Kermit Gosnell, The Media Blackout Of His Mass Murder Trial & Abortion Slaughterhouse
How Did Our Society and Culture as a People Get Here?
There are many essays posted here on this little blog site which cover a variety of topics. Yet they are all about one thing, saving our Republic from the decay of morality and the never-ending entrenchment of Progressive/Socialism into our culture, society and government. We speak about large issues of conflicting ideology that encompass vast areas of effect in general terms. The attacks upon our Constitution and Bill of Rights have huge consequences that will effect the entire population of America in divesting ways. The current agenda in our Public School System driving “Forward” the propaganda of Communism and Socialism by indoctrinating our children to believe such systems of government work better than a Constitutional Republic with a Capitalist Free Market System. This has and will have lasting effect for generations on our Nation for years to come regardless of what we do today to alter this course and bring education back to developing critical thinking, problem solving ability, independent self responsibility and love of Country by knowing Freedom is not a gift, it is a Blessing paid for in blood. Our schools are controlled by Federal government by blackmailing States with withholding of Fed funding, States that do not accept Common Core get no money for education. Our Federal government is also attacking the Christian faith with the IRS and Department of Justice, therefore they are eliminating the foundations of ethics and morals on which this Republic was Founded on. The government is mandated by the Constitution to remain Neutral in respects to Religion, today under the Obama administration they have taken a open stand against faith of The People.
The reason they want to rid America of Christianity is simple, Progressive/Socialism cannot flourish with faith in God by the population. Because understanding that our Freedom, Rights and Liberties are derived from a Higher Power than Man or Government and they shall not infringe upon it is not compatible with the wishes of our current Congress, Supreme Court or the Obama Administration. A new morality must be established, not by Natural Law of a Higher Authority based on the Holy Bible our Founding Fathers formed our system of government on, but by the morality of Man in which all powers originate in Government. This way morality can be established by the consciences of the population with the acceptance of popular majority, or set by government to further an agenda or ideology of the current administration. This opens many doors in a society and the culture of a people, historically this move toward true democracy always benefits those in power at the time of the transition at the expense of the population. Hundreds of millions of lives have been lost due to this moral decay and corruption of government through out history in every civilization that has experienced it. America is now in the middle of this transformation, we are at a fork in the road. The same road the Great Roman Empire faced hundreds of years ago, they chose wrong, our path is in your hands
Now That We Have Arrived in a Progressive Morality
The above are big issues and problems, let us get small now. The things I talked about concern hundreds of thousands of people on a massive scale, let us talk about just one person, one life. Does one life really matter in the grand scheme of things? Perhaps the life of a young child such as the children being murdered by a sick mad person hyped up on mood medication, do they matter? The recent tragedy at Sandy Hook is an unspeakable evil my heart and thoughts cannot begin to understand. Yet it was the work of a deranged killer living out a fantasy and seemingly out of touch with reality. He used a firearm to commit this act and now it seems that our government is now in the process of removing our 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights, they are doing absolutely nothing to protect our children. Do you understand this? Neither Congress nor Obama has suggested or talked about one single thing that would protect the lives of our kids while they were in the public schools. This tells me they do not care about the lives of children, whether it be a single child or a group of children. This evil action only serves one purpose for Obama and his administration, to push “Forward” his Marxist agenda on America, he could give a rats ass about those kids!
What about a baby? How do you think he feels about a baby being murdered? It this different than a child being murdered? Do we as a society and culture now classify the value of a human being by their age? Yes we do. And it seems our government not only condones it but also funds it through Planned Parenthood with tax dollars. Our society condones it of course because there are abortion facilities in every city in America that never get a second look or thought. How does this doctor get away with doing this in the open, all the people who worked there knew what was going on. All of the women that this happened to knew what was going on. He was not hiding anything, the time span this covered in telling. It screams our culture now condones genocide through euthanasia of living babies. Is it now OK to kill for convince or was it more a question of who they were killing. A baby no one would ever miss because it was marked for execution anyway? A live living human being for God’s sake! Or in America today one has to acquire status before they are considered living and have God given Natural Rights against being murdered?
You ask yourself and let me know below, I honestly wonder how people feel about this. All of you Pro Life people out there tell me I am full of shit on this one would you. Tell me to mind my own business, that I have no right to even air an opinion about what a woman does with her baby or body. I must agree that I in fact have no right to tell anyone what to do with their body, but a baby is another story. I understand the baby is yours, no argument from me on that point, you are right. I get that the baby lives inside of you and in fact part of you. My problem is simple, even a mother cannot kill a child, even if they are her kids, she has no right to kill a child.
The Big Argument about When Life Begins
We can rationalize this all day long, we can theorize till the cows come home, we could even let government make the choice for us. When does a collection of cells or a fetus if you will become a human being? At what point do they deserve the protections of life enjoyed by every other person, like the mother. One thing I want to make crystal clear before I go further. In any case where the health of the mother is in jeopardy, the mother of the baby has every right to make the decision of losing the baby to insure her health. This should not be questioned by anyone, it is her decision alone and should be honored. In a case of rape or incest I say a baby is a baby is a baby. Even if the conception was forced or violent, the child is innocent. I feel very bad for the mother, don’t get me wrong, but we are talking about a life here. The mother could put her baby up for adoption, give parental rights to a relative or place in the hands of the State. At least the kid has a chance at life, to live and be alive far out weighs being dead. I realize it is 9 months of a mothers life but what is that really in comparison to allowing a child to live? Would you risk your life to save a child if the opportunity presented itself? Would you face down a gunman at a school killing kids even if it meant you may be killed in doing so? But in doing this, you saved children’s lives, I would not give it a second thought.
So, the question remains as to where life begins legally and morally. From conception to delivery the child is in the mother, where along the line is it a person? After the baby is delivered and outside the mother, is it a person yet? Tell me what is different about a baby 1 minute before delivery and 1 minute after? I guess legally it matters, the government says so, so it must be true. Something magical must happen upon the first breath of a child according to the gov. It has mysteriously become a person when only a moment ago it was nothing more than stem cell material ready for the closest garbage can. Can a mother say the child inside of her is not alive when it moves around? I feel if people were honest with themselves everyone must agree that life begins at conception, it is the only logical scientific and moral conclusion that is self evident one could come to. Once the process of cell division begins those cells are unique in the world, no other human being has the same DNA of the fetus. Therefore from conception a new life has begun, like no other life. Be it young and developing makes no difference, like the germinating seed of the mighty oak tree, it is still an oak tree. But government and some people feel differently about life, they qualify it under their personal criteria for many reasons, and all of them are in opposition to God and Natural Law. One does not need to have faith to understand Natural Law, all civilizations, societies and cultures are built upon this. Yet both go hand in hand to form alliances among all peoples on the earth. The first transition from a hunter / gather existence of man to a corporative farming was community was based on Natural Law, religion did not play a role. It is the difference between right and wrong, the right to self defense, the concept that murder is wrong, nothing to do with the Bible yet both say the same thing.
If life begins at conception then abortion is murder, plain and simple. Don’t need no Bible or government to tell you that. Abortion as a matter of connivance is murder. Just because a baby may interrupt the life style of a mother for 9 months does not justify murdering a baby even if it is inside of her. Keep one thing in mind reading my words, there are many things that are legal yet unlawful. If you cannot determine the difference between them you need to educate yourself with the definitions of these words.
Just a thought but worth saying here. The Pro Choice crowd repeats that a fetus is nothing more than a group of cells, not a real baby of course. In many States if a woman is murdered or killed due to negligent homicide and she is carrying a viable fetus at the time, the perpetrator will be charged with a double murder, one for the mother and one for the baby. Can we have this both ways, to be able to classify a baby as either a fetus or a group of cells depending on the circumstances? This cause and action happen simultaneously in a single state that charges double homicide and also sanctions Planned Parenthood at the bequest of the federal Government, this is swimming deep shit.
Taking what is Legal beyond Lawful
Gosnell crossed the line by killing living babies laying on a table breathing on their own. Think about this for a few moments, a small prayer could not hurt if you have a heart either.
How did he justify this, how did he get away with it for so long, how did he find a staff to assist him in these actions and mothers that had no problems with him killing their baby? These question reflect a larger problem with America today, how have we became a culture that holds no value on the life of a new born. All of the women he had as patient had these late term abortions as a matter of convince, nothing to do with health concerns, rape or incest. I guess it is legal to kill a baby as long as it is inside of the mother, OK. But what is the difference really, nothing. If these kids were ready to come out and live, killing them inside or outside makes no difference. But I suppose it makes everyone feel better and everything is OK when the government says it is OK. What a load off their chest it must be to have the permission of government to do this and also the population that considers abortion a right of the mother. Morality is being shaped by whatever people think is ethical it seems, today we throw away Natural Law and embrace whatever we as a people say is right. Planned Parenthood has no problem with a doctor killing a living baby on a table or leaving it to die as long as the mother agrees. This is a fact and always has been, wake up! Planned Parenthood is funded by the government, so the government also condones this. Barack Hussein Obama II has always supported late term abortion as far back as his Senate seat as a Rep of Illinois. He has voted “present” on every bill that addressed this issue of late term abortion. He has stated he has no problem laying the baby aside and letting the child die of natural causes if that is the wishes of the mother in a botched abortion. It gets the doctor off the hook because everything is legal and the paperwork is in order.
Don’t think for one moment that Gosnell is an isolated case, this shit is going on all over America today. A State tries to de-fund Planned Parenthood in their State and they have the civil liberties division of the U.S. Justice Department under Eric Holder neck deep up their ass. If you knew Obama as well as I do you would understand abortion plays well in his socialist agenda and the transformation he is conducting in America. Take a look at his cabinet and where they stand on abortion and population control through selective breading. Gosnell’s only mistake was getting caught actively killing babies instead of letting them die, guess time is money of course.
Planned Parenthood lobbies for ‘post-birth abortion’
Lawmakers told mother’s ‘choice’ to let babies die on table
A lobbyist for a regional division of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion business in the United States, says a doctor and a mother should be allowed to decide to kill a newborn who survives an abortion.
The stunning position echoed statements made by Barack Obama while he was in the state Senate in Illinois, and repeatedly opposed a proposed law that would have obligated physicians to provide care to a baby surviving the abortion procedure.
The Planned Parenthood comments came at a recent Florida legislative hearing from Alisa LaPoit Snow, who was opposing a proposal that would require a doctor to provide care to an infant whom an abortion failed to kill.
Lawmakers were stunned, asking the same question over and over.
“So, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief,” said Rep. Jim Boyd. “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
“We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”
The same, or very similar, questions followed several times, as if the lawmakers could not believe the position advocated.
“You stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?” wondered Rep. Jose Oliva.
Snow didn’t change her response.
“That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider,” she said.
When one lawmaker suggested at that point the “patient” also would include the newborn, Snow responded, “That’s a very good question. … I would be glad to have some more conversations with you about this.”
The Weekly Standard reported that Snow diverted the conversation when another lawmaker specifically asked, “What objection could you possibly have to obligate a doctor to transport a child born alive to a hospital where it seems to me they would be most likely to be able to survive?”
She responded that in some rural situations “the hospital is 45 minutes or an hour away” and said “logistical issues” were concerning.
WND has reported before on the idea of “post-birth” abortion, including when a Princeton “bioethicist” announced he’d allow the killing of disabled babies after they were born if that was in the “best interests” of the family. Those comments came from Peter Singer, a controversial bioethics professor, who responded to a series of questions in the UK Independent several years ago. WND had reported Singer believes the next few decades will see a massive upheaval in the concept of life and rights, with only “a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists” still protecting life as sacrosanct. To the rest, it will be a commodity to be re-evaluated regularly for its worth. His newest sermon on his beliefs came in a question-and-answer interview the Independent set up with readers.
Singer’s response came to Dublin reader Karen Meade’s question: “Would you kill a disabled baby?” “Yes, if that was in the best interests of the baby and of the family as a whole. Many people find this shocking, yet they support a woman’s right to have an abortion,” he said. He added that one point on which he agrees with the pro-life movement is that, “from the point of view of ethics rather than the law, there is no sharp distinction between the fetus and the newborn baby.” The statement furthers the arguments that Singer’s position is just an extension of the culture of death that has developed in the world, with euthanasia legal in some locations, abortion legal in many and even charges that in some repressive societies there’s an active business in harvesting healthy organs from victims in order to provide transplants for the wealthy. “At least he’s consistent,” Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told LifeSiteNews.com at the time. Singer holds that man is no different from other forms a life, and therefore man’s life is not worth more than, for example, a cow.
He told readers he’d kill 10 cows before killing one human, but that’s not because they are of less value, only that humans would mourn. “I’ve written that it is much worse to kill a being who is aware of having a past and a future, and who plans for the future. Normal humans have such plans, but I don’t think cows do,” he said. Obama was a member of the Illinois legislature when he decided to not support a bill to provide medical care for newborns who survived failed late-term abortions. Along about 2002, when Illinois was considering plan that apparently was similar to what Florida lawmakers were reviewing, he said: “I just want to be clear because I think this was the source of the objections of the medical society.
As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child – however way you want to describe it – is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that its nonviable but there’s, lets say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just out limp and dead, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct?”
He continued, “Let me just go to the bill, very quickly. I think, as this emerged during debate and during committee, the only plausible rationale, to my mind, for this legislation would be if you had a suspicion that a doctor, the attending physician, who has made an assessment that this is a nonviable fetus and that, let’s say for the purposes of the mother’s health, is being – that – that labor is being induced, that that physician (a) is going to make the wrong assessment and (b) if the physician discovered, after the labor had been induced, that, in fact, he made an error, or she made an error, and, in fact, that that physician, of his own accord or her own accord, would not try to exercise the sort of medical measures and practices that would be involved in saving that child.
Now, if – if you think that there are possibilities that doctors would not do that, then maybe this bill makes sense, but I – I suspect and my impression is, is that the medical society suspects as well that doctors feel that they would be under that obligation, that they would already be making these determinations and that, essentially, adding a – an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion. Now, if that’s the case … and I know that some of us feel very strongly one way or another on that issue, that’s fine, but I think it’s important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births. Because if these children are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that they’re looked after.”
“No previous president has been so radically pro-abortion as Obama, who, when he was in the Illinois Senate, voted three times against the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act. The bill would have ensured that if a live baby fully emerged before an abortion was successfully completed, he or she was to be saved,” he said.
“To let this legislation die would be an act of infanticide, but it did not pass while Obama was in the Illinois Senate. ”
He continued, “Sate Sen. Obama insisted that the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act interfered with a woman’s reproductive rights. But wanted or not, the child had been born, and preventing him or her from continuing to live was infanticide!”
If it is condoned today to let a baby die outside of the mother with the consent of the mother at birth, then why not at 3 years old? You give me an argument on this, tell me what difference it makes. The baby or child is the “dependent“ of the mother, which have no problem with and as a matter of face totally agree with. A parent should be able to care for their kids as they wish as long as they do not harm them. As shocking as this may sound and unbelievable at that is one of Obama’s buddies in his administration has some rather odd ideas pertaining to children and parents. (I do not recall his name at the moment but will edit this post with his name and title in the administration.). He has stated and even written a book saying a parent may kill their child form birth up to 6 years old. His justification was simple, a child has no value to the collective until they start school and government starts investing money into their education. After that the child becomes property of the State and acquires value through achievement. It is pure Communism at it’s finest, not a wonder he is a friend of Obama and works for him. Well if the government says it is fine to dispose of a child if they have no value then what about an old retired person that is a dependent of the collective. Not only are they valueless but they have a negative effect on the collective, any person in this position is as vulnerable as a new born baby.
With new technology selective breading is today not only possible but being practiced through testing on a baby in the womb. If the child has a birth defect or perhaps a inherited negative trait, simply abort them and try again. We don’t even do this crap to animals. But it is accepted today in the American culture, that says volumes about just how effective the Progressive/Socialist have shaped our thinking. Congress will not touch this stuff on Pro Choice or Pro Life, they are out for the vote and it is dangerous to take a stand. It is sad to say but the number one job of a congressman/congresswoman is to get re-elected. All the other stuff is just stuff to fill in the time and gain political capital by pork projects to their constituents. They do not even read the dam bills they p[ass as law anymore, it takes too much time they say. Charlie Rangel went so far as to say it would take 7 lawyers to understand them so what is the point of reading them. In comes Obamacare, another bill never read by a single person before voting on it because it was published 3 minutes before the vote took place, all 2000+ pages. So here we are as a society, I understand how we got here, where we are going looks very bad for everyone except the elite in power. Which by the way are not subject to the laws they pass for everyone else because they always place an exemption clause in them for their entire family. If you look up the word Oligarchy, you will find America is now one.
Where is the Mass Media on this Story
Not a peep out of them, hardly a word anywhere on any of the major news networks or even general entertainment channels. It is no secret that the media in America was in trouble as far back as 2001, but in 2009 they officially died. They are no longer the necessary 4th branch of government to keep The People informed about what Washington was doing. They know quite well that for this Republic to sustain our Freedoms we must be an informed society. Well they are manned and controlled by people educated by Progressive universities, what do you expect, anything different? But 2009 was a real turning point in media for America, they are no longer a news agency. They have become the propaganda machine for the Progressive/ Socialist that control them and Washington. The only truthful news one would find today comes from alternative media such as the internet. Newspapers are in the same boat, they are largely subsidized by public funding. So they are literally bought and paid for, networks on the other hand are more than willing to be the mouthpiece of “Change” and “Forward”. Have you ever seen a network news broadcast in the past 5 years besides FOX News that was not in love with the Obama family and held Barack up on a pedestal fit for a King. Comparing him to Jesus, Lincoln, FDR, the greatest peace maker America ever had, the great uniter and God knows what else.
Like Gosnell, they have taken a step beyond reality. The old saying goes “if it is not reported on the news, then it never happened”. They take this beyond outrageous today in selective coverage that is driven by one and only one thing, and that is to support the Obama agenda in his push to Socialism. This is why Gosnell has not been covered at all. It goes against the grain of the picture the administration wants to paint for the public about abortion. They do this every day so it is nothing new. Something that has rarely happened in news media is also going on, outright knowledgeable lying. It is one thing to slant a story but to lie about the facts sets a precedence in media. They have been caught red handed doing this and exposed publicly. They don’t seem to even care. It seems they figure rightly so the American people only has the mental capacity for 15 min continuous sound bite news. Our attention span is greatly limited by being ignorant about what the hell they are talking about anyway, this is true and they are right. Also we have a memory that only spans about 2 weeks on news stories that are presented by cable and hard copy media. This is also true. Not only has Obama hired many psychologist to figure out how to get people to vote for him, the media also hires them to figure out how to present the daily news to be entertaining and at the same time not saying anything of value. It seems to be working well, we have many uninformed people that are so clueless it is actually funny.
If Gosnell had used an AR-15 or Glock the media would have wall to wall continuous coverage of this. If any person walked into this abortion nightmare and shot as many people as he killed the media would drop Sandy Hook because they would have another bigger poster story to support stripping Americans of their Constitutional Rights. Likewise if these things had happened to animals, the media would also talk about until you were sick of hearing it day after day. I am sure new laws would be introduced and action taken for such an evil crime in the treatment of animals. But this is only about babies that are unwanted, and everyone loves abortion because it is just so convenient, a great way to get rid of a problem. And I will go even further in saying the Justice Department is not in the business of prosecuting black men today for any reason. Gosnell’s attorney stated the only reason Gosnell is on trial is because he is a black man providing services for poor women. If this is the case then it is evident this practice is common place. This progressive educated lawyer brings up the race card, go figure. Anyone against Obama is automatically racist, so I guess this card covers everyone that is black and murders uncounted children.
A Few References and Stories in Closing
Please do not take my word for anything here as I am just another single white male that loves God and Country that clings to my Bible and Firearms. The exact sort the Department of Homeland Security has classified as a domestic terrorist. They call me a domestic terrorist because I am a Christian and believe in the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land. Because I love America just how it is, it does not need changing, can’t fix something that is not broken. Funny thing is that coming right down from the top, the Presidency that Muslims can no longer be considered domestic terrorist because it violates their rights of Faith and would be prejudicial of a minority. Any non-European in America likewise cannot be accused of racisms because the Department of Justice has determined a minority is incapable of such a stance by the fact they are a minority. This is supported by policy and regulation as well as taught in everyone of our schools. What a wonderful world we live in, upside down to the point our own government is openly judging a person by the color of their skin and not the content of their character like Dr. King so wisely preached to all men, to all men we are created equal and brothers in the eyes of the Lord.
‘I’m Almost in Disbelief’: Planned Parenthood Rep Says Mother and Doctor Still Have Right to Decide Baby’s Fate if Born Alive and ‘Breathing’ on a Table
Good hard data links:
Gohmert on Gosnell Trial: Life has Value
FOX NEWS: Krauthammer on No Media Coverage of Gosnell
Other links of interest:
Got to Love this pure Bull Shit out of Obama’s mouth!
Video: Obama Says He’s ‘Pro-Choice’ on Third-Trimester Abortions
4:31 PM, Aug 22, 2012 • By JOHN MCCORMACK
The Washington Post reports that President Obama is running his reelection campaign as a “culture warrior,” trying to cast his opponents as extremists on such issues as abortion in the case of rape and requiring religious institutions to pay for contraception. But could Obama’s own extremism on abortion come back to bite him?
During a 2003 press conference, Barack Obama indicated that he thought abortion should be legal in all situations, even late in pregnancy:
OBAMA: “I am pro-choice.”
REPORTER: “In all situations including the late term thing?”
OBAMA: “I am pro-choice. I believe that women make responsible choices and they know better than anybody the tragedy of a difficult pregnancy and I don’t think that it’s the government’s role to meddle in that choice.”
In another interview, Obama said: “I voted no on the late-term abortion ban, not because I don’t recognize that these are painful issues but because I trust women to make these decisions.”
But over the years, Obama has been shifty on the issue of late-term abortion. As an Illinois state senator, Obama opposed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. The problem, in Obama’s own words, was that in some cases the “fetus, or child — however you want to describe it” was “not just coming out limp and dead.” Supporters of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act wanted to require doctors to provide medical care to these infants, while Obama wanted to leave it up to the discretion of the abortionist to determine whether these infants had a reasonable chance of sustained life.
But when Obama ran for president in 2008, he said that he supported states’ banning late-term abortions so long as the bans contained a “strict” exception for the physical health of the mother. Days later, Obama modified his position, saying he also supported an exception for “serious clinical mental health diseases.” Supreme Court reporter Jan Crawford noted at the time that Obama’s position was still “startling” because the exceptions Obama claimed to support were narrower than the Supreme Court’s 1973 edict in Doe v. Bolton that there must be “emotional, psychological, familial, and … age” exceptions to late-term abortion bans.
Obama’s 2008 endorsement of late-term abortion bans also appeared to be in conflict with his support for the Freedom of Choice Act. In 2007, Obama cosponsored the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would strike down restrictions on abortion at the state and federal level. The bill stated that all abortions must be legal before “viability” for any reason and that abortions must be legal until birth if a woman’s health is at risk. FOCA does not contain a definition of “health,” therefore “anything an abortionist says is related to ‘health’ is sufficient,” according to Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. “A state would not be able to adopt any limiting definition (for example, defining ‘health’ to exclude emotional distress), because that would be to narrow and infringe on the federally guaranteed right which FOCA would establish. The entire purpose of FOCA is to prohibit any narrowing of the federally guaranteed right — for example, by requiring parental notification, or by refusing to fund abortions.”
In a direct challenge to the very broad definition of “health” in Doe v. Bolton, a number of states in recent years have banned abortions from being performed after 20 weeks of pregnancy, the time when an unborn child can feel pain. But, in contrast to his vocal opposition to state legislation such as Arizona’s immigration law and Wisconsin’s labor reforms, Obama has remained silent on these late-term bans.
When the House of Representatives voted on a late-term abortion ban for the nation’s capital this summer, White House press secretary Jay Carney dodged the issue. “Well, I haven’t spoken to the president about this particular piece of legislation,” Carney said at a White House press briefing on July 31, “but the president’s position on a woman’s reproductive freedom is well known.” Almost one-month later, the White House has not indicated whether Obama supports or opposes banning abortion when an unborn child can feel pain.
According to Dr. Martin Haskell, the man who invented the partial-birth abortion procedure, most abortions after 5 months of pregnancy are “purely elective.”
“I’ll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range,” he said in a 1993 interview with American Medical News. “In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.”
IF THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA WANTS TO AVOID TELLING THIS STORY, IT IS UP TO US
Please share this with everyone you know
We’ve forgotten what belongs on Page One
Kirsten Powers 8:49 p.m. EDT April 11, 2013
It’s not your fault. Since the murder trial of Pennsylvania abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell began March 18, there has been precious little coverage of the case that should be on every news show and front page. The revolting revelations of Gosnell’s former staff, who have been testifying to what they witnessed and did during late-term abortions, should shock anyone with a heart.
NBC-10 Philadelphia reported that, Stephen Massof, a former Gosnell worker, “described how he snipped the spinal cords of babies, calling it, ‘literally a beheading. It is separating the brain from the body.” One former worker, Adrienne Moton, testified that Gosnell taught her his “snipping” technique to use on infants born alive.
Massof, who, like other witnesses, has himself pleaded guilty to serious crimes, testified “It would rain fetuses. Fetuses and blood all over the place.” Here is the headline the Associated Press put on a story about his testimony that he saw 100 babies born and then snipped: “Staffer describes chaos at PA abortion clinic.”
“Chaos” isn’t really the story here. Butchering babies that were already born and were older than the state’s 24-week limit for abortions is the story. There is a reason the late Democratic senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan called this procedure infanticide.
Planned Parenthood recently claimed that the possibility of infants surviving late-term abortions was “highly unusual.” The Gosnell case suggests otherwise.
Regardless of such quibbles, about whether Gosnell was killing the infants one second after they left the womb instead of partially inside or completely inside the womb — as in a routine late-term abortion — is merely a matter of geography. That one is murder and the other is a legal procedure is morally irreconcilable.
A Lexis-Nexis search shows none of the news shows on the three major national television networks has mentioned the Gosnell trial in the last three months. The exception is when Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan hijacked a segment on Meet the Press meant to foment outrage over an anti-abortion rights law in some backward red state.
The Washington Post has not published original reporting on this during the trial and The New York Times saw fit to run one original story on A-17 on the trial’s first day. They’ve been silent ever since, despite headline-worthy testimony.
Let me state the obvious. This should be front page news. When Rush Limbaugh attacked Sandra Fluke, there was non-stop media hysteria. The venerable NBC Nightly News’ Brian Williams intoned, “A firestorm of outrage from women after a crude tirade from Rush Limbaugh,” as he teased a segment on the brouhaha. Yet, accusations of babies having their heads severed — a major human rights story if there ever was one — doesn’t make the cut.
You don’t have to oppose abortion rights to find late-term abortion abhorrent or to find the Gosnell trial eminently newsworthy. This is not about being “pro-choice” or “pro-life.” It’s about basic human rights.
The deafening silence of too much of the media, once a force for justice in America, is a disgrace.
Erick Erickson (Diary) | April 12th, 2013 at 04:30 AM
Last night on twitter, Dave Weigel of Slate noted he was just hearing from twitterers about the gruesome trial of Kermit Gosnell. Those who care about the story owe a tremendous debt to Kirsten Powers taking to the pages of USA Today to write about it.
It is fascinating how much of a bubble the media lives in with that bubble so DC-NYC centric. It is again one of the problems for news organizations like CNN as it tries to rebuild. With the exception of Fox News, the American news networks focus on the things people along the coast are interested in and not what people along the American river valleys are talking about.
In churches, local restaurants, and small town hair salons a lot of people across the country are talking about the terrible trial of Kermit Gosnell in Pennsylvania. It’s just not the people who interact with those who produce the news in New York City.
In fairness to CNN, unlike many other mainstream media outlets, it covered the Gosnell arrest back in 2011, but moved on. Only Fox, which is the number one news network largely because it actually cares what people outside the DC-NYC bubble care about, has stayed with the story.
Gosnell is now on trial two years after his arrest. The stories coming from the trial via the few outlets willing to pay attention are horrific and gruesome. But what’s more, similar stories are trickling out from other abortion clinics. The uncommon barbarism of Kermit Gosnell’s clinic turns out to be more common than most might imagine.
But they won’t imagine it. Like with Dave Weigel from Slate, most reporters have never paid attention to the trial or the horrors of many abortion clinics. Reporters lean left, are sympathetic to abortion, and view the right’s demands for coverage unsympathetically because of the reporters’ biases.
Within the media coverage Gosnell is either a story they covered in 2011 or something they won’t cover at all. If they cover it now, they do so in passing so they can say they covered it. But they won’t devote the resources to it as they would if Gosnell had killed dogs. He only killed babies.
In Kirsten Powers column she noted
A Lexis-Nexis search shows none of the news shows on the three major national television networks has mentioned the Gosnell trial in the last three months. The exception is when Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan hijacked a segment on Meet the Press meant to foment outrage over an anti-abortion rights law in some backward red state.
The Washington Post has not published original reporting on this during the trial and The New York Times saw fit to run one original story on A-17 on the trial’s first day. They’ve been silent ever since, despite headline-worthy testimony.
Liberals, and even reporters who try to be fair minded, often complain that conservative decided to leave and go do their own media thing with Fox, talk radio, etc. Well, this is an example of why conservatives had to do that. Otherwise many stories many Americans care about would never be told.
Had Kermit Gosnell killed dogs, HLN would be giving it wall to wall coverage as they do all sorts of sensational trials. Nancy Grace would be in full outrage mode every night through the course of the trial. It’s sad that a man who engaged in horrific acts of barbarism will never be as known to the public as Casey Anthony or George Zimmerman because Gosnell’s crime is viewed as less than a crime by the vast majority of the producers of American news.
*Must-See* Documentary About Gosnell Clinic:Tying Women To Bed, Forcing Abortions on Them, Dead Babies In Jars, And The ‘Special Room’ For The White Women
In a case that has already spawned so much horror, the Gosnell case is one where the more you look the more you see. And then wish you hadn’t.
In addition to the killing of babies, in and out of the womb, by essentially beheading them with scissor snips through their vertebrae, Gosnell kept jars of dead babies and baby parts strewn around the office. Women were treated with unsterile instruments and by people who were not medical professionals.
At least two women appear to have died from this negligence and by some estimates from workers at the “clinic”, over 100 babies (yes, they were already born) were killed in this manner.
The above documentary, “3801 Lancaster”, uploaded in January 2013, notes much of this. It also adds the chilling testimony of those concerned. The woman who was raped, and became pregnant, who went to the clinic for an abortion but heard the heart beat of her child and decided not to go through with it on the table. Gosnell hit her in the legs, had her tied to the bed, gave her more drugs and proceeded with the abortion anyway. Now, the woman no longer can have any children.
When this case first broke in media, many on the left refused to look at it. Many still refuse to cover it, not able to deal with what facing it might mean. Foolish Reporter does a good synopsis on this mentality here.
Gosnell’s defense attorney even went so far as to refer to the prosecution of Gosnell as “racist” because he was black and “serving” a poor population.
Yet, as the documentary notes, the district attorney in testimony on the matter notes that in the Gosnell clinic white women were given the “special room” that was just a little bit better than that for the people of color. Why? Because according to Gosnell, that was just the way of things in life. Also he thought the white women more likely to complain about problems. Unbelievable.
The latest account is from Ashley Baldwin who did ultrasounds, administered intravenous medicine and, ultimately, assisting in abortions performed by Gosnell. Ashley had no medical license. She also was a 15 year old high school sophomore at the time.
Over and over again, incidents would occur, and yet the State Department of Health did nothing, they had not even had someone on site since 1993. Why?
Some in the documentary thought it might be because of the lack of concern about the people of color. That may well be part of it. But as Foolish Reporter notes, it’s also because of the habit of looking away when it comes to abortion.
10 Of The Most Shocking Allegations In The Gruesome ‘House of Horrors’ That Was Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s Abortion Clinic (WARNING: Graphic)
Apr. 12,2013 4:34pm Billy Hallowell
Editor’s Note: This article deals with extremely-disturbing themes and subjects. Please be advised.
The details emerging from Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s murder trial are so gruesome that, based on the descriptions, one would assume they are fictional scenes from a horror movie. However, the reality is that the court case, which continues to expose the details of the alleged murders of at least seven babies, is, according to witness testimony, anything but a concocted tale.
TheBlaze first covered the case back in Jan. 2011, when we reported that Gosnell, 72, a Philadelphia-based abortion doctor, was charged with eight murders. Our coverage at the time, based on an AP report, provides just a brief overview of the horrific allegations:
A doctor who gave abortions to minorities, immigrants and poor women in a “house of horrors” clinic was charged with eight counts of murder in the deaths of a patient and seven babies who were born alive and then killed with scissors, prosecutors said Wednesday.
Dr. Kermit Gosnell…made millions of dollars over 30 years, performing as many illegal, late-term abortions as he could, prosecutors said. State regulators ignored complaints about him and failed to inspect his clinic since 1993, but no charges were warranted against them given time limits and existing law, District Attorney Seth Williams said. Nine of Gosnell’s employees also were charged.
Gosnell “induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord,” Williams said.
The so-called “house of horrors” was discovered following drug-related complaints. It was in 2010 when the FBI first raided the facility after reports that painkillers were being improperly distributed. But rather than mere pill infractions, what authorities found was far more sinister.
When officials went in, the clinic’s conditions were unimaginable, with fetuses and severed feet reportedly stored without reason inside the establishment — and with blood splattered about. Considering these horrific conditions and the litany of additional details that have emerged since the case began, many are wondering why the media have been so silent on reporting what unfolded at Gosnell’s clinic.
Today, on Fox News, liberal commentator Kirsten Powers charged that there was no excuse for the media’s purported blackout on covering the abortion doctor’s horrific — and allegedly murderous — treatment of patients and their kin.
Considering that outlets generally love stories like this, Powers seemed dumbfounded as to why Gosnell’s purported crimes have gone somewhat unreported, as she noted that the general rule is “if it bleeds, it leads.”
“Whatever your position on abortion is, this is a story of interest to everyone,” she told Fox host Megyn Kelly. “This clinic had not been inspected in 17 years.”
Considering the lack of coverage (earlier today, we showed just how profound the dearth is), TheBlaze wants to offer readers a recap of some of the story’s most shocking — and important — details. In addition to allegations that Gosnell killed seven babies and one woman died on his watch, here are some of the key, must-know allegations:
1) Gosnell allegedly treated his minority clients with much less respect than his white patients. Considering that he was named, according to the AP, in more than 40 malpractice suits, the clinic head would purportedly perform abortions for caucasian women in cleaner locations (he assumed whites were more likely to complain about him).
2) In addition to the murderous allegations being waged against Gosnell, eight former employees of the clinic have pleaded guilty (some to third-degree murder) and have spoken in great lengths about the terrifying conditions at the clinic.
3) A 15-year-old girl allegedly helped facilitate abortions — including on potentially live babies — at the clinic. Ashley Baldwin, now 22, claims she worked nearly 50 hours per week. Even more shocking, she allegedly helped give women the drugs needed for the procedure — and apparently assisted throughout. Baldwin said that she saw aborted babies move on at least two occasions following abortions (in one instance, she said “the chest was moving”).
4) Gosnell purportedly used untrained and low-paid staff to conduct nearly 1,000 abortions each year. The charge for a procedure in the horrific conditions mentioned? Between $350 and several thousand, depending on how far along the pregnancy was. Prosecutors believe he made millions from the practice. Authorities claim the clinic brought in about $15,000 per day.
5) Speaking of “untrained,” prosecutors claim, according to the Gospel Coalition, that Gosnell is not certified to work in either gynecology or obstetrics.
6) In the grand jury report, the clinic was said to smell of animal urine and blood stains were on blankets and furniture inside of the office. Not surprisingly, sterilized instruments were unheard of inside the establishment. And somehow the state had failed to inspect — or even visit — the clinic since 1993.
7) In March, Adrienne Moton, a medical assistant at the clinic, provided sickening details about her alleged actions at the clinic, claiming that she snipped the spines of at least 10 babies; she said that another worker — and Gosnell himself — did the same. But that’s not the worst part. Moton also claimed that she once killed a baby after it was delivered in a toilet by cutting its neck with scissors. Moton plead guilty and has been in prison since 2011.
8) Another former employee, Sherry West, shared yet another horrifying story. She claims that she was once called to the back room at the clinic, where aborted babies’ bodies were apparently kept on a shelf. Once there, West heard a live baby among the bodies cry out. The screaming child “really freaked” her out, she told the court. “I can’t describe it. It sounded like a little alien,” she said, noting that she previously referred to the babies as “specimens,” because it was easier to mentally handle what was going on at the clinic.
9) Then there’s Robyn Reid’s story. She was only an 87-pound teen when she went to the clinic in 1998. Accompanied by her grandmother, she was looking for an abortion. But once she made it to the office, Reid changed her mind. But Salem-News.com writes that the doctor allegedly forced an abortion on her. ”Gosnell ripped off her clothes and restrained the girl. When she regained consciousness 12 hours later at her aunt’s home, she discovered that an abortion had been performed against her will,” the website reports.
10) “3801 Lancaster” is (warning: graphic) a documentary series that highlights the horror found at the clinic. Many of these claims, among others, are covered by the filmmakers.
TheBlaze will continue to explore this horrific story and will report accordingly as details unfold. You can read more about the clinic here.
The Scathing Speech That Takes the Media to Task for Blackout of Gruesome Abortion Trial: If the ‘Doctor’ Used An AR-15, You Bet They’d Care
Apr 12,2013 10:15am Becket Adams
Ten Congressmen took to the floor of the U.S. House on Thursday to shed some light on the trial of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist who stands accused of murdering seven newborn infants (allegedly cutting their spines with scissors) and one grown woman.
Among the 10 U.S. lawmakers was Rep. Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican who says the media has intentionally ignored Gosnell’s “house of horrors.”
“If Dr. Gosnell had walked into a nursery and shot seven infants with an AR-15, it would be national news and the subject of presidential hand-wringing,” said Rep. Smith.
Indeed, that anti-gun advocates like CNN’s Piers Morgan are Johnny on the Spot when it comes to gun violence, it’s difficult to imagine this wouldn’t be a bigger story if Gosnell had used so-called assault weapons
“Will the decades-long major national news media cover-up of the brutality—and violence—of abortion methods ever end?” Rep. Smith continued. “Will Americans ever be told the horrifying details as to how — and how often — abortionists dismember, decapitate, and chemically poison innocent babies?”
Here’s the media blackout of the Gosnell trial summed up in one picture:
The above photo comes courtesy J.D. Mullane, a news columnist with the Bucks County Courier Times and The Intelligencer.
“Reserved media seats Thurs a.m. in Courtroom 304 in Phila where Gosnell is on trial,” Mullane said in a tweet on Thursday, adding that the seats had been empty all morning.
“On Thursday there were only nine people in the seats, watching the trial, including me,” he later added.
And here’s Rep. Smith’s complete speech [h/t LSN]:
Will the decades-long major national news media cover-up of the brutality—and violence—of abortion methods ever end?
Will Americans ever be told the horrifying details as to how—and how often—abortionists dismember, decapitate, and chemically poison innocent babies?
Will Americans ever be informed by a conscientious, unbiased news media that in the past 40 years, over 55 million child victims have been brutally killed by abortion—a staggering loss of children’s lives that equates to the entire population in England? And that many women have been hurt physically, emotionally, psychologically—and according to the Center for Disease Control over 400 women have actually died from legal abortions.
Will Americans ever be told that of the 55 million children, Planned Parenthood alone claims responsibility for destroying over 6 million babies and that just two weeks ago a Planned Parenthood leader in Florida testified at a legislative hearing on a state initiative to protect born alive infants that even when a child survives an abortion, the decision to assist or kill the born alive infant should be “up to the woman, her family and her physician.” In other words, even if a child intended to be aborted survives the assault, the choice to kill remains—so called after birth abortion. Isn’t that extreme child abuse?
Murdering newborns in the abortion clinic, it seems to me, is indistinguishable from any other child predator wielding a knife or a gun. Why isn’t that that child seen as a patient in need of medical care, warmth, nutrition and dare I say—love?
Now another national media cover up! In this case, even when a Jeffrey Dahmer-like murder trial of an abortionist named Kermit Gosnell, who ran the benign-sounding Women’s Medical Society, unfolds in a Philadelphia Courtroom replete with shocking testimony of beheadings, unfathomable abuse, death, and body parts in jars. To this day, the national news media remains uninterested, indifferent—AWOL. Why the censorship? Gosnell’s “house of horrors” trial fails to attract any serious and meaningful national news reporting.
Dr. Kermit Gosnell is on trial for eight counts of murder. One count is for the death of a woman who died during an abortion at his clinic. Seven counts are for babies who survived their abortion and were born alive but then killed by severing their spinal cords with a pair of scissors.
In the words of the Grand Jury report: “Gosnell had a simple solution for unwanted babies: he killed them. He didn’t call it that. He called it ‘ensuring fetal demise.’ The way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking scissors in the back of the baby’s neck and cutting the spinal cord. He called that ‘snipping.’ Over the years there were hundreds of ‘snippings’.
Indeed, the national news media has not only taken a pass and looked the other way, but their stunning indifference has done a grave disservice to Gosnell’s victims—the woman killed, other women injured and children slaughtered by Gosnell. Because of the national media’s indefensible silence—because of their failure to report—other women and children at other abortion mills might be at risk.
Indeed, the Gosnell Grand Jury Report in January 2011 powerfully noted that an absence of press coverage—and gross negligence by health department personnel in Pennsylvania—enabled Gosnell to show a “contemptuous disregard for the health, safety, and dignity of his patients that continued for 40 years.”
Some media commenters, however, are beginning to take note of the national news media bias and blackout in the case.
“Media Bias: A basketball coach who shoves and curses at his players merits constant coverage by a media also transfixed by Newtown. But a Philadelphia doctor on trial for murdering a woman and seven babies? It’s ignored.
Those who get their news from the three major networks have probably not heard of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, now on trial in Philadelphia, charged with seven counts of first-degree murder and one count of third-degree murder for killing seven babies who survived abortions and a woman who died after a botched pain-killer injection.
According to the MediaResearchCenter, in one week Rice received 41 minutes, 26 seconds of air time on ABC, CBS and NBC in 36 separate news stories. Gosnell received zero coverage.
If Dr. Gosnell had walked into a nursery and shot seven infants with an AR-15, it would be national news and the subject of presidential hand-wringing.
In today’s edition of USA Today, columnist Kirsten Powers writes:
“Infant beheadings. Severed baby feet in jars. A child screaming after it was delivered alive during an abortion procedure. Haven’t heard about these sickening accusations?
“It’s not your fault. Since the murder trial of Pennsylvania abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell began March 18, there has been precious little coverage of the case that should be on every news show and front page.”
“She goes on to point out: “A Lexis-Nexis search shows none of the news shows on the three major national television networks has mentioned the Gosnell trial in the last three months. The exception is when Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan hijacked a segment on Meet the Press”
“In a letter sent by Media Research Center President Brent Bozell and twenty prominent leaders call on the broadcast networks to stop censoring coverage of the trial, pointing out that as of April 4th, since the trial began ABC, CBS and NBC have given the story zero coverage in their morning and evening news shows.
“Again I ask. When will the media blackout stop? Will America ever be told about the brutality of abortion and the violence that is commonplace inside the abortion industry? Or will the media continue to censor this trial of the century, because it exposes an all too inconvenient truth that not only are unborn children destroyed in these killing centers, but that even babies who survive the abortion can’t escape the deadly hand of the child predator.