Quote:A prominent World Economic Forum (WEF) official has called for an 86 percent reduction in the population of humans to give the globalist elite a “higher standard of living.”



The call was made by Dennis Meadows, who argues that the massive depopulation goal can be achieved “peacefully.”
Meadows is one of the main authors of the Club of Rome’s 1972 pro-depopulation book “[i]The Limits to Growth.”[/i]
He is an honorary member of the Club of Rome and a member of the World Economic Forum.

Despite his book being published over 50 years ago, it forms a key part of the WEF’s agenda and his ideology is still very anti-human.
Meadows argues that most of the world’s population must be wiped out so that the survivors can “have freedom” and a “high standard of living.”
During a 2017 interview, Meadows claims that genocide of 86% of the world’s population is “inevitable.”
However, he insists that a “benevolent” dictatorship could accomplish the mass de-population “peacefully.”

“We could [ ] have eight or nine billion, probably,” he says of the world’s growing population.
“If we [b]have a very strong dictatorship which is smart[/b] … and [people have] a low standard of living,” Meadows says as he explains how the population reduction agenda could be triggered.


“But we want to have freedom and we want to have a high standard of living [b]so we’re going to have a billion people[/b].
“And we’re now at seven, so [b]we have to get back down[/b].


“I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow, and that it can be done in a way which is relatively equal, you know, so that people share the experience.”

Quote:...and if there was any doubt that the apostate rot that has been the papacy for the last 1,000 years (if you're Orthodox), or 500 years (if you're Anglican or Protestant), or 142 years since Vatican I when Pius IX made himself infallible has reached the point of no return, when what was once Roman Catholicism is no longer concerned with teaching Roman Catholicism, but embracing every trendy fad of "public policy wonks" and technocrats, then this story shared by K.M. might serve to dispel any lingering doubts:

Quote:Bill Clinton and Pope Francis Call for ‘Urgent Depopulation’ To Save the Planet

No...that foamy lather flecking the face of the UN Secretary General is not because he just finished a pleasant jog near the UN building (who'd want to jog there anyway?). It's because these people are acting increasingly like they have that insane hatred of all and sundry brought about by rabies infection.
And Francis appears to have been bitten by it:

Quote:Stressing the urgency of addressing the climate change “catastrophe,” the pope and ex-POTUS vowed to fight global boiling “before it’s too late.”

“It is time to work together to stop the ecological catastrophe before it’s too late,” the pontiff told Clinton at a meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).

“Let us stop while there is still time, please.”

Francis reiterated his intention to release a second document on the “climate catastrophe” later this month.
The move comes eight years after the publication of his encyclical “Laudato Sì” on the same theme.

In late August, Francis said it is time for world leaders to “listen to science and institute a rapid and equitable transition to end the era of fossil fuel.”

It is “absurd to permit the continued exploration and expansion of fossil fuel infrastructures,” he declared in his message for the September 1 Feast of Creation.

“Let us raise our voices to halt this injustice towards the poor and towards our children, who will bear the worst effects of climate change.”

“The unrestrained burning of fossil fuels and the destruction of forests are pushing temperatures higher and leading to massive droughts,” the pope stated.

He claimed that the alleged “catastrophe” is a product of “consumerist greed, fueled by selfish hearts.”
Francis then suggested communist-like policies to address “climate change.”

“Richer nations have contracted an ‘ecological debt’ that must be paid” to poorer nations, he declared.

“Let us heed our call to stand with the victims of environmental and climate injustice, and to put an end to the senseless war against creation,” he said.

Fossil fuels bans? Feast of Creation?  I thought all those incarnational feasts were also about setting the view of Creation back into proper perspective? But I guess all those people like Augustine, Pope Gregory, Cassian, Gregory of Tours, Augustine of Canterbury, Dunstan, Benedict, Aquinas, Eriugena, Duns Scotus (and on and on we could go) were wrong about that. It helps to be infallible and to have a universal jurisdiction, because you can always change direction on a dime, and make everything ultimately about enhancing that claim to such jurisdiction, and you don't even have to listen to your own pesky theologians! Whew! That was a close call! We almost lapsed back into recognizably Roman Catholic ways of thinking and doing things. Thank goodness we managed to avoid that, or Bill Clinton wouldn't be dropping in for a visit!

Of course, that's the problem with the papal system: you don't have to listen to anyone. That's another very long story about how a brand ("catholic faith") was hijacked, and it's one that most don't want to hear, but to give it the Cliff notes treatment, the word "catholic" is from the Greek kath and hole (pronounced "Oh-lee"), meaning "according to the wholeness".  It does not mean and never meant "according to the Pope", which would be kathapapa.

So, while there's precious little in this article to justify the headline about population and "net zero," I have no doubt that if the Bishop-like entity of Rome thinks that fossil fuels fall within his jurisdictional competence - and bad news folks, that's what "universal jurisdiction" as pronounced at Vatican I means - then it's a short hop, skip, and a jump from Boniface VIII's Unam Sanctam to other "updatings" of the mechanisms and institutions of the papal ecclesiastical system to enforce those goals: climate change science disputers, quackcination disputers or refuseniks could literally be declared heretics...

... and we all know how Rome handled such people during the middle ages: it turned them over to the "secular authority" for punishment ... think "sanhedrin" and "Pontius Pilate" here.

But if you've been a good little boy or girl you just might get an indulgence to drive your old fossil fueled vehicle to the grocery store (because you can't afford one of those electric things).

So as I have been warning for a very long time, expect Rome to be captured and used by the globalist new world order, because that is ultimately where the papal claims lead it; they are the now well-metastasized and nearly fatal cancer eating away at the last vestiges of that ancient Catholic faith that may be left in the Roman ecclesiastical system. Francis, in other words, is not the aberration and departure from a system carefully elaborated since the schism between eastern and western churches over a thousand years ago; he is rather the logical denouement.

Or to put it in the words of Pius IX when an Italian cardinal told him that he could not find the doctrine of infallibility in the tradition, "Son io tradizione." (I am tradition.)

See you on the flip side...

(09-30-2023, 11:36 PM)727Sky Wrote: Ageing populations, Sperm counts down, women not having babies or getting married, seems like something is helping them with their agenda. A little bio-lab add-ons and mission complete is less than a century if not sooner.

Quote:The New York meeting of billionaires Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, David Rockefeller, Eli Broad, George Soros, Ted Turner, Oprah, Michael Bloomberg and others was described by the Chronicle of Philanthropy as an informal gathering aimed at encouraging philanthropy. Just a few billionaires getting together for drinks and dinner and a friendly chat about how to promote charitable giving.

There was no agenda, we were told. And no plan for a follow-up meeting.

But in an age of fallen wealth idols, it was inevitable that a meeting of billionaire minds would draw scrutiny. Surely all that money and power in one room had to spell trouble for the rest of us.

An article in the Times of London, headlined "Billionaire Club in Bid to Curb World Population," said the issues discussed in the top-secret meeting included health care, education and--by far the most controversial--slowing the global population growth.

"Taking their cue from Gates they agreed that overpopulation was a priority," the article said, adding that "this could result in a challenge to some Third World politicians who believe contraception and female education weaken traditional values."

Such a stand wouldn't be surprising. Mssrs. Gates, Buffett and Turner have been quietly worrying about Malthusian population problems for years. Mr. Gates in February outlined a plan to try to cap the world's population at 8.3 billion people, rather than the projected 9.3 billion at which the population is expected to peak.

But some right-leaning blogs have started attacking the billionaires as forming a kind of secret sterilization society or giant ATM to fund abortions. It fed into time-honored fears of the rich using their wealth to reshape mankind in its preferred image. Some are raising the specter of eugenics.

I am not taking a stand on population control. But from what I was personally told about the meeting--and what the Times spells out further down in its story--population control was just one of many items raised during the meeting, as each philanthropist talked about what they were working on. It wasn't the reason for meeting and there are no real plans for a follow-up confab.

The notion that this secret gathering was aimed mostly at shrinking the world's population just doesn't ring true.

That said, almost all of the attendees are politically liberal. Do you think this Star Chamber of Philanthropists is something to worry about or something to be grateful for?

Quote:The term star chamber refers pejoratively to any secret or closed meeting held by a judicial or executive body, or to a court proceeding that seems grossly unfair or that is used to persecute an individual.

Star Chamber originated in England as a separate court under the king

The Star Chamber has its origins in the English institution of the same name that tried people too powerful to be brought before the ordinary common-law courts; the fear was corruption.

From the Middle Ages, the Star Chamber consisted of a committee of the English king’s council. It was reorganized in 1487 under King Henry VII, so that it was composed of four high officers of state, with the power to add to their number a bishop, a temporal lord of the council, and two justices of the court of Westminster. Henry VIII’s chancellor and cardinal Thomas Wolsey encouraged plaintiffs to appeal first to the Star Chamber before filing in the ordinary courts.

Star Chamber used in libel, perjury, conspiracy cases

The jurisdiction of the Star Chamber included forgery, perjury, riots, maintenance, fraud, libel, and conspiracy. It could impose fines, whipping, the pillory, prison sentences, and mutilation, but it could not impose the death penalty. The Star Chamber received its name from the room in which it met in Westminster Palace — a room in which stars were painted on the ceiling.

At first, the court was popular for protecting ordinary people from their oppressors. But eventually it abused its powers, using torture to obtain confessions. Jurors were punished for finding verdicts against the Crown.

King Charles I used the Star Chamber to crush opposition to his policies. In 1641 the Long Parliament abolished the court.