WASHINGTON -- Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs, Frank Loy, recently addressed a conference where he vowed to fight for the restoration of U.S. funding for the United Nations population program in China.
CHINA-- The frantic father pounded on the locked delivery room door shouting, "Don't kill my son, don't kill my son!" His tragic plea fell on deaf ears. The disheveled mother was struggling to sit up in bed. "Don't! Don't!" she screamed as the midwife began drawing iodine into a syringe. The healthy baby in his eighth month had survived the traumatic birth induced by an abortifacient drug, but now faced the grim specter of the iodine needle injection into the soft spot of his head - a deadly procedure. Why? This was the second child born under a one-child per couple policy. The baby's mother looked with pleading eyes. She knew what the needle meant. "Have mercy!" she cried. Mercy? Never! No permit - no baby.
Meanwhile, back in Washington, Mr. Loy proceeded with his presentation to a conference on women and population, saying the congressional ban on funding for the UN population fund has had "terrible immediate human consequences." Congress enacted the ban because the United Nations Population Fund (UNPF) promoted abortion-related programs in Third World countries and were actively operating in China which enforces a one-child per family policy by forcing pregnant mothers to undergo abortions.
What are the "terrible immediate human consequences" Mr. Loy speaks of? Does he refer to the few babies who might have escaped the abortionists' fatal instruments or the few women who might have escaped forced sterilization in China because of the U.S. funding cut off? Congress terminated U.S. funding for these brutal "programmes" of mandatory abortion of the second child and other more atrocious practices. Yet, Mr. Loy says restoring funding to the UN program will be one of his top priorities. He went further saying that the U.S. "risks becoming the biggest Cairo deadbeat" by failing to meet funding pledged at the 1994 UN Cairo Conference on Population.
The WINDS spoke with Dr. Steven Mosher of the Population Research Institute who gave insightful background information relating to China and its family planning policy. Dr. Mosher is the first, and to date, the only American allowed to live in a Chinese village and observe close-up the prosecution of the one-child policy. Mosher says he was an "eyewitness to such things as forced abortion, forced sterilization, forced IUD insertion, and various other human rights violations."
Mosher says, "I became aware while in China and, even more after leaving China, that the United Nations Population fund was not only supporting, but acting as a cheerleader for China's one-child policy. Now, initially, I thought this was happening merely out of ignorance. I thought they didn't know how the Chinese government was prosecuting the one-child policy; that they assumed that it was all for the good that China was reducing its growth rate. I assumed they didn't know very much about the means [by which it was accomplished], so I proceeded to tell them. It did no good.
"The United Nations Family Planning Agency (UNFPA) gave its highest award to the head of China's family planning program. UN funding for China's program began in 1979, was renewed in 1984, and was being given in five-year increments which does not suggest a lot of careful monitoring of the program." In 1986 the U.S. Congress passed the Kemp-Kasten Amendment which forbade any U.S. funds from going to any country or program which participated in a program of forced abortion or forced sterilization. It was clearly directed at China and the UNFPA. From 1986 to 1993 China got no funds from the U.S. government. That was reversed in early 1993 by the Clinton administration which certified untruthfully, based upon no discernible new evidence, that the UNFPA was not involved in a program of forced abortion or forced sterilization anywhere in the world."
Today, the UNFPA and the Chinese government, with their counterparts in Washington and New York, are more concerned with building an acceptable international image than actually implementing any real changes in their policy of infanticide. "In the delicate phrasing of Kerstin Trone, UNFPA program director, "the government of China is keen to move away from its administrative approach to family planning to an integrated, client-centered reproductive health approach...."
Nevertheless, "except within the population control movement itself, which continues to celebrate China's forceful approach, the one-child policy has become a byword for female infanticide, coerced late-term abortions, forced sterilization/contraception, not to mention a host of other horrific abuses that rival in sheer barbarity the worst of Nazi Germany." "Slow Learner: UNFPA and China's One-Child Policy," Population Research Institute.
Dr. Mosher says his continuous monitoring of the Chinese program since its inception reveals that it is "still quite coercive." The program "involves lack of informed consent, use of questionable methods, the use of bribes and sanctions, the use of targets and quotas, and the use of outright coercion [force]."
Has international outrage led China to soften down its hard approach to population control? Mr. Loy at the U.S. State Department may pretend he's convinced, but for a more accurate assessment, one should consult with the shattered women and the defenseless children in China for the truth. "China's population control program is not friendly," says John Garrison, research director for Human Life International in Ottawa. "At this month's Beijing population conference, they unveiled a fleet of 600 mobile abortion vans ready to fan out across the countryside, all equipped with body clamps for their unwilling patients.... China's policy has also resulted in tens of thousands of abandoned children. Western film crews have recorded orphanage "dying rooms," in which unwanted babies are starved to death. Alberta Report, November 1997.
Human Rights Watch has reported that "a majority of children, who entered a Shanghai orphanage in the late 1980's and early 1990's died within a year; that this high death rate was typical of orphanages throughout China, and that it was a result of a policy, euphemistically called 'summary resolution.'
"In the Chinese orphanages, according to these critics, it is these disabled children who tend to be subjected to 'summary resolution'--deliberately starved, sometimes medicated to keep them quiet as they starve, and confined to 'dying rooms.' The parallels with the treatment of disabled children in German institutions during the Nazi era are haunting.
"According to the reports provided by Human Rights Watch, the starved children in the Chinese orphanages look very much like the starved children in the German 'Children's Specialty Institutions;' the Chinese institutions, too, administer sedatives to some children selected for death; they, too, use false diagnoses as cover-ups; they, too, cremate the remains of starved children; and they, too, employ physicians, many of whom probably tell themselves that the children dying under their care would have died anyway, and in any case are useless eaters in a country challenged by scarce resources." Washington Post, January 24, 1996.
The WINDS asked Dr. Mosher if he sees China's policy being shaped from the outside by the UN or other international groups, or does this policy originate within China itself? "I think the timing of foreign support for China's program is very revealing," said Mosher. "The UNFPA went into China in 1979 with a $50 million grant. They wanted to support China's effort in a big way. The other international grantee to the program was the International Planned Parenthood Federation. They only anteed up about $500,000, but still it was an important symbolic support for what China was about to do, which was to undertake the most radical population control program that any nation has in the history of man. Let's be clear about what China is doing. No country has ever undertaken a one-child policy. The fact that it has been going on for eighteen years shouldn't make us forget that this is really unprecedented.
"You have these two international population planning organizations at the precise moment that China becomes deadly serious about population control. Do they have a certain amount of responsibility when abuses occur? Of course they do. They certainly have a responsibility to continually monitor the situation and to withdraw honorably when they become aware of abuses. They have been aware of abuses for seventeen or eighteen years and they are still involved in China, so that doesn't say very much about their ability to police themselves.
"The UNFPA, in particular, can be faulted here because its own charter says that couples should be free to decide for themselves the number and spacing of their children. That is one of their fundamental rules. But the Chinese constitution, article forty-two, says that couples have a duty to practice family planning, to limit themselves to one child; so there is a basic philosophical contradiction there. The UNFPA is in China in violation of its own charter."
To gain a realization of what China's one-child policy actually is, Dr. Yin Wong, an obstetrician who worked in a Chinese hospital, reveals the hideous details which international family planning agencies and the news media are keeping deathly silent about.
Despite the high-sounding rhetoric and noble declarations advocating advancement for the world's women by UN agencies and Washington officials, the atrocities countenanced by their silence and perpetrated by their support, exemplifies the real estimation in which human rights and even human life itself is held by China, the United Nations and the United States.
Dr. Wong unmasks this one-child policy in a devastating expose which has been published on various Internet sites after her escape from China. She describes in chilling detail the death relentlessly inflicted on a helpless child who represents the brutal genocide of an entire second-child generation of Chinese children.
The unfortunate Chinese woman who finds herself pregnant with a second child faces the horror of certain death for the child. As Dr. Wong reveals, the mother is arrested and forced into a hospital by the family planning office where she is injected with a drug, inducing abortion. In the following case, the near full-term baby was strong enough to survive the untimely birth.
The midwife who handled routine deliveries in the hospital called Dr. Wong to take care of the fetus, which entailed administering an injection of alcohol or iodine into the soft spot of the baby's head which brings a writhing and painful death. Doctors in China have a duty to strictly ensure that there are no second-birth or abortion survivors. Dr. Wong had never had to deal with this directly before, as senior doctors were always on hand, but on this night, she was on call alone.
Stepping across the hall into the unheated bathroom, Dr. Wong found a black plastic garbage bag on the cold floor next to a garbage can marked DEAD INFANTS. The bag was moving and cries were coming from it. Kneeling, she told the midwife to open the bag. She had pictured an underdeveloped fetus. She found instead a perfect 4-1/2-pound infant. The baby's lips were purple from lack of oxygen, but he was showing all the activity of a healthy, normal newborn.
Gently, the doctor cradled his head in one hand and placed the fingertips of the other on his soft spot. The skin there felt wonderfully warm and it pulsed each time he wailed. Her heart leapt. This is a life, an actual person, she thought. He will soon die on this cold floor. The midwife pressed the lethal syringe into her hand. The mother screamed from across the hall. "Doctor, stop!"
Letting the needle and glass syringe slip to the floor and shatter, Dr. Wong headed to her supervisor hoping to get consent to admit the child to the Intensive Care Unit. She felt certain that the senior obstetrician, a woman in her late 50's with children of her own, would not harm this child. Dr. Wong quickly explained that they had a baby boy who was born after a live-birth abortion and could they send him to ICU?
"Absolutely not. This is a second birth!"
"But he's a healthy child," she pleaded. "Please come look!"
The supervisor hesitated, then angrily shouted, "Why are you asking me this? You know what the policy is!" Her tone was frightening to Dr. Wong. Apologizing, she closed the door.
She recalled staff meetings in which the supervisor had frequently reminded them how important the birth control policy was. Usually, she would reveal that someone in a nearby hospital had been jailed for allowing the birth of a child without government permission. Under such circumstances the child was to be killed.
There had been a recent incident involving the hospital orderly. He was an uncommunicative, middle-aged man whose job it was to bury infants, whether dead or alive, in sealed bags. The orderly was given thirty yuan apiece for the grisly job. After burying four infants a day, his earnings averaged more than twice the salary of a doctor. Wondering why he was paid so much, she asked a coworker, "because no one else will," was the reply. When she inquired about details, she was told that in cases of abortion failure, the man had to bury the babies alive. "No matter what happens," she was told, "the birth control policy must be carried out."
Returning to the cold bathroom, she gathered up the crying baby and hurried him into the delivery room. She laid him in an infant bed under an ultraviolet heat lamp and with the help of oxygen tubes taped under his nostrils, his hands and feet soon turned pink. She carefully wrapped him in a soft blanket.
The midwife prepared another syringe, this time with alcohol in excess quantity and placed it on a tray next to the newborn's bed. The mother cried out again, pleadingly, for the life of the baby as she tried to climb over the bedrail. Dr. Wong hurried to her side to calm her down. As she eased her back into the bed, she whispered that she was trying to save her baby. The woman began to cry. "Dear lady"... she said softly, "I will thank you for the rest of my life."
The thought, "This life is a gift from God: no one has the right to kill him," became so dominant that Dr. Wong had the impression it was being said by someone else. She wondered, "Is this how God speaks to people?" For two hours she stood vigil over the child as he gradually ceased whimpering and fell asleep.
Again she went to see the supervisor. "I'm sorry," she said; "I can't do this. I feel it's murder, and I don't want to be a murderer."
The supervisor's voice exploded, "How can you call yourself an obstetrician? They do this in America all the time! Take care of the problem at once and don't bother me again!"
With her heart pounding, she returned to the delivery room. The baby was still asleep, but when she touched his mouth he wheeled to suckle. "Still hungry, little one?" she whispered. Her eyes filled with tears. Suddenly she felt terribly alone.
During the Cultural Revolution, when she was eight-years old, her father had been arrested for saving the life of an official who was considered a "counter-revolutionary." Her father had been exiled to the countryside, her mother sent to a labor camp, and she and her four-year old brother had been left with neighbors. Those years had been hard. She remembered her mother's stories of torture and starvation. Wishing to save a life, especially where money for the military government was at stake, was a major offense against the State.
She wondered if her father would support her. Despite the early hour, she went to the phone. Both parents listened at one receiver as she poured out her heart. "I keep hearing God's voice."
There was a long silence. Finally her father spoke. "This is a life," he said, "you cannot be part of a murder. You are a child of God, and so is this baby. Killing him would be like killing your own brother." Dr. Wong hung up and hurried back.
The maternity ward was in chaos. The delivery room door had been locked and the baby's father was pounding on it and screaming, "Don't kill my little boy!" Dr. Wong ran into the delivery room through a side door. There, beside the baby's bed, her supervisor stood with a syringe, feeling for the soft spot. The infant's blanket and oxygen tubes had been stripped away. He was crying violently. "Don't give that injection!" she shouted as she seized the syringe.
"What are you doing!" her supervisor yelled. "You're breaking the law!"
Instead of fear, Dr. Wong felt a sense of peace. "This child committed no crime," she appealed. "How can you kill him?!"
The supervisor glared at her incredulously. Lowering her voice, she ominously threatened that if Dr. Wong continued to disobey, she would never practice medicine again.
"I would rather not be a doctor than commit murder," she said. "I would rather waive my right to have my own child than kill this one."
Dr. Wong then proposed that she adopt the baby. The supervisor said she had lost her senses and left. Dr. Wong swaddled the baby again and replaced the oxygen tubes. He quieted down and his color returned.
At 8 a.m. the hospital administrator arrived and was told what had happened. He summoned Dr. Wong to his office and demanded, "Why are you unwilling to do your duty? Are these people friends of yours? Did you take money from them?"
Dr. Wong replied that she didn't even speak their dialect and he could search her for money if he wanted. Then a senior bureaucrat from the local Family Planning Office walked into the room and took a folder out of an expensive attaché case. He began to read the text of a local directive on birth control, "Those who obstruct Family Planning from performing duties shall be subject to punishment." When he finished, he looked at Dr. Wong and said sharply, "Do you realize it is illegal for this baby to live?"
"None of us has the right to decide that," I said.
The man grew angry. "We are talking about government policy here and where [subsidy] money is at stake. You have broken the law!"
Dr. Wong said that she didn't feel she had. "Very well," he said evenly. "Let's you and I go and give the injection. I will kill the baby myself."
"You admit then, that you are breaking the law! If so, I have the right to have you arrested right now!"
Desperately she searched for an out. She had been on call for more than twenty-four hours and couldn't think clearly. She felt queasy and said weakly that she was off duty and her shift was over.
"Not true," he said. "'You haven't finished your tasks."
"Please!" she said as she began to cry while her legs gave way and a spreading blackness came before her eyes. When she came to, she was lying outside the doctors' lounge and had a terrible knot on her head with a headache. It was almost noon. Then she remembered the baby! She leapt up and ran to the delivery room. The tiny bed was empty. "Where...?" she asked the midwife.
"The man from Family Planning ordered us to give the injection," she replied, avoiding eye contact. The little boy had writhed for almost half an hour then slowly died in his own vomit.
Dr. Wong was banished to a remote area of China for her act of conscience. She eventually escaped, making her way to the U.S. where she unsuccessfully applied for asylum.
"Terrible, immediate human consequences?" A clearer picture begins to emerge from the obscurity of far-off China. The ruthless barbarity inflicted on the powerless Chinese people is hardly an isolated mishap that has befallen a few unfortunate peasants half a world away. No! Evidence suggests that the experiment was planned and calculated here in America--the world's paragon of virtue and morality.
The late globalist Jacques Cousteau candidly expressed the underlying motivation of those who dictate policy to the population control agencies of the world. He said, "In order to stabilize the population of the world, we must eliminate 350,000 [people] per day."
The WINDS spoke with Dr. John Coleman, author, political scientist and economist, who has written widely on the issue of the world's powerful, behind-the-scenes forces. Dr. Coleman says the U.S. is poised on the verge, prepared to slide over the brink into the tyranny of dictatorship. Relating to the population issue, he describes the mentality of the manipulators of world policy. They consider that "the mechanism of agriculture and the industrialization of the world was a terrible mistake....It has led to, and presently supports, a mass of people who perform no indispensable service....consuming the limited resources and destroying the environment of the globe. The remedy...lies in destroying an economy based upon agricultural and industrial expansion, because these support larger and larger populations of unwanted 'useless eaters'." Dr. John Coleman, Global 2000: A Blueprint For Global Genocide, p. 9.
Those in the western world who fail to prove themselves usable members of the system now being implemented, whether from physical inability, uselessness to the cause or from conviction of conscience, will find themselves in the bull's eye of globalism's "final solution."
The "slaughter of the innocents" will not be limited to China. The decision to make abortion a matter of "choice" in the United States irreversibly opened the door for the coercive, genocidal measures which constitute the mandatory system envisioned by the global executionists to unleash its reign of terror here in America.
Undersecretary of State Loy's shameless plea for support of China's policy of butchery should be recognized for what it is. As a representative of the United States, he reveals how America will increasingly react to those it considers to be expendable. For a high government official to openly and publicly call for the support of this brutal regime of death, reveals the threshold over which this government has passed in the resumption of the holocaust of half a century ago which will escalate to encompass the world.
NOW Moves to Squelch Abortion Protest, Free Speech
Protester Decries Hypocrisy of Holocaust Museum
U.S. Continues Sickening Procedure!
Disclaimer: APFN is not responsible for the accuracy of
material on 'The Winds'
and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within their web pages.
This page is in the public domain.