by Nabil Shaban.  at   http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Arc/3165

How many films, plays, TV
programmes, books etc., have you
encountered concerning the Nazi
inspired Jewish Holocaust? Five? Ten?
Fifty? Hundred? No doubt, a good
many. And so you should have, we all
need a constant reminder of how a
morally bankrupt State can and will, if
given the chance, ruthlessly pursue a
programme of the complete annihilation
of a section of society which it
perceives as being either a racial threat
or biologically inferior.
And now another question! How many
films, plays, TV etc. etc., have you seen on
the Nazi inspired Euthanasia programme
whereby thousands and thousands of
mentally and physically disabled babies,
children and adults were systematically
given death sentences by German doctors
under Reich orders, and were gassed,
injected, poisoned into oblivion? Three?
Two? One? None, I'll bet
In fact, WE (and I speak as someone with
a genetically-endowed disability) were the
"First to go. January this year was
the 50th anniversary of the first gassings,
and before the first Jews, there were
already sixty-thousand of us, so-called
"useless eaters" as defined by the SS
state, testing the Extermination Apparatus!
There are several reasons why you have
been kept pig ignorant about this. One
obvious reason is that disabled people until
recently have been kept pig ignorant, have
not had either the confidence or
encouragement to articulate their own
history or develop a group identity via the
mainstream media. And, of course, we as
a visible but heterogeneous minority, have
not had any financial clout, so we have not
been able to dominate the literary and
entertainment industries.
Another reason is that most, if not all,
expectant mothers and fathers to be, want
so-called "normal", "perfect', "healthy",
"unblemished" babies. Surely no one in
their right mind if they could freely choose
would opt for a "disabled" or "deformed"
offspring! Because society has placed
excessive value on the normal, the perfect
and the healthy, and consequently we who
are disabled or deformed are regarded
socially and medically as not normal, not
perfect, and not healthy, we are deemed to
be inferior and therefore, to be brutally
frank, not wanted.

With all this bubbling beneath your
subconscious it is little wonder there has
been scant interest in Hitler's final solution
to the "problem" of the mentally and
physically disabled.
It is also not surprising that there has been
scant interest either from the public or
media in a little amendment passed by the
House of Lords, proposed by the
Commons in its third reading of the newly
Royal assented law "Human Fertilization
and Embryology Bill". The main purpose of
this amendment, known as Amendment
20, is to reduce the time limit for an
abortion from 28 weeks to 24 weeks.
However within this amendment certain
exceptions were made, and in these
cases, in law, there is to be no time limit. In
certain circumstances abortion will be
legally permissable right up to a minute or
second before the birth. One of the
circumstances described in the
amendment where a full term abortion will
be permissable, which I am vehemently
and violently opposed to, is where...and
quote "...there is a substantial risk that if
the child were born it would suffer from
such physical or mental abnormalities as to
be seriously handicapped."

Thanks to the Queen and Parliament, we
now have one law for the able-bodied
foetus, and a diametrically opposed law for
another class of foetus. As I, and Professor
Hawking, and many others like us, have in
the past been described as suffering from
such physical abnormalities as to be
seriously handicapped, were this Bill law
thirty-odd years ago I wouldn't be alive
now, and Steven Spielberg would not be
attempting to make a movie based on
Hawking's new discoveries in physics. And
Daniel Day-Lewis would not have got an
Oscar for playing Christy Brown. Life is
said to be viable at 24 weeks if it is able-
bodied but if it is disabled or deformed,
under British law, it will not have an
automatic right to life. This law is now
broadcasting, loud and clear, that the law
and society in its heart of hearts considers
disabled people unworthy
of life.
The Archbishop of York during the Lords'
debate opposing this amendment believed
that Britain had arrived at a moral
watershed, and that if this amendment is
not stopped ..."we shall have crossed a
moral dividing line which we ought not to
cross." In saying this, I'm sure the Arch-
Bish was indicating that the amendment
contained the seeds of an ideology. And if
he wasn't, then I am. Be warned. This
Amendment 20 is one of the many first
steps to a Nazi Britain.
Of course, some will argue that the law is
not seeking to force mothers-to-be to kill
disabled foetuses about to be born. And, of
course, on paper that is true. But by giving
the choice, it is making it socially
acceptable and further devalues the worth
of disabled people. I also believe that this
law will subsequently be supplemented
with another Bill (perhaps a Health and
Social Security one) stating that any
mother knowingly chosing to have a
severely disabled child when she had
ample opportunity to choose otherwise, will
not be entitled to any additional support
from the State for this child. Once this sort
of law has been passed, then the pressure
will really be on to prevent disabled people
being born.
Another argument attempting to quell fears
concerning the effects of this amendment
is to reassure us that it will be the doctors
who will be given the final responsibility,
and since they are such a noble and
compassionate profession, only good can
come. What naivety. As a disabled
person I have learnt not to trust the
medical profession. And it was the doctors
who signed the death warrants of
thousands of disabled people in Nazi
Germany. Hitler slowly introduced his
Euthanasia programme. First to go were
the newly born disabled. In Britain soon,
the first to go can be those about to be
born, And then someone high up will ask
the perfectly logical question "What
difference does it make if it is a minute
before or after birth? These unfortunate
creatures, according to law, are still neither
viable nor meaningful. Why don't we do
what we mean, and go the whole hog !"
Let us remember, it is diversity and
difference which ensure the survival of the
species. Homogeneity and notions of
"normal" weaken the strain, mutations,
freaks and abnormalities keep the life
forces spiralling upwards. And attempting
to remove us from the face of the earth,
through eugenics, genetic engineering,
euthanasia, "therapeutic abortion", and
a 'enabling laws" such as this amendment,
will imperil the human race. Contrary to
popular belief, perfection and purity are
bad, and imperfection is good. Human
civilisation didn't really take off until the
Bronze Age. When you add a pure metal
e.g. copper, which is too soft for tool
making, to an even softer metal, which is
also pure, namely, thin, you can make an
alloy which is harder and durable than
either - bronze. In the words of Bronowski,
"The point is that almost any pure material
is weak, and many impurities will do to
make it stronger." Need I say more.