This news report is provided courtesy of  Greyson Deitrich III of Independence News LLC.

Bill Jasper is angry. Recently returned from the world summit in Copenhagen, he is largely ignored by global warming true believers. This is a shame. Not only because as a United Nations consultant his knowledge is internationally sought, but as the Senior Editor of the venerable New American Magazine his understanding runs deep. Far deeper than the 20 something year old experts at Copenhagen whose noses point high enough to avoid seeing him.

Bill remembers global cooling in the ‘70s and ‘80s. He remembers the drinking water “imminent” disaster of the ‘60s. He was there when Earth-loving protesters shed the blood of innocent bystanders at G20 conferences in the ‘90s.

He noticed something. A common factor. Always the same players were in financial and political support. Names like Carnegie, Rockefeller, and more recently Soros were always present, but unseen. Their money drives the various organizations. Their power and organization supports them. When one cause goes beyond public acceptability, they collapse it and start a new one. After all, quoting SEIU president Andy Stern, “Any means justifies our end goal.”

So what is the end goal? What could possibly be worth continuing to channel billions of dollars over more than a century of effort?

Bill Jasper knows. So does anyone who studies the term “progressive”. The Progressive Party, established late in the nineteenth century, has as its central plank “Eliminating the existence of the poor, immigrants, products of mixed marriage,” and anyone who does not approach Progressive ideals of human perfection. Progressive ideas of elimination were expressed in 1911 by the Carnegie Institution and supported by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 27 states adopted the concepts of forced sterilization, marriage restriction and “Point Eight” of the “Report of the Eugenic Section for Cutting Off Defective Human Population”.

Point Eight, by the way, can be described in two words – gas chamber. Dr. Benjamin Ward Richardson, funded by the Carnegies, invented and patented a “Lethal Chamber for Painless Extinction”. The idea was to remove “Blacks, Native Americans, Southern Italians, East Europeans, Jews, Hispanics, and ideological recalcitrants” (quoted from the “Progressive Platform” of 1927). Chicago physician Dr. Harry Haiselden greatly expanded the Progressive influence when, on Nov. 12, 1915, he delivered and destroyed the child of Anna Bollinger, whom he found to be “unfit”. With State and Federal courts in support, infant euthanasia as well as deliberate elimination of infirm adults spread nationally. The Illinois Institution for the Feebleminded at Lincoln, Illinois became the center of the great American experiment in Progressivism. Thousands died after being intentionally fed tuberculosis –laced milk.

Hard to believe, isn’t it. Our national Library of Congress records it. Newspapers of the ‘20s enthusiastically reported it. Historians recognize it. Then Stanford University president David Starr Jordan, describing the targeted minorities as “bacteria”, “vermin” and “mongrels”, supportively developed and taught the “Doctrine of Race and Blood”. The Stanford Dept of Humanities was restructured to help create the new idyllic vision of what was described as “social justice”.

This entire scene of the first national attempt at government imposition of Progressive, comprehensive health care is the background for recent remarks by our nation’s Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Mrs. Clinton, when asked, responded by saying “I am not a liberal; I am by definition a Progressive in the American tradition of the early twentieth century”. She went on to cite knowledge of the Progressive movement that surely includes its central concept. The terms may have changed. Eugenics, euthanasia, racial elimination are gone. What Progressives now call “Population Control” and “Social Justice” have replaced them.

There is a power struggle within the Democratic Party today. It represents the ideological difference between traditional blue collar Democrats and Progressives. George Miller (D), Rep. California; Rosa de Lauro (D) Rep. Connecticut; and Patty Murray (D) Sen. Washington, are all up for election in 2010. All define their political agenda as “Progressive”. All have received major contributions from known Progressive Party supporters. All state a need for population control and social justice through comprehensive health reform.

Bill Jasper is concerned. He’s seen this all play out before. He read the letters of Progressive Party support to Leon Whitney, President of the American Eugenic Society, from German political Progressive Adolph Hitler in 1930.

Surely it can’t happen again.

It’s interesting that at the heart of the arguments offered by the Drinking Water protesters, the Global Cooling protesters, the Mother Earth protesters and now the Global Warming protesters is one central solution: Population Control. Progressive power is at a height not seen since the early 20th century. Our President is a self-avowed Progressive. Without the seemingly miraculous election of Sen. Scott Brown, we would already have the central plank of Progressive agenda as law of the land.

Elections have consequences. Surely this coming November raises the stakes of this axiom as never before. Let’s all hope for change… Greyson Deitrich III Independence News

Resources:

Interview: Bill Jasper – New American Magazine

Interview: Edwin Black – New York Times

Source: Library of Congress

Source: Chicago Tribune Archives 1927

This news report is provided courtesy of  Greyson Deitrich III of Independence News LLC.