Lies, Damn Lies, and Stupid Lies

Everyday we hear it on the news, see it on the TV and read about it in the newspapers, what a danger to the world Iran is becoming all because it wants to build a nuclear power station to serve the energy needs of its citizens. Hilary Clinton is rabid at the idea along with her fellow Zionists in America and Israel. They view Iran’s right to decide its own future as tantamount to an act of war and threaten them with war in an attempt to persuade them to see things their way. America on the one hand are pointing out that “Peak Oil” is with us and there will be no energy to spare, on the other they are saying that although nuclear power is okay for them, they do not want Iran to have it because they will make nuclear bombs and attack the free world and they will just have to get along without the means to build a sustainable economy for their people.

Imagine someone running into your living room on a hot and sweaty day and forcing you to turn off your fan because they don’t want you to cool off and informing you that you will never be able to use your fan again because they don’t like it. I might take umbrage to that particular liberty. The reality is that the West’s insistence that Iran cannot entertain the idea of nuclear power because they don’t like it, is a terrible liberty and completely without merit. To add insult to injury the demon makers in Washington have gone out of their way to convince the Global community that Iran is hell bent on building a nuclear arsenal for the express purpose of destroying the very principles of democracy and all that is held dear to the freedom lovers of the world. The fact is we are all free to do what we are told. A strange kind of freedom wouldn’t you say. Shut up they explain.

A decided case of the “pot calling the kettle black” and an incredible hypocrisy given that America’s idea of freedom is to take it away from all and sundry including its own citizens. They are bordering on the maniacal with the venom they are spitting at Iran and the propaganda media is working overtime to ensure that each and every one of us is aware that Ahmadinejad is the Devil on Earth for daring to challenge the might of America.

I for one find the behaviour of America and the rest of the global community, with the exception of Brazil and Turkey, in this respect, to be somewhat hysterical and difficult to understand, added to which it is extremely hypocritical. How could the attitude of the West be so anti Iran, after all what have they ever done to us? The answer is of course nothing so what could possibly be so upsetting for the Western powers in Iran trying to generate electricity for its citizens?

To answer this simple but complex question we have to go back to a 1975 conference in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, and the beginnings of the environmental movement. What could the environmental movement possibly have to do with the Western powers being so dead against Iran’s bid for energy independence, I hear you say? Well it’s all tied in with Global Warming and the Malthusian view of the world that was adopted, in no uncertain terms, by the likes of a leading anthropologist at that time, Margaret Mead, who organized the said conference. Margaret, like all her invited key note speakers, was committed to the idea of population control and made no secret of her intentions in that area. Included in the conference was a veritable cast of Dr Strangelove characters with climatologist Stephen Schneider, biologist George Woodwell, the current president of The American Association for the Advancement of Science, John Holdren, all holding sway along with the Malthusian fanatic and prophet of doom himself, the grim reaper Paul Ehrlich, author of the depressing but well read book The Population Bomb.

If you never read it, back in those heady days of LSD and free love, no prizes for guessing what it is all about. The conference discussion was to focus on the absurd choice of either feeding the starving people of the world or letting them die and saving the environment. Mead and her Madding crowd saw the majority of the world’s population as useless mouths to feed and rather than just moan about it they were going to act on it using the principle “the end justifies the means”. They actively went about the business of scheming to rid the world of its abundance of human beings, by fair means or foul. Well mostly foul. Malthus, whom they all followed with religious fervor, took the view that there was far too many mouths to feed and helping helpless people, the poor, was counter productive not to say pointless given they did little to contribute to society pointing out that we would all be better off if those same people, the poor, got off the planet and stopped consuming his food. How Malthus arrived at his conclusions is a mystery given the population of the planet in his day was a fraction of what it is now but it would seem that even then it was far too crowded for the likes of him. It may have had something to do with the fact that he came from a large family and had to fight for attention. Malthus, for those of you that are not familiar with him, was a British economist and demographer back in the 18th/19th century’s and put forward the argument that at the current growth (in his time) the population would outgrow its ability to sustain a food supply. He thought that rather than help and nurture the less fortunate masses, we should let them meet their demise sooner than later. He suggested creating slums for them to live in and encourage disease wherever possible in the hope that the useless mouths, as he saw them, would, in short order, die out. Malthus was born into what was called the Maunder Minimum period where extreme cold lasting for many years caused yearly crop failures which gave rise to mass starvation and disease across both Europe and America, so his concern for overpopulation at that time was very puzzling. His economic model did not take into account an improvement in weather conditions and mans ability to improve his agricultural output providing plenty of sustenance to feed the masses and as such was shot down by subsequent economic analysis.

However Mead and her happy fun loving band of people, undeterred by their modern economic critics, were at the heart of what was to become a worldwide movement to save the planet. A noble and worthy cause, one would think, unless like me, you take the view that “the end” does not necessarily “justify the means”.

Mead’s population-control policy was firmly based in the post-Hitler eugenics movement which took on the more palatable names of “conservation” and “environmentalism. Julian Huxley, the vice president of Britain’s Eugenics Society (1937-44), had announced in 1946 “even though it is quite true that radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake” Even following the war where the ravages of death had been vast to say the least, the likes of Huxley were hot on the trail of furthering the aims of population control as though the war had not killed sufficient people for his liking. Eugenics is supposed to be about the study and practice of selective breeding applied to humans but in practice, under the Nazis, it became something quite different. It was all very well having a master race but they still had the problem of all those not so perfect humans that represented an embarrassment to the Nazi ideal and had to go, Odd really, given that Hitler was hardly a Rock Hudson look alike, nor were any of his other cronies come to that. Since WW2 the public and the scientific communities have associated eugenics with Nazi abuses, such as enforced racial hygiene, human experimentation, and the wholesale extermination of "undesirable" population groups. Logic dictates that genetically bred perfect people would make less perfect people obsolete. Make no mistake, Population Control is not about birth control, it’s a euphemism for Nazi style extermination of entire populations of people, except these days the Nazis are called Environmentalists.

The Club of Rome was a environmental think tank formed in 1968 by an Italian Industrialist and a Scottish scientist who gathered together a small but influential group of people in a villa in Rome, hence its name. Their mission was to act as a catalyst for change by using their collective savvy, as they saw it, to influence world leaders in their ideas to save the future of humanity. The club attracted many new important members who, coincidently, belonged to the Bilderberg group including Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands. They were all committed Eugenics advocates so their mission was clear.

They raised considerable public attention back in 1972 with their report on the subject Limits to Growth, which sold 12 million copies in more than 30 translations, making it the best-selling environmental book in world history. Whatever language they used to describe their mission it was all about population control. The club makes predictions that appear to be self fulfilling prophecies as they always seem to fit the data provided by their bought and paid for scientists. Very convenient I would say.

Most if not all predictions about the future of our environment or economic system are based on computer models but as any scientist worth his salt will tell you, these predictions, with which they instill so much confidence are inherently faulty. What is a little known fact, outside of mathematical circles, is that computer models, like the ones relied on by the IPCC to predict future climate change, contain what is known as “irreducible imprecision.”. The fact is we are severely limited by the fact that we do not know with arbitrary accuracy the evolution equations and the initial conditions of any system sufficient to make a remotely accurate prediction about an event prediction based on the model but that is what the scientists, who should know better, base their decisions upon. Lies, damn lies, and stupid lies.

Mead had been president of the AAAS back in 1974 and as such carried a big stick in the scientific community. One wonders why considering her 1928 book on the sex life of South Pacific Islanders was later found to be a fraud. The book sold well though but as we know, sex always sells. The gross indiscretion of outright lying did not appear to be to be a stumbling block for Mead and her extreme right wing, some would say Nazi Malthusian, view of the world prevailed to achieve great acclaim in her chosen field. Mead and her band of morally challenged individuals were to lay the groundwork for what was to become the IPCC and the introduction of a tax on the very air we breathe, all in the name of saving mother planet from ourselves.

The North Carolina conference, which took place on Oct. 26-29, 1975, was co-sponsored by two agencies of the U.S. National Institutes of Health: the John E. Fogarty International Center for Advanced Study in the Health Sciences and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Mead certainly had friends in high places. What came out of that conference was the Road Map as to what to do to solve the perceived problem of overpopulation ala Malthus and was fully supported by the aforementioned sponsors. It was at this government-sponsored conference, more that 35 years ago, that virtually every scary scenario we have witnessed, since Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth’ hit the screens and we were all made aware of the terrible peril we were facing, was concocted. All the scientists in attendance were charged with the responsibility of coming up with credible science to convince the world that we were all in deep doo doo so that the governments of the world would have to respond and do their bidding with a grateful public egging them on. So far it’s worked a treat.

What has all this got to do with Iran and nuclear energy and bombs I hear you say again? I’m coming to that. In a world where energy is in abundance it would be much harder to thin out the population so energy of all kinds, along with oil, had to be made to appear scarce including nuclear energy. The convenience of the 3 mile Island accident in 1979 comes to mind coinciding with a big award winning movie, ‘The China Syndrome’ released just 12 days before the accident. One hell of a co-incidence wouldn’t you say, I mean what are the odds? It was certainly a bit of luck for the producers, or was it? The China syndrome was a pseudo scientific hypothesis that if a reactor core melted down it wouldn’t stop until it melted all the way to China. An absurd notion but they believed it. The fact that it would actually come out in the Indian Ocean geographically speaking, did not have the same appeal, obviously, as China. The idea completely ignored the effects of gravity.

I’m not suggesting that “the powers that be” would deliberately sabotage a nuclear facility just to support a long term goal to depopulate the planet by ensuring that renewable energy of the nuclear kind would not be an option, heaven forbid; they wouldn’t do something like that, would they? Americans gave a collective sigh of relief that the feared meltdown was averted and the nuclear core did not eat its way to China. The fact that that hypothesis was and is nonsense was never made clear to a grateful public who all agreed they would be better off without such scary energy sources. It certainly put the kybosh on the American nuclear industry and put to bed their long term plans for a cleaner fresher American atmosphere of the kind that only nuclear power could promise. You see where I’m going with this.

Mead’s keynote speech to the 1975 climate conference set the agenda: Mankind had advanced over the years to have international laws governing the sea and the land; now was the time for a “Law of the Atmosphere.” The notion of Cap and Trade on Co2 was born just one year later. It was a collaboration between Mead and William Kellogg her co-organiser and a climate scientist working for the Rand corporation. Thanks Margaret. The whole conference was a naked solicitation of lying formulations to justify an end to human scientific and industrial progress which they saw as the only way to stop the rot and make a better world. Unfortunately for most of us that didn’t mean a better world for us, it was just meant for them, the elite, those chosen ones who were crazy enough to see themselves as somehow more entitled than you or me, assuming your not one of them.

Drastic situations, as they saw it, called for drastic measures. The slide to oblivion had to be stopped; the continuing industrialization of the planet could no longer be tolerated, action had to be taken however unpalatable it may seem, the planet was at stake. Pretty stirring stuff and Nazi Germany’s Joseph Goebbels minister of propaganda, could not have done a better job in convincing otherwise intelligent people that encouraging the death, ultimately, of billions of people was the right thing to do. It is a common belief that Eugenics, ridding the world of its human deadweight and replacing them with perfect beings for those considered surplus to requirement, originated in Nazi Germany and was a corner stone of Goebbels beliefs but it actually began in the good ol' US of A and exported to Germany as a way to try it out like a dry run. 70 years on it is still very much in the forefront of the ruling classes of America’s agenda. One of Goebbels famous quotes was “Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play”.

Playing the press became the cornerstone of the environmentalist/eugenics movement under Mead and not unlike Goebbels, when they lied they lied big-time. An example of a big-time lie occurred back in the late sixties and was delivered by one of Mead’s right hand men Dr George Woodall a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a Fellow of the Academy of Arts and Sciences who has been one of the key advocates of the Global warming hypothesis from the beginning. He was involved in the 60’s campaign to ban DDT and in 1967 wrote an article for Science Magazine where he claimed that on inspection he found there to be at least 13 pounds of DDT per acre of soil in a plot that he had personally examined. Shock and Horror.

What he had neglected to point out was that he had collected his samples for analysis at the very place where they washed down the trucks used for transporting the DDT. There was an official enquiry and his lie was exposed but neither he nor Science magazine wrote a detraction and the article stood.

The fact was DDT was the most effective and harmless way to deal with the problem of mosquito borne diseases, such as Malaria, and reduced outbreaks from millions per year to a few hundred cases but the campaign to demonise it was politically successful and we were back to the millions dying each and every year for the want of a few pennies worth of DDT. Chalk up another Victory for Eugenics. That situation remains unchanged despite the consensus that DDT is not the dangerous substance it was made out to be.

It was a woman by the name of Rachel Carson who began the countrywide assault on DDT with her 1962 book, Silent Spring. Carson made spurious claims in her book designed to scare the BeJesus out of the American public about DDT and synthetic pesticides. “For the first time in the history of the world, every human being is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the moment of conception to death,” she intoned. The first charge against DDT was that it caused cancer. No research has ever turned up any evidence to support that contention, despite massive use of DDT in agriculture in the 1950s and 1960s. Wayland Hayes, U.S. Public Health Service scientist, for 18 months, fed to human volunteers, daily, three times the quantity of DDT that the average American was ingesting annually. None experienced any adverse effect, then or six to ten years later. The point was that DDT was not serving the cause of the environmentalists. We can’t be saving lives and creating more mouths to feed. Something had to be done and it was.

In 1969, the environmental defense fund the Sierra Club, and National Audubon Society petitioned the Secretary of Agriculture to ban DDT, claiming it was carcinogenic to humans. He agreed to partially phase it out by December 31, 1970, which did not satisfy the environmentalists.

The Environmental Protection Agency headed by William Doyle Ruckelshaus who served as the first head of the Agency, appointed Administrative Law Judge Edmund Sweeney to evaluate DDT. In 1971-2 he conducted a seven-month hearing. EPA actually participated, testifying against DDT! Judge Sweeney, after 80 days of testimony from 150 expert scientists, ruled that DDT “is not a carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic hazard to man and does not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds, or other wild life”. He went on to point out that “there was a present need for the continued use of DDT for the essential uses defined in this case”.

The Environmental Defense Fund appealed Sweeney’s decision. The appeal should have been passed to an independent jurist but Ruckelshaus decided to rule on it himself. A gross conflict of interest one would imagine. Not surprisingly, he upheld his own ban “on the grounds that “DDT poses a carcinogenic risk to humans.” According to the Santa Ana Register, July 23, 1972. He had categorically banned DDT despite the fact that he had not attended a single day of the 80-day hearing nor read a page of the transcript. Justice was definitely not seen to be done on that day.

The Audubon Society and the Natural Resources Defense Council, to stop exports of DDT to third-world countries, instituted a number of lawsuits, ultimately gaining the support of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in 1977. These decidedly American organizations showed an incredible largess in their overt concern over the export of DDT to third world countries where the problem of Malaria was most prevalent. Despite all the evidence in favour of DDT as a benign substance and a credit to life saving, it made no difference and the world was denied its benefits.

In 1979, on April 26, Ruckelshaus wrote to the American Farm Bureau Federation that his ban was imposed for political, not scientific, reasons: “Science, along with other disciplines such as economics, has a role to play, but the ultimate judgment remains political,” he wrote. But in 1994, by way of contradiction, he wrote in a letter to the Wall Street Journal, “The scientific basis for the ban was solid then and still stands. DDT is a highly persistent chemical that moves up the food chain, and it accumulates in the fatty tissue of humans.” However, according to Professor Edwards, it does no harm. Professor Edwards says that “DDT residues do not ‘build up’ in animal food-chains, because they are metabolized and excreted by fish, birds and mammals.”

Such was and is the power of the environmental/eugenics movement and its campaign to reduce the world population that even stark realities and plain and simple truth made no difference when the courts made their ruling and changed the lives, or non lives of millions of unfortunate individuals destined to die in the dirt.
What has all this got to do with Iran and their desire to build themselves a nuclear reactor? I’m getting there. I’m trying to set the ground by painting a picture of the incredible lengths to which these strange people will go to achieve their goal in bringing down the population of the world. They are the ‘Crazy rulers of the world’ and as such have more than 90 percent of its wealth and resources. They own the press, the media, the entertainments industry, the publishers, the TV stations, the farms, the factories, the power stations, the land we live on, the water we drink, and now the air that we breath, and they are not who you think they are. The ones we know about are not the rulers they just appear to be. When you think about it if you were one of the rulers would you want anyone to know?

Back to Margaret Mead and her fellow conspirators. You have to understand that when dealing with government, politicians, industrialists etc, Mead and her cronies were preaching to the converted. For them and the “crazy rulers of this world” it was an easy thing to believe as they view the masses from the point of view of looking down their noses as though they were all in the court of Louis the 16th of France and pals of Marie Antoinette. “Let them eat cake”. Not that that was true and an example of telling fibs of a political nature. Marie Antoinette was not what she was painted to be but even now, two hundred years after her death, the lie persists. Persistent lies are what politics are all about, and plausible denial is the means by which they divert the truth until people lose interest.

Hilary Clinton is a great example of the nose perspective and almost always gives the appearance of having smelt something nasty. She is a true moron and a rabid dog, particularly when it comes to Iran. She has been sold the bill of goods that she is one of them, a chosen one, that deserves to rule, and acts accordingly. Mephistopheles is doing a first class job. Her husband is a consummate liar and showed the world that you can even be caught out in a lie and get away with it. It’s stretching credibility a touch when you admit to smoking a “marijuana joint” but you didn’t inhale. I see. Then he follows that with “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” when everybody knows he did except, it would seem, him. There are lies and damn lies and then there are stupid lies. The lies the judges, the politicians, and the scientists tell are stupid lies because they will be found out but they all work on the principle that they will all be dead and buried by the time they are and will not have to live out their lives in perpetual disgrace. That may have been true up until the invention of the Internet and the World Wide Web less than 20 short years ago, but it’s not true now. We live in the information age and your information is my information and it’s coming to get you. It’s a double edged sword, it cuts both ways.

Okay, back to Iran. If it was any sovereign state in the supposed third world that was looking to build a nuclear power station for the purposes of becoming energy independent they would get the same treatment that Iran is getting today. Nuclear energy, in particular, is under attack by environmentalists, not because it represents a danger to society as such, but because of its promise of virtually unlimited cheap energy that would not bode well in keeping the yoke in place in the third world. So, under the guise of protecting the world from possible and very scary nuclear annihilation they introduced the nuclear Non proliferation treaty prohibiting developing countries from acquiring civilian nuclear technologies in case they used their power generation systems to build nuclear bombs to rain down on us. When one considers how angry the world is at Iran for trying to take care of its own sovereign needs to provide energy for its population then its safe to say the plan is working. The idea that they would build bombs is absurd; to do what, take over the world?

It goes against the grain of the environmental/eugenics movement and their long held plan and belief that energy independence on the part of anybody in the developing world would only serve to upset their long term plans for depopulating the world. They need people to starve and get sick and freeze to death and succumb to heat exhaustion and thirst and localized mass murders of the kind witnessed in Bosnia and Kosovo and Somalia and Palestine and Iraq and Chechnya and Africa and the latest being Haiti. For all the aid that was collected for the Haitian people precious little has actually found its way to them. One has to wonder why?

In South Africa they have them believing that Aids and HIV are not connected so there is no need to supply the drugs that would treat it, as far as the government is concerned, despite more than 20% of the adult population suffering from the disease with half a million more each year falling prey to the disinformation that the health department gives them. 1000 people each and every day die from Aids in South Africa alone, with similar figures in other African countries and the numbers are rising each and every day. The eugenics program is certainly working there.

I can honestly say to Iran, “It’s not personal”, it’s part of a deep seated plan to reduce the population of the world down to what the “crazy rulers” consider manageable and with crazy people like Margaret Mead and Paul Erhlich working for them, who managed to convince some extremely respectable scientists to go along with them in the giant lie they concocted back in 1975, then it is cause for concern but it’s not specifically about Iran. Margaret Mead died in 1978 never to see the end result of what she so stridently and enthusiastically worked toward. Many of her ideas were called into question after she passed away but she still remains a well respected scientist in the memory of her contemporaries. No change there then. Incidentally Paul Ehrlich thought that the ideal population for America was no more 150 million so if you’re an American more than half of you are for the chop.

I don’t think things have worked out quite as well as Margaret hoped it would as there have been several false starts in swinging the world over to a one world government by creating various, seemingly natural, disasters, along with man made disasters and pollution that threatens the life of every man, women, and child on the planet, or that’s what they want you to think, along with the idea that they are the answer to our collective problems. When there is a disaster, despite their alleged expertise in disaster control, they are always slow to respond ensuring maximum damage and subsequent death rates. The 9/11 debacle is a case in point when the most security aware country in the world were caught on one foot for almost 1 hour before they began to respond to what was, if you believe what they said, the first violent attack on mainland America since the British tried to win back the country. They must have had cub scouts manning the defense systems that day so incompetent were they. At any rate that’s what they wanted us to believe.

The latest failure in their bid for control of the planet was the disastrous Copenhagen conference. It was there that they hoped to introduce their global authority in policing the industrial world and taxing us all out of existence. They were shot down in flames. Despite being caught in another lie, ala the Anglia Uni emails, they still brazen it out and act as though it is everyone else that is lying and that Anthropogenic global warming is really happening, all because there are too many people. It’s a brilliant way to get whole nations to give up their sovereignty and fall under the controlling yoke of the United Nations, that’s if they can finally pull it off. You’ve got to hand it to Margaret Mead, she had some balls but was right about the fact that there are far too many people. I can’t argue with that but I do argue against playing God. What makes them think it’s up to them to decide who lives or dies. The fact is we occupy an incredibly small part of the available land mass available to us and do have the space to expand into if need be. All the talk of going to Mars and terra forming distant planets makes one wonder why such seeming ingenuity cannot be brought to bear right here on earth and help solve the problem of supporting our teeming masses without having to leave for distant planets or kill off our existing inhabitants.

I for one hope Iran does not buckle under the weight of Global bullshit and get to build their reactor, such is their right, and generate some warm winters and cool summers for the Iranian people.As my fellow Irishman and comedian the late lamented Dave Allen used to say, May your God go with you.

~Sean Casey