WASHINGTON D.C. -During an interview by Emily Bazelon of the “New York Times Sunday Magazine”, Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg reveals how she originally understood the high court’s 1973 decision on ROE v. WADE to be based upon a desire for government population control. Specifically stating:
“…there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
New York Times Magazine
July 12th, 2009 Edition
Justice Ginsburg points to U.S Air Force policy prior to ROE v. WADE of automatic discharge for women who became pregnant. She further explains how it was customary for superiors to recommend abortions in lieu of discharge and that the U.S. Air Force actually offered abortions to pregnant enlisted women on base. Specifically Justice Ginsburg cites her representation of Captain Susan Struck during her hearing in 1972.
Moreover, Justice Ginsburg reveals how she imagined Medicaid could have served as the vehicle for government funded abortions. However, to her complete surprise, the court ruled to uphold the “Hyde Amendment” i.e. prohibition on the government funding of abortion, in its 1980 decision, HARRIS v. MCRAE. The ninety-minute interview also covered her opinions on President Obama’s pick for the high court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. To which Fox News Judicial Analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano admonished her for cheer leading a potential Supreme Court nominee whilst residing on the bench.
Have you ever really been a fan of something only to find out it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, i.e. the classic bait and switch? My partner and I enjoyed watching the original Zeitgeist last year as it railed against the establishment, the Federal Reserve, and threw a critical eye to the origins of modern religion. We applauded what seemed to be a philosophy based in challenging the status quo.
This past Summer, while leaving a comment on a friend’s MySpace profile, I stumbled across the trailer for “Zeitgeist II: Addendum”. The trailer indicated it would premiere on October 3rd, 2008 and as such I eagerly awaited its online release. However, having researched further into the Zeitgeist website, its source material, and underlying philosophical motivations, this blogger is thoroughly convinced it is yet another finely crafted slick marketing piece advocating globalism.
The Zeitgeist homepage has a link beneath the Addendum place holder image, listed as
“-IMPORTANT REFERENCE SOURCES-”. Clicking the link takes you to a page that states:
Note: We at Zeitgeistmovie.com promote the following “Zeitgeist: Addendum”
reference material because of our belief in the importance of the message. We
make absolutely no money off of sales.
Following their fervent non threatening statement of “belief in the message” the site then points viewers to “One of the Most Important Books you will ever read”, entitled “The Best that Money Can’t Buy” by, Jacque Fresco. Peter Joseph, director and producer of ZeitGeist I and II further reinforces his adamant support for the aforementioned book stating:
This book was a critical influence for Parts 3 and 4 of “ZeitGeist: Addendum”
Unfortunately, this book is nothing more than another half-ass attempt at “perfecting human society” through a “resource based economy”. This same “goal” has been advocated relentlessly by the plutocratic oligarchs in their veiled attempt to market humanity oppression, disguised in benign gift wrapping. This is the same ultimate goal as the failed “League of Nations” and its predecessor, “The United Nations” which also advocates, one world governed without borders for the benefit of humanity. (insert Kum-Ba-Yah chorus here).
Following the link to the “Venus Project”, one is taken to what looks like a Star Trek junkie’s bad acid trip, who is obviously stuck in some bizarre 1970’s science-fiction-midlife crisis. Behind the gaudy rendering of future buildings, home, bridges etc, is the real bowl of crazy behind “The Venus Project”. Clicking on the Venus Project’s statement on a “Resource Based Economy”, one is greeted by the insidious goal of the group. The 6th paragraph or setup, of the group’s statement, utterly contradicts subsequent paragraphs, stating:
We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world’s population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.
However, just two paragraphs down, they state their philosophy’s mean to achieve its end:
At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth’s inhabitants. Only when population exceeds the carrying capacity of the land do many problems such as greed, crime and violence emerge. By overcoming scarcity, most of the crimes and even the prisons of today’s society would no longer be necessary.
So since we as intellectual, intelligent, individuals, who do not live under rocks know; resources are already less than balanced for a population of 6.8 Billion and rising.
So how exactly does Mr. Jacque Fresco expect to “balance the carrying capacity of the land” and do away with prisons? Furthermore, how is it any different than this Council on Foreign relations globalist asshole?
Or this statement from the United Nations 1994 International Conference on Population and Development:
Full Document
With these changes, the focus of United Nations population conferences shifted from expertise to policy. In the minds of donor governments and population activists, the main purpose of population conferences became, arguably, the effort to make governments more aware of their population problems and to encourage and assist them in lowering the birthrate.
So while I am all for getting rid of the Federal Reserve and the debt based economy, challenging those in power, questioning the origins of modern religions, abolishing the Income Tax, etcetera. My philosophy does not align with yet another example of elite statism, disguised by Peter Joseph and his movie as revolutionary. My great hope is that there will be a second age of reason, whereby humanity regains its inherent rights and liberty by throwing off the oppressive hands of tyranny, not merely replacing one group of elitist plutocrats with another.
Don’t Tread on Me!
Source(s): ZeitgeistTheMovie.com – TheVenusProject.com - United Nations: 1994 International Conference on Population and Development
