Alex welcomes to the program Valerie Stevens of Optimum Population Trust, an environmental group which expounds on the need to severely limit human population growth to save the planet.
TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum
(MP3) Alex Jones interviews a “Population Reduction†advocate (12 posts)
-
Posted 16 years ago #
-
Alex Jones as Bill O'Reilly
I'm disappointed in Alex Jones. Or I would be if I didn't expect this. This is crap. A perfect example of why I'm only interested in Alex Jones for his focus on 9/11 truth. This was a set up hit piece worthy of O'Reilly. He quite obviously had her on, not to have a reasonable conversation, but to mis-charachterize her position, interrupt her a lot, and support his. This really didn't sit right with me.
And she's right. We need to control the world population in some way. I never got the impression Jones was trying to have a conversation with her about any of the legitimate concerns of her organization, but merely trying to bait her into revealing a position of hers that he was trying to emphasize. And in the end, despite his efforts, her position was a lot more balanced than he may have anticipated, and that left him flailing to make his point. The Chinese menace. The Tax menace. Government regulation!!!
As I do value much that Jones has contributed to public knowledge, I'm not trying to tear him down, or make a new enemy. Generally I just take the stuff I find valuable and leave the rest. This has, in fact, been the reason for a number of recent thread deletions. Before Alex Jones was into 9/11 truth, he was already going strong. I wouldn't have been listening to him before, and if he was not concerned with 9/11 truth, I wouldn't be listening now.
Dem, most of your recent posting has been from Alex Jones sites. Honestly, I can and do go to his sites, and see what's going on from time to time. Personally, I don't want the updates, unrelated to 9/11, and our forum will not generally be featuring them. We link to Terrorstorm on our 9/11 truth page because its good. And we aren't going to take down that link just because we don't share the same political ideology as Jones. But the type of behavior evident in this interview certainly doesn't make him look fair or reasonable. In fact the whole things ends up coming off as mean spirited. One might imagine O'Reilly interviewing Griffin. Even if O'Reilly makes his point, he sure looks like an asshole for stepping on a soft-spoken, kind hearted person.
Posted 16 years ago # -
I see where you're coming from, but I don't think you're seeing what's motivating AJ to be like that there. He's freaked out by the population reduction plans, which involve the massive culling of billions of innocent people. This woman probably doesn’t have the first clue about that madness but she is facilitating it nonetheless. If there's a genuine problem with the world's population size then lets have some honestly about it, frankly though it's nonsensical because developed nations like France are in population decline. Population is booming in the Third World for a number of solvable factors that could be corrected if those countries were helped to stand up and develop. But the "elite" have a boot on their devolvement with trade scams and debt etc, so this notion of "the world's population is out of control and the only solution is genocide" is false from start to finish.
Posted 16 years ago # -
^ I meant to say “development†not “devolvementâ€.
Posted 16 years ago # -
After having read Eating Fossil Fuels by Dale Allen Pfeiffer it became obvious to me that even if Pfeiffer's consclusions were only partly right, a whole heck of a lot of people were going to die simply because there would not be food. I still think so.
If you have never read it, here is the URL: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100303_e...
at the old fromthewilderness archive. Pfeiffer also has a site www.mountainsentinel.com
Obviously, it should be clear that I subscribe to the Peak Oil thesis. For better or for worse.
My suspicion is that there need be no specific 'population reduction plan' .... except simply denying the means for producing food.......
And, of course, some have argued that the who 'Peak Oil' or 'Peaking Energy' meme is simply a set up for the global elites making that happen and blaming it on the lack of resources to replenish the soil.
But however you cut it, the petri dish is getting pretty crowded and it can sustain only so many bacteria.... Alex J. can yell all he wants. But a reasoned discussion of the various issues might give folks a way to deal with this. Ranting and bluster is useless.
m
Posted 16 years ago # -
Population cannot keep expanding exponentially
As medicis says, we live in a world limited resources. Population reduction is a legitimate issue and this screaming about "mass culling" only serves to instill terror and irrationality. And DBLS, the solution that most of the population growth activists, progressives, environmentalists, liberals are proposing is not "genocide," it is reasonable reduction in birth rates (throughout the world, especially in the 3rd world). This can be encouraged through education and increasing the availability of birth control, not necessarily through authoritarian enforcement.
http://www.smalltownproject.org/category/populatio...
Over 400 generations (10,000 years), our human population has grown from several million people to approximately 6.1 billion… We continue to depend on a series of ancient, genetically and socially determined habits and attitudes, many of which seem to have been more suitable for our hunter-gatherer ancestors. We must adopt new ways of thinking that will serve our descendants well in a world that is crowded beyond imagining… unless, of course, we destroy ourselves.
The world has been converted in an instant of time from a wild natural one to one in which humans, one of an estimated 10 million or more species, are consuming, wasting, or diverting an estimated 45% of the total net biological productivity on land and using more than half of the renewable fresh water.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Well said, medicis
'Even if his conclusions were only partly right'...that's a important place to take this discussion, because it applies to both sides.
Yes, there is a billion dollar a year industrial PR campaign to frame environmental issues in a manner that deflects any sense of real emergency, or tries to misdirect people's perception of the causes. The Discovery Channel is a good example. Industry may even support the thesis of man made global warming, as they do on the Discovery Channel, only to suggest that industrial solutions will be adequate to address these problems. However, claiming that the entire environmental movement is an extension of industrial logic is simply inaccurate. Industry is trying to co-opt a very honest and international concern for the future of humanity and out planet.
But on the other hand, debunk one environmental emergency, and I can always point to another. Our negative impacts upon our environment are incredibly diverse. Even if half the claims made by the environmental movement are ill informed, the informed half can not be ignored. And I would say this same is true about the 9/11 truth movement. Please ignore the propaganda. But don't miss seeing the forest for the trees.
So both of these concerns have something to offer, but neither should be accepted entirely or at face value.
Remain skeptical!
Posted 16 years ago # -
And, interestingly... perhaps alarmingly, the global elites appear to be buying up the water rights.
just thought I'd add that.
Ever since Kissinger attended the world population conference, I think back in 72, most of the PTB have been well aware of the population catastrophe looming. (Kissinger is also accused of having called Americans "useless eaters"... though I am not sure he actually said that... although, of course, it would be perfectly in keeping with what he is.) And also, ever since Hubbert, the problem of peaking energy supplies. My guess is they've been planning for a long while now. They are not stupid. They have the power to implement their plans and they are well on their way. Their solution, I would bet, is indeed a kind of culling through limiting resources and controlling production and distribution of food and medicine. I do wonder in the dark recesses of my paranoia, that they have already been doing so. But Alex Jones has to address it seriously rather than simply yelling about the New World Order which has the effect of inhibiting actually working towards solutions.
If it seems like I am attributing too much to the 'elites' (as many, including David Griffin refer to them) I can only respond that when I imagine having their mind-set, all the things I believe they are doing are precisely what I would do.
So, in addition to the historical problems and logistical resource issues that you mentioned, truthmod, I also believe we are in the midst of a truly civilization shattering war. It is as covert a war as they can make it. But no less deadly and no less all-encompassing for all 'they' try to keep it from becoming blatant and commonly known. And it is looking fairly bleak right about now.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Forgive me, I didn't see your post, 'truthmover'. I have been trying to juggle writing a couple of forensic reports and posting here and there. Bed time. I wake up early because I do much better writing in the early hours rather than the late ones. This is an interesting discussion. I hope it continues.
Posted 16 years ago # -
The solution to the population problem seems simple to me, you just have to acknowledge two observations.
The populations of highly industrialized nations are in decline. The populations of third world nations are on the rise.
This solution is to raise the living conditions and education levels of all people to a level where it is no longer prudent to have so many children. In a country with a history high infant mortality and a reliance on the next generation to take care of the past generations, to have many children is a mechanism to insure survivability. As medicine and health care has decreased infant mortality and there remains the cultural influence to continue to have many more children than the community can support.
As the wealth of the world is being consolidated into the hands of a few this problem of disparity will only get worse, leaving much of the underdeveloped world prone to be exploited.
As a species we must improve the economic conditions of these underdeveloped nations in order to counter act the need for having so many children. This can only come from education and giving people a means to support their families. The practical solution will take generations, unfortunately, in my opinion, the power to facilitate this change has been bent on controlling and exploiting the people instead of lifting them up and showing them that each life is equal in value.
Posted 16 years ago # -
Well said, imgstacke. As you point out, it's about education and equality, not about a euthanasia program. It's sad that so many people get immediately hot under the collar when the issue of population reduction/stabilization comes up.
This seems to be the reason that Zero Population Growth had to change their name to "Population Connection:"
Posted 16 years ago # -
This movie I saw last night, had some good points on overpopulation:
Namely, that if the population of the US/developed world is adjusted in terms of resource use, we end up having a huge population compared to the third world. Therefore, it seems that the education we're talking about must actually occur here in our countries more than in developing ones. This involves education about how unfair the distribution of wealth, consumption, waste, and pollution has been.
Planet enters 'ecological debt' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6033407....
Rising consumption of natural resources means that humans began "eating the planet" on 9 October, a study suggests.
The date symbolised the day of the year when people's demands exceeded the Earth's ability to supply resources and absorb the demands placed upon it.
The figures' authors said the world first "ecological debt day" fell on 19 December 1987, but economic growth had seen it fall earlier each year.
Posted 16 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.