No need for feelings of sorrow for this guy. He's experiencing peace and comfort.
Posted on 03/26/2005 4:23:47 PM PST by InvisibleChurch
Saturday, March 26, 2005 6:22 p.m. EST Nazis Used Starvation to Kill
Confounding all conventional wisdom and human experience, many liberal groups and even some medical experts have argued for Terri Schiavo’s death.
They claim that starvation and dehydration is not painful or discomforting for her or anyone undergoing the experience.
In fact, they allege that such victims begin to experience "euphoria” as the victims draw close to death. If such claims are true, we may have to rewrite the history of such notorious events as the Holocaust – where starvation was the key process by which millions died and were later placed in crematoriums.
The internationally-accepted Geneva Convention – which identifies starvation as a war crime – also will have to be rewritten. Ditto for many statements made by reputable organizations – many of them liberal, who have condemned the practice for decades.
Strange Bedfellows
Remember that statement about politics making strange bedfellows? Perhaps such is the case with liberal activists who want Terri to die from starvation and the Nazis who killed 13 million people.
As it turns out, starvation was the primary means of killing unwanted peoples.
Shortly after World War II, a U.S. congressional committee investigated the Nazi Holocaust and found that starvation was the main instrument of torture in the concentration camps.
The Committee notes the prisoners' daily diet "consisted generally of about one-half of a pound of black bread per day and a bowl of watery soup for noon and night, and not always that."
The report continued, "Notwithstanding the deliberate starvation program inflicted upon these prisoners by lack of adequate food, we found no evidence that the people of Germany as a whole were suffering from any lack of sufficient food or clothing. The contrast was so striking that the only conclusion which we could reach was that the starvation of the inmates of these camps was deliberate."
If we believe the New York Times, what’s so bad about the Nazi’s starvation tactic?
A Times article relating to Schiavo’s death cited several "experts” who offered the new view on starvation.
"From the data that is available, it is not a horrific thing at all," Dr. Linda Emanuel, the founder of the Education for Physicians in End-of-Life Care Project at Northwestern University, told the New York Times.
The Times also cites Dr. Sean Morrison, a professor of geriatrics and palliative care at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, who insists that starvation victims "generally slip into a peaceful coma."
"It's very quiet, it's very dignified - it's very gentle," he adds.
Despite the Times’ desire to turn the truth upside down, the facts speak for themselves:
To begin with, there is the long standing and internationally accepted Geneva Convention: "The prohibition to starve civilians as a ‘method of warfare’ is included in Article 54 of Protocol I and Article 14 of Protocol II."
According to the International Criminal Court, starvation as a means of killing is a war crime. The Court noted: "Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions' is a serious violation of the laws and customs of war [52]."
The liberal human rights organization, Amnesty International, has long cited starvation as inhumane. For example, in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, the group claimed that "scores of civilian deaths, predominantly among children, from starvation and injuries [were] sustained during the conflict." Amnesty International stated at the time that it "condemns in the strongest terms the use of starvation as a weapon of war against civilians as a clear and serious violation of Geneva Conventions that Laos has ratified."
Amnesty International also blasted North Korea after the UN reported that some 2 million North Koreans have died from starvation, adding that in total, 50 percent of the population doesn't have enough to eat.
Work And Progress, a liberal Web site, was critical of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan in 2001, and even claimed the U.S. military action there had caused up to 7.5 million Afghans to be threatened with starvation. The site went on to note: "Starvation is, quite literally, torturous. And the equation will seem just about right to many people: the atrocity that the U.S. government is willing to subject a handful of people to on U.S. soil, it is willing to subject millions to in some far off land."
In 2001, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., a member of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, offered up House Resolution 102, backed by three other lawmakers, noting that during World War II, the Axis Powers – Germany, Italy and Japan – noting that many of the 18,745 American soldiers captured during the war "were subjected to barbaric prison conditions and endured torture, starvation, and disease." The treatment of American POWs "violated international human rights principles," said the resolution.
In a report by the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, regarding the "Definition of the Right to Food," the commission recommended "the right to food and nutrition was a human right." The commission also advocated "the right to food in emergency situations" should "be taken into account," to "include the obligation of states to grant access to impartial humanitarian organizations to provide food aid and other humanitarian assistance."
The New York Times may well be remembered as the newspaper that was most outraged over photos of Iraqi terrorist suspects being mistreated by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison – but claimed that starvation was a benevolent way to die.
Of course, if the Times is right - and starvation causes "little discomfort" - the paper may have uncovered a valuable new tool in the war on terror.
One wonders how the Old Gray Lady would react if U.S. interrogators began to starve terrorist suspects in a bid to extract information.
Yea, what do we think were doing putting poor Scott Peterson behind bars.
Only if they put panties on her head.
No need for feelings of sorrow for this guy. He's experiencing peace and comfort.
She is brain-damaged....NOT 'brain-dead'. Look it up...there IS a difference.Don't just swallow the Liberal lie.
I am sure that if camera's were allowed in her room right now...you would see the face of someone in a lot of pain.
Death by dehydration is very painful.
redrock
Perhaps she would have been able to eat it if she had the swallowing therapy that was denied her.
I had forgotten that. Chilling. It is now legal in Florida to remove nutrition and hydration from the disabled who would not otherwise die soon enough to suit some, so it is official policy.
Psst. does this mean that women are now their husbands chatel?
Like the fetus it once was right? But you think it is okay to "abort" a fetus?
The US is (was?)not a third world nation. This is not the Congo. Or some backwater nation that throws tires around people's necks and sets them aflame.
This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. The country of John Wayne, Audie Murphy, Sgt. York, Roy Rogers, the Lone Ranger. A country built on bravery. A country that still has people that would run UP the stairs on 9/11 to their deaths while trying to save others. More heros are overseas fighting for us today.
Don't give me some crap about courts and court cases. The bottom line is that many many people have worked very hard to kill this woman. It's been pornographic. Sickening and frightening. Not a hero in the lot.
This killing by judicial fiat is not America. It puts us on the same level as backwards people in backwards places who eat each other. We don't take the helpless among us in this country and sacrifice them. But if we do in this case it cracks the foundation of what many people like me believe what this country is about. If this woman dies America no longer has the moral authority to point fingers at anyone else. We will no longer be the good guys. Hang up the white hat.
Are you REALLY comparing "high cholestrol" and people with "diabetes" to a woman who is brain dead and cant eat/feel pain/or care for herself?? Please think again.....tinfoiler
What's the big deal? Haven't the liberals been telling us how "euphoric" people are as they are starved to death? Seems to me the Nazis were being exceedingly kind to let them die that way. </dripping sarcasm>
Shes brain dead...she wont ever get better, she wont ever feel emotion, she wont ever feed herself, she wont ever get up...nothing...she will just sit there, smiling with a lifeless, dead grin on her face. Is that what you want?
Let's follow the logic. Since the courts have seen all the facts, therefore, whatever is happening to Terri must be ok.
Problem: non sequitur.
It's the husbands decision...leave it at that.
Again, follow the logic: Since the husband is her legal guardian, therefore whatever the husband decides to do to her is ok.
Problem: non sequitur.
Looks like zarf needs a logic lesson.
-A8
You think the nazi ideology died with hitler? Do some research. Is starving the helpless an American ideal? I grew up thinking we were the good guys with the white hats that always came in to save the helpless. Unfortunately there seem to be no cowboys left, only political idealogues. And they aren't gonna save anybody or anything, including you.
My understanding is that food was available in England that could have alleviated the starvation, but that shipping it to Ireland was blocked. I could be wrong, that is just a recollection. It is true that is is different in that the blight was not planned as an effort to kill large numbers of people.
Well, you're wrong about the brain dead and you do NOT know whether or not she can feel pain. You just do NOT know that (and neither do we, the question is what do you do when the matter is in doubt).
But it's very interesting that you think people who can't eat for themselves and can't care for themselves deserve to be starved to death.
There are lots of people in nursing homes fitting the latter two descriptions. Do you think it's time for a little mercy killing spree? We could just stop feeding them and let them slowly die, I bet you'd like that.
What's your point?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.