Coming Food Crisis Play into Global Elite’s Demand for Population Stabilization

Since 2010, the UN Food and Agricultural Organization have stated that the rise in food prices is directly correlated to the 80 million people being added to the world’s population annually. This fact, according to the globalists at the UN, is beginning to “tax both the skills of farmers and the limits of the earth’s land and water resources.”
Added to this problem are the 3 million people who are “moving up the food chain” eating more than their share in gluttonous nations like the United States and China.

While New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is announcing that the city plan to ban sugary beverages larger than 16 ounces to curb the waistlines of the average New Yorker, the rest of the world is wondering where their next meal may be coming from.

The UK, the average person’s weight continues to dramatically increase with the use of high fructose corn syrup, increase consumption of processed foods and a lethargic lifestyle. Their societal issues with food and weight are mirrored in America. And if compared to other nations, the problem remains the same. While some die of starvation, others are dying from over consumption. Both the degenerative quality of the food being sold in the developed world and the lack of food in the under-developed nations are causational to the same end – population reduction.

To keep up appearances, the mainstream media will dole out ludicrous studies such as one published last month that reported men who are stressed find heavier women more attractive. Instead of facing the health problems brought on by an industry that is designed to deplete the human body of nutrition thereby causing disease and early death, the MSM would have the American public considering their burgeoning waistlines as trendy. Meanwhile, the quest to become anorexic-esque thin is still en vogue and sought after – ever leaving the average American confused about their self-image.

Perhaps a portion of the problem facing Americans and their eating habits stems from the use of chemically enhanced food such as chocolate that is prescribed as a mood-stabilizing drug. The brain manipulation by way of chemical inhibitors comes from the use of valproic acid that acts as an anti-depressant; calming moods and other related psychiatric conditions.

Pointing out the US investment in ethanol is a drain on the world’s food stores; which allocates massive amounts of food to the production of this plant-based fuel for cars.

The World Bank issued a statement of concern last month for the coming food shortage due to the drought devastating the US and Europe. According to Jim Yong Kim, World Bank group president: “Food prices rose again sharply threatening the health and well-being of millions of people. Africa and the Middle East are particularly vulnerable, but so are people in other countries where the prices of grains have gone up abruptly.”

Because of the drought, Obama offered , through the USDA, to purchase $170 million in pork, chicken, lamb and catfish to stave off some of the financial burden of American farmers. The White House announced the use of this food in food-aid programs.

Water resources are directly tied to global food supplies. As more of the planet’s water is securitized by private corporations and governments, some globalists suggest that the world’s population may have to become vegetarian in order to survive.

Malik Falkenmark and colleagues at the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) are responsible for a report that explains “there will not be enough water available on current croplands to produce food for the expected 9 billion population in 2050 if we follow current trends and changes towards diets common in western nations.”

The UN and Oxfam are warning nations that the scarcity of water will limit food production dramatically and cause another food crisis. Oxfam is predicting food prices to rise incredibly in developed nations.

The globalist answer to the problem: by adopting a global vegetarian diet, the world’s water supplies will be saved and the erratic weather evidenced by the man-made climate change myth will simply disappear. Miraculously, third world nations would have the arable land to feed their populations which would increase trade and food surplus.

In April, S. Matthew Laio, bioethics professor at New York University proposed that the masses take a pill that would cause nausea when a person ate meat. This would eventually create a lasting aversion to meat-eating.

Laio had other ideas, like using genetic engineering or hormone therapy to birth smaller babies that would be less resource-intensive throughout their lifetime. Larger people consume more food and energy over their life. Smaller people consume less. Liao believes that human engineering would liberate a family to choose from two medium sized children or three small sized children. Or they could choose one large child. The choice is theirs.

This bioethics professor also thinks very highly of China’s one child policy (that was first instituted by Mao, modeled after Henry Kissinger’s work) and Britain’s advocators of a two-child maximum.

Competition for water will be the next Great War. The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) claims that food security in Southeast Asia and the sub-Saharan Africa will be protected by investing in small pumps because the world depends on their success.

The World Bank and the UN Population Fund have issued ultimatums (referred to as guidelines) to under-developed nations to either implement their plans for population reduction, or be withdrawn from the international community.

According to the UN’s Reproductive Health Action Plan 2010-2015 , adherence to the UN’s Millennium Development Goal number 5 is an imperative. This goal calls for a 75% reduction in maternal mortality and universal access to reproductive health by 2015.

Melinda Gates, at the recent London Family Planning Summit held in July, spoke of preventing 40% of unwanted births in under-developed nations like Africa and India to reduce the world’s human population growth significantly.

Population stabilization , the true meaning behind family planning is evident in the World Bank and UN Population Fund’s push against sovereign nations to reduce their populations by rule of the “global consensus” which dictates human rights policy by deeming some fit to live and others not.

Based on the Rockefeller Commission report, population stabilization is an endeavor worth pursuing, although its success would take decades because of the high incidents of reproduction by marriage. However, with the destruction of the family, this problem could be solved. Furthermore, the stabilization of the global population would reallocate resources to be better spent in terms of quality versus quantity.

Concluding that the best way to achieve population stabilization is to coerce the nation’s citizens that they freely choose abortion and not having a child at all as part of an acceptable societal norm. By way of implementation of social barrier and cultural pressures, the average citizen would rather go with the flow and chose not to procreate for the sake of being part of the herd.

Simultaneously, by reforming the acceptable amount of children born into a married house-hold, the impact on population growth would seem to be natural. And trends would take care of social conformity. Those who had more children would be shunned.

Increasing access to abortion clinics with the inception and popularity of Planned Parenthood would give unacceptable pregnancies a viable solution. This would distract and control another Baby Boom from occurring.

Using images on television, film and print media to control the ideals of the modern family to fit the model of a population stabilized by no longer being plagued with “run-a-way” births; but focusing on the example of small-families as the best way to go.

Last month, eugenicists, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva proposed after-birth abortion for infants up to age 2 as they are a “threat” to their parents and society because of the drain on resources, time and energy expended to care for them. Giubilini and Minerva continued on to say that “merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life.”

Droughts, lack of access to nutritional food and an agenda of the global Elite to reduce the population are not conspiracy theories. Simply look at the data, the evidence being played out in real time and their own publications where these concepts are outlined for implementation. They all connect together to form the basis of the 90% human population reduction that is necessary for the global Elite to control the world’s population as feudal serfs and slaves to Global Governance.

Source

Advertisements

Will the U.S. Suffer Blackouts Due To Drought?

Well, its official – the U.S. government has acknowledged that the U.S. is in the worst drought in over 50 years, since December 1956, when about 58 percent of the contiguous U.S. was in moderate to extreme drought.

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center’s “State of the Climate Drought July 2012” report, “Based on the Palmer Drought Index, severe to extreme drought affected about 38 percent of the contiguous United States as of the end of July 2012, an increase of about 5 percent from last month… About 57 percent of the contiguous U.S. fell in the moderate to extreme drought categories (based on the Palmer Drought Index) at the end of July… According to the weekly U.S. Drought Monitor, about 63 percent of the contiguous U.S. (about 53 percent of the U.S. including Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico) was classified as experiencing moderate to exceptional (D1-D4) drought at the end of July.”

Much business writing on the effects of the drought have focused on its agricultural aspects. To give but one, the hottest, driest summer since 1936 scorching the Midwest have diminished projected corn and soybean crop yields s in the U.S. for a third straight year to their lowest levels in nine years. Accordingly, the price of a bushel of corn has jumped 62 percent since 15 June and soybeans gained 32 percent in the same period.

But as consumers fret about the inevitable rise in food prices to come, the drought is unveiling another, darker threat to the American lifestyle, as it is now threatening U.S. electricity supplies.

Why?

Because virtually all power plants, whether they are nuclear, coal, or natural gas-fired, are completely dependent on water for cooling. Hydroelectric plants require continuous water flow to operate their turbines. Given the drought, many facilities are overheating and utilities are shutting them down or running their plants at lower capacity. Few Americans know (or up to this point have cared) that the country’s power plants account for about half of all the water used in the United States. For every gallon of residential water used in the average U.S. household, five times more is used to provide that home with electricity via hydropower turbines and fossil fuel power plants, roughly 40,000 gallons each month.

Michael Webber, associate director of the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of Texas at Austin, is under no such illusions, stating that the summer’s record high heat and drought have worked together to overtax the nation’s electrical grid, adding that families use more water to power their homes than they use from their tap. Webber said, “In summer you often get a double whammy. People want their air-conditioning and drought gets worse. You have more demand for electricity and less water available to produce it. That is what we are seeing in the Midwest right now, power plants on the edge.”

In July U.S. nuclear-power production hit its lowest seasonal levels in nine years as drought and heat forced Nuclear power plants from Ohio to Vermont to slow output. Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman David McIntyre explained, “Heat is the main issue, because if the river is getting warmer the water going into the plant is warmer and makes it harder to cool. If the water gets too warm, you have to dial back production,” McIntyre said. “That’s for reactor safety, and also to regulate the temperature of discharge water, which affects aquatic life.”

Nuclear is the thirstiest power source. According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in Morgantown, West Virginia, the average NPP that generates 12.2 million megawatt hours of electricity requires far more water to cool its turbines than other power plants. NPPs need 2725 liters of water per megawatt hour for cooling. Coal or natural gas plants need, on average, only 1890 and 719 liters respectively to produce the same amount of energy.

Source

Millions in India affected by severe drought

An estimated 20 percent shortfall in the annual June-September South-West monsoon has severely affected the lives of hundreds of millions of farmers and agricultural workers in rural India. Severe drought is causing significant crop and financial losses and for many hunger and even starvation.

Yet neither India’s Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government nor the various state governments have seen fit to bestir themselves to mount concerted relief programs so as to alleviate the desperate conditions confronting the rural toilers in large swathes of the country.

The drought has severely affected people in Punjab and Haryana in the north, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Gujarat in the west and Karnataka in the south and overall conditions are said to be far worse than the last drought in 2009. According to Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh, “[T]he drought in Maharashtra is the worst in last 20 years, the Gujarat drought is the worst in last 25 years and the Karnataka drought is the worst in last 40 years.”

While the all-India rain shortfall is estimated at 20 percent, in the worst affected states it is far in excess of this. For instance the rain deficit in north and south Karnataka is 51 percent and 47 percent respectively, while in Gujarat it ranges from 58 percent to 79 percent.

The government and the corporate media are presenting the ravages caused by the drought as the product of meteorological events beyond human control. But the drought is far from being simply a “natural” disaster. Although the monsoon is notoriously fickle and India’s rainfall is heavily concentrated in a few months of the year, India’s elite, even after 65 years of independent rule, has failed to develop a modern, comprehensive irrigation system.

About 65 percent of India’s agricultural land lacks irrigation facility—and this in a country where at least 60 percent of the population is dependent on agriculture for their livelihood.

The failure to invest in irrigation dates back decades but the problems in India’s agriculture sector have only worsened since 1991, when the Indian elite abandoned state-led economic development in favour of wholesale integration into the world capitalist market. In the name of attracting foreign investment and promoting industrial growth, Indian governments at all levels have slashed corporate taxes, cut subsidies to farmers, and otherwise pursued pro-market “reform.”

Public investment has been diverted from agriculture into building roads, ports, and other infrastructure projects demanded by big business. To the extent that the Indian elite has any agricultural policy at all, it is one of throwing small and medium farmers to the vagaries of the market while seeking to pave the way for the development of agro-business by loosening ceilings on landholdings.

Because of the lack of irrigation and state support for agriculture—many small farmers are only eking out a living in the best of times—the effects of the ups and downs in the monsoon are magnified.

The immediate impact of the drought has been a significant drop in the amount of crops sown, but this will soon translate into reduced incomes for farmers and farm labours and an increase in food prices for all Indians.

Food inflation, it need be noted, has been in double digits for the past several years and even before the drought was causing increasing hardship. More than 75 percent of India’s population survives on less than $2 per day, with a majority of them earning less than $1 per day.

In Gujarat out of a normal sowing area of 900,000 hectares (ha) at least 600,000 ha have been severely affected. Out of this around 470,000 ha have already experienced a crop shortfall of at least 50 percent.

Similarly in Rajasthan, the sowing area is a mere 99,000 hectares as compared with 150,000 hectares last year. Even drinking water is in short supply in parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan.

The cultivation of rice, cotton, soybeans, and pulses (legumes) have all been badly affected.

The drought and the derisory government assistance being offered have resulted in an increase in farmer suicides. For instance, on August 1, Vala Jeeva Modh from Khorala village in Gujarat consumed poison to end his life because of crop failure. The following day Jaypalsinh Jadeja, a 40-year-old farmer from Rataiya village in the same district, hanged himself.

The phenomenon of farm suicides is tied to the power moneylenders wield over small farmers. Unable to obtain government or bank loans, many small farmers are forced to contract loans with moneylenders who charge exorbitant rates so that they can obtain the seed and other inputs they need to grow their crops and support themselves until harvest time. But in the event of crop failure, the moneylenders still press for payment in full.

The so-called Empowered Group of Ministers appointed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to oversee the drought-response has announced a pitiful relief package of a mere 2 billion rupees ($US36 million) with a further relief of 50 percent subsidy to farmers on diesel prices in all drought-affected areas.

When cabinet advisors were asked if the support measures are enough, they reportedly answered with callous indifference, “[I]t is drought-like and not actual drought.” Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar, who chairs the Empowered ministerial group, has cynically said it is up to the states to declare a drought.

The state governments, for their part, don’t want to call the rain-deficit a drought because that would lead to pressure for increased relief payments.

The Hindu supremacist BJP, India’s Official Opposition, is attacking the Congress-led UPA for failing to come to the farmers’ aid. But the BJP state government of Gujarat has established a relief fund of just 500 million rupees (less than $10 million) after asking the central government for 28 times that amount. The Gujarat government is offering drought-afflicted farmers compensation of just Rs. 5000 ($90) per hectare.

Even the meager sums announced by state and Union governments will go mainly to the better-off sections of farmers, while leaving the small farmers and agricultural workers mostly empty handed.

Source

‘We’ll make a killing out of food crisis’, psychopathic Glencore trading boss Chris Mahoney boasts

Drought is good for business, says world’s largest commodities trading company

The United Nations, aid agencies and the British Government have lined up to attack the world’s largest commodities trading company, Glencore, after it described the current global food crisis and soaring world prices as a “good” business opportunity.

With the US experiencing a rerun of the drought “Dust Bowl” days of the 1930s and Russia suffering a similar food crisis that could see Vladimir Putin’s government banning grain exports, the senior economist of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, Concepcion Calpe, told The Independent: “Private companies like Glencore are playing a game that will make them enormous profits.”

Ms Calpe said leading international politicians and banks expecting Glencore to back away from trading in potential starvation and hunger in developing nations for “ethical reasons” would be disappointed.

“This won’t happen,” she said. “So now is the time to change the rules and regulations about how Glencore and other multinationals such as ADM and Monsanto operate. They know this and have been lobbying heavily around the world to water down and halt any reform.”

Glencore’s director of agriculture trading, Chris Mahoney, sparked the controversy when he said: “The environment is a good one. High prices, lots of volatility, a lot of dislocation, tightness, a lot of arbitrage opportunities.

“We will be able to provide the world with solutions… and that should also be good for Glencore.”

Glencore announced pre-tax global profits of £1.4bn. The G20 is considering holding an emergency summit on the world food crisis.

Oxfam was scathing about Glencore’s exploitation of volatile world food prices. Jodie Thorpe, from the aid agency’s Grow Campaign, said: “Glencore’s comment that ‘high prices and lots of volatility and dislocation’ was ‘good’ gives us a rare glimpse into the little-known world of companies that dominate the global food system.”

Oxfam said companies like Glencore were “profiting from the misery and suffering of poor people who are worst hit by high and volatile food prices”, adding: “If we are going to fix the ailing food system then traders must be part of the cure.”

Stephen O’Brien, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Development, said: “We know that food-price spikes hit the poorest hardest. Ensuring the poor can still access enough food is vital in times of food-price rises, which is why the UK is investing in safety nets that deliver food and cash to the poorest.”

A Glencore spokesperson said: “Regardless of the business environment, Glencore is helping fulfil global demand by getting the commodities that are needed to the places that need them most.”

Source: The Independent