Inhuman: Undercover in America's Late-Term Abortion Industry - Washington D.C.

Gosnell is not alone. Videos document the blatantly inhuman and barbaric acts of abortionists leaving crying babies to die, or even killing the newborns themselves.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Michael Brown - Thank You Mommy For Killing Me

If the enemies of Planned Parenthood wanted to make them look bad, they could not done have a better job than the baby-killing corporation did with its new slogan and ad campaign. The slogan? “Care. No matter what.” The ad campaign, “Your Baby Will Thank You.”



Too bad Dr. Kermit Gosnell didn’t think of the slogan first. He could have boasted, “We provide baby-killing care no matter what. In the womb. Outside the womb. Early in the pregnancy. Late in the pregnancy. You just come in pregnant, we guarantee you’ll leave without a baby – although we might just keep some of the baby parts as trophies of the excellent ‘care’ we provide.”

Yes, mothers, your babies would certainly have thanked you for bringing them to such a caring doctor: “Mommy, I started to whimper and I was so afraid, but then that nice man snipped my spine, and I didn’t feel anything anymore.”

Here in Charlotte, North Carolina, the city’s busiest abortion clinic (located on Latrobe Drive), provided a different level of “care” for its customers. This week, it was temporarily shut down after, “Inspectors from the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services conducted a surprise visit to Latrobe April 19-20 and did additional investigation work in late April and early May.

“They found ‘that conditions at A Preferred Women's Health Center, LLC, present an imminent danger to the health, safety and welfare of the clients and that emergency action is required to protect the clients.’

“They found that the facility was improperly administering chemical abortions and improperly examining post-abortive women before they were discharged from surgery. . . . These health violations come on the heels of a similar investigation in December, when state inspectors found dead insects, blood splatters and dirty surgical instruments inside the abortion facility.” (This is a link to the actual report.)

The Latrobe clinic also failed to reassemble the body parts of the aborted babies – clinically and coldly called the P.O.C., or “products of conception” – a procedure which is intended to ensure that the mother’s uterus is completely emptied of any baby remains.

At Latrobe, mothers had to return to get some of the leftover “products of conception” evacuated from their wombs. Planned Parenthood should be proud of the extra “care”! (Of course, these “products of conception” soon become “medical waste,” so, not to worry.)

And what would the babies have to say about this? “Thank you, Mommy, for bringing me to such a wonderful, caring place. When the nice doctor realized that he left my arm in your belly, he took it out the next time free of charge.”

Apparently the folks at Latrobe weren’t as careful with their trophies as Dr. Gosnell was. But then again, Dr. Gosnell didn’t have the same way with words as did another colleague with his own house of horrors, late-term abortion specialist Dr. Leroy Carhart.

As documented in a chilling video, Dr. Carhart had this dialogue with a prospective patient:

Woman: So I’ll have a dead baby in me?
Dr. Carhart: For 3 days, yeah.
Woman: Will it start to decay or something?
Dr. Carhart No, it’s like putting meat in a Crock-Pot, okay? . . . in a slow cooker
Woman: . . . And what do you use to break it up? Just –
Dr. Carhart: A whole bunch of, you know –
Woman: You’ve got a toolkit.
Dr. Carhart: A pickaxe, a drill bit, you know . . .

“Oh Mommy, I really like this doctor. He has a special toolkit for sucking out my brains, and he thinks I’m really special, like ‘meat in a Crock-Pot.’ Can we see Dr. Carhart if you decide to abort me too late for the other nice doctors and nurses?”

Yes, dear mothers, as Planned Parenthood says proudly, your baby will thank you.

And, according to Dr. Carhart, the mothers will then thank him:

Dr. Carhart: And I think out of respect and love and honor for this baby that you’ve lost, you will find yourself being a better person . . . postpartum depression is really very common, but post-abortion depression? I can honestly tell you that I haven’t seen one — one person that way, and . . . . . I’ve not had anybody leave there feeling worse than they came.

Dr. Leroy Carhart

In fact, it seems that lots of people are thanking doctors like Leroy Carhart these days. His few colleagues who continue to perform the barbaric, late-term procedures, have been celebrated in a new film entitled After Tiller, which “chronicles the lives of the only [four] physicians in the country still performing third-trimester abortions in the wake of the assassination of Dr. George Tiller in 2009.

“The audience [at the Sundance Film Festival] gave a standing ovation for the filmmakers as well as the four featured doctors who were on hand to take questions from the audience after the film.”

Yes, let’s all rise and applaud these noble and courageous doctors. And while we’re at it, let’s all thank Planned Parenthood for caring, no matter what. Unfortunately, it will be hard to hear our voices over the din of 55 million babies as they join together with one voice and say, “Thank you Mommy for killing me!”

Oh yes, I know that millions of moms agonized over the decisions they made and many live with guilt until this day. All the more then must Planned Parenthood be exposed.

Dr. Michael Brown

Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and is the author of 20 books. He has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Star Parker - How Abortion Has Changed America

The trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, facing the death penalty for the deaths of four infants and one woman in his clinic, is over. America has moved on.

It’s exactly what the pro-abortion contingent wants. They want Gosnell out of the news because they want abortion out of the news. Ongoing discussion provokes thought about the status quo. And pro-aborts want to keep things as they are.

And, they have reason to be confident.

Our president, whom no one can accuse of not being politically astute, showed up this week, despite the Gosnell story, as the first sitting president ever to address Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.

When Kirsten Powers brought attention to Gosnell, with her USA Today column, she said it wasn’t about abortion. “This is not about being pro-choice or pro-life,” she wrote. “It is about human rights.”

For Powers, the story was about lack of supervision. And, of course, where abortions are carried out legally, clinics should be supervised and inspected.

But to leave the story there is to be content with the tip of the iceberg. And the whole iceberg is a huge story that all of America should be looking at.

The whole iceberg is bigger than abortion itself. It is about how profoundly America has changed since Roe v Wade, in 1973, made abortion an accepted part of American life.

Let’s be clear that pro-aborts and pro-lifers differ on far more than technicalities about when life begins. They differ about what life is.

In the state of Pennsylvania, where Gosnell was doing his dirty business, abortion is legal until the developing child is 24 weeks - 6 months - old. Among Gosnell’s many transgressions was performing abortions after 24 weeks.

But Planned Parenthood, and their guest speaker, our president, oppose that 24-week limit. They believe abortion should be legal until the child is born.

In 2007, shortly after the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, which banned a brutal abortion procedure most commonly used to destroy infants from 15 to 26 weeks old, then-Senator Obama spoke at a Planned Parenthood event and decried the decision. He called it part of a “concerted effort to steadily roll back” access to abortion.

Justice Kennedy, who wrote the decision, included a description of one of these procedures on a 26-week-old infant. It takes a certain deadening of the heart, of the soul to read the description of the little baby clasping his fingers and toes as the doctor jams his scissors into his skull , and still believe this should be permitted.

Since Roe v Wade, we’ve given birth to a new materialistic culture of narcissism where reverence for life itself is gone. Life has become a commodity and people use each other as cavalierly as they destroy innocent young life.

As our reverence for life has diminished, so has our reverence for the institutions that surround and support it.

Scholars at the Brookings Institution observed in 1996 that Roe v Wade contributed to the collapse of marriage and the dramatic increase in out-of-wedlock births. The idea that children were part of a sacred institution called marriage started disappearing.

The sense of honor, the sense of shame disappears in this culture of self.

In 1965, seven years before Roe v Wade, less then 10 percent of American babies were born to unwed mothers – 24 percent to unwed black women and 3.1 percent to unwed white women. As of 2010, this was up to 41 percent of our babies born to unwed mothers – 73 percent to black women and 29 percent to white women.

Sixty percent of our out-of-wedlock births are to women in their 20’s.

Soon, as our resources diminish to care for our growing aging population, we will start dealing with our elderly as we do our unborn.

But if everything is meaningless, who cares?

Star Parker

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Lila Rose - Tamara Holder Debate Bronx Infanticide Undercover Video

Pro-life advocates will stage a protest at the office of a Washington, D.C. abortion practitioner who was exposed on an undercover video saying he would let a newly-born baby die who survived a failed abortion.

In a second undercover video Live Action has released in two days, another abortion clinic staffer acknowledges leaving babies to die following failed abortions. The videos show there are other abortion clinics, abortion practitioners and staff who, like Kermit Gosnell, would leave babies to die after failed abortions.

First, the pro-life group released a video showing an abortion facility staff member saying an unborn child born alive after a botched abortion should just be flushed down the toilet. In the second video, leading D.C. late-term abortion doctor Cesare Santengelo admits he would leave a baby struggling for life after a failed abortion to die.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Alfonzo Rachel - Left-Wing Media Ignore the Gosnell House of Horrors

The MSM is still keeping quiet on the Kermit Gosnell abortion trial. So why is the left keeping mum on a story tailor made for prime time coverage? Zo thinks the media is in denial to protect their pro-choice agenda. Hear more on this ZoNation.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Matt Barber - Kermit Gosnell Trial: Much Ado About Nothing

What’s the big deal?

I mean, why are we surprised that an abortionist and his staff would, behind the walls of an always-lethal abortion clinic, commit one of the most horrific serial killings in American history? What did you think abortionists do, heal people?

Why are we taken aback that there was no oversight, no regulation, or that Planned Parenthood, though privy to the clinic’s filthy, medieval conditions, refused to report it to the Department of Health? After all, Planned Parenthood, Barack Obama and the DNC have vehemently opposed all laws – such as those in Virginia, Mississippi and elsewhere – designed to prevent exactly the same kind of squalid conditions found in Gosnell’s clinic (and others), laws that simply direct abortion mills to meet the same minimal safety standards required of all other medical facilities.

You didn’t really buy that whole “women’s health” nonsense, did you?

Sucker.

Seriously, there are so few sociopathic doctors left willing to hack alive those inconvenient little buggers; so you anti-choice nuts need to just chill. Who cares about “blood smeared walls,” or babies left to drown in toilets, or snipped spinal cords, or dismembered body parts kept in jars, or screaming, crying newborns silenced by decapitation? What did you think women were “choosing” with abortion, some kind of medical treatment? We’re not removing a tumor here. You’ve got to kill a few babies to make a “reproductive freedom” omelette. Besides, there’s billions to be made in the death racket.

Let’s keep it real. The only difference between what happened in Gosnell’s Philadelphia clinic and what happens every day in Planned Parenthoods across the country can be measured by a matter of inches – by the child’s proximity to her mother in the room. Whether the baby is in the womb or 12 inches removed, a dead baby is a dead baby, right? So why all the drama? Relax. You know, Roe v. Wade and all.

Besides, what’s an abortionist to do (wink, wink) if that resilient little pest does survive, if she’s born alive? I appreciate President Obama’s candor on the matter. Like he said, laws preventing abortionists like Gosnell from finishing her off are “really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.” Snippety-snip, eh, Barack? You know, choice and all.

Or, as Gosnell attorney Jack McMahon noted during the trial, it’s “ludicrous … to say a baby is born alive because it moves one time.” You anti-choice zealots don’t get to define the terms here. One man’s “alive” is another man’s “unwanted pregnancy.” Potato, potahto.

And why are we stunned that the mainstream media have spiked a story with all the bloody and salacious newsworthy trappings that – had abortion not been involved – would have filled the news cycle 24/7?

You think some now-barren, 40-something copy editor who’s had five abortions wants to draw attention to its grisly reality? You think she wants to be reminded of her own string of dismembered little choices? No, better to sip appletinis with the boys down at the National Press Club and pretend it never happened. Now that’s reproductive freedom! That’s freedom of the press!

In reality, to the media, this stuff is old news. Gosnell is on trial for doing something nearly indistinguishable from partial-birth abortion – a “never necessary” procedure (according to the AMA) Obama vocally endorsed. He said that banning it was part of a concerted effort “to steadily roll back the hard-won rights of American women.”

Furthermore, why are we surprised that this rush-to-judgment-when-it-suits-his-political-agenda president suddenly “can’t comment” on Gosnell “because it’s an active trial”? Remember? This is the same race-baiting “community organizer” who said that Cambridge police “acted stupidly” when arresting a combative black Harvard professor who, as it turned out, was himself acting stupidly. Don’t forget; this is the same president who had no problem laying guilt on a “presumed innocent” George Zimmerman, saying, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

Funny, I actually do have a son and, when he was born, he looked a lot like those little boys Gosnell and Planned Parenthood kill every day. Come to think of it, most of them looked almost identical to Trayvon, skin color and all.

Curious.

Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., called Obama out on his refusal to address Gosnell: “Mr. President, your silence on this issue is deafening,” he said.

I agree. The left’s silence – to include the mainstream media – speaks volumes. It’s a tacit endorsement of Gosnell’s gruesome practices. And why shouldn’t it be?

To “pro-choicers” it’s not that old Kermit did anything wrong; it’s just that he got caught doing it. He was careless. He pulled back the curtain of “reproductive freedom” to reveal abortion’s house of horrors. Kermit Gosnell is liberalism personified, and liberalism relies on deceit. The “progressive” culture is a culture of death. Moral relativism is as moral relativism does.

Speaking of moral relativism, on Friday the first sitting president in United States history gave the keynote address at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser. Nice timing. Even as the Gosnell mass-murder trial wraps up, Obama was lending the full weight of his presidency to a mass-murder celebration.

His message? All you Planned Parenthood-hating, anti-Gosnell right-wingers better listen up: “No matter how great the challenge, no matter how fierce the opposition, there’s one thing that the past few years have shown,” he promised. “That Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere. It’s not going anywhere today. It’s not going anywhere tomorrow.”

Yeah, we’ll see about that, slick.

Matt Barber

Matt Barber served as Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America before joining Liberty University School of Law in 2008. In addition to his Juris Doctorate degree, Dean Barber holds a Master of Arts in Public Policy from Regent University and a Bachelor of Science in Organizational Management from Colorado Christian University.

Matt Barber is a published freelance writer, many newspapers and online publications run his columns, including the Washington Examiner, Washington Times, Insight magazine, WorldNetDaily.com, TownHall.com and many others.

Matt Barber was a law enforcement officer for three years and a corporate fraud investigator for five years.

Matt Barber served twelve years in the Army National Guard, and was an undefeated professional boxer, retiring in 2004. Several times prior to turning pro, he was a state and regional Golden Gloves champion, competing in the 1992 Western Olympic Trials and winning a Gold Medal in the 1993 Police and Fire World Games.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Kevin McCullough - Barack Hussein Gosnell

President Obama continues to break barriers in his historical Presidency.

Some of them infamous barriers, but he breaks them nonetheless.

This past Friday was just such an occasion. Because, to my knowledge, for the first time, a sitting President brought the full weight of the office he holds face to face in support of an organization that killed 339,000 American children, the last year we have records for.

Not only that President Obama beamed proudly, as he congratulated the "good work" this organization has done (while killing 339,000 children a year), and pledged continued support from you and me--the American tax-payer--to do so. In fact in Friday morning's speech he seemed to imply that if any of us objected to our tax dollars being used to burn, chop, and stab children to death, that we were from some throwback era. He implied we were stuck in fact in the 1950's.

I guess he picked that decade because it was still illegal to burn, chop, and stab children to death--much less get paid to do so with tax-payer dollars then.

Oh and did I mention--we gave this organization just shy of one half billion dollars to burn, chop, and stab those children to death.

See Planned Parenthood touts cancer screenings, but Lila Rose proved they don't do mammograms. They claim they are improving the health of women, but they have become the biggest cemetery of unborn women in history. They say they give women choices--which they interpret to mean--encourage them to be as promiscuous as possible. Planned Parenthood may be many things, but helpful to women, is not one of them--so says every woman I've ever spoken to on the matter.

But that didn't stop President Obama: "You've also got a president who's going to be right there with you, fighting every step of the way."

Fighting what Mr. President? Fighting to defend innocent children as they struggle to survive? Fighting to protect baby boys and girls who 100% of the time would choose to live rather than be snipped at the base of their brain stem?

Simultaneous to President Obama's big appearance the relatively unnoticed trial of Kermit Gosnell continued in Philadelphia.

You may not know anything about it because the main networks have purposefully chosen to ignore a trial that includes 300 plus bodies of dead children, jars of pickled feet, children struggling, gasping, crying out for life, only to in fact have a cold piece of steel slice their brain stem and immediately fall silent.

See Mr. Gosnell is on trial for the murder of at least eight children and one woman because he had an instance or two of malpractice in his procedure office.

Well in Planned Parenthood's 100+ years there have been far more women who have died from exactly the same cause, and the number of children killed in their procedure offices is Gosnell's total multiplied hundreds of thousands of times (in just the last year we have on record.)

What is also stunning is the abject racial self-loathing it must require for President Obama and Kermit Gosnell to directly and unequivocally contribute to an organization and "medical" practices that were set up by design to extinguish the people with their same color of skin.

Margaret Sanger--Planned Parenthood's founder--argued in articles such as "The Eugenic Conscience" (February 1921) that sterilizing the "unfit" Negro was her "plan of Salvation" for the American civilization.

Evidently President Obama and Kermit Gosnell strongly agree with that racial "solution." Their actions certainly demonstrate as much.

The truth is Kermit Gosnell's house of horrors where he burned, chopped, snipped, and stabbed babies to death, is very little different than the Planned Parenthood "super-sized" abortion mills. Very little different indeed.

The truth is that both Planned Parenthood and Kermit Gosnell prey upon mostly immigrant minority women and while President Obama trots out Sandra Fluke to yell "squirrel" about contraception, and has attempted to force those of us who have a moral objection to providing money to those who will burn, chop, snip and stab babies, the smoke screen never fools the children who always end up dead.

Thinking about it from the moral arguments in fact, if Planned Parenthood is providing tremendous "health services for women" by way of killing 339,000 children (of which half of them are likely to be female), than Kermit Gosnell should be in the women's health care hall-of-fame. He did it for the poorest, and those with the least amount of resources, and at least most of the women walked out alive. Only a few ended up at the hospital to get sutures redone.

Yes President Obama, Planned Parenthood, and Kermit Gosnell, unified for the cause of women's health--so long as you define children as removable tumors.

You're just unlikely to see President Obama showing up at Kermit Gosnell's side to tell him he'll be fighting alongside him every step of the way.

Kevin McCullough

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays (7-9am EST) & "Baldwin/McCullough Radio" Saturdays (9-11pm EST) on 289 stations & Sirius/XM . His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas Nelson Publishers, "No He Can't: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change" is in stores now.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - A Stillborn Found in Laundry Service Sheet

Originally posted at Live Action News

---

Imagine having a laundry service that caters to a large health care facility. The usual delivery of dirty bed linens arrives and sits around for 48 hours. Finally, a tired worker drags the large duffel-type bag over to a workstation and starts to yank the contents of the bag out onto a table or the floor. All of a sudden, something unexpected tumbles out. It’s not hospital slipper socks, nor a damp towel. It’s not even a standard crumpled up pile of blue Chux. Wrapped in a sheet like a shroud is a fully formed stillborn baby.

That scenario is exactly what took place in St. Paul, Minnesota when workers from the Crothall Laundry were going about their day washing soiled sheets from Regions Hospital.

In response to the grisly discovery, the Minnesota hospital issued an apology, saying that the babe in the bedsheets was a 22-week-old fully-formed fetus who had died prior to birth. After delivery, the stillborn was taken to the morgue, where its small body was swaddled in a hospital sheet. Apparently, someone mistakenly tossed the tiny baby in with dirty linen, sending both the bedclothes and the stillborn to the laundry.

The hospital’s chief nursing officer, a contrite Chris Boese, said in a statement, “This was a terrible mistake, and we are deeply sorry. We have processes in place that should have prevented this but did not. We are working to identify the gap in our system, and to make sure this does not happen again.”

Staff at Regions Hospital claim they called to notify the family to express regret, and also extended support and counseling to the laundry service employees who got to see, up close and personal, what a 22-week-old fetus looks like. The interesting thing here is that, based on the need for psychological counseling, it’s clear that what the laundry workers saw didn’t resemble a blob of tissue – because if it did, counseling obviously would not have been necessary.

In hospitals that do perform abortions, it’s been alleged that leaving a baby to die in a laundry room is not unusual. Since having closed its Reproductive Health Clinic, Regions Hospital no longer performs elective abortions, so it’s unlikely that the child who ended up in the laundry was a result of a late-term abortion gone badly.

The “born alive” question arises because over the years, the definition of “pro-choice” has expanded to include the right to let a pesky infant who simply refuses to die live out its final minutes on a shelf in a soiled laundry room, cold and gasping for air.

And while to some that may seem shocking, Americans must agree that laundry room execution is acceptable, because in November a president was re-elected who believes that giving life-saving treatment to a wriggling little scrapper who defiantly resists going directly into the red biohazard bag “burdens the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”

Clearly, it’s Barack Obama’s opinion that the sacred right to a hands-off form of infanticide trumps treating an unwanted baby with the dignity and respect every human being rightly deserves.

The Kermit Gosnell murder trial is currently rousing America from its “abortion is a benign procedure” stupor, is proving that babies do occasionally emerge from the womb alive as a result of a botched abortion. In Italy, one defiant warrior aborted at 22 weeks for the sin of being “disabled” struggled to survive under a sheet with his umbilical cord still attached. It was under that sheet that a priest who had come to the laundry room to pray found him. The baby boy was transported to neo-natal care, where he later cooperated with the “original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion” and died.

Americans are coming to find out that infanticide isn’t a radical viewpoint in pro-choice circles. Recently, pro-choice community pillar Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates sent a lobbyist named Alisa LaPolt Snow, complete with pearls and a conservative business suit, to speak to the Florida legislature in defense of the practice of allowing babies who survive an abortion to die without medical intervention.

Ms. LaPolt Snow also believes that the “right to privacy” decision as to whether post-abortion children shivering and struggling to live be given medical care is a matter solely for the mother, her family, and the abortionist. Snow’s opinion, albeit articulated in a different way from the president’s, is indistinguishable from Barack Obama’s, and from his deep concern over the issue of human rights burdening the original decision to dispose of a baby.

And so, Regions Hospital extended apologies to the parents of the 22-week-old stillborn infant, who was transported from the Crothall Laundry back to the hospital morgue to be inspected by the medical examiner. In the meantime, traumatized laundry workers may seek counseling after finding the remains of a baby about the same gestational age as thousands who are terminated every year in this country. The difference is that the latter group is deprived of dignity and consists of nameless infants who are tossed onto the right-to-choose garbage heap without even a second thought.

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Glenn Beck - Kermit Gosnell's House of Horrors

What exactly makes Kermit Gosnell's Abortuary an exception to other Abortuaries from a Pro-Abortion point of view?

Points 1-7 are common in ALL Abortuaries; so it must be points 8,9 an 10 that makes Gosnell's Abortuary an exception to those who are Pro-Abortion.


1) Late Term Abortions.
2) Partial Birth Abortions.
3) Method of Bodily remains disposal.
4) Killing Babies who survived the initial abortion attempt.
5) Allowing Babies to die who survived the initial abortion attempt.
6) Snipping the spinal column or other methods of killing the Babies.
7) Opening a Babies skull with an instrument and vacuuming out its brains.

8) Separate facilities for Blacks.
9) Unsanitary conditions - especially in the Black facilities.
10) Keeping parts of Babies bodies in jars.

aired April 23, 2013

Dr. Kermit Gosnell the baby killer. This Abortionist killed more babies in a single Month in his Abortuary - than ALL school shootings in the history of America combined and no one seems to care. God will make america pay for this slaughter of innocent children.

Click HERE for Gosnell Grand Jury Report

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

PJTV Trifecta - House of Horrors Murder Trial: Why Did the Media Ignore the Philly Abortion Case for So Long?

The media will cover everything from Sandra Fluke's birth control needs to the suicide of a Christian leader's son. So why did it ignore the case of the Gosnell abortion clinic for so long? Find out as Trifecta looks at evidence of bias in the media.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Michael Brown - Planned Parenthood Confirms its Baby-Killer Status

In testimony that shocked Florida legislators, a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood explained that “her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.” But what else should we expect from an organization that has made countless millions of dollars off the killing of unborn babies?

As reported March 29, 2012 by the Weekly Standard, these legislators were “considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion,” similar to the Born Alive Protection Act that Barack Obama voted against four times before he was president.

Rep. Jim Boyd was so taken aback by the testimony of Alisa LaPolt Snow, the Planned Parenthood lobbyist, that he said to her, “So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief. 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?”

She replied, “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

What? The baby survives an abortion in a Planned Parenthood clinic and is fighting for its life, and Planned Parenthood isn’t willing to say, “Yes, we want to see the baby’s life saved”? Of course not. If it was up to the mother and doctor to terminate the baby’s life inside the womb, why not continue the barbaric act outside the womb?

Rep. Jose Oliva, also incredulous, asked Snow, “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?”

Snow replied, “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider,” to which Oliva rightly countered, “I think that at that point the patient would be the child struggling on the table, wouldn’t you agree?”

Snow was obviously caught off guard and could only reply, “That’s a very good question. I really don’t know how to answer that. I would be glad to have some more conversations with you about this.”

In other words, even I can’t pretend to defend my own ridiculous position here.

And what would Planned Parenthood say about the actions of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell? He was charged “with murdering seven babies born alive and with the death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar, who died during an abortion in November of 2009.”

Specifically, these were “seven recently born babies whose necks were stabbed with scissors and whose spinal cords were slit” by Gosnell. But if we follow the rationale of Planned Parenthood, what did he do that was so terrible? After all, the mother wanted to terminate her baby’s life and the doctor simply made sure it happened, inside or outside the womb. Why should he face criminal charges? (We’re not discussing Gosnell’s alleged involvement in the death of Karamaya Mongar.)

Remarkably, earlier this year, “a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University” published an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics arguing that, “Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are ‘morally irrelevant’ and ending their lives is no different to abortion.” (This is not a fabricated story.)

According to the article, “newborn babies are not ‘actual persons’ and do not have a ‘moral right to life’. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.”

This would include a baby born with Downs Syndrome whose condition had not been diagnosed by prenatal testing? By all means, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, the authors of the article argue, the parents should have the right to kill the baby. (I’m literally getting chills of disgust as I type these words.)

And these are “medical ethicists” linked to Oxford University, not Nazi doctors linked to the Third Reich (although they might well have served Hitler with distinction with “ethics” like this).

Giubilini and Minerva concluded that “what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.” Yes, kill a healthy, unwanted baby too!

Not surprisingly, “The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics [and a colleague of the two authors], said the article’s authors had received death threats since publishing the article,” which is completely understandable although not justifiable.

But rather than saying he had made a terrible error by publishing such dangerous – literally, murderous – drivel, Savulescu stated that “those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were ‘fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society.’”

This is perverted academic arrogance at the highest (really lowest) imaginable level, but the professor simply stated directly what Planned Parenthood’s Alisa LaPolt Snow wasn’t willing to say: Only fanatics oppose our good work, and we are committed to taking the lives of unwanted babies. So if we can’t finish the job in the womb, we’re happy to do so outside the womb.

God help us.

Dr. Michael Brown

Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and is the author of 20 books. He has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Planned Parenthood endorses post-birth abortion

The Weekly Standard reports:

Florida legislators considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion were shocked during a committee hearing this week when a Planned Parenthood official endorsed a right to post-birth abortion.

Alisa LaPolt Snow [pictured right] the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.

“So, um, 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,” said PP lobbyist Snow.

Rep. Daniel Davis then asked Snow, “What happens in a situation where a baby is alive, breathing on a table, moving. What do your physicians do at that point?”

“I do not have that information,” Snow replied. “I am not a physician, I am not an abortion provider. So I do not have that information.”

Rep. Jose Oliva followed up, asking the Planned Parenthood official, “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?”

Again, Snow replied, “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider.”

Florida HB1129 defines the term “born alive” almost as the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 did. An amendment to HB1129 added the federal BAIPA’s “neutrality clause.”

But HB1129 went further than the federal BAIPA by adding, as the sponsor testified (beginning at 11:02) during the committee hearing:

1. Parity, that regardless of how a born alive infant entered the world – natural birth, c-section, or abortion – s/he shall be treated with the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence. The bill provided that a born alive baby would immediately be transported to a hospital.
2. “Infant born alive” becomes a reportable item.
3. Surrender – “A work in progress,” according to the sponsor, The bill’s language originally assumed the baby was not wanted, since the mother had just paid to have him or her killed, and should be immediately surrendered to the state. The sponsor said an amendment was being crafted for the unique circumstance when an abortion was necessary for the health of the mother, which meant mean she likely would still want the infant born alive and give it loving care.

It was into this bill language mix that PP lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow stepped in.

The problems PP had with the bill were providing care, transport, and surrender.

The former two are problems state Sen. Barack Obama had with a separate companion bill (page 33) to Illinois’ Born Alive Infants Protection Act, which for all intents and purposes was saying the same thing, that medical care of abortion survivors was to be taken out of the hands of the doctor who had been paid to kill them:

[A]n additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make thee assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion….

Obama agreed with Snow that, regarding the care of abortion survivor, as Snow testified, “any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”

Barack Obama fought the BAIPA (Born Alive Infant Protection Act) in Illinois with all the power he could muster.
Why? Ask Barack Obama

Life After Abortion

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Matt Barber - ‘Pro-Choice’ Slave Masters Losing War

The pro-aborts are losing. They know it, and they hate it.

As LifeNews.com reported in January: “CNN released the results of a new poll showing a majority of Americans want all or most abortions prohibited – a clear pro-life majority.”

Indeed, the winds of life are blowing free the foul stench of a pro-abortion culture of death.

This is why President Obama and his fellow pro-abort zealot, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, have unilaterally, arbitrarily and unconstitutionally forced, through Obamacare, every taxpaying American citizen to fund “free” abortion-on-demand.

This draconian overreach is in perfect keeping with the 2012 DNC platform, which, for the first time, admits without shame: “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to … abortion, regardless of ability to pay.”

Psalm 8:28 commands: “Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.”

To be sure, there can be none more oppressed than the tens of millions who, over four short decades, have been – and will continue to be – slaughtered within the safe haven of their own mothers’ wombs.

With its 1973 Roe decision, the U.S. Supreme Court put the government’s official stamp of approval on mass murder. Since then, the battle lines have been drawn. This is war. They, “pro-choicers,” are the bad guys, while pro-lifers are the good guys. It really is that simple – that black and white. It’s good versus evil.

History will reflect as much.

To the unenthusiastic mother, politically motivated abortion violence is deviously portrayed as an acceptable escape from what may seem a desperate situation. To the innocent child, it is – without fail and without due process – execution by torture.

Consider the horrific practice of Partial-Birth Abortion, innocuously tagged “Intact Dilation and Extraction.” This is a practice so brutal and so needless that even the liberal American Medical Association (AMA) admitted that it is never necessary under any circumstances.

During a partial-birth abortion, the abortionist pulls a fully “viable” child – often kicking and thrashing – feet first from her mother’s womb, leaving only the top of her head in the birth canal. This is so the abortionist can technically claim to be performing an abortion, rather than committing murder.

He then stabs the child through the base of her skull with scissors, piercing her brain until her kicking and moving about suddenly and violently jerks to a halt. Next, he opens the scissors to enlarge the wound, inserts a vacuum tube and sucks out her brains, thereby collapsing her skull.

Her now limp and lifeless body is then cast away like so much garbage.

Appalling, isn’t it? Infanticide by any objective measure.

So, naturally, Mr. Obama, reasonable fellow that he is, agrees with the AMA, correct? He and other “pro-choicers” were the first to applaud the high court when it upheld a ban on this Hitlerian practice, right?

Wrong.

Barack Obama unbelievably called the Court’s decision in Gonzales v. Carhart part of a concerted effort “to steadily roll back the hard-won rights of American women.” In so doing, he revealed to the world that leftist support for abortion “rights” has everything to do with politics and nothing to do with science or “health care.”

Moreover, consider Mr. Obama’s opposition to the “Born Alive Infant Protection Act.” It passed both houses of Congress in 2002 with overwhelming bipartisan support. Born Alive very simply requires that when a baby survives an attempted abortion – when she is “born alive” – further attempts to kill her must immediately cease, and steps must be taken to save her life.

Yet, incredibly, this president, while serving in the Illinois Senate, vehemently opposed the bill’s Illinois twin. He complained that requiring efforts to save the live victim of a botched abortion is “really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”

Barack Obama’s solution? Finish off the little pest.

So prepare for Obama and other pro-aborts to go utterly berserk now that Arkansas has passed the Human Heartbeat Protection Act. It requires that when an abortion is performed at or after the 12th week, doctors must test for a fetal heartbeat before an abortion is performed. If a heartbeat is detected, a woman cannot have an abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or if a mother’s life is in danger.

This is common-sense stuff. The human heartbeat has long been indisputable proof of life both within and without the womb.

Still, and not surprisingly, even as the state legislature was overriding the Democratic governor’s veto of the new law – SB 134 – the ACLU and other pro-abort radicals were vowing to challenge it in court.

Mathews Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, has vowed to preserve it: “If asked, Liberty Counsel will defend this law without reservation, free of charge for the people of Arkansas, born and unborn,” he said.

“In keeping with medical advances, history and common sense, the Arkansas legislature has said that the life of a 12-week-old unborn child with a detectable heartbeat is protected under the law.”

And well it should be. SB 134 is just the beginning. Brave lawmakers in Arkansas have provided the template for other states to follow.

They’re on the right side of history.

Indeed, history has a way of repeating itself. The Roe decision was not the first time the U.S. Supreme Court has so disgraced our nation. Roe v. Wade represents the twin bookend to the Court’s shameful 1857 Dred Scott decision.

In Dred Scott the Court absurdly held that African-American slaves, even if emancipated, were not fully persons and therefore could never be considered U.S. citizens. Likewise, Roe v. Wade ruled that children in gestation are not fully persons and are therefore not entitled to their most basic civil right: life.

As with Dred Scott, Roe’s fate, I believe, is certain. It’s just a matter of time. History will eventually judge Roe v. Wade every bit as harshly as Dred Scott.

Call yourself “pro-choice”? Shame on you. You’re no better than a modern-day slave master. Dump the garbage and join the right side of history.

There’s plenty of room over here.

Matt Barber

Matt Barber served as Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America before joining Liberty University School of Law in 2008. In addition to his Juris Doctorate degree, Dean Barber holds a Master of Arts in Public Policy from Regent University and a Bachelor of Science in Organizational Management from Colorado Christian University.

Matt Barber is a published freelance writer, many newspapers and online publications run his columns, including the Washington Examiner, Washington Times, Insight magazine, WorldNetDaily.com, TownHall.com and many others.

Matt Barber was a law enforcement officer for three years and a corporate fraud investigator for five years.

Matt Barber served twelve years in the Army National Guard, and was an undefeated professional boxer, retiring in 2004. Several times prior to turning pro, he was a state and regional Golden Gloves champion, competing in the 1992 Western Olympic Trials and winning a Gold Medal in the 1993 Police and Fire World Games.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Abortion Documentary - 3801 Lancaster - Kermit Gosnel

An online documentary, 3801 Lancaster, on the trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, was released this week. The documentary reveals the horrific acts of an abortion clinic that went far beyond the typical boundaries of law or reason. Gosnell repeatedly performed illegal third trimester abortions and silenced breathing infants with a clip of the spinal column, then stored the remains like Hannibal Lecter. What made matters worse was government agencies tasked with supervising such treatment centers turned a blind eye to the horror. An insightful comment, delivered by one of the prosecuting attorneys in the documentary, asked "How is it that we have more oversight in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of women's hair salons and nail salons than we do over abortion clinics?"

The documentary, while decidely slanted in favor of the pro-life movement, reveals something disturbing about ourselves.

CitizenLink brought an important pro-life message to the nation's largest gathering of conservatives. This is a panel discussion at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference. It followed a screening of "3801 Lancaster", a documentary about Kermit Gosnell's abortion business in Philadelphia.

The speakers are David Altrogge, writer and director of the film; Charmaine Yoest, Americans United for Life; and Michael Geer, Pennsylvania Family Institute. The emcee is Stuart Shepard of CitizenLink.

CPAC 2013: Pro-Life Panel Discusses '3801 Lancaster' Documentary

Grand Jury Report with Pictures:

WARNING - Graphic language and pictures.

Click HERE for report

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

NRLC - Barack Obama's Abortion Record

On January 22, 2011, the 38th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion on demand, President Obama issued an official statement heralding Roe as an affirmation of “reproductive freedom,” and pledging, “I am committed to protecting this constitutional right.”

Supreme Court:

President Obama appointed pro-abortion advocates Elena Kagan (2010) and Sonia Sotomayor (2009) to the U.S. Supreme Court. As a key political aide to President Clinton, Kagan helped direct a political strategy that blocked the enactment of a ban on partial-birth abortions during the Clinton Administration. Sotomayor had previously helped direct the litigation projects of a private organization that filed multiple pro-abortion lawsuits, including challenges to parental notification requirements.

Health care law::

In 2010, President Obama narrowly won enactment of a massive health care law (“ObamaCare”) that will result in federal funding of health plans that pay for elective abortion, and will lead to large-scale rationing of lifesaving medical treatments. Obama actively worked with pro-abortion members of Congress to prevent effective pro-life language from becoming part of the final law.

Funding Abortion Providers::

In 2011, President Obama indicated he would veto the entire federal spending bill -- forcing a government shutdown -- rather than accept a provision cutting funding to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. The Obama Administration later blocked efforts by several states to cut off government funds to Planned Parenthood.

Embryo-Destroying Research:

In March 2009, President Obama issued an executive order to allow federal funding of research that requires the killing of human embryos

Sex-Selection Abortion:

In May, 2012, the White House announced President Obama’s opposition to a bill to prohibit the use of abortion to kill an unborn child simply because the child is not of the sex desired by the parents. The White House said that the government should not “intrude” on “private family matters.” (H.R.3541)

Abortion Funding:

In 2011, the Obama White House issued formal veto threats against the Protect Life Act (H.R. 358), a bill that would repeal the abortion-expanding provisions of the 2010 ObamaCare law, and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (H.R. 3), a bill to permanently prohibit any federal program from funding elective abortions.

International Abortion Advocacy::

In 2009, President Obama ordered U.S. funding of private organizations that perform and promote abortion overseas. His Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, told Congress that the Administration would advocate world-wide that “reproductive health includes access to abortion.”

Conscience Protection::

In February 2011, the Obama Administration rescinded a regulation that had been issued by the Bush Administration, which would have protected health-care providers from being penalized for refusing to participate in providing abortions. In 2012, the Administration issued a “final rule” to force many groups, including religious schools and hospitals, to provide health plans covering certain drugs and procedures, even if it violates their religious and moral convictions.

Visit the National Right to Life Website by clicking HERE

March for Life Rally (January 25, 2013)

The location this year will be on the National Mall between 7th & 9th Streets in Washington D.C., the same place as last year. The rally will begin at 12:00 PM and continue until about 1:30 PM, followed immediately by the March.

For Complete Information Visit the March for Life Website by clicking HERE

A shocking video tour of a 'Closed' abortion clinic Click HERE

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - Obama’s Vanishing Lead with Women Voters

Originally posted at American Thinker

---

The Democratic party likes to portray itself as seeing women as equal to men. Yet it’s the Democrats who think they can woo female voters by dangling free contraceptives in front of them like a carrot luring a donkey.

For months America has been hearing how it’s President Barack Obama who has the estrogen vote sewn up. Now, according to a recent USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, America comes to find out that Mitt Romney is currently leading Barry the Birth Control President in the top battleground states, and the women he thought were willing to sell the country down the river for an IUD are driving that lead.

In 2008, a large contribution to Barack Obama’s 13-point margin of victory came from women swept up in the euphoria of a wave of Oprah Winfrey flag-waving hysteria. In 2012 it appears that Winfrey and her tear-soaked eyelashes are sitting this one out, and so are all the women who followed her lead.

According to a recent article in USA TODAY entitled Swing States poll: Women push Romney into lead, Susan Page writes:

“As the presidential campaign heads into its final weeks, the survey of voters in 12 crucial swing states finds female voters much more engaged in the election and increasingly concerned about the deficit and debt issues that favor Romney.”

Much to the chagrin of the mainstream media, feminist activist Sandra Fluke, and Obama shills like ingénue Scarlett Johansson and Eva ‘Border Security Expert’ Longoria, “the Republican nominee now ties the president among women who are likely voters, 48%-48% while he leads by 12 points among men.”

According to USA TODAY/Gallup Romney now leads among likely voters in the swing states Obama thought he had in the can a few weeks ago. If this keeps up, it looks like Barack Obama is going to have to give away free weed whackers to the fellas just to stay in the running.

These more recent polls are consistent with a national Pew Poll taken after the first presidential debate that showed Barack Obama’s 18-point lead among women had dissolved; leaving him tied 47%-47% with Romney among likely female voters. In addition, married women, who tend to vote Republican, are more enthusiastic this election cycle than unmarried women, who tend to vote Democratic.

Whatever the reason, Democratic pollster Celinda Lake admitted that since his strong performance in the first debate, “In every poll, we’ve seen a major surge among women in favorability for Romney.” According to Ms. Lake, “Women went into the debate actively disliking Romney… came out thinking he might understand their lives and might be able to get something done for them.” Presidential prospects for Mitt Romney have only continued to improve after the second and third debates.

Why? Because as a rule, the fairer sex is generally more discerning and Mitt Romney just doesn’t display the demeanor of guy who would leave a woman “dying on the floor” as Nancy Pelosi predicted he would if he’s elected – quite the contrary. On the other hand, without those Styrofoam Greek columns, during the first debate in Denver Barack Obama looked too weak and disinterested to aid a woman even if she was “dying on the floor.”

Romney pollster Neil Newhouse also maintains that “The first debate had a significant impact on these voters as they watched it and Governor Romney appeared nothing like the candidate that was essentially a caricature in the advertising by the Obama campaign. It’s these voters who began to realize that the picture being painted of him was not reality.” In the 2012 campaign season, misconceptions about the two candidates are being revealed, especially the hyped-up impression of Barack Obama, who’s turning out to be the world’s emptiest suit.

Suffice it to also say that working women are not impressed by a man who touts signing an equal pay bill while paying his own female staff roughly 18% less than his male staff. Moreover, despite the fact that our “abortion extremist” President is convinced that the way to a girl’s heart is promising free contraceptives and abortion on demand, the truth is that what impresses most women is a confident air of leadership that displays the character traits of strength, stability and security.

Hence, when compared to President Obama’s three debate performances, Mitt Romney’s poised but assertive, polite, take-charge steadiness makes him look like a knight in shining armor to female voters who are clearly paying attention.

In the end, as shocking as it may seem to Barack Obama, it’s the competence and ability to turn the economy around, create jobs, and reestablish national security that mean much more to American women than being outfitted by the White House for a lifetime of sex without consequence.

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.