Contradictions légales au sujet des fins de vie

Contradictions légales au sujet des fins de vie

par Georges FELTIN-TRACOL

Le 29 octobre dernier, Emmanuel Macron annonçait sur X (ex-Twitter) son intention d’inscrire dans la Constitution de la V^e République l’avortement. Une phrase serait ajoutée à l’article 34 : « La loi détermine les conditions dans lesquelles s’exerce la liberté de la femme, qui lui est garantie, d’avoir recours à l’IVG. » La révision serait adoptée en Congrès réuni à Versailles par le vote qualifié des trois cinquièmes des députés et des sénateurs.

Cette procédure parlementaire éviterait le risque de référendum que ne veut pas ce très grand démocrate. Le Monde du 31 octobre 2023 rapporte les propos d’un conseiller de l’Élysée pour qui une campagne référendaire accorderait « une tribune totalement disproportionnée par rapport à ce qu’ils [les groupes hostiles à l’IVG] représentent en réalité ». Le choix du Congrès offrirait au contraire au système médiatique d’occupation mentale une mise sous pression maximale sur tout parlementaire réfractaire ou abstentionniste.

Une fois encore, Macron se trompe. Il devrait observer ce qui se passe actuellement aux États-Unis. Dans les États dits conservateurs qui soumettent à leurs électeurs la question de l’avortement, ceux-ci répondent favorablement à son maintien et désavouent des républicains inféodés aux sectes évangéliques. Redoutable animal politique, Donald Trump a déjà compris cette désaffection. Il ne considère plus ce sujet sociétal comme une priorité dans sa campagne électorale de l’année prochaine.

En Pologne, les nationaux-conservateurs atlantistes du PiS viennent de perdre les élections législatives. Leur politique anti-IVG bien trop restrictive a favorisé la mobilisation de leurs opposants, à savoir les plus jeunes électeurs et les électrices. Jaroslaw Kaczyński n’est pas Viktor Orban, plus fin et plus subtil.

Ce projet de révision constitutionnelle court-circuite cependant un autre projet gouvernemental traitant de la fin de vie, du suicide assisté et de l’euthanasie. Le contraste en devient saisissant. La Constitution, une nouvelle fois défigurée, comportera à la fois l’interdiction d’éliminer physiquement des ordures (tueurs d’enfants, assassins de personnes âgées, terroristes, trafiquants, vendeurs et usagers de drogues, etc.) et l’approbation de la fin du fœtus. Quant à la loi sur l’euthanasie, elle autoriserait les médecins à abréger sous certaines conditions, pour l’heure floues, la vie de patients jugés incurables ou trop âgés. Les Pays-Bas et la Belgique montrent dès à présent d’inquiétantes dérives dans ce domaine.

Et puis, quel avenir pour l’objection de conscience des personnels de santé en matière d’avortement? Son introduction dans la Constitution interdira-t-elle toute contestation? Y aura-t-il sous peu un délit de contestation de l’IVG? Remarquons qu’on peut toujours réclamer le rétablissement de la peine capitale sans déclencher de poursuites judiciaires.

En juin 2023, des militants anti-IVG à Lyon ont osé l’impensable. Ils ont collé des autocollants contre l’avortement sur les vélos en libre service de la métropole dirigée par les Verts. L’exécutif métropolitain a porté plainte pour dégradations. Mais les enquêteurs ont usé du délit d’entrave à l’IVG. Serait-ce un détournement de la loi? Serait-il possible d’étendre ce délit à d’autres actions hors de tout lieu de santé? Laissons à Foxley le soin de répondre à cette double interrogation dans une prochaine intervention de sa remarquable chronique, « De Droit et de Croc ».

Remarquons en outre que ceux qui souhaitent l’abolition de cette objection de conscience étaient les mêmes à militer au temps du service national obligatoire en faveur de l’objection de conscience... Cette dernière serait-elle donc sécable ou malléable au gré des circonstances?

Qu’on ne se méprenne pas ! Votre serviteur qui n’est pas monothéiste ne considère pas la vie comme un absolu indépassable. La peine de mort est une nécessité fondamentale pour le bon ordre social. C’est la voûte qui soutient tout l’édifice pénal. Son abolition lamentable excite le crime et encourage l’amoindrissement progressive des peines dites incompressibles.

Par exemple, la justice belge refuse de renvoyer en France Salah Abdeslam, le seul terroriste survivant des attentats du 13 novembre 2015, condamné à la réclusion à perpétuité sans aucune réduction de peine. Les magistrats belges assimilent cette peine à une peine ou à un traitement inhumain ou dégradant ! On sait que les progressistes militent pour la suppression de la peine de sûreté de 22 ans qui violerait les droits de l’homme, de la femme et des poux. Ces officines grotesques s’élèvent contre la prison, sauf quand il s’agit d’enfermer historiens critiques et militants dissidents.

Les plus hypocrites dans ces débats de société restent bien sûr les Verts. Ces soi-disant écologistes s’affichent en défenseurs véhéments du vivant: ils défendent les cours d’eau, les écosystèmes, les paysages, la faune et la flore. Ils sont prêts à interdire la corrida dans le Midi, les combats de coqs dans le Nord et la chasse partout. Ils manifestent devant les boucheries traditionnelles artisanales qui heurtent leur véganisme. Ces ardents chantres du vivant sont prêts à deux coups de fourchettes de manger de la viande végétale industrielle… À quand donc des lions herbivores ? Ils sont enfin pro-choix. Ils s’opposent aux OGM avec raison, mais ils acceptent les OHCM (organismes humains chimiquement modifiés) dans le cadre d’une transition sexuelle. Frappés d’hémiplégie conceptuelle, ces défenseurs de la bio-diversité se moquent de l’indispensable ethno-diversité et développent des réflexes manichéens pavloviens, assis dans leur salon embourgeoisé en attendant l’arrivée d’un Uber ou d’un Delivroo.

Contrairement aux chrétiens, la fin de vie peut être anticipée à la suite de Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, de Henry de Montherlant, de Yukio Mishima et de Dominique Venner. Ces quatre morts volontaires confortent une philosophie vitale de l’homme intégral. Se donner la mort n’est pas un interdit moral comme ne l’est pas la limitation par des avortements nécessaires des risques de transmission de maladies génétiques inguérissables ou de tares héréditaires.  On peut très bien imaginer qu’une société ré-organisée, verticale et hiérarchisée instaure l’autorisation préalable de mariage et le permis de conception.

Ainsi est-on très loin des motivations politiciennes et féministes de pacotille en faveur de l’introduction de l’IVG dans la Constitution. Le sujet est en tout cas bien trop sérieux pour le confier aux branquignols politiciens.    

GF-T

• « Vigie d’un monde en ébullition », n° 94, mise en ligne le 29 novembre 2023 sur Radio Méridien Zéro.

Bill Gates talks about "vaccines to reduce population"

Bill Gates talks about
‘vaccines to reduce population’

By F. William Engdahl

Ex: http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/

 

Microsoft founder and one of the world’s wealthiest men, Bill Gates, projects an image of a benign philanthropist using his billions via his (tax exempt) Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, to tackle diseases, solve food shortages in Africa and alleviate poverty. In a recent conference in California, Gates reveals a less public agenda of his philanthropy―population reduction, otherwise known as eugenics.

Gates made his remarks to the invitation-only Long Beach, California TED2010 Conference, in a speech titled, “Innovating to Zero!.” Along with the scientifically absurd proposition of reducing manmade CO2 emissions worldwide to zero by 2050, approximately four and a half minutes into the talk, Gates declares, "First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."1 (author’s emphasis).

In plain English, one of the most powerful men in the world states clearly that he expects vaccines to be used to reduce population growth. When Bill Gates speaks about vaccines, he speaks with authority. In January 2010 at the elite Davos World Economic Forum, Gates announced his foundation would give $10 billion (circa €7.5 billion) over the next decade to develop and deliver new vaccines to children in the developing world.

The primary focus of his multi-billion dollar Gates Foundation is vaccinations, especially in Africa and other underdeveloped countries. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a founding member of the GAVI Alliance (Global Alliance for Vaccinations and Immunization) in partnership with the World Bank, WHO and the vaccine industry. The goal of GAVI is to vaccinate every newborn child in the developing world.2

Now that sounds like noble philanthropic work. The problem is that the vaccine industry has been repeatedly caught dumping dangerous―meaning unsafe because untested or proven harmful―vaccines onto unwitting Third World populations when they cannot get rid of the vaccines in the West.3 Some organizations have suggested that the true aim of the vaccinations is to make people sicker and even more susceptible to disease and premature death.4

Dumping toxins on the Third World

In the aftermath of the most recent unnecessary Pandemic declaration of a global H1N1 swine flu emergency, industrial countries were left sitting on hundreds of millions of doses of untested vaccines. They decided to get rid of the embarrassing leftover drugs by handing them over to the WHO which in turn plans to dump them for free on select poor countries. France has given 91 million of the 94 million doses the Sarkozy government bought from the pharma giants; Britain gave 55 million of its 60 million doses. The story for Germany and Norway is similar.5

As Dr. Thomas Jefferson, an epidemiologist with the Cochrane Research Center in Rome noted, “Why do they give the vaccines to the developing countries at all? The pandemic has been called off in most parts of the world. The greatest threat in poor countries right now is heart and circulatory diseases while the virus figures at the bottom of the list. What is the medical reason for donating 180 million doses?”6 As well, flu is a minor problem in countries with abundant sunshine, and it turned out that the feared H1N1 Pandemic “new great plague” was the mildest flu on record.

The pharmaceutical vaccine makers do not speak about the enormous health damage from infant vaccination including autism and numerous neuro-muscular deformities that have been traced back to the toxic adjuvants and preservatives used in most vaccines. Many vaccines, especially multi-dose vaccines that are made more cheaply for sale to the Third World, contain something called Thimerosal (Thiomersol in the EU), a compound (sodium ethylmercurithiosalicylate), containing some 50% mercury, used as a preservative.

In July 1999 the US’ National Vaccine Information Center declared in a press release that, "The cumulative effects of ingesting mercury can cause brain damage." The same month, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) alerted the public about the possible health effects associated with thimerosal-containing vaccines. They strongly recommended that thimerosal be removed from vaccines as soon as possible. Under the directive of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997, the Food and Drug Administration also determined that infants who received several thimerosal-containing vaccines may be receiving mercury exposure over and above the recommended federal guidelines.7

A new form of eugenics?

Gates’ interest in inducing population reduction among black and other minority populations is not new unfortunately. As I document in my book, Seeds of Destruction8, since the 1920’s the Rockefeller Foundation had funded the eugenics research in Germany through the Kaiser-Wilhelm Institutes in Berlin and Munich, including well into the Third Reich. They praised the forced sterilization of people by Hirtler Germany, and the Nazi ideas on race “purity.” It was John D. Rockefeller III, a life-long advocate of eugenics, who used his “tax free” foundation money to initiate the population reduction neo-Malthusian movement through his private Population Council in New York beginning in the 1950’s.

The idea of using vaccines to covertly reduce births in the Third World is also not new. Bill Gates’ good friend, David Rockefeller and his Rockefeller Foundation were involved as early as 1972 in a major project together with WHO and others to perfect another “new vaccine.”

The results of the WHO-Rockefeller project were put into mass application on human guinea pigs in the early 1990's. The WHO oversaw massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines. Comite Pro Vida de Mexico, a Roman Catholic lay organization, became suspicious of the motives behind the WHO program and decided to test numerous vials of the vaccine and found them to contain human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, or hCG. That was a curious component for a vaccine designed to protect people against lock-jaw arising from infection with rusty nail wounds or other contact with certain bacteria found in soil. The tetanus disease was indeed, also rather rare. It was also curious because hCG was a natural hormone needed to maintain a pregnancy. However, when combined with a tetanus toxoid carrier, it stimulated formation of antibodies against hCG, rendering a woman incapable of maintaining a pregnancy, a form of concealed abortion. Similar reports of vaccines laced with hCG hormones came from the Philippines and Nicaragua.9

Gates’ ‘Gene Revolution in Africa’

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, along with David Rockefeller’s Rockefeller Foundation, the creators of the GMO biotechnology, are also financing a project called The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) headed by former UN chief, Kofi Annan. Accepting the role as AGRA head in June 2007 Annan expressed his “gratitude to the Rockefeller Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and all others who support our African campaign.” The AGRA board is dominated by people from both the Gates’ and Rockefeller foundations.10

Monsanto, DuPont, Dow, Syngenta and other major GMO agribusiness giants are reported at the heart of AGRA, using it as a back-door to spread their patented GMO seeds across Africa under the deceptive label, ‘bio-technology,’ a euphemism for genetically engineered patented seeds. The person from the Gates Foundation responsible for its work with AGRA is Dr. Robert Horsch, a 25-year Monsanto GMO veteran who was on the team that developed Monsanto’s RoundUp Ready GMO technologies.  His job is reportedly to use Gates’ money to introduce GMO into Africa.11

To date South Africa is the only African country permitting legal planting of GMO crops. In 2003 Burkina Faso authorized GMO trials. In 2005 Kofi Annan’s Ghana drafted bio-safety legislation and key officials expressed their intentions to pursue research into GMO crops. AGRA is being used to create networks of “agro-dealers” across Africa, at first with no mention of GMO seeds or herbicides, in order to have the infrastructure in place to massively introduce GMO.12

GMO, glyphosate and population reduction

GMO crops have never been proven safe for human or animal consumption. Moreover, they are inherently genetically ‘unstable’ as they are an unnatural product of introducing a foreign bacteria such as Bacillus Thuringiensis (Bt) or other material into the DNA of a given seed to change its traits. Perhaps equally dangerous are the ‘paired’ chemical herbicides sold as a mandatory part of a GMO contract, such as Monsanto’s Roundup, the most widely used such herbicide in the world. It contains highly toxic glyphosate compounds that have been independently tested and proven to exist in toxic concentrations in GMO applications far above that safe for humans or animals. Tests show that tiny amounts of glyphosate compounds would do damage to a human umbilical, embryonic and placental cells in a pregnant woman drinking the ground water near a GMO field.13

One long-standing project of the US Government has been to perfect a genetically-modified variety of corn, the diet staple in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. The corn has been field tested in tests financed by the US Department of Agriculture along with a small California bio-tech company named Epicyte. Announcing his success at a 2001 press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants, announced, “We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies.”14

Hein explained that they had taken antibodies from women with a rare condition known as immune infertility, isolated the genes that regulated the manufacture of those infertility antibodies, and, using genetic engineering techniques, had inserted the genes into ordinary corn seeds used to produce corn plants. In this manner, in reality they produced a concealed contraceptive embedded in corn meant for human consumption. “Essentially, the antibodies are attracted to surface receptors on the sperm,” said Hein. “They latch on and make each sperm so heavy it cannot move forward. It just shakes about as if it was doing the lambada.”15 Hein claimed it was a possible solution to world “over-population.” The moral and ethical issues of feeding it to humans in Third World poor countries without their knowing it countries he left out of his remarks.

Spermicides hidden in GMO corn provided to starving Third World populations through the generosity of the Gates’ foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Kofi Annan’s AGRA or vaccines that contain undisclosed sterilization agents are just two documented cases of using vaccines or GMO seeds to “reduce population.”

And the ‘Good Club’

Gates’ TED2010 speech on zero emissions and population reduction is consistent with a report that appeared in New York City’s ethnic media, Irish.Central.com in May 2009. According to the report, a secret meeting took place on May 5, 2009 at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, President of Rockefeller University, among some of the wealthiest people in America. Investment guru Warren Buffett who in 2006 decided to pool his $30 billion Buffett Foundation into the Gates foundation to create the world’s largest private foundation with some $60 billions of tax-free dollars was present. Banker David Rockefeller was the host.

The exclusive letter of invitation was signed by Gates, Rockefeller and Buffett. They decided to call themselves the “Good Club.” Also present was media czar Ted Turner, billionaire founder of CNN who stated in a 1996 interview for the Audubon nature magazine, where he said that a 95% reduction of world population to between 225-300 million would be “ideal.” In a 2008 interview at Philadelphia’s Temple University, Turner fine-tuned the number to 2 billion, a cut of more than 70% from today’s population. Even less elegantly than Gates, Turner stated, “we have too many people. That’s why we have global warming. We need less people using less stuff (sic).”16

Others attending this first meeting of the Good Club reportedly were: Eli Broad real estate billionaire, New York’s billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Wall Street billionaire and Council on Foreign Relations former head, Peter G. Peterson.

In addition, Julian H. Robertson, Jr., hedge-fund billionaire who worked with Soros attacking the currencies of Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea and the Asian Tigen economies, precipitating the 1997-98 Asia Crisis. Also present at the first session of the Good Club was Patty Stonesifer, former chief executive of the Gates foundation, and John Morgridge of Cisco Systems. The group represented a combined fortune of more than $125 billion.17

According to reports apparently leaked by one of the attendees, the meeting was held in response to the global economic downturn and the numerous health and environmental crises that are plaguing the globe.

But the central theme and purpose of the secret Good Club meeting of the plutocrats was the priority concern posed by Bill Gates, namely, how to advance more effectively their agenda of birth control and global population reduction. In the talks a consensus reportedly emerged that they would “back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.”18

Global Eugenics agenda

Gates and Buffett are major funders of global population reduction programs, as is Turner, whose UN Foundation was created to funnel $1 billion of his tax-free stock option earnings in AOL-Time-Warner into various birth reduction programs in the developing world.19 The programs in Africa and elsewhere are masked as philanthropy and providing health services for poor Africans. In reality they involve involuntary population sterilization via vaccination and other medicines that make women of child-bearing age infertile. The Gates Foundation, where Buffett deposited the bulk of his wealth two years ago, is also backing introduction of GMO seeds into Africa under the cloak of the Kofi Annan-led ‘Second Green Revolution’ in Africa. The introduction of GMO patented seeds in Africa to date has met with enormous indigenous resistance.

Health experts point out that were the intent of Gates really to improve the health and well-being of black Africans, the same hundreds of millions of dollars the Gates Foundation has invested in untested and unsafe vaccines could be used in providing minimal sanitary water and sewage systems. Vaccinating a child who then goes to drink feces-polluted river water is hardly healthy in any respect. But of course cleaning up the water and sewage systems of Africa would revolutionize the health conditions of the Continent.

Gates’ TED2010 comments about having new vaccines to reduce global population were obviously no off-the-cuff remark. For those who doubt, the presentation Gates made at the TED2009 annual gathering said almost exactly the same thing about reducing population to cut global warming. For the mighty and powerful of the Good Club, human beings seem to be a form of pollution equal to CO2.

---

1 Bill Gates, “Innovating to Zero!, speech to the TED2010 annual conference, Long Beach, California, February 18, 2010, accessed here

2 Telegraph.co.uk, Bill Gates makes $10 billion vaccine pledge, London Telegraph, January 29, 2010, accessed here

3 Louise Voller, Kristian Villesen, WHO Donates Millions of Doses of Surplus Medical Supplies to Developing countries,  Danish Information, 22 December 2009, accessed here

4 One is the Population Research Institute in Washington

5 Louise Voller et al, op. cit.

6 Ibid.

7 Noted in Vaccinations and Autism, accessed here

8 F. William Engdahl, Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation, Global Research, Montreal,  2007, pp. 79-84.

9 James A. Miller, Are New Vaccines Laced With Birth-Control Drugs?, HLI Reports, Human Life International, Gaithersburg, Maryland; June-July 1995.

10 Cited in F. William Engdahl, "Doomsday Seed Vault" in the Arctic: Bill Gates, Rockefeller and the GMO giants know something we don’t, Global Research, December 4, 2007, accessed here

11 Mariam Mayet, Africa’s Green Revolution rolls out the Gene Revolution, African Centre for Biosafety, ACB Briefing Paper No. 6/2009, Melville, South Africa, April 2009.

12 Ibid.

13 Nora Benachour and Gilles-Eric Seralini, Glyphosate Formulations Induce Apoptosis and Necrosis in Human Umbilical Embryonic, and Placental Cells, Chemical Research in Toxicology Journal, American Chemical Society, ,  (1), pp 97–105.

14 Robin McKie, GMO Corn Set to Stop Man Spreading His Seed, London, The Observer, 9 September 2001.

15 Ibid. McKie writes, “The pregnancy prevention plants are the handiwork of the San Diego biotechnology company Epicyte, where researchers have discovered a rare class of human antibodies that attack sperm…the company has created tiny horticultural factories that make contraceptives…Essentially, the antibodies are attracted to surface receptors on the sperm,” said Hein.  “They latch on and make each sperm so heavy it cannot move forward.  It  just shakes about as if it was doing the lambada.”

16 Ted Turner, cited along with youTube video of  Turner in Aaron Dykes, Ted Turner: World Needs a 'Voluntary' One-Child Policy for the Next Hundred Years, Jones Report.com, April 29, 2008.
Accessed here

17 John Harlow, Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation, London, The Sunday Times May 24, 2009. Accessed here

18 Ibid.

19 United Nations Foundation, Women and Population Program, accessed here