FIGHT THE DEPOPULATiON AGENDA OF THE LOBBiES
-
Lobbies are trying to depopulate the world cause the foundamentals of their sick system was wrong.
They want to make survive their elites only.....
And the new era must the era of the awareness of all the population, not the era of the sick people surviving.
Inshaallah.Overpopulation is the biggest sickness of this world. I care less about Georgia guidestones, it is common sense to reduce or maintain the world population.
Humans should not follow cats or rabbits as role models.
Peace,
Edip -
Overpopulation is the biggest sickness of this world. I care less about Georgia guidestones, it is common sense to reduce or maintain the world population.
Humans should not follow cats or rabbits as role models.
Peace,
EdipAs much as I respect the work you've done, that's the kind of talk that'd make me want to tire my wife out and have 13.5 kids.
Those complaining about overpopulation should start with themselves. The Earth is pretty damn big contrary to what one might think and humans have survived in the harshest of conditions.
To boot, those interested can read this http//www.amazon.com/War-Against-Weak-Eugenics-Americas/dp/0914153064/
Populations control is a good way to control populations.
7141 And We have saved you from the people of Pharaoh, they were
afflicting you with the worst punishment; they used to kill your children
and rape your women; and in that was a great trial from your Lord. -
Overpopulation is the biggest sickness of this world. I care less about Georgia guidestones, it is common sense to reduce or maintain the world population.
Humans should not follow cats or rabbits as role models.
Peace,
Ediponly 500 millions surviving = 6,200 billions dying
i respect your work edip, but if you do not understand this is the meaning of that message kill all the poor people around the globe and our elites will survive.
6,200 billions of poor people who recyce all shall die cause 500 millions of rich people who waste and pollute all shall survive? do you agree with this plan?
this is not a true solution. this is just a way to postpone the issue until the next slaughter.
the solution is changin the system changin the production system, changin the economic system, changin the financial system and redistributin the wealth, cause consumist lifestyle destroyed the earth, not overpopulation. after done that ok, control the birthrate and we'll be in balance with the earth.
but that plan means only surviving of this sick system, it means ww3, it's totally un-islamic (and the muslims are the first target) and it's the biggest error that the world can do.
think about it. -
I posted as "guest" above.
Edip, I'd also like to ask you
-
On what basis should one be given or denied the right to a progeny?
-
Who decides?
-
-
only 500 millions surviving = 6,200 billions dying
Don't worry Mujahingle, it's not just 6.2 billion people who need to die. Every soul must taste death. A falling world population requires no change in what is happening now at all - because urbanized societies have too few children to replace themselves. It's nothing to do with an evil non-muslim plan to reduce the number of muslims. The populations of Europe and Russia are in freefall. America's population would be to if it weren't for all the immigrants. The number of children being born in Muslim countries are all in decline now - Turkey and Lebanon have a fertility rates of 1.87 children born/woman, Iran 1.71. In capitalist societies people choose to have few children because children cost a lot of money and there's no farm for them to help on.
I think this is a bad thing, however, because a high and growing population drives forward science and technological progress. We'd all be poorer if there were fewer people. You couldn't have things like the space programme if the would were sparcely populated, as you need a big poor of highly skilled people, an army of engineers and scientists, and a smaller world population would mean fewer economies of scale, fewer tax payers to spread the costs over. A small world population could do just as much damage to the environment as a large one - there were only a few million people in the world when we wiped out the woolly mammoths and other big animal species 10,000 years ago. I think a growing world population is the only way to drive forward science in such a way as to save the planet.
-
In capitalist societies people choose to have few children because children cost a lot of money and there's no farm for them to help on.
this is not the true reason.
please read this article
http//www.savethemales.ca/200202.html
and dig the site
-
I posted as "guest" above.
Edip, I'd also like to ask you
-
On what basis should one be given or denied the right to a progeny?
-
Who decides?
I see... Why do you infer such an idea from my simple support of controlling human population? It could be done voluntarily by improving people's education, awareness about the limited resources of earth, by empowerment of women, and by increasing the living standards...
Do those who oppose population-control think that the earth can feed 60 billion people? Or 600 billion? Or 6 Trillion? Isn't it obvious that there will be a point where populating the earth like cats and rabbits will not be possible? So, the disagreement is not about the morality of such a population control, but about the timing of it. I think the world has already overpopulated. Just visit some big cities and you will see what I mean. Or visit India and see piles of holy s...t in the Ganj river!
Peace,
Edip -
-
I see... Why do you infer such an idea from my simple support of controlling human population? It could be done voluntarily by improving people's education, awareness about the limited resources of earth, by empowerment of women, and by increasing the living standards...
Do those who oppose population-control think that the earth can feed 60 billion people? Or 600 billion? Or 6 Trillion? Isn't it obvious that there will be a point where populating the earth like cats and rabbits will not be possible? So, the disagreement is not about the morality of such a population control, but about the timing of it. I think the world has already overpopulated. Just visit some big cities and you will see what I mean. Or visit India and see piles of holy s...t in the Ganj river!
Peace,
EdipWhile you see a crowded city in India, I see acres upon acres of uninhabited land in countries like Canada.
People flock to the cities for convenience.
And please provide some proof of the Earth's resources actually decreasing, not being monopolized.
-
rsw - hopefully not too young! Most countries have laws against that kind of thing
I see... Why do you infer such an idea from my simple support of controlling human population? It could be done voluntarily by improving people's education, awareness about the limited resources of earth, by empowerment of women, and by increasing the living standards...
Do those who oppose population-control think that the earth can feed 60 billion people? Or 600 billion? Or 6 Trillion? Isn't it obvious that there will be a point where populating the earth like cats and rabbits will not be possible? So, the disagreement is not about the morality of such a population control, but about the timing of it. I think the world has already overpopulated. Just visit some big cities and you will see what I mean. Or visit India and see piles of holy s...t in the Ganj river!
Peace,
EdipI see the problem more as people having children without the will and the capacity to support them. Obviously, if you are a farmer, if your land is insufficient to support anyone but yourself, and you do not have the money or the intelligence to educate children, then you are irresponsible if you have more than one or two.
However, if we have the means to look after our children and the intelligence to change the world and adapt ourselves to the environment, then why not? Before human beings invented farming, there was not enough land to support more than 50 million people. Before the advent of chemistry, the world could not support more than 1 billion people. Today's agriculture can feed perhaps 15-30 billion people. But things like hydroponics and other advanced technologies can feed far more, the sun gives us vast amounts of energy, when we look into the far future the capacity of the human race is limited only by God's command.
Of course this is not to say that if everyone has lots and lots of children everything is okay. What I am saying is the limit is our ability to support children, not our perception of the largeness or smallness of the world. Your average rice farmer in the third world cannot build hydroponic facilities. It is the responsibility of those with means and intelligence to raise children with the skills and the goodwill to improve the situation of the human race.
Love and understanding,
-
While you see a crowded city in India, I see acres upon acres of uninhabited land in countries like Canada.
People flock to the cities for convenience. And please provide some proof of the Earth's resources actually decreasing, not being monopolized.Well, my dear, you just shot yourself in your toes. Canada has some open land because they do population control voluntarily. Do you really want Canada be filled by cats and rabbits too? ;D Then, the Canadian farms that produce grain for the cats and rabbits of the world will be a thing of history. Have you learned the story of rain-forests? The rate that they are destroyed to open space for cats and rabbits?
When China calculated that soon its population would be starving they mandated a draconian population control. Do we really want India's, China's, Bengladesh's population get doubled, tripled, quadrupled? Or, you wish to turn Canada and other relatively empty countries with semi-starving cats and rabbits?
I just wonder where and how you subscribe to such ideas. Fighting against imperialism does not mean to be reactionary; we need to think before we reject some "foreign ideas."
Of course, there is unjust distribution of natural resources. Of course there are imperialistic policies that robs the poor to feed the rich... However, those problems cannot be solved by crawling into the burrows of rabbits.
Peace,
Edip -
Of course, there is unjust distribution of natural resources. Of course there are imperialistic policies that robs the poor to feed the rich... However, those problems cannot be solved by crawling into the burrows of rabbits.
Peace,
Edipok, but not even by killing the poor, cause the real cancer is the rich, and not even by stopping the births cause it's un-natural and it leads to a sick society of old people who want to live forever....
the only solution is changin the system (the productive one, the financial one and the moral one too) and i think that a true islamic socialism system resulting from the qur'an could be a good alternative to this one.
-
Looks like Western Counter terrorism Agencies have tried a new tactic on terrorists not involving sending our boys out. well done, lets roll this across all terrorists camps.
Click to rate Rating 411 - Mike, Swinetown, 19/1/2009 1117
http//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1121842/Al-Qaeda-hit-Black-Death-fear-medieval-plague-kills-40-terrorists-training-camp.html
Al Qaeda hit by Black Death fear as medieval plague kills 40 terrorists at training camp
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1015 AM on 19th January 2009
Comments (6) Add to My Stories
Al Qaeda terrorists have been left fearing the Black Death plague after it wiped out at least 40 insurgents at an Algerian training camp, it was reported today.
The horror disease, which killed 25 million people in medieval Europe, is understood to have been found in a militant?s body dumped at a roadside.
Terror group AQLIM (al Qaeda in the Land of the Islamic Maghreb) was forced to turn its shelter in the Yakouren forests into mass graves and flee, it has been claimed
Now al Qaeda chiefs are said to fear the plague has been passed into other cells - and possibly Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.
Many insurgents may choose to surrender for treatment rather than die a horrible death.
?This is the deadliest weapon yet in the war against terror,? a security source told The Sun
?Most of the terrorists do not have the basic medical supplies needed to treat the disease.
?It spreads quickly and kills within hours. This will be really worrying al-Qaeda.....Clock ticking
-
doesnt this also create the possibility of the terrorists using the plague on us? say, by taking samples from their own victims and spreading the disease in public places, perhaps targeting specific people, etc? all that talk about how powerful it is and we just gave it to them?
-
doesnt this also create the possibility of the terrorists using the plague on us? say, by taking samples from their own victims and spreading the disease in public places, perhaps targeting specific people, etc? all that talk about how powerful it is and we just gave it to them?
Those were the old days when tit for tat was possible. The virus released is likely to targer certain genes the rest will be unaffected something like the anthrax found in the two American Media employees was "biologically engineered." in 2001.
peace -
People consider reproduction a right and will never recognize an authority attempting to regulate it. Even young children sneak off and have sex when their parents tell them not to. Good luck trying to change everyone's mind on that.
Ask any woman here whether she would like to do something natural (have children as soon as she started mensurating). The women here are sooooooooooo indoctrinated thanks to these people, just like the catholics were indoctrinated by the Vatican and pushed for late marriages.
-
Henry Kissinger The world must forge a new order or retreat to chaos
Not since JFK has there been such a reservoir of expectations
Tuesday, 20 January 2009
The alternative to a new international order is chaos.....
The extraordinary impact of the President-elect on the imagination of humanity is an important element in shaping a new world order. But it defines an opportunity, not a policy. The ultimate challenge is to shape the common concern of most countries and all major ones regarding the economic crisis, together with a common fear of jihadist terrorism, into a strategy reinforced by the realisation that the new issues like proliferation, energy and climate change permit no national or regional solution
What kind of global economic order arises will depend importantly on how China and America deal with each other over the next few years. A frustrated China may take another look at an exclusive regional Asian structure, for which the nucleus already exists in the ASEAN-plus-three concept. At the same time, if protectionism grows in America or if China comes to be seen as a long-term adversary, a self-fulfilling prophecy may blight the prospects of global order. Such a return to mercantilism and 19th-century diplomacy would divide the world into competing regional units with dangerous long-term consequences.
http//www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/henry-kissinger-the-world-must-forge-a-new-order-or-retreat-to-chaos-1451416.html -
i'm starting to think that the elites of almost all the world believes they are something like "the true chosen people" and all the others are the goyim.. and the world is their promised land...
be aware and stay tuned brothers