| Author |
Message |
   
Schantz
Member
Post Number: 89
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 12:18 am: | 
|
Scott,
Because I chose to respond here for reasons that I don't need to explain to you and your antagonistic friends that's why.
No worries, I will not bother you again.
Elvis has left the building.
Please give a parting farewell from me to your buddies who are all about distortion and disruption. I'm sure they are smiling as they have succeeded in reeking havoc to this board which you continue to approve. |
Marcela
Member
Post Number: 178
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 09:45 am: |
|
Schantz:
Sorry, there was a huge misunderstanding. You can be most certainly that you are off the list.
We talk about overpopulation, but like friends that we have become we send each other fun emails too. We are not buddies with the moderators, we just communicate them what we are doing. Because we use Figu material, and Billy and Christian are very aware of what we are doing and they endorsed our efforts.
Schantz, I am not speaking for the rest of the members of the list, I am speaking for myself only:
There is no need to use words like “antagonist” “distortion” or “disruption”. I wouldn’t like to have emails of that nature sent to me either. I want to ask you something though. Please don’t send me a farewell to me and don’t say that I am smiling at something that I have never done.
For prosperity I will analyze the words that you used so all forum users can know what you were saying:
Antagonist is a synonym of: rival, adversary, opponent, enemy…
Reeking is synonym of: Stinking, smelly, putrid, fetid…
Havoc is a synonym: chaos, mayhem, mess, disaster…
We are just trying to find a way to create awareness about overpopulation, but if you want to condemn us for that, go ahead…
Salome
|
J_rod7
Member
Post Number: 920
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 04:53 pm: |
|
*****
Schantz,
Your feelings are misdirected and unwarranted. From what you have written, it appears to be an emotional reaction to some perceived insult to your person. IMO, your perception has no basis in fact. No one here is "out-to-get" you.
On the contrary, your thoughts have added flavor to the Forum discussions. Adam has already expressed that your inclusion into the Circle of the Roundtable was an error. Have you NEVER made an error?
The Over-Population issue has been addressed by Billy, as the most critical of all. The Initiative to bring this awareness to all Human Beings on Earth, is a direct response to the call from the True Prophet.
For those of us in the Circle, we see our work as essential for the eventual reduction in the Over-Population. I consider myself and all the others in the Circle, to be engaged in Honorable efforts on behalf of the Human Beings on Earth. Certainly, we give the Honor to Billy, who has shown us his Leadership through the Global Birth-Stop Initiative of his first proposal.
If we were not engaged in this Initiative, who else would? We could not expect anyone from outside of the FIGU Forums to step up for Billy. If WE don't do it, it won't get done.
Please re-examine where your feelings have come from. Can it be based on some misperception?
You have always been welcome here.
In Peace
*****
You say you want an Evolution, well you know, we're all doing what we can. -(Beatles revamped)
Rod
|
Davo
Member
Post Number: 9
Registered: 05-2009
| | Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 05:13 pm: |
|
Hi Moderators,
I am puzzled about something that just happened here and how it could happen. Marcela just replied back to Schantz's post but look at the posting time and date of both posts?? |
Syn
Member
Post Number: 194
Registered: 04-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 06:40 pm: |
|
nothing big schantz just posted at midnight and marcela posted in the morning...
They must find it difficult...Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather then the truth as the authority
-Gerald Massey
|
Davo
Member
Post Number: 11
Registered: 05-2009
| | Posted on Friday, June 05, 2009 - 08:57 pm: |
|
Hi Syn, I'm still confused because it wasn't a case of those two posts merely being posted at different times and then the mods passing them and allowing them to go through and then thats how we saw them. Shantz's post got posted first,(the time was that time) THEN Macela replied to him 3 hours before?? The time MUST be later?? |
Marcela
Member
Post Number: 179
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 10:24 am: |
|
Davo:
I know it is a bit confusing if you are not used to read the time like that. Some countries use the am/pm format, others use the 0-24 clock.
12:00 pm is noon; it marks the beginning of the afternoon hours. 12:00 am marks the beginning of the hours after midnight; therefore, morning hours.
Salome
|
Davo
Member
Post Number: 13
Registered: 05-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, June 06, 2009 - 04:36 pm: |
|
Marcela thanks, I thought all posts were posted under this forums time. |
Gaiawingz
Member
Post Number: 71
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Michael;
Please do not fall into the trap of thinking that somehow implementing (or even discussing!) future sterilization/birth control methods (does it make anyone feel better if we just refer to it as '100% effective, 100% reversible birth control'?) would ever entail the retroactive application of these methods.
I run into this problem a lot. As everyone can tell, I am a strong proponent for forced (reversible) sterilization / control of births -- and I guarantee you that my parents would never have passed the rigors of my evaluations for prospective parents. This is not about retroactively going back and aborting all the people born to unworthy parents, but rather simply controlling as best we can the future circumstances into which we allow children to be born.
So yes, one must discriminate about who is and who is not allowed to have children. Most human beings are not fit to be parents, as depressing as they might find the concept.
Would my highest standard of parenting be introduced immediately? In all likelihood, no. But within a few short generations? Oh yes, and like it or not as you will, everyone would ultimately benefit and flourish as a result.
Now, I do fully understand apprehension about what current regime could possibly be allowed to enact such measures and be trusted to be objective and honourable about the whole process -- indeed, such a regime does not exist, currently. So yes, if the US Government started force sterilizing groups of people, I would be suspicious. I sincerely doubt that any of the regimes with the force to implement such measures would actually want to carry out my method of doing things, though, so again, we'd be talking about different circumstances and different objectives of the regime in question.
That said, I do think that there are individuals such as myself who could, and would be willing if they had the resources to, implement such measures in an objective, balanced, and fair way. Would most people probably think it was fair? Probably not, especially when one thinks of the population of the States, for instance.
Here in the States, the majority of people are not remotely ready to be parents, yet most of them are. Of course, there would be many, many individuals who, especially in the first generation of strictly-controlled births, would protest and screech and make quite a lot of fuss about the whole matter.
Consider the following, however:
Everyone in the US, if they wish to abide by the law, must get a Driver's License to operate a motor vehicle. Most citizens do not really mind too much about having to qualify and prove that they are capable, because cars are, after all, potentially dangerous and deadly if one doesn't know what one is doing.
So tell me honestly, do you really think that someone who is blind should be given a license? How about someone who, upon totaling their car (but remaining, for the sake of this argument, unhurt) and finally getting back to the DMV with the instructor, rages and screeches about how there is absolutely nothing wrong with their navigation of the roads nor their handling of a car, etc. and therefore demands a license.
No one in their right mind would want someone like that driving around the roads, would they?
So why do people cower before violent, abusive, and mentally deranged/psychologically unfit 'adults' who will not listen to, nor consider, reason with regard to reproducing?
Food for thought, folks.
Peace;
- Gaia |
Scott
Moderator
Post Number: 1803
Registered: 12-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 01:14 pm: |
|
Gaia,
I moved your post over into the overpopulation category, because it seems with the advent of any type of enforced birth control for whatever reason will reduce this over populated planet.
Scott |
Borthwey
Member
Post Number: 109
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 03:06 pm: |
|
I find the idea of a mandatory sterilization of all boys or girls before entering the reproductive age, quite acceptable. This would to begin with, eliminate all unwanted pregnancies (maybe even anti-abortion lobbies would come to support this?)
It should be a simple and reversible procedure.
From that point on, the right to conceive a child would depend on having a permit.
Being that bringing a child to the world is not a thing that should be taken lightly, I find it very fair that it would be subject to specific guidelines and an evaluation of each case by specialized professionals.
These things are for the obvious interest of the child, which is (and should be accepted as being) more important than anyone's desire to have one.
I also think that this could be discussed more neutrally and openly in society if it were not for the still present effects of religions on the matters of sex, reproduction and birth control.
David
|
J_rod7
Member
Post Number: 929
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, June 11, 2009 - 03:32 pm: |
|
*****
Best Greetings to All,
Gaia,
In consideration of Population Reduction, There a few steps which could be implemented immediately.
Sterilize ALL persons convicted of any Felony.
This should apply to all persons IN Prisons AND to all such persons as a mandatory requirement for Parole. This should also apply to all felons which have already been released on parole. This should apply in every Nation on Earth.
Immediate Halt of Welfare / WIC / Subsistence payments for any beyond the third child.
If the irresponsible "breeders" do have more than three, they will have to "make-do" with an allowance for only three. This will discourage the ignorant and welfare cheats from pumping out unwanted babies for the purpose of State Income.
A little more food on the Buffet table of thought.
Peace
*****
You say you want an Evolution, well you know, we're all doing what we can. -(Beatles revamped)
Rod
|
Ramirez
Member
Post Number: 189
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Friday, June 12, 2009 - 12:24 am: |
|
David.
"Being that bringing a child to the world is not a thing that should be taken lightly, I find it very fair that it would be subject to specific guidelines and an evaluation of each case by specialized professionals."
From where would you, a national government, independant body representing society or humanity with oversight and regulatory powers find suitable impartial, incorruptible individuals to assemble such a group ?
They would also need 24/7 protection & kevlar vests. You think bombing abortion clinics is a problem .... what about mandatory sterilization clinics. Would you work in one ?
Rod.
"Sterilize ALL persons convicted of any Felony."
What about the various unconvicted felons such as various national leaders, politicians, bankers, military types, medical researchers, scientists etc ?
Among those are a collection where sterilization if implemented might actually make a difference down the line.
"Halt of Welfare / WIC / Subsistence payments for any beyond the third child."
Now that is a very sensible idea, probably far more effective in practice than any sterilization program. Without the reward incentive large families would gradually become unfashionable.
Everything is way different .... if someone else pays for it.
Giawingz.
As always your ideas have merit though I think removing the rewards as Rod suggested is simpler, less invasive & would ultimately be more effective.
Additional to that could be the concept that any sort of child welfare payments are only made as a tax concession .... to taxpayers.
This is off course somewhat harsh in present & coming times due to the recession - financial meltdown & would unfairly target those who have due to unfortunate circumstances lost an opportunity to work often through no fault of their own.
Cheers.
|
Johnnybalmain
Member
Post Number: 33
Registered: 11-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 12, 2009 - 01:11 am: |
|
Rod,
For what it is worth I completely agree with your Post 929. It would be a brilliant start to population control.These little steps will start the journey.
Peace John |
Borthwey
Member
Post Number: 110
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 12, 2009 - 06:19 am: |
|
Ramirez;
I happen to have a good image of social workers/assistants. They already do an assessment work on determinating who gets to adopt children and whether certain people should be stripped of their parental rights.Do you know of any cases of corruption on this area? Misjugements can still exist, but there are ways to minimize them.
My line of thinking is that one who wanted to procreate would be under the same scrutiny as one who wants to adopt. It's the same thing, in essence. It just means that being able to produce offspring doesn't bear the automatic right to take care of the child.
While abortion can be said to go against the “thou shall not kill” commandment, what is it about “sterilization clinics” that you think would fuel the wrath of religious extremists?
David
|
Ramirez
Member
Post Number: 190
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Friday, June 12, 2009 - 08:14 am: |
|
David.
In my part of the world social workers in general have a mixed reputation.
The humane dedicated type are often overworked, depressed, ignored, not promoted because they tend to speak out and act in the genuine interest of children who come to their notice.
There are regular ... usually at least monthly horror stories of horrific abuse, neglect, death, unsuitable parents & foster parents gaining access, failure by authorities to respond to multiple public complaints by neighbours & family members.
There pervades a currently fashionable left wing non interventionist craziness where it's often considered that leaving children in the care of parents who are welfare parasites, prostitutes, junkies, criminals is considered a better alternative than foster care or institutions for the sake of maintaining "natural family ties"
Then you have the various power seeking social workers who out of a personal malevolence pretend that various children are not really in danger & are subsequently left with or returned to carers who abuse, murder, destroy them much to the dismay of genuinly caring social workers who leave the profession in droves as a result.
Judges, magistrates, journalists often question why this state of affairs is permitted to continue enquiry after enquiry .... but little changes.
Why ... ask those from the think tanks who create such policies, politicians who enact laws enabling then maintaining them, beuracrats who oversee them.
Off course not every case is such but enough to create an overall impression that among the so called child welfare, social worker strata of the workforce & oversight mechanisms controlling the basic direction there exist huge fundamental flaws and shortcomings.
However the greatest weakness of this arena has been the phenomenon of the so called single parent family by design as a career .... in most cases nothing more than worthless lazy parasites creating children solely for the sake of acquiring subsidized housing, welfare payments & to use as a bargaining chip/human shield.
Cheers.
|
Borthwey
Member
Post Number: 111
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 12, 2009 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Ramirez;
Depending on the realities involved, there have to be different procedures. What works in one place may not work in another. I agree that this must be taken into consideration. Much of what we can do as a whole has to do more with individual responsability and global conscience than with the “quality” of the laws.
Regards
David
|
Baselineplayer
Member
Post Number: 50
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Friday, June 12, 2009 - 11:11 pm: |
|
Dear all,
I do strongly agree with J_rod7's post no. 929 about the immediate steps in population reduction. In my point of view, these are great ideas for removing the most unsuitable persons from procreation.
I do also have an idea that everyone who are wants to beget children have to be approved and licenced for being parents first before any procreation. That would ensure that only the suitable people who passes all the tests can be parent.
That would ensure that no unsuitable persons ever could be parents anymore, and the children are garanteed an excellent and safe childhood.
I do also agree that the suggested punishments for illegal procreation should be a penalty of 10 annual incomes and that the state takes the child for placement in a more suitable family home.
That should learn about how important it is that children are garanteed the best possible start in the life, as well as a stopping the overpopulation.
Med Bästa Hälsningar / Mit Besten Grüssen / With Best Regards
/Baselineplayer
|
Ramirez
Member
Post Number: 192
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, June 13, 2009 - 03:41 am: |
|
Baselineplayer.
"That would ensure that no unsuitable persons ever could be parents anymore, and the children are garanteed an excellent and safe childhood."
This is a subjective concept.
Who is going to ensure that the various families often referred to as the Illuminati will no longer procreate ?
After all it is they who through various mechanisms & political proxies (elected stooges) write national & transnational (UN-EU) laws.
Speaking of stooges .....
Here is Mr Obama proposing a law of "Prolonged Detention" .... 10 minutes YouTube 22 megs.
He speaks of a "rule of law" whereby persons may be held in detention indefinitely based on an evaluation that they "might in future" commit an offense ..... fascinating stuff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVChNmN9y7E
What about Mr Obama's backers, advisors from the CFR, Goldman Sachs banking buddies etc .... will they be locked up or are they the ones who decide who needs to be locked up.
1984 by George Orwell .... it's a good read.
Cheers.
|
J_rod7
Member
Post Number: 933
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, June 13, 2009 - 05:41 pm: |
|
*****
Best Greetings to All,
Asking for your support here, in relation to the singular objective for the Sterilization of All Felons convicted of Violence.
I have sent an E-mail to the Director of Prisons, Mr. Harley G. Lappin, to request his consideration (and action). The Letter is reproduced below.
Please, if you live in the US, follow-up with a short note of your own words to reinforce this idea, to be applied in the Federal System of Prisons.
For those living in other countries, write a similar note to whomever is in charge of your local Prison Systems.
We've gotta get this going, gotta start SOMEWHERE in the chain of Population reduction. Please, step-up, take action.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
To Attention:
Harley G. Lappin
Director,
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Sir,
For your serious consideration, It is proposed to STERILIZE ALL CONVICTED FELONS.
This should be MANDATORY for ALL those convicted of every act of VIOLENCE against any other Human Being.
This should be MANDATORY for any Violent Offenders being considered for Parole.
Sterilization should be performed as Vasectomy for all Male Inmates, and Tubal Ligation for all Female Inmates.
Sterilization will gradually result in the reduction of Humans in the "Gene-Pool" with the propensity for Violence.
This could also provide additional DIS-INCENTIVE to those premeditating Crimes-of-Violence.
Those which have already lost the "right-to-vote," will also have removed the "right-to-procreate."
Respectfully,
(signed)
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
One step along the Path of Peace
Salome
*****
You say you want an Evolution, well you know, we're all doing what we can. -(Beatles revamped)
Rod
|
Matthew_justin_deagle
Member
Post Number: 85
Registered: 05-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, June 13, 2009 - 05:44 pm: |
|
Ramirez,
No, it is not subjective. How can you say that after all the research that has been done into psychological disorders, the backgrounds of criminals, etc., that there are not many OBJECTIVE criteria for determing who should and should not be a parent?
It is pure weak-sensedness (imbecility).
Salome,
- Matthew |
Mgilbo1
Member
Post Number: 76
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 13, 2009 - 07:31 pm: |
|
The biggest hurdle I see with population control is the fact that many people today think OP is some Rich Man plan to depopulate the world with man-made diseases, shots etc... They completely deny that OP has anything to do with the current problems we face in the world. They deny all facts and believe the weakest arguments against OP.
To me, all you have to do is look around and you can realize what a disaster humans have been to nature. To most other people outside of this forum, they think we can hold 40 billion people with little or no problems at all.
I have realized, as I get older, that the level of thinking for most people is very limited. They can't see the bigger picture in anything and deny everything they can't understand. How can one teach anybody whacked out on religion or drugs or both? In America, 50% of the population is on some anti-depressant or mind altering drug. Whats the chances of them accepting birth restrictions?
Mark Gilbo
|
Mgilbo1
Member
Post Number: 77
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 13, 2009 - 07:44 pm: |
|
Here are some youtube responses I get from people that don't believe in OP. I find some funny but some quite scary as well. I think I'm going to make a youtube video on all the best responses I have received from overpopulation non-believers. I have hundreds of these but here is a few.
"watch endgame blueprint for global enslavement and obama deception, overpopulation is a lie perpetrated by globalists to continue their criminal agenda of mass murder and genocide"
"okay, you die then. give yourself.
You are ignoring mathematics and logic. Every person on Earth, with 1/4 acre each, in Australia, leaves Qnslnd empty. People who ignore logic have an agenda. You, madam, have an agenda. I suppose you are being paid by NWO elite. Whatever your agenda, you are a misguided soul. "
"I understand the exaggerated problems we face in todays world, but I believe that God has set a time for His return and that He has a plan for very every soul thats walked the planet regardless of their circumstances while they're on Earth. Thats what seperates Christians from Enviromentalists. We know that man is evil and that whole populations and cultures have aligned themselves with Satan who is the destroyer of both man and the planet, but we have to believe that God has a perfect plan for end time events and He is not overwhelmed by todays population numbers.
I would suggest that the financial collapse could be Gods judgement on the greedy and ungodly. It clearly states in the bible that Gods sets up kingdoms and destroys them so God orchestrates as men unknowingly work out His Will even with their evil acts and motivations. If we lessen the life of even one man then we're all losers because one day it could be you and me that are the problem and not future generations unborn."
"No, the logical thing is not to slow births. As the numbers of women of childbearing age naturally increases throughout much of the world, the logical thing to do is advocate the natural flow of human life, welcome more and more babies to naturally come out of rising numbers of birth canals, naturally populating somewhat closer together. The more populated we get, the more we ADAPT, and the more parents there are wanting children. Welcome baby booms to persist and spread."
"Why don't you get things started then. Nwo loving scum."
Mark Gilbo
|
|
