The Rainbow Swastika (PDF book) - Scattered Seed Ministries

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Rainbow Swastika - Human History According to the New Age Page 4 of 8 fact that Sanger reprinted this line in the May 1919 _BCR_ alongside her article.) In some cases, unsavory Sanger quotes are denounced as nonexistent, whereas other sources have cited book and page for them - the Sanger statement cited above from _Pivot_ about "human weeds" and "genetically inferior races" is specifically dismissed as an "allegation" by "anonymous anti-family planning activists"). I know of no other attempt by PP to deal with Margaret Sanger's eugenics.] Did Planned Parenthood target only poor black communities for eugenic control, as most people believe? Not if the locations of their birth control clinics are any indication. Sanger herself opened one in the Brownsville section of New York - not a neighborhood of poor Afro- Americans, but immigrant Slavs, Hispanics, Italians... and Jews. [In the 1998 statement, the PPFA "refutes" the fact that Sanger targeted these groups for population control by saying that she was not promoting "abortion" among them, only "birth control"....] Were Sanger's "undesirables" limited to the socially unproductive and genetically dysfunctional? Not if we consider her own declaration that "dysgenic races" should rightly include "Fundamentalists and Catholics" - a purely religious consideration. (see _Woman's Body, Woman's Right_, Linda Gordon, p.229-334.) We will see later that, according to Bailey's New World Order, religious conviction does indeed affect one's fitness for the new human subrace. [Some sources claim that Margaret Sanger was indeed a Theosophy devotee, which would explain many of her convictions, but I have not yet found documentation for this claim.] Nazi Germany was not the first country with racial purity laws. The US Supreme Court sanctioned forced sterilization of "undesirables" for over 40 years - the only difference being that racial desirability was evaluated by social/health criteria rather than by ethnic/religious background. Following the Supreme Court ruling on "Buck v. Bell" (1927), in which Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes upheld the "Eugenics Laws" of several states, these laws were adopted by a total of 30 American states between 1927 and 1933. Before the landmark case, 17 states had already enacted compulsory sterilization laws, beginning with Indiana in 1907. These laws followed the "Model Eugenical Sterilization Law" of the Eugenics Record Office, (founded in 1910 and directed by BC League's Harry Laughlin) which called for forcibly sterilizing "criminal mental patients, retarded, blind, deaf, diseased, alcoholics, and dependents on society"; these laws also required segregation of the physically and mentally disabled in state-run institutions (where sterilization took place routinely). The State of Virginia added "unwed mothers, prostitutes, petty criminals and children with disciplinary problems" to their list. [As we know, Hitler rounded up the Jews only after legislating forced sterilizations and abortions, euthanasia, elimination of the physically and mentally disabled, and disposal of social misfits. The U.S. legal system must therefore be held responsible for encouraging Nazi eugenic policy, having enacted similar laws before Hitler even came to power. The Nazi Law for the Prevention of Progeny with Hereditary Disease did not come into being until 1933.] The U.S. eugenics laws were repealed by the Supreme Court only in 1972. [see the _Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia_, The American Life League, Chapters 53 and 105, on line via the Web] After the Nazis took eugenics to its logical and horrifying conclusions, American eugenics saw the wisdom of going "underground", promoting what their British counterparts admiringly called "crypto-eugenics": working through gradual, incremental education and media exposure to increase public tolerance (and with it legal sanction) for selection programs. It is part of the crypto-eugenics strategy to educate people that "quality of life" takes priority over life itself. "Society legalizes abortion to enhance the quality of human life." (Dr. H.G. Whittington, writing on abortion counseling strategy) "Upon the quality of human life all else depends." (Stoddard, _Rising Tide_ p.i) [Today, we are so accustomed to the mantra "Quality of Life" that many fail to notice the growing list of conditions that supposedly "threaten quality of life" - or the fact that most of them are less a threat to a fulfilled existence than to society's bank accounts. Evaluating "quality of life" by monetary cost is one of the most insulting, dehumanizing, materialistic travesties of our society... and not a word of protest from the NA philosophers who loudly denounce materialism as a global evil! So much for New Age integrity.] The first resistance to selection which the crypto-eugenicists tackled was abortion, which after decades of effort has finally resulted in the fetus being accepted as an unresponsive subhuman by most sectors of society - except for the deeply religious Jew or Christian, the informed anatomy student, and the reasonably alert pregnant woman. Second on the list is euthanasia, or "assisted suicide", which is only now beginning to show fruit. The next "selection" process to be introduced is infanticide. Moving gradually from early-stage permissiveness, legislation in the U.S. has been steadily pushing abortion limits which have now reached to the very moment of birth; "partial-birth abortion" was recently (Aug. 2000) sanctioned by the Supreme Court in a controversial 5-4 decision (which incidently invalidates contrary laws in 30 states and the sensitivities of 2/3 of the American public). From there, it is a short step to the proposal which seemed lunatic less than 3 decades ago: "Most birth defects are not discovered until birth. If a child were not declared alive until 3 days after birth, the doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose, and save a lot of misery and suffering. I believe this view is the only rational, compassionate attitude to have." (Nobel Prize winner and ethicist Dr. James D. Watson, 1973, emphasis mine.) Margaret Sanger, more than a generation before Watson, already saw cases where even perfectly healthy babies should be spared the "misery" of life: "The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it." (Sanger, _Women and the New Race_, 1920, p.67) And her colleague, Madison Grant, saw infanticide as a natural process which could aid the "preservation of the species", if it weren't for the "sentimental beliefs" inherited from Judaism and Christianity. As could be expected, "quality of life" was cited when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the "euthanasia" of "Baby Doe" of Bloomington, Indiana (1982-3), which in fact was premeditated infanticide (death by starvation) of an unwanted child. In fact, some would like to go even farther, equating the "quality of life" which merits being born at all with a genetic forecast of good health for one's entire life: "If we could tell what fetuses are going to be affected with cancer in their 40s and 50s, I would be for aborting them now." (Dr. Cecil B. Jacobson, Chief of the Reproductive Genetics Unit, George Washington University Hospital, quoted in _Psychology Today_, Sep. 1975, p.22) This will likely be the first application of the famous Genome Project, which is endeavoring to identify and "map" as many as possible of the 10,000+ human genes: "It is highly likely that within a decade [from 1990], tests for a variety of aberrant genes [those which show a higher-than-average chance of developing a disease or disorder] will be cheap and easy enough to permit testing of large numbers of people.... As the list of known defective genes grows, there will be mounting pressure for mass screening of the population, at least of the newborn population.... As prenatal genetic diagnosis becomes simpler and easier, the temptation will arise to use it for less severe genetic aberrations...." (Jerry Bishop and Michael Waldholz, _Genome_. See pp.17-20, 278, 308). [To put things in perspective, ponder the fact that The Genome Project is a multi-billion-dollar effort, mostly financed by the US government. Why aren't the champions of humanism protesting about the many social needs that could be alleviated with those billions? Why should an academic research project rate such an outrageous budget? Because it's the eugenicist's spiral stairway to heaven, promising a powerful shortcut to "creating a race of thoroughbreds"; or in NA terms, it provides micro-screening for the "starseed" quality needed to populate the coming Age of Aquarius.] Most assume that abortion and euthanasia laws uphold "pro-choice", ie, that such "selections" are explicitly left up to the affected individual or family. Isn't the abortion credo summed up in "My body, my choice..."? A less-publicized element in landmark abortion laws, such as "Roe v. Wade" (1973) and the American Law Institute Model Penal Code (1962), is thatthe doctors - not the parents - are given "the basic responsibility" for deciding abortions. Could abortion legislation ever be interpreted to force certain women to abort their babies for the http://philologos.org/__eb-trs/naB.htm 2/26/2012
The Rainbow Swastika - Human History According to the New Age "good of society"? The sacred assumption of "woman's right to choose" was suspended years ago in China, where a nationwide forcedabortion program is funded by the UN "Fund for Population Assistance" [sic]. What about the newer movement for assisted suicide, respecting an individual's "right to die with dignity"? The World Health Organization reported that at least 50 million "missing" Chinese women are possible euthanasia victims in a country that chooses to place higher value on its males. (WHO Regional Committee for the Western Pacific, in a UN report released Sept. 26, 1997) How could this take place with the knowledge and approval - and assistance - of that global champion of Human Rights, the United Nations? Page 5 of 8 The answer is alarmingly simple. In the New Age Plan to which the UN is dedicated,"quality of life" is a collective value, not to be interpreted by the selfish desires of an individual or group. Certain forward-looking global figures have been telling us for decades that the individual's "quality of life" is secondary to that of the community: "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are basic rights. But they are the rights of the individual and were listed [in the Declaration of Independence] at such a time when the literatures of freedom and dignity were concerned with the aggrandizement of the individual. They have only a minor bearing on the survival of a culture." (B.F. Skinner, prominent Harvard psychologist and writer). "The ill-conceived 'love of neighbor' has to disappear, especially in relation to inferior or asocial creatures... in order to secure the maintenance of a hereditarily sound and racially pure people.... The life of an individual has meaning only in the light of that ultimate aim." (Dr. Arthur Guett, Nazi Director of Public Health) "We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices." (U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, in Buck v. Bell) "Society as the trustee of life is responsible to [collective] life for every botched [individual] life that comes into existence... [therefore society should] make it impossible for them ever to see the light of day." (Friedreich Nietzsche) [in all of the above, emphasis is mine to show parallels] 3d. Balance with the Earth is a NA principle which reminds mankind that in the midst of all his advances, he must not forget that he is also part of a Bigger Design in the cosmos. We might assume that this is meant to offset the eugenic mentality of omnipotence and impart a humbler perspective of man's position - and so it is at the grassroots level. However, it is a two-tiered philosophy which further serves the eugenics policy with regard to the upper ranks of NA leadership. Part of man's enlightenment is to realize his responsibilities to care for the Earth. [Please note that New Agers are not speaking here about ecology, although they use genuine ecology to attract caring, responsible people. We are now examining a religion in which man serves the Earth, capital "E", as a goddess/mother.] While man is certainly obligated to take better care of the planet's resources, in the NA value system the Earth does not exist to serve and sustain man; nor is man, for all his uniqueness in nature, to be regarded as superior to nature in any way. Both concepts, derived from Judaism, are arrogant and wrong. "To give preference to the life of a being simply because it is a member of our species would put us in the same position as racists." ("bioethicist" Peter Singer, _Animal Liberation_. Significantly, Professor Singer is now Chairman of Princeton University's "Center for Human Values".) In the same spirit, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (champion of compulsory sterilization laws as noted in theeugenics section) commented, "I see no reason for attributing to man a significance different in kind from that which belongs to a baboon or a grain of sand." But it is not enough that man is no longer to be considered the crowning achievement in creation, or even that "Mother Earth's needs" must come before those of global humanity. By some peculiar reverse logic, man in his newly-found godhood begins his divine "at-one-ment" with Nature by admitting that he is an alien, an intruder, a blight on Nature: "Human happiness and certainly human fecundity are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn't true.... We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth.... Until such time as homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along." (U.S. National Park Service biologist David Graber, reviewing Bill McKibben's _The End of Nature_ in _The Los Angeles Times_, Oct. 22, 1989) "The real enemy [which humanity must unite to fight] is humanity itself." (_The First Global Revolution_, Club of Rome, p.115) "[Mankind is] the cancer of the planet." (U.S. Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 31, 1966, p.176) Accordingly, the U.S. government is currently setting aside huge tracts of American land which will be off-limits to human beings, including locations where forcible population transfer will be necessary. Clearly the much-publicized NA creed of "returning to Nature" can mean something not anticipated by many who have jumped on the "Earth First" bandwagon. To deal with this "cancer" which is humanity, not only is the quality of human life to be strictly controlled, but the quantity as well. Drastic reduction of the human "plague" is a NA mandate of the highest order, and therefore (human) over-population is sold by the Western media and government as the greatest menace facing the Earth today, beginning with the landmark book, _The Population Bomb_, by Paul Ehrlich: "We must cut out the cancer of population growth. Coercion? Perhaps, but coercion in a good cause." (p.11) The Georgia Guidestones, a tourist site dubbed "America's Stonehenge", is a monument to New Age priorities, and over-population gets attention from first to last - literally. Engraved on huge granite slabs in 12 different languages (including Hebrew) are a NA equivalent to the Ten Commandments, said to be dictated by anonymous "guides". Guideline Number One specifies that earth's population must be reduced to 1/2 billion in order to "balance with Nature", implying that at least 80% of humanity must be eliminated. Guideline Number Ten reads: "Be not a cancer on the earth - leave room for nature, leave room for nature." While the Guidestones were erected by an anonymous group which cannot claim to represent NA leadership worldwide, prominent figures concur that catastrophic population reductions are necessary for humanity's advancement: "The total world population should be not more than 2 billion, rather than the current 5.6 billion [in 1994]." (Cornell University professor David Pimentel, speaking at the American Association for the Advancement of Science) The UN was even more specific: "A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard, 2 to 3 billion would be possible." ("UNEP Global Assessment Report", Phase One Draft, sec.9) [According to the UN Population Census table, its 1 billion limit would take us back to the global population of the year 1804, and 2 billion to 1927.] At the "State of the World Forum", sponsored by the Gorbachev Foundation and attended by many world leaders (San Francisco, 1995), Dr. Sam Keen, a respected NA philosopher, proposed the more stringent Georgia Guidestones level of 1/2 billion: "Cut the population [of roughly 5.8 billion that year] by 90% and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage." (William Jasper, "Global Gorby", _The New American_, Oct. 30, 1995) Al Gore, U.S. Vice President at the time, went so far as to blame overpopulation in Third World countries for global warming. (_Washington Times_, "Third World Birth Control Tops Gore's List of 'Global Warming' Cures", Oct. 1997) [How an abundance of dark-skinned babies can affect global temperatures more than an abundance of American cars, power plants, shopping malls and air conditioners is a mystery I'm still pondering. The fact that the man wasn't laughed out of office provides yet more food for thought.] [Note: Reputable scientists have been offering proof that the earth is not overpopulated at all, but that the available land, food and populations are not being managed efficiently. Consider Colin Clark, former Director of the Oxford University Agricultural Economic Institute, who determined that with today's technology enough food can be produced to feed 35.1 billion people with "an American-type diet" using only 50% of the earth's land mass. Or Roger Revelle, former Director of the Harvard Center of Population Studies, who came up with a http://philologos.org/__eb-trs/naB.htm 2/26/2012
Page 1 and 2: The Rainbow Swastika - Education fo
Page 9 and 10: The Rainbow Swastika - The Gods of
Page 17 and 18: The Rainbow Swastika - Human Histor
Page 19: The Rainbow Swastika - Human Histor
Page 23 and 24: The Rainbow Swastika - Human Histor
Page 25 and 26: The Rainbow Swastika - Nazism and t
Page 37 and 38: The Rainbow Swastika - New Age Miss
Page 51 and 52: The Rainbow Swastika - New Age View
Page 59 and 60: The Rainbow Swastika - The Plan of
Page 67 and 68: The Rainbow Swastika by Hannah Newm
Page 69 and 70: The Rainbow Swastika - Introduction
Page 71 and 72:
The Rainbow Swastika - Introduction
Page 73 and 74:
The Rainbow Swastika - Introduction
Page 75 and 76:
The Rainbow Swastika - The Transfor
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
The Rainbow Swastika - A Jewish Res
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91:
show all

The Rainbow Swastika (PDF book) - Scattered Seed Ministries

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?