By Kevin Galalae



Human rights have always existed but have been recognized by different names.  Their most concise and ancient expression is the golden rule, treat others as you want to be treated, which is common to all cultures and religions and is the clearest proof that human rights are universal.

What has changed over time is their classification and codification.  As societies became more complex and encompassed ever greater numbers of people, social strata and opportunities for interaction the number of human rights grew by necessity, out of conflict and appeasement.

The most basic human rights – the right to life, food and shelter – are the original natural rights imbedded in man’s genes by instinct and survival.  Their recognition as such predates man’s ability to express them, which came much later, first as a thought and then as a linguistic achievement.  But the anguished grunt of the cave man who suffered the injustices of his brutal existence and the lofty language of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have one and the same source, man’s innate sense of right and wrong, and one and the same meaning, the human, the all too human realization that all men deserve the same rights, that all men are equal under the sun.  It is this recognition that elevated human beings above beasts and formed and still forms the basis of all social structures and the guiding rod of all human interactions.

To this extent, the equality and universality of human rights have as long a history as upright human beings.  They also have equally old and powerful enemies.   The most ancient and persistent is the scarcity of resources, followed by lack of cooperation and poor social organization, and last by hierarchical power structures fed by man’s vanity for wealth and status.  These are the forces that have challenged and compromised the equality and universality of human rights throughout history and why to this day our rights are not inalienable but merely conditional, not concrete reality as much as intangible hope.

The first and oldest enemy of human rights, the scarcity of natural resources, has begot fierce competition between men and in the process some have lost what others have gained.  Competition for scarce resources is an enduring threat to the equal distribution of economic rights and the uniform enforcement of political rights, for the latter are very much a consequence of the former.  That is to say, unless people are fed and clothed and sheltered, the State has little tolerance for their citizens’ freedom of speech, conscience or religion, which take a backseat to those rights that mean life and death.

The second enemy, lack of cooperation and poor social organization, has been amplified by society’s growing complexity.  When communities expanded and the division of labour gave rise to special interests and to widely different perspectives due to one’s place and function in society, these divisions became gateways for new abuses, of which slavery is the most brutal.  Though slavery exists to this day as debt bondage and indentured servitude, it is no longer the rule but the exception.

The last enemy of human rights is man’s vanity, his need to acquire wealth and status and the price he is willing to make others pay for it.  Man is perpetually fighting this enemy within from the moment he acquires sufficient physical and mental strength to impose himself on others, or to resist the imposition of others on him.  Unfortunately for human civilization these invidious distinctions have become part of nearly every society’s values and norms and are at the basis of the hierarchies that run the show.  By accident more than design, they wreak havoc on the principle of equality between men affecting every human right in existence.   And because hierarchical societies justify the greatest levels of aggression and can force men to act contrary to their nature, they have largely displaced communal and egalitarian societies that frown upon the exploitation of many for the benefit of the few.   That is why conflict and war between nations and ideologies have caused the most gruesome atrocities, the vilest form of human rights violations.

We have waged war on these three enemies with some success, but as we have focused our attention on each one of them in isolation a new enemy has appeared on the scene; the strongest and most insidious incarnation yet of what we may simplistically define as the embodiment of evil.

This enemy has combined the original three into one and has as a result grown in strength, scope and destructive force.  It is all the more dangerous because we no longer have a clear idea of what is good and what is evil once the perspective from which we look at human rights is global.  The enemy in question and that is yet to be identified as such by most of us is mankind itself through its excessive consumerism and exponential population growth.

We are 7 billion strong and require all Earth’s resources and more to satisfy our basic needs let alone our insatiable wants.  Since we have long outgrown the planet’s ability to support us, judging by our environmental impact, the global struggle for resources has made their scarcity and their unequal distribution all the more obvious.  An American consumes roughly 40 times more resources and energy than an African, 20 times more than an Asian, and 3 times more than a European. We have reached the most advanced level of cooperation and social organization – as we have had to, in order to make the most of the world’s resources and distribute them across borders – but we have yet to bridge the gap in consumption levels and this exacerbates our cultural differences and animosities, which are all the more obvious now that we interact with one another globally, both physically and virtually, more than ever before.  As a result, the most cruel and numerous violations of human rights are committed by members of one culture or ethnic group against members of another in a grand process of supremacy, exploitation and assimilation that brings with it the fear of the unknown and insecurity.  And in all of this, man’s vanity works in mysterious ways to achieve global objectives through newly formed international hierarchies that will hopefully bring the intended results through what has become the most ambitious plan to coerce mankind to do what is necessary before it is too late and long before men outgrow their geopolitical ignorance, cultural prejudices and dated loyalties.

The legal enforcement of human rights is the last hurdle in the struggle for their realization.  It is why we have built an international legal framework at the end of World War II, which has succeeded in softening the edges of human rights abuse.  But as long as human rights stand in the way of someone’s greed or power lust, of a people’s prejudices towards another, or of a country’s economic and hegemonic ambitions, they will remain more hope than reality, especially if humankind continues to grow in numbers and to exceed the planet’s resources and regenerative capacity.

At least we now understand that we are the enemy. 

images (19)


Humanity’s problems are so severe that only two options remain: one, to act concisely without the people’s knowledge or permission; and two, to urgently forge global consensus so that accelerated and coordinated action becomes possible and national prerogatives are voluntarily sacrificed for supranational goals.

To avoid a fight for supremacy and hedge against failure, both options are being pursued at the same time in a complementary fashion.  The US military-industrial-security complex and select allies are pursuing the first option, which we may call the Hard or Military Solution, while the EU and the UN are pursuing the latter, the Soft or Civilian Solution.  The goal is the same though the functions and methods of each camp are worlds apart.  The outcome is sadly predictable.

What is the goal?  It is to prevent humanity from self-destruction, which requires arresting global warming and environmental degradation and reducing the global population and softening the edges of poverty.

What are their functions?  The military camp is tasked with acquiring tight control of the population and suppressing resistance to buy time for the civilian plan to work and, should it fail, supplant it. The civilian camp’s role is to create the economic, political and legal framework necessary to implement a coordinated plan and relies on the military to be the stick to their carrot.  The name of the military plan is unknown, but I call it Agenda 12 for Global Control, while the civilian plan is well known as Agenda 21 and the Millennium Development Goals.

To implement its plan, the military camp, led by the Anglo-American intelligence agencies, had to bypass the rule of law to be able to act contrary to national constitutions and international covenants in the name of security.  This was not politically and legally possible without a catalytic event of sufficiently cataclysmic proportions to instill mass fear and panic and bring the issue of security to the forefront.  All evidence shows that 9/11 was helped along by the US security apparatus while 7/7 received assistance from their British counterparts.  The two tragedies were then used to start a war on a created and invisible enemy, Islamic terrorism, which conveniently targets countries situated on the world’s last remaining and significant oil reserves, and to impose on the frightened populace at home incremental measures of control akin to martial law.  As a result, civil society, the judiciary and the media have been leashed through broad-sweeping counter-terrorism laws that impose acquiescence on non-governmental organizations, super-injunctions on the courts, and censorship on news organizations.  Also, countries reluctant to cooperate with the master plan can now be threatened with a crippling energy crisis by denying them access to oil.

To implement its plan, the civilian camp needed to overcome two critical impediments: political and economic alignment and adaptive capacity.  The first is a work in progress and refers to economic and political integration across frontiers to ensure that everyone pulls in the same direction and the corporate and political establishments of every country take orders from the center.  The second, adaptive capacity, refers to how fast societies can adapt to necessary change, which depends on education, investment, tolerance, innovation and, most of all, acquiescence, the tools that make societies adaptable and pliable, so that nations and people can keep up with the pace and direction set by the centre and the people are harnessed to the master plan of the New World Order with or without their will.

What are the methods?  The military camp employs surveillance, censorship, misinformation, false flag operations, secrecy, created enemies, intimidation, sanctions, torture, imprisonment, assassination and war.  These methods are used against states that refuse to fully subscribe to the New World Order; countries such as Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, North Korea and Zimbabwe.  They are also used against individuals who see through the deceit and expose aspects of the master plan, be they whistleblowers or astute observers; individuals like Bradley Manning, Janet Bürgermeister, Thomas Andrew Drake, Janet Phelan, Edward Snowden, Jeffrey Silverman, Julian Assange, and myself.

The civilian camp, through its banking arm, employs fiscal manipulation and debt to force the developed world to give up its social safety net and the developing world to accept the privatization of national assets, both of which are necessary to divert enough money to fund the master plan.  Through its corporate arm, it uses capital from the developed world and labour from the developing world to monopolize the means of production, destabilize national economies and irreversibly integrate the marketplace so as to transfer economic control from national to transnational entities and interests, which is necessary if people are to abandon their national loyalties to international entities and interests.  Through its political arm, national leaders are convinced, corrupted or coerced to cooperate and international organizations are staffed with insiders.    Through its legal arm, national and international courts are curtailed to ensure that violations and crimes committed in the name of the master plan are buried or whitewashed.   And through its media arm, the masses are kept obedient and ignorant.

What is the outcome?  The planners like to believe that the Soft Solution will succeed and the world will emerge as a closely knit confederation of nation states that have divested much of their sovereignty and authority to a supranational infrastructure capable of coordinating the world’s resources and knowhow to solve our environmental and overpopulation problems peacefully.  They also like to believe that the rule of law will be reinstated and the military-industrial-security apparatus will be brought back under control.  But these are mistaken beliefs because the emerging leaders are by necessity immoral individuals who will be too well entrenched and impervious to justice due to establishment-wide complicity in crimes that the general population could never forgive once aware.   They will instead force each other to commit ever greater atrocities to hide previous crimes.  The outcome will be an environmentally stable world culled of excess population by waves of man-made pandemics and by low intensity warfare via chemical and biological weapons delivered through the basic elements of life (water and food), and ruled by a global elite with special rights and privileges atop a downtrodden general population living in perpetual servitude and fear.

Regardless whether the civilian or the military plan prevails, the general population faces the same dismal outcome, global dictatorship.

Already, the victims of this global master plan are human rights and civil liberties worldwide, the national constitutions and international covenants that enshrine them, and the international legal system that safeguards them.  The evidence of this decay is provided by the flood of individuals who turn to the international courts in despair and in overwhelming numbers to seek protection from their own states whose violations increase in gravity and frequency from year to year.  What they find is not justice but the establishment’s last line of defence.

What they find is that our right to rights has been irreversibly destroyed.  It is now conditional on the greater geopolitical agenda of our global leadership that is intent on saving mankind from itself and the planet from mankind by any means necessary, which requires the temporary suspension of our rights and liberties but which will in turn necessitate their permanent annihilation.

What is saved in the end will not be worth having because what is lost in the process will prove to be what makes life worthwhile.



Many past civilizations grew beyond their food supply or resources and collapsed.  The people of Easter Island, the Mayas and the Mycenaean civilization provide compelling examples.   The modern world is also on the brink of self-destruction and this time it will be global unless we act decisively at this eleventh hour.

The approaching collapse is foretold by the depletion of natural resources and violent competition for them, environmental damage, global warming, conflict, poverty, desperation and the impotence of God and science to rescue us from ourselves; all of which impinge in one way or another on human rights and civil liberties.  The ultimate cause for these dire effects or at the very least for their unprecedented gravity is our overwhelming numbers.  There are simply too many of uswe are multiplying too fast and place too great a burden on the planet.[i]

Overpopulation is exacerbating the scarcity of natural resources, placing impossible demands on science and technology, causing environmental damage beyond the planet’s ability to regenerate, making life hectic and stressful and over-regulated, and igniting ethnic and cultural conflicts the world over.

The prices of staple foods and basic commodities have nearly tripled in the last decade and are increasingly out of reach for the three billion who earn less than $2 a day.  That is how economic rights have been washed away en masse by increasing poverty.  The votes of citizens are losing their value because the big decisions are not made in the national assemblies but in the boardrooms of transnational corporations and international organizations where the people have no representation and no say.  That is how political rights have been diluted to mere shadows of their former selves.  The norms and values by which we live are losing their meaning because they are based on dated loyalties, old knowledge and false comforts, which is why we blame others for our shortcomings and sense of disorientation and impotence, taking out our anger and frustrations on the people who are least like us and most vulnerable.  That is how class and civilizational rifts have come to dominate our times and cloud our judgments and outlook with dire effects on cultural and group rights.

And this happens not because there is a lack of will and compassion but because we are in a catch 22 situation, the better we do the more we multiply and the longer we live, with disruptive consequences for the social, economic and environmental balances on which our well-being depends and to which we have become accustomed to.  This forces us to think and work smarter than ever before, to forge consensus and cooperate deeper and wider than ever before, and to restructure and build a social, political, economic and environmental architecture that for the first time in our history considers the entire planet and all of humankind.  We live accelerated lives that place unfathomable burdens on our ability to cope and adapt to these global demands.  And because we are still developing the global consciousness we need to cope with these demands, we feel overwhelmed and inadequate.

Yet the logic is simple.  More people, beyond the 7 billion we already have, require increased economic and industrial activity at a time when 60% of us are already malnourished because we have surpassed the planet’s ability to support us.  The inevitable by-products of increased economic and industrial activity are resource depletion and environmental pollution, at a time when both are at acute levels, which in turn lower quality of life and standards of living for present and future generations and threaten the very survival of the species by further damaging the planet’s life support systems.

The argument that there is enough for all of us if only we shared is no longer defendable.  We are 7 billion strong and at current fertility rates we are adding a billion more every twelve years.  Half of us are living in abject poverty and there is nowhere to expand to without destabilizing the last remaining healthy biotopes.

Those who want to do something about it are caught between two futilities: on the one hand, trying to empower, motivate and educate the inert masses so they act of their own volition; and on the other, trying to overcome the entrenched interests, conservative positions and rapacious instincts of those who occupy positions of power and influence and who want to pursue global solutions only so long as the burden falls on the majority while the benefits are theirs alone.

But is it really that simple or this oversimplification hides far more than meets the eye?  Are the masses inert because they do not care enough to know or because they do not know enough to care?  Are they disempowered because they have willingly given up their right to self-determination or because that right was systematically usurped?  Are they unmotivated to act because they are lazy and afraid or because their hands have been tied and their ability to act curtailed?  All these statements seem equally true.

And what about the leadership?   Are those in power willing to sacrifice the future of the planet and the wellbeing of their fellow men and of their own children because they are too greedy and power hungry or are they simply restricted by the limitations of their office and the demands of society for immediate gratification?  Are they too conservative and rapacious to act with foresight or are they held back by local and national interests, to say nothing of religious beliefs and social mores?  Are they reluctant to use their power and influence for global, long-term objectives because they fall outside their proper duties or are they prohibited by the democratic promises they made to the voters or by the pressing responsibilities they have towards employees and shareholders?  Again, all of the above is true because our systems are outdated and imprison us all.

Everyone agrees that overpopulation is the primary global problem and that unless we solve it everything else we do is futile.[ii]  To solve the overpopulation problem we need a comprehensive plan and a central agency to coordinate it.  The agency is the UN but the plan is hidden in Agenda 21 and the Millennium Development Goals – the world’s roadmaps for sustainable development and the eradication of poverty, hunger and disease – rather than isolated and given the attention it deserves.  That is so because the UN coordinated Conference on Population and Development held in Cairo, Egypt, in 1994, and its Program of Action, which is the steering document for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), encountered such fierce opposition from religious and conservative groups that it was never repeated.

This approach invites secrecy, coercion and deception and a problem of this magnitude cannot be accomplished by these means.  This approach also encourages man’s worst instincts and entrenches and unifies already powerful elites with dire repercussions on justice, freedom and equity.  This approach, in other words, amplifies all other problems in order to tackle overpopulation.  Clearly a top-down approach cannot work for this giant problem unless it is mirrored by and synchronized with a bottom-up effort.

The bottom-up effort, however, will not materialize unless our leadership removes the barriers it has erected to keep us ignorant, indifferent and impotent.  Our potential for action will remain unrealized unless the media is allowed to educate rather than forced to deceive; the Internet is used to let the truth out and not disseminate lies; industry satisfies legitimate needs not unnecessary wants; political leaders lead instead of leading us astray; and unless man’s need to believe is guided to trust in himself rather than divest responsibility onto God’s or science’s shoulders.

And none of this will happen unless enough people have the courage to jump over the triple fence of economic exploitation, political manipulation and religious indoctrination erected around us by our own leaders, histories and cultures and open the gates for everyone else so that together we can shatter the matrix of control.  We must in other words earn the right to be masters of our own destiny and to do so we must be able to stand on the shoulders of giants not hide in their or God’s shadow.  People who refuse to act with Earth and mankind in mind deserve to be cut out from the decision making process.  They cannot be trusted with the destiny of man and the planet’s wellbeing.    

Yet if we fail to rise to the challenge in sufficient numbers we are doomed to a bleak and brutal future.  The wealthy and the elites that buttress them will only accelerate an ongoing covert plan that uses food and water as weapons of depopulation and genetic degeneration.  According to this plan, the rich eat organic and whole foods while the poor are relegated through economic deprivation and food industrialization to excitotoxin-laden and chemically-altered foods, genetically modified organisms, ammoniated meat, and to fruit, vegetables and grains grown in soils depleted of minerals and enzymes; a diet that condemns us to obesity, sterility, neurodegenerative brain diseases, mental retardation and premature death.  The rich drink mineral water bottled at source from the world’s cleanest aquifers while the poor are relegated to drinking fluoride laced and heavy metal laden tap water that lowers fertility.  The rich live on large tracts of land away from pollution and stress while the poor are corralled in ever denser urban environments where life is increasingly restrictive, hectic and dehumanizing.

Our devolution and depopulation are being engineered to turn eugenics into self-fulfilling prophecy and divide mankind into a physically and mentally distinguishable upper class that lives long and well and an inferior underclass that lives less and poorly.  This outcome is being foretold by evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry who predicts that the human species will split in two; a handsome and smart elite and a retarded and goblin-like rabble.

It is science now and not the Church that issues indulgences to those who seek absolution for their economic and political sins.   And the United States, where the Hard Solution I spoke of in my previous article is well on its way, needs a lot of indulgences.

The United States, where the war on the poor is most advanced and the conceits of the elite are well entrenched, now ranks 37th in health while in mid-20th century it ranked 1st.  The US has decayed to such an extent in only 50 years as to have the highest infant mortality rates among developed nations, the highest cancer rates in the world, and to rank only 24th in life expectancy although it spends more than any other country on health.

This is not by accident but by design, which is why the US is the only developed nation where the poor are deprived of medical insurance while the rich enjoy the best care in the world, where income inequality is seen as a God-given and immutable reality, and where toxic food is deliberately promoted for mass consumption.  Not surprisingly, the US is also the only country in the world where the lowest socioeconomic class is already distinguishable at a glance from the upper class by their physical appearance, language use and mental characteristics.

Economic, social and political policies are used to create genetic inequality, which in turn contribute to greater social and economic disparities, so much so that in the not so distant future there will be a “parting of the ways between the genetic ‘haves’ and the genetic ‘have-nots’”, which will in time give rise to two varieties of humans, “the ‘gracile’ descendants of a genetic upper class and the ‘robust’ descendants of a genetic underclass.  The genetic ‘halves’ will tend to be tall, thin, symmetrical, clean, healthy, intelligent and creative.  The genetic ‘have-nots’ will be short, stocky, asymmetrical, grubby, unhealthy and less intelligent.”


Paving the way for this outcome are technological and social factors that are rapidly changing the characteristics of our species.  The more advanced our technology becomes the less directly dependent we are on our fellow men and this is diminishing our moral sentiments and making us more selfish and self-centred.  Furthermore, the more restrictive and regulated our society becomes, as it must, due to constantly increasing population densities and growing urbanization, the more we begin to resemble “domesticated animals: enfeebled, ineffectual, pampered, homogenous, spoilt, and juvenile”.


It is safe to say that the rifts within and between nations, as well as the widespread disintegration of families, reflect both our growing selfishness and our domesticated attitudes and that it won’t be long before there will be a goblin-like underclass relegated to a life of misery and servitude and a God-like upper-class claiming divine rights.  The destruction of the middle class and the emergence of a global society made up of billionaires and paupers augur this very outcome.


Will we allow overpopulation to push the elites towards extreme forms of social Darwinism and eugenic solutions that render our rights null and void or will we assume control of our destinies and bring about an era of equal and universal respect for human rights?  If we continue to be selfish and act like domesticated animals the first outcome will occur by default.  But if we awaken and start acting like rational, free and engaged human beings then the latter outcome is inevitable.

One thing is certain; we will get what we deserve.

One other thing is equally certain; once we run out of fossil fuels, in a century or so, we will no longer be able to sustain the existing population levels.  If by then we will have succeeded in transitioning to renewable energy sources and using natural resources sustainably, we will be able to at most support 2 billion people.  This gives us just enough time to reduce our population to that level within one hundred years if every couple on earth voluntarily agrees to have only one child.

However you slice it and dice it, we must, through “mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon”, relinquish the “freedom to breed”; a conclusion arrived at in 1968 by Paul Ehrlich and more valid now than ever.  If we refuse to accept this inconvenient truth then the only alternative is depopulation through war, famine and pestilence.  All indications are that Christians will fight Muslims for the remaining oil and that the rest of the world will be drawn into this conflict on one side or the other; a conflict that will involve not just conventional but also, and probably primarily, biological weapons as a means of killing two birds with one stone; control of the last remaining oil reserves and depopulation.  And Jews, as always, will be at the center of the conflagration playing both sides to their advantage.

If we let it come to that because we are too obtuse to exercise voluntary self-restraint on the procreation front and shared sacrifices on the economic front, the world as we know it and with it all our rights and liberties will come to an abrupt and miserable end.

Those unlucky to survive will look upon the past with envious nostalgia, be they goblins or gods.

[i] The principle fallacy of overpopulation deniers is their reliance on the argument that the population will peak at 9 billion by 2040 and therefore we have nothing to worry about.  This flawed argument, however, fails to consider that the reason the population will peak at 9 billion by 2040 is that the international community has used covert chemical, biological, psychosocial and economic methods of population control since 1945; methods that have been carefully concealed because they by-pass democratic processes and constitute genocide.  Without the active suppression of human fertility for the past 68 years the population would continue to grow at natural rates and double every 25 years until humanity collapses under its own weight.  The demographic transition (from growing to stable to decreasing population) would never occur as it is a wholly engineered process and is most certainly not the result of affluence and development.  Instead, civilization grinds to a halt and ends in famine, war or environmental devastation/resource depletion, as the demise of countless civilizations prior to modern times clearly show.   For clarification on this point see “Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy”.

[ii] The existence of family planning programs in every country on earth demonstrates that policy makers across the globe agree that overpopulation is a problem they cannot ignore.  However, due to the sensitive and politically explosive nature of this subject overpopulation is discussed only behind closed doors.  The Kissinger cables released by WikiLeaks offer a window into the reluctance of policy makers to discuss their population control methods openly:  http://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/.



On 20 July 2012, President Putin approved a law that requires foreign funded non-governmental organizations (NGOs), of which there are over 1000 on Russian soil according to the Itar-Tass news agency, to register with the Justice Ministry as “foreign agents”.

With characteristic hypocrisy, Washington denounced the new Russian law as “anti-democratic, but failed to mention that its Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) requires since 1938 all foreign-funded organizations, except those funded by Israel, to register as foreign agents with the Counterespionage Section in the National Security Division of the Justice Department.  Such criticism is particularly distasteful at a time when Congress is debating laws to prosecute journalists for exposing violations against human rights activists.

Activists in Russia and abroad are rightfully worried and decry the law as a throwback to the Soviet era. They see it as an underhanded way to supress the protest movement and undermine their ability to protect citizens from corrupt officials and overbearing state institutions, of which Russia has never had a shortage.  The government rightfully justifies the new law as necessary to improve transparency, which is the polite way of saying that it will no longer tolerate the subversion of its political process and the authority of the state by foreign entities and interests.

Russia Today reports that a recent opinion poll shows 64% of Russians agree foreign-funded NGOs should have no part in the country’s political life.  The law has even stronger support across political parties, having passed through both houses of Parliament with overwhelming majorities.

To better understand the Russian government’s perspective let us imagine a world in which influential Russian NGOs, like the Moscow Helsinki Watch Group, begin to focus their activities on violations committed abroad while becoming indifferent to those at home.

Let us also imagine that the Russian state becomes the main source of funding for their exported NGO’s and that a revitalized communist party donates millions of rubles to their annual budgets.  These internationally-minded Russian NGOs then begin to identify every economic prisoner in the West as a political victim by pointing out that in capitalist societies economic exploitation is the main vehicle of political control.  They take issue with America’s unjust wars, drone strikes that have killed 175 innocent children to date and its terrifyingly high incarceration rate, which at 735 prisoners for every 100,000 citizens is nearly as high as that of the Soviet Union under Stalin at 830 prisoners for every 100,000 citizens.  They also highlight through Amnesty-like appeals thousands of Westerners who file against their states at the European Court of Human Rights and who hunger and protest at the court’s gates in hope of justice only to be ignored.

Let us imagine that they become hyperactive and highly successful in showing drastic deterioration in the social, legal, economic and political fabric of Europe and North America and that Russian newspapers and broadcasters have the global reach to embarrass the West for each and every violation thus exposed.

Let us imagine that while these Russian NGOs are doing a fine job abroad addressing violations large and small, a near collapse of human rights and civil liberties at home in a new Russia expanding its economic influence and political ideology abroad by neo-imperialist means is treated as a taboo subject by Russia’s civil society and media because they have been fully subsumed in the government’s grand geopolitical agenda.

Last but not least, let us imagine that this new Russia controls the international legal infrastructure and the Bretton Woods organisations being their main source of funding and also contributes more than any other nation or bloc of nations to the running of the UN and its many subsidiary agencies and as such sets the international agenda, which is conceived solely by Russian and Chinese think-tanks and is called the People’s World Order.

How would Western nations treat these Russian-funded NGOs in their midst?  It is safe to say that none of them would be allowed to operate for very long in the US or Europe.   They would be perceived as Trojan Horses and pursued with extreme prejudice by a new brand of McCarthyism.

Seen in this light, the tolerance the Russian government has shown Western-funded NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch – who are funded in large part by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and other CIA and State Department fronts as well as by billionaires like George Soros, whose interests are those of the world’s corporate elite – can only be described as exemplary compared to how the West would have acted under similar circumstances and a reversed tables scenario.

Russia, of course, is not the only country to have adopted such protective measures. Early 2011, Egypt expelled hundreds of people associated with foreign-funded NGOs for “instilling dissent and meddling in domestic policies”.  In 2008, Venezuela expelled the Director and Deputy Director of Human Rights Watch (HRW) for “meddling in the internal affairs of our country”, which was a direct response to a HRW report that accused the government of Hugo Chavez of “discrimination on political grounds”, “open disregard for the principle of separation of powers” and for attacking “journalists’ freedom of expression, workers’ freedom of association, and civil society’s ability to promote human rights”; criticisms that could be levelled at the US, Canada and the UK with equal validity and, to a lesser extent, at the EU.

The ugly reality is that the double-standard of Western NGOs who see evil abroad but none at home is what has destroyed their credibility.  Equally corrosive, the West’s erosion of the separation between civil society and the economic and political establishments has thrown every NGO operating abroad under suspicion.  The destruction of the checks and balances of Western democracies in this post 9/11 era of surveillance and censorship under the pretext of fighting terrorism has caused a chronic lack of trust in media and civil society organizations that are too close to Washington or corporate interests, so much so that only 21% of Americans trust their media and fewer than ever donate to NGOs.  America’s intolerance towards non-capitalist and non-Western forms of economic and political organization and the conformist attitudes of Western NGOs to Washington’s geopolitical agenda have shattered the world’s good will towards NGOs that see no evil at home but react to every violation of human rights abroad.

These are the unintended consequences of an aggressive policy of hegemony that insists on controlling the destinies and resources of every country on earth and has subsumed most Western NGOs in this grand and corporate dictated geopolitical agenda.  What the world understands but Western NGOs and their governments completely ignore is that the vilest and most numerous violations of human rights are committed by corporate interests and are economic in nature or are derived from the greed with which the West pursues global control, causing conflict and hardship worldwide.

In a rare display of self-criticism, Jimmy Carter wrote in a recent article (“A Cruel and Unusual Record”) that the US government’s counterterrorism policies clearly violate at least 10 of the 30 articles written in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and that “as a result, our country can no longer speak with moral authority on these critical issues”.

Having lost its moral authority, the banner of freedom and democracy has passed to Western NGO’s, but as long as they remain indifferent to what happens at home and violations committed in the West under the pretext of fighting terrorism and radicalization are ignored by civil society and actively supressed by the domestic and international court systems as well as by the UN Human Rights Council, the result can only be a continuing and accelerated deterioration of human rights worldwide, along with the elevation of Western hypocrisy to a new and unprecedented level.

The cancer is spreading from the UN Security Council where anti-terrorism and counter-radicalization resolutions adopted post 9/11 provide the cover governments need to supress legitimate dissent and to institute evermore intrusive and illegal policies and programs that border on martial law in the US and facilitate gross violations throughout the West and elsewhere.  The cancer causing agents, however, are Washington and London who sponsored these resolutions and are responsible for creating two proxy institutions, the Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC) and the Counter Terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED), to carry out their dictates and thus give them international legitimacy for crimes against democracy and the wholesale destruction of human rights.

The West insulates itself from the criticism of NGOs by holding the purse strings and by demanding that open societies are treated differently from closed societies.  But in light of the fact that the governments of Western nations are becoming increasingly secretive one can hardly speak of them as being open societies.  The US, using Executive Order 13526, and the UK, through its draconian Official Secrets Act, hide more secrets from their people than the governments of closed societies.  The impact of their secrecy is also far more consequential than elsewhere because they are the countries that drive the global imperialist agenda.

In addition, they are great at hiding things in plain view and at manipulating the law and the system to create dead ends.  And when that fails and determined individuals expose the machinations, violations and crimes of Western governments and suffer serious consequences at the hands of structural violence then both national and international courts shut down like clams and refuse to process lawsuits directed at Western nations.  The rule of law therefore does not apply to Western nations and the freedom and democracy the West promotes are but delusions of a terminally ill, hopelessly dishonest and utterly lawless New World Order delegated from Washington and London.

In this new global environment NGOs have a dual and contradictory political role.  On the positive side they criticize authoritarian regimes and expose human rights violations, while on the negative side they obscure the profound class divisions and economic exploitation of neoliberal economies to channel political dissent abroad into dependent relations on the dominant neo-liberal elites at home.  As such, they no longer represent a Third Way between “authoritarian statism” and “savage market capitalism”, as they like to assert, but a forward assault team for the corporate/banking power structure of imperialist hegemony.  The so-called ‘democratic transition’ they are entrusted with is a euphemism for neo-imperialist expansion and the final disenfranchisement of the people they purportedly want to help to freedom but whom they instead saddle with a new type of social and economic colonialism.

Professor James Petras explains that once NGOs achieve a country’s ‘democratic transition’ they “emphasize projects not movements”, depoliticize and demobilize the poor by diverting “attention from the sources and solutions of poverty”,and reorient “people to produce at the margins not to struggle to control the basic means of production and wealth”, thus preventing them from addressing “the structural conditions that shape their everyday lives”.   NGOs have co-opted the language of the Left but linked it “to a framework of collaboration with donors and government agencies that subordinate activity to non-confrontational politics” and ensure that “empowerment never goes beyond small areas of social life with limited resources within the conditions permitted by the neo-liberal state and macro-economy.”

What the world needs is not more co-opted NGOs who are merely the refuge of a new and spoilt petit bourgeoisie that does more harm than good, but strong socio-political movements that challenge all authoritarian and elitist structures and wrestle power away from the few to empower the many.  Alas the courage and determination for such a struggle is sorely missing and the only thing that brings people out on the street these days is economic necessity.

By then it is too late for peaceful change and the world invariably descends into chaos.



For over 65 years, the media has remained silent with respect to the eugenic and genocidal methods of population control employed by governments throughout the world under the auspices and impetus of the United Nations and its agencies.

Every now and then, as rarely as a celestial event, ethical individuals have broken rank with the conspiracy of silence only to find their careers come to a sudden end and no one to hear or publish their stories.

John Swinton, former Chief of Staff for the New York Times, took his colleagues by surprise in 1953 when he made the following statement at the New York Press Club:

“There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar weekly salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities, and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”

The media prostitutes have only gotten kinkier since 1953 and today’s practitioners not only lack even a modicum of honesty but are complicit in crimes against humanity that are without precedent in their magnitude and indecency.  If it were not for the alternative media that has proliferated in the past ten years thanks to the World Wide Web, we would to this day live in a state of complete ignorance and deception.

Common citizens have had to wrestle the truth from the blood-drenched hands of journalists and editors, whose sole concern is to propagate half-truths fed to them wholesale through the narrow pipelines of state or corporate-controlled news agencies that are interested only in manufacturing consent so as to maintain the illusion of democracy and freedom.

The insidious level of complicity between the media and the political and corporate elites has been carefully guarded.  David Rockefeller, speaking at the June 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany, expressed his gratitude:

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.

It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

What exactly have they been hiding, the innocent readers will ask?  What is exactly is hiding behind taboo words like the New World Order, world government, the banking elite?  What exactly is being discussed in such complete secrecy at Davos, G8, or Security Council meetings?  Why are governments that purport to be free, democratic and transparent classify millions of documents while purporting to be public servants acting in the people’s interest?  Behind secrecy hides illegality; that much we can guess.  But what illegality?  We all know that economic and political power has been consolidated at the global level and supranational level, but very few know why and those who do know rather than guess are part of the establishment and are keeping quiet.

Well, I am not part of the establishment but have been able to uncover the truth about the world denied us for so long.  The truth is that since the end of World War II peace and stability have been maintained by controlling population growth to avoid a third world war that in the nuclear age would be our last.

To control population growth governments have had to interfere with our reproductive systems and have done so by turning the basic elements of life, water and food, into weapons of mass sterility, which is why one out of five women in the West remain childless compared to one out of thirty in India.  I describe the methods they have been using for nearly seven decades, and the new methods they have added to their arsenal, in my first book on the subject, Chemical and Biological Depopulation.

This intrusion into our lives and destruction of our health has required governments to bypass the democratic processes, as no citizen would accept being chronically poisoned or vote for politicians advocating legislating family size.  It has also required that they subvert the rule of law, as no national or international court could possibly defend the poisoning of humanity.  The moral complexity and ambiguity of the Global Depopulation Policy does now allow facile judgments for the simple reason that the geopolitical necessity of maintaining peace and stability in a world with finite resources and an exploding population has left our leaders with the unpalatable dilemma of having to choose the lesser evil for the greater good.  Had they done nothing and left it in the hands of God, the world would have long burned to ashes.

In my recently published book, “Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy”, I not only expose for the first time in history the existence of a global depopulation effort and describe its progression; I also assess the damage done by the policy as well as outline its achievements.

I take the liberty of quoting my book:


Let us briefly review the cost in human life paid and yet to be paid by the people of this planet as a result of the way in which our leadership, both national and international, have pressed on.


–          nearly 2 billion births covertly prevented by chemical, surgical and bacteriological means


–          more than 500 million births overtly prevented by legislation and abortion


–          more than 300 million genetic lines permanently and irrevocably shut out of procreation


–          Japan’s, Europe’s, Russia’s, North America’s, Australia’s and New Zealand’s IQ reduced by 15 to 25 points


–          10% of the populations exposed to covert chemical sterilization methods has been rendered sexually confused


–          10% of all children born in countries subjected to covert chemical sterilization have been condemned to developmental disorders


–          1 out of 5 Western women rendered infertile or childless by a combination of chemical and psychosocial methods of population control; compared to one out of 20 in China and 1 out of 30 in India


–          100% of the populations subjected to chemical fertility control have damaged endocrine systems resulting in chronic illness in at least 25% of these affected populations


–          all males subjected to chemical fertility control methods have compromised, substandard sperm


–          more than 500 million people have met with premature deaths due to artificially high levels of morbidity and mortality achieved through chemical, biological and bacteriological methods of population control




It would be intellectually dishonest of me to pretend that the measures taken by the Global Depopulation Policy have not saved the world from a far worse outcome than what has been sacrificed.


–          civilization would have long collapsed had the population been allowed to grow at natural rates and an additional 2 billion people would have been born into the world between 1950 and today


–          widespread famine would have destabilized Africa, South America and Asia by the 1980s causing universal misery and suffering of an order of magnitude never experienced in history


–          a Western world with a population twice as large as today would have conquered and taken by force the resources of Africa and South America to ensure its own survival and standard of living


–          the environmental degradation we face today would have been twice as bad and none of the protected tracts of land that have been set aside over the past 50 years could have been saved from desperate exploitation


–          there would have been no peace and prosperity and large areas of the world would have been annihilated by nuclear war

As difficult as it is to admit it, we owe the depopulation lobby our civilization’s survival and our very lives, sickened though they are. More than this, we owe them a world order where consensus not force rules (most times) and where the more humane tools of monetary coercion have replaced the brutal means of military conquest. We owe them peace and prosperity. We also owe them our innocence, for they have allowed us to keep our hands free of blood and our consciences unburdened by guilt.”

What I have not discussed in my book is what will happen if we do not succeed in forcing our governments and the international community to abandon covert chemical and biological poisoning for overt legislation as the means by which to halt and reduce the global population to a sustainable level.


The following projections and estimates are for the next one hundred years.

–          two out of four women worldwide will be infertile by 2050 and three out of four by 2100

–          two billion genetic lines will be terminated by 2050 and four billion by 2100

–          the IQ will be lowered worldwide from an average of circa 90 today to an average of 70 by 2050 and 50 by 2100 and mental retardation will be the norm rather than the exception

–          half the population will be sexually confused

–          half the world’s children will suffer from developmental disorders by 2050

–          nine out ten people worldwide will have severely damaged endocrine systems resulting in chronic illness in at least three quarters of the population

–          life expectancy will sink from an average of 70 years today to 60 years by 2050 and 50 years by 2100.

–          nine out of ten males worldwide will have useless sperm

Perhaps the most frightening aspect of this scenario is that hardly anyone alive a century from now will have the intellectual capacity necessary to grasp the immediate reality let alone the historical damage done by the Global Depopulation Policy.

What has taken Nature and God eons of evolution to perfect, man will have destroyed in just two centuries.  There is no name yet in the criminal code of any nation to describe the affront to God and Nature caused by the devolution of man by man that the global depopulation policy engenders.

If we want to survive as a species and as a civilization we must all awaken to the bitter truth and confront it without fear or hesitation.  The time to change course is now, or we shall be forever lost.

Those in the mainstream media who maintain the code of silence for self-serving reasons are sacrificing the wellbeing of their children and their children’s children for their own.  May God forgive them for their sins because their sons and daughters will not!


One out of five women in the West remains childless compared to one out of twenty in China and only one out of thirty in India.  Such glaring differences have nothing to do with culture or sexual norms and everything to do with the separate methods of population control used by these countries.

Nearly one in four children in the West suffer from developmental disorders, allergies and asthma, compared to at most one in twenty in the developing world.  This is not because western children are feebler than children elsewhere, but because western governments were the first to use chemical and biological agents to undermine human fertility and have in the process done irreparable harm to their people’s genetic and intellectual endowments.  Yes, our children’s intelligence is affected too, which is why China has a three-fold higher incidence of genius among its children than western countries.  Judging by our historical dominance in science and technology this could not have always been the case and explains why we are losing ground.

More than half of all adults in Western countries suffer from illnesses conveniently attributed to poor diet and lack of physical activity – heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and cancer – but are in fact the result of endocrine disrupting poisons deliberately fed to us through the basic elements of life, food and water.

These are but the most obvious results of the Global Depopulation Policy, which I expose in all its hideous complexity in my recently published and ardently censored book Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy”.

The British and Canadian governments, tacitly aided by the international community and the United Nations, have imprisoned me five times in the past two years to prevent me from exposing the world’s best-kept secret, the Global Depopulation Policy, the axis around which the new world order revolves.  After almost a year behind bars, I have earned the right to say what no one else dares, but the world needs to find out if we are to save mankind from self-destruction.

Since the end of the Second World War and with the formation of the United Nations in 1945, international peace and stability have been maintained by controlling population growth. Unbeknown to the masses, governments have used covert methods to limit births in developed and underdeveloped countries alike and to accelerate deaths in Africa and a few critically poor and overpopulated areas elsewhere.

Births have been prevented by interfering with the reproductive system so as to lower human fertility, while deaths have been promoted by weakening the immune system so as to increase morbidity and mortality.”

Population control has been pursued for the past seven decades through chemical, biological, psychosocial and economic means to engineer a decrease in human fertility and thus ensure that no country outgrows its resources and is forced to wage wars of aggression against weaker neighbors that in the nuclear wage would lead to assured mutual annihilation.  Population control is a substitute to war and the reason why we have not repeated history and caused World War III.

To force every country on earth to adhere to the self-imposed discipline and multi-generational effort required to subvert their people’s reproductive freedom, elected governments have relied on the support and expertise of the United Nations, which has coordinated the global effort to control population growth and, more importantly, has acted as the arbiter of mutual coercion to ensure that everyone plays by the same rules and no country escapes or eschews population control measures.   Elected governments and dictatorships alike have adopted population control measures without their people’s knowledge or consent, and in so doing have subverted the rule of law and bypassed democratic processes, if they had any to begin with.

That is why the Bretton Woods institutions formed at the end of World War II have been insulated from democratic safeguards, sheltered from media scrutiny, shrouded in secrecy, and empowered to act at the supranational level, thus above and beyond the will of nation states.  That is why the world now faces an unbridgeable rift between the people, who are imprisoned behind national borders, and the elites, who govern through the international organizations they control.  And that is why the rights and freedoms we have on paper are but an illusion, our democracies a sham, and the information we receive is made up of carefully calibrated lies.

Every aspect of our lives is in one way or another affected by this global effort to prevent war by controlling population growth; an effort that is without precedent in both its magnitude and duration, as it encompasses the entire world and is already 68 years old.  Now in its third generation, the effort to control population growth has come to a halt because the negative side-effects of the poisonous methods used to achieve desired demographic targets can no longer be ignored, and therefore the methods themselves can no longer be justified.  As neither can be ignored nor justified the damage done to the rule of law, democracy, justice and truth by the autocratic powers of the United Nations; powers required to impose its will on reluctant nation states.

The medicine has become more deadly than the disease.  It is this realization by the very people in control of the depopulation policy and thus in control of the world, to which I owe my life.  Instead of having an unfortunate accident, I am allowed to speak the truth and say what no head of state, high-ranking bureaucrat, or intelligence agent can, due to the fact that they are bound by confidentiality agreements that are part and parcel of the rights and responsibilities of every member state of the United Nations Organization.

While I am allowed to speak the truth, my reach is being curtailed for good reasons, namely the need to gradually prepare the public to accept, understand and forgive that we have been targeted by the very people and organizations we have entrusted to protect and promote our rights, security and health, but who have paradoxically needed to undermine our ability to have children, and in the process our general health, in order to ensure our long-term security and the survival of the human race in a world of finite resources.

To change course, by abandoning covert poisoning for overt legislation, we must all understand what is at stake and acquire the knowledge and will to look at the world as a whole and make the necessary sacrifices.  Neither God nor science can save us from our own ignorance.  We can only save ourselves.

If we fail to rise to the occasion, governments around the world will be forced to continue to use the existing methods and most of the world’s genetic lines will be annihilated within a few generations, time during which a regime of global tyranny will be needed to accomplish this war of attrition.

One thing is certain; those who refuse to confront and understand the bitter reality we face will not be allowed to drag down the rest of us.  Just as Homo Sapiens displaced Neanderthalers, so will the enlightened displace the unenlightened.

Read, learn, rise and survive.

media apathy


After four years of trials and tribulations, six arrests, ten months in foreign exile and one year behind bars, I released “Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy” in September 2013 and in one clean swoop brought to light the deepest and darkest secrets of the international order.

My book has become the world’s most censored for the obvious reason that it threatens the very foundation on which global security has rested since the end of World War II and augurs the dissolution of the United Nations and of America’s hegemony.  If its contents were to come under the searing scrutiny of the global media and become public knowledge too soon and too fast, the world could be engulfed in violence and within days nearly every government on earth would fall by the hands of their own enraged citizens.

Aware of this danger, the international community is working hand in glove to prevent the dissemination of my book in the vain hope that the truth can be buried again and the grand project of globalization and depopulation, for one is inseparable from the other, can continue unabated and by the same methods, as it has since 1945.

It is not my intention to discuss either the contents of this devastating book or the consequences of its publication, which is scheduled to take place in the next three months, an event already announced by Progressive Press.  The purpose of this article is to show how vital research is censored from academia and how scientific publications, databases and libraries are purged of any material that exposes inconvenient truths, even when life and limb are at stake for billions of people and the advance of science as well as social progress are stalled.

Although Killing Us Softly has been circulating online free of cost for the past six months, it is housed by half a dozen websites, is available for purchase on Scribd, and has the unique distinction of being distributed by The Pirate Bay as a torrent file for download via peer-to-peer networks(a copyright infringement that I fully support and for which I am grateful to the owners of this otherwise vilified website), it has been rendered largely invisible to search engines by the global censorship apparatus.   How this is accomplished is something Edward Snowden might be able to shed light on.  What I can show here and now, through material evidence, is the underhanded methods by which the authorities, with the help of unscrupulous and self-serving individuals, are attempting to suppress this lifesaving book from scientific databases, libraries, and online repositories of scholarly research.

On 20 December 2013, I submitted my book to the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) and, as expected, given its scientific value, it was accepted into the database two days later.

SSRN “is a multi-disciplinary online repository of scholarly research and related materials” and is devoted, in Wikipedia’s words, “to the rapid dissemination of scholarly research in the social sciences and humanities”.

Needless to say, I was pleased and announced this event the next day on LinkedIn and Facebook.

I am pleased to announce that my book, “Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy” has been accepted by the Social Sciences Research Network (SSRN). This is academic confirmation of the validity of my research and should dispel any lingering doubts that we are not being poisoned by our freely elected governments. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2370409


On 28 December, SSRN emailed me the following notice:


Your paper, “KILLING US SOFTLY: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE GLOBAL DEPOPULATION POLICY”, was recently listed on SSRN’s Top Ten download list for: PSN: Population & Family Planning (Topic).Sincerely,
Michael C. Jensen
Social Science Research Network


Given the importance of my book, I was not at all surprised that it shot to the top ten list in less than a week.  My enthusiasm however was not shared in the corridors of power.  The censors panicked and must have leaned heavily on SSRN, which is a privately owned company, to withdraw my book from public viewing.  SSRN complied and on 7 January 2014 emailed me the following note:


SSRN System at SSRN has added the following comment to your submission, Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy (Abstract ID 2370409):
We have recently reviewed this submission to SSRN. Unfortunately, our staff erred in accepting your submission for SSRN’s public eLibrary. We have accepted your paper to appear in the Private Paper section of your MyPapers page, which is where submissions that are not scholarly research papers (including opinion, advocacy, satirical and summary book review papers) are accepted as per SSRN policy. You may post or share the URL with others.
Thank you,
SSRN Management


Despite being robbed of scholarly status my book continued to receive the attention it deserves from the academic community, which enraged the censors who, once again, leaned on SSRN to set the stage for my book’s removal from the database.  To this effect, SSRN sent me the following email on 16 January 2014:

SSRN System at SSRN has added the following comment to your submission, Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy (Abstract ID 2370409):
It has come to SSRN’s attention that you are using the posting of this paper on SSRN as proof of its scholarly status. SSRN has judged your paper to be non-scholarly. A note has been added to this effect on the abstract page of your paper and your access to revise the submission has been restricted. If this solution is unacceptable to you, please email 
support@ssrn.com to request that SSRN remove your submission from the SSRN site.Thank you,
SSRN Management


Realizing that the censors are attempting to precipitate a disagreement in order to use it as a pretext to remove my paper from the SSRN database, I ignored the email and SSRN has left it at that.  Last I heard from them was to inform me that my book has been viewed 958 times, which undoubtedly places it at the top of the list in its category.


To SSRN’s credit, my book continues to enjoy a safe haven in their repository, undoubtedly much to the chagrin of the censors at the United Nations and at the US State Department.  Unable to compel SSRN to remove my book, the censors turned for help to the University of Victoria, from which I graduated in 1990.

Out of the blue and without prior notice, my old university sent me the following letter on 3 February 2013
















Angered by the clumsy attempt of the University of Victoria to intimidate me with legal action on the pretext that I have “wrongly associated myself” with the university, I fired back the following email:


To whom it may concern,My Social Science Research Network account makes no claim that I am an employee of the University of Victoria.  It merely indicates that I am an alumnus.  You can commence any action you want.  I look forward to meeting you in court and demanding court costs for attempting to intimidate me so as to suppress vital information with respect to the Global Depopulation Policy.  If the current administrators of the University of Victoria wish to be seen in this light by the global community then you will be doing a great disservice to the reputation of the university and the credibility of your graduates.  At such, it is doubly important for me that I meet your threats with resolve.Sincerely,Kevin Galalae


For good measure and to isolate the university’s legal department I also wrote to the President of the University of Victoria, Mr. Jamie Cassels:


Dear Mr. Cassels,As President of the University of Victoria, the university from which I graduated, you should be very concerned about the conduct of your legal officers.  Enclosed you will find a letter I received from your legal department threatening me with legal action unless I withdraw my book from the Social Science Research Network and abstain from indicating that I am a graduate of the university.  I am also forwarding you the communication thread I have had with the university thus far (see below).  My book – “Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy” – is the world’s most censored book and the most important book written in the past half century.  The letter I received from your university is an underhanded attempt to censor my book from the SSRN website and the fact that the University of Victoria would engage in such a blatant act of censorship against one of its most illustrious graduates is shameless and morally reprehensible.  It is also an illegal act as it runs counter to education law which spells out that universities are to encourage not suppress freedom of thought and speech. 

More than anything, it shows a complete lack of appreciation for the sacrifices I have made and continue to make for Canada and the world and for the children of the very people who issue legal threats on behalf of the university from which I graduated.  This will shed light on the price I have paid and continue to pay to publish the very book your university seeks to censor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kevin_Galalae


This is unacceptable and I would have never expected such an act of cowardice and underhandedness from my university.  If your academics and administrators had any wisdom they would be tripping over one another to offer me research grants so I can continue my work on the global depopulation policy; a policy that affects every human being on the planet.  My work has altered and will continue to alter global policy, which is more than any of your professors could ever claim. 


I expect an apology without delay.




Kevin Galalae


To trace the legal attack against me to its source, I phoned the university’s General Counsel, Mr. Don Barnhardt, who signed the letter and asked him whose orders he followed.  Reluctantly, he conceded that it was the Vice-President Academic and Provost, Ms. Reeta Tremblay, who asked him to threaten me with legal action.  To confirm that this is indeed the case and to ask why Ms. Tremblay would behave in such a manner, I called her office several times on 4 February and left a message asking her to call me.  To this day, she did not return my calls or respond to my email:

Ms. Tremblay,Your colleague, Mr. Barnhardt, the general Counsel of the University of Victoria, has informed me that you have asked him to threaten me with legal action, which he has dutifully done (see attachment).  I would like you to confirm that you are indeed the individual who has initiated legal action against me. I look forward to hearing from you.Sincerely,

Kevin Galalae


Ms. Tremblay,Further to my previous email, if you are not the one who initiated the legal attack on me, then I would like to know on whose behalf you are acting.Sincerely,Kevin Galalae

While neither the university’s president, Mr. Cassels, nor its provost, Ms. Tremblay, returned my calls or emails, Ms. Tremblay forwarded my emails to Mr. Barnhardt, the university’s legal counsel, who responded as follows on 4 February:

Mr. Galalae: The attached email has been forwarded to me for response. As I indicated to you earlier, when it comes to attention of the University of Victoria that an inaccurate statement of an association with UVic exists, as in the case of the SSRN abstract, UVic will seek to correct such inaccuracy.  That is what has occurred in this case and our earlier correspondence clearly describes UVic’s concerns.


To be clear, UVic is acting solely in its own behalf in accordance with its ordinary practices, and is  not acting on behalf of any other party.


Any future communication (via telephone, email or otherwise) on this matter should be directed to me.



Don Barnhardt

General Counsel

University of Victoria

Administrative Services Building

PO Box 1700 STN CSC

Victoria, B.C.

V8W 2Y2

Tel: 250-721-7985

Fax: 250-721-6677

E-Mail: gencouns@uvic.ca


On the same day, Mr. Barnhardt also wrote to me on behalf of the president of the university:


Mr. Galalae: This is in response to your email messages appended below. To be clear, the University of Victoria has no objection to your identifying yourself as an alumni of the university.  The concern of the university lies with the manner in which you have referenced your association with it on your SSRN abstract.  On the abstract it simply states:


Kevin Galalae

University of Victoria


This formulation is typically used when the author is in fact employed with or associated with the university.   The misleading effect of this formulation is compounded by your providing the university’s address as your contact address at the bottom of the abstract page.


If the abstract page stated Kevin Galalae, B.A. (University of Victoria) and did not use the university address as your contact address, the university would have no objection as that would be understood to mean you are a graduate of the university. 


I trust that this clarifies the university’s concerns.




Don Barnhardt

General Counsel

University of Victoria

Administrative Services Building

PO Box 1700 STN CSC

Victoria, B.C.

V8W 2Y2

Tel: 250-721-7985

Fax: 250-721-6677

E-Mail: gencouns@uvic.ca


To set the record straight, I responded as follows on 4 February:


Mr. Barnhardt,At no time did I give the university’s address or enter it when I filled out the SSRN membership.  I don’t even know the mailing address of the University of Victoria.  This must be an electronic addition that SSRN automatically enters and has nothing to do with me.  You should therefore take this up with the designers of the SSRN website not with me.  I have no control over that.I hope this settles the issue.Regards,Kevin Galalae


Having received no response from either the president of the university or its provost, I sent the following email on 5 February, which I CCed to all parties, including Mr. Cassels, the president of the University of Victoria:


Ms. Tremblay and Mr. Barnhardt,Unless I receive a written apology from both of you within 24 hours and the name of the person whose orders you are following expect to find your names in the international media.  Your unscrupulous attempt to censor my book “Killing Us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy”, which is the only source the people of the world have to know what is being perpetrated on them by their own elected governments and the broader international community, is beyond contempt and violates not only the most common code of decency but also the public’s right to know, my freedom of conscience and expressional rights, education law, and a dozen articles of the UN Convention.As administrators of a university you should know better.  That you do not seem to know better will become evident when you wake up to a public relations nightmare that will stain UVic’s reputation for decades to come and will undoubtedly cost you your jobs.I look forward to hearing from you.Sincerely,

Kevin Galalae


To date, I have received no apology and no response.  Mr. Cassels, Ms. Tremblay and Mr. Barnhardt have chosen to protect the person and organization that asked the university to threaten me with legal action in the hope that I would withdraw my book from the SSRN website.

That is how the Global Depopulation Policy and the crimes against humanity it engenders have been concealed for the past seven decades and why until I came to the world stage no one has dared to whisper the truth.



Total Page Visits: 58 - Today Page Visits: 1

Check Also

US, China Should Pursue Peace, Not Military Brinkmanship

BY LYU JINGHUA   Neither side wants to appear weak, but recent actions and rhetoric …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *