“For example”, the report continues, “messages like these can appeal specifically to the over thirty age group: “Family planning is for YOU. Have you had two children or more? The now’s the time to visit your local clinic.” And: “Most people plan their families. They know that education, clothing, housing, all cost money. How many children can you afford?” In another instance, people are being scared with all kinds of gruesome images: “For example, the commercial might begin with the hungry cries of four or five children, followed by the tired voice of the mother.” The examples in the document go on and on, crudely distributing messages into the mass media: “A sequence might be set up, (…) showing John and Mary with two children. The caption reads: “John and Mary…. nice house ……lovely children”, and another (showing another couple with four children), “Doris and Jack….. no house ….. too many children.”
“Personality shows”, the report mentions, “can be useful in the reinforcement phase. (…) A well known personality who demonstrates an interest in family planning, or remarks on the success of the campaign, can often add credibility to the family planning message.” The report would like to see these personalities follow the script word for word, for example in response to a woman, who recently gave birth to her first child: “Well, that’s marvellous”, the radio personality should respond, “Congratulations Mrs……… I suppose you won’t be having any more children for a bit. You want that boy of yours to grow healthy and strong and I know you need time to recover- Children take up a lot of your time, don’t they?” The document states that personality alone cannot fully carry the message through to the listening audience: “Jingles and spot announcements, jokes and quick comments, can be included in the programmes, which will then have the effect of keeping the subject of family planning firmly in mind.”
How would the UNESCO-people arrange all this? Just by voluntary compliance of the media-people involved?
“There may be some scheme whereby those people will be paid for their work (…)”- says the document. In other words: bribery is being proposed as an acceptable means of bringing the media into the strategy.
Also community plays should be used to convey the message:
“The afternoon play can carry the theme, skillfully woven into the story. It is possible that some plays could be specially written for the purpose, but it is probable that the message can be incorporated into plays by those writers who have been briefed well enough in advance.” Music and pamphlets are another way of doing it, the report says: “Songs can be useful in this phase, (…). They must be professionally composed and recorded, and the messages must be reasonably subtle if it is to be acceptable to programmers.”
But the proposed Resource Unit won’t restrict itself to just radio, TV and plays. Feature films are considered perhaps to be the most effective tools in conveying the message to unsuspecting audiences: “(…) There are two ways in which the family planning message can be included in feature films. The first is for the family organisation to commission a film specifically for the campaign. (…) if it is to be successful, well known and popular actors must be chosen, and the scripting and direction has to be professionally executed. Another method is for the family planning theme to be introduced into feature films which are already planned and prepared by local commercial production companies. In this case, the family planning organisers must be aware of the possible ways in which the theme can be subtly incorporated, as producers are not likely to respond to a suggestion which involves the total re-thinking of the plot. (…) Suitable opportunities can be found in love stories, in stories based on conflicts between men and women (…).”
And the document- thoroughly immersed in deception- continues on, listing example after example- and illustrating quite vividly the willingness on the part of the Malthusian-minded elite to lie, cheat and deceive in order to convince people that “less is more”. In the 1970s, air pollution and global cooling were thrown into the equation- later on it became anthropogenic global warming. As this document shows, nation after nation is methodically bombarded with predictive programming-propaganda, requiring of the receiver an almost superhuman set of defence mechanisms to fence off the pitchforks of the eugenicists, poking at them from all sides.
Exhibit C: Declaring Man The Enemy of the Earth
As we know, the globalists have decided long ago that the environmental debate is no longer a debate- it has been decreed that the “discussion is over” and everyone should better realize that man is the prime cause for global warming on the planet earth, or of any other natural calamity. As long as it serves the double purpose of the elite: to abolish nation-states in favor of a great global government, and- as Jeffrey Sachs’ 1991 document reveals- reduce the world population in the same breath. The imagined threat of “international terrorism” hardly being sufficient to justify the drastic measures being implemented, another common enemy has presented itself, and what better enemy than the one staring back at you in the mirror.
As numerous meteorologists and climatologists have testified to in recent years, their participation in the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been used to back a theory that they themselves did not support. And then there are the thousands of meteorologists of good name and standard, who out of scientific righteousness have stepped forward and presented their facts before the public and scientific community. But it is of no concern to the global elite. They have for a good long time, spanning the last couple of centuries at least, presided over the politics of eugenics and enforced its diabolical mechanisms with energy, cunning and precision. It is not an idle use of words, when we identify eugenicists as such, for however just and noble its cloaking makes them out to be, this supposed righteousness is merely a grotesque carnival-costume intended to shade its true countenance.
For an October 1975 ‘International Workshop on Environmental Education’, UN-representative Lars Emmelin writes: “The adult education effort seems to me most critical. First, because this element- now outside the formal channels of education- will continue to be the decision makers for the next 15 to 20 years, and it is within this period that the most critical and disruptive decisions will have to be made. We cannot afford to focus on youth and let the elders die off before changing our course, which, if time permitted, would be the most efficient way of institutions change.”
In choosing its course for mass-indoctrination, the 1975 workshop explores various ways in which the mass media can be used to “sensitize” the general public in accepting the UN’s long-term ambitions. Under the headline ‘The Media as Environmental Educators’ (page 4) several options are being presented by one of the participants in how the media can best be used:
“Discussing the role of media as motivators Sandman concludes that: “Four relatively effective kinds of environmental information are: basic ecological principles; prescriptions for environmental action; early warnings of anticipated problems; and assessments of blame for environmental degradation.”’, the report states.
During an ENESCO-conference in October 1977 held (bizarrely) in Soviet Russia, the Director-General of UNESCO, Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow, “paid tribute to the Soviet Union and to the spectacular results achieved since the October Revolution in all areas of economic, social and cultural life, particularly in education and science, and, more especially, in environmental education.”
You’re reading it right. Here the good Director-General is paying tribute to a then 60-year old regime responsible for murdering many millions of its own people in death camps and deliberate mass-scale starvation-operations. Yes, “environmental issues” were very high on the agenda of the USSR, very high indeed.
After having taken his hat off to his fellow-psychopath, the Director-General plunged into a long and melodious speech on the importance of the “environment-issue” in the decades to come: