alone will cause requirements for water to double in nearly half the world.

Still greater increases would be needed to improve standards of living.

In many LDCs, water supplies will become increasingly erratic by 2000 as a result of extensive deforestation.

Development of new water supplies will become more costly virtually everywhere.

Significant losses of world forests will continue over the next 20 years as demand for forest products and fuelwood increases.

Serious deterioration of agricultural soils will occur worldwide, due to:

• erosion
• loss of organic matter
• desertification
• salinization
• alkalinization

and waterlogging.

Already, an area of cropland and grassland approximately the size of Maine is becoming barren wasteland each year, and the spread of desert-like conditions is likely to accelerate.

Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and ozone-depleting chemicals are expected to increase at rates that could alter the world’s climate and upper atmosphere significantly by 2050. 

Acid rain from increased combustion of fossil fuels (especially coal) threatens damage to:

• lakes
• soils
• crops

Radioactive and other hazardous materials present health and safety problems in increasing numbers of countries.

Extinctions of plant and animal species will increase dramatically.

The future depicted by the U.S. Government projections, briefly outlined above, may actually understate the impending problems.

At present and projected growth rates, the world’s population would reach 10 billion by 2030 and would approach 30 billion by the end of the twenty-first century.

These levels correspond closely to estimates by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences of the maximum carrying capacity of the entire planet.

Indeed, the problems of preserving the carrying capacity of the Earth and sustaining the possibility of a decent life for the human beings that inhabit it are enormous and close upon us. 

Yet there is reason for hope.

It must be emphasized that the Global 2000 Study’s projections are based on the assumption that national policies regarding:

• population stabilization
• resource conservation
• environmental protection

will remain essentially unchanged through the end of the Century.

The United States, possessing the world’s largest economy, can expect its policies to have a significant influence on global trends.

An equally important priority for the United States is to cooperate generously and justly with other nations – particularly in the areas of:

• trade
• investment
• assistance

in seeking solutions to the many problems that extend beyond our national boundaries.

With its limitations and rough approximations, the Global 2000 Study may be seen as no more than a reconnaissance of the future; nonetheless its conclusions are reinforced by similar findings of other recent global studies that were examined in the course of the Global 2000 Study.

All these studies are in general agreement on the nature of the problems and on the threats, they pose to the future welfare of humankind.

The available evidence leaves no doubt that the world – including this Nation – faces enormous, urgent, and complex problems in the decades immediately ahead.

Prompt and vigorous changes in public policy around the world are needed to avoid or minimize these problems before they become unmanageable.

Long lead times are required for effective action.

If decisions are delayed until the problems become worse, options for effective action will be severely reduced.

SAUCE:

Depopulation of a Planet – Part 4 (bibliotecapleyades.net)

---

Depopulation of a Planet – Part IV: A Picture Emerges (basecamp.com)