“Common sense could not understand that it was possible to exterminate tens and hundreds of thousands of Jews,” —Yitzhak Zuckerman, a leader of the Jewish resistance in Warsaw (US Holocaust Memorial Museum)
Above is a picture of a pile of corpses in the Buchenwald concentration camp after liberation in May of 1945. If you have the stomach for it, you can search for pictures of a late-term aborted baby. One is thought of as a horrible crime against humanity and the other is a legally protected right. Yom Ha Shoah, or Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day, was Wednesday, April 15th. PBS had some very good TV specials in remembrance of what happened 70 years ago. While watching some of these programs my wife and I were mystified as to how it was possible for an entire class of people to have absolutely no rights, to be thought of as disposable. It is difficult for us to comprehend how the Nazis were able to accomplish this in a civilized culture. What did people know at the time? Were people aware of what was happening? If they knew about it, why wasn’t there more resistance? If they didn’t know about it, how were they deceived?
“The (Nazi) regime practiced a propaganda of deception by hiding specific details about the “Final Solution,” and press controls prevented Germans from reading statements by Allied and Soviet leaders condemning German crimes.” (From ‘Deceiving the Public’ United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.)
A thought occurred to me: the same thing is happening today in 2015. Once again, an entire class of people have no rights and are considered disposable. The difference is that today, a majority of people are aware of what’s happening. But, like 70 years ago, I believe that many people are again being deceived by a “propaganda of deception.” Only this current “propaganda of deception” is perpetuated by the media and politicians. Expectant mothers are deceived and victimized by influential politicians and an agendized media; they and their babies are the casualties of a new holocaust.
Consider the “press controls” exercised by our media during the Dr. Kermit Gosnell murder trial. In her USA Today op-ed piece, Kristen Powers questioned why there was such media hysteria when Rush Limbaugh verbally attacked Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke but “accusations of babies having their heads severed — a major human rights story if there ever was one — doesn’t make the cut.” Conor Friedersdorf, staff writer at The Atlantic, questions why, in Gosnell’s medical office, the fact that “white women were attended to by a doctor and black women were pawned off on clueless untrained staffers” was not considered newsworthy. Since when is such a blatant example of racial prejudice not worthy of media attention? If this happened anywhere else other than in the office of an abortionist it most surely would have been front-page news. Why all the secrecy?
The Nazis also prevented the public from details of their “Final Solution” the same way that our media and politicians ‘protect’ the general public from the details of what happens to millions of children during abortion procedures. The Nazis effectively used deceptive euphemisms to hide their murderous intentions:
“German officials stamped ‘evacuated,’ a word with neutral connotations, on the passports of Jews deported from … Germany and Austria to the ‘model’ ghetto at Theresienstadt, near Prague, or to ghettos in the East. German bureaucrats characterized deportations from the ghettos as ‘resettlements,’ though such ‘resettlement’ usually ended in death.” (See above)
German officials used words like “evacuated” or “resettlement” which usually meant starvation or gas chamber. Politicians today also use words with neutral connotations like ‘reproductive rights,’ ‘terminate a pregnancy,’ and ‘choice.’ When Congressman Debbie Wasserman Schultz speaks of ‘reproductive rights,’ she may be referring to the saline injection procedure where “The doctor inserts a long needle through the mother’s abdomen and injects a saline solution into the sac of amniotic fluid surrounding the baby. The baby is poisoned by swallowing the salt and his skin is completely burned away. It takes about an hour to kill the baby.” (prochoice.com). When Hillary Rodham Clinton mentions “terminating a pregnancy,” she could be referring to the dilatation and curettage procedure, where the baby is cut into pieces and scraped out through the cervix. When our president uses the word “choice,” he could mean the suction aspiration procedure, where the child is torn into small pieces by a powerful vacuum, sucked through a tube into a bottle, and discarded.
Seventy years ago the Nazis used the words “evacuated” and “final solution.” Today politicians use the words “choice” and “reproductive rights.” Do they mean the same thing? They both result in the death of millions of innocent people. So for the people to whom these words were intended – 70 years ago to the Jews, and today to the unborn – these words definitely do mean the same thing.
If Hillary Clinton decided to exercise her “reproductive rights,” would she be at peace with her decision to have her daughter Chelsea poisoned, then burned to death with a concentrated saline solution? Would Barack Obama be at peace if Michelle exercised her “choice” to have their daughter Malia torn into small pieces, sucked into a jar, and thrown away with bio hazard trash? I wish I could have the opportunity to ask them that question.
In his March 31, 2015 column in “The Blaze” Matt Walsh puts our present day holocaust into perspective:
“About 60 million have been exterminated in this country since 1973, and not a single murder charge was handed down. Sixty million. Think of the Holocaust repeated every decade for one hundred years. That’s the body count we’re dealing with. Only, many of the German Nazis were eventually tried and executed for their crimes, while the American Nazis are treated to banquets with the president.”
Surely what happened 70 years ago could never happen again today, could it? We live in a much more civil and enlightened culture. Could it ever be possible for a large segment of our society to be sanguine with the knowledge that the law of the land permits the mass destruction of human beings? It has already happened and a large number of people have indeed been fooled by a “propaganda of deception.”