Eugenics, population control likely cause of ignoring of millions of malaria deaths
In his August 16, 2006 LifeSiteNews.com Special Report, Green Hands Dipped In Blood: The DDT Genocide, John Jalsevac exposed what may have been the worst crime of the 20th century, exceeding perhaps even the many millions of deaths caused by the Nazi’s or the horrific mass killings of Stalin or Mao Tse Tung.
The current cause celebre of AIDS has caused nowhere near the perhaps 80 million deaths that have resulted so far in large part from the 30 year ban on the use of DDT to prevent malaria.
Finally, recent news is that, despite still intense objections by environmental extremists, controlled indoor spraying of DDT is finally again being incorporated into the malaria control programs of such agencies as USAID and the World Health Organization (WHO).
In her article, Winning the War on Malaria, Ugandan Fiona Kobusingyer-Boynesin relates that “Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, and hundreds of doctors, disease experts, religious leaders and human rights advocates signed a declaration, demanding that substantial money be spent on Artemisinin (ACT) drugs, insecticide-treated bednets and indoor spraying with DDT.” Their pleas, and those of others, have finally produced results.
Kobusingyer-Boynesin states that DDT has proven to be by far the best weapon against malaria. She reports it can reduce malaria by 75% in some areas and together with the use of new ACT drugs, South Africa, following a spraying and ACT drug program, has reduced its malaria rates by 95% in the past three years.
So, the huge questions is why was DDT banned for the past 30 years when the ban so obviously led to many millions of deaths and horrible suffering for up to a billion other mostly poor, third-world citizens? How can environmentalists, being aware of the overwhelming evidence that DDT spraying could have prevented most of that suffering still so cruelly oppose rescinding the genocidal ban of the past 30 years?
In his article, Call for DDT Opponents to be Held Accountable for Millions of Preventable Malaria Deaths, Steven Milloy reveals that the ban was based on what he calls junk science, or in other words, scientific argument with little or no validity.
He begins by stating that “Rachel Carson kicked-off DDT hysteria with her pseudo-scientific 1962 book Silent Spring. Carson materially misrepresented DDT science in order to advance her anti-pesticide agenda.” Milloy then takes to task the Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, WHO and especially “then-Environmental Protection Agency administrator William Ruckelshaus who actually banned DDT after ignoring an EPA administrative law judge's ruling that there was no evidence indicating that DDT posed any sort of threat to human health or the environment.”
Milloy calls for accountability for the massive death and suffering. He states, “Much of this human catastrophe was preventable, so why did it happen? Who is responsible? Should the individuals and activist groups who caused the DDT ban be held accountable in some way?”
What Milloy does not answer in his current essay, however, deliberate junk science aside, is why have the environments have been so extremely insistent that DDT be banned regardless of the resulting catastrophic suffering and loss of life? That answer, carefully researched, is explained in John Jalsevac's 2005 Special Report.
The Report notes “one of the most revealing quotations related to the issue at hand is another by Charles Wurster, who was reported to have said in 1971, after it was pointed out to him by a reporter that the widespread usage of the pesticide DDT saved lives: “So what? People are the main cause of our problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them…”’
And that brings us to the likely real reason for the devastation – an ingrained, obstinate and deadly eugenics and population control mentality among many of the leading environmentalists and world elites. A mentality that considers preserving a rain forest or a group of gorillas or a species of insect above protecting the lives of poor, third world humans. Nothing else seems to explain the cold-hearted opposition to DDT and there is plenty of evidence to support such a conclusion as junkscience.com has also related in previous articles. LifeSiteNews.com