U.S. Homosexual “Marriage” Will Affect Other Countries

But in a strange cover-up, big leftist media denies that the U.S. is the leader of the global homosexual movement

By Julio Severo

Because of the U.S. global cultural hegemony, the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of homosexual “marriage” will affect other nations, and homosexual activists in many parts of the world are excited in their expectation to use the court ruling to advance their cause, according an Associated Press report.

Even though large U.S. companies (Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc.) and even the U.S. government have greatly incited the trend toward legal acceptance of homosexual “marriage,” the Associated Press, whose reports are blatantly pro-homosexuality, has been quick to detach the U.S. from the leadership role by saying “The U.S. is [not the] leader in this movement,” ignoring that the U.S. was the first nation to appoint a global homosexual envoy for the homosexual ideology and that the State Department and USAID have been funding and training homosexual organizations in other nations.

AP’s attempts to dismiss the U.S. leadership in the international homosexual movement pointed that other nations, as Argentine, had gay “marriage” before the U.S.

Brazil, the largest Catholic nation in the world, had effectively passed gay “marriage” in 2013, before the U.S., but homosexual activists involved in this campaign were heavily involved with U.S. homosexual activists and their “Brazilian” propaganda was heavily dependent on data and expertise from their U.S. counterparts.

Because Brazil has no global cultural hegemony, its gay “marriage” has not affected other nations. When the U.S. Supreme Court legalized homosexual “marriage,” the Palácio do Planalto (the Brazilian White House) and the Brazilian Department of Education websites displayed the homosexual rainbow — a homosexual celebration that the Brazilian government did not hold even in the Brazilian legalization of homosexual “marriage.”

Even though Brazil and the U.S. are antagonistic in some economic issues, they have had an undeniable, vibrant and incredible brotherhood in the homosexual agenda.

Similarly, the Argentinian homosexual “marriage” has produced no international effect, because Argentine has no global cultural hegemony. Yet, it is very unlikely that Argentinian homosexual activists involved in this campaign were not heavily involved with U.S. homosexual activists and that their “Argentinian” propaganda was not heavily dependent on data and expertise from their U.S. counterparts.

“The U.S. decision will have a big impact in other countries,” said Esteban Paulon, president of the Argentine Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transsexuals, adding that his organization contributed documentation to U.S. legal groups arguing the case before the Supreme Court.

This is an old trick. It is the same modus operandi of U.S. pro-abortion groups and foundations. They fund and train activists in the developing world, and when necessary these activists are used as a showcase to advocate, in a Third World voice, exactly what U.S. pro-abortion groups and foundations want. They present their trained Third World voice in the UN system and international forums on abortion and population control and say, “Are you seeing? They want abortion and population control and they want our help to do it!”

The motivation behind these efforts is everything, except good-hearted.

The United States National Security Council, the highest decision-making body on foreign policy in the United States, promulgated a top secret document entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200), also called The Kissinger Report. Its subject was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published on December 10, 1974, during a Republican administration, was the result of collaboration between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

According to Dr. Brian Clowes, a population control specialist at Human Life International, “NSSM 200 continues to be the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government. It therefore continues to represent official United States policy on population control… The primary purpose of U.S.-funded population control efforts is to maintain access to… resources of less-developed countries.”

NSSM 200 is the most important population control document by the U.S. government. But there was an effort to deny that the U.S. has been the leader in the global population control movement.

Clowes explains that nations would never be able to pinpoint the dirty work of the U.S. population control efforts as direct U.S. responsibility because there was a strategy involved to escape this accusation. He said, “NSSM 200 also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations — specifically the Pathfinder Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) and the Population Council — to do its dirty work.”

USAID, which was involved with the CIA in the NSSM 200, has been using its large population control experience and sophistry to promote the homosexual agenda around the world.

Last year, USAID and the U.S. Department of State hosted the third Conference to Advance the Human Rights of and Promote Inclusive Development for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Persons in Washington, D.C.

Leading U.S. government officials spoke at the event.

The conference brought together government officials, private funders, business leaders, scholars and homosexual activists from more than 30 countries to increase coordination, cooperation and resources dedicated to promoting the homosexual agenda around the world, and to ensure full inclusion of homosexual activists in political power structures.

The conference focused on diplomatic and foreign assistance strategies to address homosexual issues around the world. It also discussed the best ways to engage faith communities to support the homosexual agenda and to integrate it into development programs.

In spite of this massive U.S. involvement in the global homosexual agenda, the U.S. big leftist media, including AP, wants to cover up the U.S. leadership in this movement.

This cover-up is also happening through diplomatic strategies.

The U.S. global homosexual envoy recently visited Brazil and other nations to garner their homosexual experiences and use them to give the impression that his dirty work is not to advance the homosexualist ambitions of the Obama administration. Even though the funding, expertise and inspiration come from U.S. homosexual groups, everything will be done allegedly for the sake of homosexual groups’ wishes from Brazil, Argentine and even Africa!

Twenty-one countries now impose gay “marriage.” In most of those countries, well-organized, funded and trained homosexual groups are lobbying for expanding gay “marriage” rights, especially adoption.

These movements, which have received funds and training from the U.S., including from the State Department and USAID, are getting a real boost from the legal gay “marriage” in the U.S., according to the AP report. They will use the U.S. experience to advance their cause (“Hey, the most advanced nation in the world has advanced gay laws, and we should imitate”) and U.S. homosexual groups will in their turn use their experience for more and more (“Hey, even Third World nations are embracing the homosexual agenda. Why should we refrain from advancing more?”)

All of them are involved in a vicious circle of dirty works. But what will make the ultimate difference is cultural hegemony.

In his 1997 book “The Grand Chessboard,” Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the most trusted foreign policy advisers in the U.S. government (from Carter to Obama), argued that the U.S. have a worldwide hegemony in the main domains. He said,

“America stands supreme in the four decisive domains of global power: militarily… economically… technologically… and culturally.”

The Brazilian and Argentinian homosexual “marriage” and other gay agendas have had no effect on other nations. But if the U.S. wants to use them, they will surely make a global critical impact.

The powerful U.S. hegemony is now in the service of its own homosexual agenda and the homosexual agenda of international homosexual groups that USAID and the State Department have been training and funding.

The answer to this pro-homosexuality hegemonic power is pockets of conservative resistance in the U.S. and an international conservative resistance to repulse the homosexual imperialism promoted by the U.S. government and big companies.

Homosexuality brought destruction to Sodom, and it will bring destruction to any city or superpower embracing it. A remnant of Christians faithful to God should warn about the danger of sodomy and support efforts to protect children and their families from it.

“What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities near them is an example for us of the punishment of eternal fire. The people of these cities suffered the same fate that God’s people and the angels did, because they committed sexual sins and engaged in homosexual activities.” (Jude 1:7 GWV)

Marriage is the union between a man and a woman. To defend this original and real marriage against a fake “marriage” of two men will not save the eternal souls of people. But it will save children, families and society from psychological, moral and physical destruction.

To preach the Gospel and to make it clear that Jesus Christ saves, heals and delivers will make the ultimate difference among sinners who love homosexual sins and among nations that love to promote and impose these sins. They will have a chance to be saved, healed and delivered.

If they do not want the Gospel, Christians should act prophetically, especially in the case of a nation that began with the Gospel, was champion at exporting the Gospel and impacted many nations for the Gospel and now finishes with sodomy, as a champion at exporting sodomy and affecting many nations in this sin.

With information from the Associated Press.

Portuguese version of this article: “Casamento” homossexual dos EUA afetará outros países

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

US Names First Global Envoy for Homosexual Agenda

U.S. Homosexual Envoy Wants Brazil in New International Pro-Sodomy Coalition to Deflect Accusations of US “Cultural Imperialism”

Global Homosexual Envoy Talks about Republicans, Russia and Saudi Arabia

Manifest Destiny in the Bible? America Is Modern Babylon, Said David Wilkerson

Washington, D.C.: The Seat of the Immoral World Government

Obama Orchestrated Ukraine Coup to Re-Start Cold War and Prevent Russia from Leading Global Revolt Against LGBT Agenda

Homosexual “Marriage” and the Last Days

Gay “Marriage”: Obama Lied, Rick Warren Believed

Will legal same-sex marriage result in religious persecution?

Moral clash between US and Africa

Leading the world by evil example: Obama and gay “marriage”

Land of Billy Graham legalizes homosexual “marriage” and six judges resign rather than be forced to officiate such perversion

U.S. Homosexual Envoy Wants Brazil in New International Pro-Sodomy Coalition to Deflect Accusations of US “Cultural Imperialism”

He attended Gay Pride Parade in Brazil and hoisted the homosexual rainbow flag just by the US flag in the US Consulate General in Rio de Janeiro

By Julio Severo    

Brazil provides many positive and inspiring examples in the homosexual cause. This is the opinion of the US Department of State Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTI Persons, Randy Berry. He talked to homosexual activists and Brazilian authorities.

Homosexual flag side by side with the U.S. flag in the U.S. consulate in Rio, Brazil

His four-day visit to Brazil, from June 6-9, included two days in São Paulo, for contacts with homosexual groups and participation in the Gay Pride Parade. In Brasília, Brazil’s capital, he met high-rank foreign affairs officials. In Rio de Janeiro, he met authorities and homosexual activists in the U.S. Consulate General, where he hoisted the homosexual rainbow flag just by the US flag. According to Berry, the US and Brazilian governments have similar interests and concerns in the homosexual issue.

His trip to Brazil comes three years after the State Department’s December 2011 launch of its Global Equality Fund, an initiative that partners with public and private entities to support programs that advance the homosexual agenda worldwide, including by funding homosexual initiatives. According to C-Fam, “The Global Equality Fund, which has disbursed $7 million since its launch in 2011, has expanded with the help of Nordic countries and private sector partners. Obama has announced an additional $12 million in the fund” in 2013.

As the special envoy for homosexual rights, Berry is leading the State Department’s efforts to work with governments, civil society and the private sector through the Global Equality Fund.

The homosexual flag will remain flying for one week in the US Consulate in Rio. U.S. provisional consul general Michael Yoder said, “This flag shows our support to LGBT community. It is an honor and a privilege that the U.S. and LGBT flags are together in these days.”

In its official Twitter in Portuguese, the U.S. Embassy in Brazil said about Berry’s visit, “Diversity makes us richer, exclusion poorer.”

In an interview with Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo, Berry explained his trip’s purpose: to create a coalition of nations to advocate the homosexual agenda. He said, “It is harder to ignore criticism if it comes only from the U.S., but with several nations expressing concerns, it is more effective.”

Brazil has been active in other U.S. pro-sodomy coalitions. The “Core LGBT Group,” a U.S. coalition in the UN system, includes Brazil, European Union and Israel. It is committed to “concerted action” for the homosexual agenda in the UN. These coalitions are important to deflect accusations that the homosexual agenda is part of U.S. imperialistic ambitions.

Berry came to Brazil to involve Brazilian officials and leaders in other coalitions. He said that “Brazil and the U.S. are very close” in the homosexual issues and he made clear he was “also very excited about potential partnership opportunities for the future.”

A career foreign service officer, Berry took up the first post for a global homosexual envoy in the U.S. and world history in April and he is traveling far and wide to amplify the message that the homosexual agenda is an essential part of the U.S. foreign policy agenda. This post was idealized by former State Department Secretary Hillary Clinton.

With his trip to Brazil and other nations, his interest is “figuring out how to combine these lessons to make the kind of change we really want to see in the world.” By using experiences from several nations influenced by the U.S. gay agenda, he will protect the U.S. global pro-sodomy strategy from criticism that the U.S. government is imposing a U.S. homosexual agenda on other nations.

Yet, if the way told by Berry, homosexual activism in Brazil is an “inspiration,” it was born from other inspiration. When I began to write my book “O Movimento Homossexual” (The Homosexual Movement) in 1995, there was no gay parade or similar blatant homosexual propaganda in Brazil.

My book, which was published in 1998 by the Brazilian branch of Bethany House Publishers, revealed the appalling advance of homosexual activism in the U.S., warning that it would reach Brazil. The reaction was often disbelief. About the cases of persecution of American Christians portrayed in my book, Brazilian readers said that this negative scenery would never happen in Brazil. Some even called me crazy and exaggerated.

Sadly, what I warned eventually happened: under U.S. inspiration, in a short time Brazil advanced fast in the gay agenda. And now the advance of this imported ideology will be used by the U.S. homosexual envoy to say to the world: “Hey, our advocacy of the gay ideology is not U.S. cultural imperialism. Brazil is also doing the same thing and we are just copying Brazil!”

My book exposed that in 1990, the Ford Foundation gave over 100,000 dollars to several Brazilian groups fighting AIDS and “discrimination.” The Atobá Gay Liberation Movement, in Rio de Janeiro, received 40,000 dollars. Besides, Brazilian homosexual activists were invited, with all paid expenses, to spend time in the U.S. to get training. Some of them eventually worked in the Brazilian diplomacy in the UN, which helps to explain why Brazil, in the homosexual issues, always side with the U.S. and never with the Vatican and Russia, which do not promote the gay agenda.

The Brazilian homosexual newspaper Lado Bi interviewed Randy Berry and asked him: “In spite of all Russian initiatives against LGBT population, there seems to have no reprisals against Russia. Do you have plans to promote egalitarian civil rights there?”

Berry answered: “Yes, we are concerned about guaranteeing everybody’s right to express freely.” His answer about Russia was largely evasive. Actually, he did not need to talk much. While he was saying this in Brazil, Obama was accusing, according to Reuters, “President Vladimir Putin of wrecking Russia’s economy in a doomed drive to recreate the glories of the Soviet empire.”

According to Rev. Scott Lively, “Obama orchestrated Ukraine coup to re-start Cold War and prevent Russia from leading global revolt against LGBT agenda.” Before the Ukraine coup, the U.S. big media and government were attacking Russia relentlessly because of a Russian law banning homosexual propaganda to children. In fact, immediately before this U.S.-orchestrated coup, Decision, a major evangelical magazine published by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, had Putin and his anti-sodomy law in a remarkable cover story by Franklin Graham.

With the Ukraine coup, Marxist Obama is free to attack Russia allegedly “just because of the Ukrainian crisis,” to wreck Russia’s economy with sanctions and blame it in supposed efforts to recreate the Soviet empire. According to Lively, even GOP Establishment Neo-Cons are united with Obama in these attacks.

This perverse union is very similar to the same union last year of U.S. feminists, abortion advocates, homosexual activists, leftists and neo-cons like Cliff Kincaid who attacked, inspired by a U.S. ultranationalism joining left-wingers and right-wingers, an international pro-family event in Moscow, Russia.

Finishing his evasive answer on Russia, Berry said, “From the moment people recognize LGBTs are humans like them, very powerful changes began to happen.” Possible translation: When Russia stop banning homosexual propaganda to children, very powerful changes will happen: no sanctions to wreck Russia’s economy, no accusation that Putin is recreating the Soviet empire and, yes, if Russia wants to annex the whole Ukraine to impose the homosexual agenda, the U.S. and European Union will give full support. After all, pro-sodomy propagandists are entitled to do what no one else can.

Yet, this right does not work in every case. Saudi Arabia freely tortures and murders homosexuals, and Berry and his government never talk about condemning and imposing sanctions on this radical Islamic nation, because Saudis keep their money in U.S. banks. So the U.S. ultimately decides how and when a nation deserves sanctions and condemnation for alleged human rights violations.

While the homosexual rainbow flag is flying, by Berry’s wish, just by the U.S. flag in the U.S. Consulate in Rio this week, he will follow his homosexual mission, which is an essential part of the U.S. foreign policy agenda, of imposing the homosexual agenda around the world.

Hey, this is not U.S. imperialism! It’s just the U.S. implementing an inspiration it received from Brazil and other nations…

With information of Brazilian and international news agencies.

Portuguese version of this article: Embaixador homossexual dos EUA quer o Brasil em nova coalizão pró-sodomia internacional para desviar acusações de “imperialismo cultural” dos EUA

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

US Names First Global Envoy for Homosexual Agenda

Manifest Destiny in the Bible? America Is Modern Babylon, Said David Wilkerson

Washington, D.C.: The Seat of the Immoral World Government

Obama Orchestrated Ukraine Coup to Re-Start Cold War and Prevent Russia from Leading Global Revolt Against LGBT Agenda

UN Elects Ugandan as President, Pushing Back on US LGBT Pressure

By Wendy Wright

NEW YORK, June 20 (C-FAM) Western pressure on African countries to liberalize policies on homosexuality has had a boomerang effect, uniting Africans against it and resulting in what some see as a new non-aligned movement of countries.

Last week the United Nations elected a Ugandan as president of the General Assembly over  last-ditch efforts by activists who, along with the Obama administration, have condemned Uganda’s recently enacted law against homosexual acts.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activists called on the Obama administration to deny Sam Kutesa's visa, but by election day at the UN, their petition had only gathered 13,466 signatures.

Kutesa is Uganda’s foreign minister and defended the law internationally, stating promotion and exhibition of homosexuality “is wrong for our young people and it offends our culture.”

Africans called Western criticism of Uganda an attack on national sovereignty and some noted, “the Western world criminalizes almost all of these same offenses” as the amended law, such as homosexual rape.

The role of president of the General Assembly is symbolic though prominent. The highest profile task is presiding over the assembly as heads of state address its 193 members each year.

The position is rotated annually among regions. It is Africa’s turn, and the African Union--most of which ban homosexual acts--put forward only one candidate.

In February, Uganda’s President Museveni hinted he sought closer military ties to Russia because of U.S. meddling on LGBT issues. Russia has also defied criticism of its ban on exposing children to homosexual propaganda.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton launched the first salvo for international LGBT rights in a speech at the UN in 2011. Soon after, President Obama announced he would condition foreign aid on LGBT rights.

African leaders predicted the U.S. policy would provoke a “significant diplomatic confrontation.” Kenyans said, “Those who live as gays need help to live right and we should not be supporting them to live in a wrong reality.”

In March, Africans were forced to abandon their resolution on AIDS after it was amended by governments advocating for sexual rights. The resolution sponsored by African countries struggling with the deadly disease was tailored to address public health and protecting women and girls.

European, U.S., and Latin American delegates, who view AIDS as a political opportunity to advance sexual rights, demanded the resolution remove references to reducing the number of sexual partners and delaying sexual initiation.

After Western countries lost in lengthy negotiations, they eventually outmaneuvered the Africans using a technicality in the last moments of the conference. One disheartened African delegate said, “It’s all about sex, sex, sex for them.”

A senior U.S. diplomat recently warned about the Obama administration’s heavy-handed approach, CNSNews reports. Richard Hoagland co-hosted the first LGBT “pride celebration” at the U.S. embassy in Pakistan in 2011. A week later, protesters said the U.S. had “unleashed cultural terrorism on us.”

Speaking at an event on global LGBT rights, Hoagland cautioned some countries “will react to our values and goals with backlash” against homosexuality.

Last week a U.S. senator introduced a bill to make LGBT rights a permanent feature of U.S. foreign policy.

Source: Friday Fax, via Julio Severo in English

Recommended Reading:

U.S. and European diplomats join gay “pride” march in Greece, ignore plight of Syrian Christians

US Embassy in Tel Aviv Makes History by Putting Homosexual Flag Under the American Flag

US wants to combat anti-homosexuality movement worldwide

Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda

By Brian Clowes, Ph.D.

Comment by Julio Severo: I met Dr. Clowes some 15 years ago at a special pro-life training in Brasília, Brazil. During some days, I was able to learn from him and know his superb pro-life knowledge, which all of us need. So I am bringing you a little of his pro-life wisdom in his article on NSSM 200. If you do not know this document, you should know it, because, as says Dr. Clowes, “NSSM-200 is critically important to pro-life workers all over the world, because it completely exposes the unsavory and unethical motivations and methods of the population control movement.” Every pro-life leader in the world needs to be acquainted with it, because it is impossible to understand the current obsessive pro-abortion efforts without grasping the influence of NSSM 200. This is a must-read article. For international readers, what is striking in this heinous document is that it was issued by a Republican administration. All of us know that Democrats are pro-abortion and unrealiable when they are in power. See the example of pro-abortion Barack Obama. But are Republicans unsuspicious? Do they never collaborate in population-control schemes? Sadly, NSSM 200 shows otherwise. So whether under Democrats or Republicans, the population-control machine in the U.S. government advances. Ronald Reagan, of course, was a marvelous exception. In 1992 I was asked by a pro-life consultant in the Brazilian Senate to translate crucial portions, which were then distributed among Brazilian senators. Here is the article by Dr. Clowes:

The United States National Security Council is the highest decision-making body on foreign policy in the United States. On December 10, 1974, it promulgated a top secret document entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200, also called The Kissinger Report. Its subject was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published shortly after the first major international population conference in Bucharest, was the result of collaboration among the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Departments of State, Defense and Agriculture.

NSSM-200 was made public when it was declassified and was transferred to the U.S. National Archives in 1990.

Although the United States government has issued hundreds of policy papers dealing with various aspects of American national security since 1974, NSSM-200 continues to be the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government. It therefore continues to represent official United States policy on population control.

NSSM-200 is critically important to pro-life workers all over the world, because it completely exposes the unsavory and unethical motivations and methods of the population control movement.

The Purpose of NSSM-200

The primary purpose of U.S.-funded population control efforts is to maintain access to the mineral resources of less-developed countries, or LDCs. NSSM-200 says that the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries… That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.

In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from LDCs to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, whose numbers must be limited by population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be the primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts.

According to NSSM-200, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include:

* the legalization of abortion;

* financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates;

* indoctrination of children; and

* mandatory population control and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.

NSSM-200 also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations—specifically the Pathfinder Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) and the Population Council—to do its dirty work.

This document, which is completely devoid of morality or ethics, has directly and inevitably encouraged atrocities and massive human rights violations in dozens of the nations of the world. Just three examples are shown below.

Peru. During the years 1995 to 1997, nearly a quarter of a million Peruvian women were sterilized as part of a program to fulfill then-president Alberto Fujimori’s family planning goals. Although this campaign was called the “Voluntary Surgical Contraception Campaign,” many of these procedures were obviously coerced. In fact, women whose underweight children were on government food programs were threatened with the withholding of this food if they refused to be sterilized, and others were kidnapped from their families and forcibly sterilized.

China. For many years, the United States government has funded the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). One of the main targets of UNFPA money is the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and its widely-criticized forced-abortion and family planning program. According to its own documents, the UNFPA has donated more than $100 million to China’s population control program; has bought and custom-designed a $12 million IBM computer complex specifically to monitor the population program; provided the technical expertise and personnel that trained thousands of Chinese population control officials; and presented China with a United Nations award for the “most outstanding population control program.”

Uganda. Uganda became the first African country to roll back its adult HIV infection rate, from 21 percent in 1991 to about six percent in 2004, a 70 percent decrease. The nation accomplished this amazing feat by discouraging condom use and by changing the behavior of the people. The population control groups could not allow this success to interfere with their inflexible template, so they aggressively undermined President Yoweri Museveni’s program. Timothy Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, called this highly effective program “gross negligence toward humanity.” The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Population Services International, CARE International, and others are pushing condoms as hard as they can in Uganda, and the HIV infection rate is creeping up once again. This is perhaps the most egregious example of population control ideology trumping the science of proven HIV prevention programs.

Outline of the Population Control Strategy in NSSM-200

NSSM-200 explicitly lays out the detailed strategy by which the United States government aggressively promotes population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.

The following outline shows the elements of this plan, with actual supporting quotes from NSSM-200:

The United States needs widespread access to the mineral resources of less-developed nations (quote shown above).

The smooth flow of resources to the United States could be jeopardized by LDC government action, labor conflicts, sabotage, or civil disturbances, which are much more likely if population pressure is a factor: “These types of frustrations are much less likely under conditions of slow or zero population growth.”

Young people are much more likely to challenge imperialism and the world’s power structures, so their numbers should be kept down as much as possible: “These young people can more readily be persuaded to attack the legal institutions of the government or real property of the ‘establishment,’ ‘imperialists,’ multinational corporations, or other—often foreign—influences blamed for their troubles.”

Therefore, the United States must develop a commitment to population control among key LDC leaders, while bypassing the will of their people: “The U.S. should encourage LDC leaders to take the lead in advancing family planning and population stabilization both within multilateral organizations and through bilateral contacts with other LDCs.”

The critical elements of population control implementation include:

Identifying the primary targets: “Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.”

Enlisting the aid of as many multilateral population control organizations as possible in this worldwide project, in order to deflect criticism and charges of imperialism: “The U.S. will look to the multilateral agencies, especially the U.N. Fund for Population Activities which already has projects in over 80 countries to increase population assistance on a broader basis with increased U.S. contributions.”

Recognizing that “No country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion.”

Designing programs with financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates: “Pay women in the LDCs to have abortions as a method of family planning. … Similarly, there have been some controversial, but remarkably successful, experiments in India in which financial incentives, along with other motivational devices, were used to get large numbers of men to accept vasectomies.”

Concentrating on “indoctrinating” [NSSM-200’s language] the children of LDCs with anti-natalist propaganda: “Without diminishing in any way the effort to reach these adults, the obvious increased focus of attention should be to change the attitudes of the next generation, those who are now in elementary school or younger.”

Designing and instigating propaganda programs and sex-education curricula intended to convince couples to have smaller families, regardless of social or cultural considerations: “The following areas appear to contain significant promise in effecting fertility declines, and are discussed in subsequent sections … concentrating on the education and indoctrination of the rising generation of children regarding the desirability of smaller family size.”

Investigating the desirability of mandatory [NSSM-200’s language] population control programs: “The conclusion of this view is that mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now.”

Considering using coercion in other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless a targeted LDC implements population control programs: “On what basis should such food resources then be provided? Would food be considered an instrument of national power? Will we be forced to make choices as to whom we can reasonably assist, and if so, should population efforts be a criterion for such assistance?”

Throughout the implementation process, the United States must hide its tracks and disguise its programs as altruistic: “There is also the danger that some LDC leaders will see developed country pressures for family planning as a form of economic or racial imperialism; this could well create a serious backlash. … The U.S. can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with:

The right of the individual couple to determine freely and responsibly the number and spacing of children and to have information, education, and means to do so; and

The fundamental social and economic development of poor countries in which rapid population growth is both a contributing cause and a consequence of widespread poverty.”

Point (6) above cannot be emphasized enough. The motivation for population control is purely selfish. Therefore, the organizations promoting population control must engage in a massive program of deception. They must present their programs as supporting personal freedom, or as concern for the welfare of poor nations.

The Basic Question: Is Population Control Necessary?

There is growing awareness that the world “population explosion” is over or, indeed, that it never actually materialized. When the population scare began in the late 1960s, the world population was increasing at a rate of more than two percent per year. It is now increasing at less than one percent per year, and is expected to stop growing in about the year 2040, barely a generation from now.

NSSM-200 predicted that the population of the world would stabilize at about 10 to 13 billion, with some demographers predicting that the world population would balloon to as high as 22 billion people. Now we know that the population of the world will reach about eight billion, and then will begin to decline.

The worldwide application of the strategies recommended in NSSM-200 has resulted in regional population growth rates decelerating so fast that they are already causing severe economic and social problems in Europe, the former Soviet Union, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong. Many developing nations are now aging even more rapidly than the developed world, which foretells of even more severe problems for their relatively underdeveloped economies. The developed nations had the opportunity to become rich before they became old; if a nation becomes old first, it will never become rich.

From the very beginning, the concept of a “population explosion” was an ideologically motivated false alarm specifically designed to allow rich nations to pillage the resources of the poorer nations. The resulting push for population control in LDCs has borne absolutely no positive fruit in its decades of implementation. In fact, population control ideologies and programs make it even more difficult to respond to the impending grave crisis looming in the form of a disastrous worldwide “population implosion.” It is time to begin urging families to have more children, not less, if we are to avoid a worldwide demographic catastrophe.

The first step in such a massive change in policy is, of course, to change our vision and our values. In order to do this, we must repudiate old ways of thinking and outmoded ways of accomplishing our objectives.

NSSM-200 represents the worst aspect of the “advanced” nations meddling in the most intimate affairs of lesser developed nations. It symbolizes as no other document does the face of the “ugly American.” It advocates violating the most precious freedoms and autonomy of the individual through coercive family planning programs.

NSSM-200 does not emphasize the rights or welfare of individuals or of nations, just the “right” of the United States to have unfettered access to the natural resources of developing nations. The United States and the other nations of the developed world, as well as ideologically motivated population control NGOs, should be supporting and guiding authentic economic development that allows the people of each nation to use their resources for their own benefit, thereby leading to an enhancement of human rights worldwide and healthier economies for all.

No human relationships are closer or more intimate than those found in the family. Yet the “developed” world has spent more than 45 billion dollars just since 1990 attempting to control the number of children born to families in developing nations through the widespread imposition of abortion, sterilization and birth control under the umbrella terms “family planning services” and “reproductive health.”

All that the tens of billions of dollars of population control expenditures have accomplished is to make hundreds of millions of large poor families into small poor families. If this massive amount of money had instead been put to the service of authentic economic development—better schools, drinking water, roads, health care—hundreds of millions of people would be living much better lives now.

Source: Human Life International, via Julio Severo in English

Recommended Reading:

Blood in the Rivers: the Contraceptive Culture and Prophecies in Revelation

Anthony Comstock: the first pro-life activist in the modern history

No Respect for Family and Nations: US Government Spends Millions on Training Gay Militants Around the World

The folly of man’s planning

NSA in bed with most Western states as Brazil also complains about surveillance by U.S. spy agencies

Julio Severo’s thoughts: The US surveillance on other nations is immoral, but so do empires: they do whatever they do with whoever they want. Let me clarify that a nation that imposes the gay agenda on other nations falls under the category of empire, an evil empire. A 2011 WND report said about the Obama plan to have the US as a global LGBT sex cop. Two years ago, WND reported on DHS monitoring my blog. I am a Brazilian citizen. Why such surveillance on me? Are my pro-life and pro-family activities a threat to America? In Brazil, I am in the frontlines against gay tyranny.

I am not worried just about the US surveillance. I am worried also that the Brazilian socialist government will now use the US intrusions as a pretext to ask UN intrusions in the nations. So a US wicked act will lead to a Brazilian wicked act.

As a Christian, I am opposed to the wicked acts by the US and Brazil, especially their love for the gay agenda.

Read now the DailyMail report:

Snowden says NSA 'in bed' with most Western states as Brazil also complains about surveillance by U.S. spy agencies

By Reuters Reporter and Daily Mail Reporter

Fugitive whistleblower Edward Snowden says America’s National Security Agency is ‘in bed’ with Germany and other Western states, while Brazil is demanding an explanation from the U.S. over reports that its citizens have been under surveillance for at least a decade.

America's National Security Agency works closely with Germany and other Western states on a 'no questions asked'-basis, former NSA employee Snowden said in comments that undermine Chancellor Angela Merkel's indignant talk of ‘Cold War’ tactics.

‘They are in bed with the Germans, just like with most other Western states,’ German magazine Der Spiegel quotes him as saying in an interview published on Sunday that was carried out before he fled to Hong Kong in May and divulged details of extensive secret U.S. surveillance.

Outspoken 'hero': Fugitive whistleblower Edward Snowden says America's National Security Agency is 'in bed' with Germany and other Western states

‘Other agencies don't ask us where we got the information from and we don't ask them. That way they can protect their top politicians from the backlash in case it emerges how massively people's privacy is abused worldwide,’ he said.

Snowden’s comments about cooperation with governments overseas, which he said were led by the NSA's Foreign Affairs Directorate, appear to contradict the German government's show of surprise at the scale of the U.S. electronic snooping.

Germany has demanded explanations for Snowden's allegations of large-scale spying by the NSA, and by Britain via a programme codenamed 'Tempora', on their allies including Germany and other European Union states, as well as EU institutions and embassies.

Chancellor Angela Merkel pointed out during President Barack Obama's recent visit that Germany had avoided terrorist attacks thanks to information from allies.

But she says there must be limits to the intrusion on privacy and wants this discussed next week in parallel with the start of EU-U.S. free trade talks.

Close allies: U.S. President Barack Obama, left, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, right, toast during a dinner hosted by Merkel in honour of the Obamas at Schloss Charlottenburg in Berlin on June 19, 2013

Berlin has alluded repeatedly to ‘Cold War’ tactics - Merkel used the term again on Saturday at a political rally - and has said spying on friends is unacceptable. Her spokesman has said a transatlantic trade deal requires a level of ‘mutual trust.’

Brazil is getting ready to demand an explanation from the United States over report its citizens' electronic communications have been under watch by U.S. spy agencies for at least ten years, foreign minister Antonio Patriota said on Sunday.

Patriota's remarks were in response to a report in the Globo daily newspaper on Sunday saying that the U.S. National Security Agency has been monitoring the telephone and e-mail activity of Brazilian companies and individuals as part of U.S. espionage activities.

The report cited documents obtained from U.S. fugitive Edward Snowden, a former NSA intelligence contractor.

More accusations: Brazil's foreign minister Antonio Patriota, pictured, says the United States has been spying on Brazil's citizens' electronic communications for at least a decade

Patriota also said his government plans to propose changes to international communications rules administered by the Geneva-based International Telecommunications Union to improve communications secrecy, the statement said.

Brazil also plans to present proposals to the United Nations to protect the privacy of electronic communication.

‘The Brazilian government is gravely concerned by the news that electronic and telephone communications of Brazilian citizens are the objective of espionage efforts by U.S. intelligence agencies,’ a foreign ministry statement said.

The Globo report did not say how much traffic was monitored by NSA computers and intelligence officials. But the article pointed out that in the Americas, Brazil was second only to the United States in the number of transmissions intercepted.

Brazil was a priority nation for the NSA communications surveillance alongside China, Russia, Iran and Pakistan, Globo said.

In the 10-year period, the NSA captured 2.3 billion phone calls and messages in the United States and then used computers to analyze them for signs of suspicious activity, the paper said.

In the United States, the NSA used legal but secret warrants to compel communications companies to turn over information about calls and emails for analysis.

Some access to Brazilian communications was obtained through American companies that were partners with Brazilian telecommunications companies, the paper reported, without identifying the companies.

Speaking out: Activists from the Internet Party of Ukraine perform during a rally supporting Snowden in front of U.S. embassy, in Kiev on June 27, 2013

The Globo article was written by Glenn Greenwald, Roberto Kaz and José Casado. Greenwald, an American who works for Britain's Guardian newspaper and lives in Rio de Janeiro, was the journalist who first revealed classified documents provided by Snowden, outlining the extent of U.S. communications monitoring activity at home and abroad.

After providing the information to Greenwald, Snowden fled the United States for Hong Kong and was most recently seen in the transit area of the Moscow airport.

Snowden's U.S. passport has been revoked. He has made asylum requests to several countries, including Ecuador, Venezuela and Bolivia. Three countries - Bolivia, Venezuela and Nicaragua - have offered to give Snowden asylum.

Germany’s domestic intelligence chief has said he knew nothing of such widespread surveillance by the NSA.

But German opposition parties - with an eye on September's federal election - insist that somebody in Merkel's office, where the German intelligence agencies are coordinated, must have known what was going on.

The government did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Der Spiegel report, which follows a report last week in French daily Le Monde saying France also had an extensive surveillance programme.

Der Spiegel has reported that on an average day, the NSA monitored about 20 million German phone connections and 10 million internet data sets, rising to 60 million phone connections on busy days.

Protest: A member of German Piraten Partei holds the portraits of U.S. Army Private First Class Bradley Manning and Snowden during a protest in Berlin's Tiergarten district on June 19, 2013

Germans are particularly sensitive about eavesdropping because of the intrusive surveillance in the communist German Democratic Republic (GDR) and during the Nazi era.

Snowden, a U.S. citizen, fled in May a few weeks before the details he provided about the NSA were published and is believed to have been holed up in Moscow airport since June 23.

Bolivia offered asylum on Saturday to Snowden, joining leftist allies Venezuela and Nicaragua in defiance of Washington, which is demanding his arrest for divulging details of the secret U.S. spy programs.

Der Spiegel said the interview was conducted while Snowden was living in Hawaii, via encrypted emails with U.S. documentary maker Laura Poitras and hacker Jacob Appelbaum.

Snowden told them that America's closest allies sometimes went even further than the NSA in their zeal for gathering data.

NSA headquarters: An undated aerial handout photo shows the National Security Agency headquarters building in Fort Meade, Maryland

The Tempora programme of Britain's GCHQ eavesdropping agency is known in the intelligence world as a ‘full take.’

‘It sucks up all information, no matter where it comes from and which laws are broken,’ Snowden said. ‘If you send a data packet and goes through Britain, we'll get it. If you download anything, and the server is in Britain, we'll get it.’

If the NSA is ordered to target an individual, it virtually take over that person's data ‘so the target's computer no longer belongs to him, it more or less belongs to the U.S. government.’

Source: DailyMail, via Julio Severo in English.

Recommended Reading:

Brazil expresses concern at report of NSA spying

Obama’s War on Christians

NSA has total access via Microsoft Windows

“1984” Live! US Surveillance Scandal Is The Biggest Story Of Your Lifetime

Beware: You Are Being Monitored!

Homeland Security surveillance detected on Julio Severo website

US surveillance on blogs and websites