Behind the Headlines
Video of the Week
Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2012)
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)
I dont watch
much network television these days. There are few programs worth my attention.
On Friday, January 18, 2002 CBS previewed its new drama, First
Monday, a series about the U.S. Supreme Court. Produced by the folks
who created J.A.G. (one of the few programs I watch on TV) which
preceded the new series starring James Garner, I decided to devote a couple
of hours to the idiot box.
What I didnt anticipate was that what
would catch my eye and hold my attention over the weekend was not a television
programit was a commercial. More precisely, it was an anti-National
Right To Life commercial sponsored by the NARAL Foundation
(National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League). Between
the liberal mainstream networks (i.e., ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN)
I expect the ad may have run several times. I saw it on CBS. It
was the most frightening advertisement Ive ever seen in my life.
What made it frightening was not what was said but what was very subtlety
alluded to with imagery of the elderly.
I realized when I saw the NARAL commercial
the first time that Tuesday, January 22 was Roe v. Wade Day and
that the National Right to Life march would take place in Washington,
DC with pro-life, family values Americans quietly marching from the White
House to the steps of the Capitol Building. But as I watched this commercial
message on choice I realized the commercial was concerned
with much more than abortion choices.
The National Abortion and Reproductive
Rights Action League stepped far beyond the abortion rights issue
and, using imaginary of the elderly well beyond child-bearing age, their
message raised the spector of choice at the other end of the
corridor of life: euthanasia.
The text of the commercial message did not
suggest that NARAL had become an advocate of the termination of
life at both ends of the age corridor. The female announcer, in a calm,
pleasing, almost serene voice said, I believe theres a
reason we are born with free will. And I have a strong will to decide
whats best for my body, my mind...and my life. I believe in myself.
In my intelligence, my integrity, my judgment. And I accept full responsibility
for the decisions I make. I believe in my right to choosewithout
interrogations, without indignities, without violence. I believe that
right is being threatened. The greatest of human freedoms is choice. And
I believe no one has the right to take that freedom away. Whats
life without choice?
Based on the timing of the commercials,
most of those who saw the spot would likely have consciously thought it
was a pro-abortion choice ad. And, consciously, it was. But it was the
deliberate subliminal message within it that was frightening because that
message was telling the elderly that they also had the right to choice.
Subliminally, the NARAL commercials were telling the elderly that
if their lifestyle was so substandard that life did not provide sufficient
satisfaction to merit its continuation, or if they were chronically (and
not necessarily terminally) ill, they should also have the right to end
their own lives painlessly, and with dignity in orderone imaginesso
that they would not become a burden either on their families or on an
already overburdened society that would have to care for them.
The NARAL message was very clear.
The National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League appears
to have assumed the role of hall monitor at both ends of the
Age Corridor. NARAL has become the advocate of death at both ends
of the corridor of life. Throughout the past decade there have been several
attempts at State level to enact laws that would theoretically protect
the right of the elderly to die with dignity when they are
faced with degenerative terminal illnesses that will eventually turn them
into human vegetables before they die, or when they are faced with painful
chronic illnesses that will greatly reduce the quality of
their lives. Many of those with diminished quality are simply
confined to wheel chairs; others must carry portable oxygen canisters
in order to breathe. Some are bed-ridden or home-confined for one reason
Others, after experiencing the loss of lifelong
mates, suffer from deep depression and loneliness. Many of them contemplate
suicide on a daily basis not because they are suffering physically, but
because they cannot mentally cope with the loneliness suffered from the
loss of their mate. Each of them have one or two things in common that
has triggered the opening phase of what will become a major debate on
the merits of allowing the elderly to take charge of
their lives if they want, and to provide them with painless methods
(if not actual medical assistance in some cases) to prematurely end their
The elderly, particularly those who are
infirmed, have ceased to be productive members of society.
Instead, they have become consumptive members of society,
consuming far more than they produce. The utopian Eden of
the 21st century cannot afford citizens who consume more than they produce.
That is going to be the reality experienced shortly by the welfare class
not only in the United States but in all of the industrialized nations
as the tenets of Karl Marx are woven into the fabric of the free
enterprise system to create the political system known as the third
Tragically the utopians behind the encroaching
world government who are advocating euthanasia as a personal choice
through grassroots advocacy groups like NARAL and Planned Parenthood
which they fund, know that the programs they are attempting to create
that would provide the elderly with the right to terminate
their own lives at the onset of the program are actually designed to ultimately
allow government health care officials to decide when society can no loner
afford to provide health care for the terminally ill by requiring them
to sign living wills as a condition of treatment in all medical facilities
The first nation in the modern world to
offer its elderly a voluntary program of euthanasia was Hitlers
Third Reich. German citizens who were aged, infirmed or suffering
from painful, debilitating chronic conditions or terminal illnesses that
would ultimately result in painful deaths were afforded the right to die
with dignitywithout pain. Most German hospitals included
transitional wards where the elderly could seek terminal
assistance. In many instances, sons and daughters were persuaded
to allow their aged and sometimes senile parents to be placed in transitional
care units where they would eventually die. In some cases the children
were not aware that they were sentencing their parents to death by allowing
them to be cared for in those state institutions.
Slowly, the legalized voluntary program
in Germany was expanded to include mandated euthanasia. Anyone with Downs
Syndrome or any form of mental illness was removed from the institutions
in which they were confined and sent to advanced treatment centers.
After a brief period, the families of the mentally disabled received form
letters from the Reich Minister of Health informing them of the unfortunate
death of the family member.
Germanys voluntary euthanasia program
of the early 1930s slowly evolved into the Third Reichs
extermination camps of the 1940s. What began as a humanitarian gesture
that purported to offer the aged a humane, painless escape from an endlife
of horrible, debilitating pain and suffering, slowly evolved into the
state-sanctioned execution of several ethnic groups: Jews, gypsies and
Slavs as well as the cultural misfits: homosexuals and lesbians. In the
beginning, the concentration camps like Dachau, Belsen, Treblinka,
Auschwitz and Birkenau were used to house slackers
who refused to earn a living and chose to be a burden on society. The
concentration camps were forced labor camps. Those confined there were,
at least in the beginning, sentenced to confinement by a lawful court
for a specified period of timeanywhere from six months to one or
After spending even a month in a concentration
camp, those confined had little trouble finding employmentand never
felt any job was beneath their dignity. Slowly the slackers were replaced
with the aged and those physically or mentally handicapped. Out of the
public view, their passing went all but unnoticed.
The Third Reich now controlled life at both ends of the age corridor.
Between 1934 when Hitler assumed
power and legislated the legal right of the aged to ...make their
own decisions about their lives... and 1939 when the Third Reich
assumed that right for the State, Hitlers Germany exterminated
over six million peoplestate-mandated ethnic euthanasia.
Today that type of euthanasia is called genocide.
Of course, most people who read this article
will quickly dismiss the concept of forced euthanasia as something that
could not happen in the worlds greatest democracyparticularly
in a society that offers its citizens a constitutional Bill of Rights.
Shocking as it may seem, the Clinton-Gore
Administration actually contemplated initiating a program of forced
euthanasia to deal with AIDS. The White House meeting in which the discussion
transpired occurred on November 12, 1993.
According to the White House protocol, attending
the November 12 meeting were Bill Clinton, Gene Sperling, Joshua
F. Steiner (the Treasury official who, when called upon by Congress
to testify against Bill Clinton based on entries in his personal
diary, declared under oath that he lied to his diary), and
presidential advisor David Gergen. The topics under discussion
that day was the Iran Problem, the Pollard Case,
the Federal Banking Project, the Information Highway,
media issues and the AIDS Crisis.
In reading the segment (below) it is important
for the reader to understand that the plans discussed by Bill
Clinton on November 12, 1003 were uniquely the private contemplations
of William Jefferson Clinton and not the other participants of
the meeting, nor were they the views of the Congress of the United States.
It is chilling to think that any President would discuss, even privately,
the idea of creating a series of AIDS centers in sparsely
populated areas of the country where all citizens with AIDS would be confined
until such time they were deemed to be terminal. At that time,
with the consensus of the centers physicians, that persons
life would be extinguished. If Clintons plan
had materialized, it would have been only a matter of time before those
terminal decisions would have been advanced to include other
chronically or terminally ill peopleor perhaps others who are a
consuming burden on society. Fortunately for the American
people, the Clinton Health Security Act failed to pass, and the
imperative to devise a final solution policy for AIDS was
never formulated by the Clinton Administration. Nevertheless,
those gay community which fought hard to elect Clinton in 1992
and to re-elect him in 1996 will never realize how close they came to
finding themselves confined to Bill Clintons rural Auschwitz
...which [w]ould contain all of the amenities. I guess thats
why they called him Slick Willy.
Keep in mind that when the Nazis
began practicing their own brand of ethnic profiling by seizing Jews,
Poles, gypsies and Catholics and interning them in concentration camps
in the mid to late 1930s, the Jews were initially viewed as the personal
property of the camp administrators (i.e., human capital) who rented
them out to wealthy industrialists. It was such a profitable venture for
both the camp administrators and the industrialists that many of them
relocated their factories near the concentration camps in order to capitalize
on the cheap slave labor. In the beginning, the Jewsthe worlds
first human capitalwere allowed to live as long as they produced
more than they consumed. Ultimately, even though the Jews had a monetary
value to the camp administrators, the Nazi Party embarked on a bold plan
to rid the world of Jewry, and the mass extermination of the Jewsinvoluntary
euthanasia by mass genocidebegan. (Note: it is important for the
reader to note that the protocol quoted below, and two others in the possession
of the author have been disavowed as legitimate documents
by the Clinton White House in 1996. One of the protocols,
dated November 11, 1993 is contained, in its entirety, in this authors
book, Whatever Happened To America? which was published by Hallberg
Publishing last spring.)
In the section of the White House protocol
dealing with the AIDS Crisis, the meeting notes reveal that
the ...President g[ave] an overview of the AIDS situation and its
relationship to the Health Security Act. Based on position papers
submitted to the President by various organizations [sic] include the
WHO and the CDC, it is evident that AIDS is an epidemic
in the United States. Juggling figures to show that only those who have
the diseases of opportunity which strike individuals who are HIV positive
has kept the figures artificially low. More recent surveys indicate that
the number of those in this country who are HIV positive are at least
50% to 60% higher than generally reported. The President states further
that a person who is HIV positive will, sooner or later, fall victim to
one of the diseases that proves fatal. Therefore, in considering the actual
number of AIDS victims, the entire picture has to be taken into account,
not merely those who have contracted various diseases that the destruction
of the immune system leaves them open to.
The President now believes that it
would impossible to include any so-called AIDS patients with those citizens
covered by the Health Security Act. The figures for end-care in
these cases are so high as to surely bankrupt the funding for the Act.
With a growing number of patients developing fatal illnesses due to their
HIV positive condition, it will be necessary to find alternative solutions
to this coming health system disaster.
The President has several position
papers in hand and has seriously considered all of them in addition to
further input on the subject he has received from many diverse sources.
It is the accepted position that AIDS is caused by a retrovirus and it
is impossible for medical science to develop any kind of vaccine for it.
Many drugs have been produced but these only treat the symptoms and do
not address any kind of care for the actual AIDS virus. He agrees fully
with the insurance companies view that if their firms were compelled to
extend health insurance coverage to all who apply without first instituting
a nationwide testing for AIDS, bankruptcy would be the inevitable result.
This attitude is also applicable to the inclusion of AIDS sufferers in
the Health Security Act and for the same reasons.
The President outlined a possible
course of action for discussion.
All private and public funded research
into a cure for AIDS will be phased out. In place of this, the President
proposes that a special AIDS task force be set up. Its public purpose
would be to gather all of the existing information and medical experimentation
under one roof, controlled entirely by the federal government. This can
be presented as a positive move to the general public and the gay community.
Of course some research could continue but funded on a more reduced basis
than heretofore. Also, and most important, an experimental system, an
AIDS center, can be set up in a thinly-populated area of the country.
This would address several problems. In the first place, no major urban
center would wish a large number of dying AIDS patients in their neighborhood.
In the second place, the more remote the area, the better the security
could be. Patients could receive visits from family and friends but it
would be far more difficult to do this than if the initial center was
located in an accessible urban center.
One of the criteria for admission
to the center, which should contain all the amenities, would be for the
patient to sign a living will form upon admission. Then, at a future time,
which would be determined by a panel of our physicians, when it is evident
that the patient is approaching the final stage of the disease, the staff
is able to exercise the option granted to them by the patient earlier.
The President has been assured that
the staff would be entirely able to ease the final moments of the terminal
patient. He proposes that a special letter on his letterhead and with
machine-signed signatures of both himself and his wife be sent to the
family or other survivors upon the death of the patient.
If the center should prove successful,
others could be instituted on a regional basis. The President stresses
that visitors to this center should be warmly treated by staff members
and every evidence of comfort and support for the welfare and treatment
of the patient be evidenced. Outgoing mail, of course, can be monitored...
Had the Health Security Act of 1993
been enacted into law by the Democratically-controlled Congress, it is
very likely the radical program to deal with the rapidly escalating cost
of treating AIDS would have been surreptitiously employedor at least
the public relations campaign needed to convince the public it was a good
idea would have been launched.
Without legislation to legally provide American
citizens with the right to die on whim, the Clinton
Administration would have been hard-pressed to get their AIDS treatment
centers funded by Congressparticularly after the GOP took over both
the House and Senate in 1994. The important consideration here is not
whether or not such a program was, would or could be, implemented by the
Clinton Administration in 1993, but that any contemporary
national leader could even contemplate such Hitler-era solutions to a
pandemic problem. The Clinton plan had a draconian touch of Auschwitz
about it. The test center would be placed in a sparsely populated
area. The centers would be one-way facilitiesall patient traffic
would be incoming. Like Auschwitz, which greeted its newcomers
with a classical orchestra, Clintons AIDS centers would, according
to the former President, have all the amenities. But its primary
task would be to fool both the patients and their visitors
by taking care ...that visitors to this center...be warmly treated
by staff members and every evidence of comfort and support for the welfare
and treatment of the patient be evidenced. If you will recall, the
Nazis went through unbelievable pretense to conceal what was happening
in the deaths campseven to the extent of disguising mass gas chambers
as bath houses where they introduced Zyklon-B pellets through the
air vents or dispersed them through the shower heads. The dead were then
carted out by other inmates and disposed of at the camp crematorium.
And, like the pretense used by the Nazis
in the 1930s when they practiced state-sponsored euthanasia to eliminate
Germanys unwanted, Bill Clinton wanted the families
of each of the AIDS victims euthanized in his AIDS center to receive ...a
special letter on his letterhead and with machine-signed signatures of
both himself and his wife be sent to the family or other survivors upon
the death of the patient.
Even though the industrialized nations are
now producing live births below replenishment levels, the utopians at
the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations still believe the world
will soon become overrun with too many new mouths to feed and too many
elderly people who require too many social services that must be paid
for by the rest of society. Since both are consumers rather
than producers, both groups appear to be expendable in the
utopians quest for fewer people on planet Earth.
The public relations campaign to sell America
on the notion that it is politically correct to grant the elderly the
right to decide whats best for their bodes, their minds...and their
lives is in full gear. And, most people watching the very subtle, sublimal
spots used by NARAL dont realize that images of elderly people
demanding the right to determine whats best for their lives have
surreptitiously been burned into their brains. After they view that commercial
a half dozen times or more, the contemplation will slowly become part
of their thought processes, and such a contemplation will no longer appear
Americans, even those who are handicapped,
need to be very careful what they wish for. The graying of America is
in full bloom. We are living longer. And, if we keep our health, we are
enjoying the fruits of our labors much longer. The average
human life span in the industrialized nations in 1996 was 79 years. In
1900 the average life expectancy in America was 48.9 years. While utopian
alarmists insist that by the year 2029 the average life span in the industrialized
nations will be 100 years, University of Illinois Public Health professor
Jay Olshansky poophahs the idea, saying that ...everyone
alive today will be long dead before a life expectancy of 100 is achieved.
There are no magic potions, hormones, antioxidants, forms of genetic engineering
or biomedical technologies that exist today that would permit a life expectancy
of 120 to 150 years as some people have claimed. Leonard Hayflick,
an aging expert at the University of California at San Francisco agreed.
Superlongevity, he said, is simply not possible.
Nevertheless, the utopians are convinced
that it is, or shortly will be, the case. They are already moving to correct
the problem. There is a growing fear among societal planners that the
federal government will be saddled with both the unanticipated costs of
advanced retirement incomes for the elderly as they go off the actuarial
charts, and the crippling medical expenses of Americas super
old that will threaten the solvency not only of the countrys
health insurers but the nations treasury as well. The fear that
this will soon be a reality in America makes it imperative for Congress
or the United States Supreme Court to address the right to die with
dignity issuewith an eye on legalizing voluntary euthanasia
in America. However, once the citizens of any nation are legislatively
granted right to die, they are only one step away from giving their government
the right to determine when their government can no longer afford to keep
them. At the onset of a legalized euthanasia program, when the elderly
are hospitalized they will be allowed to complete a living will that stipulates
that if, in the doctors opinion, they cannot recover sufficiently
to enjoy a reasonably normal and active life, or if their condition deteriorates
to the point where they will be bedridden or require external stimuli
of some sort to live, that they will be painlessly sedated to the point
where their respiration ceases.
Once voluntary euthanasia is legalized,
state-mandated euthanasia under some circumstances will be
only a stones throw away.