Moscow-run rabbinical conference brags of Jews ‘bringing the corona virus vaccines into the world’

Chief rabbi of Moscow and chairman of the conference of European Rabbis, Pinchas Goldschmidt (L), speaks next to European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek during a press conference on May 30, 2011 with other religious leaders after a meeting to discuss rights and democracy at EU headquarters in Brussels. (GEORGES GOBET/AFP via Getty Images)

“The 3 vaccines in the final stage were created by Jewish scientists; Modern, Pfizer and the Gamlia Institute, while the virus of hatred against Jews is only erupting more strongly, “said Count Goldschmidt at a conference opened today at the Conference of European Rabbis (Haredi)


By Hanani Breitkopf

November 18, 2020 Anno Domini
Translated from the Hebrew

The European Rabbinical Conference convened today (Wednesday) as well as tomorrow, via the Zoom, for its biennial conference. Among the guests were the President of the European Parliament, Chief Rabbi David Lau, and the Minister of the Diaspora, Omar Yankelevich.

The chief rabbis and chief fathers of the tribunals from European countries, came together to discuss halakhic, personal and welfare issues that concern the Jewish communities around the world and especially in the Corona era that severely damaged European Jewry in particular and in general.

In the discussions chaired by the President of the Great Conference of Moscow, Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, and the Chairman of the Standing Committee, Rabbi Menachem Gelli, Rabbi of London; Geneva, and Strasbourg.

The conference was opened by Rabbi Gaali in the Psalms for the Medicine of the Governor of Europe, Rabbi Hanoch HaCohen Ben Beila Arentroy, as well as in remarks in memory of the late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sachs. Remembrances were delivered in his memory.

The guest of honor at the conference was David Cecily, President of the European Parliament, who spoke of the rising anti-Semitism in Europe and said: “No one should be seen as a minority because of their religion. Everyone should be seen as a full-fledged European citizen. We will not tolerate anti-Semitism and violence in Europe.”

“I accept your position that this is a dangerous virus and we have a responsibility to fight it with greater determination.”

Later, a discussion took place with the President together with the President and Rabbi of Moscow, Pinchas Goldschmidt, who expressed the fears of the Jewish community in Europe about legislation in various countries that poses a threat to slaughter or circumcision, and the constant fear of terrorist attacks in Paris and Nice in recent weeks.

At a past conference of the conference in Jerusalem, with Rabbi Lau (Photo: Eli Itkin)

The GRP sought President Sasuli’s assurance that the protection currently enjoyed by the Jewish community would be enshrined in European law. “We are concerned about the rise of the far right across Europe and the dangers facing religious communities because of Islamic extremism.”

GRP Goldschmidt described anti-Semitism as another virus to be fought and said that the European Union must work for the well-being of the Jewish people and communities.

“I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Jews are the ones who are currently bringing the corona virus vaccines into the world. The three vaccines that are in the final stages have been created by Jewish scientists; “Bursts harder,” said the GRP.

Sasuli responded to the GP and said: “We will not tolerate anti-Semitism and violence; I accept your position that this is a dangerous virus and we have a responsibility to fight it with greater determination.”

“Physical violence and desecration of buildings or cemeteries experienced by Jewish communities throughout Europe are unbearable. He said there is no room for indifference in the face of these acts and that states and the EU itself must enforce appropriate measures against them.”

The Chief Rabbi of Israel, David Lau, said at the conference that he managed to prevent a number of conversions abroad. “I informed everyone that only a certificate signed by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel is an acceptable conversion certificate, certified”.

Rabbi Moshe Lebel of the European Rabbinical Conference expressed the concern of European rabbis about the proposed conversion law on the eve of the High Court decision on the matter, and that the voice of Diaspora Jewry was not heard.

“Unfortunately, we hear the voice of ‘Diaspora Jewry’, ostensibly from the United States, of bodies that are far from the law and the foundations of the Torah and the Holy and the voice of the keepers of Kerem Yisrael the courts and rabbis of Europe is not heard.”

Rabbi Lebel reminded the participants of the Berlin agreement signed between the European Rabbinical Conference and the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, under the guidance of the GDO, according to which uniform criteria were set regarding conversion and the central part of the GRD Lau in its preparation and existence.

GRD Lau replied that the Rabbi strongly opposes the proposed law and the outline of miracles. “Indeed, Daraa’s Had is one. We are fighting the proposed conversion law and the outline of miracles.”

In a professional discussion with the Minister of Diaspora, Ms. Omer Yankelevich, the participants raised a number of issues in the field of strengthening communities in Europe and especially support for the future generation.

The minister said that “the community framework, which is the connecting thread between the Jew and the community, is currently at a very critical point. I am aware that the difficulty of maintaining an education system and holding prayers, holidays and community events is almost impossible.”

“You rabbis are the spearhead of the people of Israel in preserving their identity, and I thank God for the right to head an ministry that faces these challenges. We are preparing some excellent programs to help you with this; The issue of the budget today, as you all know, is not simple, but my office will help as much as I can to meet the challenges, especially at the critical point where we are today.”

Tomorrow, as stated, the discussions of the Standing Committee on Slaughter in Poland and Belgium will continue. Monitoring of the Agunot Law in Israel, with the participation of MK Yaakov Asher, Chairman of the Knesset’s Constitution Committee.

The situation in the United Arab Emirates community. Bill for Agunot in the Netherlands. A mass grave discovered in the city of Jaslo in Poland. Developments on the subject of the Vilna Cemetery and the establishment of an organization of rabbis of Islamic countries.

5 comments

  1. As mentioned before it would_not_surprise me if jaws fauci is a crypto/marrano. Sadly if you look at all these megacorps most of the ceos and upper management are jews cjews. The crypto rockefellers took to commercializing, monopolizing and fully controlling the medical profession long ago. I was reading eustace mullins book on this. They also did this with pagan state education, science etc It’s certain that at some point we’ll have a major death toll in the USA from all these schemes the serpent people perpetuate.

    Only takes one fake terrorist attack to stop the grocery trucks, or the megacorp “farms” to fail in some way, chemical attack by “skinheads” who knows. One huge dow crash to communize housing of all types, and you can tell it’s just totally fluffed. Even just the jew Fed to drastically pull back, all it takes is some mega event, then the jews(or their government) swoop in to buy it all up cheap, happened many times. I’ve actually been to some of these places where these fires are currently in CA and it’s very remote, small mountain towns. It’s statistically impossible to get all this fire activity of the last few years, these are started deliberately. Either via laser satellites, plane mounted weapons or even good old on the ground collaborators, perhaps in NFS uniforms. It’s just too useful to the beast empire to be a coincidence. Masks required, vaccines required in places and now smoke all over the west, strategically placed bc they know the wind directions from years of data. Oh and weather manipulation on top of that, but even more is the constant repetition of lies, hypnotism making it “fact” in peoples minds. That’s the scariest part, regular people of all types believing these lies or that this is all just happening naturally/randomly to them. These are the people who will go along with anything_anything, concentration camps, police state methods etc and you can bet it won’t be reported on accurately if at all so to them it doesn’t exist if it’s not on the tv or what’s really happening if it’s presented in a curated manner etc

    Now I’m of the opinion that this whole afghanistan thing is a totally planned distraction and of course another implementation of the Kalergi Plan. Bring a bunch of probably cryptos into this and other countries, give them more than any taxpayer peon could ever get free and then you have an insular community of collaborators to do operations under cover of being a “protected” class, more equal than everyone else hypocrisy. Of course there is the war for profit part of it too.

    We know dang well that a withdrawal was done with a full understanding, probably to do with pipelines and drug routes/defined profit cuts. Now these rat pols around the world are getting jew political points and free federal money to bring these foreigners, probably cryptos, into different places. Remember the iraqis that bush, buchs crypto, brought into the country? Yeah these are a pool of unknown agents for various nefarious operations. Perhaps we’ll get another fully planned terrorist attack with the result of more patriot acts, airport soft concentration camps/interrogation conditioning or worse. Some of these could even be used to start forest fires, if laser mounted satellites are not preferrable, anything. They’re probably going to bring 11,000 out, they’ll get here on 11/11 etc Maybe the shadowy taliban are actually just crypto leadership who knows. Everything the j-m-m mafia does is evil, no good in it.

  2. Florida governor: Meeting in Israel didn’t violate law

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis defended a meeting he held with the state’s independently elected Cabinet in Israel last week, saying Tuesday that a lawsuit filed by an open government watchdog group and several media outlets challenging the legality of the meeting was “frivolous.”

    DeSantis’ remarks came after meeting with the Cabinet in the state Capitol six days after their meeting at the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem. He was asked about the lawsuit filed by the First Amendment Foundation and several news outlets claiming the meeting violated the state constitution and laws that require meetings be accessible to the public.

    https://news.yahoo.com/florida-governor-meeting-israel-didnt-181431658.html

    The Jerusalem meeting was streamed live by The FLORIDA Channel and reporters from Florida were in attendance. It was also shown live on screens in the Cabinet’s usual meeting room at the Capitol, and a conference line was used in case any Floridians wanted to comment on the discussion DeSantis and the Cabinet had with Israeli experts on water supplies and emergency response. None did.

  3. MRNA Vax Exempt in the US.
    All Congress and staff.House and Senate.
    6000 White House Employees.
    2500 Pfizer Staff,1500 Moderna Staff,120,000 J+J Employees.
    15000 CDC staff
    14000 FDA Staff
    300000 Chinese Students.
    2 Million Illegal Aliens.
    https://stateofthenation.co/?p=88299

  4. Jewish Blood libel, past and present through abortion and Covid vaccines

    I never thought of this until I read this Jon Rappoport article that babies were an essential part in the making of vaccines…

    What was more an issue was the fact that LIVE babies, part of PLANNED abortions, or should I say part of INFANTICIDES, were born alive outside the wombs to get live hearts and organs for these lab experiments…

    This situation leads me to believe that we have our own city, Framingham, pushing these experimental vaccines using technology that comes out of a Frankenstein movie and nobody is connecting the dots here.

    It’s not that vaccines are the problem enough, but that how these were used and how LIVE BABIES were used, no different than the Aztec sacrifices back in the yonder days slicing victims open to get a beating piping heart and yet we look at those people as being uncivilized peoples, and yet our current society is doing these sacrifices now in a grander scale without people even knowing the background facts…

    Little did I know that the people who protected animals from these cruel lab experiments rejoiced when it became known what was happening to these innocent creatures and their complains saved these creatures but failed to realize that LIVE BABIES were next in this cause to cure so called diseases that probably don’t exist in the first place, and are just returning health issues brought on by vaccines in the first place…causing more vaccines after vaccine to cure other disease “variants” that will only use up the Greek alphabet in procuring more vaccines which caused the health issues in the first place…

    The moral problem for Catholics here is obvious when we all know the Catholic Churches stand on abortion but fail to realize that the vaccine industry relied on abortions and even worse procured LIVE BABIES for development of these vaccines, which as far as I am concerned now, are criminally are being injected into children….

    Blood libel

    “Blood libel or ritual murder libel is an antisemitic canard which falsely accuses Jews of murdering Christian children in order to use their blood in the performance of religious rituals. Historically, echoing very old myths of secret cultic practices in many prehistoric societies, the claim as it is leveled against Jews, was rarely attested to in antiquity.” Wikipedia

    The dilemma here is our own health departments, politicians, schools and enforces of these vaccines rules are part of a chain of hand slappers advocating these vaccines whose origins are linked to evils worse than the blood libels accusations that came against the Jews which were denied ever from happening by the Jews themselves, but now these same peoples, Jews, run the companies the original blood libel accusations can now made in the first place. In other words, these Jews own all the vaccine companies AND the abortion medical waste disposal services whose past and now, are involved the harvesting of live babies for profit in one blood libel that is TRUE, and after, dispose of those bodies through companies like Stericycle, this can’t be denied…How do they get out of this predicament of this modern BLOOD LIBEL?

    How in good conscience can all these vaccine political and health pushers be involved in companies that kill live babies and then later take away the waste? It’s unconciable….If you refuse the vaccine refuse it on those arguments….

    Joe Rizoli

    Murdering infants to obtain fetal tissue for vaccine research
    An interview with AnnaMaria Cardinalli

    by Jon Rappoport
    (To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

    For my recent series of articles on the murder of infants to obtain fetal tissue for vaccine testing and research, I gained key information from investigative reporter AnnaMaria Cardinalli’s article, “Catholic Conscience and the COVID-19 Vaccine,” in Crisis magazine.

    AnnaMaria agreed to do an interview on this and related subjects. The interview speaks for itself—and it should provide people a VERY fundamental reason for rejecting the COVID vaccine.

    Q: It seems you’ve lived at least several lives side by side. You’ve earned a lofty worldwide reputation as an operatic contralto and classical guitarist; you’re a licensed private investigator; you carried out extensive research for the US military in Afghanistan; you own a private security firm; you donate all your earnings to a Catholic order which wants to start an orphanage for exploited children. And I’m not covering all the bases. It’s rather mind-blowing. Before we dive into the subject at hand, can you speak to this variety and achievement?

    A: Ha! Your question is very flattering and I’m hardly at issue here, but I’ll be happy to answer. The variety of work I’ve been involved in is so wildly unlikely that I could have never sat down and come up with it as a plan! The one factor underlying all it is my incredible fortune to have been raised soundly in the Catholic Faith by my mom, so despite my own many failings, I knew enough to put my life completely at the disposal of God’s will from an early age. I find utterly astounding the adventures on which He’ll lead a soul when He’s given that freedom. Making music was always my personal hope, but the rest came as a natural consequence of responding to circumstances around me with whatever capacities I had the ability to respond. That’s the very definition of responsibility (“response ability”), and a real means by which God guides our lives, don’t you think?

    Q: In your wide range of experiences, did medical issues ever pop up on your radar?

    A: Medical issues arose in two ways. On one hand, when I worked for the FBI and was embedded with the Joint Special Operations Command In Iraq, I received truly fantastic, cutting-edge training in a collateral duty as a Tactical Operational Medic. Later, in Afghanistan, I participated in medical missions to help assess rural tribal community needs—particularly the medical needs of women and children. Through these military experiences, I found a passion for emergency medicine. I recently re-certified as an EMT to better assist my community’s current medical mission to the homeless (sosvan[dot]org), and I continue to pursue more advanced certifications.

    On the other hand, I do not approach the issue of the cell line origins as a practitioner or any sort of medical expert, but as an investigative journalist, simply seeking out the facts and holding them to the light of common logic. My thinking is that the factors necessary to understand the nature of what we put into our bodies must be, at least on a basic level, accessible and comprehensible to the general population, and one need not be a medical expert to grasp them. Otherwise, how could most of us make an informed decision? We can’t allow clear, critical truths to be obfuscated by the statement, “You’re not an expert. You wouldn’t understand.”

    Q: How did you become interested in the very specific origin of the fetal cell line, HEK 293? What made you think it might be important?

    A: I was led to interest in HEK 293 via a long path. My experience in Afghanistan imparted to me a particular investigative focus on Human Trafficking. I’ve written and worked extensively on the issue, and the more I learn, the more I am overwhelmed by its prevalence, both internationally and on our own soil. In recent years, while the China Tribunal brought the harvesting and sale of organs belonging to unwanted citizens into clear focus overseas, the Planned Parenthood expose by David Daleiden and others brought the same practice to light in the US. Both these developments solidified the trafficking issue in my mind not only as one of forced labor or sexual exploitation but of the complete commoditization of the human person—the viewing of the human being as a mere collection of occasionally useful parts, lacking any other value. This should frighten every person, regardless of their faith background or lack of one, because history shows us over and over again that it’s when we fail to recognize our common humanity that atrocities prevail.

    With regard to HEK 293 specifically, for Catholics like myself, it is a grave moral responsibility to examine whether any action one takes participates in, perpetuates, or encourages such evil. We are bound to inform our own individual consciences and act in accordance with them. So, when the COVID vaccine became available, I sought to find out all I could about the nature of its origins and was led right back into the human trafficking concerns that plague me. It was in this research that I came across the work of the biologist and vaccine developer Pamela Akers. Her public acknowledgement of the necessary procedure for ensuring the viability of Human Embryonic Kidney (HEK) cells coincided with what medical professionals had shared with me privately.

    For me, this was enough to raise concern that warranted further investigation before taking the vaccine. Sadly, the more the matter is investigated, as it was by the courageous, thorough, and insightful author of the Gateway Pundit article, the more evidence arises supporting my worst fear—that a perfectly innocent living child, a healthy little girl, born alive and outside the womb, was killed for and by the harvest of her organs, and that this is a practice that may underlie great parts of the research industry. Believe me, I am longing to find firm and indisputable confirmatory evidence that this nightmare scenario is NOT the case. However, your in-depth coverage of the subject following the Crisis and Gateway Pundit articles seems to continually contribute direct, expert-based medical evidence of the horrifying truth. Saddening as it is, I truly appreciate what you are accomplishing.

    Q: The HEK (Human Embryo Kidney) 293 fetal cell line has been used to test COVID vaccines. That makes its origin vividly important now. How did you become convinced that the evidence pointed to the removal of an alive infant from her mother’s womb, and then the killing of that infant, in 1972, in the Netherlands, in order to harvest her kidneys—which would be used to create the HEK 293 cell line?

    A: I reiterate that I had to be convinced by simple logic that anyone, not medical researchers exclusively, could follow. In fact, the more specialized the language describing a medical moral issue becomes, the more it can be used to obscure the facts. I would almost laugh, if not for the gravity of the issue, at hyper-euphemistic descriptions one finds in the medical literature. It discusses, for instance, situations like the finding of electrical impulses in the cardiac tissue of the POC.

    First of all, “POC?” Product of conception? What a way to talk around an issue! I’m a proud product of conception and have never met anyone who wasn’t! Electrical impulses in the cardiac tissue? With fewer keystrokes, that could be called “a heartbeat.” So, I’m a POC with intact electrical impulses in my cardiac tissue or, if anyone were looking to save on ink, “alive.” Please, though, forgive my digression.

    I worked to write very carefully in the Crisis article the simple facts that concerned me about the origins of the HEK 293 cell line. Rather than try to summarize that argument in this interview and thus potentially miss a critical component–may I please direct interested readers to the article at the link below?

    Catholic Conscience and the COVID-19 Vaccine [note: the link to this article is in my blog posting of this interview]

    I became further convinced of the reality following the publication of the Gateway Pundit exclusive which offered some insightful analysis taking into account the recent Pfizer whistleblower revelations. I’d also like to direct anyone interested to that great article with a link below.

    Exclusive: Pfizer’s Nervousness About Its COVID Vaccine’s Origins Conceals a Horror Story [note: the link to this article is in my blog posting of this interview]

    It’s not that I don’t want to answer the question, it’s that I want it to be answered as accurately as possible.

    Q: When I read conventional medical literature that describes research on aborted fetuses, I see no mention of taking the infant from the mother’s womb, alive, and then killing him/her. Is this a research “open secret” that is held back from the public and even many doctors? I read a 1975 federal report on medical research using fetuses. It went on for a hundred pages, and there wasn’t one reference to killing infants in the process of removing their organs.

    A: I think the first issue here is the extremely removed language typical of the descriptions of these procedures that I reference above, along with its tendency to state actions separate from their obvious consequences. It’s a linguistic tendency that may well reflect the thinking and training of researchers and abortionists. In Dr. Kathi A. Aultman’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on March 15th 2016, which you excerpted in your incredibly revealing post of October 27th, the doctor describes her initial fascination with the cellular perfection of the little bodies she dissected, and explains that it was only years later that was she able to overcome her scientific dissociation to make the intellectual connection that the tiny perfect bodies were those of people whose lives she had ended.

    I worry our society has removed death so far from life that we don’t even recognize it, and that is a scary thing. Our grandparents die in facilities away from home rather than with their hands held in ours. Our food arrives packaged and devoid of any reminders of the animals from which it came. Fido moves to a faraway farm, while we play immersive games where graphically taken lives merely “reset.” Therefore, unlike any generation prior to ours, most of us can go through life without regularly witnessing the reality of death, which makes for a very unnatural understanding of it—one far from the Catholic motto of memento mori. It’s an understanding that might even allow a scientist to admire a human body on which she performed a procedure that ended the function of its “cellularly perfect” organs without grasping that she was its killer.

    I suspect this kind of thinking in turn produces academic writing in which it is almost impossible to see anything untoward. Perhaps most authors themselves can’t see it, aside from the presumably rarer instances of dedicatedly evil individuals who do see things clearly and actively choose to obfuscate the reality. Either way, this is why the literature will never say, as you had difficulty finding, “in the next step, kill the newborn,” even if it is the obvious consequence of the procedure described.

    If the doctors involved were capable of that kind of cause-and-effect thinking, perhaps they would have to first write, “in the next step, first anesthetize, then kill the newborn.” If some of those doctors believed themselves Christians, they would have to write “in the next step, first baptize, then anesthetize, and then kill the newborn.” Even if they believed themselves merely in possession of basic mammalian instincts, they would at least have to write “in the next step, first cuddle and comfort the crying newborn, then anesthetize and kill him.” Of course, they can’t go there without recognizing the child’s humanity, so instead, the scientific dissociation of cause-and-effect remains in place.

    This critical thought barrier is evidenced particularly in the literature when we see organs harvested from living children outside the womb referred to as fresh “fetal” or even “embryonic” tissue. The biomedical research companies requisitioning the tissue make the same linguistic error and it goes constantly uncorrected. No. The medical term for a delivered fetus in its first moments and days of life outside the womb is a neonate. A newborn. Most of these people went to medical school and know the difference, but they persist in the error.

    Perhaps if we could only require them to accurately use the language of “fresh neonatal tissue” in their requisitions and reports, some would be unable to proceed. Requesting a “heart of newborn” for the development of whatever a researcher might be concocting in the lab might finally sound to the ears of many too much like procuring the ingredients of a witch’s brew belonging to horror fiction. It certainly makes “eye of newt” sound resoundingly tame.

    Other than the issue of logic and language, however, I don’t think the practice of infanticide by vivisection is particularly secret among those working closely in the arena of biomedical research, and it’s certainly known among the abortionists who supply the needs of the industry, although I agree with you that it’s not something that doctors whose scope never intersects the arena are aware of any more than most of us are. It’s simply not brought to our attention in the media. We focus where the media points us, and there appears some decided silence on the issue.

    A breakthrough in public awareness of the direct killing of living unwanted newborns for the sake of biomedical research, which, almost incomprehensibly, generated far less media attention and public outcry than it should have, occurred with the David Daleiden hearings. There many doctors and scientific procurement company representatives spoke openly of the practice, though often in the detached terms that would require careful listening. For instance, the CEO of Stem Express admitted dryly that “fetal hearts were perfused using a Langendorff apparatus.”

    A Langendorff apparatus serves to preserve the functional viability of hearts ex-vivo (which means, literally, outside of a living body). That is, to specify the use of the Langendorff apparatus is to know that a heart requiring this preservation was, in fact, taken from a living body. To state the painfully obvious cause-and-effect reasoning generally left out here, the removal of a functioning vital organ from a living person (without the replacement of its function) is the direct killing of that person. No example is clearer than that of a beating heart. Ask an Aztec.

    Dr. Theresa Deisher, a Stanford University School of Medicine researcher heavily involved with the use of adult stem cells, describes exactly how that killing must take place in order for the Langendorff perfusion to function. Both in her September 19th, 2019 testimony at the Daleiden trial and in a same-day interview with Lifesite News, she explained that the individuals performing the vivisection would necessarily “cut open the baby’s chest and they would take the heart out beating and drop it in a buffer with potassium. She went on to state with rare clarity, “of course, if the heart isn’t beating, they can’t get any of these cells. Nobody wants a stopped heart.”

    At another point in her testimony she explained again that, “some of the babies had to have beating hearts when they were harvested.” Logic alone dictates this fact, as she explained “once the heart goes into contraction, you can’t get it to come out of that position.” It “has to be beating and be arrested in a relaxed position” to be of use for research purposes.

    Again, just with the use of basic reason, it goes without saying that not only are breathing hearts being removed, but that these procedures occur on living children outside the womb, not within it. The people doing the dissection are not opening the chest of the child in the sort of incredibly rare and highly specialized in utero surgery that might be done to repair a fetal heart condition. The cost and specialization would be astronomical and nonsensical, as they intend to destroy the child, not save it.

    So, just by using the single example of hearts on the Langendorfff apparatus, which is to say nothing of the “embryonic” kidney cells, (which may more accurately be called “neonatal” kidney cells) used in the COVID vaccine testing and development, I think I can answer your question by saying there is no “open secret” regarding infanticide for medical research. There is no secret at all. I am not revealing anything that is not already obvious, even to a non-expert, given to looking at the simple facts.

    The shocking thing, at this point, is not that this is happening, but that we have yet to react, as a whole, in opposition to it. In fact, we accept it by welcoming into our lives the “benefits” of the tortuous murders of innocent children. If we are doing this unknowingly, then perhaps it is because we have bought into the suspension of cause-and-effect reasoning like that to which the researchers subscribe.

    Your question leads me, however, to one more point, which I hope provides a wake-up point if nothing else has. Even more shocking than our acceptance of this evil is the fact that it is entirely unnecessary. We could have the same or perhaps greater benefits by other means, but we don’t pursue the course of action that has proven successful in halting unethical bioresearch before and redirecting the course of the industry.

    Why don’t we do for our own species what we have succeeded in doing for animals? Most people recognize that animal advocacy and speaking with our wallets through the boycotting of unethically-produced products is genuinely critical because lab animals are innocent creatures who cannot speak for themselves. Isn’t that true of human “lab babies” too?

    Also in the expert testimony cited above, Dr. Deisher made the point that using human fetal tissue for research has become more prevalent because increasing regulations on the welfare of animals have made the use of humans more convenient. More convenient! In a way, while horrifying, this is also wonderful news, because it means that animal activists successfully changed things, albeit with a terrible unexpected outcome. However, it means that we can do the same for our species too!

    Does that mean that the kind of beneficial research advances which have previously come from the study of neonatal tissue need to stop? Do we have to decide on a sacrificial trade off, with improvement in the lives of those with debilitating illnesses on one hand and the murder of human babies with less compassion than lab rats on the other? Is that how science must proceed—in sanitized facilities behind closed doors that, just in case we become personally in need of its “benefits,” we prefer not to give much thought?

    Here’s another shocker. Not at all. Adult pluripotent stem cells, obtained with adult consent and with no need for tortuous murders, actually negate the necessity of the use of fetal organs for stem cell research, because they can be cultured into any type of body cell. This technology exists now, but its use is more costly and less common than the worn-in ease of the baby butchering business. However, like any emerging technology, the more its use expands, the lower its costs become.

    We can be the drivers of the expansion of its use, by making unethical research the expensive and inconvenient option. When I was a little girl, I was horrified to learn that lipsticks were tested on mistreated lab rabbits and resolved to never condone that practice with my purchase. So did every little girl I knew. Now cruelty-free cosmetics are the expected and affordable norm. Please, if we could ban together as a caring society to save the bunnies, what should we be willing to do to save the babies?

Leave a Reply