Kenyan Bishops Accuse WHO and UNICEF of Implementing a "Population Control" Program

Some potentially disturbing news out of Kenya: A statement signed by the 27 bishops of the Kenya Conference of Catholic Bishops alleges that the World Health Organization and UNICEF are injecting Kenyan women with a tetanus vaccine that has been laced with a hormone that causes miscarriages and renders some women sterile.

The bishops make it clear in their statement that they are not opposed to vaccines, but are instead troubled that there are several inconsistencies with this vaccination program (such as batch numbers and administration protocol), and that testing results have shown the presence of Beta-HCG hormone, which is not normally present in tetanus vaccines.

Dear Kenyans, due to the direction the debate on the ongoing Tetanus Vaccine campaign in Kenya is taking, We, the Catholic Bishops, in fulfilling our prophetic role, wish to restate our position as follows:

1. The Catholic Church is NOT opposed to regular vaccines administered in Kenya, both in our own Church health facilities and in public health institutions.
2. However, during the second phase of the Tetanus vaccination campaign in March 2014, that is sponsored by WHO/UNICEF, the Catholic Church questioned the secrecy of the exercise. We raised questions on whether the tetanus vaccine was linked to a population control program that has been reported in some countries, where a similar vaccine was laced with Beta- HCG hormone which causes infertility and multiple miscarriages in women.
3. On March 26, 2014 and October 13, 2014, we met the Cabinet Secretary in-charge of health and the Director of Medical Services among others and raised our concerns about the Vaccine and agreed to jointly test the vaccine. However the ministry did not cooperate and the joint tests were not done
4. The Catholic Church struggled and acquired several vials of the vaccine, which we sent to Four unrelated Government and private laboratories in Kenya and abroad.
5. We want to announce here, that all the tests showed that the vaccine used in Kenya in March and October 2014 was indeed laced with the Beta-HCG hormone.
6. On 13th of October 2014, the Catholic Church gave copies of the results to the cabinet secretary and the Director of Medical Services. The same was emailed to the Director of Medical Services on October 17, 2014.
Based on the above grounds, We, the Catholic Bishops in Kenya, wish to State the following:
1. That we are shocked at the level of dishonesty and casual manner in which such a serious issue is being handled by the Government.
2. That a report presented to the Parliamentary Committee on Health November 4, 2014 by the Ministry of Health, claiming that the Government had tested the Vaccine and found it clean of Beta- HCG hormone, is false and a deliberate attempt to distort the truth and mislead 42 million Kenyans.
3. That we are dismayed by attempts to intimidate and blackmail medical professionals who have corroborated information about the vaccine, with threats of disciplinary action. We commend and support all professionals who have stood by the truth.
4. That we shall not waver in calling upon all Kenyans to avoid the tetanus vaccination campaign laced with Beta-HCG, because we are convinced that it is indeed a disguised population control programme.

The earlier programs mentioned in the statement happened in Mexico in 1993 and in the Philippines in 1994. There, women were given a five-part tetanus vaccination that was laced with Beta-HCG.

Dr. Wahome Ngare, a gynecologist, released the following statement to MaterCare International:

When challenged in South America in the early 1990’s about the tetanus vaccine used in their campaign being laced with HCG, WHO brushed off the claims as unfounded and asked for proof. When proof was provided by the Catholic based bodies in those countries, WHO claimed that the other components of the vaccine production process may have caused false positive results. When pushed further, they accepted that a few vaccines may have been contaminated with HCG during the production process. However, HCG is not a component nor is it used in the production of any vaccine let alone tetanus! It was only after antibodies against HCG were demonstrated in the women who were immunized with the laced tetanus vaccine that the matter was sealed. The immunized women have suffered multiple [spontaneous] abortions and some have remained sterile. Do we have to wait until this point before action is taken?

Regardless of what is happening, there is a definite need for increased transparency about these programs to ease public fears and to ensure that people are protected from diseases. There are, however, significant questions regarding this vaccine program. For example, WHO's own website says that two or three doses of the tetanus vaccine are sufficient to prevent the disease--not five.

This is a serious allegation by the Kenyan bishops, and this is incredibly troubling if it is found to be true. The WHO and UNICEF should not be meddling with a woman's fertility under the guise of a health program.

WHO and UNICEF need to respond to these allegations before the public's trust in all medical programs erodes entirely. I'm incredibly pro-vaccine, but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around all of this. Let's hope that some answers are given to the people of Kenya, pronto.

Source: Townhall
See also related articles: Patheos.com, Myeclinik, Matercare.org - Catholic Doctors Speak, Kenya Conference of Catholic Bishops

Leading World Bank Demographer: Vaccination Campaigns Part Of Population Reduction Policy

October 5, 2012

By Jurriaan Maessen

On October 2nd a retired demographer at the World Bank admitted that vaccination campaigns are an integral part of the World Bank’s population policies. John F. May, the Bank’s leading demographer from 1992 to 2012, told the French web journal Sens Public (and in turn transcribed by the think-tank May works for) that vaccination campaigns, especially in so-called “high-fertility countries”, are means to achieve population reduction in those countries. May:

“The means used to implement population policies are “policy levers” or targeted actions such as vaccination campaigns or family planning to change certain key variables.”

Defining “population policy” as “a set of interventions implemented by government officials to better manage demographic variables and to try to attune population changes (number, structure by age and breakdown) to the country’s development aspirations”, May continues to explain that the World Bank is taking up the lead role in achieving general population reduction.

It is not the first time that World Bank officials boast about their willingness to implement strict population control policies in the Third World. In its 1984 World Development Report, the World Bank suggests using “sterilization vans” and “camps” to facilitate its sterilization policies for the third world. The report also threatens nations who are slow in implementing the bank’s population policies with “drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom.”:

“Population policy has a long lead time; other development policies must adapt in the meantime. Inaction today forecloses options tomorrow, in overall development strategy and in future population policy. Worst of all, inaction today could mean that more drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom, will seem necessary tomorrow to slow population growth.”, the report states. Some of those steps are now being taken.

A study published in Human and Experimental Toxicology in May of 2011 concluded that “nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates.” (page 8).

After an in-depth study into the effects of vaccine-coverage in relation to mortality rates among infants, the authors Neil Z. Miller and Gary S. Goldman came to this disturbing conclusion and advised that “a closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs, is essential.”- but naively concluded that “All nations—rich and poor, advanced and developing—have an obligation to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their desired goals.”

The authors cannot be expected to know that, actually, that the desired goals are exactly being achieved. Their final point is significant in this regard, that they obviously were not working on the notion that vaccines were harmful and obviously drew their final conclusions on the basis of the idea that the increase in high mortality rates among infants were unintended. The opposite is the case. The World Health Organization, the World Bank, The UN environmental department, the UN Population Fund, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and all the other arms of the creature we call the scientific dictatorship are closing in on all of humanity with mass-scale vaccination programmes and genetically engineered food.

Where the mantra used to be “to combat global warming, we need a one world government”, now it sounds something along the lines of “when we wish to eradicate poverty, we must have a global government and reduce human numbers, by the way.” Any pretext will do. More recently it were oceans in need that prompted the World Bank to initiate a global “alliance”. The same argument can of course be applied and is being applied to every other possible calamity.

Following this line of reasoning will inevitably bring you to pretexts under which global population control can be sold. Want to reduce victims of drunk driving? Reduce human numbers. Looking to cure cancer? Reduce the birthrate so less people will die as a result of it. The scientific community has joined the effort, attempting to sell population reduction to stop poverty and disease worldwide.

Under the guidance of Ban Ki-moon’s top advisor, Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, several studies have been published which call for mass population reduction in the name of poverty-reduction. In 2009 Sachs and his protégé’s Pejman Rohani and Matthew H. Bonds wrote the paper Poverty trap formed by the ecology of infectious diseases. They write that the “poverty trap may (…) be broken by improving health conditions of the population.”

The question that arises, of course, is how to improve “health conditions”. In another study from 2009 Bonds and Rohani say:

““(…) the birth of a child in the poorest parts of the world represents not only a new infection opportunity for a disease, but also an increase in the probability of infection for the rest of the susceptible host population. Thus, epidemiological theory predicts that a reduction in the birth rate can significantly lower the prevalence of childhood diseases.”

Earlier that same year, Bonds wrote a dissertation entitled Sociality, Sterility, and Poverty; Host-Pathogen Coevolution, with Implications for Human Ecology. The study concludes that the best way to eradicate poverty and disease is to, well… eradicate humans.

“We find that, after accounting for an income effect, reducing fertility may result in significantly lower disease prevalence over the long (economic) term than would a standard S-I-R epidemiological model predict, and might even be an effective strategy for eradicating some infectious diseases. Such a solution would make Malthus proud”, Bonds writes.

“(…) the new model, which accounts for an economic effect, predicts that a reduction in fertility may be significantly more effective than a vaccine. It also illustrates that a sustained vaccination policy would be more likely to eradicate a disease if done in conjunction with decreased reproduction.”

“This model”, Bond continues, “is likely to understate the true benefits of reduced fertility because the effect of reducing the birth rate is to reduce the flow of susceptible for all diseases, which is the equivalent of a vaccine for all infectious diseases at the same time.”

If you eradicate the human, you eradicate the disease- problem solved:

“Infectious diseases, however, continue to be most significant in developing countries, which experience relatively rapid population growth. The effect of this influx of children on the persistence and dynamics of childhood diseases, as well as on the critical vaccination coverage, is reasonably well-established (McLean and Anderson, 1988a; Broutin et al., 2005). But it is now warranted to turn this framework on its head: can fertility reduction be an integral element of a disease eradication campaign?”

The answer to that question is given by Bill Gates in 2010 when he promoted using vaccines to lower the population by 10 to 15%:

Disease and poverty, intertwined as they are, can therefore be eliminated by mas-scale fertility reduction. The religion of the scientific dictatorship in a nutshell.

It wasn’t the first time that Mr. Sachs called for global coordination in regards to population control. In a September 2009 UN press release, Sachs not only lamented human activity on the planet, but argued for scientists and engineers to take the steering-wheel in this process:

“We’re in the age of this planet where human activity dominates the earth’s processes. Humanity has become so large in absolute number and in economic activity that we have overtaken earth processes in vital ways to the point of changing the climate, the hydrologic cycle,” he told the UN Conference on Trade and Development.”

“We don’t necessarily need diplomats around the table”, Sachs continued. “We need engineers around the table, scientists around the table. We need to put the cards down and have a new kind of process.”

What kind of model does Sachs envision for his usurping utopia? He stated in an Economist publication in 2000:

“The model to emulate is the Rockefeller Foundation, the pre-eminent development institution of the 20th century, which showed what grant aid targeted on knowledge could accomplish.”

I don’t have to remind readers that it was the Rockefeller Foundation that funded and developed vaccines designed to reduce your fertility, and intended to distribute these vaccines on a mass-scale.

In his commentary The Specter of Malthus Returns, Sachs gives an adequate description of Agenda 21 without actually mentioning the UN plan for wealth redistribution and global population reduction:

“We will need to rethink modern diets and urban design to achieve healthier lifestyles that also reduce consumption. And to stabilize the global population at around eight billion, we will have to help Africa and other regions in speeding their demographic transition. We are definitely not yet on such a trajectory. We will need new policies to push markets down that path and to promote technological advances in resource saving. We will need a new politics to recognize the importance of a sustainable growth strategy and global cooperation to achieve it.”

As Paul Joseph Watson reported in his September 2010 article Global Tax Scam Shifts From Climate Change to Poverty, the pretexts under which the ongoing effort to establish a world government is moving forward is undergoing a transformation. The focus has now drifted away from the thoroughly debunked global warming myth to poverty-reduction. As usually is the case, once the pretext is sold to the unsuspecting, the eugenicists move in to “reduce fertility.” Global government, in other words, to facilitate global scientific dictatorship.

30 stunning facts they don't want you to know about Gardasil and HPV vaccines

Elite Depopulation Agenda.
Vaccination is one of them!

Facts you probably don't know about HPV and Gardasil

In August, the Health Ranger interviewed neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock, M.D. on tv.naturalnews.com. 

Dr. Blaylock shared some little known facts about the human papillomavirus (HPV) and the quick development of a vaccine to address it. Dr. Blaylock says the vaccine is "predicated on an absolute lie."

Some empowering facts you may not know about the human papillomavirus and Gardasil:

1. First, the basis is wrong. HPV by itself does not cause cervical cancer. Evidence shows it takes a combination, or co-infections - multiple viruses or virus/bacteria combinations to cause cervical cancer. Examples include Epstein Bar virus, HIV, and Chlamydia, along with HPV.

2. Birth control pills and other hormonal drugs also increase the risk of HPV.

3. It has never been proven that the HPV vaccine prevents cervical cancer. There is no scientific evidence of any kind.

4. There are over 100 strains of HPV, only about 15 of which can contribute to cervical cancer.

5. HPV vaccines only include two to four strains, leaving you open to more than two-thirds of the dangerous strains. You will still need to get routine screenings for cervical cancer.

6. You don't change or reduce the incidence of cancer by receiving the vaccine. Studies show that the human immune system develops resistance to the strains given in the vaccine, allowing others to become predominant.

7. The CDC website states that the human body's immune system clears HPV within two years, 90 percent of the time (70 percent in one year). Without the vaccine.

8. One of the most powerful connections proven to increase the risk of cervical cancer is smoking. Women who smoke have 2.3 times higher incidence of the precancerous lesions that lead to cervical cancer.

9. Diet is key. A poor diet increases risk while a diet that includes high amounts of vitamin B12 and folic acid have a 79 percent reduction in HPV infections and cervical cancer. Vitamin C, curcumin, quercetin, and other flavonoids are powerful inhibitors against cervical cancer.

10. Dietary combinations have been proven to have far greater effect against HPV than any vaccine.

11. All the marketing assertions are false. It is one of the largest, most harmful medical hoaxes of our time.

12. Officially, the vaccine has been associated with approximately 100 deaths, and 500 have been left permanently disabled.

13. Those numbers are based on voluntary reporting, which historically means only two to ten percent of cases are represented. The vast majority of cases are never reported. So, conservatively, 5,000 young girls and women have been harmed by the vaccine.

14. Cervical cancer is one of the rarest cancers in the U. S., with 12,000 cases reported per year and 4,000 deaths.

15. The number of girls and women that experience serious complications from the vaccine meets or exceeds the number of deaths.

16. Side-effects include: Multiple sclerosis, encephalitis, blindness, pericarditis, coma, and death among many others.

17. The vaccine Gardasil was "fast tracked." This was illegal. The FDA requires new vaccines to undergo testing and a waiting period of 4 years. Gardasil was developed and on the market in 6 months, with FDA approval.

18. Texas governor Rick Perry tried to force all girls in Texas entering the sixth grade to receive the vaccine in 2007, despite the fact that the incubation period for HPV averages 20 years with the median age of sufferers being 48. He mandated it over the legislature's objections.

19. People thought they were required to receive the vaccine, but that too was untrue as it wasn't an actual law.

20. Perry received huge amounts of money from the manufacturer.

21. Perry's former chief of staff became a hired lobbyist for Merck, the maker of Gardasil in 2009, exposing the connection to the pharmaceutical giant, and the motivation for pushing the vaccine.

22. The Texas Legislature overturned Perry's executive order requiring girls to get the vaccine due to the huge backlash from the public. However, the precedent had been set, and other states and countries began to follow suit.

23. Pap smears alone prevent over 80 percent of cervical cancer. A yearly pap smear reduces your chance of getting cervical cancer to .002 percent.

24. HPV vaccines have been illegally administered to millions without informed consent as the risks are rarely disclosed.

25. What people don't know is that there are Informed Consent laws that are there to protect patients. They provide a legal strategy for people who have experienced vaccine damage.

26. Vaccine manufacturers do not want doctors to discuss and disclose the risks associated with vaccines because they don't want people to realize they can opt out. This has been documented in multiple medical journals. Yet it is illegal for doctors NOT to disclose the risks.

27. The vaccine was only tested on 21,000 girls and women before being pushed on millions of children, teens, and adults worldwide, according to the FDA website.

28. The FDA website has no mention that the vaccine was ever tested on males, yet the CDC says the vaccine is "recommended for all teen boys and men through age 21."

29. The Informed Consent laws also address questions about the efficacy of vaccines. Meaning you have a right to ask questions and receive answers about how well it works, why you should allow it to be administered, as well as the risks.

30. Vaccine manufacturers have gone to the legislature(s) to get a law passed that you cannot sue over vaccine complications. But, you can sue. (http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=4D703FEAA094BED0DB02BEDC4507765C)

After learning the ins and out of the underhanded and unethical practices involved in bringing this vaccine to market, people should wonder why and how medical professionals and legislators continue to go along with promoting it unquestioningly. If this were a financial situation, there would be enough evidence to bring charges against manufacturers, the legislators, and the CDC. The vaccine industry regularly operates in criminal practices. They violate marketing laws with false statements and exaggerated extrapolations/over simplification of the facts; they doctor their statistical numbers, and present their marketing as science. Gardasil was being tested before it was licensed. They have yet to offer a plausible explanation as to why girls aged 9-12 need a vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease, much less one that only offers two years of "protection."

You have to question who is making the decisions to allow the shortcuts that have resulted in so many deaths and disabilities. Are these the same "powers that be" that are disseminating the information to your doctor that it is safe and recommended for your daughter?

BILL GATES: WORLD NEEDS FEWER PEOPLE

Joins abortionists for 'family planning' conference on eugenics

Software billionaire Bill Gates, who previously has advocated the reduction of the human population through the use of vaccines, and his wife Melinda marked the 100th year since the First International Eugenics Congress in London with a “family planning” summit with abortionists and the United Nations.

The July 11 event, co-hosted by the United Kingdom Department for International Development, included organizations such as Planned Parenthood, Marie Stopes International and the U.N. Populations Fund, as well as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Critics pointed out the summit was held 100 years after the July 1912 eugenics conference led by Leonard Darwin, the son of Charles Darwin, and dedicated to Darwin’s half-cousin Francis Galton.

Galton invented the term eugenics to promote the idea that strategic breeding would improve mankind.

According to Christian Voice, a ministry that analyzes current events and acts on Scriptural instructions for “a better way, God’s way,” the 1912 event promoted the “notion that economics can be improved by decreasing the surplus population,” based on the theories of Thomas Malthus.

The 17th century luminary suggested that the poor were “draining the world’s resources,” and a solution would be “to introduce policies specifically designed to bring death to large numbers of peasants.”

Christian Voice pointed out Malthus “encouraged poor people to move near swamps, because he knew that they would catch diseases there and begin dying off.”

The report noted that the 2012 summit “included no calls for forced sterilization, but Bill and Melinda Gates did pledge hundreds of millions of dollars to improve access to contraception in the developing world.”

Both Bill and Melinda Gates repeatedly have said there are too many people on earth.

“This was made explicit by Melinda Gates in 2011 when she commented that ‘government leaders … are now beginning to understand that providing access to contraceptives is a cost-effective way to foster economic growth,’” Christian Voice said.

Said the report: “So what exactly is the relation between contraception and economic growth? The connection is simple: fewer people = more resources.”

Controversial ideas, however, are not new to the Gates family. WND reported recently when Natural News said dozens of children in Malawi were vaccinated against measles at gunpoint.

The partner in the forced medication program? The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, according to Natural News.

Two separate press reports said that the parents took the children into neighboring Mozambique to avoid Malawi’s announced mandatory measles vaccination program for various religious reasons. However, when the families returned home to Malawi, they found the medical providers and police had waited for them, and the children were forced to receive the vaccines.

The Christian Voice report said the parents and children belonged to the Zion and Atumwe churches and believed it was a violation of their religious principles to receive the shots.

According to the Christian Voice report, District Health Officer Medison Matchaya made sure the medics giving the shots had a police escort.

The link to the concept that fewer people would make the world better came when Gates suggested vaccines as one method of reducing the world’s population.

Gates made his remarks to the invitation-only Technology, Entertainment and Design 2010 Conference in Long Beach, Calif. His February address was titled “Innovating to Zero!”

He presented a speech on global warming, stating that CO2 emissions must be reduced to zero by 2050. Gates said every person on the planet puts out an average of about five tons of CO2 per year.

“Somehow we have to make changes that will bring that down to zero,” he said. “It’s been constantly going up. It’s only various economic changes that have even flattened it at all. So we have to go from rapidly rising to falling, and falling all the way to zero.”

Gates presented the following equation: CO2 (total population emitted CO2 per year) = P (people) x S (services per person) x E (average energy per service) x C (average CO2 emitted per unit of energy)

“Let’s look at each one of these and see how we can get this down to zero,” he said. “Probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty near to zero. That’s a fact from high school algebra.”

Discussing the “P,” or population portion of the equation, he stated, “Let’s take a look. First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent” [emphasis added].

Further, he said it would not be hard to keep track of children, the vaccines they’ve had and when they’re due for another.

He said cell phone technology could be used to register every birth around the globe and track children to make sure they have been vaccinated as government advisers urge.

The massive effort was discussed by Gates at a mHealth Summit, which delved into the issues of technology and health.

According to Natural News, Gates told the conference that the goal is a lower population, and using vaccines to improve early childhood health is a step in that direction.

“That sounds paradoxical,” he said. “The fact is that within a decade of improving health outcomes, parents decide to have [fewer] children.”

“If you could register every birth on the cell phone, get fingerprints, get a location, then you could take the systems where you go around and make sure the immunizations happen,” he said. “Run them in a more effective way.”

WND also reported in May 2009 when Gates joined some of the richest men and women in the world meeting secretly in New York to talk about using their vast wealth to bring the world’s population growth under control.

In addition to Gates, the meeting included some of the biggest names in the “billionaires club,” according to the London Times, including David Rockefeller, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey, Warren Buffett, George Soros and Michael Bloomberg.

In February 2009, Gates also discussed population control.

“Official projections say the world’s population will peak at 9.3 billion [up from 6.6 billion today], but with charitable initiatives, such as better reproductive health care, we think we can cap that at 8.3 billion,” he said.

At American Thinker, just before the recent conference, Andressen Blom and James Bell wrote that Melinda Gates said this year’s conference should involve “no controversy.”

But they wrote the “only difference between the conference a century back and this year’s” is that this year’s “will never acknowledge that eugenics is its driving idea.”

“Eugenics is the infamous idea that governments should decide which kinds of citizens ought to be considered desirable … and which kinds of citizens ought to be considered undesirable … and employ the power of the state to encourage increases of desirable citizens (positive eugenics) and encourage decreases of undesirable citizens (negative eugenics),” they wrote.

They quoted Melinda Gates’ statement that government leaders “are now beginning to understand that providing access to contraceptives is a cost-effective way to foster economic growth.”

“Governments should provide all women with access to family planning tools that are safe and effective,” she said.

The Christian Voice said the meaning is the same, even if the words used today are different.

In May, Christian Voice said, the Gates Foundation gave a grant of $100,000 to researchers at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, to develop a new type of ultrasound described as a “non-invasive, reversible form of birth control for men.”

The ultrasound would make a man infertile for up to six months.

Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood founder, was a longtime advocate of eugenics who hoped to “assist the race towards the elimination of the unfit,” the Christian Voice noted. The founder of the U.K.-based Marie Stopes International pointed out Sanger believed sterilization for those “unfit for parenthood” should be “compulsory.”

“Surely no one in the West still thinks that the poor and ‘feeble minded’ ought to be subjected to compulsory sterilization, right?” Christian Voice said.

But it then cited that:

• The Gates Foundation is partnering with the U.N., which already supports China’s one-child per family limit. The programs cite “global warming” as a reason to limit the number of people.
• The Gates Foundation is a “Key Partner” with the World Health Organization and its history around the globe of forcibly sterilized women.
• Last month’s conference was aided by the U.K.’s Department for International Development, “which has given aid money to India despite warnings that it would be sued to forcibly sterilize poor women.”
• The U.K. already builds abortion policy into its foreign aid packages.
• And the Gates Foundation supports the Save the Children group, “which has been a major promoter of the population-control agenda.”

The London Guardian reported that the conference was the start of the Gates plan to raise $4 billion for their campaigns.

RH Bill: Part Of Global Depopulation Agenda

US' HHS Mandate, Philippine's Reproductive Health Bill & Ireland's Medical Treatment Bill.  What do they have in common? 

To me, it looks like an orchestrated, simultaneous, global attack to rapidly advance the depopulation agenda.

The depopulation strategy is - first you take God out of the picture, then legislate laws that will kill humanity - either through contraceptives, abortion, mandatory mass vaccinations, GMOs, etc ...

Catholics Prepare for Spiritual Battle - Good vs. Evil

Global Warming Scam Tied to Depopulation Agenda

ADDENDUM:

MANILA, April 25, 2012–Retired Archbishop Emeritus Oscar V. Cruz yesterday tagged the Reproductive Health (RH) bill as a form of foreign intervention in reaction to reports of foreign agencies’ push for the proposed legislative measure.

“I perfectly understand the collaboration and possibly even the conspiracy because there is a lot of money behind the RH bill, precisely because the most interested entities here are multinational pharmaceuticals.”

A conference on maternal and child health held this month had World Health Organization (WHO) Country Representative Dr. Soe Nyunt-u commenting that the “RH bill is of paramount importance for the welfare of the Filipino people,” stating an an oft-repeated line of advocates of the controversial measure that seeks taxpayer-funded procurement and distribution of birth control supplies, and a six-year mandatory sex education program in all schools.

In 1995 the WHO and the Philippine Department of Health (DoH) were involved in a controversy when they introduced the Tetanus Toxoid Vaccination Program. The vaccines were proven to carry hCG, which causes the spontaneous abortion of the child in the mother’s womb.

The Philippine Medical Association (PMA) came up with a positive test result that indicated that just such an abortifacient may have been administered to Filipinas without their consent.

Rey J. Echavez, M.D., one of the doctors who led the investigation and exposure of the controversy, rebuked the WHO representative and said that “He is under WHO. He cannot be neutral because his salaries are from WHO. What WHO will tell him he will propagate even if it is not the truth morally or scientifically.”

Natural Family Planning (NFP) teacher Willy Jose questioned, “It is clearly a case of unwanted foreign intervention into internal policy matters. Who are they to insist upon us Filipinos what laws we need to put in place and what not? Between the PMA and the WHO — who have contrasting views on the start of life — I’d side with our very own PMA.” (CBCP for Life)