Shockingly Racist U.N. Report Says That There Are Too Many Black And Brown Babies Being Born

Most Americans have absolutely no idea that one of the stated goals of the United Nations is to curb population growth around the globe. In fact, the U.N. spends a lot of time and energy trying to figure out ways to reduce the number of babies being born worldwide. One very disturbing example of this population control agenda is the recently discovered U.N. population division policy brief from March 2009 which openly discusses how fertility decline in the least developed countries can be accelerated. This report specifically targets black and brown babies as there are not a whole lot of white babies being born in the "least developed" nations.

This shocking report is absolutely horrifying on a couple of levels. First of all, since when did anyone decide that it was the job of the U.N. to try to control the population of the earth.

Secondly, in what kind of bizarre universe is it EVER acceptable for the United Nations to suggest that there are too many black and brown babies being born?

You can read this March 2009 U.N. document right here (it is a PDF document so you will need a PDF viewer to view it):

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/UNPD_policybriefs/UNPD_policy_brief1.pdf

When you first open up the report you are greeted by this cheery headline:

What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?

So who exactly are the least developed countries?

Well, the least developed countries do not include the United States.

Or Europe.

Or any other place primarily made up of white people.

Rather, the U.N. report defines the "less developed" countries in this manner:

For purposes of this brief, the less developed regions include all the countries and areas of the world except Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, the United States of America and all countries in Europe.

Not that the authors of the report want people in the U.S. and Europe to reproduce at high levels either. But apparently the areas of the world where black and brown babies are being born have been singled out for special treatment.

Yes, this is real.

Yes, this is really, really sick.

So just how does the U.N. report suggest that fertility rates be lowered in the "least developed" nations?

Through "family planning" of course.

In other words, people in countries where there are lots of black and brown people need to be taught that having lots of kids is bad, and getting sterilized and having lots of abortions is good.

In fact, U.S. taxpayer money is actually used by global organizations in many developing nations to go door to door and encourage women to get sterilized.

Yes, that is true: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2000/mar/00031602.html

Getting back to the report, the following is just a portion of the report's discussion about family planning:

Lack of access to family planning and, in particular, to modern methods of contraception is a major cause of the persistence of high fertility as indicated by the high levels of unmet need for family planning prevalent in most least developed countries having the requisite data.

The "persistence of high fertility"?

They make it sound like it is a disease.

The reality is that the U.N. has become obsessed with population control.

But where does the U.N. get this obsession?

The U.N. gets this obsession from the global elite who are so obsessed with population control that it is absolutely frightening. We wrote about this disturbing phenomenon in a previous article:

http://thefinalhour.blogspot.com/2009/05/gates-buffett-winfrey-attend-secret-nyc.html

This population control agenda is even represented in the White House. Barack Obama's science czar, John P. Holdren, is an extreme advocate of population control.

In 1977, Holdren co-authored a textbook entitled "Ecoscience" in which advocated population control measures that are so bizarre that they would be absolutely comical if they were not so real.

Posted below are actual quotes from Holdren's textbook.....

Pages 787 and 788:

“Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”

Pages 786 and 787:

“A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”

Page 838:

“In today’s world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?”

Pages 942 and 943:

Toward a Planetary Regime

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”

“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

Are you starting to get the picture?

For normal people it can be really hard to wrap your head around this horror, because it just seems so inconceivable that trusted people in positions of power would have such an obsession with controlling and eliminating the population.

If the United Nations is ever given more power, we might one day wake up in a world where family size limits, forced abortion and forced sterilization are the law all over the globe.

Do you want to live in a world like that? Do you want your children to live in a world like that?

If not, now is the time to speak out against the sick, twisted and openly racist population control policies of the United Nations.

Later might be too late.