Showing posts with label Kermit Gosnell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kermit Gosnell. Show all posts
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Life Site News: Abortionist twisted heads off living babies, say nurses (Video)
From: LifeSiteNews.com
An abortionist who is now facing a criminal investigation would regularly allow late-term babies to be born alive, then twist their heads off with his bare hands, according to a videotaped interview conducted by three of his employees.
“Most of the time the fetus [sic] would come all the way out before he either cut the spinal cord or introduced one of the instruments into the soft-spot of the fetus in order to kill the fetus,” said Deborah Edge, one of the employees. “Either that or twisting the head off the neck with his own bare hands.”
“Most of the time we'd see...the fetus would come all the way out, and of course the fetus was still alive,” she said, adding that the doctor's assistants could see the newborns breathing.
The abortionist also suffocated babies by putting his finger down their windpipes, and placed living babies inside trash bags.
Life Dynamics, Inc., conducted an interview with three female employees of a late-term abortion facility on May 3. The employees' names were released, but the facility's location – and the abortionist's name – is being withheld because it is an ongoing investigation. Life Dynamics revealed only that the facility is not located in Pennsylvania.
The footage proves the murders perpetrated inside Kermit Gosnell's West Philadelphia "house of horrors" were anything but anomalous, the organization stated in a press release.
“I think every morning I saw several of them,” Edge said. Of 20 babies aborted in a day, three-to-four were “completely delivered” before being murdered.
One baby, whom the doctor believed had died, was born alive, opened its eyes, and clutched the abortionist's finger, as if to stop him.
Live births were common inside and outside his offices, the three women said.
Krystal Rodriguez said she witnessed another baby born alive on the facility's hallway floor. The abortionist “put it in a trash bag,” she said.
“On some occasions, we had women that were, the fetuses were falling into the toilet,” Edge said.
Once, a baby who was intended to be aborted in his office was delivered in a McDonald's toilet and left to die.
“They stopped there in the morning, and the fetus was left in the toilet,” Edge said. “No one ever found out whose fetus it was, but it was one of his patients. We knew it...she was supposed to be in the clinic.”
The doctor showed disregard for the patients' safety, as well. Rodriguez said the doctor would sometimes insert the instruments through the woman's stomach, if it was the easiest way to kill the baby.
Edge said she routinely observed the doctor “hurting patients on the table” and not telling victims of botched abortions that he had lacerated their cervixes or uteruses.
“If he had a patients that asked a lot of questions, he would prefer for them to be put to sleep,” said Gigi Aguilar, a third employee.
“The women who go there had no idea what they were getting themselves into,” Deborah said.
“During Gosnell’s trial, it became clear that organizations like Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, and others within the pro-choice community were fully aware of what Gosnell was doing -- but they kept quiet because this was a rock they did not want the public looking under, said Mark Crutcher, who founded Life Dynamics in 1992. "What they knew, and wanted to keep hidden, was that everything being done at this abortion clinic was within the standard operating procedures for every other abortion clinic in the country."
As of the filming, the abortion facility remains open to the public.
An abortionist who is now facing a criminal investigation would regularly allow late-term babies to be born alive, then twist their heads off with his bare hands, according to a videotaped interview conducted by three of his employees.
“Most of the time the fetus [sic] would come all the way out before he either cut the spinal cord or introduced one of the instruments into the soft-spot of the fetus in order to kill the fetus,” said Deborah Edge, one of the employees. “Either that or twisting the head off the neck with his own bare hands.”
“Most of the time we'd see...the fetus would come all the way out, and of course the fetus was still alive,” she said, adding that the doctor's assistants could see the newborns breathing.
The abortionist also suffocated babies by putting his finger down their windpipes, and placed living babies inside trash bags.
Life Dynamics, Inc., conducted an interview with three female employees of a late-term abortion facility on May 3. The employees' names were released, but the facility's location – and the abortionist's name – is being withheld because it is an ongoing investigation. Life Dynamics revealed only that the facility is not located in Pennsylvania.
The footage proves the murders perpetrated inside Kermit Gosnell's West Philadelphia "house of horrors" were anything but anomalous, the organization stated in a press release.
“I think every morning I saw several of them,” Edge said. Of 20 babies aborted in a day, three-to-four were “completely delivered” before being murdered.
One baby, whom the doctor believed had died, was born alive, opened its eyes, and clutched the abortionist's finger, as if to stop him.
Live births were common inside and outside his offices, the three women said.
Krystal Rodriguez said she witnessed another baby born alive on the facility's hallway floor. The abortionist “put it in a trash bag,” she said.
“On some occasions, we had women that were, the fetuses were falling into the toilet,” Edge said.
Once, a baby who was intended to be aborted in his office was delivered in a McDonald's toilet and left to die.
“They stopped there in the morning, and the fetus was left in the toilet,” Edge said. “No one ever found out whose fetus it was, but it was one of his patients. We knew it...she was supposed to be in the clinic.”
The doctor showed disregard for the patients' safety, as well. Rodriguez said the doctor would sometimes insert the instruments through the woman's stomach, if it was the easiest way to kill the baby.
Edge said she routinely observed the doctor “hurting patients on the table” and not telling victims of botched abortions that he had lacerated their cervixes or uteruses.
“If he had a patients that asked a lot of questions, he would prefer for them to be put to sleep,” said Gigi Aguilar, a third employee.
“The women who go there had no idea what they were getting themselves into,” Deborah said.
“During Gosnell’s trial, it became clear that organizations like Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, and others within the pro-choice community were fully aware of what Gosnell was doing -- but they kept quiet because this was a rock they did not want the public looking under, said Mark Crutcher, who founded Life Dynamics in 1992. "What they knew, and wanted to keep hidden, was that everything being done at this abortion clinic was within the standard operating procedures for every other abortion clinic in the country."
As of the filming, the abortion facility remains open to the public.
Tuesday, April 09, 2013
The Anchoress: Baby Screaming After Gosnell Abortion: only of “local” interest
This article needs to be read.
From: The Anchoress
There is a saying in the news industry: “if it bleeds, it leads…”
But not always.
Perhaps the saying should be changed to, “if it bleeds and is politically expedient it leads, otherwise, it gets buried.
For instance, you might remember the story of Kermit Gosnell, the Pennsylvania abortionist who was charged with killing at least one women and multiple (perhaps hundreds) of late-term babies in his “practice. Gosnell performed late-term abortions, marveling once that a baby was “so big, he could walk with me to the bus” before he used scissors to snip its spinal cord. Sometimes, he would sever the feet to keep around the office, like trophies.
From: The Anchoress
There is a saying in the news industry: “if it bleeds, it leads…”
But not always.
Perhaps the saying should be changed to, “if it bleeds and is politically expedient it leads, otherwise, it gets buried.
For instance, you might remember the story of Kermit Gosnell, the Pennsylvania abortionist who was charged with killing at least one women and multiple (perhaps hundreds) of late-term babies in his “practice. Gosnell performed late-term abortions, marveling once that a baby was “so big, he could walk with me to the bus” before he used scissors to snip its spinal cord. Sometimes, he would sever the feet to keep around the office, like trophies.
Friday, April 05, 2013
Newtown and Gosnell: A tale of two massacres
From: WashingtonExaminer.com
You might not know it, but there's a mass murder trial going on in Philadelphia. There has been plenty of courtroom drama, and the death penalty remains a possibility.
The media are seldom shy about such sensational affairs, but they have been with one. Perhaps it's because the accused mass murderer is an abortion doctor, who along with his medically untrained staff is accused of killing a female patient and several babies who had already been born, alive and breathing.
Doctor Kermit Gosnell's preferred method of killing these latter, according to witnesses, was to sever their spinal cords. Upon his arrest in January 2011, his urine-scented and blood-soaked clinic was deemed a "house of horrors." (I will spare readers further details, which are far worse.)
This trial's gruesome revelations are emerging at almost the same time as new details about the loathsome and cowardly murderer who killed his own mother and then 26 others at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., late last year.
Some will find the comparison inappropriate, but from a political perspective, Gosnell's trial is to abortion what Sandy Hook is to gun ownership.
Both are emotional cases with horrific details that cry out for public policy debates. And in each case, the debate pits public safety against something widely considered a constitutional right.
The two cases are different in that Sandy Hook received wall-to-wall coverage and thus facilitated a national conversation about mental health and gun control -- a debate whose outcome is yet to be determined.
Not so with the Gosnell trial, which has been completely blacked out by the media. The American people are now like a jury, shielded from relevant information because judges (read: editors) decided it might prejudice their views -- in this case, against lightly regulated abortionists.
Whatever one's position on gun control, the appropriately heavy coverage of the Sandy Hook massacre at least served a public purpose by starting a discussion about mass shootings.
At its most thoughtful, the debate considered what measures might have prevented the massacre and which could be squared with Americans' constitutional rights.
At its worst, the debate suffered from media cheerleading for panic gun control legislation -- as in, "pass something, anything!" -- including but not limited to such left-leaning figures as CNN's Piers Morgan.
In stark contrast, television coverage of Gosnell's trial has been "hard to find," as the Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan put it very charitably last Sunday on "Meet the Press."
In fact, not counting Noonan's allusion, Gosnell's case has not been mentioned even once on any of the three major networks in the last month (his trial began March 18).
It has received only seven mentions on cable television since it began, one on CNN and six on Fox News. In print, Gosnell's case has been largely ignored outside of local media outlets in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
It's not as though there isn't an obvious connection between the Gosnell case and public policy. Legislators in some states (including Pennsylvania and now Alabama) have acted since Gosnell's arrest to crack down on the next abortion quack.
The media have collectively and perhaps deliberately failed to draw the obvious connection between the two stories.
The month after Gosnell's arrest, Virginia's legislature approved new health and safety rules for abortion clinics on a nearly straight party-line vote in 2011.
Gov. Bob McDonnell, R, approved the new rules three months ago. Last week, amid Gosnell's trial, abortion rights groups unashamedly announced they had submitted thousands of comments in opposition. The state Board of Health is expected to hand down a final decision next week.
Many have asked what kind of law they could pass to prevent the next Newtown. Few are writing about how to prevent the next Kermit Gosnell.
Given the frequent claim that abortion is safer for being legal, and the eagerness of the abortion rights lobby to distance itself from Gosnell, why such incredible and inflexible resistance to basic safety regulations?
The gun lobby is often accused of resisting any new gun law as if it were the proverbial camel's nose under the tent. The liberal editors who are keeping Kermit Gosnell's case off the air should ask themselves whether they aren't taking sides in the culture war.
Or can public health, public safety and public debate be subordinated to the question of whose camel's nose is going under whose tent?
You might not know it, but there's a mass murder trial going on in Philadelphia. There has been plenty of courtroom drama, and the death penalty remains a possibility.
The media are seldom shy about such sensational affairs, but they have been with one. Perhaps it's because the accused mass murderer is an abortion doctor, who along with his medically untrained staff is accused of killing a female patient and several babies who had already been born, alive and breathing.
Doctor Kermit Gosnell's preferred method of killing these latter, according to witnesses, was to sever their spinal cords. Upon his arrest in January 2011, his urine-scented and blood-soaked clinic was deemed a "house of horrors." (I will spare readers further details, which are far worse.)
This trial's gruesome revelations are emerging at almost the same time as new details about the loathsome and cowardly murderer who killed his own mother and then 26 others at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., late last year.
Some will find the comparison inappropriate, but from a political perspective, Gosnell's trial is to abortion what Sandy Hook is to gun ownership.
Both are emotional cases with horrific details that cry out for public policy debates. And in each case, the debate pits public safety against something widely considered a constitutional right.
The two cases are different in that Sandy Hook received wall-to-wall coverage and thus facilitated a national conversation about mental health and gun control -- a debate whose outcome is yet to be determined.
Not so with the Gosnell trial, which has been completely blacked out by the media. The American people are now like a jury, shielded from relevant information because judges (read: editors) decided it might prejudice their views -- in this case, against lightly regulated abortionists.
Whatever one's position on gun control, the appropriately heavy coverage of the Sandy Hook massacre at least served a public purpose by starting a discussion about mass shootings.
At its most thoughtful, the debate considered what measures might have prevented the massacre and which could be squared with Americans' constitutional rights.
At its worst, the debate suffered from media cheerleading for panic gun control legislation -- as in, "pass something, anything!" -- including but not limited to such left-leaning figures as CNN's Piers Morgan.
In stark contrast, television coverage of Gosnell's trial has been "hard to find," as the Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan put it very charitably last Sunday on "Meet the Press."
In fact, not counting Noonan's allusion, Gosnell's case has not been mentioned even once on any of the three major networks in the last month (his trial began March 18).
It has received only seven mentions on cable television since it began, one on CNN and six on Fox News. In print, Gosnell's case has been largely ignored outside of local media outlets in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
It's not as though there isn't an obvious connection between the Gosnell case and public policy. Legislators in some states (including Pennsylvania and now Alabama) have acted since Gosnell's arrest to crack down on the next abortion quack.
The media have collectively and perhaps deliberately failed to draw the obvious connection between the two stories.
The month after Gosnell's arrest, Virginia's legislature approved new health and safety rules for abortion clinics on a nearly straight party-line vote in 2011.
Gov. Bob McDonnell, R, approved the new rules three months ago. Last week, amid Gosnell's trial, abortion rights groups unashamedly announced they had submitted thousands of comments in opposition. The state Board of Health is expected to hand down a final decision next week.
Many have asked what kind of law they could pass to prevent the next Newtown. Few are writing about how to prevent the next Kermit Gosnell.
Given the frequent claim that abortion is safer for being legal, and the eagerness of the abortion rights lobby to distance itself from Gosnell, why such incredible and inflexible resistance to basic safety regulations?
The gun lobby is often accused of resisting any new gun law as if it were the proverbial camel's nose under the tent. The liberal editors who are keeping Kermit Gosnell's case off the air should ask themselves whether they aren't taking sides in the culture war.
Or can public health, public safety and public debate be subordinated to the question of whose camel's nose is going under whose tent?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
