Background Check: Obama's New Science Czar

[poncho]

John Holdren, Obama's Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet​

Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A "Planetary Regime" with the power of life and death over American citizens.​

The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both?​

These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology -- informally known as the United States' Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:​

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.​

Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.​

Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich. The scans and photos are provided to supply conclusive evidence that the words attributed to Holdren are unaltered and accurately transcribed.​

Full Report...

​

 

[OldRegular]

Given what we know about the superCzar they make good bedfellows!

 

[poncho]

Hey OR! Maybe you can help me out here. I was wondering while I was reading this "background check" do we live in communist China or the United States of America? It's getting hard to tell the difference anymore.

 

[Revmitchell]

More despotism from Obama and company.

 

[tinytim]

• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.​

Full Report...​

I hate to break it to you, but statements like these were all over the place a few months ago.. .some similar even here on BB... (Maybe not forced abortion, but forced sterilization)

Can anyone say Octomom?

 

[OldRegular]

Hey OR! Maybe you can help me out here. I was wondering while I was reading this "background check" do we live in communist China or the United States of America? It's getting hard to tell the difference anymore.

You got me poncho! I heard something on the news this morning and my first thought was "that's Communism".

 

[OldRegular]

• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.

This concept was similar to that of the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger.

Justice Ginsburg made a statement this past week [Heard it on Fox last night.] that one of the purposes of Roe v Wade was to control the birth of undesirables.

 

[poncho]

This concept was similar to that of the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger.

Justice Ginsburg made a statement this past week [Heard it on Fox last night.] that one of the purposes of Roe v Wade was to control the birth of undesirables.

Yeah, that's known as Neo-Malthusianism. A doctrine advocating control of population growth.

Economist Thomas Malthus is one of the most literally anti-human theorists in human history. He viewed overpopulation as the fount of all woe, but one which could be staunched with enough blood. In "An Essay on the Principle of Population" Malthus wrote, "All the children who are born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to a desired level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the death of grown persons...if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use...and court the return of the plague." Like their intellectual forebear, Holdren and the Ehrlichs proposed their own acceptable sacrifice to the environment.

SOURCE...

How many Obamanites here are ready to make themselves available to be made a sacrifice to the global environment? Don't be shy step right up and be the first to volunteer. It'll take just such brave people like you if we're going to make a brave new world.

John and Mond debate the value of the World State's policies, John arguing that they dehumanize the residents of the World State and Mond arguing that stability and happiness are more important than humanity. Mond explains that social stability has required the sacrifice of art, science, and religion. John protests that, without these things, human life is not worth living. Bernard reacts wildly when Mond says that he and Helmholtz will be exiled to distant islands, and he is carried from the room. Helmholtz accepts the exile readily, thinking it will give him a chance to write, and soon follows Bernard out of the room. John and Mond continue their conversation. They discuss religion and the use of soma to control negative emotions and social harmony. Source.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Page 838: Nothing is wrong or illegal about the government dictating family size

“In today’s world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?”

​

Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?

Why?

I’ll tell you why, John. Because the the principle of habeas corpus upon which our nation rests automatically renders any compulsory abortion scheme to be unconstitutional, since it guarantees the freedom of each individual’s body from detention or interference, until that person has been convicted of a crime. Or are you seriously suggesting that, should bureaucrats decide that the country is overpopulated, the mere act of pregnancy be made a crime?

I am no legal scholar, but it seems that John Holdren is even less of a legal scholar than I am. Many of the bizarre schemes suggested in Ecoscience rely on seriously flawed legal reasoning. The book is not so much about science, but instead is about reinterpreting the Constitution to allow totalitarian population-control measures.

<snip>

Page 942-3: A “Planetary Regime” should control the global economy and dictate by force the number of children allowed to be born

Toward a Planetary Regime

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”
“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

In case you were wondering exactly who would enforce these forced abortion and mass sterilization laws: Why, it’ll be the “Planetary Regime”! Of course! I should have seen that one coming.

<snip>

Page 917: We will need to surrender national sovereignty to an armed international police force

“If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.”
​

The other shoe drops. So: We are expected to voluntarily surrender national sovereignty to an international organization (the “Planetary Regime,” presumably), which will be armed and have the ability to act as a police force. And we saw in the previous quote exactly which rules this armed international police force will be enforcing: compulsory birth control, and all economic activity.

It would be laughable if Holdren weren’t so deadly serious.

Do you want this man to be in charge of science and technology in the United States? Because he already is in charge.

SOURCE...

So, this is the change Obama promised?

 

[OldRegular]

I wonder if these czars the czarinchief is appointing are to be the nucleus of the "civilian security force" he talked about during the campaign. He is the only one who has authority over these people and certainly the pansy Congress is not going to cut off funding for them.

 

[Revmitchell]

So where are the liberal responses to this?

 

[Aaron]

So where are the liberal responses to this?

They're finding it very hard to spin.