- "The raging monster upon the land is population
growth. In its presence, sustainability is but a fragile theoretical construct.
To say, as many do, that the difficulties of nations are not due to people,
but to poor ideology and land-use management is sophistic." Harvard
scholar and biologist Dr. E.O. Wilson
-
- For over 30 years, I have written, spoken and stood up
to discuss, debate and move the human overpopulation issue forward in America.
I have run into a brick wall constructed by the Catholic Church, the immigration
open border lobbies and the Congress of the United States. It appears
that any discussion in America or Canada provides our two countries with
the last taboo: no discussion of population for fear of hurting someone
else's feelings.
-
- Whose feelings? How about the 13.4 million American
children living below the poverty line? What about the 100,000 children
in Somalia starving to death in the past several months and future months?
How about the 18 million humans that starve to death around the planet
annually this year and every year?
-
- Why is the population equation the last taboo? Answer:
religion, culture and human denial. I call upon the Catholic Church, the
Protestant Churches, Islam, Buddha, Hindu and all other ancient religions
to come to the table to get a handle on relentless human population growth
that they all support. Why? Because it's killing not only millions of human
beings; it's killing millions of fellow creatures and it's killing our
planet.
-
- My long time Canadian friend Tim Murray brings it in
this interview. He makes no bones about who is stifling, strangling and
suppressing the population equation.
-
- "I am not, by nature, a conspiracy theorist,"
said Murray. "As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary
proof. But when people of my ilk consistently see our interviews, op-eds,
and lecture invitations abruptly cancelled with feeble excuses given---if
given at all---then random events suddenly take on a pattern. If we examine
it, I think only one conclusion emerges as most plausible. We have been
witnessing a slow strangulation of debate about overpopulation. It represents
a mass die-off of open discussion of arguably the most important topic
of our time by those upon whom our society most depends. Our scientists."
-
- An Excuse That Just Doesn't Add Up
-
-
- "CAPS (Californians for Population Stabilization)
was to have a booth set up at the Vancouver Convention Centre for the science
fair held by the American Association for the Advancement of Science this
winter," said Murray. "But guess what. After making the arrangements
and paying a fee of $2500, CAPS was told that the deal was off. They could
not have a booth at the fair after all. Why? It seems that somebody got
to them. Of course, alternative explanations can be entertained. AAAS explained
that it is "a non-profit, non-partisan, scientific association, and
unfortunately, CAPS does not align with AAAS". Funny how they took
the rent and then made the discovery that CAPS didn't have as legitimate
a right to have a booth as did other organizations less focused on education.
-
- "In response to further inquiry, they added that
"We do not provide booth space to organizations with as direct a political
and lobbying intent as CAPS on issues that go beyond the interests of our
multidisciplinary membership and meeting audience." Keep in mind,
this is the same AAAS whose journal "Science" published Dr. Garrett
Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons", an article that attracted
more reprint requests than any other paper Science had ever published.
Ironically, Dr. Hardin was a founder of CAPS, which AAAS now wants to exclude
from its upcoming Vancouver conference."
-
- Once upon a time overpopulation was considered a legitimate
subject for scientific research.
-
-
- "How times have changed," said Murray. "In
1976, Canada's then most prestigious and august scientific body, the Science
Council of Canada, issued a report (Number 25) that concluded that the
country faced a future of severe resource constraints, and that it would
be prudent for us to slow the population rate down so as not to exceed
30 million people by century's end. "Only by keeping population growth
low, while at the same time implementing conservation measures on all fronts....",
would it be possible to meet future energy demands. And if we did that,
they predicted, our population would "stabilize within a generation".
(p. 10, SC Report #25) They added that "annual net immigration of
about 50,000 per annum would achieve that growth." (p. 61)
-
- "Net immigration is now more than six times that
number and according to the 2007 census Canada had the fastest growing
population in the G8 group, with all major parties wanting to increase
the pace! By the beginning of this year, Canada stood at more than 34 million
people---and still growing, as resource shortages loom. No one can say
that, as far back as 1976, our top scientists did not try to warn us about
the consequences. And the warnings continued.
-
- "In May of 1991 scientists in the "Intelligence
Advisory Committee" submitted a report to the Privy Council of Canada
that emphasized that "Controlling population growth is crucial to
addressing most environmental problems, including global warming."
Six years later, a team of 63 scientists, academics and graduate students
led by Dr. Michael Healey of UBC completed a $2.4 million federally-commissioned
study of the Fraser Eco-Basin that argued for the development of a Population
Plan for the country, as it was apparent that many other farming regions
outside Canada's major urban centers would suffer the same ecological damage
that Greater Vancouver's burgeoning population had inflicted upon the region."
-
- "Their verdict was that "...population is central
to the problem of sustainability. The government cannot pursue sustainability
and at the same time ignore population...The federal government should
adopt a population policy for Canada that is consistent with the principles
of sustainability (of which) immigration is one facet." (Executive
Summary, Prospects for Sustainability, p.6)
-
- "In all three cases then, scientists had identified
rampant human population growth as very much a legitimate subject of scientific
research and felt compelled to recommend curbs to that growth," said
Murray. "Their reports obviously evidenced "lobbying intent".
But now, in 2011, the zeitgeist has shifted to the point that apparently
"science" must stand by in silent witness to a mugging of nature,
and pretend that this "non-involvement" is something other than
what is it---collusion by default. Scientists have become "silent
partners in crime". Surely Dr. Stuart Hurlbert of SDSU was correct."
-
- "Suppression of fact and opinion highly relevant
to a topic under discussion (eg. Sustainability, population growth , effects
of immigration controls) is one of the strongest, most devious , and most
irresponsible forms of advocacy possible." It seems that the
editorial gatekeepers of scientific debate are even more reluctant to debate
population issues than are politicians. As Professor Fred Meyerson of URI
once remarked, "If we were discussing the population and growth and
migration of any other species, no one would shy away from it."
-
-
- Part 2
-
- I Smell A Rat
-
- My long time Canadian friend Tim Murray brings it in
this interview. He makes no bones about who is stifling, strangling and
suppressing the population equation.
-
- "Here is my suspicion. I smell the odour of two
smear organizations in this incident. The Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC)
and the Center for New Community (CNC), who have made a habit of vetting
upcoming events and notifying the hosts that some of the invited guests
are "un-American". No doubt, the AAAS have been told that CAPs
is "anti-immigrant" and "racist". This is what has
been happening all over the continent the past few years, and with increasing
frequency. Here goes the pattern. Someone in our movement is invited to
a convention, or to an interview or to submit an op-ed piece, and suddenly,
it is cancelled---with no reason given.
-
- "It seems that nearly everyone in my circle has
had an experience like that---including me. It is like really hitting it
off with someone and then, inexplicably, finding her cold upon meeting
her the second time. Or being engaged and being inexplicably left at the
altar. If it happens once, or even twice, you can find reasons to dismiss
it. But when it becomes the norm, you know the fix is in.
-
- "Environmentalist Frosty Wooldridge had an interview
slated for the Thom Hartmann show on NPR. Then suddenly it was cancelled.
Environmentalist Leah Durant had an interview scheduled on the Lou Dobbs
Show, and suddenly it was cancelled. She had a regular column on Huffington
Post, and then it too was suddenly cancelled. No explanation given. But
guess who took her place? Carl Pope, the former Executive Director of the
Sierra Club, the man who called in the SPLC to a launch a smear campaign
against Sierrans who attempted to restore its policy of immigration reduction
to the policy books. It seems that all media is been sanitized and cleansed
of those elements who would challenge the orthodoxy of "progressive
growthism", a perverse hybrid of left-wing social policy and right-wing
economics.
-
- "Now I have learned that Madeline Weld, president
of the Population Institute of Canada, was invited in late September, 2011,
to speak at an event that the Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA) was organizing for October 31, to mark the occasion of the world
population reaching 7 billion. The event was to last 3 hours and include
a roundtable discussion. But, on October 13, Ms. Weld was advised by CIDA
that the entire event had been cancelled due to "unforeseeable circumstances."
-
- "I have an idea what those unforeseeable circumstances
might have been. I suspect that the person who invited Ms. Weld had no
idea who she was. But others at CIDA did--and when they saw (too late)
who had been invited to speak at the 7 billion event, they were no doubt
horrified. Ms. Weld has challenged the neglect of family planning by CIDA
and their flawed development model which ignores population. The powers
that be figured it was best to cancel the event."
-
- The Tentacles of the Smear Network Have A Continental
Reach
-
- "There are Canadian groups plugged into the SPLC
"Hatewatch" network too," said Murray. "The SPLC sends
out frequent bulletins advising supporters where 'racists' are about to
speak. No sooner was the first press conference for the fledging "Canadians
for Immigration Policy Reform" convened when it was under attack in
a Eco-Marxist online magazine for its 'racist' agenda. If you think this
is paranoia then perform a test. Set up a phoney lecture date by someone
on the SPLC hate-list and schedule it at a local college or auditorium.
Advertise it widely and then wait for the rent-a-crowd rag-bag protesters
to show up with placards and blow horns to shout the phantom lecturer down.
Make it a cold winter night so we can greet them with fire hoses."
-
- The New McCarthyism
-
- "We talk about the Sixth Extinction, the fact that
we are in the midst of human-caused species loss on a massive scale,"
said Murray. "But what we don't seem to fathom is that we are also
witnessing the Seventh Extinction event---- a wave of Neo-McCarthyism that
is sweeping over the land and causing a mass die-off of discussion about
the consequences of runaway immigration-driven population growth in North
America. People are being silenced, excluded and dropped. They are losing
their columns, their radio shows and their foundation money. And the people
who are doing it to them are the same kind of people who wrung their hands
when told about how badly treated "the Hollywood Ten" were, or
how 'un-American' the House on Un-American Activities was in the 50s. And
the Civil Liberties Union has nothing to say about it. Hypocrites."
-
- It's time to call off our unrequited love affair with
the soft green-left.
-
- "What can we do about it?" asked Murray. "For
starters we can refuse support or cooperation with any who work with the
smear network. Stop working with Avaaz.org or Commondreams.org. Stop supporting
green NGOs and left wing think tanks that repeat their lies and exclude
our voice. Stop pretending that environmentalists, feminists and 'progressives'
are friends who have lost their way, friends who share our goals but don't
yet understand our perspectives. These people are our enemies. They aim
to destroy us. All of them. The McKibbens, the Monbiots, the Brunes, the
Hartmans. THEY are the sectarians, not us. They are the ones who deserted
the IPAT equation, not us. We have tried to work with them but they will
not work with us.
-
- "In fact, they work very hard behind the scenes
against us---using their friends at Hampshire College, the SPLC, the CNC
and the other smear merchants as their hit men. Their objective is not
ours. They are not authentic environmentalists. They want to manage the
environment to accommodate endless population growth, but we want to end
population growth to accommodate the environment. There can be no fellowship
between us. We must end our unrequited love for this so-called environmental
'justice' coalition. Wake up. This is war."
-
- ______
-
-
- You may reach Tim Murray: http://sinkinglifeboat.blogspot.com or http://biodiversityfirst.googlepages.com,
said, "I came upon an orchestration, the environmental movement, and
all the musicians were playing violins to the tune of "Overconsumption,
overconsumption, overconsumption." They refused to play any other
tune or use any other instrument to compliment that narrow repertoire.
Apparently some corporate donors were paying them to be a one-trick pony.
|