For additional info on Holdren and other Eugenic promoters, look at this website !
BELLEVUE, Neb., Aug. 28 /Christian Newswire/ — Four former employees of late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart have come forward to tell of unsafe and illegal practices at LeRoy Carhart’s Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic.
Members of Operation Rescue and Rescue the Heartland were contacted directly by three of the women. A fourth woman is working directly with a pro-life attorney to tell her knowledge of illegal and unsafe conditions at Carhart’s clinic.
The women have made allegations that unlicensed staff illegally performed medical duties that they were not trained for or legally qualified to do, such as starting IVs, dispensing medication, and even assisting with surgeries. There were also allegations of general unclean conditions, including dried blood on surgical instruments. In addition, the women told of missing narcotics, illicit drug use by employees, and illegal post-viability abortions.
The women worked for Carhart at various times, yet they all made similar, if not identical allegations when interviewed.
One former employee told of incidents where Carhart falsified the gestational age of viable babies in order to circumvent the law. This account matches information uncovered by Operation Rescue during an undercover investigation at the now-closed Women’s Health Care Services in Wichita, Kansas, where Carhart once worked. The worker caught falsifying gestational ages in Kansas now works for Carhart at his Bellevue, Nebraska, abortion clinic. (Read full report.)
The women also chose to contact the Omaha World-Herald to blow the whistle on Carhart. An article detailing their allegations ran this morning. (Read the news story.)
The women have given sworn statements about illegal and unsafe activity at Carhart’s abortion clinic, which will be turned over to the Attorney General’s office and the Nebraska Department of Health, which is investigating Carhart. The women have agreed to cooperate with the investigation.
“We commend these brave women for coming forward to tell of unsafe and illegal conditions that exist at Carhart’s abortion mill,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “Their courage will help protect women whose health and safety currently at risk.”
Operation Rescue is not releasing the identity of the women out of concern of reprisals against them from Carhart, but the authorities investigating Carhart will have access to that information.
“Rescue the Heartland, Nebraskans United for Life, and Operation Rescue are working together to insure that the information and experiences of these women are heard by the appropriate authorities,” said Newman.
“These allegations are serious and demand immediate action on the part of the authorities in the interest of public safety. We pray that Carhart’s abortion career, which has cost untold thousands of innocent lives and led to the exploitation of thousands of women, will be brought to a speedy and peaceful end through legal channels.”
For more disgusting truths about how the abortion industry treats women click here
Glenn Beck on Health Care and Eugenics
MORE on EUGENICS/ Maafa21
Angus Reid Strategies, whose polling work on political, social and economic policy is frequently quoted in the world’s leading publications has published a Canadian poll revealing the country’s attitudes toward Euthanasia. After years of socialized medicine, this poll reveals some interesting facts.
From the August 11,2009 poll:
” Half the sample was asked whether they support doctor-assisted suicide while the other half was asked if they supported euthanasia.
Results from both questions were virtually identical (77% supported legalizing euthanasia while 78% supported allowing doctor-assisted suicide).
In order to determine whether support for euthanasia varies in specific cases, respondents were presented with certain scenarios under which patients may seek to end their lives.
Support for euthanasia was strongest under scenarios where a patient is terminally ill and seeks to end their life early (85% support euthanasia in this scenario) and where a patient is in a coma with little chance of waking and had previously specified their wishes to have their life terminated if they were ever to find themselves in this condition (86% support euthanasia in this scenario).
Support for euthanasia plunges for patients seeking to be die at the same time as their spouse, a scenario that made headlines when British composer Edward Downes sought to end his life along with his wife at a private clinic in Switzerland last month. Three-in-four Quebecers (76%) strongly oppose euthanasia in this instance.
Quebecers are split on whether a parent should have the right to euthanize a child suffering from a severe form of a disease like cerebral palsy, a situation similar to the notorious Robert Latimer case. In this instance, 40 per cent of respondents would support euthanasia while 48 per cent would oppose it.
Nearly three-in-four respondents (72%) also said that they believe patients should also have the right to refuse life-saving treatment from doctors.
Finally, a near majority of Quebecers (49%) believe that provincial governments—and not the federal government—should be allowed to set the laws that govern whether euthanasia is legal and under what circumstances.
The findings are strikingly consistent across a variety of demographic groups. While older respondents tend to be slightly more opposed to euthanasia, there is surprisingly.
FACTS: Most people are not aware that many of the exact same people who originally founded the idea of legalized euthanasia in the US, were the same ones who were on the Board of Planned Parenthood Founder, Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL). To examine this closer – all you have to do is get a copy of the New York Times from January 17,1938.
In 1938, just a few years prior to the American Birth Control League (ABCL) changing it’s name to Planned Parenthood, which today is the largest abortion provider in the nation, a group of American Eugenics Society Members and Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL) members got together and formed the National Society for the Legalization of Euthanasia. Heading this pro-euthanasia panel was a man by the name of Charles F. Potter who, in 1938 was also on the ABCL Committee for Planned Parenthood according to a February 1938, New York Times story. Potter was the leader of the First Humanist Society and organized this entire pro-euthanasia group.
Also on this pro-euthanasia board was: Sidney Goldstein who sat on the American Birth Control League’s National Council and later was on Planned Parenthood’s Board of Directors. Another member was Frank H. Hankins who was a managing editor for Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger’s newsletter called the Birth Control Review. Hankins was also an American Eugenics Society member. Another more famous name who was sat on the advisory board of this pro-euthanasia panel, was Julian Huxley, who was a later recipient of a Planned Parenthood award.
Mrs. F. Robertson Jones was also on this panel, she was an ABCL President, wrote for Sanger’s Birth Control Review , was an honorary board member of Planned Parenthood-World Population and a Board of Director of Planned Parenthood. ABCL Citizen’s Committee for Planned Parenthood member, Dr. Foster Kennedy, was also on the pro-euthanasia panel. American Eugenics Society Member, Clarence Cook Little, who was the President of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), at the same time he was on this pro-euthanasia panel. American Eugenics Society founder and friend to Margaret Sanger, Leon Whitney, also sat on this panel. Whitney advocated forced sterilization, was published in Sanger’s Birth Control Review, and openly praised Adolf Hitler for his Nazi effort. Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger was not on this panel, but she was a member of the American Eugenics Society and many of their members were on this panel. Sanger admitted that she gave a speech to the Klu Klu Klan and in her autobiography , she bragged that she received a dozen invites from the Klan for further speeches. Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest Population Control and some would say “Eugenics Control” organization and they receive millions of dollars from the US GOVERNMENT. Care to ask why????
It is important to know this because the “population Control” , “Zero Population Growth”, “Planned Parenthood” crowds are buzzing around this administration and have been heavily involved in government decision making for years. In fact, Sanger’s Planned Parenthood organization receives over $1 million dollars a day from the Government to sterilize and abort this so-called over-populated society. Planned Parenthood’s own research arm, the Alan Guttmacher Institute , reports that Black Minorities receive 5 abortions to every 1 white baby aborted in this nation. Is this coincidence or a form of racist and eugenic targeting? Remember that when they removed the GOVERNMENT Eugenics Courts, they appear to have replaced them with Federal Funding of Population Control Groups, like Planned Parenthood. see more on this in a film called: Maafa21.
So, in the current Health Care debate, could we see euthanasia on children whose parents find then inconvenient? Sure? and the elderly? You bet !
In the 1970’s President Obama’s Science Czar, Paul Holdren, published many books, several which were co-authored with radical population control guru, Paul Ehrlich. Holdren stated officially that one of his mentors was a Professor he had by the name of Paul Harrison.
Harrison suggested that infanticide was a legitimate form of population control when he wrote this in his book, The Challenge of Man’s Future, from page 87 . ” In the absence of restraint abortion, sterilization, coitus interruptus, or artificial fertility control, the resultant high birth rate would have to be matched at equilibrium by an equally high death rate. A major contribution to the high death rate could be infanticide, as has been the situation in cultures of the past.“
Holdren asked this question in an article authored by him, which was published a book entitled, No Growth Society,
” Why, then, should we compound our plight by permitting population growth to continue?” He stated clearly that in the 1970’s the US had already exceeded its “optimum population size of 210 million” (pg. 41) and concluded that , ” it should be obvious that the optimum rate of population growth is zero or negative…“
In the 1970s, as the leading theoretician of animal rights, Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and Philosophy coined the term “speciesism” for anyone so narrow-minded as to, “allow the interest of his species to override the greater interest of members of other species“. Singer holds that the right to physical integrity is grounded in a being’s ability to suffer, and the right to life is grounded in the ability to plan and anticipate one’s future. Since the unborn, infants, and severely disabled people lack the ability to plan and anticipate their future, he states that abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia can be justified in certain special circumstances, for instance in the case of severely disabled infants whose life would cause suffering both to themselves and to their parents.
In a question posed to Singer, it was asked:
“If you had to save either a human being or a mouse from a fire, with no time to save them both, wouldn’t you save the human being?”
Singer’s answer, ” Yes, in almost all cases I would save the human being. But not because the human being is human, that is, a member of the species Homo sapiens. Species membership alone isn’t morally significant, but equal consideration for similar interests allows different consideration for different interests. The qualities that are ethically significant are, firstly, a capacity to experience something — that is, a capacity to feel pain, or to have any kind of feelings. That’s really basic, and it’s something that a mouse shares with us. But when it comes to a question of taking life, or allowing life to end, it matters whether a being is the kind of being who can see that he or she actually has a life — that is, can see that he or she is the same being who exists now, who existed in the past, and who will exist in the future. Such a being has more to lose than a being incapable of understand this. Any normal human being past infancy will have such a sense of existing over time. I’m not sure that mice do, and if they do, their time frame is probably much more limited. So normally, the death of a human being is a greater loss to the human than the death of a mouse is to the mouse – for the human, it cuts off plans for the distant future, for example, but not in the case of the mouse. And we can add to that the greater extent of grief and distress that, in most cases, the family of the human being will experience, as compared with the family of the mouse (although we should not forget that animals, especially mammals and birds, can have close ties to their offspring and mates). That’s why, in general, it would be right to save the human, and not the mouse, from the burning building, if one could not save both. But this depends on the qualities and characteristics that the human being has. If, for example, the human being had suffered brain damage so severe as to be in an irreversible state of unconsciousness, then it might not be better to save the human”
Singer states here that, ” The difference between killing disabled and normal infants lies not in any supposed right to life that the latter has and the former lacks, but in other considerations about killing. Most obviously there is the difference that often exists in the attitudes of the parents. The birth of a child is usually a happy event for the parents. They have, nowadays, often planned for the child. The mother has carried it for nine months. From birth, a natural affection begins to bind the parents to it. So one important reason why it is normally a terrible thing to kill an infant is the effect the killing will have on its parents.
It is different when the infant is born with a serious disability. Birth abnormalities vary, of course. Some are trivial and have little effect on the child or its parents; but others turn the normally joyful event of birth into a threat to the happiness of the parents, and any other children they may have.
Parents may, with good reason, regret that a disabled child was ever born. In that event the effect that the death of the child will have on its parents can be a reason for, rather than against killing it.
When asked the question: Would you kill a disabled baby?
Singer Replied, “Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole. Many people find this shocking, yet they support a woman’s right to have an abortion. One point on which I agree with opponents of abortion is that, from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the fetus and the newborn baby.”
With Professors like Singer, Harrison and others teaching our kids at major Universities – do you really believe that National Health Care will not go down the slippery slope to Death Panels and Euthanasia? Just Sayn !
WASHINGTON, Aug. 26 /Christian Newswire/ — The Christian Medical Association (CMA), the nation’s largest faith-based organization of physicians, today warned of the potential for pro- suicide ideology to seep into law and government policy. The organization pointed to pro-suicide influence in a controversial Veterans Administration (VA) manual and a section of the main House healthcare overhaul bill.
The VA manual, entitled, “Your Life, Your Choices: Planning for Future Medical Decisions,” was co- authored by Dr. Robert Pearlman, who unsuccessfully pleaded for a constitutional right to assisted suicide in a 1996 Supreme Court case. [i]
The VA manual lists scenarios such as being in a wheelchair, needing kidney dialysis, or requiring a feeding tube and then asks the patient to consider whether those situations might make his or her life “Not worth living.”
Dr. Gene Rudd, Senior Vice President of the 16,000- member Christian Medical Association, said, “As physicians, we recognize the value of advance planning and counseling and appointing a personal healthcare proxy. The VA manual goes a step further, however, subtly raising with vulnerable patients the possibility that physical impairments might make their lives, in the words of the manual, “not worth living.”
“And now we learn that the pro-assisted suicide group Compassion & Choices claims [ii] to have worked with Congressional leaders to secure the end-of-life section of the healthcare overhaul bill, HR 3200. Section 1233 of that bill calls for government funds to pay healthcare professionals to give patients ‘an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include– the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family…‘
“Imagine that you’re depressed. You found out last week you have cancer. You were told that with treatment you have a 50/50 chance of beating it. No one knows how sad you are; no one has asked.
“But now the end-of-life counselor suggests you should consider this: Your disease and treatment may be a burden on your family. The cost of treatment will be significant. You may accept treatment, or decline treatment and opt for comfort care. Imagine the impact of those suggestions on a vulnerable patient.”
“Such counseling may serve the government’s purposes in a bill explicitly designed to ‘reduce the growth in health care spending.’ But it does not serve the patient’s best interest.
“A physician must remain an impartial advocate for the patient–not for the government. Paying physicians and others to counsel patients regarding the end of life when the government will be paying for that patient’s end of life care creates a conflict of interest. Patients need to know they can trust us to give independent counsel–not government propaganda.”
[i] Brief of Amicus Curiae Bioethicists Supporting Respondents, Vacco v. Quill., SCOTUS case decided June 26, 1997.
[ii] “Opponents Distort Health Care Debate,”
ADDITIONAL READING – LEARN WHO STARTED THE PRO-EUTHANASIA MOVEMENT IN THE US:
Death Panels? Is it possible?
MAAFA 21 DVD BLACK GENOCIDE IN 21ST CENTURY AMERICA
An incredible documentary that everyone must see.
They were stolen from their homes, locked in chains and brought across an ocean. And for more than 200 years, their blood and sweat would help build the richest and most powerful nation the world has ever known.
But when slavery ended, their welcome was over. America’s wealthy elite had decided it was time for them to disappear and they were not going to be particular about how it might be done.
What you are about to see is that the plan these people set in motion 150 years ago is still being carried out today. So don’t think that this is history. It is not. It is happening right here, right now.
If you think that slavery and racism is over, you will be shocked when you watch this well documented DVD exposing the racism that is still taking place within America. Maafa21 is a high quality documentary with incredible documentation – A MUST SEE for every African American !
( You Tube URL Code – Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLnNi_qb7nY )
“Contraceptives will become a form of drug warfare against the helpless in this nation.” Jesse Jackson, 1971
“Under the cover of an alleged campaign to ‘alleviate poverty,’ white supremacist Americans and their dupes are pushing an all-out drive to put rigid birth control measures into every black home. No such drive exists within the white American world.” Black Unity Party, 1968
“Proponents…have argued this bill is for blacks and the poor who want abortions and can’t afford one. This is the phoniest and most preposterous argument of all. Because I represent the inner-city where the majority of blacks and poor live and I challenge anyone here to show me a waiting line of either blacks or poor whites who are wanting an abortion.” Iowa State Rep. June Franklin, Democrat 1971.
“The abortion law, hides behind the guise of helping women, when in reality it will attempt to destroy our people.” Brenda Hyson, New York chapter, Black Panther Party, 1971
“A true revolutionary cares about the people–he cares to the point that he is willing to put his life on the line to help the masses of poor and oppressed people. He would never think of killing his unborn child.” Detroit chapter, Black Panther Party, 1970
“How the hell is getting the pill? The Mexican and the Negro. Do you want to wipe us out?” Caesar Chavez, 1967
“It is strange that they choose to start talking about population control at the same time that Black people in America and people of color around the world are demanding their rightful place as human citizens and their rightful share of the material wealth in the world.” Jesse Jackson, 1977
All these quotes are from a new film on Eugenics and Population Control called: Maafa21. It is a MUST SEE film- the best ever made on this issue. The early civil rights leaders, Black Panthers and others saw through the Planned Parenthood mirage. They saw it for what it really was: BLACK GENOCIDE.
Today 5 BLACK babies to every 1 White baby will die inside American Abortion Clinics. Is there a targeting going on? Find out: Maafa21:
WASHINGTON – The stimulus package is living up to its provocative name by funding a bacchanalia of behavioral sex research, a Post analysis reveals.
The next fiscal year is set to be one of the friskiest ever in the nation’s science labs, as researchers probe the ins and outs of sex patterns among humans and even some of our four-legged friends.
Among the most titillating grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health are studies that would:
* Examine “barriers to correct condom use” at Indiana University, at a cost of $221,000.
* Study “hookups” among adolescents at Syracuse University. Study’s cost: $219,000.
* Evaluate “drug use as a sex enhancer” in an analysis of “high-risk community sex networks” at the University of Illinois, Chicago. That study will cost $123,000.
* Study how methamphetamine, thought to produce an “insatiable need” for sex among users, “enhances the motivation for female rat sexual behavior.” Some $28,000 has been awarded for the University of Maryland at Baltimore study.