Thursday, August 30, 2012

Does It Matter If You Are Pro-Life Or Pro-Choice?

I have been seeing about an equal amount of posts that are Pro-Choice and Pro-Life on my FaceBook wall. And the Presidential candidates have made it an issue by tying it to the issue of rape. But it really matters not in this country which side you are on, because you don't get to make the decision. There is no such thing as Pro-Choice in this country, and there damn sure isn't a policy of Pro-Life in our government, because it doesn't value life.

Way back in the 1960's the Rockefeller Foundation started working towards the development and implementation of an "Anti-fertility Vaccine." By 1972, the World Health Organization and the UN were working with them, and the program had been given a more politically correct name "Fertility Reduction Vaccine." They had a task force, the Task Force on Immunological Methods for Fertility Regulation. They were studying the large scale manufacture and administration of this type of vaccine at low cost.

"In 1972 the Organization...expanded its programme of research in human reproduction to provide an international focus for an intensified effort to improve existing methods of fertility regulation, to develop new methods and to assist national authorities in devising the best ways of providing them on a continued basis. The programme is closely integrated with other WHO research on the delivery of family planning care by health services, which in turn feeds into WHO's technical assistance programme to governments at the service level."(

As you can see from the following report at the NIH, they have decided that since hormonal methods of rendering men infertile don't work too well, they intend to use chemical methods.( ) This report also shows that the Rockefeller Foundation is funding this research.

Please do not be naive enough to believe that people as rich as the Rockefeller's have any truly altruistic reason for caring how many children you have. They just want to make sure that there are less of us, so there is more for them.

The study at the above link says that the chemical gossypol that they researched caused menstrual disorders in women, so if it caused these problems for women, it would logically follow that just because it caused male infertility, it isn't healthy. In fact it caused neurological problems. So they decided to experiment on Chinese people with it, and decided that if the dose was low enough it wouldn't hurt you and was reversible. Really?

If you read my other posts on eugenics, you will soon learn that organizations like Planned Parenthood are not as benign and helpful as you are led by the nose to believe. They were established by eugenicists prior to WWI and their main purpose is NOT to allow women to have the right to choose whether or not to get pregnant or to have an abortion once she becomes pregnant. Their true purpose is to control and ultimately to stop the birth of whomever they determine to be undesirable.

To point out what may not be obvious, the very fact that they are calling this a vaccine, shows that they are going to be messing with peoples immune systems in order to cause infertility. You might not get pregnant, but at what cost to your health? They don't care if you suffer and die early. So much the better, because there will be one less mouth feeding off the resources they want to hoard.

“Because of the genetic diversity of human populations”, states the document, “immune responses to vaccines often show marked differences from one individual to another in terms of magnitude and duration. These differences may be partly or even completely overcome with appropriately engineered FRVs (Fertility Regulating Vaccines) and by improvements in our understanding of what is required to develop and control the immune response elicited by different vaccines.”

“A new approach to fertility regulation is the development of vaccines directed against human substances required for reproduction. Potential candidates for immunological interference include reproductive hormones, ovum and sperm antigens, and antigens derived from embryonic or fetal tissue.(…). An antifertility vaccine must be capable of safely and effectively inhibiting a human substance, which would need somehow to be rendered antigenic. A fertility-regulating vaccine, moreover, would have to produce and sustain effective immunity in at least 95% of the vaccinated population, a level of protection rarely achieved even with the most successful viral and bacterial vaccines. But while these challenges looked insuperable just a few years ago, recent advances in biotechnology- particularly in the fields of molecular biology, genetic engineering and monoclonal antibody production- are bringing antifertility vaccines into the realm of the feasible.”

I found the fact that they mentioned using fetal and embryonic cells very interesting, because it has recently become public knowledge that they are putting fetal cells in our food.( )( )

As a person who suffers from an autoimmune disorder, I can't help but feel very angry and betrayed by my government for allowing this experimentation. They have obviously been experimenting with better vaccine delivery systems and more effective ones for years now so that they can tell us we need all these new vaccines for new and old diseases, and as an added benefit to them, you and your children will be infertile. I fail to see how that is Pro-Choice.

It's something to think about the next time you get into a Pro-Choice argument with someone or the next time you and your family get in line to get your vaccinations.

In addition to the Rockefeller Foundation, the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation has a BIG hand in population control around the world. One of their latest projects is research and development of nano-particles that could be administered to you without your knowledge to render you infertile by introducing foreign DNA into your body. ( )

The Gates Foundation has proudly been partnering with other organizations to force people at gunpoint to be vaccinated in Malawi.(

While they pretend to be philanthropic, it is obvious that they are talking out both sides of their mouths, just in the fact that they have 2 opposite agendas: reducing childhood death and population control. The two things are really not compatible because if you want to control population, you don't really value ALL human life. The following excerpt from one of Bill Gates' statements shows that what he is truly after is controlling the consumption of resources and stability, which is a nice way of saying control of the peoples of the world through government.
" then you would have all the tools to reduce childhood death, reduce population growth, and everything -- the stability, the environment -- benefits from that."( )

The Gates Foundation is also sponsoring anti-vaccine surveillance and alert systems.
With regard to vaccines in general and the way people are being manipulated, the Council on Foreign Relations actually felt that it would be a good idea to make think people think there was a shortage of the H1N1 vaccine so that people who were resistant to getting it would get it because they were afraid they might not be able to change their minds later, and because if everyone else was rushing to get it, it must be a good idea.( )

“I think what would work better would be to say that there was a shortage and people tend to buy more of something that’s in demand. (Laughter.) We saw that — there was one season where, really, people lined up all night to get a flu shot.” Simonsen says, much to the amusement of the other attendees at the symposium."

In an article at, a very valid point was made in reference to a statement made by Andrew Jack about the people who were hesitant to take the vaccine.

"“I’m not sure that we’re countering these people very well.” Jack concludes before suggesting that the CFR put out soundbites about there being more mercury in a Tuna sandwich than in the H1N1 vaccine in order to convince “the crazy people” that it is safe.

The fact is however, you do not directly inject a tuna sandwich into your bloodstream. Is it more likely that a two fold increase in autism over the last six years is directly related to thimerosal in vaccines or to tuna sandwiches?"( )

In my other posts on eugenics, I have shown that there are people in this country, in the UN and around the world who believe that if you are not of the elite, you shouldn't be having children. And one of President Obama's own advisers believes that if you happen to be Pro-Life, or just choose to have your baby and you are unmarried, that it automatically makes you an unfit mother, and your child should be taken away from you and put into foster care. That's almost funny when you are familiar with the circumstances of Barach Obama's childhood. But wait, he's a wealthy, successful, politician, so it's different.

What it all boils down to is this: You do not have the final say-so on your fertility, unless you happen to be one of the power elite in this country.