Dr. Bernard Nathanson details the lies, deceptions, dirty tricks, and other tactics that helped make abortion legal and Socially Acceptable in the United States.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson was co-founder in 1969 of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws — NARAL — later renamed the National Abortion Rights Action League. He was also the former director of New York City's Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health, then the largest abortion clinic in the world. In the late 1970's he turned against abortion to become a prominent pro-life advocate, then later became an acclaimed pro-life activist authoring Abortion America and producing the powerfully revealing video, The Silent Scream. Dr. Nathanson is currently Clinical Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at New York Medical College and a visiting scholar at Vanderbilt University. He is the author of The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind.

************

Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist

[www.catholiceducation.org]

I am personally responsible for 75,000 abortions. This legitimizes my credentials to speak to you with some authority on the issue. I was one of the founders of the National Association for the Repeal of the Abortion Laws in the U.S. in 1968. A truthful poll of opinion then would have found that most Americans were against permissive abortion. Yet within five years we had convinced the Supreme Court to issue the decision which legalized abortion throughout America in 1973 and produced virtual abortion on demand up to birth.

How did we do this? It is important to understand the tactics involved because these tactics have been used throughout the western world with one permutation or another, in order to change abortion law.

The First Key Tactic was to capture the media

We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority.

We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalization.

The Second Key Tactic was to Play the Catholic Card

We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its "socially backward ideas" and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as "we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics" and "Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform." And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics in favour of abortion are enlightened and forward-looking. An inference of this tactic was that there were no non-Catholic groups opposing abortion. The fact that other Christian as well as non-Christian religions were (and still are) monolithically opposed to abortion was constantly suppressed, along with pro-life atheists' opinions.

The Third Key Tactic was the Denigration and Suppression of all Scientific Evidence that Life Begins at Conception

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a perinatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion. It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma. But to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

As a scientist I know, not believe, know that human life begins at conception. Although I am not a formal religionist, I believe with all my heart that there is a divinity of existence which commands us to declare a final and irreversible halt to this infinitely sad and shameful crime against humanity.

The left wing over at Fox News would love to hear this...

Not as much as they'd love to hear about you traveling the stinky road in a tin can trying to make it big on YouTube.

My wife and I decided, at different times, to abort two of our pregnancies. I have always been haunted by the memory of those decisions. It's something that I have regretted immensely since then and especially now since one of my two children passed away last year.

Oh dear, I'm so sorry. And sorry to make you feel bad, Anon.

We make a lot of mistakes and have so many regrets with our children. At least I do. And even with or without our guidance, they're often self-destructive. It hurts to watch and know we're helpless. Especially when they do the same stupid things to themselves that we did when we were young. And talking to them about it only makes them more determined to do their own thing.

In the US Bible Belt, you can be pro-death penalty, pro-gun, pro-war, pro-drone and still proclaim that you're Pro-life.


 Unknown quote 

Church, GOVT has no business telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies and reproductive organs;

I liked this quote don't remember by who-GET YOUR ROSARIES OFF MY OVARIES.

Most women in the U.S.A. support the right to abortion and control over their reproductive organs,

Most of the anti abortion people are men!
I liked this Anonymous quote-IF YOU CUT OFF MY REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE...CAN I CUT YOURS?

How can a women be free if she has no say over her reproductive organs?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 03:13PM by riverhousebill.

Quote
riverhousebill

In the US Bible Belt, you can be pro-death penalty, pro-gun, pro-war, pro-drone and still proclaim that you're Pro-life.

 Unknown quote 

A while back you said you didn't Not Like Christians or Christianity, yet this sounds like a denigration of Christians or Chritianity to me...

I'm Pro-Life and Pro-Gun, so what. People have a right to have a gun to defend themselves against those with guns. Killing your developing baby in your own belly is different than killing someone who is trying to kill you.

And I'm Pro-Death Penalty. I believe in - An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. If you kill someone, you should be killed. If you rape someone, you should be raped. If you cut off someone's finger, you should have your finger cut off. Etc. Wow - how crazy is that...

Every hear of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Same thing only switched around.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 04:33PM by Jennifer.

Five videos done years ago, is hardly trying to make it big on YouTube, try again...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2018 04:42PM by NuNativs.

Jennifer said:
"I'm Pro-Life and Pro-Gun, so what. People have a right to have a gun to defend themselves against those with guns. Killing your developing baby in your own belly is different than killing someone who is trying to kill you.

And I'm Pro-Death Penalty. I believe in - An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. If you kill someone, you should be killed. If you rape someone, you should be raped. If you cut off someone's finger, you should have your finger cut off. Etc. Wow - how crazy is that... "

A SPECIAL kind of crazy, you're all over the place...

Quote
NuNativs

Five videos done years ago, is hardly trying to make it big on YouTube, try again...

Okay, sorry. All I remember about you is that you travel around in an RV following the weather and are into permaculture and I checked out your videos the last time you mentioned one when you were speaking of how somebody could make a lot of money with YouTube through ads.

Are you Pro-Life or Pro-Gun or Pro-Death Penalty or Pro-War?

I do make the majority of my income on YouTube but it's not on that channel. I'm too busy to work on it at the moment...

Gun toting raw vegans for World Peace, kind of an oxymoron isn't it?

Sounds like becoming Planter/Gatherer is where it's at no?
"and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."

Thank you, Jennifer. And no, you didn't make me feel bad. I've had those feelings for a long time.

Quote
riverhousebill

In the US Bible Belt, you can be pro-death penalty, pro-gun, pro-war, pro-drone and still proclaim that you're Pro-life.

Now that's a twisted Logic, I agree all over the place!

Jennifer I don't hate the Christian Right, I prey everyday to go to hell so I may consul these lost souls.


Republicans: You’re Not Pro-Life, You’re Hypocrites
If you’re pro-life then you can’t support unrestricted gun righ

 

QUOTE Jennifer,
A while back you said you didn't Not Like Christians or Christianity, yet this sounds like a denigration of Christians or Christianity to me...

Sound like you have a persecution complex Jennifer, Never said that dear!

But I will say I don't want to go to heaven, Because there is nothing but Christians there. I borrowed that quote from a friend on her death bed when another friend said to Ellen don't worry you are going to heaven



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/09/2018 01:27AM by riverhousebill.

Quote Jennifer-A while back you said you didn't Not Like Christians or Christianity, yet this sounds like a denigration of Christians or Chritianity to me...

What I said Awhile back Jennifer exactly was the bible is not my book, Nothing else about disliking Christians Period!

When I said I was pro choice, You said I was pro abortion.
Its a bad habbit to assume things that are not true.


Thought I should clarify for you Jennifer,

I have no bad feelings at all about Christians.

The Extremist - Christian Right makes me feel just a little nausea
Its to bad such a group can use the word Christian, Because they give real Christians a bad name.

What would Jesus say about gun control? semi autos?

PRO GUN AND PRO LIFE


No hypocrisy at all; the two points compliment each other well. They can use the guns to force all pregnancies to term, and the resulting poverty and disaffected youths give them more opportunities to use their guns.

c salsa

Hi Jennifer, what's your understanding down below of what Jesus says about eye for an eye?

I have a lot to say on this topic but I won't have time for a couple of days.

The words of Jesus

Matthew 5
New International Version (NIV)

Introduction to the Sermon on the Mount
5 Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, 2 and he began to teach them.

The Beatitudes
He said:

3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4 Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7 Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9 Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Salt and Light
13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.

14 “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.

The Fulfillment of the Law
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Murder
21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.

25 “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Adultery
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[e] 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Divorce
31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’[f] 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.[g]

Eye for Eye
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

I posted this in another Thread - "Dr. Lorraine Day - Jewish Control of Medicine & Health Issues…" and it applies here.

Now here is my Recap regarding the 2 Main Areas of Research the Rulers of the World want to Fund.

[youtu.be]
22:59 MM
LD: That’s right, that’s right and so what I realized is they are Funding Research - there are 2 Main Areas of Research they want to Fund. Now this encompasses a very broad area. #1) they want to encompass Research on How they can Create, alright? That’s what all of this Embryonic Stem Cell Research is for and that’s why they introduced and approved of Partial Birth Abortion. For those who don’t understand what Partial Birth Abortion is - It is the most horrific thing you can imagine. They wait until a child is full grown in the womb and then, when it is ready to be born, they can turn it around inside the mother’s womb and have it come out feet first instead of head first. So they deliver the entire child alive, except the head is still in the mother’s womb, then they reach in with an instrument and Stick it into the Base of the Brain of the unborn alive child, that is his legs and arms are moving and it’s already the last instant to have its head come out, and they stick an instrument in and Suck out its Brain. That is what Partial Birth Abortion is and the reason they want it is #1) they want it for Organ Donations because when they have the full term child that’s ready to be born, they immediately take it into the next room and takeout all of its Organs to be used for Organ Donations, so they make a pile of Money on this. Now, you see, the Hospital is Not Allowed or the Unit that’s doing the Abortions is Not Allowed to Sell the Babies, but what happens is the way they get around that is that these Donor Companies come in and Dismember this child and they pay a Huge Fee for the use of the Room and that’s the way they get around Buying the Baby’s Dead Bodies, OK, that’s the way they do it. And then, they Sell these Organs on the market for Huge amounts of Money. You can get a list of Prices and yet, it’s against the Law to Sell at a certain Price, but they do it and call it a Processing Fee. 25:21 MM


[youtu.be]
41:26 MM
LD: And so back to the business I was saying that there are 2 things that they Fund, particularly. One is every aspect, like Embryonic Stem Cell Research and all that. People say, oh, isn’t it wonderful; they’re trying to help people with Parkinson’s. Well, the way people with Parkinson’s can be helped, especially Michael J. Fox, I have seen him sitting on the Television Show being interviewed where his hand is shaking so much that he could hardly hold up the Diet Pepsi or Diet Coke, whatever he’s a spokesperson for, in his hand. Well, that contains Aspartame, NutraSweet, which is one of the biggest causes of his Parkinson’s. 42:04 MM


[youtu.be]
44:32 MM
LD: But the one thing is to try to create a Human Being and clone Animals and clone Human Beings and create them. And the 2nd thing is for Torture Techniques. All of this Pain Control you’ll see Pain Clinics and they’re supposed to be relieving Pain, but the Ultimate Goal of the Research at the highest level of the Jews is to Induce Pain in Individuals without Killing them so they can keep them alive and keep introducing Pain, more Pain and more Pain in Torture Techniques, alright, this is what it’s for. And the doctors who are doing the Research do Not have a Clue that that’s how it’s going to be used. 45:18 MM


[youtu.be]
1:00:05 MM
LD: That’s correct, that’s correct and so, but, you see, the people who Run the Pharmaceutical Company are, again, mainly Jews - look at Eli Lilly - that’s Jewish and they’re all, virtually, all owned by the Jews now. [DS…] And so, this is their Way of Killing the Population, but doing it slowly and making a lot of Money as they go. Chemotherapy and Radiation Destroy the Immune System of a person with Cancer. You cannot develop Cancer until your Immune System is Suppressed. Then they want to give you something that will Suppress your Immune System even more. Well, it doesn’t make any sense to try to get a Sick person well by giving them Poison and that’s what they’re doing. So Hospitals have really become Temples of Sacrifice and certainly Not to God - they are just Sacrificing people right and left. It’s like the old Pagan Temples where they did Human Sacrifices - that’s what the Hospitals have become. 1:01:07 MM[/size

No wonder John Rose has a love affair with Dr Day fellow neo Nazi
Read about this racist Dr. Wow.

Dr David Duke of the KKK, Adolf Hitler, and our lovely brown shirt Dr Day.

John Rose you are such a racist

SHORT OF A CONSPIRCY? YOU ALWAYS BLAME THE JEWS.

RESPECTFUL INSOLENCE "A statement of fact cannot be insolent." The miscellaneous ramblings of a surgeon/scientist on medicine, quackery, science, and pseudoscience (and anything else that interests him).


Dr. Lorraine Day: Purveyor of woo, homophobia, and Holocaust denial

Those of you who’ve been around this blog for a long time probably remember Dr. Lorraine Day. In fact, I mentioned her in one of the very first substantive posts that I ever did regarding why breast cancer testimonials for alternative medicines are inherently misleading, presenting her as an example of a once respected academic orthopedic surgeon who had fallen deeply into woo. I had also been aware of her association with infamous Holocaust denier Ernst Zündel, but I had mainly thought that this was more because of Zündel’s love of woo (he claimed that he had cancer and had called Dr. Day in to provide him with all sorts of “alternative” treatments for this), rather than her sympathy for his right-wing, anti-Semitic, Holocaust denying beliefs.
Boy was I wrong, as fellow traveler in the fight against Holocaust denial Andrew Mathis has revealed to me in his detailed debunking of an interview that Dr. Day gave on a conspiracy-mongering website. I listened to this interview, and it shocked even me. To get a hint of what’s in the interview, check out the introduction:
Dr. Lorraine Day discusses the control over the medical industry by a small group of Jews and Goyim who consider us pawns in their game of world conquest. However, the Jews who follow the Talmud are actually using their Goyim “friends” also.
As Andrew puts it:
How do you use a keyboard while wearing a straightjacket?
But it’s even worse than that even that, as I found out when I foolishly tried to listen to the interview. My ears are still burning, and I’m sure I lost thousands of neurons from it. What I do in the name of skepticism and critical thinking!

After having heard part of the interview, I just had to check out Dr. Day’s other website, and, not surprisingly, I found signs of a deeply disturbed individual who is also deeply into woo, both medical and historical. I probably shouldn’t call the historical misinformation “woo,” though. In comparison to what Dr. Day lays down, “woo” seems like a happy word, used to describe harmless flights from reason. Dr. Day’s New World Order conspiracy-mongering and anti-Semitism are anything but harmless. Some excerpts:
Anti-Semitism: Here is the definition of Anti-Semitism from the lips of a Jew: “Anti-Semitism does NOT signify opposition to Semitism. THERE IS NO SUCH THING. It is an expression we use effectively as a SMEARWORD, used to brand anyone who brings criticism against us.” Harold W. Rosenthal (Jewish), administrative assistant for then-U.S. Senator Jacob K. Javits (Jewish) of New York, in an interview with American Christian magazine editor, Walter White.
“A man is considered an anti-Semite if he calls a Jew a Jew.” Hillaire Belloc, quoted in Culture Wars (Sept 2000).
“My unpardonable crime,” said Boris Lunachev, a former leader of the Communist Youth in Russia, “was to call a Jew a Jew.”
Eighty to ninety percent of all the “Jews” in the world have NO Semitic ancestry, they are Khazars – – of “Gentile” origin, barbarian Mongol Turks, from the area of Khazaria (now the Caucasus portion of Western Russia), people who, in about 740 A.D., accepted the religion and/or culture of Judaism. Very few, if any, “Jews” in the world today, have any Semitic blood (Semite, from the word Shemite. Shem was one of the sons of Noah). See The Thirteenth Tribe, by Jewish author, Arthur Koestler.
This term, anti-Semitism, is often incorrectly used by “Jews” to smear and discredit non-Jews who are looking for truth in history.
If one tells the truth about the Jews, such as “The Jews own Hollywood” (something they admit to each other), or “The Jews own the media” (something they brag about among themselves), one is considered an “anti-Semite.”
This is a clever subterfuge to eliminate any criticism of any Jew for any thing. If any Jews happen to be involved in any under-handed or even illegal activities, and someone exposes that activity, that person is branded an “anti-Semite.”
And:
Holocaust: A term that for years was defined as any devastating event. It was specifically used to describe World Wars I and II, in general.
More recently this term has been “hi-jacked” by the Jews who use it, incorrectly, to describe the purported treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Germans during World War II. Actually, it better describes the Post-World War II treatment of the German citizens by the Allies (the U.S., U.K and USSR), who were taking their orders from International Jewry, including then-U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower, a Swedish Jew, according to his West Point graduation yearbook.
Very few people realize that the Zionist Jewish version of the “Holocaust”, what the revisionists refer to as the Holocaust Hoax, is the CENTERPIECE of the Zionist Jews’ Plan to destroy all nations, control the entire world, slaughter most of the population of the earth, and reduce the rest to slaves. Without the belief in the Zionist Jewish version of the “Holocaust” by the average Jews, and everyone else as well, NONE of these things could occur! Their plans would be foiled!
For decades, America has been pummeled non-stop with “Holocaust” propaganda. On almost every corner, in every city in America, a “Holocaust” museum is rising, paid for by U.S. taxpayers. Propaganda about the “Holocaust” is filling the school textbooks and indoctrinating the minds of our children.
What is the reason behind this incessant indoctrination?
It is absolutely essential that all Jews, in particular, and everyone else, in general, believe the Zionist Jews’ version of the “Holocaust”, for the following reasons.
1. The rank and file Jews must be made to believe that non-Jews want them dead, and that millions of Jews were killed because Hitler, apparently for NO REASON except blatant bigotry, ordered their death.
2. The rank and file Jews must be terrified into believing that this “same thing” will happen again – – if any one says any thing bad (even if it’s true) about any Jew. That is why the Hate Crimes legislation is taking place in America. That is why the Zionist Jews are kidnapping and illegally imprisoning anyone who questions the Zionist Jews’ version of the “Holocaust”, including Ernst Zundel, Germar Rudolph, David Irving, Siegfried Verbeke, and others. They have committed no “crime” other than to question history!
3. The forensic evidence regarding the “Holocaust”, hard facts painstakingly collected by the Holocaust Revisionists, will stand up in any impartial court of law completely refuting the supposed “eye witness” accounts of survivors, and the Zionist Jews know that! These “eyewitness” survivors, when placed under oath in a Court of Law, have withered on the stand under cross-examination, admitting they lied, including one of the top Jewish supporters of the Holocaust, Raul Hilberg.
Instead of countering this forensic evidence that refutes the Zionist Jewish version of the “Holocaust” with hard evidence supporting their views, the Zionist Jews respond with insults, smears, more arrests, assassinations, non-stop propaganda campaigns, and rapidly multiplying “Holocaust” museums. Never once do they sit down with the Revisionists to discuss the issues!
All of these are denier canards, and not even very good ones. They’re all debunked at The Holocaust History Project, Holocaust Controversies, and Nizkor. If I were in the mood, I could tear all of them apart without even breaking a sweat, intellectually speaking.
Besides her claims that Jews control research funding by the NIH and that the head of the NIH has almost always been a Jew, she takes the case of a Jewish colleague of hers who always managed to obtain NIH funding. She asked him how he did it, and he told her that he went to the NIH every year and asked them what sort of broad areas of research the NIH considered a priority for the next year and then tailored his research to NIH priorities. Actually, as long as you’re interested in those areas of research, too, this is a very smart strategy. Not to Dr. Day, who views it as evidence that the “Jew-controlled” NIH dictates the kind of research that will be done and that the medical profession all must buckle under. (Oh, and they were also behind Salk’s research, which is as part of “population extermination.”) Never mind the fact that American scientists are trying very hard to bypass the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (that’s the NIH in particular, Dr. Day) by looking for alternate sources of funding. The ban may have slowed down stem cell research, but it has by no means prevented it.
Perhaps Dr. Day’s most bizarre claim dates back to the 1980’s. During the early part of the AIDS epidemic, according to Dr. Day, attending physicians didn’t draw blood or have much physical contact with AIDS patients. Instead, the interns and residents did. This may well have been very true, but ask yourself: How often do attending surgeons draw the blood of any patient? Not very. In fact, I can’t remember the last time I drew blood; it was probably at least three or four years ago. In any case, she says that she was “floating around in AIDS blood all the time” (not surprising, given that she made her name by claiming, on the basis of poor evidence, that aerosolized blood was an enormous risk and could transmit HIV easily, conveniently ignoring the fact that the only way any health care workers every contracted HIV was from needlesticks or accidents with sharp objects that resulted in blood-to-blood contact. While ranting about this story, Dr. Day accused Dr. Julie Gerberding, who was at San Francisco General Hospital then and is head of the CDC now, of lying to the public about AIDS and then claimed that Dr. Gerberding was “rewarded” for this lying by being appointed head of the CDC. She then stated that AIDS is a man-made virus made at Fort Detrick and claimed that homosexuality would be promoted as a lifestyle that would “destroy family cohesion,” “introduce degeneracy,” and “spread disease,” implying that it was part of the same Jewish plot. She then linked this to Hitler, stating that Hitler wanted the Jews out of Germany because they were promoting the “same kind of degeneracy,” while she spewed the usual denier lie that Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews but only kick them out of the Reich (something that may have been largely true in 1934 but most definitely was not true in 1944, when the Holocaust was under full steam).
Great. Not only is Dr. Day a woo-meister, but she’s a homophobe, a religious loon, an anti-Semite, a racist, and a Holocaust denier. After about 15 minutes, I couldn’t stand listening anymore, but I encourage you to listen to as much as you can stomach. It’s rare to see such an amazing degree of utter wingnuttery on display, and I admire Andrew for listening to it all and debunking the stuff he is knowledgeable about.
Dr. Lorraine Day is exhibit one in the case that a lack of critical thinking skills in one area is frequently associated with a lack of critical thinking skills in other areas. In her case, even while she was the Chief of Orthopedic Surgery at San Francisco General Hospital in the 1980’s, her lack of critical thinking became apparent in her hysterical warnings about aerosolized blood as a huge danger for AIDS. This could be somewhat understandable, given her profession, location, and the time period in which she developed these views, but even then it was known that aerosolized blood wasn’t much of a threat to health care personnel and is pretty easy to protect against with simple barrier methods. However, after developing breast cancer, something happened, and Dr. Day apparently lost her remaining critical thinking abilities, leading to her selling various altie treatments, claiming that there is a conspiracy to hide these “cures” (predating Kevin Trudeau by at least a decade), and, now, apparently, delving deeply into Holocaust denial.
Woo breeds woo, and, all too often, conspiracy-mongering of the worst sort as well. Much of the time, the additional woo that is bred is not as vile and harmful as Holocaust denial (more like UFOs or New Age woo), but it’s not infrequent that susceptibility to seemingly benign woo is an indicator of susceptibility to more malignant forms of pseudoscience, crankery, or pseudohistory. After reading Dr. Day’s sites, I almost wish that she had simply decided that creationism is correct; it would have been less disgusting than what she does believe. (My guess: Give her time; she’ll start spewing creationism as well.) From my perspective, though, it’s very sad indeed to see a once talented academic surgeon sink to these depths.
Share this:
Email


in
Share

Share on Tumblr

Save


Related

Dr. Lorraine Day's at it again
You may recall Dr. Lorraine Day, the former Chief of Orthopedic Surgery at San Francisco General Hospital in the 1980's who, after developing breast cancer, became a consummate altie, selling various dubious "natural, alternative therapies for all diseases, including cancer and AIDS." Somewhere along the line, sadly, she also became…
March 15, 2007
In "Complementary and alternative medicine"

How not to discuss the role of alternative medicine during the Third Reich
I really hate to write this post, but I feel compelled. The reason I hate to write it is because someone I admire screwed up. The reason I feel compelled is because of my longstanding interest in World War II and Holocaust history, not to mention my longtime interest in…
March 1, 2013
In "Anti-Semitism"

Mistaking failure to support for "censorship": The Danish government funding a Holocaust denier
Until the other day, it had been a long time since I had indulged my interest in World War II history. Not surprisingly, a certain anti-Semitic troll appeared out of the woodwork, thus amazing me with persistence, given that it's been at least two months since I've even mentioned the…
July 26, 2007
In "History"
CategoriesComplementary and alternative medicine, Medicine, Politics, Religion



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2018 12:49AM by riverhousebill.

Argh....

RHB
Jennifer I don't hate the Christian Right, I prey everyday to go to hell so I may consul these lost souls.

Tai
I hope you take this back, RHB. It's not something to kid about. I have gone there and it is beyond your imagination. Since I went there, I have watched many hell testimonies (buddhist, christian, etc) and the one thing people who have gone there have in common is that they say they wouldn't wish their worst enemy to go there.

If the buddhists have it right, some people can reincarnate after being in hell for awhile. But even buddha shakyamuni talked about the avici hell, from which there is no return. So there are many points that the christians and buddhists agree about hell.

If you look at the tibetan wheel of life
[en.wikipedia.org]
you will see that some people even have to reincarnate from heaven, because there is heaven within reincarnation and heaven beyond reincarnation.

RHB:
But I will say I don't want to go to heaven, Because there is nothing but Christians there

Tai
Maybe you don't even know what a Christian is, because if you read the jesus quotes above, many "Christians" are not following his teachings. If you had a chance to go to Jesus' heaven, you would be so fortunate. But it takes work. It doesn't happen randomly.

the different buddhas talked about heavenly paradises and that the cosmos has many heavenly paradises.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2018 04:48AM by Tai.

Tai,

Tai many Buddhist monks pray to go hell, I was looking for a story on a 14th or 15th century, Monk I had read about way back have not found it yet but came across this, Saying almost the same thing.

I read somewhere else don't know where Supposed to be words from Jesus No One Shall Pass thru The Gates Of Hell.

I don't buy into this devil stuff and go with the dude below on his thoughts.
The devil is a cop out, It was one of the 7 billion not some fall guy!
I do believe in Heaven Ive been there, A Magical place called EARTH (BE HERE NOW) Tai I also know hell and have stood in the Devils shoes U.S.Army Hawk Artilery Its all right here Heaven and Hell, Go to hell and try to save someone!
Its a nice way to get told to go to hell.
You Want to control Use the fear of the unknown,
But remember If you want to go to heaven, You Got to ask the man who owns the property.

monosharp
Registered User
16-Dec-2009 08:34
#1
Hey lads.

So I came across this story today and I honestly don't know what to think of it. I find it interesting because it really gives you an idea of how people raised outside the influence of Christianity view it, which the vast majority of Western people cannot claim.

Anyone in any western country will have some sort of experience with Christianity.

Anyways ...

There was a famous Buddhist monk in Korea who died recently. Now as I've said here a billion times before, many (not all) of the evangelist Christians here are extremely aggressive and extremely anti-Buddhist. So Buddhist temples/monks get verbally attacked commonly and physically attacked now and again.

So anyways this monk made a speech a while back where he was relating how he was told he was going to hell many times because he was Buddhist.

Anyways, he was an old monk and he didn't actually know anything about Christianity so he didn't know what hell was.

So he started doing research and this is how he put his discovery.

He was shocked, he had no idea what these people were really saying to him before. He didn't know what hell was.

So he decided to go and talk to a pastor in a church and the conversation went as follows;

(Translated from Korean)

I don't understand your God, because he's so jealous. Your God said if people don't believe him then he will send people to the Hell. I willing to go down to the Hell and try to help people who dumped to the hell since they did not believe GOD.

So basically he said he wanted to go to hell to help the people there.

I find it very interesting to see this perspective. What do people think ?

RHB
Tai many Buddhist monks pray to go hell,

Tai
While they are alive, it's ok. Not when dead. I once heard a buddhist monk vow that if the surungama sutra was not true, may he be thrown into hell. That was insane to say. it's fine to say that he believes in it 100% but not to throw the hell thing in. The surungama sutra has vast descriptions of hell and reincarnation, so it was the biggest threat he could make to prove to the world how convinced he was. For any buddhist monk to say he doesn't know about hell is suspect, in my opinion. The youtube vegan, A bas le ciel (eisel mazard), the one who is suing Durianrider in Thailand, was a buddhist scholar and he probably will act ignorant about hell, because he is an atheist and he never could believe any of the supernatural stuff in buddhism. I have met some fake buddhists who don't read the sutras, so any belief or non belief in hell is possible.

RHB
I don't understand your God, because he's so jealous

Tai
My understanding is that a person must focus on one system and can't mix systems to succeed on their path. The jealous wording is to have people only focus on that God and no other, because then they can't succeed having feet in two boats. The same in buddhism. Easterners are introverted and westerners are extroverted. The language varies, but the meaning is close.

have to write later



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2018 05:02AM by Tai.

Tai, I have a book a hitchhiker left in my car years back- HANDBOOK FOR MANKIND
Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. I read and reread this book often, Trying to see What Is What. The Buddhism practiced by many today is Neo Buddhism. The Buddhadasa Bhikkhu talks about this in the book, I find it most interesting, This is from chapter 1 Looking at Buddhism.

Now any religious text is bound to contain material which later people have found occasion to add to, and our Tipitaka is no exception. People in later ages have added sections based on then current ideas, either in order to boost people's confidence or out of excessive religious zeal. Regrettably even the rites and rituals which have developed and become mixed in with the religion are now accepted and recognized as Buddhism proper. Ceremonies, such as setting up trays of sweets and fruit as offerings to the "soul" of the Buddha in the same way as alms food is offered to a monk just do not fit in with Buddhist principles. Yet some groups consider this to be genuine Buddhist practice, teaching it as such and keeping to it very strictly.
Rites and ceremonies of this kind have become so numerous that they now completely obscure the real Buddhism and its original purpose. Take for example the procedure of becoming ordained a monk. There has come into existence the ceremony of making gifts to the newly ordained bhikkhu Guests are invited to bring food and to watch proceedings, and as a result, there is much drunkenness and noise. Ceremonies are performed both at the temple and in the home. The new bhikkhu later leaves the Order again only a few days after having been ordained, and may become an even stronger temple-hater than he was before. It must be borne in mind that there was none of this at the time of the Buddha. It is a later development. Ordination at the time of the Buddha meant simply, that some individual, who had obtained his parent's consent, renounced home and family. He was a person who was able to close accounts at home and go off to join the Buddha and the Order of bhikkhus. On some convenient occasion he would go and be ordained, and perhaps not see his parents or family again for the rest of his life. Though some bhikkhus might go back to visit their parents again on suitable occasions, this was rare. There does exist a rule permitting a bhikkhu to go home when there is a good reason for doing so, but at the time of the Buddha this was not the done thing. Bhikkhus did not receive ordination with their parents in attendance nor did they celebrate the event as a great occasion, only to leave the Sangha again after just a few days, no better off than at first, as commonly happens in the present day.
All this presenting of gifts to newly ordained bhikkhus, this performing of ceremonies, including all sorts of celebration - this we are foolish enough to call Buddhism! Furthermore we choose to make much of it, thinking nothing of spending all our own money, or other people's on account of it. This "Neo-Buddhism" is so widespread as to be almost universal. The Dhamma, the genuine teaching that once was paramount has become so overlaid by ceremonial that the whole objective of Buddhism has been obscured, falsified and changed. Ordination, for instance, has become a face-saving gambit for young men whom people have been pointing at for never having been ordained, or a prerequisite to finding a wife (as having been a monk is considered a sign of maturity), or is done with some other kind of ulterior motive. In some places an ordination is regarded as an opportunity for collecting money for which job there are always people on hand to help. It is one way of getting rich. Even this they call Buddhism! And anyone who goes and criticizes this is considered to be ignorant of Buddhism or opposed to it.

Nam Mo A Di Da Phat



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2018 06:55AM by riverhousebill.

I am personally responsible for 75,000 abortions.

It is slimy of him to say this. Just do the math and you will see that no one could be "personally" responsible. It should be "indirectly" responsible. Just saying.

I read Nathanson's book a long time ago. It was called The Hand of God but maybe there's a 2nd edition with a new title. He is a strange fellow with contradictory characteristics in his makeup. A barking mad liberal but anti-abortion. But complex people are often more interesting and trustworthy than people you can stick nicely into a little box. Pro-raw-food, pro-animal, pro-gun - doesn't offend me, even though I dislike guns, having used them as a child/teen and seeing what they could do. But we must continue to have the legal right to own them. Doesn't mean we "like" them, though I do admit there's a fair number of gun "nuts" out there.

There's some words of wisdom:
"I do believe in Heaven Ive been there, A Magical place called EARTH (BE HERE NOW) "

Democrats Refuse to Grant Legal Status to Dreamers -

[babylonbee.com]

WASHINGTON, DC—Voting down a measure that would have banned most abortions after 20 weeks gestation, Senate Democrats on Monday refused to grant legal status to millions of unborn children dreaming of one day being born.

House Republicans passed a bill last week that would guarantee citizens’ rights for U.S. children over 20 weeks gestation, the age at which all unborn babies have been scientifically proven to hear voices and feel pain. Senate Democrats killed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act on Monday, keeping the United States one of only seven nations on earth that allows unrestricted abortion at any time during pregnancy.

“Frankly, I’m tired of the Republicans’ sob stories about these so-called ‘dreamers’ who are deliberately hiding inside a womb, hoping for government protection without going through the proper channels,” a DNC spokesperson told reporters. “Maybe it’s not their fault their parents brought them into this world, but that does not give them the same Constitutional right to life that hardworking, natural-born Americans have earned.”

Sources confirm Democrats may consider an abortion ban after 24 weeks, since the unborn child would be three-fifths of the way through a typical 40-week pregnancy by that point. “I really admire the idea of a 3/5 compromise,” said one Democrat senator. “America has used the 3/5 compromise before, when we were forced to admit that people who are property are still partially human. It worked really well.”

U.S. Senate votes against protecting pain-capable preborn children

[www.liveaction.org]

(Watch the Video)

On January 29, the U.S. Senate voted 51-46 on the question of whether to proceed with the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. The bill needed 60 votes cast to continue, but failed to find that number. Sponsors of the bill’s House version had called for doing away with the 60-vote requirement.

Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) estimated that the federal bill, if passed, would save 12,000-18,000 babies annually. The bill would have protected preborn children at 20 weeks and after from painful late-term abortion procedures, such as the D&E procedure.

Children at 20-weeks are conclusively known to feel pain, and a number of scientists and medical professional say these babies feel it even more intensely than born persons. Research has recently shown that preborn children can feel pain as early as the first trimester, well before this halfway mark of pregnancy. But still, 189 congressmen and 46 senators, from both parties, voted against protecting children from the excruciating death of a painful late-term abortion.

Pro-abortion Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Mazie Hirono (D-HI) referred to late-term abortions as “peace” and “mercy,” and a saving from suffering for the preborn child. As one can see from the explanation of the procedure described above, this kind of intentional death — as well as every other type of abortion — is violent and brutal.

Not only can preborn children likely feel pain well before 20 weeks, but they are also unique human beings whether or not they can feel pain, from the moment of conception. While the Pain-Capable Act does not address the humanity of preborn children in such a way, multiple senators stated it was a step in the right direction.

Another bill, introduced in the House earlier in 2018 would, if passed, protect children from abortion once a heartbeat has been detected. It is known as the Heartbeat Bill.

Because of Roe v. Wade and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the United States has allowed for elective abortions throughout all nine months of pregnancy for 45 years now. It is one of only seven nations which allow for elective abortions past 20-weeks and at pain-capable stages. Even the Washington Post acknowledged this “seemed extreme,” but confirmed it is a fact.

During the bloc of time in which pro-abortion Democrat senators spoke on the Senate floor, many referenced a common but misleading talking point, pretending that women who undergo late-term abortions do so almost solely for medical abnormalities. Research shows, however, that most women have late-term abortions for socioeconomic reasons, which is the same reason many women cite for their earlier abortions.

Sen. Hirono even referred to late-term abortion as “life-saving” care, but research shows that these abortions carry much higher physical and psychological risks for women than early abortions (which also carry their own set of risks).

Republican senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski broke rank with other Republicans and voted with Democrats to continue to keep abortion legal after an unborn child can feel pain.

Now, because of 46 Senators, the United States continues to hold a terrible distinction on human rights: it remains a nation that allows elective abortion until birth.





Micah Pickering, now a healthy 3-year-old, was born at 22 weeks gestation in 2012. Babies his age would have been protected under Pain-Capable Act.