How Freemasons used a lying book to wage war against humanity

(LifeSiteNews) — It is no exaggeration to say that the globalist elites still in charge of most Western governments have long been determined to exterminate the greater part of humanity. And they still are.

They wrap their support for everything from abortion and euthanasia to mass sterilization and gender ideology in the mantra of “choice.” But “choice” is merely a convenient cover to generate popular support for their underlying aim: to sterilize, abort, euthanize, or transgender-ize the majority of mankind out of existence.

How else to explain their continued push for population control at a time when global birth rates are already below replacement?  It’s not just that the globalists think the “wrong” people are having babies; for them the problem is that people are having babies at all.

Consider the views of Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the EU Commission and the most powerful politician in Europe. She recently gave a speech in which she suggested that human beings were a kind of pestilence on the planet:

“[In 1972] The Club of Rome and a group of MIT researchers published The Limits to Growth report,” Ursula said. “It mapped the interaction between population growth, the economy and the environment. And 50 years ago, it came to a drastic conclusion: Stop economic and population growth – or else our planet will not cope.”

To state that the original The Limits to Growth report was apocalyptic is no exaggeration. It essentially predicted that the world would come to an end by 2070 if population growth were allowed to continue.[1] “The only feasible solution” to this, “the Predicament of Mankind,” was “population control.”  There was “no other avenue to survival” than a radical reduction in the planet’s human population.[2]

This conclusion was exactly what the Club of Rome, a Masonic organization, had paid for. The Masons hired a public relations firm, organized a press conference, and released the book with great fanfare. Scary stories sell, and this one sold four million copies, gifting globalist elites like Ursula von der Leyen with a “the end is near” narrative that they continue to hype to the present day.

The only trouble is that The Limits to Growth was a scientific hoax. The data it used in reaching its conclusions were incomplete and sometimes inaccurate, its methodology was flawed, and it assumed—wrongly—that scientific and technical advances would cease and that birth rates would stay high. In Economist Julian Simon’s words, “The Limits to Growth has been blasted as foolishness or fraud by almost every economist who has read it closely or reviewed it in print.”

Actually, it would be more accurate to say that The Limits to Growth was both foolish and fraudulent. Two years after the publication of the second volume of the study the Club of Rome unexpectedly “reversed its position” and “came out for more growth.”[3] The mainstream media, which had not only bought into The Limits to Growth, but heavily promoted it among its readers, was taken aback.

When reporters asked the Club of Rome’s founder, Italian Masonic leader Aurelio Peccei, the reason for the sudden about-face, he was remarkably candid. He explained to Time Magazine that “Limits was intended to jolt people from the comfortable idea that present growth trends could continue indefinitely. That done, he says, the Club could then seek ways to close the widening gap between rich and poor nations—inequities that, if they continue, could all too easily lead to famine, pollution and war. The Club’s startling shift, Peccei says, is thus not so much a turnabout as part of an evolving strategy.”[4]

Put into plain English, Peccei was saying that the study was rigged in order to dupe people into demanding radical population control programs, and to dupe the U.S. Congress, the EU, and other legislative bodies into funding these.

You would think that the current President of the European Union would know that the Club of Rome disavowed its own study more than a half century ago. After all, she’s the leader of a dying continent which itself is losing people from year to year. Instead, however, she continues to propagate its lies.

One can only conclude that the fevered minds of the globalist elite can no longer distinguish fact from fiction. They are so committed to “saving the planet” by rapidly reducing the human population that they are beyond rational argument. You are the carbon they want to reduce.

This certainly would have been the case had Kamala Harris won the presidential election. Harris, like Ursula von der Leyen, is a down-the-line population controller who would have greatly upped funding for the effort to reduce human numbers, all in the name of “saving the planet.”

Kamala would also have pushed for the radical reduction in carbon emissions known as Net Zero. This would not only have caused a permanent recession, as it seems to have in Europe, but it would also have greatly lowered standards of living in the U.S. by denying people access to cheap energy. Exported to poorer countries, where much of the population already lives in poverty, famine, disease, and even wars would have been the result.  And such is the hatred of humanity by the globalist elites that this would have been intentional.

The good news is that, with the upcoming inauguration of Donald Trump, we now have an opportunity in the U.S. to move decisively away from such misanthropic programs, once and for all.

Steven W. Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and the author of The Devil and Communist China.

[1] D. H. Meadows et al, The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind. (Universe Books, New York: 1972)

[2] Meadows et al. 1974: 196; “The Only Feasible Solution” is the title of Chapter 9 of the second volume of the report, Mankind at the Turning Point by Mesarovic, Mihajlo, and Eduard Pestel. Mankind at the Turning Point: The Second Report to the Club of Rome(New York, E.P. Dutton: 1974).

[3] Time magazine, 26 April 1976, 56; New York Times, 14 April 1976.

[4] Ibid.