The American Ruling Class

[blochwall]

there are answers....

Hi dutchdivco,

t is, I suspect, EVENTS that will 'finally' expose the essential truth, rather than words and research (no offence to your efforts). You can trace what these people have been doing and are doing and even are planning, and try to 'educate' people. But, as I say, I SUSPECT (could be wrong) that at some point, some event or combination of events, will expose the curtain, and the man behind the curtain (as in Wizard of Oz), so that the vast majority of people will 'see'.

Unfortunately, it is not enough to see, we must all understand why, else the next "system" will be based on the same fundamental fallacies as this one.

Please, have a listen to Stefan Molyneux, I garuantee he will provide insights which you would not likely find by yourself. He has hundreds of high quality videos which will provide answers to most of the questions your are currently asking yourself.

BW

[Nadda]

President - Election Center 2008 - Elections & Politics from CNN.com

I was under the impression Obama won by a landslide, He only won by 7%...
Then i noticed the electoral votes. Strange system we have.

And of coarse the ultimate way to 'rig' any race, is to 'own' both the winning horses; that way it doesn't matter which one 'wins';

Alot of people I know dont vote because nothing really changes and many others i know simply vote democrat, to keep the welfare rolling. Only 56% of the US population 18 and over voted in 2008. Its amazing to me how they act as if select groups of people make all the difference in elections...What about the other half of the country lol.

I feel like whats coming is inevitable

You dont have to feel that way, its statistical fact at this rate of growth.
Weather its next year or 100's of years away, it is inevitable, nothing can grow forever within finite space. World economies depend on growth, with growing populations. The collision course is already set. At this rate its only a matter of when...not if.

If its managed the collison can be avoided in the long run.

I'm no economist but it would seem to me that an economy only has to grow when its size is increased. An economy could be perfectly healthy and balanced with a stable population. Most people probably wouldnt like a stable economy because everyone wants more than that. A car dealership owner doesnt want to do average every month. He wants record profits every month. Most of us want the most we can get.

The second problem with a long term stable economy is that there are two words that no one wants to hear, Population Control. At this rate, those two words are inevitable world wide. China is there NOW.

The era of mass consumption and expansion will not last forever. This is merly an "era". It will end, im assuming within a couple generations at this rate. Assuming we avoid WWIII, Major Natural Disasters, Pandemics, or some other mass extinction event the global elite may have planned.

[blochwall]

Hi Nadda,

The second problem with a long term stable economy is that there are two words that no one wants to hear, Population Control. At this rate, those two words are inevitable world wide. China is there NOW.

The era of mass consumption and expansion will not last forever. This is merly an "era". It will end, im assuming within a couple generations at this rate. Assuming we avoid WWIII, Major Natural Disasters, Pandemics, or some other mass extinction event the global elite may have planned.

It is well known that population growth levels off with wealth. Have a look into the demographics of the UK for instance, and compare it to Africa.

Stating that population control is necessary simply becuase government agencies provide alarmist propaganga figures is not a good idea. I'd suggest you look at the actual science first, else you might find yourself in line to be "controlled" by will of yourself.

That said, I agree the system will end. Though as far as I understand, it will happen far sooner then you have suggested. The business of financial collapse is not likely a linier trend but a exponential one. And looking at the reality now as compaired to 4 years ago, I would argue that we are in the freefall stage.

I'm sorry if this post sound confrontational, that was not my intention at all.

.

[Nadda]

@blochwall

I dont mind confrontation, my statements are only opinion.
I certainly cant say that such colossal opinions of mine are fact.
I dont have the time or money to put into the global dynamics and economic research that it really would take to nail it down to an exact science. The elite power brokers do unfortunately.

It is well known that population growth levels off with wealth. Have a look into the demographics of the UK for instance, and compare it to Africa.

If thats so, why is it then that the population has doubled world wide, every country in the exact same time period at all ranges of wealth? Americans have been much wealthier per capita than the Chinese yet both populations have doubled in the last 90 years.

Maybe that was the "government propaganga" google published.
Maybe your right, like i said, unfortunately I dont have the time do the necessary research and cite multiple sources.

I simply try to use logic. We are all born with the instinct to procreate.
I've often wondered how amazing it would be to have several kids of my own...and i cant stand kids lol. My point is, if i were wealthy that would simply give me the means to have a larger family and provide for them.
I would also imagine more kids would survive in a wealthier enviroment than growing up in poverty. Also do you realize how much food and supplies are being pumped into africa by wealthier nations? That alone will skew the comparative results.

No one likes to see a kid starve. As with america i am sure many nations provide benefits to support people in poverty who specifically have children. Many of my own female family members who are poor have had multiple children simply for the funds they are being paid by the government.

I dont blame you for taking offense or even rejecting the idea of population control, no one, not even myself wants to have somebody tell me not to have kids. All that i am saying, is if the world population is in fact growing...it will not be a matter of wanting population control...when enough time has passed it will be a matter of needing it. Weather we like it or not. Earth is finite.

I agree the system will end. Though as far as I understand, it will happen far sooner then you have suggested. The business of financial collapse is not likely a linier trend but a exponential one. And looking at the reality now as compaired to 4 years ago, I would argue that we are in the freefall stage.

I dont believe a simple financial collapse will end the system. I agree, i think that a financial collapse is right around the corner. However, we would still have goods available and room for expansion. There would still be consumers and the motivation for people to produce for them. Find a consumer and a producer, then markets will follow. One way or another as long as no mass extinction event takes place...life will find a way, we'll change or reboot our currency and get back to doing what we currently do best....consume.

I was speaking about the end of the system being the point in which we no longer have the resources to consume or the space to expand. That is a ways out on the timeline.

[rickoff]

Thank you for your courteous responces,and your patience.

You are welcome, Jim and I thank you for participating in this thread.

Like our(?) current SITTING (not saying legitimate, or anything) President, my 'attitudes' are 'evolving'.

Allow me to interject that I would prefer if we all refer to the usurper currently sitting in the White House, with his feet up on the desk, as either "Barry," which is actually his (legal ?) name (Barry Soetoro) or as president and CEO of Corporation U.S. Let's not call him our President, with a capital 'P,' as he certainly is not our legitimate President and does not deserve that kind of respect.

From history going back to Nixon vs. Kennedy, I've known that 'buying' elections, and 'dirty tricks' have been going on for a long time. And,my experience as a 'poll worker' in 2004 gave me personal knowledge that 'dirty tricks' didn't stop with Watergate. While I 'focused' such awareness on the General election, it was in seeing what has happened with R.P. that helped me to realize just how much the primary process is 'rigged' at the outset, and in much the same manner. It seems that Democracy is giving people the ILLUSION that they have a voice in the outcome of elections; and the ILLUSION that the election was 'fair'; that way they accept if their side 'loses', and 'buy in' to the results, either way.

I'm glad you have come to this realization, Jim, and I hope you now see the importance of restoring our true constitutional original jurisdiction government.

And of course the ultimate way to 'rig' any race, is to 'own' both the winning horses; that way it doesn't matter which one 'wins'; bettors who lose will tear up their tickets, and shake their heads and talk about 'next time', and winners will stand in line to collect their payouts, but the 'owner' of the horse will collect the purse, regardless; I GET that.

Right on, Jim. That's exactly how the game plan works. In actuality, the candidates who eventually appear on the ballot are chosen well before election day, and not chosen by the people. They are chosen by the power elite who then own them and use them as puppets. All the real decision making, and agenda formulation, goes on behind closed doors in secrecy, and the puppets merely give the appearance that they are in charge and acting on behalf of the common man and woman.

The WHOLE system is corrupt, I get that, too. And I DO wonder; has it been this way, right from the beginning of the American Revolution, on; Were the Founding Fathers deliberately creating a 'Democracy' where people would be given the illusion, or were they creating something MORE, and its been corrupted over time? I KNOW what you believe, but I note that many of the signers WERE 'RICH'.

Yes, many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were well to do, but don't make the mistake of thinking that alone should make us suspicious of their motives. Had they not been well to do, and very knowledgeable men, chances are very slim that they would have been able to comprehend and act upon what was needed to bring about and end to tyrannical rule over us by the British empire. Take the time to actually read the Declaration of Independence, and see if you can spot anything that intentionally left a door open to creating a society where the people would only be given the illusion that they were in charge, and that government's purpose was only to serve us (and I don't mean serve as for dinner!). Again, read the entire Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, and I don't think you will find anything that gave the federal government the powers that they now think they have, or that it intentionally left loopholes open where usurpers and frauds could take this country over, choose which laws to enforce or ignore, and make up their own rules.

And, I wonder if the one 'weakness' is what happens when the curtain is pulled away? When the vast majority percieve that this is all a 'con'; that they've been lied to/decieved, whatever? At the point the illusion falls, what then?

Glad you asked that. Think about it - what would you do if you were the ruling class elite, and perceived that the people were waking up in large numbers (which they are). To hang onto their power, they would go with one of the following game plans:
1. Use a diversionary tactic to take focus off the ruling class, such as a war with Iran, to unite the people against a different perceived foe whose threat appears more ominous and imminent.
2. Attempt to focus the attention of the people on becoming more angry about the "two-percenters" by organizing and financially assisting staged protests like the "occupy" movement, but on a much more widespread basis. The ultimate goal would be to provoke widespread lawlessness and rioting, which would allow declaration of martial law, curfews, and other liberty stealing tactics to be employed to keep all of us under control.
3. In this scenario, once #2 has been put into full effect, the hope would be that liberty loving patriots would revolt and attempt to oust the so-called government. This would result in utter chaos, and is the reason why this is the Ruling Class' ultimate game plan. They would play this up in the media as a fight against the rich and the poor, and people would join one group or the other in a new civil war. Countless millions of people would be killed as a result, which would bring about the extreme depopulation that the Ruling Class considers a prime objective. Resources of those on the patriot side would be routinely confiscated and "redistributed," in a socialist manner, though the "government" would actually become the new owner and distributor of those resources. Everyone should realize that a rebellion of this kind is exactly what the Ruling Class hopes for - not fears, as this would allow them to win the battle, burn the Constitution, and establish (as victors) whatever new rules they see fit to foist upon us.

I understand this is WHY you are posting this info; to 'spread the word', and open peoples eyes. And this may well be why 'They' are creating FEMA camps, etc.' because they know the deception can't 'hold' forever. Fool some of the people, etc. Still, I suspect MOST people will respond as I have, at least initially; "I've been hearing about the 'Trilateral Commision', etc. since the 60's. So what!"

Yes, you're right. No one wants to believe that they have been living under an illusion, and that things are as bad as they really are. But eventually almost everyone will have something happen in their life that "pulls the rug out from under their feet" and causes them to begin rethinking and questioning what the truth really is.

It is, I suspect, EVENTS that will 'finally' expose the essential truth, rather than words and research (no offence to your efforts). You can trace what these people have been doing and are doing and even are planning, and try to 'educate' people. But, as I say, I SUSPECT (could be wrong) that at some point, some event or combination of events, will expose the curtain, and the man behind the curtain (as in Wizard of Oz), so that the vast majority of people will 'see'.

Those of us actively working to enlighten people and spread the truth have seen a vast increase in the numbers of people awakening to the fact that things are not what we had believed or hoped for. Take David Icke, for example. He was talking about this stuff years ago, and back then when he gave a lecture only a handful of people would show up, and many of them laughed and ridiculed him. Nowadays the largest auditoriums, worldwide, are packed with people earnestly wanting to learn more about these topics, and what they can do about it.

Sure, by then it will be 'too late'; I feel it is already 'too late'. You still hold out hope, and God Love you for that! I feel like whats coming is inevitable, and that we can 'plan for the worst, while hoping for the best', but that WE can't really do much to change what's going to happen;all we can change/affect is how we're prepared to respond to it.

Yes, I understand your way of thinking, but why put off your response to what is going down until it all has gone down as planned by the Ruling Class? There never has been a time where it has been more important for good men and women to stand up for what they believe in, and work diligently and tirelessly to restore this nation, and our Constitution, to what the Founding Fathers intended. I have explained how that can be done by ensuring that your vote really counts this November, and restoring our original jurisdiction government. This is the only plan that can succeed in helping us to legitimately take back and restore our nation, so I urge you to get behind it and take the appropriate actions necessary in a timely manner. If you do nothing but wait for what you expect will come, then you are in effect succumbing to it and actually assisting the Ruling Class in their agenda. So please think about that, and then make a choice.

Rick

[dutchdivco]

Blockwell and Nada

Just weighing in with my thoughts on Population, and Population 'control';

There are 2 aspects to population 'control',and growth. The one is the absolute #'s, and the other is distribution and ratios.

As far as the absolute #'s, it IS exponential; 7 billion now, 8 billion in 12 years, 9 Billion in another 8 years, etc. While its true that there are still many areas that are sparsely populated, it seems obvious that, unchecked, and assuming the #'s continue, at SOME point it becomes unsustainable.

And, most all the serious 'problems' mankind is struggleing with are agravated, or made worse, the greater the population.

Beyond that though, there are countries like the U.S., (Baby-boomers), Japan, and Western Europe, that have 'ageing' populations. Thes countries have set up a government run Social Security TYPE system, where young workers pay into the system and the $ goes right back out, to support retirees. Works o.k. when you have 40 workers for each retiree, not so well when you have say,...2 workers per retiree. THEN it becomes unsustainable.

On the other hand, you have OTHER parts of the world where you have the opposite; Mexico and much of latin America, Africa and the Mideast, etc. where the population is 'skewed' with a majority under 30. This ALSO is problematic; the young are less content with the status quo, and want JOBS, etc. Much of the 'problems' in the Middle east are due in part, to a 'young' population. So, "Population control" if one were going to try to exert it, would include not only trying to 'Control' the absolute #'s, but also the distribution.

I wonder if this isn't why Immigration hasn't REALLY been addressed, in the U.S.; the country needs this influx of workers to keep the 'Social (In) Security system 'afloat'?

Anyway, many '3rd world' countries are 'using' (by default)the 'old school' system of addressing the issue of what to do/how to support people who are 'too old' to work; a system used everywhere before Gov't came up with programs; its called "Have a LOT of kids!"; THAT way, (if your 'poor' or even 'middle class', when your 'too old' to work, your kids can support you. And, because such areas of the world have higher death rates, you have LOTS of kids, as 'extra' insurance, as some may pre-decease you.

Western Europe has been getting both Legal and illegal immigration, mainly from Africa and mid-east, for 20+ years, much as U.S. has been getting it from Mexico and parts south. Japan is 'screwed'; as they don't have much LAND, but otherise this migration, which may well be 'controlled' by these elites, in order to address this population distribution problem.

Overall, as far as the 'absolute #'s 'problem, the 'plans' of the elite make sense, FROM THEIR POINT OF VIEW. I am NOT saying I agree with them, just saying; Trying to 'control' population, like they are trying to do in China, is VERY difficult. So, it makes sense 'They' would look at War, and Disease as other ways to try to reduce population, and would seriously consider the 'easiest', and (perhaps) more humane way would be to insure the people were never born in the first place; i.e. sterilisation. Since people won't 'stand for' up front and out in the open mass sterilisation, doing it without their knowledge certainly seems more,...practical. GMO grains/foods, or even 'Chemtrails', makes 'sense', (again, from 'Their' point of view!)

I am NOT playing 'devils advocate' here; its just easier for me to grasp something, if I can see it from the other persons point of view, even if I DON'T agree with them.

Many of the things I see; leading me to believe 'Civilisation' is a failed experiment whose time is coming to an end, "THEY' must see also. Its just that we reach entirely different conclusions; they want MORE control, I believe we (humans) need to give up control. Our 'greatest strength' is ADAPTABILITY. As hunter/gatherers, we ADAPTED to our environment; to avoid extemes of weather, we simply MOVED; living in low elevations in the Winter, and moving to higher elevations in the summer.
But, once we 'civilised' that wasn't possible, since we were staying in one place year round. So, it was then that we began the shift from adapting, to controlling our environment; we built structures with thicker walls, etc. and air conditioning and heating to 'deal' with temperature extremes. Anyway, THEY want to 'deal' with the collapse of Civilisation by exerting MORE control, I think going back to being adaptable is the answer. Course, THEY want to maintain what they have aquired, and they can't DO that, 'my way', but think they CAN, using 'their' way. Anyway, just some thoughts. Jim

[aljhoa]

Just weighing in with my thoughts on Population, and Population 'control';

There are 2 aspects to population 'control',and growth. The one is the absolute #'s, and the other is distribution and ratios.

I wonder if this isn't why Immigration hasn't REALLY been addressed, in the U.S.; the country needs this influx of workers to keep the 'Social (In) Security system 'afloat'?

Medical science and ethnic disparities in bone marrow donor registry lists have once again illustrated the reality of race as a biological concept, disproving leftist lies which claim it is a “social construct.”

New reports which have focussed on the problems surrounding suitable matches for bone marrow transplant patients have inadvertently revealed why race does exist, and why it matters for humanity’s sake.

The statistics revealed that:
- White British people have a 1 in 3 likelihood of finding a bone marrow transplant match.
- People of mixed race living in Britain have a 1 in 200,000 or more likelihood of finding a bone marrow transplant match.
British National Party

A more egregious example is provided by his treatment of the Eyferth (1961) study of two groups of illegitimate children fathered by (mostly) American black and white servicemen and brought up by their (carefully matched) German mothers. Eyferth reported an average IQ of 96.5 for the mixed race children and of 97.2 for the whites. Lynn reduces the former number to 94 to compensate for use of an old test, and compares it, not with the score of the white sample, but with an average IQ of 100 for German children. He is thus able to conclude that the IQ of these mixed race children is half way between that of Americans and Africans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Di...lligence_(book)


Al

[minoly]

immature?

"Usurper is a derogatory term used to describe either an illegitimate or controversial claimant to the power; often, but not always in a monarchy, or a person who succeeds in establishing himself as a monarch without inheriting the throne, or any other person exercising authority unconstitutionally."

“The definition of derogatory is making something or someone feel less than they are.”

Usurper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
define derogatory | definition of derogatory

Pejorative
Pejorative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[t-rex]

Obama celebrates re-election


Ape With AK-47 - YouTube

[blochwall]

@blochwall

I dont mind confrontation, my statements are only opinion.
I certainly cant say that such colossal opinions of mine are fact.
I dont have the time or money to put into the global dynamics and economic research that it really would take to nail it down to an exact science.

Of course my statements like yours are only opinion.

The elite power brokers do unfortunately

What they have is an ability to apply their desires to any situation they like. That does not necessarily translate into a humanitarian effort. In fact, from what I understand of them, that’s very unlikely. Perhaps you haven't considered the chance these elites are manipulating our perspective so we believe its necessary to control population when actually it isn't.

for instance, If we allow nature to take its course, there can be two outcomes.

1. natural population control will happen
2. natural population control will not happen. and if it doesn't happen, then we can safely assume that it should not happen.

However, if artificial population control is instigated (I think it has been already) there can be only one outcome (if successful)

1. artificial population control will happen.
Effectively, by artificially controlling the population, any chance that people will not be culled is gone.

And considering artificial population control is to stop natural population control, why would we not let nature take its course?

I think the answer is that a small group of people want to decide how to shape the world.

If that’s so, why is it then that the population has doubled world wide, every country in the exact same time period at all ranges of wealth? Americans have been much wealthier per capita than the Chinese yet both populations have doubled in the last 90 years.

I think you might be assuming, as we are all led to, that the population will continue at at an ever increasing pace. Perhaps watching the following 5 short videos could provide some clarification.

Episode 1: Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth | Overpopulation is a myth

Maybe that was the "government propaganda" google published.
Maybe your right, like I said, unfortunately I don’t have the time do the necessary research and cite multiple sources.

Sorry, it was a bit crap of me to say it like I did. I don't think its the figures which are propaganda, but the information you received prior to looking at the figures.

As you're likely aware, figures can be a VERY good at obfuscating the truth. especially when you have some pre determined ideas about what they should tell you. The videos above should clarify the situation.

I simply try to use logic. We are all born with the instinct to procreate.
I've often wondered how amazing it would be to have several kids of my own...and I cant stand kids lol. My point is, if I were wealthy that would simply give me the means to have a larger family and provide for them.

I've been thinking about that recently, though I myself enjoy having kids around. But the fact that we are thinking about it means we are both spending less time making them lol. People who are fighting for survival, and have nothing better to do with their time, make children without a moments thought. its something to do! but I think there are more serious reasons for it. Firstly, in harsh enviroments having more kids means more chance of one surviving and thus spreading your genes. secondly, where huge effort to find food or water is required, more children means more help. granted more food and water is required as a result but one child can do more then just feed herself given enough resources.

I would also imagine more kids would survive in a wealthier enviroment than growing up in poverty. Also do you realize how much food and supplies are being pumped into Africa by wealthier nations? That alone will skew the comparative results.

The money that’s pumped into Africa by wealthy nations never gets to the population. It goes to the despotic leaders who cause the hardship. Those leaders then use that money to buy guns from the countries whom gave them the aid, and turn them on the population. Thus aid makes the situation worse.


"It's like putting our collective well meaning boot on an Africans neck, pointing a gun at his head and asking, how can we help you? to which he replies - well, perhaps you could start by getting your ****ing boot off my neck?"
Stefan molyneux

No one likes to see a kid starve. As with america I am sure many nations provide benefits to support people in poverty who specifically have children. Many of my own female family members who are poor have had multiple children simply for the funds they are being paid by the government.
I dont blame you for taking offense or even rejecting the idea of population control, no one, not even myself wants to have somebody tell me not to have kids. All that i am saying, is if the world population is in fact growing...it will not be a matter of wanting population control...when enough time has passed it will be a matter of needing it. Weather we like it or not. Earth is finite.


I dont believe a simple financial collapse will end the system. I agree, i think that a financial collapse is right around the corner. However, we would still have goods available and room for expansion. There would still be consumers and the motivation for people to produce for them. Find a consumer and a producer, then markets will follow. One way or another as long as no mass extinction event takes place...life will find a way, we'll change or reboot our currency and get back to doing what we currently do best....consume.

I was speaking about the end of the system being the point in which we no longer have the resources to consume or the space to expand. That is a ways out on the timeline.

In which case I very much agree with you on the time scale. I wish it was going to end the systems though. something needs to calm the insanity. I only wish it could be a peaceful transition, where everybody understands it needs to happen.



bw

[aljhoa]

The Asians have everyone beat, Eh...

Only in numbers at mark
2:02 - YouTube

Al

[aljhoa]

Only in numbers at mark
2:02 - YouTube

"Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate.. to suffering" - YouTube

As of April 1995, about 15 percent of working U.S. scientists, and 17 percent of working U.S. engineers, were non-native born.[2], [3] These percentages significantly exceeded the 10 percent of the total U.S. employed population aged 25 and older that was born abroad.[4] This Issue Brief discusses further data on nativity of U.S. engineers, who make up almost 50 percent of the nation's science and engineering workforce (table 1).
How Much Does the U.S. Rely on Immigrant Engineers?

Al

[t-rex]

Monkeys with guns, what a beautiful social metaphor for Obama and the CLinton Global Initiative.

I am not one for politics, engineers hate politicians and lawyers. It is however that I experienced the "movement" in San Francisco, from 1967 to 1970. It was a kind of re-awakening of the age of enlightenment, then came (from NY) Ms. Leftkowitz, she waving her little red book of Chairman Mao. Then their Commonweal takes over my home town of Bolinas. Us locals were not politically aware and were forced to leave town. Commonweal tore the signs to the town down and named the town Bobo. We call it the Kike Kunt Kommand, or KKK for short. Commonweal was brutal and some of my friends are dead because of it. Now you got their president, but this monkey has more than an AK-47, he has the CIA, FBI, USN, much more dangerous don't you think?

73 DE N6KPH

[aljhoa]

Circus (Russian: Цирк; translit. Tsirk) is a 1936 Soviet melodramatic comedy musical film. It was directed by Grigori Aleksandrov at the Mosfilm studios. In his own words, it was conceived as "an eccentric comedy...a real side splitter."

Together with her new Russian husband she finds refuge, love and happiness in the USSR. Her black son is treated very well by friendly Soviet people. The movie ends with a lullaby being sung to the baby by representatives of various ethnicities, inhabiting the Soviet Union. The lullaby was sung by Solomon Mikhaels in Yiddish
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circus_(1936_film)




This is Sweden of Today. Evil indoctrination that encourages the youth of our once proud and noble Nation to indulge in the lowest forms of behaviour: promiscuity, immorailty, homosexuality, perversion and miscegenation- to ultimately humiliate, degrade and debase our people and culture.
Swedish Youth- Evil Indoctrination - YouTube


Al

[rickoff]

Quotable quotes of the day

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill." - The Club of Rome, 1972

"We are moving toward a New World Order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road." - Mihkail Gorbachev, 1987

"The threat of environmental crisis will be the 'international disaster key' that will unlock the New World Order" - Mikhail Gorbachev, 1996

"A total [worldwide, that is] population of 250 to 300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal." - Ted Turner, 1996