Wednesday, July 30, 2014

CLASSICAL MUSIC DETERS CRIME ?



Many young people, especially the anti-social, dislike classical music so much that it can be played to discourage them from intimidating, harassing and robbing.

This experiment has been successful over many years in countless locations.

The earliest occurrence was in the mid-1980s, when Canadian outlets of 7-Eleven played easy listening and classical music to disperse teenagers loitering outside. After that, companies from McDonald's to Co-op, transport authorities, housing estates and shopping malls around the world have employed this method.

In the UK, the first to do so was the Tyne-and-Wear Metro system in 1997, following Montreal’s underground system in Canada.

Other British transport providers, including the much bigger London Underground, imitated the scheme. The most effective deterrents were anything sung by Pavarotti or written by Mozart.

Across the pond, whether at New York's Port Authority Bus Terminal, La Guardia, Newark International and John F. Kennedy International airports, and Pennsylvania Station; at Portland, Oregon, light-rail stations; in Seattle's parking lots; or in Anchorage, Alaska, Town Square, classical music has helped even against crimes like drug dealing.

Same in Australia and New Zealand. In Queensland, it reduced vandalism and graffiti.

The evidence seems plentiful. Why, then?

The simplest explanations, in the time-honored scientific tradition of Occam's razor, should be considered first.

Teenagers, especially those with uneducated ears, don't like classical music, and they think it's not "cool" to be seen by their peers listening to it.

Still other explanations are in the nature of classical music itself. Much of it conveys a sense of order, symmetry and beauty, that conflicts with the disorder and ugliness in the minds of hooligans.

Musicologist Giovanni Bietti explains that Beethoven -- who was convinced that music could make a great social contribution -- Mozart and Haydn had a rational image of music, which is why in their works the initial contrasts are always resolved through the rules of composition, giving order to thoughts. This discourages those who don’t accept the rules.

-0-
Enza Ferreri is an Italian-born, London-based Philosophy graduate, author and journalist. She has been a London correspondent for several Italian magazines and newspapers, including Panorama, L’Espresso, La Repubblica

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

IRAQ HEADS TO HUMANITARIAN HOSTORICAL AND CULTURAL DISASTER


Vatican Radio) “It is shameful that Christians are being rejected, expelled and diminished”, writes the leader of the Chaldean Catholic Church Patriarch Louis RaphaĆ«l I Sako in a letter addressed to people of good-will across Iraq’s multi-religious, multi-ethnic society ahead of an Islamist deadline to minorities in Mosul to submit to Islam, their rule or die.
During his Sunday Angelus Pope Francis told the persecuted Christians of the northern Iraqi city of Mosul that he was with them in solidarity and appealed for aid for these people who have been “stripped of everything“.
Thousands of Iraqi Christians have fled Mosul to Sunni Kurdish areas up north after the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) threatened to kill them if they don't convert to Islam or pay tax. Extremists of the al-Qaeda-inspired group began implementing their threats by burning a 1,800 year old church in the city.
Yet in whta the Patriarch described as a sign of hope, Muslims from the capital Baghdad reached out in solidarity to their Christian brothers and sisters, joining them at the end of Mass on Sunday for a special service in the Church of Mar Girgis. Many bore signs that read “I am an Iraqi Christian”.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says that the persecution of Iraqi Christians who have been driven from their homes in Mosul could constitute a crime against humanity.
In his letter Patriarch Sako writes: “It is obvious that this would have disastrous consequences on the coexistence between the majority and the minorities, even among Muslims themselves, in the near and long term. Hence, Iraq is heading to a humanitarian, cultural, and historical disaster”.
Below the full text of Patriarch Sako’s letter, english tanslation courtesy of AsiaNews
To the people of conscience and good will in Iraq and the world,
To the voice of the moderates, our Muslim brothers and sisters in Iraq and the world,
To all concerned about the continuation of Iraq as a nation for all its citizens,
To all leaders, thinkers, and human rights activists,
To all defenders of the dignity of the human person and the freedom of religions,
Peace and God's Mercy
The takeover of the Islamist jihadists of Mosul and their announcement of an Islamic state, and after days of composure and anticipation, the situation had turned negative on the Christians of the city and surrounding areas. The first signs of this reversal were the kidnaping of the two nuns and three orphans who were released after 17 days, We were encouraged by this development and we considered it a glimmer of hope, and a breakthrough. Only to be surprised by the latest developments,   the Islamic state issued a statement calling on Christians openly to convert to Islam, and either pay Jizya without specifying a ceiling, or leave their city and their homes, with their clothes only, without any luggage, and issued a "fatwa" that the homes will become the property to the Islamic state. They have marked the letter "N" on the homes of Christians for "Nazarenes"!!! As they have marked on the homes of Shiites with the letter (R) for "Rejectors". Who knows what is holding in the coming days as the laws of the Islamic state is based on what they claim to be the Sharia law, including the redefinition of identities on the basis of religion and sectarianism.
These requirements offend Muslims and the reputation of Islam, which says "you have your religion and we have ours," and "There is no compulsion in religion", and it is in contradiction of a thousand and four hundred years of history and a lifetime of the Islamic world, and coexistence with different religions and different peoples, east and west, respecting their beliefs and living in fraternity. The Christians  and in particular in our East, and since the advent of Islam, have shared together sweet and bitter memories, their bloods were mixed in defense of their rights and their land, and together they built, cities, civilization and heritage. It is shameful that Christians are being rejected, expelled and diminished. It is obvious that this would have disastrous consequences on the coexistence between the majority and the minorities, even among Muslims themselves, in the near and long term. Hence, Iraq is heading to a humanitarian, cultural, and historical disaster.
Therefore we call unto them, a warm, brotherly, urgent and serious call, and we appeal to our fellow Iraqis who support them to reconsider their strategy, and respect the unarmed innocent people, of all ethnicities, religions and sects. The Quran commands respect to the innocent,  and does not call to seize the property of people forcibly, it calls on helping the widow, the orphan, the destitute and the defenseless, and even recommend to help the seventh neighbour. We also call on Christians in the region to adopt rationality and acumen, and calculate their options well and understand what is planned for the area, and come together in love and think through together and in solidarity to build confidence in themselves and their neighbours, gathering around their church, being patient, enduring and praying until the storm passes. 
+ Louis Raphael I Sako

Monday, July 21, 2014

PSSST! IT'S NOT A WAR OF RELIGION!

For the first time in 1,600 years, Mass is not being said in Mosul: an ancient culture has been wiped out in a matter of weeks. It's a war crime that, strangely, no one seems to want to talk about.
Mosul is the second-largest city in Iraq and the place where many Christians believe Jonah was buried. Since the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis) rode into town, their faith has been forced underground. Bells have been silenced, the hijab enforced with bullets. Tens of thousands fled after being offered an unattractive choice: convert, pay a religious tax, or be put to the sword. The levy was unaffordable. According to one local news agency, Isis troops entered the house of a poor Christian and, when they didn’t get what they wanted, the soldiers raped the mother and daughter in front of their husband and father. He committed suicide out of grief.
Having driven away the worshippers, the Isis fanatics are now trying to extinguish the physical legacy they left behind. A centuries-old church has been burned to the ground; Jonah’s tomb has been desecrated. Isis wants to create the Islamic equivalent of Year Zero, a brave new world with no evidence of Christianity, women’s rights, democracy or even that most subversive of instincts, human pity.
It might seem like this revolution has nothing to do with us in the West, but that's more than a little naive. The genocide of local Christians did not begin with Isis but with the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Prior to the conflict, there were 1.5 million “Chaldeans, Syro-Catholics, Syro-Orthodox, Assyrians from the East, Catholic and Orthodox Armenians” in the country – living, of course, under the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, but living nonetheless. Today, their number has dropped to just 400,000. Religious violence peaked in the first four years of the invasion and then declined dramatically after the US-led surge. There was a hope that President Nouri al-Maliki would live up to his initial promise to protect religious minorities. But the rise of Sunni opposition to the Shiite regime in Baghdad sparked a second phase of persecution against Iraqi Christians.
Over the border came Isis, a particularly virulent strain of Islamism previously incubating in Syria’s civil war. Bashar al-Assad’s refusal to surrendered power in Damascus has destabilised the region yet further (the use of gas weaponry has a tendency to court opposition) and his own Christians have found themselves trapped in the middle of an internecine Islamic bloodbath: it was one year ago in the northern Syrian city of Raqqa where Isis first experimented with its instruction to “convert, pay a tax or die”. The Syrian patriarch of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church has estimated that perhaps 25 per cent of his country’s 2 million refugees are Christian.
The West’s direct intervention in Iraq created Hell on Earth for its Christian citizens, while the West’s lack of action in Syria (out of deference to its failings in Iraq) has permitted a regrouping of Islamist forces and the opening of a second front against Christians. The lesson is: “either leave other countries alone or, if you must intervene, do so with consistency and resilience”. The consequences of going in, messing things up and then quitting with a weary shrug are terrible for those left behind.
Yet, having been so intimately involved in the collapse of Iraq, the West is now bizarrely silent about events in Mosul. The streets of London fill with thousands marching against Israel’s military operation in Gaza; the West rails mightily against the Russian separatists in Ukraine. But of Iraq there is nothing. Why?
It could be that no Westerner wants to return to Iraq, that politicians fear that even discussing the country will lead voters to fear yet another invasion and yet another bloody occupation. Or it could be that we feel embarrassed about the very idea of Christians as a persecuted minority. The reporter John Allen argues that Westerners have been trained to think of Christians as “an agent of aggression, not its victim” - so we're deaf to pleas for help. That opinion is supported by Ed West in an excellent e-book, and its consequences have been condemned by religious leaders here in the UK. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks has compared the suffering of Middle East Christians with Jewish pogroms in Europe and reminded everyone of the words of Martin Luther King: “In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” It would indeed be awful to think that the West might remain silent as violence rages purely out of a failure to recognise that Christians can be victimised, or out of a reluctance to cast aspersions on certain brands of Islam. It would make this the first genocide in history to be tolerated out of social awkwardness.
The West’s response to Mosul is worthy of contempt: if we won’t speak out for Christians, who will? But any disgust at our own moral cowardice should be balanced by admiration for the Iraqis who continue to bear witness to their faith in a land that moves closer and closer to outlawing it. Their resilience illustrates the difference between fundamentalist Islam and Christianity: the former is a religion of killers, the latter is a religion of martyrs. And for those of us who share the faith of the thousands fleeing Mosul, Jesus's own sacrifice offers hope – a reminder that victory is guaranteed for those who endure: "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me." Whatever your faith, please pray for the Christians of Mosul

Wednesday, July 02, 2014

JESUS WENT TO SIMON'S HOUSE - WHAT WAS IT LIKE?

In Jesus’ time, the smallest homes of the very poor might be little more than a square, stone structure covered with a whitewashed sort of stucco. There would typically be one larger multipurpose room and a smaller back room for the animals. Some houses in hilly regions were partial cave dwellings, built up against the limestone rock face, perhaps with the front section built onto it. The traditional site at the house of the Annunciation in Nazareth seems to have employed this strategy. However we need not conclude from this that Joseph and Mary were destitute. Many homes employed the “hillside strategy” that made use of hollowed out caves. Such structures were easy to build and there was a certain natural coolness to them.

Another sort of house, also common among the working poor and typical village-dwellers, was one built around a central open court with small rooms opening onto it. (See the drawing at the upper right; click the picture for a larger view). This kind of building had the advantage of needing only short beams for the roof structures, since the central court had no roof. The open concept retained the coolness by allowing air to move freely through. Cooking could also be done in the open central court, when the weather permitted.

If the family had some animals, they were often kept in part of the house at night.

Families, sometimes including several generations, tended to live under one roof and had little or no privacy.

The roof was of real importance in everyday life. It was a flat roof with just enough slope to drain off the rainwater. Rainwater was carefully collected into cisterns or large containers, for in the more arid climate of the eastern Mediterranean every drop of water was precious. The roof of the house was flat and sturdy, enabling people to venture up on it. Since the roofs were used so often, the law of Deuteronomy required guard rails to be installed to prevent falling.

The roof areas in effect provided an open second floor. On the roof, tools would often be stored, laundry would be put out to dry, and people would often gather to talk, especially in the evening. Scripture also speaks of it as a place to retire and pray. In the evening when it was cool, people sat and talked, and in the better weather would often sleep there. The climate of the Mediterranean provides a rather perfect setting for this at most times of the year. Some also placed tents and other coverings on the roof.

Except for the roof structures, which included wood timbers, the basic building material in Palestine was stone. The limestone provides excellent building material and as the stones were fashioned into a wall, they would be coated with a flat, fixed stucco-like material and smoothed over. Foundations were dug with great care as Jesus also said to build upon rock rather than sand. The mortar was used to bond the stone that was made of clay mixed with shells in potsherds.

As for the structure of the roofs, wooden trusses were necessary, since the roof would be used as a kind of second floor. Then a kind of wattling or firm lattice of straw mats would be covered over and smoothed with hard clay. Yearly repairs were made just prior to the rainy season. Most of the inner doors were narrow; only the door facing the street was wider and had a hinged door that could be secured.

In poorer homes the floor was simply pounded earth. The more affluent might have pebbles or baked clay tiles. Wooden floors could be afforded only by the very wealthy.

Only the very wealthy could afford to have water piped to their houses. Ordinary people went to the well or spring-fount, or perhaps a local stream, and collected water with skins, jars, and all kinds of pitchers. Some larger towns did have conduits or aqueducts that brought the water to certain public areas. The washing of clothes was done away from the main house lest water run back in.

Generally there was no need for a lot of heating, except in the cooler months of the year. Most of the houses therefore had no fireplaces. If it did grow cold, there were charcoal braziers where small fires would be kindled.

Lighting was not very abundant. Small oil lamps were used. It will be recalled from above that much time was spent out-of-doors so interior lights were less necessary.

Furniture was extremely simple. The chief object in the home was the chest. There were chests for provisions and chests for clothes. For the poorest families, chests doubled as tables. Since clothing was simple, there was little need for many different sets or changes of clothing, and thus there was less need for numerous chests and the sorts of insanely large closets many have today.

Most moderately well off families did have a low table at which to recline and eat. People in this region and time reclined on their left elbow and ate with their right hand. Sitting on chairs at higher tables to eat was rare.

The kitchen as we know it did not exist. In small houses cooking was done out back on an open fire or in a fire pit. Utensils were kept in a chest. In larger houses the courtyard might be the place of the cooking fire and kitchen items were kept in a storeroom.  Only the largest homes had a dedicated area with a fiery oven.

Bedding was rolled out on the floor; the bed as a piece of furniture off the floor, as in our homes today, was largely unknown at that time except among the very wealthy. Family members stretched out on mats, covering themselves with their own cloaks. Many slept on the roof in the warmer months.

Many even smaller houses seem to have had a bath of some sort. The ancient Jews were conscientious about cleanliness and saw it as related to holiness and ritual purity. The usual bath (often called a mikveh) was narrow and one stepped down into it. Bathing was for hygiene to be sure, but there were also ritual baths that the Jews took. In the Holy House in Nazareth, a mikveh is located in or near the house and adjacent to the carpenter shop of Joseph.

Latrines were more likely outhouses and were situated away from the main dwelling. They may have been shared facilities between several domiciles, depending on the size and layout of the town or village. There is an excerpt in the Torah in which Moses instructs the ancient Israelites to ”build your latrines outside the camp.” It further states, “When you go to the toilet, take a paddle or a shovel with you and use the toilet and then cover it up,” suggesting that some sort of lime was thrown in after the use. Other directions about latrines were that they should be located in discreet, private locations. Certain archeological digs have uncovered the presence of latrines that consisted of a pit dug into the ground and of an enclosed, roofed chamber; basically an outhouse.

It was a simpler time to be sure, but still with all the basic needs of a home.

Thursday, June 19, 2014

CHILD IMMIGRATION BASED ON AN OBAMA LIE IN MEXICO

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - The United States has changed indelibly in the past six years, since the election of Obama. The American people are more policed, more monitored and watched than ever. Meanwhile, the government itself, from the IRS, to the BLM, to various federal agencies are now overpowered and virtually unaccountable.

With an amazing exception-the U.S. Border Patrol is being overwhelmed by an adversary they cannot fight, and instead have no choice but to love. Our borders are being overwhelmed by a human wave, made of children, many of them unaccompanied by their parents.

What is happening to our country? And why are our borders being overrun? According to the U.S. Border Patrol, almost 50,000 unaccompanied children have recently crossed the border.

Fifty thousand unaccompanied children.

In addition to these children the state of Texas has seen 35,000 illegal immigrants per month crossing the border. Immigrants report that so many people are so desperate to cross that rates human smugglers charge have skyrocketed from $100 per person to over $1,000.

Women regularly risk rape, enslavement, and even death to be smuggled by human traffickers into the United States. Victims report unsanitary conditions, little or no food and water, and a variety of other complaints related to their treatment -and that's just what they receive at the hands of U.S. authorities after suffering worse during their travels.

Immigrants are coming from Central America, a few displaced by local violence and poverty, but many are coming because Obama and his "posse" have successfully spread an insidious lie in Latin America which is not being reported by the media.

The immigrants largely believe that they, children in particular, will not be deported, but instead allowed to stay. In other words, they have been led to believe that children, in particular, will be granted automatic amnesty.

What Obama has done is place hundreds of thousands of people, possibly millions, on human trafficking trade routes into the United States where they will contribute to crime, violence, and overwhelm infrastructure and services. This makes Obama the smugglers best friend, an ally to human traffickers. It also makes him an enemy of federal enforcement agencies and taxpayers. It's an offense to humanity to permit the spreading of false rumors.

We can bomb faraway countries with ease, use drones to blast people to oblivion at a word, but apparently we can't reach people in Latin America with the truth that America's borders aren't open.

How do we know people think these things? The Border Patrol itself is reporting that hordes of illegal immigrants are actually waiting to be picked up after crossing into the United States. Whereas before these people would flee and avoid the law, they now expect agents to pick them up and give them documents which will allow them to stay in the U.S.

This is the result of a campaign of deception spread by the Obama administration, human traffickers, and badly misinformed people. Obviously, someone is selling a rumor and the people are buying, so much so they send their own children unaccompanied across the border.

Consider what NBC News, a stanchly liberal media outlet revealed:

"We're having to provide them baby formula, diapers, medical treatment," said Raul Ortiz, the Deputy Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol Rio Grande Valley Sector, which monitors 312 miles of riverbank, "It pulls at every agent that's exposed to this, it pulls at our heartstrings," said Ortiz. "We have kids at home, so there is a lot of sympathy and empathy for what they're going through."

And Breitbart had this to say:

On last Sunday's Al Punto program, a mother whose son was detained by the U.S. Border Patrol said that her son made the trek from Honduras to America because he believed the Obama administration would not deport him. Illegal immigrants have been flagging down border patrol agents to receive what they believe are "permits" to indefinitely remain in the United States. Though the "permits" are actually documents requiring the illegal immigrants to show up at immigration hearings, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) said that many have already been skipping these hearings and that there was "no way" that most of the illegal immigrants who are given the "permisos" will show up to their scheduled hearings.

Of the Obama administration, in case you had any doubt they've not put the welcome mat out is saying this, as reported by Breitbart:

"The Obama Administration has made it very clear that it will use any resources available to do "what's in the best interest" of each migrant child. While that rhetoric sounds well-intended, it makes the U.S. a magnet for everyone in the world who not only needs a helping hand, but for everyone who needs to be fully sustained."

President Obama has invited a human invasion of the United States and rather than combat the crisis by fighting the rumors in Central America and securing the border, he is allowing tens of thousands of people per month into the country. SO many people are entering that instead of deportations, illegal immigrants are given summons to appear in court, then flown to other states and released at bus stops. This effectively makes the Border Patrol part of the Obama apparatus to flood the country with illegal immigrants.

This is coupled with his promises to provide these people with everything, all while U.S. citizens go hungry and homeless, a quarter of whom are children.

Via Breitbart: "Reacting to what has been labeled a "humanitarian crisis," U.S. taxpayers are providing the illegal immigrants with housing, food, education, health care, recreation, vocational training, family unification, and even legal council. In the face of providing such amenities to the migrants, there are hundreds of thousands of  U.S. citizens--including families and children--who remain without a home or food."

All these people of course will be future voters. Only a fraction will appear at their hearings, and only a sliver of those will be deported. The Obama invited invasion is successful.

This is not how it should be.

These people, coming to the United States, must be treated with great respect and mercy, for they are people. However, the Border Patrol is not trained or equipped to house thousands of children in humanitarian facilities, look after their education and change their diapers. Yes, they are expected to change the diapers of unaccompanied babies.

Even the New York Times complained in a recent op-ed that social services in that state were being overwhelmed by the recent influx.

While we must treat these people well, give them asylum when they require it, and look after their needs while they are here, we also have a solemn obligation to defend our borders from human traffickers and terrorists. At a word, the president could secure our borders. Every state has a national guard, we have an army that is coming home from war. In an emergency we could post reinforcements that can assist the border patrol and help to dispel the rumor that immigrants will be given a free pass into the country.

Obama is a media wizard, so he could certainly buy media in Latin America and tell people to stop sending their children into our country. Warn them of the dangers of human trafficking. All these evils could be stopped.

But they're not because our politicians, starting with Obama, profit from this illicit trade in human beings. They get plenty of political traction during election years from this issue.

Illegal immigration is not a problem in many countries because they deal with the problem directly. It is a problem in the United States because it's a profitable problem. Only the taxpayers pay.

So the question remains. What is Obama playing at?

Whatever the answer may be, it's not in your best interest, nor in the interest of those coming into this country illegally.

We forget that the Western half of the Roman Empire collapsed in 476 AD because it was overrun from the north. Great civilizations are destroyed from within, a result of corruption and strife. The Obama administration is creating just these problems in our country today. We shouldn't be surprised to see the host of evil and ills that come as a result.

Thursday, June 12, 2014

800 babies in a septic tank in Ireland (is a hoax). It is not true.

If you're on the internet you've heard about the nuns in Ireland who killed and dumped hundreds of babies in a septic tank in the 1960's.

The story is a mainstream media hoax that was, for them, just too good to be true. It's telling that when right now it turned out that babies were being burned in an incinerator for energy the media pretty much ignored that one for a long time but a rumor about nuns 64 years ago gets splashed all over the mainstream media. They showed their hand on this one. Let's face it, they don't care about dead babies. They care about attacking the Church and making Christians appear like hypocrites.

There's only one sin in MSM world and that's hypocrisy. But, you see, in that outlook the only sinless person is the nihilist.

A Forbes takes down the story pretty effectively:

Few of us are inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth, and that applies in spades to journalists running with a sensational news story. But even by normal media standards, recent reports about the bones of 796 babies being found in the septic tank of an Irish orphanage betray a degree of cynicism and irresponsibility rarely surpassed by allegedly reputable news organizations.

Although the media attributed the “dumped in a septic tank” allegation to Catherine Corless, a local amateur historian, she denies making it. Her attempt to correct the record was reported by the Irish Times newspaper on Saturday but has been almost entirely ignored by the same global media that so gleefully recycled the original suggestion. That suggestion, which seems to have first surfaced in the Mail on Sunday, a London-based newspaper, reflected appallingly on the Sisters of Bon Secours, the order of Catholic nuns at the center of the scandal.

Today the Irish Times has published a reader’s letter that has further undercut the story. Finbar McCormick, a professor of geography at Queen’s University Belfast, sharply admonished the media for describing the children’s last resting place as a septic tank. He added: “The structure as described is much more likely to be a shaft burial vault, a common method of burial used in the recent past and still used today in many part of Europe.

“In the 19th century, deep brick-lined shafts were constructed and covered with a large slab which often doubled as a flatly laid headstone. These were common in 19th-century urban cemeteries…..Such tombs are still used extensively in Mediterranean countries. I recently saw such structures being constructed in a churchyard in Croatia. The shaft was made of concrete blocks, plastered internally and roofed with large concrete slabs.

“Many maternity hospitals in Ireland had a communal burial place for stillborn children or those who died soon after birth. These were sometimes in a nearby graveyard but more often in a special area within the grounds of the hospital.”

For anyone familiar with Ireland (I was brought up there in the 1950s and 1960s), the story of nuns consciously throwing babies into a septic tank never made sense. Although many of the nuns may have been holier-than-thou harridans, they were nothing if not God-fearing and therefore unlikely to treat human remains with the sort of outright blasphemy implied in the septic tank story.

So what are we left with? One fact seems beyond dispute: conditions in Irish orphanages up to the 1960s, if not later, were positively Dickensian. Certainly the death rate at many was shockingly high. But how should blame be apportioned? A major part of the problem would appear to have been the pervasive poverty of the time (the institution at the center of the scandal operated from the 1920s through the early 1960s). Because they were so desperately underfunded, Irish orphanages were disgracefully overcrowded, which meant that when one baby caught an infection, they all caught it. Not the least of the hazards was tuberculosis, a then incurable disease that spread like wildfire in overcrowded conditions.
You can read the whole thing at Forbes. It is worth it.

Monday, April 28, 2014

ABORTIONS AND NAZI DOUBLE SPEAK

By comparing Germany’s Nazi holocaust and America’s abortion holocaust you’ll see there is practically no difference between the mindset of holocaust then and now. As with slavery in early America, killing Jews in Nazi Germany, or killing babies in America today — just because something is legal does not make it right. So how do you get a country to allow humans to be treated worse than animals? You use euphemisms to convince people that these actions are justifiable, or even beneficial.
Abortion advocates and America’s largest Death Camp operator, Planned Parenthood, have elevated the dehumanization of holocaust victims to an art form with their ‘pro-choice’ rhetoric. But those who side with the pro-choice crowd may be shocked by the racial slurs and elitist ideals of Planned Parenthood’s celebrated founder, Margaret Sanger. As you’ll see, in a film liked at www.faafa21.com, her words and goals bear an eerie similarity to the words and ideas of the Nazis.
Dr. Josef Mengele was the most active of the SS doctors at Auschwitz, the infamous Nazi concentration camp. Present at the arrival of all the transports, Mengele oversaw the selection and cremation of thousands of murder victims at Auschwitz. His name was known and feared throughout the camp. Several accounts of camp survivors depict Mengele as killing in a dispassionate, medical way “as though he were performing regular surgery without showing any emotion at all.”
Mengele routinely conducted experiments on humans, the most famous of which were conducted on twins selected on the unloading platforms of Auschwitz. At the end of the experiments, Mengele simply injected chloroform directly into the hearts of many of these twins. After the war, Josef Mengele practiced medicine in Buenos Aires in the 1950?s. He “had a reputation as a specialist in abortions,” which were illegal at the time. Mengele was arrested after he killed a girl in his abortion clinic, but an Argentine judge released him. Mengele was never extradited and presumably died in Chile in 1979.
But Mengele wasn’t the only one. Vilis Kruze was a former SS officer who after the war worked as an abortionist for Kaiser Permenente in Ohio and Hawaii. It seems you can take the doctor out of the killing camp, but you can’t take the killing camp out of the doctor.
ABORTION CLINICS AND DEATH CAMPS
The euphemisms used by Nazis and abortion advocates are eerily similar. Death camps were called “relocation centers” in Nazi Germany and Nazi Occupied Europe. Death camps are called “reproductive health centers” in modern America. The Jews were described as a “parasitic race” by Hitler, while the unwanted child is described “a mere parasite” by Planned Parenthood. The end result then was “termination” of the Jews and the end result now is “termination of pregnancy.”
The Nazi Spin
In the Nazi death camps the victims were labeled “useless eaters,” “human ballast”, “a mentally dead person,” etc. Genetic counselors and physicians who referred for extermination were called, “protectors of the family.” Those sentenced to die were “life unworthy of life.” The killing was advocated for the “health of the people,” being described as “purely a healing treatment” and a “healing work”. The bodies of the murdered Auschwitz inmates were referred to as “garbage.” Jews were repeatedly referred to as a “disease,” for which extermination was the “cure” or “final solution.”
German Physicians referred to the killing of handicapped children as a “surgical operation” and killing hyperactive children was a called a “cure.” The first panel to decide which children would be executed and which were not was called the “Committee for the Scientific Registration of Serious Hereditary and Congenital Diseases.” The first killing centers were called “Children’s Specialty Institutions” and “Therapeutic Convalescent Institutions.”
In the initial killing programs of Nazi Germany, mentally deficient children were killed only after acquiring parental consent. One Nazi doctor that killed children by gradual sedation and then over-dose said, “there was no killing strictly speaking people felt this is not murder, it is a putting-to-sleep.” Killing patients was referred to as giving “special treatment” – both in the case of mentally ill patients and later of the Jews as a whole. Zyklon-B, the poison used to kill mass numbers of Jews, was referred to as “medicine.”
R U a Nazi? RU-486?
When the Nazis switched from machine-gunning their victims in large mass graves to marching their victims through gas chambers at Auschwitz, the gas that they employed was a chemical called Zyklon-B. Zyklon-B was developed by a small chemical company owned by IG Farben, a major supplier for Auschwitz and other death camps that funded many of the experiments undertaken by Mengele and other SS doctors. IG Farben profited handsomely because of the increased use of Zyklon-B. IG Farben’s name became virtually synonymous with the holocaust and unethical medical experimentation. So, after the war, this company underwent a name change and it became Hoechst AG.
However, a Nazi by another name is still the same and, today, a subsidiary company of Hoechst AG is the developer and main producer of RU-486, the so-called ‘abortion pill’. The ghost of IG Farben is still haunting us by allowing killers to again distance themselves from their deeds. But Hoechst AG is not the only chemical profiteer in the abortion industry.
Borrowing from the IG Farben playbook, Upjohn Pharmaceuticals stock prices doubled when it announced the development of a vaginal prostaglandin-suppository marketed specifically for abortion. (It is no longer on the market, because it turned out to be quite dangerous – not only for the babies it was designed to kill, but also for the women who used it.) Searle, the producer of Cytotec, also saw its stock values surge after its product began to be used as an abortifecient. Using chemicals to kill has become big business for pharmaceutical companies – both during the Nazi holocaust and during the abortion holocaust.
The Pro-choice Spin
Note the commonality language between the Nazi positions and the claims of abortionists and today’s “pro-choice” supporters. In Nazi Germany, the killing of Jews was not against the law, the killing centers were “medical centers” that the killers were “doctors” and the killing was done in the name of promoting “health.” In pro-choice America, the killing of babies is not against the law, the killing is done at “medical clinics”, the killers are “doctors” and abortion is called a woman’s “health” issue.
In America’s death camps the victim is usually called a “fetus,” but they have also been called “unseen infections,” “a sexually transmitted disease” and “a cancerous growth”.
Abortion supporters have stated that abortion is the “preferred treatment” for “unwanted pregnancy: the number two sexually transmitted disease” and “an aborted baby is just garbage.”
Abortion is commonly referred to as a mere “procedure” or “minor surgical operation” and abortionists are often called “service providers.” Compare this to the Nazi death squads called “special service groups”. The IRS lists Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinic operators as “charitable organizations” engaged in “promoting health.”
Compare this to the official name of the Nazi organization for implementing euthanasia, the “Charitable Foundation for Institutional Care.”
Like-minded Lingo
In 1943, Himmler referred to the killing of Jews as having “exterminated a germ,” and abortion advocate Natalie Shainess justifies abortion by claiming that the unwanted pregnancy is merely “an alien germ.”
Former Auschwitz physician Dr. Fritz Klein made the analogy between the massacre of Jews and “a good doctor” who “takes a scalpel and removes an appendix full of pus.” He went on to say, “The Jews are the pus-filled appendix in the body of Europe.” Similarly, abortion advocate Dr. Alan Guttmacher likened the destruction of the fetus to “operating on an appendix or removing a gangrenous bowel.”
Under the Nazi regime, the term “special treatment” was used euphemistically for Jews and others to be exterminated. Today, the medical establishment (AMA, American Academy of Pediatrics, etc.) refers to abortion as the physicians duty “to provide care and treatment” for unwanted pregnancies.
Block 20 at Auschwitz, where “experiments” were “terminated” with a lethal injection of phenol to the heart, was known by both inmates and doctors as the “treatment room.” The room in abortion clinics where the abortion is actually committed is commonly known as the “procedure room.”
The Hypocrite Oath
Although only twenty doctors were brought to trial at Nuremberg for experimenting on human guinea pigs, the holocaust allowed a limitless supply of human victims. Hundreds, if not thousands, of German doctors actively experimented on Jews and other prisoners in Nazi Germany. Methods of sterilization were experimented with from injections that caused infections of the ovaries, to x-ray burning of reproductive organs. Pre-cancerous growths of cervices were induced and studied.
In addition, the tissue and organs of victims were frequently harvested for further experimentation. The same, of course, is going on in America today. Abortion clinics supply the medical establishment a virtually endless supply of human tissue that would otherwise be unavailable. Pharmaceutical companies and research hospitals all pay top dollar for organs, limbs and tissue from aborted fetuses .
Hitler Was Pro-Choice
In 1933, when the Nazi’s came to power, the law was changed to legalize abortion and make this a matter of decision for a medical review board. The development of Germany’s abortion policy was left to the county’s most vociferous abortion advocacy group, the Berlin Chamber of Physicians. This group, which advocated abortion on demand, determined that “The health of the mother – considered from all angles – is the decisive factor.” Then, just as now, health of the mother criterion was loosely understood to mean any economic or psychological affect on the woman’s total well being.
There were approximately 500,000 abortions annually in Germany under the Third Reich, a country of 60 to 70 million people. And, in Nazi Germany, racial stock was considered an aspect of the health of the mother. If she was from an “unhealthy” race, such as Polish, Czech or Jewish, then she was often forced to have an abortion against her will. However, race wasn’t the only consideration. Hitler actively promoted the destruction of the crippled, poor and unemployed classes, as did Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. Abortion led to forced sterilization, which led to “euthanasia,” which led to Auschwitz.
“Safe and Legal”
Today, abortion is justified by claiming the killing of babies is “safe and legal .” Dr. Michael Jackson, an abortionist and clinic owner said, “I just go by what the courts say. I only do what’s legal.” These were the same justifications used by doctors who participated in the massacre of millions at Auschwitz. Zyklon-B, the poison gas used to kill the Jews, was seen as helping to alleviate suffering and permit “humane killing”.
At Nuremberg, numerous Nazi doctors and killers said they were innocent because they had broken no law. “The jurists in Berlin told us this was a legal matter,” testified Walter Schmidt, “quite legal.” According to an expert on Auschwitz, “The Nazis committed no crime at Auschwitz since no law or political order protected those who were condemned.”
In fact, the legality itself helped to distance the killers from the killing – if it was legally ordered or at least permitted, then the killing was someone else’s fault. At the trial held for nurses who injected infants and children with lethal substances, the heart of their defense of was that the killing was carried out in conformity of the existing laws. The defense claimed that “these people were only carrying out the laws of the land” and “the accused did not act wrongly because they were covered by law.”
Death Camp Madness
The railroad platform at Treblinka, where the Nazi holocaust victims were singled out for death, had flower beds that gave the area a “a neat and cheery look.” Today, abortion clinics use plants and bold colors to create a “cheerful and anxiety-free environment.”
An inmate orchestra provided tangos, jazz and waltzes as the victims were dispatched to the “shower rooms” of Auschwitz. Soothing music is piped into most waiting rooms and “procedure rooms” of abortion clinics.
According to an Auschwitz survivor, 17,280 corpses were disposed of “per twenty four hour shift. And the ovens, with murderous efficiency, functioned day and night.” According to a former abortionist, “From eight in the morning until midnight, seven days a week, doctors working in ten operating rooms performed vacuum aspirations on an endless parade of pregnant wombs.” (Vacuum aspiration is a type of abortion.)
An Auschwitz gassing technician stated that, “I had no feelings carrying out these things.”
One abortionist stated that, “I never had any psychological adverse reaction, except for an occasional feeling that one was destroying life.”