Friday, February 29, 2008

Abortionist Obama: "The First Thing I’d do as President is, is Sign the Freedom of [Abortion] Choice Act"

Coming soon Planned Parenthood’s Barack Obama as the Abortionist President.

Fred

Barack Obama before Planned Parenthood Action Fund, July 17, 2007

Dessa Cosma: [W]hat would you do at the federal level not only to ensure access to abortion but to make sure that the judicial nominees that you will inevitably be able to pick are true to the core tenets of Roe v. Wade?

Barack Obama: Well, the first thing I’d do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.

[http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction]

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Obama Strongly Endorses Partial-Birth Abortion

[Barack Hussein Obama] said, "for the first time in Gonzales versus Carhart, the Supreme Court held—upheld a federal ban on abortions with criminal penalties for doctors. For the first time, the Court’s Obama an abortion restriction without an exception for women’s health. The decision presumed that the health of women is best protected by the Court—not by doctors and not by the woman herself. That presumption is wrong."

Notice, he doesn't use the words, "Partial-birth Abortion, " because just the name is disgusting and probably because 80% of the American people want it banned and here is why:

In this late term gruesome procedure, the entire baby is delivered except for the head, which they make sure stays in the birth canal (otherwise it would be murder), then the back of the baby's head is stabbed with scissors, the hole is enlarged, a rube is inserted and the baby's brains are sucked out with a powerful machine. All the while the baby suffers excruciating pain. It's enough to make you cry. How in the world, can a society condone such barbarism? Barack Obama can.

He said, "It is time for a different attitude in the White House. It is time for a different attitude in the Supreme Court. It is time to turn the page and write a new chapter in American history."

The change Obama wants is to keep torturing and killing little children. Notice, he doesn't mention that it could be done to save the "life" of the mother, he states, "health," which is so broad that it could mean, "doctor, since Ive been pregnant, I don't feel good, or it makes me nervous, or I've been nauseated." It's all subjective.

Besides, a partial-birth abortion is not an emergency procedure as the cervix has to be dilated over a 2-3 day period. It's just a means for a mother to have her child killed late in her pregnancy, if she changes her mind and deems the child would be an inconvenience at that time.

He mentioned the swing vote of Justice Kennedy: "Without any hard evidence, Justice Kennedy proclaimed, It is self-evident that a woman would regret her choice.”

Obama ignores the women who have taken to alcohol and drugs after having their child killed. Too bad he hasn't read the reports of women who have killed themselves after having their child killed. One just last week.

He cited medical uncertainty about the need to protect the health of pregnant women. He said, "even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists found no such uncertainty. Justice Kennedy knows many things, my understanding is he does not know how to be a doctor."

Ah, but the doctor that Obama speaks of is the doctor who is going to kill the baby, for a fee, of course. When he mentions Obstetricians and Gynecologists finding no uncertainty, he lies. The American College of Christian Obstetricians and Gynecologists found much uncertainty. They say abortion increases the risk of drug and alcoholic abuse as well as suicides. The Catholic OB AND GYN doctors found the same. But, he ONLY mentions doctors who have no respect for human life. The ACOG.

Barack Hussein Obama is so evil that he voted against giving aid to a baby who survived being killed. Just let him/her die, he insists.

Obama keeps mentioning Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the most liberal justice on the Supreme Court.

He said, "we’re a country founded on the principle of equality and freedom." This is true, but we're not a country that kills innocent little babies because they are an inconvenience.

He loves to say a women's reproductive freedom. As if pro-lifers are against that. Women can reproduce at will, but once the reproduction is over, then do not kill the child.

He is so backward in his thinking that he still thinks that condoms are the answer to stem STDs and pregnancies and abstinence teaching is a waste of time. Apparently he doesn't know that the more condoms that are handed out, the more STDs and the more pregnancies. Planned Parenthood knows this which is why they pass them out. The more they pass out the more abortions they can do and the more money they make. They're not stupid.

Obama, even mentioned the name of the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, a woman, who if she had her way would have people like Obama killed.

On the rights of married couples to bear children, Sanger wrote, "Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child." On the rights of racial minorities, the handicapped and the mentally ill, she said, "More children from the fit, less from the unfit - that is the chief aim of birth control."

On the extermination of blacks, she cautioned, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," Margaret Sanger referred to blacks, immigrants and indigents as "human weeds," and "reckless breeders." She wrote that they were, "spawning... human beings who never should have been born." By virtue of their numerical superiority, she saw poor people and the newly immigrated Slavs, Latins, and Hebrews as a real threat to Anglo-Saxon political and economic power.

Sanger responded to this "threat" by developing her own "Plan for Peace." In it she outlined her strategy for the eradication of those she deemed "feeble minded," including Catholic and Jewish immigrants. In addition to immigration restrictions and the administering of a special IQ test, her evil scheme advocated compulsory sterilization AND segregation to a lifetime of farm work under "competent instructors"...Practically speaking, she envisioned Concentration Camps!

There was little difference between Margaret Sanger and the German Nazi...In fact Hitler and Sanger were both proponents of Eugenics, a social philosophy which advocates the creation of a race of human thoroughbreds.
At the same time, Hitler spread birth control and abortion propaganda in the eastern territories outside Germany. Himmler, carrying out Hitler's orders, directed an intense propaganda campaign to persuade these so-called "inferior" people that having children was harmful.

Margaret Sanger believed that most people were not intelligent enough to share in the right to govern and wanted a totalitarian rule similar to Adolf Hitler's. She constantly attacked the Catholic Church and referred to it as "immoral" for opposing her evil schemes for "social progress." In 1942, this evil woman, the infamous Margaret Sanger, founded Planned Parenthood!

This is the organization that Obama has a love affair with, an organization founded on the principle that people like Obama should be eliminated and NEVER be given a chance to run for the presidency of the United State.

The fact that Obama heaped praises on Planned Parenthood means he does not do his homework or he is just plain stupid. Either way, besides his penchant for baby killing, stupidity is not a good trait if one wants to be president of the United States, especially during war time.

There is so much more that I can write about Obama's speech, but time does not permit.

Below, is the full text of Barack Hussein Obama's speech before the baby killing organization known as Planned Parenthood:


Frank Joseph MD

DrFrank@abortiontruths.net
http://www.abortiontruths.net

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction

Barack Obama before Planned Parenthood Action Fund, July 17, 2007

Transcribed by Laura Echevarria, www.lauraechevarria.com, (view the video of this speech at www.imoneinamillion.com)

Barack Obama: Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, well, Ariana, thanks for stealing the show. [Laughter] That’s how, that’s how we teach young people at Trinity United Church of Christ. They’re not shy. It’s so wonderful to see and thank you for the wonderful introduction and the great work that you are doing. You’re representing the church and the city of Chicago very, very well. All right—give her a round of applause [Applause].
I heard, Ariana, I heard your folks are here, where are they—Oh, I see, the one with the camera [Laughter] video taping everything. All right, I should have figured that out. Well, you should be proud, she’s extraordinary.


Thanks to all of you at Planned Parenthood for all the work that you are doing for women all across the country and for families all across the country—and for men, who have enough sense to realize you are helping them, all across the country. I want to thank Cecile Richards for her extraordinary leadership. I’m happy to see so many good friends here today, including Steve Trombley and Pam Sutherland from my home state of Illinois. We had a number of battles down in Springfield for many many years and it is wonderful to see that they are here today.

You know it’s been a little over five months since I announced my candidacy for President of the United States of America and everywhere we’ve been, we’ve been inspired by these enormous crowds. We had twenty thousand people in Atlanta, twenty thousand people in Austin, Texas, fifteen thousand people in Oakland, California and I would love to take all the credit for these crowds myself, to say to myself that it’s just because I’m just so fabulous, but [Laughter] my wife says otherwise. Michele, I think, confirms that these crowds are not about me. It’s about the hunger all across America for something different. It’s about the sense that we can do better—that we’ve come to a crossroads, that we’re not pointed in the right direction.

And as I look out over these crowds—and they are a wonderful cross-section of the country, male, female, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, disabled, gay, straight, old, young—what I’m heartened to see is particularly the young people who are getting their first chance to be part of a larger movement of Americans. I see young women who are Ariana’s age and younger, and I think about my own two daughters, Sasha and Malia, and sometimes it makes me stop and makes me wonder: what kind of America will our daughters grow up in?

What kind of America will our daughters grow up in?

Will our daughters grow up with the same opportunities as our sons? Will our daughters have the same rights, the same dreams, the same freedoms to pursue their own version of happiness? I wonder because there’s a lot at stake in this country today. And there’s a lot at stake in this election, especially for our daughters. To appreciate that all you have to do is review the recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States. For the first time in Gonzales versus Carhart, the Supreme Court held—upheld a federal ban on abortions with criminal penalties for doctors. For the first time, the Court’s endorsed an abortion restriction without an exception for women’s health. The decision presumed that the health of women is best protected by the Court—not by doctors and not by the woman herself. That presumption is wrong.

Some people argue that the federal ban on abortion was just an isolated effort aimed at one medical procedure—that it’s not part of a concerted effort to roll back the hard-won rights of American women. That presumption is also wrong.

Within hours of the decision, an Alabama lawmaker introduced a measure to ban all abortions. With one more vacancy on the Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a woman’s fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe versus Wade and that is what is at stake in this election. The only thing more disturbing than the decision was the rationale of the majority. Without any hard evidence, Justice Kennedy proclaimed, “It is self-evident that a woman would regret her choice.” He cited medical uncertainty about the need to protect the health of pregnant women. Even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists found no such uncertainty. Justice Kennedy knows many things, my understanding is he does not know how to be a doctor.


[Laughter and Applause]


He dismissed as mere preferences the reasoned judgments of the nation’s doctors. We’ve seen time after time these last few years when the president says otherwise, when the science is inconvenient, when the facts don’t match up with the ideology, they are cast aside. Well, it’s time for us to change that. It is time for a different attitude in the White House. It is time for a different attitude in the Supreme Court. It is time to turn the page and write a new chapter in American history.


[Applause]

We know that five men don’t know better than women and their doctors what’s best for a woman’s health. We know that it’s about whether or not women have equal rights under the law. We know that a woman’s right to make a decision about how many children she wants to have and when—without government interference—is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country. We also know that there was another voice that came from the bench—a voice clear in reasoning and passionate in dissent. The voice rejected what she called, quote “Ancient notions of women’s place in the family and under the Constitution. Ideas that have long been discredited.” Unquote. One commentator called the decision in Gonzales, “An attack on Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s entire life’s work.” And it was. But we heard Justice Ginsburg and we know what she was saying. She was saying, “We’ve been there before and we are not going back. [Applause] We refuse to go back. [Applause]”



We know, we know it’s not just one decision. It’s the blow dealt to equal pay in the Ledbetter [v. Goodyear] case, it’s the blow dealt to integration in the school desegregation case, it’s an approach to the law that favors the powerful over the powerless—that holds up a flawed ideology over the rights of the individual. We don’t see America in these decisions—that’s not who we are as a people. We’re a country founded on the principle of equality and freedom. We’re the country that’s fought generation after generation to extend that equality to the many not restrict it to the few. We’ve been there before and we’re not going back.

I have worked on these issues for decades now. I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law. Not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality. Steve and Pam will tell you that we fought together in the Illinois State Senate against restrictive choice legislation—laws just like the federal abortion laws, the federal abortion bans that are cropping up. I’ve stood up for the freedom of choice in the United States Senate and I stand by my votes against the confirmation of Judge Roberts and Samuel Alito [Applause]

So, you know where I stand. But this more is than just about standing our ground. It must be about more than protecting the gains of the past. We’re at a crossroads right now in America—and we have to move this country forward. This election is not just about playing defense, it’s also about playing offense. It’s not just about defending what is, it’s about creating what might be in this country. And that’s what we’ve got to work together on.


There will always be people, many of goodwill, who do not share my view on the issue of choice. On this fundamental issue, I will not yield and Planned Parenthood will not yield. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t find common ground. Because we know that what’s at stake is more than whether or not a woman can choose an abortion.

Choice is about how we lead our lives. It’s about our families and about our communities. It’s about our daughters and whether they’re going to have the same opportunities as our sons. There are those who want us to believe otherwise. They want us to believe that there’s nothing that unites us as Americans—there’s only what divides us. They’ll seek out the narrowest and most divisive ground. That is the strategy—to always argue small instead of looking at the big picture. They will stand in the way of any attempt to find common ground.

At a time when a real war is being fought abroad they would have us fight cultural wars here at home. But I am absolutely convinced that culture wars are so nineties; their days are growing dark, it is time to turn the page. We want a new day here in America. We’re tired about arguing about the same ole’ stuff. [Applause] And I am convinced we can win that argument. If the argument is narrow, then oftentimes we lose. But if you ask everybody—you ask the most conservative person—do they want their daughters to have the same chances as men?, most will answer in the affirmative. The vast majority will answer in the affirmative.

We can win that argument. We can turn this page.

It is time to turn the page on policies that fail to deal with tragedy of ten thousand American teenagers getting an STD everyday. Of fifty-five contracting HIV and another twenty-four hundred becoming pregnant. It’s time to turn the page on a stance that refuses compassionate support of victims of rape and sexual assault. Not even to the brave servicewomen fighting for our country who aren’t getting the support they need when they come home as veterans of the United States of America. [Applause] If they’re fighting for us, they should be getting the services that they deserve. It’s time to turn the page on a policies that provides almost 1.5 billion dollar to teach abstinence in our schools but refuses to teach basic science and basic contraception.


Pam, we’ve been through these fights in Illinois, we’re going to be in these fights here in Washington. There’s nothing wrong with science. It’s actually made our lives better. [Applause] Let’s teach science to our kids. We need, we need to make choices about what happens before pregnancy. It’s a false argument to say that the only way to prevent disease and unintended pregnancy is abstinence education. Just as it is a false argument to say that the only way is through contraception. As Martin Luther King used to say, “It’s not either/or it’s both/and.”


There’s a moral component to prevention. And we shouldn’t be shy about acknowledging it. As parents, as family members, we need to encourage young people to show reverence toward sexuality and intimacy. We need to teach that not just to the young girls, we need to teach it to those young boys. [Applause] But [Applause] But even as we are teaching those lessons, we should never be willing to consign a teenage girl to a lifetime of struggle because of a lack of access to birth control or a lifetime of illness because she doesn’t understand how to protect herself. That’s just commonsense. There’s common ground on behalf of commonsense—there we have an opportunity to move forward and agree.

People of all faiths—from members of Ariana’s and my church, Trinity United Church of Christ to United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, understand that we cannot ignore that abstinence and fidelity may too often be the ideal but often not the reality.

We need more programs in our communities like the National Black Church Initiative which empowers our young people by teaching them about reproductive health, sex education and teen pregnancy within the context of the African-American faith tradition.

We need more leadership at the federal level. That’s why I’m an original co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act. [Applause] To guarantee equity in contraceptive coverage, provide comprehensive sex education in our schools and offer rape victims factually accurate information about emergency contraception.

We need to tackle the tragedy of unintended teen pregnancy. When seven hundred and fifty thousand teens become pregnant every year, and half of Latina and black teens will become mothers before reaching their twenties, it’s not just a public health problem. If we reduce teen pregnancy, we can also reduce poverty.

Now the good news is that there has been a decline in the teen birth rate,in part due to the outstanding work of Planned Parenthood. But we all know that we can do more. That’s why I’ve been working on this in Congress. Today, I introduced the Communities of Color Teen Pregnancy Prevention Act to increase funding for programs to combat this problem in communities all across this country working with grassroots organizations [Applause] to increase education. We need, we need to ensure that pharmaceutical companies can offer discounted drugs to safety net providers like Planned Parenthood [Applause] and university clinics so that access, so that access to affordable contraception is not just a privilege for the few but an option for all women. It’s amazing how many women tell me the stories of how important it was for Planned Parenthood to provide them services when they were in college and they did not have the health insurance or the access to a regular doctor that they needed. To be able to have somebody they could trust to deal with so many of their basic and essential health issues.

And we can’t stop there because we know that there is more at stake. The struggle for equality is also a struggle for opportunity. You’ve worked in the communities. You’ve seen women and families trying to keep pace. You’ve seen our daughters hit the glass ceilings and come to closed doors.

The social contract in this country was made for a time when most women stayed at home with the kids. But even though this time is long passed, we still have social policies designed around the old model. The, as Justice Ginsberg said, “Ancient notions of women’s place in the family,” and so women still receive less in pay, less in health benefits, less in pensions, less in social security. When women go on maternity leave, America is the only country in the industrialized world to let them go unpaid.

If you’re a single mom, like my mom was, and you can’t afford health insurance for yourself and you’re trying to figure out whether your kids are going to be covered or not, the message from this current administration is: tough luck, that’s the breaks.

The truth is, too often our daughters don’t have the same opportunities as our sons. But that’s not who we are. That’s not the America we want for our children and I am absolutely convinced that we can make this change. We can update the social contract so that caring for a newborn baby isn’t a three month break, it’s a paid leave—so that all of our children have basic health care. [Applause]

We should be ashamed that the President of the United States is fighting providing health insurance coverage to all children because he’s worried that’s socialized medicine. He would rather fight an ideological battle than make certain that children who have preventable illnesses, like asthma, are getting regular checkups instead of going to the emergency room, which is costing all of us more money.

We can update the social contract so that our kids can go to school earlier and stay longer; so that a mom can stay home with a sick child without getting a pink slip; we can go to work, she can go to work—knowing that there is affordable quality child care for her children; so that more families can stay together and prosper and our daughters have no limits to the shape of their dreams.

We can make these changes but first we gotta get rid of the can’t-do-won’t-do-won’t-even-try style of government that we’ve had in Washington over the last several years. An administration that says, “We don’t have the money to do it.” But we’ve got ten billion dollars a month to fight a war in Iraq that should have never been authorized [applause] and should have never been waged. We can find the money to make sure our daughters have the same rights as our son.

We can make this change.
We can make this change but first we have to get rid of the politics that’s obsessed with who’s up and who’s down. A politics that is power for power’s sake. A politics of cynicism and fear—fear, above all, of the future.

This kind of change is about more than any one judicial appointment or law—as important as they may be—it also about leadership.

It’s about not settling for what America is but working for what America might be.


You know, I’m here as a candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America because I had a grandmother who never got more than a high school education. But she worked on a bomber assembly line—she was Rosie the Riveter—and then went to work after she and my grandfather had married, and her daughter had been born, she went to work as a secretary. And worked her way up to become vice-president of a bank, the same bank where she started as a secretary, and ended up being the financial rock for our entire family.

I’m here because of a mother, who for most of her life was a single mom, and yet was able to put herself through school and get a Ph.D. and end up specializing in women’s development and starting micro-enterprises for women in Africa and Asia and all around the world. And still somehow added, had the time and capacity to fill up her children with love and affection.

I’m here because of my wife, who as many of you know, is smarter, and tougher and better-looking than I am [laughter]. And many people ask why she shouldn’t be the Obama running for President and I explain that she’s too smart to want to run for president. She’d rather tell the president what to do. [laughter]


But most of all I’m here as a candidate because there are these two little girls that I try to tuck in every night—it’s harder during the campaign season—whose futures depend upon us creating a more equal society.

I want my daughters to grow up in an America where they have the exact same opportunities as America’s sons. I want Sasha and Melia to dream without limit. To achieve without constraint. To be absolutely free to seek their own happiness.

At this crossroad, we need to talk about what America might be—an America of equality and opportunity for our daughters. We need to talk about what Justice Ginsberg called, “A woman’s ability to realize her potential.” Because when we argue big, we win.

I am convinced of that.

I am convinced that Republicans and Democrats and Independents, Blue-state voters and Red-state voters, they want a fair shake for their daughters.
In 1966, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America gave its first Margaret Sanger Award to Martin Luther King, Jr. And in his acceptance speech, which was delivered by his strong and wonderful wife Coretta, Dr. King wrote, “Our sure beginning in the struggle for equality by non-violent, direct action may not have been so resolute without the tradition established by Margaret Sanger and people like her.”

That struggle for equality is not over and now we are at one of those rare moments where we can actually transform our politics in a fundamental way. But it’s going to take people as resolute as Mrs. Sanger and Dr. King—people like your own Cecile Richards—it’s going to take young people like Ariana. It’s going to take millions of voices coming together to insist that it’s not enough just to stand still. That it’s not enough to safeguard the gains of the past—that it is time to be resolute and time to march forward.

I am absolutely convinced that we stand on the brink of that kind of achievement. And if we succeed in raising the awareness all across America that what is good for our daughters is also good for our sons. That when we expand opportunity for some, we expand opportunity for the many.

When we have achieved as one voice a strong call for that kind of more fair and more just America, then I am absolutely convinced that we’re not just going to win an election but more importantly we’re going to transform this nation.

Thank you [applause] very much, appreciate you guys, thank you.


Thank you.


[applause continues]


Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you guys. Thank you, Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Thank you guys, you’re very gracious, thank you.




Thank you.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

"Creating and Reinforcing Perceptions of Victimization"

Liberialism IS a mental disorder:

Saturday, February 16, 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WorldNetDaily Exclusive
Top shrink concludes liberals are nuts!
Makes case ideology is mental disorder


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: February 16, 2008
12:23 am Eastern


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WorldNetDaily



WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."

While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to "the vast right-wing conspiracy."

For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

"A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do," he says. "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do."

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

Saturday, February 23, 2008

The Intolerance of Secularism

http://ncregister.com/site/article/7844

The Intolerance of Secularism

Extremists Force Cancellation of Papal Speech at Italy’s Largest University

BY EDWARD PENTIN

REGISTER CORRESPONDENT

January 27- February 2, 2008 Issue | Posted 1/22/08 at 10:08 AM

YOU MUST LOGIN TO VIEW THIS ARTICLE

To continue reading this article, you must be a subscriber to the print edition of the National Catholic Register. This applies to all articles marked as “Sub Only”.

If you’re a print subscriber, and have already registered for a username and password, please login at the left side of this page, below the front page image of the "Current Issue."

If you’re a print subscriber, but have not registered for a username and password, you can do so by going to the Registration Page.

To register for access to NCRegister.com, you will need your account number, which you will find above your name and address in the label area of an actual print copy of the National Catholic Register.

If you’re not a print subscriber, you can order a subscription now and receive immediate access to NCRegister.com by going to our New Subscription page.

Be sure to register your email, username and password when you fill in the information in the order form. New subscribers who don’t register when they order will have to wait until they receive their first print copy of the National Catholic Register to obtain their account number, which is required for online registration.

Thank you for your interest in the National Catholic Register.


Make a Donation now!

Insightful. Informative. Uncompromisingly faithful. The National Catholic Register is more than a newspaper. It’s a cause. Your support for the Register funds important journalism that helps to build a Culture of Life in our nation, and throughout the world. Help us promote the Church’s New Evangelization by donating to the National Catholic Register right now.

Click here to donate

Friday, February 22, 2008

NY Times' Yellow Journalism in the McCain Story

NY Times' Yellow Journalism in the McCain Story

Regarding the following:

It's no secret that the liberal NY Times wants a Democrat to win the presidency, even going so far as to smear a man's reputation with NO evidence at all. And to put it on the front page, no less. The woman in question did not come forth and substantiate the story. NO ONE did.

Unlike Juanita Broaddrick who accused Bill Clinton of raping her, which the Democrat loving NY Times ignored, let lone, putting it on the front page. Then there was Jennifer Flowers who actually came forward and said she had sexual relations with Bill Clinton lasting many years. Again it did not make the front page of the NY Times. But they will INSINUATE on the front page that McCain MIGHT have had an affair with a lobbyist, Ms Iseman. What kind of an affair? No one has even come forward that they even saw them having a cup of coffee together.

Had Clinton been a conservative and a Republican, you can bet the NY Times would have put the Broaddrick and Flowers stories on the front page.This is why the circulation of the NY Times is in a free-fall. The paper cannot be trusted to be fair and balanced.

There's more evidence that Obama has the backing of the Islamo-fascists and the communist party then there is that McCain had some kind of an affair with Iseman. Why don't they put the Obama connections on their front page?

The Times will do anything to find dirt on McCain as they know he is the only Republican who can beat Obama or Hillary.

The Times wants unborn children to be brutally killed and pro-abortion judges picked for the Supreme Court and other federal benches. The Times wants homosexuality to be taught in our public schools -- that it's perfectly normal, when in fact, it is deadly. They will not run stories that the gay lifestyle is shortened on an average of 20-25 years.

The Times does not want pornography to be limited. The only thing they want limited is people going to church and the spreading of the word of God.

They know that with a Democrat as president, they're wishes will be granted, but a Republican is bad news for them, hence the innuendos about McCain with ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO BACK IT UP.

This is worse than yellow journalism, it's satanic journalism. I don't know if the devil, himself, would have the gall to run this unsubstantiated story. Yeah, I take that back, the devil would, as he can't stand people of faith, either, who just might be able to stop the killing of little children and put an end to the homosexual agenda

This story could backfire as I can see all people, even those who do not think that McCain is conservative enough, to come together and vote for McCain in the general election and send the baby killing party back to hell where it was spawned by satan.


Frank Joseph MD

DrFrank@abortiontruths.net
http://www.abortiontruths.net

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=68049

Gary Bauer accuses NYT of 'yellow journalism' in McCain story

Jim Brown - OneNewsNow

2/21/2008

A prominent evangelical Christian backer of Republican presidential frontrunner John McCain says a New York Times report claiming the Arizona senator had an improper "close" relationship with a female lobbyist is a "liberal hit-piece at its worst."

The New York Times alleges that McCain's ties to lobbyist Vicki Iseman prompted favors for her clients. According to the paper, eight years ago -- during his first run for the White House -- McCain aides were so concerned about his relationship with Iseman that they blocked her access to him to "protect the candidate from himself."

At a press conference today, McCain said repeatedly the story was "not true," and his campaign has accused The Times of a "hit-and-run smear campaign." (See related video) And former Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer, a McCain supporter, calls The Times report "yellow journalism at its worst."

"That is the cut-and-smear type of journalism that we see more and more in U.S. politics. There's nothing in the story specific; they just leave an impression," says Bauer. "And certainly the lobbyist -- the female lobbyist, in this case -- is not making any allegations about Senator McCain."

According to Bauer, McCain and his wife seemed very calm at the press conference, but they were "obviously angry and disappointed that they would have to go through this."

Several people have come forward with claims of having inappropriate sexual relationships with a number of "headline" liberal candidates, adds Bauer, but The New York Times has chosen not to run those stories. Bauer also notes that in 2004 there was an attempt by CBS News to air a last-minute report suggesting Bush had avoided the draft, yet it turned out to be a complete fabrication for which the network later had to apologize.

Bauer also suggests the report may be an effort by the newspaper to further damage McCain's relationship with some conservative Christians. "Often it seems pretty clear that the real audience is Christian conservatives," he states. "That is, left-wing newspapers will go after conservative politicians in order to undermine them with Christian conservatives."

He recalls that in 2000 -- literally days before the presidential election -- there were reports that George W. Bush had been arrested for drunk driving in New Hampshire years earlier. According to Bauer, subsequent research showed that report cost Bush millions of votes and almost cost him the presidency.



_______________________________________________


To respond to this email, subscribe, or unsubscribe, please contact Dr. Frank:

drfrank@abortiontruths.net

Thank you.

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Why are "Wall Streeters Underwriting" Obama, but not Huckabee?

Stay Classy, Mike Huckabee

"The uncool subject is class," author Bell Hooks once wrote. "It's the subject that makes us all tense." What an understatement, considering the two leading "change" candidates in the latest presidential polls.

Barack Obama is contending for the Democratic nomination as a candidate who avoids focusing on economic class. He asks us to believe — nay, to "hope" — that the interests of Wall Streeters underwriting his campaign can somehow be "brought together" with the interests of workers harmed by corporate America's wage, job and pension cutbacks.

By contrast, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is competing for the Republican nomination on a call for proletarian solidarity. Next to John Edwards (D), he is the "classiest" presidential candidate, explicitly deriding "plutocracy" and "the Club for Greed" that he correctly says runs Washington.

"There's a great need in this country to elect someone who reminds [voters] of the guy they work with, not the guy who laid them off," Huckabee thunders.

This is taboo territory. Though the Wall Street Journal reports that America has among the lowest class mobility in the industrialized world, the Establishment stifles discussion about class. Why? Because those controlling the debate — from television anchors to political donors to campaign consultants — are among the wealthiest members of what Huckabee calls "the ruling class." They have an obvious self-interest in pretending class does not exist.

Not surprisingly, officialdom has reacted quite differently to the Obama and Huckabee phenomena.

The ruling class roundly praises Obama's class-averse campaign. Even George Will, the columnist-spokesman for country club Republicanism, effused that Obama is "refreshingly cerebral."

Will lambastes Huckabee as "an adolescent" for daring to "lament a shrinking middle class." Such vitriol is commonplace, from the National Review calling the Republican candidate "deeply naive" to Time's Joe Klein praying for a "monumental implosion" of Huckabee's campaign.

To those with money and power, Huckabee is committing the worst sin. His class rhetoric puts his Christian religion's altruistic, meek-shall-inherit-the-Earth tenets above Washington's free market fundamentalism. And the cultural roots accompanying Huckabee's cause are even more appalling to the limousine crowd. This Republican apostate is not an Ivy Leaguer putting on a wink-and-nod show.
He's a former Baptist minister from a low-income family who was never scrubbed by an elite brush — meaning he might actually believe in his class crusade.

This explains not just the difference in treatment of the Harvard-educated Obama and the Ouachita Baptist University-educated Huckabee, but an even more revealing hypocrisy involving President Bush.

Recall that the media portrays Bush's alliance with the religious right as proof of his convictions. Huckabee's alliance with the same religious right is subtly cast as a sign of supposed ignorance. Bush's rhetorical gaffes are often painted as endearing — evidence that despite his silver-spoon pedigree, he is the authentic "average American man" thinking "in a common-sense way," as Republican commentator Peggy Noonan wrote. Huckabee? The Weekly Standard calls him "a village idiot" and a "rube," while Noonan derides him for "populist manipulation."

Bush, you see, was always an aristocrat underneath the "windshield cowboy" veneer. He is the son of a president, a Skull-and-Bones man — ruling class all the way.

Huckabee, on the other hand, is a real-life regular guy. He views religion as more than just a convenient political cudgel, truly did pull himself "up from the bootstraps" — and his class grievances are personal. The well-heeled narcissists in the media and political Establishment are appalled. They see Huckabee as a country bumpkin getting uppity.

As UCLA professor Mark Kleiman wrote, "If you went to Harvard, it's plain embarrassing to say you're going to vote for someone as, well, unwashed, as Huckabee."

Certainly, Obama's underlying policy platform is good for working-class America — and better than Huckabee's, which is led by a punishingly regressive tax proposal.

However, the campaigns' rhetorical themes are critical to consider because they impact what will — and will not — be acceptable topics of political debate in the post-Bush era.

Personally, I want to believe Obama's vision of America as a class-free utopia where change comes without rancor or division. But history shows that most positive change in America has been about class and conflict — whether it was the battle for basic labor laws or the fight for Social Security.

That's why, whoever wins the primaries, the more class forces its way onto the presidential stage, the better.

In short, stay classy, Mike Huckabee.

David Sirota is the bestselling author of "Hostile Takeover" (Crown, 2006). He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network — both nonpartisan research organizations. His daily blog can be found at www.credoaction.com/sirota. To find out more about David Sirota and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

[http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-sirota/stay-classy-mike-huckabee.html]

Saturday, February 16, 2008

The Media of Relativism

http://ncregister.com/site/article/8051/

The Media of Relativism


BY The Editors

February 17-23, 2008 Issue | Posted 2/12/08 at 11:58 AM

Pope Benedict XVI sent a message to Catholics who watch TV or movies, or read periodicals that’s in a line with his warning about the “dictatorship of relativism.” In his World Communications Day address, he spoke about finding the truth in the media.

The Communications Day theme this year uses a nice little turn of phrase: “Searching for the Truth in Order to Share It With Others.” It’s a good application of the Christian vocation to the media-driven world in which we live.

In the message, the Pope recognizes the pervasive presence of the media in contemporary society, “Truly, there is no area of human experience, especially given the vast phenomenon of globalization, in which the media have not become an integral part of interpersonal relations and of social, economic, political and religious development,” he writes. He doesn’t say that with a sigh. That influence is often positive, he points out. But he does warn against the violence and vulgarity that the media often bring to entertainment and the manipulation they can bring to the news.

In the Zenit news service, Legionary Father John Flynn provided some examples to illustrate the Holy Father’s arguments.

He saw news manipulation in the reporting on the numbers of people who attended a Church-sponsored, pro-family rally Dec. 30 in Madrid. Organizers claimed that 1 to 2 million people were present. Madrid’s municipal authorities said it was easily a million. But El País, the socialist-inclined Spanish daily, reported Dec. 31 that no more than 160,000 people attended the event. One report, on the Internet-based Periodista Digital, further reduced the number in a Dec. 30 chronicle of the rally to “thousands.”

The Spanish daily El Mundo caught another distortion in the media coverage: In spite of the importance of the rally and the interest in the event by many Catholics in Spain, no television station, apart from a minor one run by the Church, bothered to provide a complete transmission of the rally held in Madrid.

Father Flynn cited other examples of media manipulation.

Down Under, the copycat hit “Australian Idol” banned participants from talking about religion and, in a public appearance held at the Sydney Motor Show, the final six contestants on the program were instructed not to answer questions about their religion or personal beliefs. The show’s creator, Fremantle Media, was reportedly upset that some of the participants were being supported by a large Christian audience.

In Hollywood, he saw more examples. The film Elizabeth: The Golden Age caused protests for its biased historical vision. On Nov. 2, the eve of its release in Britain, the Telegraph newspaper published an article listing the many historical faults in the production. Register readers saw Steven D. Greydanus’ review telling how the film portrayed Catholics uniformly as traitors and conspirators.

Print media is not exempt from problems. An egregious case of inaccuracy came with the so-called Gospel of Judas Iscariot, which National Geographic hyped in 2006. April D. DeConick, in an editorial-page commentary published Dec. 1 in The New York Times, revisited the find. He described how he re-translated the Coptic text, finding many errors, including choices of translation made by National Geographic scholars that “fall well outside the commonly accepted practices.”

Sometimes it seems the media purposely sets out to offend Christians, notes Father Flynn. A Sept. 21 report on the London-based Times newspaper website informed readers about “a beer-bellied, hip-hop styled, Jesus,” featured in a publicity campaign for a Belgian television station. The station, part of the European media company RTL, also portrayed Jesus flanked by two bikini-clad blondes.

Meanwhile, in the United States, the Catholic League recently protested the comedy musical Jerry Springer: The Opera, which in January was scheduled to run at New York’s Carnegie Hall. Said Catholic League President Bill Donohue: “It’s an all-out assault on Christianity.”

The show has played in a number of locations over the last few years, causing protests wherever it goes. In England the BBC broadcast the show in 2005 — and got challenged in court by Stephen Green of the evangelical group Christian Voice, who brought blasphemy charges against the BBC.

A final decision came when the High Court of Justice ruled that broadcasters and theaters staging live productions could not be prosecuted for blasphemy. One article noted that the BBC received a record 63,000 complaints about the show when it was broadcast.

Offending Islam gets a different reaction, of course. A digital book version of The Three Little Pigs was turned down from an awards competition sponsored by an agency of the British government because it could offend Muslims, who consider pigs unclean. In a Jan. 23 article the BBC recounted that Becta, an educational technology agency, rejected a digital version of the classic tale from its Bett Award competition, because the judges warned that “the use of pigs raises cultural issues.”

Instead of falling into the errors of materialism and relativism, Benedict XVI recommended that the media “can and must contribute to making known the truth about humanity, and defending it against those who tend to deny or destroy it.”

This is particularly urgent, he said, in the current context where the new media are changing the nature of communication.

We all search for the truth. The media can help us find it.

“Let us ask the Holy Spirit,” Benedict XVI concluded, “to raise up courageous communicators and authentic witnesses to the truth.”


Make a Donation now!

Insightful. Informative. Uncompromisingly faithful. The National Catholic Register is more than a newspaper. It’s a cause. Your support for the Register funds important journalism that helps to build a Culture of Life in our nation, and throughout the world. Help us promote the Church’s New Evangelization by donating to the National Catholic Register right now.

Click here to donate

Birth Control Mutates Our Fish

http://www.all.org/newsroom_allblog.php

The consequences of birth control

Birth Control Mutates Our Fish

15 Feb 2008


Andrew Flusche
Staff Attorney

Birth control hurts people—the side effects are well documented. And now there's increasing evidence that hormonal birth control also harms our environment. I wrote about this in a featured column and a new study by the U.S. Geological Survey found the same results.

The chemicals in birth control run through women's bodies and out into the water system. The fish are being harmed by this influx of estrogen. The result: intersex fish. You don't have to be an environmentalist to be scared of that! ( LINK )

http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10126


► The Pill

What is it?

The birth control pill is also known as an oral contraceptive. It is a pill taken by mouth daily. It is supposed to work by preventing the woman's body from becoming pregnant if she engages in sexual intercourse.

What is in the pill?

The birth control pill comes in many forms, from the progestin-only pill to combinations of progestin and estrogen.

Progestins and the estrogen in the pill are artificial hormones designed to help a woman's body believe that it is pregnant month after month. All the vital organs in her body are affected by the constant use of this pill. It contains powerful steroids that constantly remain present in her body. The pill's artificial hormones suppress the woman's production of normal progesterone and estrogen.

This constant presence of powerful steroids is not healthy, and there are side effects when using the pill.

How does the pill work?

The birth control pill can work in one of three ways:

1. It can prevent ovulation (releasing an egg from the ovary)
2. It can cause the mucus in the cervix to change so that if sperm reach the cervix, they are not allowed to enter, and
3. It can irritate the lining of the uterus so that if the first two actions fail, and the woman does become pregnant, the tiny baby boy or girl will die before he or she can actually attach to the lining of the uterus.

In other words, if the third action occurs, the woman's body rejects the tiny baby and he or she will die. This is called a chemical abortion.

Abortion is an act of direct killing that takes the life of a tiny human being-a life that begins at fertilization.

Is the pill safe?

No! If you are not using the pill, don't start. If you are on the pill now, take out the patient package insert that should be with the pills and read it.

If you are not using the pill, don't start. If you are on the pill now, take out the patient package insert that should be with the pills and read it. Here are some of the side effects:

* bacterial infections (because the pill weakens the immune system.)
* more susceptible to the AIDS virus (HIV) because the pill weakens the immune system
* pelvic inflammatory disease-an infection of the fallopian tubes that can cause sickness or sterility
* infertility-unable to ever bear children
* cervical cancer
* ectopic pregnancy
* shrinking of the womb (endometrial atrophy)
* mood swings and depression
* breast cancer
* blood clots
* birth defects in children conceived while women are on the pill
* tender breasts
* stroke
* weight gain

The pill also offers no protection against sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS.

What is my best option?

Some people may try to convince you that the pill is totally without risk. Don't believe it!
Don't depend on the pill. It could be harmful to you. It could also kill your baby-without you knowing it.

If you're single, abstinence is always your best choice. It isn't always easy, but it always works. By abstaining from sex, you eliminate the possibility of pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

If you are married, be faithful to your spouse, trusting in the Lord and His will.
Be good to your self. Don't take the pill.

Sources:
A Consumer's Guide to the Pill and Other Drugs, by pharmacist/researcher John Wilks.
'Infant Homicides Through Contraceptives,' by pharmacist Bogomir Kuhar; 2nd edition, 1995.
Medical consultant: Stephen Spaulding, M.D. Dr. Spaulding is a board-certified family practitioner whose writings have appeared in a variety of medical journals.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.all.org/article.php?id=11174

► Sue birth control companies for your health


By Andrew F. Flusche, J.D.

Tobacco kills. So does hormonal birth control. Why can Planned Parenthood freely market birth control products, but Phillip Morris must comply with an increasing array of restrictions?

Fifty years ago, people would not believe that their cigarettes were lethal. Many people smoked, especially highly visible public figures and celebrities. Today's world widely understands the negative health effects of smoking, even on non-smokers.

Lawsuits were instrumental in heightening social awareness about tobacco and they can have the same effect for hormonal birth control. Birth control companies must be sued to protect women’s health.


The risks


Hormonal birth control drugs are well-known causes of breast, cervical and liver cancer. The hormones increase the risk of breast cancer 20 to 30 percent for up to 10 years after the woman stops taking the medication. A recent British study tried to debunk the cancer risk, but went on to show that taking hormonal birth control for over eight years does increase the risk of cancer. The International Agency on Cancer Research found that the risk of cervical cancer increases by more than 50 percent after five years of birth control use, and that the risk doubles after 10 years of use.

Blood clots are another common risk of hormonal birth control and these can lead to deep vein thrombosis, heart attack or stroke. Studies generally agree that hormonal birth control users face a blood clot risk three to six times greater than women not on birth control. Furthermore, the risk for smokers and women over 35 is significantly greater. Finally, birth control drugs that contain desogestrel (“third-generation” pills) double the risk of blood clots, on top of the already-increased risk of other hormonal birth control.

What many women may not know is that hormonal birth control also harms their bones. A Women's Health Initiative study concluded that there is a statistically significant increased risk of fractures among birth control users. Also, a 2007 study of female military cadets found that hormonal contraceptives negatively impact skeletal formation. These same studies point out that peak bone density is reached by age 25, so the birth control risk is acute among young women whose bones are still forming.

In addition to health risks to women, hormonal birth control is taking its toll on our environment.

While tobacco has second-hand effects on non-smokers and air quality, the hormones in birth control drugs pollute the water supply. Several studies have documented this hazard, including one funded by the EPA and one by the state of Washington’s Puget Sound Action Team. The synthetic steroids from birth control drugs run through women’s bodies, into the sewage system, and out into the world’s waterways. The effects of this pollution include decreasing numbers of male fish and contaminated drinking water.


Who to sue


Birth control drugs create two primary targets for lawsuits: manufacturers and healthcare providers. The risks and side effects of hormonal birth control open up both of these groups to potential liability, so they must be examined each in turn.

Manufacturers bear liability for their products when they fail to warn consumers about the product's hidden risks. Standards vary among the states, but plaintiffs typically prevail by showing that the manufacturer knew (or should have known) about the risk and did not warn the plaintiff. The plaintiff's injury from the product must also be within the undisclosed risk category.

Healthcare providers can also be liable for injuries to a patient from a drug they prescribed. Providers must obtain the informed consent of a patient for any treatment or medication. The provider must explain the medication to the patient, along with possible risks and side effects. Failure to properly explain the risks of a drug can render the provider liable if the drug harms the patient.

Both these types of suits certainly depend on a variety of factors. Laws vary by state, including the standard of care that providers must meet and the standard that manufacturers are judged against. Also, the specific injuries caused by hormonal birth control differ among affected patients. However, the key point for this discussion is that women can sue for health detriments caused by birth control.


Lawsuits thus far


Birth control manufacturers are familiar with lawsuits. In fact, they should be frightened by tort claims. Two examples illustrate this point: Dalkon Shield and Ortho Evra.

A.H. Robins marketed the Dalkon Shield IUD starting in 1971. After mass reports of spontaneous abortion by women who conceived while using the device, the FDA pressured Robins to pull it from the market in 1974. Nevertheless, thousands of lawsuits were filed, including a class action. The lawsuits were so successful that Robins filed for bankruptcy in 1985.

More currently, Ortho McNeil is battling waves of lawsuits over its birth control patch, Ortho Evra. The patch contains similar hormones as its sister product, Ortho-TriCyclen, but the patch's hormones go into the patient's bloodstream more quickly. This higher dose of hormones causes an increased risk of blood clots, which Ortho McNeil failed to discover. A dozen women died in 2004 from patch-related blood clots and countless others incurred serious injuries. Lawsuits are still being filed to hold Ortho McNeil accountable.


What to do


If you have suffered an injury that might be linked to hormonal birth control, you should contact an attorney. Your potential claim might expire with the passage of time, so be vigilant.

Perhaps more significantly, awareness is vitally important. Women and young girls simply do not understand the harm that these 'liberating' drugs can do to their bodies. They do not comprehend their legal rights. To find out more about the risks of specific birth control products, consult brochures available from American Life League.

Spread the message that companies like Ortho McNeil and Planned Parenthood can be taken to court for harm to women from birth control drugs. Spread the message to help save lives.

Release issued: 11 Oct 07
Andrew Flusche graduated with a J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law. He works for American Life League as a public policy analyst and legal researcher.

Friday, February 15, 2008

'Republicans for Choice' Endorses McCain

'Republicans for Choice' Endorses McCain
By Penny Starr
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
February 06, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - The Republicans for Choice Political Action Committee has endorsed John McCain (R-Ariz.), saying he is the best candidate now that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is out of the presidential race.

The Republicans for Choice PAC supports Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, and also wants the Human Life Amendment removed from the plank of the Republican Party.

Republicans for Choice founder and Chairwoman Ann E.W. Stone told Cybercast News Service that McCain's pro-life position wasn't an issue.

"(McCain) is (pro-life), but it's not at the top of his agenda, not like Huckabee or the born-again Romney," Stone said. "He's shown his willingness to reach across the party, and we look forward to those discussions."

Another Republican pro-abortion group, however, has not endorsed McCain or any other Republican presidential candidate.

"We only endorse pro-choice Republicans," Jennifer Stockman, co-chairwoman of the Republican Majority for Choice, told Cybercast News Service, adding that her organization felt it was too soon to endorse Rudy Giuliani, who left the race after placing a distant third behind McCain and Mitt Romney in the Florida primary.

Stockman said that in a campaign where candidates are vying for the title of "true conservative," nods by pro-abortion groups might not even be welcomed.

"Our endorsement, quite frankly, wouldn't help anyone in the primary," Stockman said.

Colleen Parro, executive director of the Republican National Coalition for Life, said the endorsement should make some Republicans uncomfortable.

"My first thought was how embarrassing for the pro-lifers who have signed on for McCain," Parro said.

Another pro-life group, Democrats for Life of America, said they can't find a candidate to endorse.

"None of the candidates fit our criteria," Kristen Day, executive director of DFLA, told Cybercast News Service. "If we were to endorse Obama or Clinton, it would ruin our credibility.

"We are focused on the pro-life Democrats who are running for Congress, the U.S. Senate and in local races across the country."

The DLFA did not endorse Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 election.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200802/CUL20080206a.html

Thursday, February 14, 2008

"Flurry of E-Mails, Blog Posts, and Complaints from the Pro-Life Community Pressured YouTube into Reversing their Decision"

14 February 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Michael Hichborn, Director of Media Relations
540.226.9178
mhichborn@all.org

YOUTUBE CONCEDES ERROR IN BANNING AMERICAN LIFE LEAGUE'S PRO-LIFE VIDEO

Censored Video Restored After Objections from Pro-Life Media and Supporters

Washington, D.C. (14 February 2008) – After numerous articles and pressure from Catholic and online media, Google-sponsored YouTube cited a “technical malfunction” as the reason American Life League’s pro-life video was censored by YouTube staff.

"Once word got out that YouTube had allowed the Planned Parenthood ads our report was based on to remain on their site, while at the same time censoring our report, a flurry of e-mails, blog posts, and complaints from the pro-life community pressured YouTube into reversing their decision," said Jim Sedlak, vice president of American Life League.

The original notification e-mail sent to American Life League by YouTube reads, "After being flagged by members of the YouTube community and reviewed by YouTube staff, the video below has been removed due to its inappropriate nature."

Three days later, American Life League received a second e-mail that said:

"This email is to inform you that a video was recently removed from your account due to a technical malfunction. The issue has since been remedied and we appologize (sic) for any inconvenience or distress this may have caused. The following video(s) have been reinstated and your account has not been penalized."

According to YouTube's user guide:

"When a video gets flagged as inappropriate, we review the video to determine whether it violates our Terms of Use—flagged videos are not automatically taken down by the system. If we remove your video after reviewing it, you can assume that we removed it purposefully, and you should take our warning notification seriously."

Praising the YouTube decision, Sedlak commented “We are pleased that YouTube has reversed their decision to remove our video. Our ALL News Report was neither objectionable nor inappropriate. While it is unfortunate that YouTube chose this tactic in the first place, it is encouraging to note that they corrected their poor decision in a timely fashion.”

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

· American Life League's reinstated "Planned Parenthood Sells Sex" report (link)

· Alliance Defense Fund (link)

· Catholic News Agency (link)

· EWTN (EWTN)

· Inside Catholic blog (link)

· News Busters (link)

· Catholic Answers blog (link)

· Pro Life Blogs (link)

· Catholic Fire blog (link)

· Google-sina medical, health articles, (link)

· Digg (link)

· The Brown Pelican Society blog (link)

· USA Partisan blog (link)

· Fred Martinez’s Monitor blog (link)

· Weasel Zippers blog (link)

· St. John Valdosta’s blog (link)

· Theology Online (link)

· Some Have Hats blog (link)

· Casusa Nostrae Laetitiae blog (link)

· Major Autem His Est Caritas blog (link)

· Bob Enyart Live (link)

· Free Republic blog (link)

· Clip Marks (link)

· Café Theology blog (link)

· The Boondocks blog (link)

· The Curt Jester blog (link)

· Katoliko blog (link)

· Aussie Coffee Shop(link)

· Per Christum blog (link)

· Missa’s Place blog (link)

· The Divine Source of Motherhood blog (link)

· The Source Daily (link)

· Vital Signs Blog (link)

· Truth Seeker 24 blog (link)

· Political Party Poop blog (link)

· Birth Story blog (link)

· Steve’s Serendipities blog (link)

· Tim Blair News blog (link)

· Moonbattery blog (link)

· AP Check blog (link)

· L.I.F.E. blog (link)

· Political Vindication blog (link)

· Dyspepsia Generation blog (link)

· Alyeh blog (link)

· Dog Supplies Blog (link)

· News Unfiltered (link)

· Yahoo News (link)

· Bio-Medicine (link)

· MichNews (link)

· Individual.com (link)

· Examiner.com (link)

· Buzz Tracker (link)

· Street Insider (link)

· Power Blog (link)

· Clip Marks (link)

· One News Now blog (link)

· Freedom Zone blog (link)

· Blog Net News (link)

· Red Tram International (link)

· DMN Forums (link)

· Day Life (link)

· Pew Sitter blog (link)

· Jill Stanek (link)

· Catholic Blogs (link)

###

____________________________
Michael Hichborn
Director of Media Relations
American Life League
1179 Courthouse Road
Stafford, Virginia 22554
540.659.4171 (w)
540.226.9178 (c)
mhichborn@all.org
http://www.all.org/

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

How Birth Control Works

http://www.catholicexchange.com/node/69551


A Challenging Truth, Part One: How Birth Control Works

By Patti Maguire Armstrong

February 9, 2008

How can something be both immense and minute at the same time, something upon which all of human history depends, yet fragile and almost non-existent to the eye? It is the union of an egg and sperm — an embryo. Such is God's way. He takes something smaller than a mustard seed and brings forth all of civilization. After creating everything in the universe single-handedly, He created us in his own image and bestowed upon us the power to become co-creators with Him. Working in union with us, when the sperm unites with the egg, not only has a new human life been set in motion, but so too has a spiritual life. God places an everlasting soul into the being of every son and daughter.

Most of us rarely think that deeply about it all. In our worldly way, we forget eternity and begin to affix costs — physical, emotional and monetary. The costs can seem exorbitant when we focus only through the eyes of the world. And looking through those same worldly eyes, the way to prevent the miracle we clearly do not recognize as such is so easy, inexpensive, and ironically, also so small — the birth control pill. But the pill does not just prevent the miracle, it also destroys it, a fact that is often surprising to committed pro-lifers. This fact is true for all contraception that works through manipulation of hormone levels.

History

The pill has become a symbol of freedom to those who have been told they can "have it all". And it has become a symbol of destruction to those who support a "Theology of the Body," philosophy, the essence of Catholic teaching that artificial means must not disrupt God's natural order of things.

The first birth control pill received approval from the Food and Drug Administration in 1960. Using a synthetic estrogen hormone, the pill tricked a women's body into thinking it was pregnant. No egg would be released thereby preventing the opportunity for conception.

Although the pill was initially introduced with the idea of affording women a reliable way of limiting their family size, it soon became the ticket to the Sexual Revolution that began in the Sixties and never really ended. The pill promised something it's never been able to deliver: sex with "no strings attached". There are always emotional and moral consequences to thwarting God's purpose, but women discovered physical problems too. Blood clots, heart attacks and strokes were some of the side effects caused by the Pill's high estrogen levels. Drug manufacturers lowered these levels in order to reduce the side effects but that also increased the incidence of breakthrough ovulation. With the lower levels of estrogen, eggs would sometimes still get released and pregnancies resulted.

The drug companies tackled this situation by adding the synthetic hormone progesterone, which makes the uterine wall (the endometrium) inhospitable to implantation by an embryo. So if an egg was released and became fertilized by a sperm, thus creating life, the pill would have actually failed to prevent a conception, meaning it failed as a contraceptive. But, through preventing implantation of the embryo, the pill acts as an abortifacient and stops life from continuing to the next stage. (A clear and simple demonstration of this can be seen here.)

Since some women actually do become pregnant while on the pill, there are some embryos that manage to implant into the uterus. Whether it's RU-486, Norplant, Depo-Provera, the morning after pill, the Mini-pill, or the Pill, there is no chemical "contraceptive" that always causes an abortion. There is also none that never causes an abortion.

Ignorance

There is no way of knowing what percentage of pregnancies result in abortion through the pill. The woman using the pill with this scenario never even knows that she conceived a child. Her cycle will continue on schedule with no realization that an embryo is being flushed from her body. The Catholic Church has never wavered on the teaching that life begins at conception. Although Catholics are contracepting at rates parallel to non-Catholics, using artificial means to change our body's natural functions in order to block the potential for life has been recognized as rebellion against God's plan for humanity. However, using natural means to understand the rhythms of life and then to work in union with God is encouraged through Natural Family Planning.

The issue of birth control is a big one where misunderstanding and ignorance often misguide people. But when it comes to the pill, the ignorance that many women fall prey to is lack of understanding of its abortifacient properties. Most women don't consider that while taking their birth control, they may also be aborting a life within them. As Pope Paul VI predicted when he issued his encyclical Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life) in 1968, the use of artificial contraception would lead to abortions.

Although it seemed to many to be an overdramatic prediction, it proved to be prophetic. In hindsight, its logic in saying that widespread use of contraception would lead to "conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality" was prophetic. Since the Pill began to be sold in 1960, divorces have tripled, out-of-wedlock births jumped from 224,000 to 1.2 million, abortions doubled, and cohabitation soared 10-fold from 430,000 to 4.2 million.

Sex both inside and outside marriage ceased to be about a bond of marital love in which a couple became one in union with God. It became merely an activity for personal satisfaction devoid of anything more. The Pope predicted man would lose respect for woman, considering her "as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion."

Society as a whole moved from recognizing sex as something reserved for married couples to something for everyone, since the possibility for pregnancy was greatly reduced (although never completely removed). Thus, people completely opposed to having children could have sex with others whom they had chosen as bed partners but would never chose to co-parent their children. The most intimate experience intended to be shared in love and self-giving with the potential for creating life became merely a form of recreation. And if life sprang forth, such a life was easily regarded as nothing more than an unintended problem that could legally be disposed of through abortion.

But women choosing abortion and the men who either make that choice with them or plead for them to do otherwise, are very aware of the decision that is being made, whereas women who choose to take birth control pills are not so aware of the potential ramifications of their choice. There is not a baby with a heartbeat who must forcefully be removed, but unbeknownst to many, there is a baby. Since life begins at conception, a life, even though undetectable to us, is still a life. It is the way God chooses to begin things, small and yet mighty in its eternal existence.

In addition to the pill, IUDs, Depo-Provera and Norplant also cause early, undetectable abortions. Doctor usually fail to warn women of the abortifacient properties of the pill. I've heard some doctors admit they were not actually even aware of these properties. Women often choose contraception as a means to avoid pregnancy without realizing they are not actually stopping pregnancy, but quickly ending it.

Denial

In his booklet, titled Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions?, Randy Alcorn states: "The question of whether it causes abortions has direct bearing on untold millions of Christians, many of them pro-life, who use and recommend it. For those who believe God is the Creator of each person and the giver and taker of human life, this is a question with profound moral implications."

Alcorn was a Protestant pastor who not only used the pill in his married life, but also counseled other married couples to do so. He had a vested interest in not recognizing the pill as an abortifactient. But when confronted with the facts through his own research, it demanded changes in his own behavior and philosophy. His booklet was written in 1998 to inform others of the truth.

Alcorn's booklet has met some opposition. According to him: "Despite evidence, some pro-life physicians state that the likelihood of the Pill having an abortifacient effect is infinitesimally low, or nonexistent.

Though I would very much like to believe this, the scientific evidence does not permit me to do so."
Alcorn, surprisingly, found that the greatest resistance to recognizing the abortifacient quality of the pill comes from the Christian community. "Dr. Walt Larimore has told me that whenever he has presented this evidence to audiences of secular physicians, there has been little or no resistance to it. But when he has presented it to Christian physicians there has been substantial resistance. Since secular physicians do not care whether the Pill prevents implantation, they tend to be objective in interpreting the evidence.

After all, they have little or nothing at stake either way. Christian physicians, however, very much do not want to believe the Pill causes early abortions. Therefore, I believe, they tend to resist the evidence. This is certainly understandable. Nonetheless, we should not permit what we want to believe to distract us from what the evidence indicates we should believe."

It's easier to be pro-life when we limit the discussion to the abortion industry. The inclusion of artificial birth control complicates and confuses people. With so many opinions even among Catholics, how is a person to know what to believe? I understand the confusion. While living in Montana, I had a doctor who was also a priest, who told me it was not realistic to expect a couple to follow the Catholic teaching on birth control. He prescribed birth control pills to many of his female patients. So, is it any surprise there are many Catholics, ones like me, ignorant of the true teaching?

Yet, we must cut through the false teachings and erroneous opinions to reach the truth. Our lives, our bodies and our souls are all we have. They are gifts that must be safeguarded. Christopher West, author and speaker, has written books and articles explaining the beauty and truth of God's plan for men and women. In his book, Good News about Sex and Marriage, he asserts that the Church's teaching on sex and marriage is good news because it's the truth about love and true love is the fulfillment of the human person. He also admits that the news is challenging. "This is so because the truth about love is always challenging."

Patti Maguire Armstrong is the mother of ten children including two Kenyan AIDS orphans. She is a speaker and the author of Catholic Truths for Our Children: A Parent's Guide (Scepter). She is also the managing editor and co-author of Ascension Press's Amazing Grace book series. Her website is RaisingCatholicKids.com.

Monday, February 11, 2008

Rush vs. McCain

Rush vs. McCain

TomRoeser.com ::
Personal Asides: My Interview on Black Radio... McCain's "Calm Down" Not Exactly What the Doctor Ordered... Lessons from the Book "Grace and Power."

Posted: 08 Feb 2008 07:52 AM CST



WVON Radio.

My longtime buddy and former sparring partner when we were on Chicagoland public radio, Cliff Kelley, has become, as many of you know, the authentic voice of the black community and has been celebrated as such because as a former alderman he knows the political situation intimately and is extraordinarily well-spoken, witty and perceptive. Yesterday he called me for comment on his WVON radio show on the decision by my candidate, Mitt Romney, to withdraw.

Whether he reached me at a down time or not I cannot say, but it happened just after I had my daily dose of Limbaugh. Hearing that whining and egregious self-justification and puffery... ballooned by an ego that pretends it is kidding but which is truly not and is instead struttingly braggart... it occurred to me that the blindsided right deserves to have a President Obama and a reinforced Democratic majority. The blindsided right of the conservative movement which brooks no compromise or accepts any deviation from the talk show-crafted dialectic... the blindsided right which has been behaving like a spoiled child, dissatisfied with Romney (too opportunistic), with Thompson (too lethargic), with Huckabee (too liberal on spending), with Tancredo (too single issue oriented), with Hunter (not charismatic enough). And certainly with McCain (an untrustworthy scoundrel).

Yes the full-mooners of the blindsided right richly deserve to get Barack Obama. After bitching about all the deviations from orthodoxy, they ought to find out what it is to live under a 97% liberal president (basis "National Journal's" analysis of his voting record) as I did for the first 20 years of my observant political life (FDR's 1933 to the end of Truman 1953) along with a increased Democratic House and Democratic Senate.

This came to me as I was listening to Limbaugh while behaving myself (on my stationery bicycle). Ensconced in New York behind his "golden EIB microphone" the man who never went in for politics as a youth but is nevertheless the oracular know-all, the expert on the intricacies of voting phenomena, with a well-paid staff ("Mr. Snerdly") pulling up commentaries from which he can sample... the man earning $30 million a year with 20 million adherent listeners... hugely enjoying himself ("more than a human being has a right to"). Then a ditzy ditto-head woman called to bend his ear for many minutes telling him why although a lifelong Republican she would never, ever, vote for McCain. Which the great guffawer hugely enjoyed. Listen, said the ditto-head, let me tell you about McCain. You say he's a war hero? Right: listen, Rush, so was Benedict Arnold! .

Get that? Benedict Arnold. Did he challenge her? Of course not. The oleaginous blindsided Mouth kept her on, soothing her, saying uh-huh supportively, savoring every moment, not agreeing with her but guzzling it down with her adulation ("Oh, Rush-Rush, what would we do without you?"). Said he: Oh I don't know m'dear, God would raise up another prophet to earn $20 million just like me. Benedict Arnold. You'd think someone who didn't serve in Vietnam would have the grace to defend one who did and who refused repatriation from his captives because he wanted no favoritism as the son of an admiral. But no, that never occurred to blindsided and blindsighted El Rushbo, swollen as he is with his own narcissism.

Arnold (1741-1801) was indeed a wounded veteran-a hero figuring in the capture of Ticonderoga, the battle of Valcour Island, Danbury and Ridgefield culminating in Saratoga. But character was his flaw; when he felt he was not honored enough, indeed unjustly criticized, he changed sides and obtained command of West Point in order to surrender it to the British, fleeing down the Hudson to avoid capture by Washington, escaping to England where he received a commission as a brigadier general and the equivalent of $500,000 in reward for his treachery. No difference between McCain and Arnold. Those who read my day-to-day recounting of Gene McCarthy who vowed to get even with an LBJ who didn't promote him to the extent that he torpedoed plans to win the war... those who have read this may see a hazy contrast to a talk show host who, dissatisfied with the electorate, vows to spread dissention so the cause he insists he represents will be maimed. No difference. Ego uber alles.

For all the good he has done, blindsided Rush is rapidly destroying it now... refusing to acknowledge that for all his puffed-upedness the Republican electorate repeatedly picked McCain. He cannot accept the will of the voters who disagreed with his estimate... along with the blonde anorexic harpy with knee-length hair who tosses it so beguilingly as a TV talking head, Ann ("I will campaign for Hillary Clinton") Coulter... and the doe-eyed girlfriend of the right with the fingernails on blackboard voice, Laura ("I don't care; I won't vote for him") Ingraham. Only slightly wrose and more improbable are the Ron Paul idolaters ready to canonize their cranky hero who wants the highways to be privatized, the FDA abandoned with people allowed to discover for themselves what poison they are eating, all troops to be brought home tomorrow and a shrug to his adolescent geek followers when they smoke pot and stoke up with pills... the same Ron Paul whose old newsletters spewed out anti-Semitism and anti-black hatred which carries the imprimatur "Ron Paul" and which he declines to own up to. In true "open minded" libertarian style he doesn't disavow his newsletters, doesn't extol them. They're just expressions of points of view. We call it liberty. I call it invincible ignorance.

They are 19th century rear-view visionaries who tout the Death of the West, who wants legal immigration to be halted for ten years and after that a definite quota so we can have white, "Christian" admittees and a return to Hamiltonian out-of-date high tariffs, swift withdrawal from battle spots. All these deserve what all of us may well get-the accession of Barack Obama. It would almost be worth it to hear them whine when it comes. So intellectually dishonest are they that they will never acknowledge their baby highchair antics, furiously shaking their spoons of oatmeal at the adults, caused it to happen. All of these overpaid, spoiled rightist brats and braggarts can take a flying leap and plunge to the bottom of hell so far as I am concerned.

There are many things wrong with John McCain. For me nothing is more suspect than the hint... just a hint... that he may regard my key issue, pro-life, as less than significant, based on his reported statement courtesy Bob Novak that Sam Alito wears too much his colors on his sleeve. Still it is sure that the Pascal Wager must be applied in this case. I mean to pursue him on it. But given the certainty of pro-abortion judges being appointed by Obama and the possibility, maybe probability, of pro-life judges by McCain... who but an un-rational person would harm the chance of winning. But significant vestiges of the extreme conservative wing is ditzy-just like the Benedict Arnold lady. For proof you don't have to go far. They are the ugly spawn of mal-education and a shock jock mentality where views are all black and white, blather-mongers to whom compromise is repugnant and evil.

They truly are bringing down upon themselves-and all of us-the Barack Obama presidency, a presidency where the only joy we will have is to listen to their future clangorous wailing while exempting themselves from blame for the predicament they have brought to us. What a scurvy crew.

And if you say that I am intemperate at their intemperateness this is right: a taste of their own medicine.

McCain.

It can be said truly that John McCain does not know... has not the faintest conception... of what it takes to heal any rupture. His remark to conservatives the other day that they should "calm down" is case in point. When you seek to make up with your wife whom you have wronged or have been unjust to... just as McCain has been on "McCain-Feingold"... you don't say, "calm down." You say: Jeez, I'm sorry. What can I do to make it up? Does this man have no tact whatever? Did that curt bluntness and snappishness come from the Hanoi-Hilton or was it instilled at birth?

Poll Shows John McCain Faces Tough Road in Gaining Conservative Support

Poll Shows John McCain Faces Tough Road in Gaining Conservative Support
Less than 30% of conservative activists at the Conservative Political Action Conference "strongly support" him
MANASSAS, Va., Feb. 9 /Christian Newswire/ -- Richard A. Viguerie, chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, today released the results of a true random poll of 1,000 conservative activists attending the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C. CPAC is the nation's largest annual gathering of conservatives, and was chosen by former Gov. Mitt Romney as the place where he announced his withdrawal from the GOP presidential race on Thursday.

The first question asked of the 1,000 conservative activists was: "In your opinion, is Senator John McCain a true conservative?"

The results:

Yes 197 (19.7%)
No 595 (59.5%)
Undecided 208 (20.8%)

The second question was: "If Senator John McCain is the Republican nominee, I will..."

The results:

299 29.9% "strongly support McCain"
279 27.9% "I will vote for McCain, but do not expect to work or contribute"
35 3.5% "I will vote for the Democratic nominee"
90 9.0% "I will vote for a conservative third party candidate if one is on the ballot in my state"
40 4.0% "I will not vote"
257 25.7% "I am undecided at this time--I need to see if Senator McCain reaches out to conservatives in a serious and meaningful way"

"From these results, it is clear that Senator McCain has a challenge in gaining the conservative support he needs in order to win the general election," says David Franke of ConservativeHQ.com. "Only 3 in 10 conservative activists strongly support him. Even if you add in the people who will limit their activity to voting for him, and all of the undecided conservatives (not likely), he will have only 83.5% of the conservative vote. Historically, the Republican presidential candidate needs more than 80% of the conservative vote in order to win. The poll results show he can possibly reach that level of conservative support, but it will be dauntingly hard."

NOTE TO EDITORS: Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, pioneered ideological and political direct mail and has been called "the funding father of the conservative movement" for his role in helping build dozens of conservative organizations. He is the author of Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause (Bonus Books, 2006).


Christian Newswire

Saturday, February 09, 2008

Why is Ann Coulter Campaigning for Hitler, Hillary and Romney?

Why is Ann Coulter campaigning for Hitler, Hillary and Romney? The one thing all three had in common is a gay agenda.

"Coulter noted, if McCain made former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney his vice president, she would support the Republican ticket."[http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200802/POL20080208f.html]

Romney or Giuliani being the VP would be a reason for me and many pro-family voters not to vote for McCain. Although we could never join Ann in voting for Clinton. Maybe Coulter needs to ask Hillary to make Romney her VP.

Fred


Unlike McCain, Hitler 'Had a Coherent Tax Policy,' Coulter Says

By Matt Purple
CNSNews.com Correspondent
February 08, 2008

(Clarification: Ann Coulter's appeared at the Omni Shoreham hotel but not at CPAC.)

Washington (CNSNews.com) - In a speech at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C., Friday, just down the hall from the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), author Ann Coulter said that the primary difference between Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Adolf Hitler was that Hitler "had a coherent tax policy."

Coulter compared a potential alliance between disillusioned conservative Republicans and Sen. Hillary Clinton to the alliance between Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin during World War II, which was formed to defeat Hitler.

"I'm not comparing McCain to Hitler," she added. "Hitler had a coherent tax policy."

The remark received wild applause from the audience of about 500 conservative activists. Many in the crowd seemed hostile to the idea of a McCain presidency and cheered Coulter's attacks on the Arizona senator.

Coulter also criticized McCain for his sponsorship of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill, accused him of wanting amnesty for illegal immigrants, and mocked his frequent touting of his military service in Vietnam.

"Couldn't we pick a POW who doesn't want to shut down Guantanamo?" she said.

Coulter even attacked McCain's age, quipping that he had been in the Senate since the Spanish-American War and wondered if his age had influenced some of his more moderate positions.

"At John McCain's age, he's looking for posterity," she said. "He's worried about his New York Times obituary."

Nevertheless, Coulter noted, if McCain made former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney his vice president, she would support the Republican ticket.

"I've led one impeachment. I can lead another," she said.

Coulter was not invited to speak at CPAC this year, but she gave her speech in the same hotel where the conference occurred.

[http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200802/POL20080208f.html]

Mitt Romney's Liberal Paradigm Shift: a Republican FOR Homosexual 'Special Rights'

MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 4 /Christian Newswire/ -- Peter LaBarbera, founder of Republicans For Family Values, today criticized GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney for his "novel pro- homosexual positioning in the GOP." On Dec. 16, Romney (the alleged "conservative" in the race) told NBC's "Meet the Press" that "it makes sense at the state level" to enact pro-homosexual "sexual orientation" laws. (Last week, CNN's Roland Martin reported that Romney told him that he opposes "gay marriage," but supports "gay rights.")

LaBarbera issued the following statement:


Mitt Romney just doesn't get it on the homosexual agenda, and if he doesn't get at after serving as governor of liberal Massachusetts -- where "gay marriage," homosexual adoption and pro- homosexuality indoctrination in schools ALL were advanced by the sort of pro-gay "sexual orientation" laws he's now espousing -- then he's not going to get it at the federal level.

Romney is already using his bully pulpit as a candidate to affirm "gay rights"-- even AFTER he's earned the backing of pro-family leaders who seemingly would have much to teach him about the danger and misuse of pro-homosexual laws. (Note that Romney uses gay-affirming "discrimination" rhetoric even with regard to the Boy Scouts' ban on homosexuals.)

I don't know any serious pro-lifers who are pro- homosexuality. We all have compassion for homosexual strugglers, but we draw the line at laws that would distort "civil rights" to include sinful and changeable homosexual behavior -- because these laws will be used to compel individuals, business and even ministries to violate their beliefs and support homosexual relationships (see the Weekly Standard article, "Banned in Boston," about Boston Catholic Charities electing to close down its historic adoption agency rather than place kids in homosexual households).

Romney is trying to shift the GOP's pro-family paradigm on homosexuality, and it's an unwise shift -- much like retreating from a principled position on pro- life (e.g., "I'm pro-choice but not pro-partial-birth abortion"). Due to Romney's potential for being the "Nixon-goes-to-China" president who advances pro-homosexuality agendas in the GOP -- I cannot support him.

Why do the same conservative pundits who have assailed Mick Huckabee and John McCain as too liberal, promote the fiction that Mitt Romney - who strongly defended abortion-on-demand and who remains in favor of anti-Christian homosexual special rights laws as a Mormon -- is a "conservative"?



Christian Newswire


THE PINK SWASTIKA AND HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST HISTORY

http://caosblog.com/5803

The Pink Swastika- by Judith Reisman
Filed under: General , Communism, Socialism and the Nazis @ 4:52 am
This is published here at CB with Dr. Reisman’s written permission.

THE PINK SWASTIKA AND HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST HISTORY
by
Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
The Institute For Media Education1

The greatest sacrilege to the millions of innocent infant and aged Nazi victims, would be allow these dead to be exploited as political fodder to re-arm the same ideologues who ushered in Germany’s “final solution”. The Pink Swastika challenges the historical meaning of The Pink Triangle and in doing so, brings light to one of the darkest pages of human history.

Are the Victimizers Co-Opting the Holocaust?

Under the banner of The Pink Triangle (a Nazi symbol for incarcerated homosexuals), a mass media campaign by the major broadcasters and press, has been awarding Nazi victim status to homosexuals. Claiming to have been victimized by the Nazis just like the Jews, pink triangles are sweeping the land, embossed on fancy stationary, upscale check books, flags, posters, stickers, shirts, pins, and the like. After losing nearly all of my (Jewish) family in the gas chambers during World War II, I was deeply disconcerted when Holocaust museums world wide advertised new exhibits alleging the Nazi mass murder of homosexuals. One of the complaints of those curating these exhibits has been the dearth of evidence with which to document museum assertions of a Nazi aminus toward homosexuals. Now, here come the authors of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, to document why evidence of a fatal form of Nazi “homophobia” has been uniformly lacking.

Instead of evidence finding Nazism in conflict with homosexuality, Lively and Abrams report the strategies of the German homosexual movement to ensconce National Socialism (the Nazi party) and Adolf Hitler, triggering a holocaust which engulfed all of Europe. Writing of those days in The Mass Psychology of Fascism, radical German sexologist and Hitler contemporary, Wilhelm Reich, warned that Nazi leadership was both ideologically and actually homosexual.2 Almost as an aside, Reich noted Nazi leaders such as “Bluher, Röhm…. Rosenberg” represented Hitler’s fascism, which was, Reich said, “a male state organized on a homosexual basis.” 3

But, the primary confirmation of The Pink Swastika and Reich, are the formal writings of Adolf Hitler himself, in the bible of the Nazi movement, Mein Kampf [My Struggle]. Here the reader meets up with page after page of Hitler’s outspoken hatred of Jews, Marxists, Negroes, Chinese, Arabs, women, and all Eastern Europeans along with his overwhelming worship of power and disdain for Judeo-Christian morality alongside his strategy for world domination. In his introduction to Mein Kampf, Konrad Heiden reconfirms Hitler’s hatred for Christianity, as he viewed the “belief in human equality” to be a Jewish plot, made popular due to “Christian churches”. (Emphasis mine)

Hitler is documented as classifying who he and Germany should hate. He hid nothing. Jews and the like were subhuman, they were “parasites” “vampires,” “liars” “cowards,” “traitors,” among other adjectives. But, search the Nazi manifesto for any animosity, contempt, much less hatred of homosexuals. To do so is to search in vain. In point of fact, as Reich knew personally, Hitler eulogized and venerated the archetypal super macho Aryan male, for whom women were seen to serve the role of breeders for the race of supermen. The Fuhrer’s contempt for women is made vivid by the abnormal way in which he used his niece and the few other women close to him, including Eva Braun.

Hitler outlined in Mein Kampf who would live and who would die: He stated who would be slave and who would be master. The Pink Swastika opens his fascist bible to the prototypical Nazi macho homosexual male best expressed today in the widely popular “Tom of Finland” fantasy drawings sold in all homosexual book stores, magazines, as well as in general advertisements for “gay” films and phone sex. Common are the blond, square jawed muscle men wearing Luftwaffe caps, skin tight black pants, high black polished boots, sporting a black leather strap going from the shoulder diagonally across a hairless, bare, Aryan chest, a whip swishing alongside the hero’s slim hips.

The authors recall the 1920s post WW1 Weimar Republic, the near starvation and wild currency fluctuations in Germany against the backdrop of the sex and drug “Cabaret” scene of Europe and Gay Berlin. They point to Berlin’s world famous coterie of Bohemian artists, sadosexual transvestites, lesbians and homosexual nightclubs and baths, as well as the rampant control of Berlin by pornographers, organized crime and drug dealers. In this milieu, reports Elson in Time-Life Books, Prelude to War, thousands of prostitutes walked Berlin’s city streets half nude, dressed as “dominatrixes” and school girls, while transvestites and “powdered and rouged young men” everywhere sold their wares to financiers and military men alike.

The famous German Jewish homosexual sex “scientist,” Magnus Hirshfeld, reported that roughly 20,000 boys and youths were prostituted to Germany’s flourishing “gay” population. (The British, qua-American homosexual icon, Christopher Isherwood blissfully said of Berlin’s 1920’s boy brothels, “Berlin is for boys…The German Boy….the Blond”).

In the midst of such pansexual revelry it could be argued that were Hitler a shy, retiring sort of bookworm, he might not notice the dominating homosexual sensibility and the erotic mix of sexes. However, Lively and Abrams conclude that as a young aspiring Viennese artist, Hitler would be especially familiar with the artistic homosexual fraternity for Vienna was the hub of Bohemian culture. Hitler claims to have been destitute, and in the midst of the Cabaret era, he was reduced to living in a men’s hostel for down-and outers. Both male and female prostitution were rife, the younger the better. Such a poor young artist would have met many “different” and adventurous people whose celebrity. like today, was gilded by an intimacy with homosexuality. The authors present a reasonable body of evidence to the jury of public opinion, including the possibility that Hitler earned extra cash as a youthful Viennese prostitute, serving a male clientele.

In a fascinating read of 204 well documented pages, the authors of The Pink Swastika track down the facts behind the homosexual movement’s current claims for Nazi-victim status. Divided into seven parts, the story opens as the new Nazi party is founded in the smoky din of the Bratwurstglockl, “a tavern frequented by homosexual roughnecks and bully-boys….a gay bar,” favored by Hitler’s closest comrade, Captain Ernst Röhm. Almost every biography of Hitler reports that Rohm was a flagrant homosexual and the only man Hitler called by the familiar “du.”

Hitler’s beloved Storm Trooper Chief and founder of the Brown Shirts, the authors note, had a “taste for young boys.” Almost as close to Hitler as Röhm was Rudolph Hess, known for his dress-up attire as “‘Black Bertha’” in the gay bars of pre-war Berlin” In fact, Mein Kampf was dedicated to Hess while Hitler was in prison. The Pink Swastika reports that Hitler was given power by a homosexual gang, a gang says Dr. Carroll Quigley, President bill Clinton’s college teacher and mentor, that subverted Germany’s free elections by underhanded and brutal strategies.

According to Quigley in Tragedy and Hope (1966) Hitler’s intimate friend, Captain Röhm and his trusted homosexual cadre of Storm Troopers staged the famed burning of the Reichstag, along with other bully-boy tactics, to frighten people into supporting the Nazi party and Hitler. For our purposes here it is useful to see what Quigley says about homosexual Nazi Storm Troopers:

Accordingly….a plot was worked out to burn the Reichstag building and blame the Communists. Most of the plotters were homosexuals and were able to persuade a degenerate moron from Holland named Van der Lubbe to go with them. After the building was set on fire, Van der Lubbe was left wandering about in it and was arrested.

This is especially interesting. The Pink Swastika addresses the many myths surrounding “The Night of the Long Knives” or the “blood purge” when supposedly only homosexuals such as Röhm were murdered by Hitler. Quigley offers another interesting insight, saying that “Most of the plotters were homosexual”. He adds that many of those who knew the truth were murdered in March and April while ”Most of the Nazis who were in on the plot were murdered by Goring during the “blood purge” of June 30, 1934” (emphasis added).

Also, as Lively and Abrams report, it was under Röhm and his Storm Troopers that the records and books of “the Sex Research Institute,” were burned. The authors reveal that Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, the Jewish “feminine” homosexual director of the Institute, maintained detailed records of his many court-referred sex offenders, including important Nazi rapists, and homosexual child offenders, pederasts. Quigley confirmed that Röhm and other key Nazis who knew too much about Hitler’s criminal activities were killed for allegedly plotting against Hitler.

Lively and Abrams track the role of Röhm in recruiting and training a total of roughly 2.5 to 4.5 million Storm Troopers (SA) and Gestapo (SS) compared to about 100,000 men in the regular German army. Once the SA was disbanded after the June 1934 blood purge, most of these experienced SA homosexual leaders moved into other power positions in the German military.

The authors raise many questions in The Pink Swastika. If he feared homosexual influence on boys, why did Hitler chose known homosexuals to serve as key youth leaders? Karl Fischer, a homosexual teacher, began the Wandervogel (a German version of the boy Scouts), which became “The Hitler Youth” in 1933, under a well known pederast, Hans Blueher, who wrote of man-boy “love.” Gerhard Rossbach, homosexual Nazi leader of the Freikorps gave over leadership of the Schill Youth to Edmund Heines, a convicted Nazi pederast, and murderer, all under the watchful eye of Adolf Hitler.

The Pink Swastika reports that while Hitler and his Gestapo chief, Heinrich Himmler methodologically annihilated all German and European Jews via mass deportations to death camps, beyond political homophobic rhetoric after the Röhm murders, and a demand that men produce children for the Aryan race, Hitler refused to attack “homosexuals.”

Adolf Brand, a pederast-child pornographer was one of many prominent “butch” advocate homosexuals who continued to live, write and entertain in Germany, untouched by the Nazis. Other homosexual and bisexual leaders cited by these and other authors included Bladur von Schirach, Hitler Youth Leader; Hans Frank, Hitler’s Minister of Justice; Wilhelm Bruckner, Hitler’s adjutant; Walther Funk, Hitler’s Minister of Economics; friend and advisor Hermann Göring, Hitler’s second in command (who dressed “in drag and wore camp make-up”), Hans Kahnert, who founded Germany’s largest “Gay rights organization (Society for Human Rights) which counted “SA Chief Ernst Rohm among its members,” Edmund Heines, a pederast sadist, Dr. Karl Gunther Heimsoth, a homosexual Nazi who coined the term “homophile,” and Julius Streicher, an infamous pornographer and pederast who was very close to Hitler.



Most interesting was Emil Maurice, Hitler’s close personal secretary and chauffeur. One of the Röhm purge assassins, apparently Maurice had secured a blackmail strategy that preserved his life until the war’s end. For Lively and Abrams cite Maurice as homosexual, while Mollo, in his history of the SS, portrays Maurice also as Jewish described in a famous photograph:



Hitler and four of his first SS men (a fifth has been erased). L to R: Schaubk, Schreck, Hitler, Maurer and Schneider. The fifth man was Emil Maurice who was thrown out of the SS in 1935 when found to be a Jew, but later allowed to retain his appointment and privileges, and wear [sic] SS uniform.

A look at another photograph of Hitler finds him voluntarily posing enthusiastically before a massive statue of two nude, muscular men holding hands. This suggests we ask if Hitler had a sexual relationship with his handsome young chauffeur (a not uncommon arrangement as identified in reports of the time), . Maurice is identified as the man erased in the SS photograph, his two shoes still quite visible in the picture. Elsewhere, pictures of Maurice reveal a dark-haired, rather Semitic looking young man. Could Maurice have been Hitler’s Jewish, SS lover? What a fascinating research question. The captions read:

[Picture #1] “Hitler in prison with Maurice, Kriebel, Hess and Dr. Fredrich.” [Picture #2] “Common room of Nazi prisoners at Landsberg. Behind Hitler, Emil Maurice, early companion and chauffeur.”

Most histories of World War II (see especially Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich) report Hitler’s ties to the “notorious” homosexual, Ernst Röhm and other males within his coterie. The Pink Swastika notes, if anything, that sex laws under Hitler’s Reich Minister of the Interior Henrich Himmler were largely tolerant toward the “2 million” Germans Himmler said were registered in homosexual organizations in 1933, for “only repeat offenders can be incarcerated.” “Repeat offenders” meant a fourth public sex offense, or someone who had already served six months in jail for repeated offenses. In 1940, Himmler reiterated that only “multiple offenders” (largely engaged in sex in a public forum) might be jailed. However, wrote Himmler, “artists and actors” might escape any penalty, despite how often they were found in compromising situations.

During the Hitler era, of roughly 70 million Germans , “less than 1%” “hardly one hundredth of all the country’s inhabitants” were Jewish, said Hitler. Morris Ernst, in his book on Kinsey, discussed Hirschfeld’s findings:

Germany….with a population of 62,000,000, there were nearly a million and a half men and women [said Hirschfeld] “whose constitutional predisposition is largely or completely homosexual” Just how big a proportion of his estimated million and a half German homosexuals found their way into Nazi uniforms is not known, of course. But a good many of them were attracted by the Nazi principles and the society of their fellows in a bond which excluded all women (p. 169-170).

Historical records suggest Germany had perhaps 700,000 Jews versus 2-3 million “registered” homosexuals, according to Himmler. Whether there were 1 and a half million (Hirschfeld) or 2 to 3 million (Himmler), at most 10,000 German homosexuals were sent to work camps, 6,000 died and 4,000 were released. The 6,000 homosexual deaths are a minimum of Germans who would have been “fems,” despised by the homosexual powered elite as well as collections of homosexuals who were also Jewish, Italian, Asian, Black, Communist, Marxist and the like. This still leaves estimates of 20,000 male prostitutes unaccounted for with the under 1% of homosexuals largely interned in “work camps,” not, the authors note, the “death” camps for Jews and other outcasts. Lively and Abrams point to the nearly 100% extermination effort by the Nazis toward all captured Jews of all nationalities, gassed or interned in death camps. The especial concern of Hitler that all good Germans reproduce in order to create an Aryan nation must not be forgotten. Aryan Germans were expected to breed and it is well known that German breeding farms were established for that purpose. Non-German homosexuals appear to have been of no interest to the Nazis, for there is no record of any attempts to hunt, arrest or harm foreign homosexuals, for any reason.

The evidence strongly suggests these selected German homosexuals were killed for political reasons, versus 566,000 of roughly 700,000 German Jews (85%), 23.5% of all gypsies, 10% of Poles, 12% of Ukrainians, 13.5% of Belorussians. The German military plot to kill Hitler resulted in the murder of the few men responsible, as well as 7,000 of their family members. The authors raise some interesting questions, such as where is the record of retaliation for those who hid, hired, nursed and fed persecuted homosexuals? The author’s discussions of the “butch” versus “fems” battle raging between German homosexuals and the effect of this internal war on alleged “book burning: and the like, answer many critical questions.

In the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Shirer said Hitler welcomed “Murderers, pimps homosexual perverts, drug addicts or just plain rowdies.” In fact, even Shirer sidestepped the brazenly homosexual nature of Nazi party pioneers–a critical body of knowledge for any society contending for a civil existence. The authors cite several million “Butch” type Rohm homosexual Nazis who worked as guards and directors of women’s and men’s death camps and work camps. Elie Weisel, the world famous Holocaust survivor, reported witnessing homosexual guards and administrators who “kept” and raped young Jewish boys at will, “there was a considerable traffic in children among homosexuals here, I learned later.”

Lively and Abrams report that basic mathematics refute the idea that homosexuals were killed for being homosexual. For were homosexuals treated like Jews, 2-3 million out of 2-3 million German homosexuals should have lost their businesses, their jobs, their property, their possessions and most should have lost their lives. Homosexuals would have been forced to wear pink triangles on their clothing in the streets, they would have had their passports stamped with an “H,” barred from travel, work, shopping, public appearances without their armbands, and we would have thousands of pictures of pink triangle graffiti saying “kill the faggots,” and the like. If German homosexuals were not Nazis, these 2-3 million men would have been homeless, walled into ghettos, worked as a mass labor pool, then gassed and their abuse recorded in graphic detail, as were millions of Jews. And, if Germany’s several million “gays” were not Nazi victims, they were Nazi soldiers, collaborators or murderers.

Interviewing SS General Jurgen Stroop and a German policeman, Moczarski, Kazimiers reports on the continued presence of homosexuals in the Nazi hierarchy.

A policeman well acquainted “with Germany’s homosexual element [spoke up and said they] kept files on all known and potential pederasts. He remarked that very few homosexuals in the NSDAP were as “indelicately” treated as was Rohm…”So maybe a few of the fags in the party did get knocked off. There were plenty of others who made out just fine. They remained active party members…..got promotions…..[and were] protected by the top NSDAP brass.”

The Storm Troopers and the Gestapo were schooled in what the authors call the “Hellenistic” Greek ideal of man-youth-pedagogy. Concerned about the man-boy aspect of homosexuality, The Pink Swastika connects-the-dots for readers from the homosexual power structure in Germany to the current social debate in the United States. The naked, copulatory San Francisco “gay rights” parades, the violent homosexual burning of buildings when Governor Pete Wilson originally refused gay minority rights, the bullying attacks on Cardinal O’Conner and former HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan and scores of others, note the authors, are a replay of the homoerotic Nazis.

Our own research on Heterosexual v. Homosexual Partner Solicitation Language (The Advocate v. The Washingtonian), as noted earlier, regularly finds men and boys pictured in naked Fascist chic, strutting the black Luftwaffe cap, boots, whips and black leather–Fascist sadism. While Lively and Abrams cite at least 160 ex-gay organizations nationwide which identify sex abuse, neglect and authoritarian trauma as triggering homosexual conduct, on the evidence, a post-World War II Fascist model is afoot in American schools under the protective cover of “AIDS Prevention” and “gay youth” protection, controlled largely by adult homosexual activists.

Parallel with these subversive activities is the effort to divorce children from their parents, by painting the fatal and lonely life of homosexuality with a patina of heroism and martyrdom, via mass media, institutional education and law (the privilege of marriage being a recent assault) undermining America’s survival as the international standard barer of a Judeo-Christian moral order. Lively and Abrams are concerned, and I would conceded properly so, that idealistic “gay youth” groups are being formed and staffed in classrooms nationwide by recruiters too similar to those who formed the original “Hitler youth”. The Pink Swastika authors draw our attention to the need to forcefully reverse the flood of “gay rights” legislation or face a massive increase in children dedicated to the exploitive and heartbreaking “gay life” with all that implies for the child and society.

The Pink Swastika finds that serious “Judeo-Christians” are the likely targets of this resurgent homosexual movement. In 1934, all German school children were receiving textual, verbal and cinematic classroom indoctrination into Fascism. By 1936, sexuality advocate, Wilheim Reich warned that the wide availability and juvenile use of pornography was creating heterophobic German children–boys and girls who feared and distrusted the opposite sex. The homosexual fight for Nazi victim status comes directly on the heels of our exposé of forty years of corrupt and cynical manipulation of the fraudulent “10%” of homosexuality data established by Dr. Alfred Kinsey and Co. (Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Reisman and Eichel). Recently, Newsweek challenged the fraudulent Kinsey data, asking, “How Many Gays Are There?” while the Wall Street Journal faced up to “Homosexuals and the 10% Fallacy.”

Recent admissions by Dr. John Bancroft, the new Kinsey Institute Director of Kinsey’s reliance and use of a homosexual pederast[s] to obtain Kinsey’s child sex data raises the specter that a homosexual/pederast biased male research base has become the foundation of current sexual attitudes, education, conduct, law and public policy. As no other sex researcher has ever reported his or her laboratory experiments on children to determine their sexual capacity, Kinsey remains the citation for all such scientific claims. To that end, H.R. 2749, “The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act of 1995” was introduced by Congressman Steve Stockman, December 1995, to begin to investigate that possibility. The price we now are paying for decades of Kinsey’s claims of infant and child sexuality and his 10% homosexuality data, can never be calculated.

Now the homosexual press regularly reports that scores of “closet” lesbians and homosexuals are in place to resurrect homosexuality, reshaping the nation’s ideals of child, marriage, justice, research, law, health, sexuality, crime and public policy from the old bi/homosexual sensibility. If it is true that institutional Judaism capitulated to homosexual pressure in Holocaust museums worldwide, awarding Nazi victim status to the macho male ideology which launched the Holocaust, what does growing homosexual power mean to their memory, and to the way homosexual power will exert itself in the future?

The Pink Swastika is both an excellent course in Nazi history, and an excellent warning for the future of our nation. Historical research like this should be pouring out from our institutions of higher learning. That universities are captured by “politically correct” homosexual/feminism only proves how dangerous fraud in science has been and continues to be for our nation. Lively and Abrams have done a yeoman’s job in bringing this controversial and important information to the public forum. The book should be purchased in quantity and distributed as widely as possible, for woe unto our nation should we ignore the warning of James Madison in 1832: “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both.” The Pink Swastika is critically needed popular information in the current Culture War, lest America become a Farce or a Tragedy or perhaps both.

ENDNOTES
Wilhelm Reich (1970), The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Penguin: New York, pp. 123, 127.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. (1992) Houghton Mifflin.
The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia. (1991), Columbia University Press.
Robert Elson (1976), Prelude to War. Time-Life Books, New York, pp. 70-83.
Havelock Ellis (1934), Psychology of Sex, Ray Long & Richard R. Smith, Inc., New York, p. 221-222, Ellis cites Magnus Hirschfeld’s research on boy prostitution.
Christopher Isherwood (1953), Christopher And His Kind, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, New York, pp. 4-5.
The Washington Blade, August 11, 1985, p. 47 (a homosexual press).
Carroll Quigley (1966) Tragedy and Hope, Macmillan Company, New York, p. 437.
Ibid.
Andrew Mollo, A Pictorial History of the SS, 1923-1945. Stein and Day, New York, p. 19.
John Toland (1976) Adolf Hitler, New York. Ballantine books, p.131.
See: Eldon R. James, Ed., “The Statutory Criminal Law of Germany,” Washington, The Library of Congress, 1947, pp. 114-115, and Timothy Kearley “Charles Szladits’ Guide to Foreign Legal Materials: German,” published by the Baker School of Foreign and Comparative Law, Columbia University, 1990.
Morris Ernst, American Sexual Behavior and the Kinsey Report, The Greystone Press, NY, NY, 1948.
Mein Kampf translated by Ralph Manheim, Boston: Sentry Edition: Houghton Mifflin, 1962. Also see Ingo Muller, Hitler’s Justice: Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass: The Courts of the Third Reich, 1991, where Muller writes “Accounts of the power and invluence wielded by Jews in the Weimar Republic have usually been grossly misleading. In actual fact the percentage of Jews in the population of Germany declined steadily from the late nineteenth century onward, shrinking from 1.2 percent in 1871 to 0.76 percent in 1930….0.16 percent of all government employees. p. 59.
The People’s Chronology, Henry Holt and Company, Inc. 1992.
Katz, Steven. (1989). “Genocide in the 20th Century”: Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Vol 4, No 2. Great Britain: Pergamnom Press, pp. 127-148.
William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich, New York,
Elie Wisel (1982) Night, New York, Bantam Books, p. 46.
Moczarski, Kazimiers (1977). Conversations With An Executioner. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. pp. 38-
Reich, supra, pp. 123, 127.
The Washington Post, December 8, 1995, p. B1, and December 28, 1995 Letter to the Editor.
John Toland (1976) Adolf Hitler, New York. Ballantine books, p.131.
Letter from James Madison to W.T. Barry (August 4, 1832), reprinted in The Complete Madison, S. Padower, ed. 1953, p. 337.

Please note: The citations aren’t perfect, but I’m getting ready to go on a trip and I DO THINK they’re all there.

posted by Fred Martinez @ 10:58 PM 1 comments

Wednesday, October 03, 2007
The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party
“As a Jewish scholar who lost hundreds of her family in the Holocaust, I welcome The Pink Swastika as courageous and timely . . . Lively and Abrams reveal the reigning “gay history” as revisionist and expose the supermale German homosexuals for what they were - Nazi brutes, not Nazi victims.”
- Dr. Judith Reisman, Institute for Media Education

[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html]
Homosexuality and the Nazi Party
by Scott Lively

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Lively is co-author of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuals and the Nazi Party (Keizer, Oregon: Founders Publishing Company, 1995). The Pink Swastika is not available through Leadership U., but is available by calling Jeremiah Films at 1-800-828-2290.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The pink triangle, symbol of the "gay rights" movement, is familiar to many Americans. As the badge used by the Nazis to designate homosexuals in the concentration camps, the pink triangle perfectly expresses the message of "gay rights." That message is that homosexuals are currently and historically victims of irrational prejudice and that those who oppose homosexuality are hateful bigots. This all-important victim status engenders sympathy for the homosexual "cause" among well-meaning heterosexuals. Thus, millions of otherwise rational Americans support a movement whose sole unifying characteristic is a sexual lifestyle they personally find repugnant.

When homosexuals display the pink triangle, they are equating all opposition to homosexuality with Nazism and themselves with the Jewish victims of the Holocaust. As pro-homosexual Rabbi Bernard Mehlman puts it, "Homophobia and Anti-Semitism are part of the same disease." This quote appeared in an advertisement in a homosexual newspaper. It announced the dedication ceremony of the New England Holocaust Memorial in Boston last year. An accompanying article reported that New England homosexuals had pledged $1 million to help build the memorial, including $50,000 for an initial monument consisting of six steel and glass towers. Alongside the monument is an inscription honoring homosexual victims of the Nazis. Another Holocaust memorial being prepared in New York City is expected to similarly honor homosexuals. Washington, D.C. is home to the official U.S. Holocaust Museum which not only maintains a pro-homosexual display, but also employs noted homosexual activist Klaus Mueller as a staff researcher. Other Holocaust related projects, such as the Anne Frank Exhibit now touring the United States, incorporate a similar message in their programs.

While some homosexuals were interned in Nazi work camps, the role of homosexuals in Nazi history cannot be accurately represented solely by a pink triangle. Our review of more than 200 history texts written since the 1930s suggests that a pink swastika is equally representative, if not more so. For, ironically, while many homosexuals were persecuted by the Nazi party, there is no doubt that the Nazi party itself had many homosexuals within its own ranks, even among its highest leadership.


The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party
The "gay rights" movement often portrays itself as an American phenomenon which arose from the civil rights movement of the 1950s. It is not uncommon to hear homosexualists (those both "gay" and "straight" who promote the legitimization of homosexuality) characterize "gay rights" as the natural third wave of civil rights activism (following blacks and women). In reality, however, Germany was the birthplace of "gay rights," and its legacy in that nation is truly alarming.
The "grandfather of gay rights" was a homosexual German lawyer named Karl Heinrich Ulrichs. Ulrichs had been molested at age 14 by his male riding instructor. Instead of attributing his adult homosexuality to the molestation, however, Ulrich devised in the 1860s what became known as the "third sex" theory of homosexuality. Ulrichs' model holds that male homosexuals are actually female souls trapped within male bodies. The reverse phenomenon supposedly explains lesbianism. Since homosexuality was an innate condition, reasoned Ulrichs, homosexual behavior should be decriminalized. An early follower of Ulrichs coined the term "homosexual" in an open letter to the Prussian Minister of Justice in 1869.

By the time Ulrichs died in 1895, the "gay rights" movement in Germany had gained considerable strength. Frederich Engels noted this in a letter to Karl Marx regarding Ulrich's efforts: "The pederasts start counting their numbers and discover they are a powerful group in our state. The only thing missing is an organization, but it seems to exist already, but it is hidden." After Ulrichs' death, the movement split into two separate and opposed factions. One faction followed Ulrichs' successor, Magnus Hirschfeld, who formed the Scientific Humanitarian Committee in 1897 and later opened the Institute for Sex Research in Berlin. The other faction was organized by Adolf Brand, publisher of the first homosexual magazine, Der Eigene (The Special). Brand, Benedict Friedlander and Wilhelm Janzen formed the Gemeinschaft der Eigenen (The Community of the Special) in 1902. What divided these groups was their concepts of masculinity. Ulrichs' theory embraced a feminine identity. His, and later Hirschfeld's, followers literally believed they were women trapped in men's bodies.

The followers of Brand, however, were deeply insulted by Ulrichs' theory. They perceived themselves not merely as masculine, but as a breed of men superior in masculine qualities even to heterosexuals. The Community of the Special (CS) asserted that male homosexuality was the foundation of all nation-states and that male homosexuals represented an elite strata of human society. The CS fashioned itself as a modern incarnation of the warrior cults of ancient Greece. Modeling themselves after the military heroes of Sparta, Thebes and Crete, the members of the CS were ultra-masculine, male-supremacist and pederastic (devoted to man/boy sex). Brand said in Der Eigene that he wanted men who "thirst for a revival of Greek times and Hellenic standards of beauty after centuries of Christian barbarism."

One of the keys to understanding both the rise of Nazism and the later persecution of some homosexuals by the Nazis is found in this early history of the German "gay rights" movement. For it was the CS which created and shaped what would become the Nazi persona, and it was the loathing which these "Butches" held for effeminate homosexuals ("Femmes") which led to the internment of some of the latter in slave labor camps in the Third Reich.


From Boy Scouts to Brownshirts
The "Butch" homosexuals of the CS transformed Germany. Their primary vehicle was the German youth movement, known as the Wandervogel (Rovers or Wandering Youth). "In Central Europe," writes homosexual historian Parker Rossman, "there was another effort to revive the Greek ideal of pedagogic pederasty in the movement of 'Wandering Youth'... Ultimately, Hitler used and transformed the movement...expanding and building upon its romanticism as a basis for the Nazi Party" (Rossman:103).
Rising spontaneously in the 1890s as an informal hiking and camping society, the Wandervogel became an official organization at the turn of the century, similar to the Boy Scouts. From early on, however, the Wandervogel was dominated and controlled by the pederasts of the CS. CS co-founder Wilhelm Janzen was its chief benefactor, and its leadership was rife with homosexuality. In 1912, CS theorist Hans Blueher wrote The German Wandervogel Movement as an Erotic Phenomenon which told how the organization was used to recruit young boys into homosexuality.

Wandervogel youths were indoctrinated with Greek paganism and taught to reject the Christian values of their parents (mostly Catholics and Lutherans). The CS belief in a homosexual elite took shape within the Wandervogel in the concept of "der Fuehrer" (The Leader). E.Y. Hartshorne, in German Youth and the Nazi Dream of Victory, records the recollections of a former Wandervogel member in this regard: "We little suspected then what power we had in our hands. We played with the fire that had set a world in flames, and it made our hearts hot...It was in our ranks that the word Fuehrer originated, with its meaning of blind obedience and devotion...And I shall never forget how in those early days we pronounced the word Gemeinschaft ["community"] with a trembling throaty note of excitement, as though it hid a deep secret" (Hartshorne:12). Louis Snyder notes in the Encyclopedia of the Third Reich that, "The Fuehrer Principle became identical with the elite principle. The Fuehrer elite were regarded as independent of the will of the masses" (Snyder:104). Snyder was not writing about the Gemeinschaft der Eigenen or of the Wandervogel, but of the upper ranks of the Nazi party some thirty years later. Another Nazi custom from the Wandervogel was the "Seig Heil" salute, which was an early form of greeting popular among the wandering youth. During World War I, the greatest hero of the German youth movement was Gerhard Rossbach. Described by historian Robert G. L. Waite as a "sadist, murderer and homosexual," Rossbach was "the most important single contributor of the pre-Hitler youth movement" (Waite,1969:210). More importantly, Rossbach was the bridge between the Wandervogel and the Nazi Party.

In the turbulent days following Germany's defeat in World War I, Gerhard Rossbach was one of many former army officers placed in command of Freikorps (Free Corps) units. These unofficial auxilary military units were designed to circumvent limitations imposed on German troop strength by the Allies. Rossbach organized a Freikorps called Rossbach's Sturmabteilung (Rossbach's Storm Troopers). Rossbach also built the largest post-war youth organization in Germany, named the Schilljugend (Schill Youth) in honor of a famous Prussian soldier. In The Black Corps, historian Robert Lewis Koehl notes that both Rossbach's Storm Troopers and the Schilljugend "were notorious for wearing brown shirts which had been prepared for German colonial troops, acquired from the old Imperial army stores" (Koehl:19). These Storm Troopers would soon become known as Nazi Brownshirts. Konrad Heiden, a contemporary of Hitler and a leading authority on Nazi history, wrote that the Freikorps "were breeding places of perversion" and that "Rossbach's troop...was especially proud" of being homosexual (Heiden:295). Rossbach's adjutant was Edmund Heines, noted for his ability to procure boys for sexual orgies. Ernst Roehm, recruited by Rossbach into homosexuality, later commanded the Storm Troopers for the Nazis, where they were more commonly known as the SA (an acronym for Sturmabteilung).


The Power Behind the Throne
While Adolf Hitler is today recognized as the central figure of Nazism, he was a less important player when the Nazi machine was first assembled. Its first leader was Ernst Roehm. Homosexual historian Frank Rector writes that "Hitler was, to a substantial extent, Roehm's protegé" (Rector:80). Roehm had been a captain in the German army. Hitler had been a mere corporal. After World War I, Roehm was highly placed in the underground nationalist movement that plotted to overthrow the Weimar government and worked to subvert it through assassinations and terrorism. In The Order of the Death's Head, author Heinz Hohne writes that Roehm met Hitler at a meeting of a socialist terrorist group called the Iron Fist and "saw in Hitler the demagogue he required to mobilize mass support for his secret army" (Hohne:20). Roehm, who had joined the German Worker's Party before Hitler, worked with him to take over the fledgling organization. With Roehm's backing, Hitler became the first president of the party in 1921 (ibid.:21) and changed its name to the National Socialist German Worker's Party. Soon after, Rossbach's Storm Troopers, the SA, became its military arm. In his classic Nazi history, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, author William Shirer describes Roehm as "a stocky, bull-necked, piggish-eyed, scar- faced professional soldier...[and] like so many of the early Nazis, a homosexual" (Shirer:64). Rector writes:

Was not the most outstanding, most notorious, of all homosexuals the celebrated Nazi leader Ernst Ro[e]hm, the virile and manly chief of the SA, the du buddy of Adolf Hitler from the beginning of his political career? Hitler's rise had in fact depended upon Ro[e]hm and everyone knew it. Ro[e]hm's gay fun and games were certainly no secret; his amorous forays to gay bars and gay Turkish baths were riotous. Whatever anti-homosexual sentiments may have been expressed by straight Nazis were more than offset by the reality of highly visible, spectacular, gay-loving Ro[e]hm. If there were occasional ominous rumblings and grumblings about "all those queers" in the SA and Movement, and some anti-gay flare-ups, homosexual Nazis felt more-or-less secure in the lap of the Party. After all, the National Socialist Party member who wielded the greatest power aside from Hitler was Ro[e]hm (Rector:50f).
Betraying his roots in the "Butch" faction of the German "gay rights" movement, Roehm viewed homosexuality as the basis for a new society. Louis Snyder writes that Roehm "projected a social order in which homosexuality would be regarded as a human behavior pattern of high repute...he flaunted his homosexuality in public and insisted that his cronies do the same. What was needed, Roehm believed, was a proud and arrogant lot who could brawl, carouse, smash windows, kill and slaughter for the hell of it. Straights, in his eyes, were not as adept in such behavior as practicing homosexuals" (Snyder:55). "The principle function of this army-like organization," writes historian Thomas Fuchs, "was beating up anyone who opposed the Nazis, and Hitler believed this was a job best undertaken by homosexuals" (Fuchs:48f).
The favorite meeting place of the SA was a "gay" bar in Munich called the Bratwurstglockl where Roehm kept a reserved table (Hohne:82). This was the same tavern where some of the earliest formative meetings of the Nazi Party had been held (Rector:69). At the Bratwurstglockl, Roehm and associates-Edmund Heines, Karl Ernst, Ernst's partner Captain Rohrbein, Captain Petersdorf, Count Ernst Helldorf and the rest-would meet to plan and strategize. These were the men who orchestrated the Nazi campaign of intimidation and terror. All of them were homosexual (Heiden:371).

Indeed, homosexuality was all that qualified many of these men for their positions in the SA. Heinrich Himmler would later complain of this: "Does it not constitute a danger to the Nazi movement if it can be said that Nazi leaders are chosen for sexual reasons?" (Gallo:57). Himmler was not so much opposed to homosexuality itself as to the fact that non- qualified people were given high rank based on their homosexual relations with Roehm and others. For example, SA Obergruppenfuhrer (Lieutenant General) Karl Ernst, a militant homosexual, had been a hotel doorman and a waiter before joining the SA. "Karl Ernst is not yet 35," writes Gallo, "he commands 250,000 men...he is simply a sadist, a common thug, transformed into a responsible official" (ibid.:50f).

This strange brand of nepotism was a hallmark of the SA. By 1933 the SA had grown far larger than the German army, yet the Vikingkorps (Officers' Corps) remained almost exclusively homosexual. "Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops," writes historian H.R. Knickerbocker, "had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuhrer or Obergruppenfuhrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement" (Knickerbocker:55).

In the SA, the Community of the Special's Hellenic ideal of masculine homosexual supremacy and militarism was fully realized. "Theirs was a very masculine brand of homosexuality," writes homosexualist historian Alfred Rowse, "they lived in a male world, without women, a world of camps and marching, rallies and sports. They had their own relaxations, and the Munich SA became notorious on account of them" (Rowse:214). The similarity of the SA to Freidlander and Brand's dream of Hellenic revival is not coincidental. In Gay American History, Jonathan Katz writes that Roehm was a prominent member of the Society for Human Rights (SHR), an offshoot of the CS (J.Katz:632).

The "relaxations" to which Rowse refers were, of course, the homosexual activities (many of them pederastic) for which the SA and the CS were both famous. Hohne writes that Roehm "used the SA for ends other than the purely political...Peter Granninger, who had been one of Roehm's partners...and was now given cover in the SA Intelligence Section. For a monthly salary of 200 marks he kept Roehm supplied with new friends, his main hunting ground being Geisela High School Munich; from this school he recruited no fewer than eleven boys, whom he first tried out and then took to Roehm" (Hohne:82).


Hitler's "Gay" Roots
In 1945 a Jewish historian by the name of Samuel Igra published Germany's National Vice, which called homosexuality the "poisoned stream" that ran through the heart of Nazism. (In the 1920s and 30s, homosexuality was known as "the German vice" across Europe because of the debaucheries of the Weimar period.) Igra, who escaped Germany in 1939, claims that Hitler "had been a male prostitute in Vienna at the time of his sojourn there, from 1907 to 1912, and that he practiced the same calling in Munich from 1912 to 1914" (Igra:67). Desmond Seward, in Napoleon and Hitler, says Hitler is listed as a homosexual in Viennese police records (Seward:299). Lending credence to this is the fact, noted by Walter Langer, that during several of those years Hitler "chose to live in a Vienna flophouse known to be inhabited by many homosexuals" (Langer:192). Rector writes that, as a young man, Hitler was often called "der Schoen Adolf" (the handsome Adolf) and that later his looks "were also to some extent helpful in gaining big-money support from Ernst Ro[e]hm's circle of wealthy gay friends" (Rector:52).
Langer, a psychiatrist, was commissioned by the Allies in 1943 to prepare a thorough psychological study of Hitler. His report, kept under wraps for 29 years, was published in book form in 1972 as The Mind of Adolf Hitler. Langer writes that Hitler was certainly a coprophile (a person who is sexually aroused by human excrement) and may have practiced homosexuality as an adult. He cites the testimony of Hermann Rauschning, a former Hitler confidante who "reports that he has met two boys who claimed that they were Hitler's homosexual partners, but their testimony can hardly be taken at face value. More condemning," adds Langer, "would be the remarks dropped by [Albert] Foerster, the Danzig gauleiter, in conversation with Rauschning. Even here, however, the remarks deal only with Hitler's impotence as far as heterosexual relationships go, without actually implying that he indulges in homosexuality. It is probably true that Hitler calls Foerster 'Bubi,' which is a common nickname employed by homosexuals in addressing their partners. This alone is not adequate proof that he has actually indulged in homosexual practices with Foerster, who is known to be a homosexual" (Langer:178). However, writes Langer, "Even today, Hitler derives sexual pleasure from looking at men's bodies and associating with homosexuals" (Langer:179). Too, Hitler's greatest hero was Frederick the Great, a well-known homosexual (Garde:44).

Like Langer, Waite also hesitates to label Hitler a homosexual but cites substantial circumstantial evidence that he was.


It is true that Hitler was closely associated with Ernst Ro[e]hm and Rudolf Hess, two homosexuals who were among the very few people with whom he used the familiar du. But one cannot conclude that he therefore shared his friend's sexual tastes. Still, during the months he was with Hess in Landsberg, their relationship must have become very close. When Hitler left the prison he fretted about his friend who languished there, and spoke of him tenderly, using Austrian diminutives: 'Ach mein Rudy, mein Hesserl, isn't it appalling to think that he's still there.' One of Hitler's valets, Schneider, made no explicit statement about the relationship, but he did find it strange that whenever Hitler got a present he liked or drew an architectural sketch that particularly pleased him, he would run to Hess- who was known in homosexual circles as "Fraulein Anna"-as a little boy would run to his mother to show his prize to her...Finally there is the nonconclusive but interesting fact that one of Hitler's prized possessions was a handwritten love letter which King Ludwig II had written to a manservant" (Waite, 1977:283f).
Hitler, if homosexual, was certainly not exclusively so. There are at least four women, including his own niece, with whom Hitler had sexual relationships, although these relationships were not normal. Both Waite and Langer suggest that his sexual encounters with women included expressions of his coprophilic perversion as well as other extremely degrading forms of masochism. It is interesting to note that all four women attempted suicide after becoming sexually involved with Hitler. Two succeeded (Langer:175f).

The Homoerotic Brotherhood
Whether or not Hitler was personally involved in homosexual relationships, the evidence is clear that he knowingly and intentionally surrounded himself with practicing homosexuals from his youth. Like Roehm, Hitler seemed to prefer homosexual companions and co-workers. In addition to Roehm and Hess, two of his closest friends, Hitler filled key positions with known or suspected homosexuals. Rector, himself a "gay Holocaust" revisionist, attempts to dismiss sources that attribute homosexuality to leading Nazis, but nevertheless writes that...

Reportedly, Hitler Youth leader, Baldur von Schirach was bisexual; Hitler's private attorney, Reich Legal Director, Minister of Justice, butcher Governor- General of Poland, and public gay-hater Hans Frank was said to be a homosexual; Hitler's adjutant Wilhelm Bruckner was said to be bisexual;...Walter Funk, Reich Minister of Economics [and Hitler's personal financial advisor] has frequently been called a "notorious" homosexual ...or as a jealous predecessor in Funk's post, Hjalmar Schacht, contemptuously claimed, Funk was a "harmless homosexual and alcoholic;" ...[Hitler's second in command] Hermann Goering liked to dress up in drag and wear campy make-up; and so on and so forth (Rector:57).
Igra, who confidently asserts that the above men were homosexuals, cites still other Hitler aides and close friends who were known homosexuals as well. He states that Hitler's chauffeur and one-time personal secretary, Emile Maurice, for example, was homosexual, as well as the pornographer Julius Streicher, who "was originally a school teacher, but was dismissed by the Nuremberg School Authorities, following numerous charges of pederasty brought against him" (Igra:72f). SS Chief Heinrich Himmler's "pederastic proclivities [were] captured on film" by Nazi filmmaker Walter Frenz (Washington City Paper, April 4, 1995). Reinhard Heydrich, mastermind of the first pogrom, Kristallnacht, and of the death camps, was homosexual (Calic:64). In The Twelve Year Reich, Richard Grunberger tells of a party given by Nazi propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, which degenerated into a homosexual orgy (Grunberger:70). A recent biography of Albert Speer by Gitta Sereny speaks of a "homo-erotic (not sexual) relationship" between Speer and Hitler (Newsweek, Oct. 30, 1995). Langer notes that Hitler's personal bodyguards were "almost always 100 percent homosexuals" (Langer:179). Hitler's later public pronouncements against homosexuality never quite fit with the lifelong intimacy-sexual or otherwise-which he maintained with men he knew and accepted as homosexuals.
In light of the above it is not surprising that many of those whose ideas influenced Hitler were also homo-sexual. Chief among those were occultists Jorg Lanz Von Liebenfels and Guido von List. In 1958, Austrian psychologist Wilhelm Daim published Der Mann der Hitler die Ideen gab ("The Man Who Gave Hitler His Ideas") in which he called Lanz the true "father" of National Socialism. Lanz was a former Cistercian monk who had been excommunicated for homosexuality (Sklar:19). After being expelled from the monastery, Lanz formed an occultic order called the Ordo Novi Templi or The Order of the New Temple (ONT). The ONT was an offshoot of the Ordo Templi Orientis which practiced tantric sex rituals (Howard:91).

On Christmas day, 1907, many years before it would become the symbol of the Third Reich, Lanz and other members of the ONT raised the swastika flag over the castle which Lanz had purchased to house the order (Goodrick-Clarke:109). Lanz chose the swastika, he said, because it was the ancient pagan symbol of Wotan, the god of storms (Cavendish:1983). (Wotan, the inspiration for "Storm Troopers," was the Teutonic equivalent of Baal in the Old Testament and Zeus in Greek culture). Waite notes that it was through Lanz that Hitler would learn that most of his heroes of history were also "practicing homosexuals" (Waite, 1977:94f).


Refuting "Gay Holocaust" Revisionism
"Gay Holocaust" revisionists assert that Hitler's ascension to the Chancellorship marked the beginning of a homosexual Holocaust in Germany. For example, in The Pink Triangle, Richard Plant writes, "After years of frustration...Hitler's storm troopers now had the opportunity to smash their enemies: the lame, the mute, the feebleminded, the epileptic, the homosexual, the Jew, the Gypsy, the communist. These were the scapegoats singled out for persecution. These were the 'contragenics' who were to be ruthlessly eliminated to ensure the purity of the 'Aryan race.'" (Plant:51). Rector, another revisionist, makes a similar statement: "Hitler's homophobia did not surface until 1933-1934, when gays had come to affect adversely his New Order designs-out of which grew the simple solution of murdering them en masse" (Rector:24). The fact is that homosexuals were never murdered "en masse" or "ruthlessly eliminated" by the Nazis. Yet many homosexuals were persecuted and some did die in Nazi work camps. What is the truth about Nazi persecution of homosexuals? There are several incidents in Nazi history which are most often cited as evidence of a "gay Holocaust." This list includes a series of increasingly harsh public pronouncements and policies against homosexuality by Hitler and Himmler, the sacking of the Sex Research Institute of Berlin, "the Roehm Purge" (also known as "the Night of the Long Knives"), and the internment of homosexuals in work camps.
The law against homosexual conduct had existed in Germany for many years prior to the Nazi regime as Paragraph 175 of the Reich Criminal Code, to wit: "A male who indulges in criminally indecent activity with another male, or who allows himself to participate in such activity, will be punished with imprisonment" (Burleigh and Wipperman:188). When Hitler came to power he used this law as a means of tracking down and punishing those homosexuals who, in the words of one victim, "had defended the Weimar Republic, and who had tried to forestall the Nazi threat" (ibid.:183). Later he expanded the law and used it as a convenient tool to detain other enemies of the regime.

In February of 1933, Hitler banned pornography, ho-mosexual bars and bath-houses, and groups which promoted "gay rights" (Plant:50). Ostensibly, this decree was a blanket condemnation of all homosexual activity in Germany, but in practice it served as just another means to find and destroy anti-Nazi groups and individuals. "Hitler," admit Oosterhuis and Kennedy, "employed the charge of homosexuality primarily as a means to eliminate political opponents, both inside his party and out" (Oosterhuis and Kennedy: 248).

The masculine homosexuals in the Nazi leadership selectively enforced this policy only against their enemies and not against all homosexuals. Even Rector lends credence to this perspective, citing the fact that the decree "was not enforced in all cases" (Rector:66). Another indication is that the pro-Nazi Society for Human Rights (SHR) continued to participate in German society for several years after the decree. In The Racial State, Michael Burleigh and Wolfgang Wippermann remind us that Roehm was a leading member of the SHR; and we know from Anthony Read and David Fisher that the SHR was still active in Germany as late as 1940 (Read and Fisher:245). Furthermore, Oosterhuis and Kennedy write that "although he was well known as a gay-activist, [Adolf] Brand was not arrested by the Nazis" (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:7). Some of Brand's files were confiscated by the Nazis in their attempt to gather all potentially self-incriminating evidence.

In 1935, Paragraph 175 was amended with Paragraph 175a which criminalized any type of behavior that could be construed as indicating a homosexual inclination or desire (Burleigh and Wipperman: 190). (Interestingly, the new criminal code addressing homosexuality deleted the word "unnatural" from the definition-Reisman, 1994:3.) This new law provided the Nazis with an especially potent legal weapon against their enemies. It will never be known how many non-homosexuals were charged under this law, but it is indisputable that the Nazis used false accusations of homosexuality to justify the detainment and imprisonment of many of their opponents. "The law was so loosely formulated," writes Steakley, "that it could be, and was, applied against heterosexuals that the Nazis wanted to eliminate...the law was also used repeatedly against Catholic clergymen" (Steakley:111). Kogon writes that "The Gestapo readily had recourse to the charge of homosexuality if it was unable to find any pretext for proceeding against Catholic priests or irksome critics" (Kogon:44).

The charge of homosexuality was convenient for the Nazis to use against their political enemies because it was so difficult to defend against and so easy to justify to the populace. Since long before the Nazis, homosexuals had generally lived clandestine lives, so it was not unusual for revelations of their conduct to come as a surprise to their communities when it became a police matter. This is not to say that actual homosexuals were not prosecuted under the law. Many were. But the law was used selectively against the "Femmes." And even when they were threatened, many effeminate homosexuals, especially those in the arts community, were given protection by certain Nazi leaders (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:248). Plant writes:


The most famous example is that of the actor Gustaf Grundgens...Despite the fact that his homosexual affairs were as notorious as those of Roehm's, Goering appointed him director of the State Theater...[And] On October 29, 1937 ...Himmler advised that actors and other artists could be arrested for offenses against paragraph 175 only with his personal consent, unless the police caught them in flagrante (Plant:116).
There is one additional reason why the Nazis arrested homosexuals and raided even the homes of their supporters. They were looking for incriminating evidence against themselves (the Nazi leaders). Blackmail of homosexuals by estranged partners and prostitutes was a simple fact of life in Germany. "[H]omosexuals were particularly vulnerable to blackmailers, known as Chanteure on the homosexual scene," write Burleigh and Wippermann. "Blackmail, and the threat of public exposure, resulted in frequent suicides or suicide attempts" (Burleigh and Wipperman:184). The Nazi leaders were quite familiar with this phenomenon. Igra reports that Heinrich Hoffman, the official Nazi photographer, gained his position by using information about Hitler's perverse abuse of his (Hoffman's) daughter to blackmail the future Fuehrer (Igra:74). Heiden relates another story in which Hitler bought an entire collection of rare political writings to regain possession of a letter to his niece in which he openly revealed his "masochistic- coprophil inclinations" (Heiden:385). Once he was in power he had other ways to solve these kinds of problems.

Targeting "Femmes"
The Nazis' hunt for incriminating evidence, as well as the selectivity of the Nazi violence, was obvious in the attack on Magnus Hirschfeld's Sex Research Institute, May 6th, 1933. As noted previously, the Sex Research Institute of Berlin had been founded by Hirschfeld (in 1919) as a center for "study" of homosexuality and other sexual dysfunctions. For all intents and purposes, it served as the headquarters for the effeminate branch of the German "gay-rights" movement. For this reason alone, the "Butch" homosexuals of the Nazi Party might have destroyed the Institute. Indeed, throughout the preceding years the Nazis had increasingly harassed Hirschfeld personally. Victor Robinson, Hirschfeld's biographer, wrote in 1936:

Although the Nazis themselves derived great profit from Hirschfeld's theories (and called on him personally for help), they continued his persecution relentlessly; they terrorized his meetings and closed his lecture halls, so that for the safety of his audiences and himself, Hirschfeld was no longer able to make public appearances (Haeberle:368).
Homosexualist James Steakley acknowledges the "Butch/Femme" aspect of the incident, saying that some German homosexuals "could conceivably have approved of the measure, particularly if they were Nazi sympathizers or male supremacists" (Steakley:105).
However, the attack against the Institute was not motivated solely by the Nazi enmity against effeminate homosexuals. It was an attempt to cover up the truth about rampant homosexuality and other perversions in the Nazi Party. Sklar writes that, "Hitler attempted to bury all his earlier influences and his origins, and he spent a great deal of energy hiding them...[In this campaign to erase his past] Hitler ordered the murder of Reinhold Hanish, a friend who had shared his down-and-out days in Vienna" (where Hitler is suspected of having been a homosexual prostitute) (Sklar:21). Hitler also knew that Hirschfeld's facility had extensive records that could be damaging to himself and his inner circle. This was the reason for the raid, according to Ludwig L. Lenz, the assistant director of the Sex Research Institute, who was in charge on the day of the raid. A part of the following quote was cited earlier:


...our Institute was used by all classes of the population and members of every political party...We thus had a great many Nazis under treatment at the Institute. Why was it then, since we were completely non-party, that our purely scientific Institute was the first victim which fell to the new regime? The answer to this is simple...We knew too much. It would be against medical principles to provide a list of the Nazi leaders and their perversions [but]...not ten percent of the men who, in 1933, took the fate of Germany into their hands, were sexually normal...Many of these personages were known to us directly through consultations; we heard about others from their comrades in the party...and of others we saw the tragic results....Our knowledge of such intimate secrets regarding members of the Nazi Party and other documentary material-we possessed about forty thousand confessions and biographical letters-was the cause of the complete and utter destruction of the Institute of Sexology (Haberle:369).
Burleigh and Wipperman report that the ransackers had "lists" of materials they were looking for (Burleigh and Wipperman:189) and that they carted away two truckloads of books and files. The materials taken from the Institute were burned in a public ceremony, captured on film, on May 10th. The spectacular and oft replayed newsreel footage of this event has caused the burning of books to become synonymous with Nazism. What information went up in smoke on that day will never be known, but we can infer that the pile of burning paper contained many Nazi secrets. According to homosexual sources at the time, the Nazis destroyed twelve thousand books and thirty-five thousand photographs. The building itself was confiscated from the SHC and turned over to the Nazi Association of Jurists and Lawyers (Steakley:105).

The Roehm Purge
The event in history most frequently cited as evidence of Nazi persecution of homosexuals is known variously as the Blood Purge, the Night of the Long Knives, and the Roehm Purge. Steakley writes that "the indisputable beginning of Nazi terror against homosexuals was marked by the murder of Ernst Ro[e]hm on June 28, 1934, 'The Night of the Long Knives'" (Steakley:108). It was on that night (actually over an entire weekend) that Adolf Hitler's closest aides orchestrated the assassinations of hundreds of his political enemies in one bloody sweep. Among the victims of this purge were Roehm and several of the top officers of the SA.
We have emphasized that the leadership of the SA was mostly, if not entirely, homosexual. The fact that SA leaders were the primary targets in the massacre could therefore be construed as a sort of "moral cleansing" of the Nazi ranks, which, in fact, Hitler claimed it was. But Hitler lied. The Roehm Purge was driven by political, not moral concerns. Hitler feigned disgust and outrage about the homosexuality of the murdered SA leaders to justify himself to the German people; it was a tactic he had used previously to allay public suspicions about the sexual deviancy of his inner circle. The importance of this fact is asserted in many leading works by both mainstream and homosexualist historians. The following are excerpts from four different historians who have examined the issue:


Hitler eliminated his closest friend Roehm and certain SA leaders as potential rivals. The strictly political motivation of this ruthless power play was initially too obvious to be entirely denied, but later it was conveniently obscured by charges of homosexual depravity (Haberle:369f).
The formal accusations against Roehm and those arrested with him centered on their homosexual activities, which Hitler had of course known about for fifteen years and shrugged off, it being alleged that these activities disgraced the party. For those victims without any homosexual background, "the Great Blood Purge" continued all over Germany, as Nazi leaders got rid of all their most hated enemies, as well as the inevitable "mistakes" (Garde:726f).
Ernst Roehm wasn't shot because the Nazi Party felt outraged by the abrupt discovery that he was "having" his storm troopers-that had been known for ages; but because his sway over the SA had become a menace to Hitler. In the Hitler Youth the "dear love of comrades" was evilly turned into a political end. And if the Nazi hierarchy was well larded with homosexuals, so was Wilhelm II's court and so was the Weimar Republic (Davidson:152).
Hitler himself, of course, had been well aware of Roehm's sexual orientation from the earliest days of their long association....So strong was Roehm that the Wehrmacht [German Army High Command] was concerned that he might seize control of the army. In 1934, Hitler became fearful that the Wehrmacht was plotting a coup against him to prevent such a takeover. To forestall this danger, Hitler had Roehm and about one thousand other men murdered one weekend in June 1934, the famous "Night of the Long Knives" (Crompton:79f).
Igra provides us with a long and detailed account of the power struggle which led to the purge, beginning with a refutation of the idea that it represented a policy of extermination of homosexuals by Hitler:

We shall find that, far from eliminating the sex perverts from his party, Hitler retained most of them, and that he moved against those whom he did eliminate only with the greatest reluctance and after he had been relentlessly pushed by outside forces and circumstances. On June 14 and 15 Hitler was in Venice to see Mussolini. It soon became common knowledge that the German Dictator and his entourage had made an unfavorable impression upon the Italians... Mussolini was never a stickler for puritan morality, to say the least, but there was one vice which the Italians particularly loathe; they call it il visio tedesco, the German vice. The conduct of some members in Hitler's entourage at Venice disgusted the Italians. Mussolini protested against the moral character and political unreliability of the leading personnel in the Nazi Storm Troops and warned Hitler that he would have to sacrifice his favorite colleagues if he wished to save his own personal prestige and that of his regime. Among those colleagues, Roehm, Heines and Karl Ernst were mentioned (Igra:77f).
The Roehm Purge, then, was not a "moral cleansing" of the Nazi ranks, but a re-alignment of power behind the German government which was primarily forced upon Hitler by powerful political elements whose support he needed to maintain control. Igra goes on to point out that not only did the majority of the SA homosexuals survive the purge, but that the massacre was largely implemented by homosexuals. He cites Strasser's statement that "the Chief Killers of Munich [were] Wagner, Esser, Maurice, Weber and Buch." These men "were all known to be sex perverts or sexual maniacs of one type or another," concludes Igra (ibid.:80). Plant records that the larger campaign of assassinations across Germany was orchestrated by Reinhard Heydrich, also a well-known homosexual (Plant:56). Igra addresses Hitler's justification for the purge:

In his defense before the Reichstag a week later Hitler talked of "traitors." That was his alibi...In his speech to the Reichstag he admitted that one of the motives for ordering the massacre was to get rid of the moral perverts in his party and that they were traitors because they practiced homosexualism. But under the dictatorship it was not possible for anyone to put Hitler at question. Nobody asked him to explain how it was that, if his purpose was to get rid of homosexuals, he really didn't rid himself of them but used them as the instruments of his own murder lust and still retained most of them as members of his personal entourage, as well as in key positions of the party organization and the government. Otto Strasser, in his book, The German St. Bartholemew's Night (which has not been published in English), mentions sixteen of these highly placed homosexualist officials who survived the massacres of June 30 and retained their posts (Igra:82).
In the Camps
Although homosexuals were never targeted for extermination, some were interned in Nazi work camps. The actual number of pink-triangle prisoners, estimated at 5,000-15,000 by Joan Ringelheim of the US Holocaust museum (Rose:40), was a tiny fraction of the total camp population. Of these, an undetermined percentage were heterosexuals falsely labeled as homosexuals. Homosexuals who died in the camps (mostly of disease and starvation) were "a small fraction of less than 1 percent" of homosexuals in Germany (S. Katz:146), compared to more than 85 percent of European Jewry exterminated in the gas chambers. More significantly, many of the guards and administrators responsible for the infamous concentration camp atrocities were homosexuals themselves, which negates the proposition that homosexuals in general were being persecuted and interned.
While any prisoner could be chosen as a Kapo (a slave overseer), none of the other interned groups except homosexuals had counterparts among the Nazi guards and administrators. Examples of the homosexuality of the concentration camp guards can be found in many of the personal accounts of Holocaust survivors. Elie Wiesel, sent to the Buna factory camp in the Auschwitz complex, for example, acknowledges this in his book Night:


The head of our tent was a German. An assassin's face, fleshy lips, hands like wolf's paws. He was so fat he could hardly move. Like the leader of the camp he loved children...(Actually this was not a disinterested affection: there was a considerable traffic in young children among homosexuals here, I learned later) (Wiesel:59).
In Treblinka, the narrative account of the Treblinka uprising, Steiner records the story of another Nazi administrator, taken from interviews with survivors:

Max Bielas had a harem of little Jewish boys. He liked them young, no older than seventeen. He had a kind of parody of the shepherds of Arcadia, their role was to take care of the camp flock of geese. They were dressed like little princes...Bielas had a little barracks built for them that looked like a doll's house...Bielas sought in Treblinka only the satisfaction of his homosexual instincts (Steiner:117f).
The enduring "Butch/Femme" conflict among German homosexuals clearly had a substantial bearing on the treatment of pink-triangle prisoners. Plant writes of one survivor who reported that "the guards lashed out with special fury against those who showed 'effeminate traits'" (Plant:172). And Rector records an interview with a former Pink Triangle named Wolf (a pseudonym) in which the issue of effeminacy was raised. "The ones who were soft, shall I say, were the ones who suffered terribly," said Wolf. Rudolf Hoess, the infamous commandant of Auschwitz, who may himself have been a "Butch" homosexual, defined "genuine homosexuals... [by their] soft and girlish affectations and fastidiousness, their sickly sweet manner of speech, and their altogether too affectionate deportment toward their fellows" (Hoess in Rector:137f). These "genuine homosexuals" were considered incorrigible and held in special barracks, while many non-effeminate homosexuals were released (ibid.:137). Hoess, incidentally, had at one time been a close friend of Edmund Heines (Snyder:301), the procurer of boys for Roehm's pederastic orgies.
Toward the end of World War II, many homosexuals were released from the concentration camps and drafted into the German army (Shaul:688). Steven Katz cites records that "indicate that 13 percent of all homosexual camp inmates were reprieved and released" (S. Katz:146). This was happening at the same time as the Nazis' frantic push to increase their "production" in the death camps, in an effort to exterminate every last Jew in Europe before the Allies could liberate the camps.


The American Connection
While the Nazi Party was crushed as a political force in 1945, remnants of Nazism survive around the world. As in Germany, many of these fascist groups are dominated by male homosexuals.
The most famous incident in the history of the American Nazi Party resulted from its 1977 demand to stage a march through the largely Jewish neighborhood of Skokie, Illinois, a Chicago suburb and the home of many Holocaust survivors. This plan was devised by Frank Collin, who often appeared with his followers "in full Nazi regalia: brown shirts, black boots, and armbands..." Civil authorities effectively blocked the march at first, but the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) rose to Collin's aid and forced the City of Chicago to allow it. The subsequent event drew international media attention. Homosexualists Johansson and Percy in Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence have finally revealed, more than 15 years later, that Collin was a homosexual pederast. In 1979 Collin was arrested "for taking indecent liberties with boys between ages 10 and 14" and was sentenced to seven years in prison (Johansson and Percy, 1994:130).

Meanwhile, back in Germany, the alarming increase of neo-Nazi skinheads is also linked to homosexuality. Elmay Kraushaar, a journalist for Der Spiegel, Germany's equivalent to TIME, is quoted in The Advocate:


There is a gay skinhead movement in Berlin. They go to cruising areas with leaflets that say, "We don't want foreigners." A major leader of the neo-Nazis in Germany, Michael Kuhnen was an openly gay man who died of AIDS two years ago. He wrote a paper on the links between homosexuality and fascism, saying fascism is based on the love of comrades, that having sex with your comrades strengthens this bond (Anderson:54).
Learning from History
Sadly, the homosexual dimension of Nazi history is overlooked by many historians. As Duberman, Vicinus and Chauncey have stated with the title to their "gay studies" text, the role of homosexuals and pederasts has been Hidden from History. They, of course, imagine the influence of homosexuality to be positive. From the Judeo-Christian cultural context, however, the rise of homosexuality necessarily represents the diminution of Biblical morality as a restraint on human passions. Consequently, where Judeo-Christian ideals decrease, violence and depravity increase.
It was the pederasts of the Community of the Special who sponsored the revival of Hellenic pagan ideals in German society. These men were viciously anti-Jew and anti-Christian because of the injunctions against homosexuality inherent in the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. Homosexualist Warren Johansson notes that Hans Blueher, one of the leading theoreticians of the Community of the Special, "maintained that Judaism had suppressed the homosexual aspect of its culture, with concomitant hypertrophy [enlargement] of the family" (Johansson:816). Benedict Friedlander, in an essay for Der Eigene titled "Seven Propositions," chose as his first proposition an attack on Christianity. "The white race is becoming ever sicker under the curse of Christianity, which is foreign to it and mostly harmful," writes Friedlander. "That is the genuinely bad 'Jewish influence,' an opinion that has proven true, especially through the conditions in North America" (Friedlander in Oosterhuis and Kennedy:219). For his part, Adolf Brand called Christianity "barbarism" and "expressed his desire to fight 'beyond good and evil,' not for the sake of the masses, since the happiness of 'the weak' would result in a 'slave mentality,' but for the human being who proclaimed himself a god and was not to be subdued by human laws and ethics" (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:183). We should not forget Nietzsche, who called Christianity "the lie of millennia" (Macintyre: 188).

Much has been made of the reported silence, and in some cases complicity, of the supposed Christian churches during the Third Reich. But few have noted the long period of "Biblical deconstruction" that preceded the rise of Nazism, and fewer still have chronicled the diabolical perversion of German religious culture by the Nazis themselves. While the neo-pagans were busy attacking from without, liberal theologians undermined Biblical authority from within the Christian church. The school of so-called "higher criticism," which began in Germany in the late 1800s, portrayed the miracles of God as myths; by implication making true believers (Jew and Christian alike) into fools. And since the Bible was no longer accepted as God's divine and inerrant guide, it could be ignored or reinterpreted. By the time the Nazis came to power, "Bible-believing" Christians, (the Confessing Church) were a small minority. As Grunberger asserts, Nazism itself was a "pseudo-religion" (ibid.:79) that competed, in a sense, with Christianity and Judaism.

The schools were heavily targeted in order to de-Christianize the young. Mandatory prayer in schools was stopped in 1935, and from 1941 onward, religious instruction was completely eliminated for all students over 14 years old (ibid.:494f). The Nazi Teachers Association actively discouraged its members from taking religious instruction, while at the same time many teachers of religious studies (who were all required to be licensed by the state) "inculcated neo-paganism into their pupils during periods of religious instruction." Later, teachers were outright prohibited from attending voluntary religion classes organized by the Catholic church (ibid.:495).

From the early years, leading Nazis openly attacked Christianity. Joseph Goebbels declared that "Christianity has infused our erotic attitudes with dishonesty" (Taylor:20). It is in this campaign against Judeo- Christian morality that we find the reason for the German people's acceptance of Nazism's most extreme atrocities. Their religious foundations had been systematically eroded over a period of decades by powerful social forces. By the time the Nazis came to power, German culture was spiritually bankrupt. Too often, historians have largely ignored the spiritual element of Nazi history; but if we look closely at Hitler's campaign of extermination of the Jews, it becomes clear that his ostensive racial motive obscures a deeper and more primal hatred of the Jews as the "People of God."

The probable reason for Hitler's attack on Christianity was his perception that it alone had the moral authority to stop the Nazi movement. But Christians stumbled before the flood of evil. As Poliakov notes, "[W]hen moral barriers collapsed under the impact of Nazi preaching...the same anti-Semitic movement that led to the slaughter of the Jews gave scope and license to an obscene revolt against God and the moral law. An open and implacable war was declared on the Christian tradition...[which unleashed] a frenzied and unavowed hatred of Christ and the Ten Commandments" (Poliakov:300).

There is no question that homosexuality figures prominently in the history of the Holocaust. As we have noted, the ideas for disposing of the Jews originated with Lanz von Leibenfels. The first years of terrorism against the Jews were carried out by the homosexuals of the SA. The first concentration camp, as well as the system for training its brutal guards, was the work of Ernst Roehm. The first pogrom, Kristallnacht, was orchestrated in 1938 by the homosexual Reinhard Heydrich. And it was the transvestite Goering who started the "evolution of the Final Solution...[with an] order to Heydrich (Jan. 24, 1939) concerning the solution of the Jewish question by 'emigration' and 'evacuation'" (Robinson:25). Still, despite their disproportionate role, homosexuals did not cause the Holocaust. They, along with so many others who had lost their moral bearings, were merely instruments in its enactment. The Holocaust must be blamed on the one whom the Bible compares to "a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour" (NKJ:I Peter 5:8).

Yet, while we cannot say that homosexuals caused the Holocaust, we must not ignore their central role in Nazism. To the myth of the "pink triangle"-the notion that all homosexuals in Nazi Germany were persecuted-we must respond with the reality of the "pink swastika."

[This article, excerpts from The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams (Founders Publishing Company, 1995), first appeared in Culture Wars (April 1996), edited by Dr. E. Michael Jones. The excerpt was prepared for Culture Wars by Scott Lively. Culture Wars, 206 Marquette Avenue, South Bend, IN 46617, phone (219) 289-9786.]


Bibliography
Agonito, Rosemary. History of Ideas on Women: A Source Book. New York, G.P. Putnam & Sons, 1977.
Alyson Almanac. Boston, Alyson Publications Inc., 1990.

Anderson, Shelly. "Youth." The Advocate. January 26, 1993.

Bleuel, Hans Peter. Sex and Society in Nazi Germany. New York, J.B. Lippincott Company, 1973.

Burleigh, Michael, and Wipperman, Wolfgang. The Racial State:Germany 1933-1945. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Calic, Edouard. Reinhard Heydrich: The Chilling Story of the Man Who Masterminded the Nazi Death Camps. Military Heritage Press, William Morrow and Company, 1982.

Cavendish, Richard. Man, Myth & Magic: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Supernatural. New York, Marshall Cavendish Corporation, 1970.

Costello, John. Mask of Treachery: Spies, Lies, Buggery and Betrayal. New York, William Morrow and Company, 1988.

Crompton, Louis. "Gay Genocide: from Leviticus to Hitler." The Gay Academic. Palm Springs, California, ETC Publications, 1978.

Davidson, Michael. The World, the Flesh, and Myself. London, Arthur Baker Ltd., 1962.

Dynes, Wayne. The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. New York, Garland Publishing, 1990.

Fest, Joachim C. Hitler. New York, Vintage Books, 1975.

Friedlander, Benedict. "Memoirs for the Friends and Contributors of the Scientific Humanitarian Committee in the Name of the Succession of the Scientific Humanitarian Committee." Journal of Homosexuality, January-February 1991.

Fuchs, Thomas. The Hitler Fact Book. New York, Fountain Books, 1990.

Gallo, Max. The Night of the Long Knives. New York, Warner Books, 1973.

Garde, Noel I. Jonathan to Gide: The Homosexual in History. New York, Vantage Press, 1969.

Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. The Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and their Influence on Nazi Ideology. New York, New York University Press, 1992.

Graber, G.S. The History of the SS: A Chilling Look at the Most Terrifying Arm of the Nazi War Machine. New York, Charter Books, 1978.

Greenburg, David F. The Construction of Homosexuality. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1988.

Grunberger, Richard. The 12-Year Reich: A Social History of Nazi Germany 1933-1945. New York, Ballantine Books, 1971.

Haeberle, Irwin J. "Swastika, Pink Triangle, and Yellow Star: The Destruction of Sexology and the Persecution of Homosexuals in Nazi Germany." Hidden From History: Reclaiming the Gay andLesbian Past. Duberman, Martin, Vicinus, Martha, and Chauncey, George Jr. (Eds.). United States, Meridian, 1989.

Hartshorne, E.Y. German Youth and the Nazi Dream of Victory. New York, Farrar and Reinhart, Inc, 1941.

Heiden, Konrad. Der Fuehrer: Hitler's Rise to Power. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1944.

Heritage and S.W. Jewish Press, September 16, 1983

Hohne, Heinz. The Order of the Death's Head: The Story of Hitler's SS. New York, Ballantine Books, 1971.

Howard, Michael. The Occult Conspiracy. Rochester, Vermont, Destiny Books, 1989.

Igra, Samuel. Germany's National Vice. London, Quality Press Ltd., 1945.

Johansson, Warren, "Pink Triangles." In Dynes, Wayne (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. New York: Garland Publishing, 1990.

Johansson, Warren, and Percy, William A.. "Homosexuals in Nazi Germany." In Henry Friedlander (Ed.). Simon Wiesenthal Center Annual: Volume 7. New York, Allied Books, Ltd., 1990.

Johansson, Warren, and Percy, William A. Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence. New York, Harrington Park Press, 1994.

Jones, J. Sydney. Hitler in Vienna 1907-1913. New York, Stein and Day, 1983.

Jones, Nigel H. Hitler's Heralds: The Story of the Freikorps 1918- 1923. London, John Murray, 1987.

Katz, Jonathan. Gay American History. New York, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1976.

Katz, Steven T. "Quantity and Interpretation-Issues in the Comparative Historical Analysis of the Holocaust." In Holocaust and Genocide Studies: Volume 4, Number 2, 1989. New York, Pergamon Press, 1989.

Kennedy, Hubert. "Man/Boy Love in the Writings of Karl Heinrich Ulrichs." In Pascal, Mark (Ed.). Varieties of Man/Boy Love. New York, Wallace Hamilton Press, 1992.

Knickerbocker, H.R. Is Tomorrow Hitler's? New York, Reynal and Hitchcock, 1941.

Koehl, Robert Lewis. The Black Corps: The Structure and Power Struggles of the Nazi SS. Madison Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Press, 1983.

Kogon, Eugen. The Theory and Practice of Hell. New York, Berkley Publishing Company, 1950.

Langer, Walter C. The Mind of Adolf Hitler. New York, Signet Books, 1972.

Lauritsen, John, and Thorstad, David. The Early Homosexual Rights Movement:1864-1935. New York, Times Change Press, 1974.

Levi, Primo. Survival in Auschwitz. New York, Macmillan Publishing Coompany, 1961.

Linsert, Richard. Kabale und Liebe: Uber Politik und Geschlechtsleben. Berlin, Man, 1931.

Lombardi, Michael A.. "Research on Homosexuality in Nineteenth Century Germany" (Parts I and II). Los Angeles, Urania Manuscripts, 1977.

MacDonald, Callum. The Killing of SS Obergruppenfuhrer Reinhard Heydrich. New York, The Free Press, 1989.

Macintyre, Ben. Forgotten Fatherland: The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche. New York, Farrar Straus Giroux, 1992.

Miles, David H. "Stefan, George." Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc., 1992.

Miller, Neil. Out of the Past: Gay and Lesbian History from 1869 to the Present. New York, Vintage Books, 1995.

Mills, Richard. "The German Youth Movement." In Leyland, Winston (Ed.). Gay Roots: Twenty Yearsof Gay Sunshine: An Anthology of Gay History, Sex, Politics, and Culture. San Francisco, Gay Sunshine Press, 1989.

Mosse, George L. Nationalism and Sexuality: Respectability and Abnormal Sexuality in Modern Europe. New York, Howard Fertig, 1985.

Nethercot, Arthur H. The First Five Lives of Annie Besant. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1960.

Newton, Michael. Raising Hell: An Encyclopedia of Devil Worship and Satanic Crime. New York, Avon, 1993.

Newton, Michael, and Newton, Judy Ann. The Ku Klux Klan: An Encyclopedia. New York, Garland Publishing, 1991.

Oosterhuis, Harry, and Kennedy, Hubert (Eds.). Homosexuality and Male Bonding in Pre-Nazi Germany: the youth movement, the gay movement and male bonding before Hitler's rise: original transcripts from Der Eigene, the first gay journal in the world. New York, Harrington Park Press, 1991.

Pawelczynska, Anna. Values and Violence in Auschwitz. Berkley, California, University of California Press, 1979.

Peters, H.F. Zarathustra's Sister: The Case of Elisabeth and Frederich Nietzsche. Crown Publishers, New York, 1977.

Plant, Richard. The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals. New York, Henry Holt and Company, 1986.

Poliakov, Leon. Harvest of Hate: The Nazi Program for the Destruction of the Jews of Europe. New York, Walden Press, 1979.

Read, Anthony, and Fisher, David. Kristallnacht: The Nazi Night of Terror. New York, Times Books,1989.

Rector, Frank. The Nazi Extermination of Homosexuals. New York, Stein and Day, 1981.

Reisman, Dr. Judith A. "A Content Analysis of Two Decades of The Advocate, the Gay and Lesbian National News Magazine." Work in Progress.

Reisman, Dr. Judith A., and Eichel, Edward W. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People. Lafayette, Louisiana, Huntington House, 1990.

Reiter, Joseph A. "Death in Venice." Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc., 1992.

Robinson, Jacob. "The History of the Holocaust." Holocaust. Jerusalem, Keter Publishing House, 1974.

Rose, Rick. "Museum of Pain." The Advocate, October 19, 1993.

Rossman, Parker. Sexual Experience Between Men and Boys. New York, Association Press, 1976.

Rowse, A.L. Homosexuals in History: Ambivalence in Society, Literature and the Arts. New York,Macmillan Publishing Company, 1977.

Schwarzwaller, Wulf. The Unknown Hitler: His Private Life and Fortune. National Press, Inc., and Star Agency, 1989.

Seward, Desmond. Napolean and Hitler: A Comparative Biography. New York, Simon & Schuster.

Shaul, Elisheva. "Homosexuality in the Third Reich." In Gutman, Israel (Ed.). Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. Tel Aviv, Sifria Poalim Publishing House, 198?.

Shirer, William. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. New York, Fawcett Crest, 1960.

Sklar, D. The Nazis and the Occult. New York, Dorset Press, 1989.

Skousen, W. Cleon. The Naked Communist. Salt Lake City, Utah, Ensign Publishing Co., 1958.

Snyder, Dr. Louis L. Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. New York, Paragon House, 1989.

Steakley, James D. The Homosexual Emancipation Movement in Germany. New York, Arno Press, 1975.

Steiner, Jean-Francois. Treblinka. New York, Simon and Schuster, 1979.

Strasser, Otto. Hitler and I. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1940.

Strasser, Otto, and Stern, Michael. Flight From Terror. New York, Robert M. McBride & Company, 1943.

Taylor, Fred. The Goebbels Diaries: 1939-1941. New York, G.P. Putmans' Sons, 1983.

Ulrichs, Karl Heinrich. Forschugen uner das Ratsel der Mannmanlichen Liebe. Leipzig, Max Spohr Verlag, 1989.

Waite, Robert G.L. Vanguard of Nazism: The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany 1918-1923. New York, W.W. Norton and Company, 1969.

Waite, Robert G.L. The Psychopathic God Adolf Hitler. New York, Signet Books, 1977.

Wiesel, Elie. Night. New York, Avon Books, 1969.

Wistrich, Robert. Who's Who in Nazi Germany. New York: Bonanza Books, 1984.


[ Table of Contents | ]

Email this to a friend

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
copyright © 1995-2007 Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 13 July 2002

[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html]