If you don’t believe in the infamous group known as the Bilderberg, you’re in for a real surprise! The group is real, they exist, and the elite all across the globe meet in secret to plan issues facing our world.
“Bilderberg was founded in 1954, and is an annual conference designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America.
“Every year, between 120-150 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia and the media are invited to take part in the conference. About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields.
“The conference is a forum for informal discussions about megatrends and major issues facing the world. The meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor of any other participant may be revealed.”
Notice that 120-150 political leaders attend this group and that they are discussing major issues facing the world. This is politics at its finest and I for one take issue with billionaires meeting in secret to discuss policies here in America…especially when international countries are involved in those policies. The question we need to ask ourselves is just who are at these meetings? But since most of it is kept secret we don’t really have an answer for that. Some political power in Iran may be advising our American Government, we just don’t know. The only thing we do know is the names of some of those on the committee board, whose members include powerhouses all across the globe:
|Henri de Castries||Chairman and CEO, AXA Group|
|DEU||Ackermann, Josef||Former CEO, Deutsche Bank AG|
|GBR||Agius, Marcus||Non-Executive Chairman, PA Consulting Group|
|USA||Altman, Roger C.||Executive Chairman, Evercore|
|FIN||Apunen, Matti||Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA|
|PRT||Balsemão, Francisco Pinto||Chairman, Impresa SGPS|
|FRA||Baverez, Nicolas||Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP|
|ITA||Bernabè, Franco||Chairman, FB Group SRL|
|NOR||Brandtzæg, Svein Richard||President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA|
|ESP||Cebrián, Juan Luis||Executive Chairman, Grupo PRISA|
|CAN||Clark, W. Edmund||Group President and CEO, TD Bank Group|
|BEL||Davignon, Etienne||Minister of State|
|DEU||Enders, Thomas||CEO, Airbus Group|
|DNK||Federspiel, Ulrik||Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S|
|NLD||Halberstadt, Victor||Professor of Public Economics, Leiden University|
|USA||Jacobs, Kenneth M.||Chairman and CEO, Lazard|
|USA||Johnson, James A.||Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners|
|GBR||Kerr, John||Deputy Chairman, Scottish Power|
|USA||Kleinfeld, Klaus||Chairman and CEO, Alcoa|
|TUR||Koç, Mustafa V.||Chairman, Koç Holding A.S.|
|USA||Kravis, Marie-Josée||Senior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute|
|CHE||Kudelski, André||Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group|
|USA||Mathews, Jessica T.||President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace|
|ITA||Monti, Mario||Senator-for-life; President, Bocconi University|
|USA||Mundie, Craig J.||Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation|
|USA||Perle, Richard N.||Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute|
|CAN||Reisman, Heather M.||Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.|
|AUT||Scholten, Rudolf||CEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG|
|IRL||Sutherland, Peter D.||Chairman, Goldman Sachs International|
|USA||Thiel, Peter A.||President, Thiel Capital|
|INT||Trichet, Jean-Claude||Honorary Governor, Banque de France; Former President, European Central Bank|
|GRC||Tsoukalis, Loukas||President, ELIAMEP|
|SWE||Wallenberg, Jacob||Chairman, Investor AB|
|USA||Warsh, Kevin M.||Distinguished Visiting Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University|
Furthermore, the mysterious Bilderberg group is a branch of the Illuminati dubbed with a fancier name. David Rockefellar himself—a man in the upper ranks of the Illuminati—is the member advisor of the entire group.
Although the group claims to not discuss political agendas, their website and words scream otherwise. Their next meeting will be held May/June of this year and you will be shocked at what they plan on discussing…..
There is a clear consensus among the global elite that overpopulation is the primary cause of the most important problems that the world is facing and that something desperately needs to be done about it. They truly believe that humans are a plague upon the earth and that we will literally destroy the planet if we are left to our own devices. To the elite, everything from global warming to our growing economic problems can be directly traced back to the lack of population control. They warn that if nothing is done about the exploding population, we will be facing a future full of poverty, war and suffering on a filthy, desolate planet. They complain that it “costs too much” to keep elderly patients that are terminally ill alive, and they eagerly promote abortion for babies that are “not wanted” because they would be “too much of a burden” on society. Anything that reduces the human population in any way is a good thing for those that believe in this philosophy. This twisted philosophy is being promoted in our movies, in our television shows, in our music, in countless books, on many of the most prominent websites in the world, and it is being taught at nearly all of the most important colleges and universities on the planet. The people promoting this philosophy have very, very deep pockets, and they are actually convinced that they are helping to “save the world” by trying to reduce the size of the human population. In fact, many of them are entirely convinced that we are in a “life or death” struggle for the fate of the planet, and that if humanity does not willingly choose to embrace population control soon, then a solution will have to be “forced” upon them.
Yes, I know that all of this may sound like something out of a science fiction novel. But there are a whole lot of people out there that are absolutely obsessed with this stuff, and many of them are in very prominent positions around the globe.
The following are 30 population control quotes which show that the elite truly believe that humans are a plague upon the earth and that a great culling is necessary…
1. UK Television Presenter Sir David Attenborough: “We are a plague on the Earth. It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now”
2. Paul Ehrlich, a former science adviser to president George W. Bush and the author of “The Population Bomb”: “To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of Earth is obvious but too much neglected or denied”
3. Paul Ehrlich again, this time on the size of families: “Nobody, in my view, has the right to have 12 children or even three unless the second pregnancy is twins”
4. Dave Foreman, the co-founder of Earth First: “We humans have become a disease, the Humanpox.”
5. CNN Founder Ted Turner: “A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
6. Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso about medical patients with serious illnesses: “You cannot sleep well when you think it’s all paid by the government. This won’t be solved unless you let them hurry up and die.”
7. David Rockefeller: “The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident.”
8. Environmental activist Roger Martin: “On a finite planet, the optimum population providing the best quality of life for all, is clearly much smaller than the maximum, permitting bare survival. The more we are, the less for each; fewer people mean better lives.”
9. HBO personality Bill Maher: “I’m pro-choice, I’m for assisted suicide, I’m for regular suicide, I’m for whatever gets the freeway moving – that’s what I’m for. It’s too crowded, the planet is too crowded and we need to promote death.”
10. MIT professor Penny Chisholm: “The real trick is, in terms of trying to level off at someplace lower than that 9 billion, is to get the birthrates in the developing countries to drop as fast as we can. And that will determine the level at which humans will level off on earth.”
11. Julia Whitty, a columnist for Mother Jones: “The only known solution to ecological overshoot is to decelerate our population growth faster than it’s decelerating now and eventually reverse it—at the same time we slow and eventually reverse the rate at which we consume the planet’s resources. Success in these twin endeavors will crack our most pressing global issues: climate change, food scarcity, water supplies, immigration, health care, biodiversity loss, even war. On one front, we’ve already made unprecedented strides, reducing global fertility from an average 4.92 children per woman in 1950 to 2.56 today—an accomplishment of trial and sometimes brutally coercive error, but also a result of one woman at a time making her individual choices. The speed of this childbearing revolution, swimming hard against biological programming, rates as perhaps our greatest collective feat to date.”
12. Colorado State University Professor Philip Cafaro in a paper entitled “Climate Ethics and Population Policy”: “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers may be necessary in order to do so.”
13. Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka: “I do not bear any ill will toward people. However, I am convinced that the world, including all humanity, WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.”
14. Detroit News Columnist Nolan Finley: “Since the national attention is on birth control, here’s my idea: If we want to fight poverty, reduce violent crime and bring down our embarrassing drop-out rate, we should swap contraceptives for fluoride in Michigan’s drinking water.
We’ve got a baby problem in Michigan. Too many babies are born to immature parents who don’t have the skills to raise them, too many are delivered by poor women who can’t afford them, and too many are fathered by sorry layabouts who spread their seed like dandelions and then wander away from the consequences.”
15. John Guillebaud, professor of family planning at University College London: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet.”
16. Democrat strategist Steven Rattner: “WE need death panels. Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently — rationing, by its proper name — the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.”
17. Matthew Yglesias, a business and economics correspondent for Slate, in an article entitled “The Case for Death Panels, in One Chart”: “But not only is this health care spending on the elderly the key issue in the federal budget, our disproportionate allocation of health care dollars to old people surely accounts for the remarkable lack of apparent cost effectiveness of the American health care system. When the patient is already over 80, the simple fact of the matter is that no amount of treatment is going to work miracles in terms of life expectancy or quality of life.”
18. Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger: “All of our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class”
19. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
20. Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger: “The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
21. Salon columnist Mary Elizabeth Williams in an article entitled “So What If Abortion Ends Life?”: “All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides.”
22. Alberto Giubilini of Monash University in Melbourne, Australia and Francesca Minerva of the University of Melbourne in a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics: “[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus … rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.”
23. Nina Fedoroff, a key adviser to Hillary Clinton: “We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can’t support many more people.”
24. Barack Obama’s primary science adviser, John P. Holdren: “A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.
The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”
25. David Brower, the first Executive Director of the Sierra Club: “Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license … All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
26. Thomas Ferguson, former official in the U.S. State Department Office of Population Affairs: “There is a single theme behind all our work–we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it…”
27. Mikhail Gorbachev: “We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.”
28. Jacques Costeau: “In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.”
29. Finnish environmentalist Pentti Linkola: “If there were a button I could press, I would sacrifice myself without hesitating if it meant millions of people would die”
30. Prince Phillip, husband of Queen Elizabeth II and co-founder of the World Wildlife Fund: “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
There is so much more that could be said about all of this.
If you would like to learn more, the following are 10 of my previous articles about the population control agenda of the global elite…
#2 “They Love Death”
So what do you think about all of this?
Do you agree or disagree with the sick population control agenda of the global elite?
Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below…
Source: Activist Post
This article originally appeared on Easy Health Options®.
Some folks may debate the benefits of detoxing by cleaning out the digestive tract, but almost no one denies the necessity of defending yourself against the toxins running rampant in our contaminated environment. For my own health, I have two reliable methods for detoxing.
The first is my basic, paleo diet. By eliminating processed food, I cleanse my meals and my digestive system of the troublesome chemicals food companies love to inject into addictive junk food. I also avoid grains, soy, legumes (peanuts and beans) and dairy products.
Clean Feeling Of A Saltwater Flush
The second detox I use is my occasional saltwater flush. It’s easy, relatively quick and very effective. Makes me feel cleaner: If there are toxins clinging to my intestinal walls, they’re gone by the time the flush is over.
The basic procedure is simple.
First, you add two teaspoons of sea salt (non-iodized) to a quart of room temperature or lukewarm filtered, pure water.
Then you drink the water rapidly.
Do this on an empty stomach. First thing in the morning, before you’ve eaten breakfast is good.
Make sure a bathroom is nearby. You should need it fairly quickly.
Some people recommend lying down on your right side for 15 minutes or so after drinking the water to make sure the salty solution gets through the stomach into the intestines more efficiently.
Another tip: Chew up a lemon before drinking the flush. That may help you get it down.
An alternative method is to mix the 2 teaspoons of salt into about 2 ounces of the filtered water and drink that as quickly as possible with some lemon in your mouth. When you have that down, drink the rest of the water quick as you can. That may be more palatable.
Your bathroom trips should occur within an hour or two and you will need to use the facilities more than once. You may also experience diarrhea. That is a natural consequence of performing the saltwater flush. Some discomfort may also occur because the flush has such rapid effects.
You may also feel nauseated and throw up. That is not uncommon. So be ready.
Feelings About Detox
Some people pooh-pooh a salt flush, but many others find it helpful and relaxing (when it’s over).
No matter how you feel about a flush or a detox, you should make your daily meals conducive to keeping your physiology and digestion as effective and unproblematic as possible. I follow a paleo diet, excluding processed food, wheat, dairy, soy, corn and virtually all grains. I try to eat whole foods and organic foods as much as possible. And I cook almost all of my own food.
As Dr. Mark Hyman, author of the 10-Day Detox Diet, advises for those trying to clean up their diets: “What’s ‘out’ is sugar (in any form), gluten, and dairy (inflammatory foods), grains, beans, processed factory-made foods, refined vegetable oils, alcohol, and caffeine.”
My paleo diet and the occasional saltwater flush, aside from cleaning out my digestion, have cleared my mind as well. This type of regimen seems to have my mind working better than it ever did before.
And that’s more than a gut feeling.
Many of the published mainstream media news reports outlining the recent outbreaks of measles and mumps in the US have blamed unvaccinated children for the problem. All of the reports have strong, accusatory titles, with reporters repeatedly emphasizing the need for vaccination. They stress how parents who do not vaccinate their children are putting thousands of children at risk from potentially deadly diseases. However, if you examine what is being written more closely, what they are actually saying is something entirely different. Hidden somewhere in the report will be a sentence with crucial information that many parents may miss. This information is hidden so well by the reporter that by the time most readers get to it, they will have been completely brainwashed by the rest of the information and are therefore unlikely to notice its significance. This tactic is known as misdirection. 
Misdirection At Its Best
One particular news report that caught my eye refers to the recent outbreak of mumps in the state of Illinois. The website 5KSDK.com released a news bulletin titled Mumps Outbreak Caused by Vaccination Backlash. During the bulletin, a mother with fully vaccinated children is seen on film stating: “All of my children have been vaccinated as scheduled their whole lives. I am a little disturbed that – eh – you know, if there is mumps here then that means that somebody’s children aren’t vaccinated.” The news clip stated that: “Health officials say a recent backlash against vaccines is helping aid the resurgence of the disease.” The reporter continued by stating that nine of the reported mumps cases were students from the University of Illinois, Champaign. Interestingly, the reporter then ended the report by stating that: “All of those students have been vaccinated, but the vaccine is only 80 to 85 percent effective.”  (emphasis added) This one sentence makes the whole report nonsensical, especially when you consider that both the mother used in the film and the report clearly blamed the unvaccinated population for the problem.
Yet More Misdirection
It appears that mainstream media are not only blaming the unvaccinated community for the current mumps “epidemic,” but also for the cases of measles that are being reported. Or are they? One article covering the measles outbreak in New York City reported that it is “the loons who refuse to vaccinate their children who put everyone at risk.” To make matters even worse, the article, which was published by The Daily Beast, titledThanks, Anti-Vaxxers. You Just Brought Measles Back in NYC, was written by a doctor. Let’s examine his article in more detail. About halfway through his poorly written article, he stated: “But now, shoppers in Boston-area supermarkets get to worry that they may have been exposed when they stopped by for groceries. Commuters in the Bay Area now have to contend with the possibility that they or their children may contract the illness because they happened to get on the wrong train. Over a dozen people around Los Angeles have been diagnosed with measles already this year, nearly half of them intentionally unvaccinated.” (emphasis added) Now, if nearly half of the cases of measles were intentionally unvaccinated, then this would mean that over half of them were intentionally vaccinated! He continued his report by stating: “The explanation is simple, and is as accessible as the nightly news. Vaccine-deniers are responsible to the resurgence of once-eliminated illnesses. Their movement is responsible for sickening people. They are to blame for the word ‘outbreak’ appearing in headlines from coast to coast.” He followed his accusation by adding: “The anti-vaccine crowd may think they’re only making a decision for their own family. In fact, they’re threatening to make the rest of us sick. Refusing to vaccinate your children means you are contributing to a worsening public health crisis. There is no denying it, and there is no point in sugar-coating it.”  I wonder, however, if by the time readers had read the remainder of his waffle, just how many of them actually noticed that one sentence hidden at the end of a paragraph which changed the whole meaning of his article. Let’s face it: if his article had been correct, this would mean that all parents choosing not to vaccinate their children would be putting the whole population at risk, including vaccinated children! How could that be true if vaccinations protect children against disease?
Are Parents Being Fooled Into Believing Vaccinations Protect Children?
Parents have been fooled for many years into believing that by having their children vaccinated, it will protect them against deadly disease. In fact, the CDC recommends vaccination, by stating the following information on their website: “There’s no greater joy than helping your baby grow up healthy and happy. That’s why most parents choose immunization. Giving your baby the recommended immunizations by age two is the best way to protect him from 14 serious diseases, like measles and whooping cough.”  However, this appears not to be the case, because yet another news report which I have chosen for us to examine says the complete and utter opposite. A report published by Wyoming News Source titled Anti-Vaccine Movement Puts Children at Risk stated that parents who refuse to vaccinate are irresponsible and are putting other children’s lives at risk. They stated: “It’s important to note that the vast majority of children in Wyoming are properly vaccinated before they start school, and we commend their families for that. But just one unvaccinated child puts others at risk, whether that’s in the classroom or the emergency room. Some doctors won’t even treat unvaccinated children. The waiting room situation is just too fraught with risk. Parents who wisely vaccinate might think twice about taking their children to a place where they’d be at increased risk.”  (emphasis added) Do they know something that we do not?
The Mayo Clinic Admits That Vaccines Do Not Work
It is entirely possible that they do. I say this because just a few days ago, a report was published by the Financial Post titled Vaccines Cannot Prevent Measles Outbreaks. Its author, Lawrence Solomon, reported on a paper written by Professor of Medicine and founder and leader of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group, Professor Gregory A. Poland, titled The Re-emergence of Measles in Developed Countries, which was published two years ago. Describing the paper in huge detail, Solomon explained how Professor Poland had stressed that the reason the measles vaccine was not working was hidden in our genes. Solomon stated: “ … Because different people have different genetic makeups, the vaccine is simply a dud in many, failing to provide the protection they think they’ve acquired.”  According to Solomon, Professor Poland had reported that the re-emergence of measles was due to a failure to vaccinate as well as the failure of the measles vaccine. Curious to know exactly what Professor Poland had written, I decided to research the report for myself. In the pre-edited version of the report, sure enough, Professor Poland had indicated that he believed that the re-emergence of measles was due to a failure to vaccinate, as well as the failure of the measles vaccine itself. However, he had also written the following very interesting couple of sentences: “ … As illustrated in the Table, since 2005 these outbreaks have also occurred in the U.S. – with surprising numbers of cases occurring in persons who previously received one or even two documented doses of measles-containing vaccine. In fact, as of September 2011, the U.S. has had 15 measles outbreaks with 211 confirmed cases – the highest number of cases since 1996.” Professor Poland acknowledged the fact that: “Thus, while an excellent vaccine, a dilemma remains. As previously mentioned, measles is extraordinarily transmissible. At the same time, measles vaccine has a failure rate measured in a variety of studies at 2 –10%, and modeling studies suggest that herd immunity to measles requires approximately 95% or better of the population to be immune.”  He indicated, however, that this may not be possible, because the vaccination cannot be administered to the immuno-compromised, pregnant woman and anyone who may be allergic to certain components of the vaccine. For these reasons, he recommended that a new vaccination should be developed, stating that the following measures should take place: “The practical answer to the dilemma of measles re-emergence is the development of better, next-generation vaccines. Given recent public opinion and large numbers of parents rejecting the current vaccine, combined with practical and immunologic limitations, new vaccines appear to be necessary.The ideal vaccine would require only one dose to be given at or soon after birth; it would lack contraindications and permit administration without highly trained health care personnel; it would be inexpensive, and heat stable.” (emphasis added) (To read this report in full, refer to reference six at the end of this article, or, to purchase the final edited version of the paper, follow the link provided in this version.) So, who is telling the truth and whom do we believe?
It is difficult for parents to know who is right and who is wrong when it comes to vaccination. It is even more difficult to know whom to trust. As parents, it appears that we are ‘damned if we do and damned if we don’t.’ When Professor Poland stated that the new vaccination “would lack contraindications and permit administration without highly trained health care personnel; it would be inexpensive, and heat stable,” could he inadvertently have been saying that the current MMR vaccination does have contraindications, is not always being administered by highly trained health care personnel and is not heat stable? The answer would depend on how you interpret what he has written. However, if that is indeed what he meant to say, this would have huge implications for hundreds of thousands of parents who believe that the MMR vaccination was responsible for their children’s disabilities. It also has implications for the many parents whose children have died after receiving this vaccination. Whatever the real truth is, these articles, reports and papers have certainly given us something to think about, haven’t they?