Skip to main content

Planned Parenthood’s ‘sardonic euphemisms’

Written By | Jul 21, 2015

WASHINGTON, July 21, 2015 — 1944 could have been a watershed year for the ethics of medical research. The Council of Women in London petitioned the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which inspected Nazi prison camps, to provide “all possible protection” of female prisoners from the “barbarous [Nazi] experiments under the guise of scientific research.”

“But the ICRC offered no protection and never inquired systematically as to the extent of human experiments, although it held substantial documentation,” says the Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics.

That same year, animals like rabbits, which were used in laboratory experiments, were needed for food as the deprivations of war magnified for the German people near the end of the Second World War.

“As adults resisted, the primary targets changed to ‘racial inferiors,’ especially children, and in 1944 especially Jewish … children. The year 1944 marked a high point of unethical research in the basic medical sciences,” said the Oxford Textbook.

Move over Nazi Germany; the United States is right behind you.

Over the past few days, the mainstream media have engaged in a desperate game of cover-up. A hidden-camera video from the Center for Medical Progress shows a high-ranking member of Planned Parenthood describing in great detail the deftly-handled abortion procedures that are central to the harvesting of organs, tissue and limbs of the unborn.

  • “Planned Parenthood told Congress Monday that a secretly recorded video released last week by an anti-abortion group is fraudulent and part of a years-long pattern of illegal harassment aimed at prohibiting abortion,” said the Washington Post.
  • “While the video, which was circulated on the Internet, alleges that Planned Parenthood is guilty of the crime of selling fetal remains, the official tells her questioners more than once that the cost, $30 to $100, is reimbursement for clinics’ expenses,” said the New York Times.
  • “Most studies show that a majority of Americans have a favorable view of Planned Parenthood and support federal funding for it. But the vehement, almost obsessive opposition of those who don’t makes you wonder if there’s somthing in play that goes deeper than even the abortion issue,” said the Los Angeles Times.

Continuing the theme of blaming the messenger, Eric Ferrero, vice president of communications for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said, “At several of our health centers, we help patients who want to donate tissue for scientific research, and we do this just like every other high-quality health care provider does … A well funded group established for the purpose of damaging Planned Parenthood’s mission and services, has promoted a heavily edited, secretly recorded videotape that falsely portrays Planned Parenthood’s participation in tissue donation programs that support life-saving scientific research.”

Ferrero’s statement clearly says that if the video received by your lying eyes turns out to be true, the atrocities were clearly carried out in the name of the “patient” (the mother) working in the interest of “life-saving scientific research.”

According to the media and Planned Parenthood, the group videotaping abortion-mill body snatchers are the enemies of science — humanity, even — at least the enemies of those not chopped up and sold for life-saving medical research.

A letter from Planned Parenthood to Congress reads in part:

“A group of extremists who have intimidated women and doctors for years — in their agenda to ban abortion completely — are not ‘documenting’ misdeeds; they are trying to create them, quite unsuccessfully.”

Neo-fascist members of the New Feminism and the New Left should stop their pretentious nonsense, claiming to stand on the moral high ground while failing to meet the first tenet of the Nuremberg Code, which was released following the war-crime trails of Nazi doctors:

“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

“This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

“The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.”

Thomas Jefferson wrote into the Declaration of Independence that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are inalienable rights granted all of us by our Creator, and “that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”


That one little word, enshrined in Jefferson’s moral declaration on behalf of individual sovereignty, is like Kryptonite to the self-proclaimed super men and women of the neo-fascist Left. Nothing supersedes their will to power.

As Nazi Germany once proclaimed Jews subhumans marked for extermination or medical experimentation, so too are America’s unborn “unviable tissue mass.”

The clear inconsistency in these philosophies is that both sets of tyrants believe the “inferior” possess internal organs and body parts that perfectly represent them — the evolved demigods — in the laboratories of “life-saving scientific research,” but are unequal in stature and natural rights within the womb, the death camp or the abortion mill.

Who needs consent when you have all the power to enforce your twisted delusions of superiority.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, standing as chief prosecutor for the United States at Nuremberg, said in a summation:

“In the Nazi dictionary of sardonic euphemisms, ‘final solution’ of the Jewish problem was a phrase which meant extermination; ‘special treatment’ of prisoners of war meant killing; ‘protective custody’ meant concentration camp; ‘duty labor’ meant slave labor; and an order to ‘take a firm attitude’ or ‘take positive measures’ meant to act with unrestrained savagery. Before we accept their word at what seems to be its face, we must always look for hidden meanings.”

With that in mind, what are the “hidden meanings” behind “pro-choice” and “Planned Parenthood”?

If we are honest with ourselves, we know the answer.

Steven M. Lopez

Originally from Los Angeles, Steven M. Lopez has been in the news business for more than thirty years. He made his way around the country: Arizona, the Bay Area and now resides in South Florida.