The Horror Hiding in the Shadow of Left Wing Ideology.
These are curious days in the media. They will give endless space and awards to those who speculate on possible horror attributed to the dead who cannot answer back; they cheerfully re-use photographs of dead babies, awarding those babies a nationality that changes to suit their current ’favorites’ in the war game. They are, in short, mighty selective as to what they consider ‘all the news fit for the plebs’.
This is a watershed moment in Left Wing ideology, more so than the doyen of free speech being accused of sexual crimes against women. This is the moment when the individual human rights of that protected species, ‘my body, my choice’ women, come face to face with the up and coming protected species, children. The media are truly struggling to know who to support as the ugly screams emanate from between the legs of 50% of their subscribers.
In Britain, only the Daily Mail has chosen to report on the trial of Kermit Gosnell; Dr Kermit Gosnell to his supporters, Gosnell the mass murderer to his detractors. Sky and the BBC both quietly reported that he ‘would be on trial’, some months ago; but neither have chosen to mention the matter since. In America, where the trial is taking place, the silence from the main stream media is even more stunning.
Gosnell’s trial is more than just that of a Doctor on trial. It is a hideous blow-by-blow account in stomach churning detail of the realities of the life and death for the detritus of ‘my body, my choice’ women. It is one thing to debate over a Primrose Hill dinner table with a women with a subtle but just noticeable bulge in her stomach of her right to make a ‘choice’, preferably using euphemisms such as ‘you don’t need to go ahead if you don’t want to’ or ‘I’m not ready to commit to this child, perhaps next year’ – it is not so easy to listen to the stark facts of the result of that ‘choice’ – the training given to staff in Dr Gosnell’s abortion clinic:
Lynda Williams said Gosnell taught her how to flip a baby over and snip its neck with a pair of scissors to ensure ‘fetal demise.’
Correct me if I am wrong, but outside of its progenitors body, that is no foetus. That is what we call ‘a child’. A child that one human being is calmly training another human being in the dark art of ‘snipping its neck’ – or murdering that child, as the more old fashioned of us would term it. It is a subject of intense debate in the US. They actually needed to pass a law – The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 – to point out to enthusiastic abortioneers that just because you could get away with disembowelling something called a foetus in its mother’s womb, didn’t mean that you had the right to have another go if it inconveniently refused to die before emerging into the world.
That has been the problem. ‘Are you going to keep it’ may have replaced ‘congratulations’ in the modern lexicon, on learning of a new pregnancy – but embryos weren’t just turning into foetus, they were inconveniently refusing to die even when poked and prodded with terminal intent. They just wouldn’t ’go’ quietly. They lack the good grace to remove themselves from world with the same quiet efficiency that your average empty packet of fish fingers displays. Dustmen. Abortionists. They are all one in the modern world.
A woman who worked for Gosnell testified that she was called back to a room at his abortion clinic in Philadelphia where the bodies of aborted babies were kept to hear one screaming amid a shelf-full of dead babies. “I can’t describe it,” says the woman. “It sounded like a little alien.” She says the body of the child was about 18 to 24 inches long and was one of the largest babies she had seen delivered during abortion procedures at Gosnell’s clinic.
President Obama listened to Jill Stanek recount how she’d spent 45 minutes holding a living baby left to die, until finally it was removed to a ‘soiled linen room’ to perform its moral duty and die alone and unloved. He still voted against the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act:
“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 it’s nonviable but there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead”
Obama continued to fret throughout the debate on ‘what liabilities the doctor might have in this situation’ and ‘burden[ing] the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion’ not a word about the rights of the future voter 20 years ahead. Politicians were ever short sighted. Doctors and Women bring votes today.
The media face the same predicament now. Do they pander to their women subscribers and draw a discrete veil over the gruesome details of the Gosnall trial, or do they do what they normally do in the face of gory details and murder trials – swarm en-masse round the Philadelphia court room breathlessly repeating every blood stained detail of severed feet in jars and snipped necks, on the hour, every hour?
Confronting the masses with the news that abortion is not the sterile ‘are you going to pay for it or shall I?’ procedure beloved of the soap operas is a real ideological dilemma for them. They are dealing with it by hiding behind irrelevant stories of Wizard of Oz tunes suddenly topping the charts. Martin Brunt with his characteristically hesitant delivery – ’I’m not sure if I should be saying this, but I’ll tell you anyway’ – pontificating on the security buildup for Margaret Thatcher’s funeral being down to a couple of hundred anarchists ‘who may be’ planning a demonstration, whilst ignoring the reality that every important political figure in the western world will be there, and the security might just be for their benefit!
Brunt should be in Philadelphia, that’s where the real news is. Why he isn’t there is just as worthwhile a story.
Edited to add: I am indebted to commentator BenSix for giving me a link to the graphic I have added. ‘Reserved seats for the Media Yesterday…..’ says it all really.
April 15,
2013 at 19:29
-
This is a thoughtful, well-reasoned piece on the Gosnell situation. Btw,
the judge has imposed a recent gag order because something went on in Pearl
Gosnell’s cell regarding personal writings. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/14-theories-for-why-kermit-gosnells-case-didnt-get-more-media-attention/274966/
- April 15,
2013 at 19:15
-
Slate attempts explain why the media is shying away from this story, but
comes up with not much. http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/04/12/kermit_gosnell_the_alleged_mass_murderer_and_the_bored_media.html
- April 15,
2013 at 17:34
-
“Estimated 270,000,000 guns owned by civilians in the USA, good luck trying
to register them all especially in Chicago and Detroit.
Last time I checked
there was a thing called the Hypocratic Oath, why would physicians reveal
their patients medical history to the government?
Like Britain all this law
will achieve is honest citizens being harassed and the crooks having easy
access to guns. Gun registration was tried in Canada it was a bureaucratic
nightmare, cost billions, wasted years of valuable police time, achieved
absolutely nothing and was abandoned recently.
Again with the “unless
you’ve had an abortion”, that is not an argument it is pure infantile
nonsense. Thank you for conceding the discussion.”
These guns are mostly registered. Last time I checked there was a correct
spelling of the Hippocratic Oath. Let’s at least spell it correctly, shall we?
I’m conceding absolutely nothing, but I have long known that there is little
point in arguing with fools.
You don’t live in America, or Canada, nor have you had an abortion
(obviously), so in my book your opinions are just that, and backed by no
personal knowledge whatsoever. Perhaps, while quoting ancient doctors, you
might engage in some research. http://www.haciendapublishing.com/medicalsentinel/hippocratic-oath-abortion-greek-homosexuality-and-courts
I have no idea what you’re talking about when it comes to Canada, and I
don’t think you do either. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/17/canadian-sports-shooting-association-petition-provincial-offices_n_2896200.html
- April 16, 2013 at 04:20
-
” so no point in continuing the discussion with you!”………….please make up
your mind Mewsical.
Having opined that you long ago learned not to argue with fools, you then
continue to argue with me. I can only conclude I am not a fool. Thank you
for the confidence you show in me.
Thank you, for correcting my spelling, that is all so important, we would
not want anybody confusing Hippocrates with Hypocrates it could be
disastrous. Somehow thankfully you got the gist of the message.
There would seem to be little point, even in Obama’s America of passing
new laws about registering guns, when you tell me most of them are
registered, there is a disconnect here, perhaps you are wrong, again.
Thank you, also for telling me where I do not live, though that is going
to be a little problematic to the tax authorities, health insurance and
numerous other bodies, can I refer them to you, to tell them where I
live?
I can assure you I know whereof I speak related to Canadian gun laws,
just for fun, you may consider this article. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/12/11/gary-mauser-why-the-long-gun-registry-doesnt-work-and-never-did/
While on the subject of you being wrong (a very worrisome multiple
occurence) your link to the Hippocratic (I’m learning) oath as it relates to
abortion, is interesting, but since you and I were referencing patient
records related to mental health, it is in the end, meaningless.
I will conceed that I have still not had an abortion, though that would
hardly warrant boasting about, would it?
So, since you and I are having a tough time being civil, and people
mostly come to the pub for a relaxing drink and quiet conversation, I will
remove myself from this conversation. I will run the risk of you advising
the patrons that I live on Mars, have pointy horns and a tail, and opinions
on abortion (oh the heresy!) Who said chivalry was dead? Any spelling
errors, can be gratefully corrected.
- April 14,
2013 at 20:19
-
@ HH – the difference between the UK gun consciousness and the American gun
consciousness can’t really be held side by side for comparison. This country
is very gun-oriented, waaaay beyond anything the UK has ever experienced. The
sheer volume of gun-ownership is staggering, but by the same token, most of
the gun owners are responsible people who come from generations of gun owners.
It’s a tradition here. And for the longest time there was no problem like mass
killings. The first example was the sniper at the University in Texas in 1963,
if you remember. Before that we only had the lone shooter one target lot, like
the Kennedy assassination, Martin Luther King, etc. It seems that these mass
shootings of recent years involve shooters who seem to have severe
mental/emotional problems, and come from families who resolutely ignore the
obvious and furthermore keep guns around. And guns that are capable of
rapid-fire killing. They are designed for that purpose, and why an ordinary
citizen should need such a weapon is beyond me.
My family were hunters – at
least my maternal grandfather, when the family were in India for about 35
years. It was necessary to have guns living in the jungle. My grandfather was
a Forestry Commissioner, so spent a lot of time around dangerous animals. I
was taught to respect guns, but I never really liked the idea. I owned a gun
here, but solely for self-protection against a stalker (before the stalking
laws were put in place) but it was just a Snake Charmer, the only gun I could
get on short notice without having to wait for a background check. Fortunately
for me, a woman detective was assigned to my case and had the guy arrested in
24 hours on an outstanding warrant. When I asked her why she had been able to
move so fast yet the other police officers had done nothing, she said “Because
they’re men.”
- April 14, 2013 at 18:00
-
Re: “President Obama listened to Jill Stanek recount how she’d spent 45
minutes holding a living baby left to die”
45 minutes? I thought they would have come out dead. How late are the
abortions supposed to have been?
- April
14, 2013 at 18:21
-
@ Luco – that makes no sense to me either. Maybe this sort of claim is
why the media is keeping a low profile or part of the reason could be that
the television stations that feature live trials are all caught up with the
Jody Arias murder trial and are not covering Gosnell as thoroughly as they
might have had Jody not been available to amuse everyone for hours, and
hours, and hours, and hours – she was ELEVEN days on the stand, and the
thing is still dragging on. A lot of the country is truly fascinated – I’m
not one of the them – so they’re giving as much coverage as the advertisers
would want.
-
April 14, 2013 at 22:52
-
Mewsical,
Re: “Maybe this sort of claim is why the media is keeping a low profile
or part of the reason could be that the television stations that feature
live trials are all caught up with the Jody Arias murder trial and are not
covering Gosnell as thoroughly as they might have”
The latter sounds likely.
Though I noticed somebody above mentioned racism. Is the doctor black?
Were a lot of the patients black? Because I think I heard somewhere that
some blacks in America have a b their bonnet because they reckon thats the
reason abortion was legalised in America in the first place, and thats why
all these ‘planned parenthood’ places are in mostly black areas etc – it’s
a conspiracy to get rid of the blacks, apparently….
- April 15, 2013 at 00:04
-
Gosnell is African-American, so I would guess that his ‘patients’
came from the low-income African-American community. However, there are
planned parenthood clinics in Hispanic communities as well, and in
regular communities. We are a nation of immigrants after all, and these
days there is less interest in integration, so we have many people from
different countries arriving who do not speak English or make much
attempt to learn either.
- April 14,
2013 at 17:23
-
I was wondering what the women who had to see Gosnell were going through
emotionally – I know it must have been a nightmare. So perhaps the lack of
coverage could also be out of consideration for them. I imagine they are
testifying as well. Why should they be punished by having a media hue and cry
about their private lives and the tough decisions they had to make? Gosnell
will not escape justice, but why it needs to be all over the media, you got
me.
Does anyone remember that film Vera Drake, about the woman abortionist in
London in the 1950s?
- April 14, 2013 at 17:36
-
A fair point, but if the rest of the media really were standing to one
side in respect of the feelings of those who suffered in this, what might
that say about the only major newspaper in the UK that is covering the
story? Much as the implications might appeal to my stereotype of the
behavioural antics of that particular paragon of virtue, I honestly can’t
really see that being the cause of the relative muteness on this matter, no
matter how much I might not believe in any related altruism on that
sanctimonious rag’s part
- April 13,
2013 at 17:46
-
Btw, whatever the outcome here in America of this American issue, it has
absolutely nothing to do with gun control, and it will disappoint whoever that
poster was that bi-partisan agreements have been reached. This is a direct
result of the Newtown parents group lobbying in Washington this last week. If
you want to talk about murder, please talk about what happened to a group of
innocent 6 year old school children, who were mowed down by a crazed man with
an automatic weapon. That won’t be happening again.
What Gosnell reveals is that there is very little help for low-income women
who become pregnant unwittingly – well, that’s another issue – and then have
to scratch around for money to try and take care of things. To sit in judgment
without having experienced this situation personally is distasteful to me. Gun
laws first, access to early affordable abortions next. Then the Gosnells of
this world will no longer be needed.
- April 14, 2013 at 06:50
-
Read Furor’s post once again to understand my comment, it is not
difficult to comprehend.
I will speak of murder when and if I think it appropriate without your
permission, even if it occurs in the USA. You may wish to review my post
about Newtown before blathering. As to future multiple-shootings at schools,
I can guarantee that one will happen in the future despite the Obamabot’s
attempt to paper it over, there is no joy in predicting that. Fools who make
additional laws believing they will be upheld by the mentally incompetent
are themselves incompetent and cynical. There were adequate legal gun
restrictions in place in Connecticut, it did not prevent a tragedy. For the
trillionth time a Bushmaster is NOT an automatic weapon, you reveal your
ignorance by insisting so.
What Gosnell reveals is that very few in the USA really wants to talk
about the major issues surrounding this sordid trial, and abortion lobbyists
will do their damnedest to shut down commentary as shown by your
comments.
- April 14, 2013 at 10:48
-
You’re actually both right in certain ways
No amount of legislation will stop the bad and the mad misusing guns.
It just breeds resentment amongst those who had legitimate reason for
ownership and use as their freedom is curtailed to no practical real
outcome.
But, similarly (not sure if Cascadian really wants a zero option as
some do, so it’s difficult to know his or her desired end requirement),
there should be no pretense that restricting the availability of legal
abortion services will stop demand for such, or that back alley illegal
practice will grow as a replacement, nor that, despite whatever moral
qualms one has about abortion as a practice, it’s better that there is
some seriously well controlled service available, at an affordable level,
run to proper professional standards.
I would have added ‘ethically sound’, to that list but that could
easily be misconstrued, especially if for some people, ‘ethical’ means
right or wrong. Rather, I really mean that they should be carried out
technically properly, under well developed professional standards, clear
limitations as to what is and is not acceptable on times and procedures,
properly and effectively regulated, with a requirement for full
information to be provided to applicants on all aspects of what they are
doing, both positive and negative, (as most ‘good’ providers will be doing
now anyway) before they make a final choice, rather than the whole process
be some mere production line
- April
14, 2013 at 16:29
-
No more gun purchases on the internet or at gun shows WITHOUT A
BACKGROUND CHECK. The deal is done. Sorry. Listen, move here and live
here, otherwise your opinion is meaningless. And whoever it is who is
‘insisting’ that a Bushmaster is not an automatic weapon,is not me. So
take your huff and puff and go attack them.
Btw, have any of you gentlemen actually HAD an abortion? Any of you at
all?
- April 14, 2013 at
16:48
-
April 14, 2013 at 18:18
-
“The deal is done”….absolutely correct, and it will NOT stop one
future mass shooting by the mentally deranged . Are you happy?
I have
no wish to move to the USA, I live in a better country, with mostly sane
leglisators who respond to genuine need thoughtfully, not the Oprah-fied
system you have, trampling your constitution and state laws to please
the hysterical.
My opinion is only meaningless to close-minded
people. I can easily be ignored.
Let me quote your previous comment
“were mowed down by a crazed man with an automatic weapon” that would
appear to be you. Somebody is very good at huffing and puffing.(hint- it
is not me)
And then the final ridiculous comment in a fine mess of
verbiage ” have any of you gentlemen had an abortion” shows the
nonsensical lengths that the abortion lobby go to silence comment.
To
satisfy Ho Hum’s curiousity I am in favour of whatever a patient and her
doctor decide, provided it is acted upon within twenty-one weeks. Unless
something catastrophic happens at a later date that threatens the womans
health then we are obviously in the realm of an emergency..
- April 14, 2013 at 18:35
-
Part of the background check is a thorough investigation into the
psychological/psychiatric condition of the applicant. If the applicant
is on psychotropic medication – no gun for you, pal. That’s the
definition of ‘crazed.’ No more attending the gun shows and walking
out with a weapon in your hand any longer. A responsible gun-owner
will not mind waiting to obtain the gun. Don’t know what effect this
will have on the future of gun shows, or internet sales, but I’ll bet
it will be far-reaching. It was actually a Senator from West Virginia,
which is very much a “gun state” who helped put this legislation in
place after meeting with the Newtown parents. The Newtown children
were literally mowed down, as if being executed by firing squad.
And unless you’ve had an abortion or someone you care about has had
an abortion, I personally don’t care to hear your opinion, it’s not
based in knowledge or empathy, just a lot of opining with no basis in
reality. But, I can tell you are a ‘right fighter,’ so no point in
continuing the discussion with you!
-
April 14, 2013 at 19:55
-
Mewsical, I’m honestly a bit lost on this one.
I can understand that some degree of gun control may reduce the
number of deaths in the US. I really don’t understand why you think
that that will seemingly stop mass killing by crazy people completely,
even if you restrict the term ‘crazy’ to only include those who can be
medically defined as such
Here in the UK, where there is almost total control over legal
ownership, occasionally someone who we find out later probably was a
bit bonkers can still end up legally owning a gun, and as for illegal
ownership, well, they seem to be as easy to get as fish and chips if
you know how, and crazy people are often anything but stupid. I know a
few
I’d like to think you were right, but I have some real doubts
-
April 15, 2013 at 05:32
-
Estimated 270,000,000 guns owned by civilians in the USA, good luck
trying to register them all especially in Chicago and Detroit.
Last
time I checked there was a thing called the Hypocratic Oath, why would
physicians reveal their patients medical history to the
government?
Like Britain all this law will achieve is honest
citizens being harassed and the crooks having easy access to guns. Gun
registration was tried in Canada it was a bureaucratic nightmare, cost
billions, wasted years of valuable police time, achieved absolutely
nothing and was abandoned recently.
Again with the “unless you’ve
had an abortion”, that is not an argument it is pure infantile
nonsense. Thank you for conceding the discussion.
- April 13, 2013 at 11:38
-
Dear Anna
For the first time I was unable to finish reading one of your posts. Thank
you for posting what I managed to read. I used to think hypocrisy was a
relatively minor issue, but then I never thought of it being used to ignore
murder
- April 13, 2013 at 05:37
-
Re: “Lynda Williams said Gosnell taught her how to flip a baby over and
snip its neck with a pair of scissors to ensure ‘fetal demise.’
Correct me if I am wrong, but outside of its progenitors body, that is no
foetus. That is what we call ‘a child’. A child that one human being is calmly
training another human being in the dark art of ‘snipping its neck’ – or
murdering that child, as the more old fashioned of us would term it”
I think the problem is that at that stage there is no way that
infant/foetus would have survived outside the womb anyway.
In this country it seems to be that 12 or 13 weeks is your cut off point
unless there is something wrong (i’d assume seriously wrong) with the baby or
it could put the mothers life at risk, not a nice decision to have to make but
I suppose in some cases a necessary one….
-
April 13, 2013 at 04:43
-
This is not “Abortion” this is Infanticide/murder!!!
I would arrest the bastard and let the Judge decide.
IF the judge decided wrongly, then I know damn well where I can “obtain” a
VERY nice “final solution”…. a 7,62mm “final solution”.
- April 13, 2013 at 17:30
-
Calm down Furor, I understand your response, but that is precisely what
the Obamabot’s want to provoke to justify gun restrictions.
In the end Gosnell was doing precisely what his clients wanted, there is
some joint responsibility here.
-
April 14, 2013 at 13:51
-
A bit late to this rodeo, but someone DID apply a “final solution” to a
similar doctor, albeit one whose methods were not perhaps as revoltingly
sickening:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_George_Tiller
The
perp, if you read the entry, got 50 to life; as he is a man in his fifties,
this effectively means he will never get out, absent clemency.
Obviously,
the perp deserved what he got, in terms of the fact that he set out to
murder someone and he did so. That he is made out to be a heinous criminal
of the stripe of a terrorist is not a surprise, as it should not be. What IS
surprising, and perhaps should be, is that Dr. Tiller was made out a
“martyr” to some noble cause. Dr. Tiller was what he was, a man performing a
morally-questionable act under questionable circumstances, and a case can be
made that he was playing with fire and got burned. Of course, it is never
proper to “blame the victim,” oh dearie me no, can’t possibly assail someone
for engaging in a volitional act which, had he abstained therefrom, would
mean he might still be alive all other things being equal. No, we must
applaud Dr. Tiller’s moral courage of his convictions, as if he were somehow
the modern moral equivalent of Goodman, Chaney and Schwerner (google them if
the names don’t ring a bell), in the abortion-rights debate. The same people
can look at George Zimmerman, another man who engaged in what can arguably
be classed as a volitional morally-questionable act in questionable
circumstances (toting a gun whilst confronting a man who may have initially
posed no immediate personal threat) and can say that Mr. Zimmerman “got what
he deserved” (in terms of the “ass-whupping” he was getting which prompted
the shooting of Trayvon Martin), but that Martin didn’t (HIS volitional
morally-questionable act of continuing to pursue a confrontation where
nothing but the avoidance of being “punked” was at stake). Tiller was as
methodical in his gaming of a system for his personal gain (Medical
insurance claims– surely you didn’t think he was doing it gratis?) as Mick
Philpott ever was, if one will be honest– that Tiller was otherwise an
upright member of society ( a church usher, FFS!) and Philpott wasn’t, well,
that’s just the difference between people for ya!
- April 13, 2013 at 02:57
-
In these days of free contraception and morning after pill there should
really be little need for abortion. However if it is needed or wanted it
should be restricted to the first three months and only in exceptional
circumstances thereafter. That should satisfy the vast majority of people who
are uncomfortable with the idea but do not want it to be illegal again. Fox
news is doing a lot on the case mentioned but seems to be the only media
outlet that is.
- April 12,
2013 at 21:45
-
Plenty of coverage has been going on on this story. http://www.salon.com/2013/04/12/there_is_no_gosnell_coverup/?source=newsletter.
- April 12, 2013 at 20:21
-
I will maintain my record of 100% avoidance of commenting on abortion-a
very emotive issue, since this story is demonstrably about murder!
The landlady makes a good point about the media being absent from the
trial, though I believe she misses some very obvious points about why that
should be so. Allow me to enumerate them:
1. Pack jounalism-The journolist was revealed several years ago, it allowed
“journalists” to discuss amongst themselves what they believed was worthy of
coverage and what in effect should be ignored or censored. Once exposed it
faded away. Does anybody really believe that such a list has not been revived
under a different name and more secure circumstances? And that it does not
exist amongst “journalists” in every country?
2.Feminine gossip
columnists-Evidence as recently as this week on the Margaret Thatcher story,
reveals a woeful lack of rigour amongst wimmin employed as “journalists”, they
have a pre-agreed “point-of-view” and stick to the trivial-twin sets and
pearls meme, when “everybody” agrees that real wimmin with “opinions that
matter” should look like Glenda Jackson (shudder) or the young boy that Ed
Balls married. Abortion must never, ever be discussed as anything but a womyns
sacrosanct right, any male perspective is wrong.
3.Racism- Yes, lets go
“there”. Everybody knows racism is BAD, no lesser an authority than the
Football Association reminds you every waking hour. But it cannot be denied
that Dr. Gosnell is black, a brother, negro, African-American (take your
pick). Can a black doctor really be as bad as Dr Mengele? Could a black doctor
possibly have murdered more black infants than all the murdered black slaves
and civilians prior to emancipation? Why are so many black women murdering
their offspring? Where do Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton stand on this issue of
killing so many black people? They have an opinion on every other black issue.
Enquiring minds want to know, will we have to wait until the National Enquirer
reports?
Do you see why “journalists” are avoiding this issue as if the hearing room
had been sprayed with Anthrax powder? Reporting on this hearing will take
courage, that is why the present crop of gossip-mongers are absent.
Perhaps we will hear Obama pronounce on the proceedings, he was not
reticent about commenting on the Trayvon Martin case. Or maybe more
importantly Jay-Z, Rhianna or Beyonce will comment. Anna points us to Obama’s
comments in the Illinois legislature, go read them-here is an excerpt bottom
of page 33-”Because if these are children who are 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.” He did not define looked after, it could have both
positive or negative implications, against my better judgement I will assume
he meant that the child should be assisted to survive.
-
April 12, 2013 at 18:57
-
I see the telegraph have just run a blog on it, allowing comments unlike
the rest of the week.
- April 12,
2013 at 18:08
-
I find it remarkable that with the access to birth control that Gosnell had
women come to him in what appears to be their last trimester. Who were these
women and why did this take so long to get to Gosnell? However, he is NOT
typical, and I believe that the lid the media are keeping on it is because
here in God’s own country there are people with firearms who will take their
revenge on other doctors who are legally performing abortions, usually in the
first trimester. We don’t need that.
- April 14, 2013 at 22:23
-
Mewsical,
Re: “I believe that the lid the media are keeping on it is because here
in God’s own country there are people with firearms who will take their
revenge on other doctors who are legally performing abortions, usually in
the first trimester”
I think that probably is the main reason, especially religious fanatics
etc….
- April 12, 2013 at 17:10
-
Hold the front page – literally – the BBC ‘news’ site has this as it’s
‘latest’
‘radio 1 controller says …chart show will only play 4 or 5 seconds
of Ding dong song ‘ ! – I’m so relieved to hear this as breaking news !
- April 12, 2013 at 16:47
-
Why is no one asking why these women had to go to this ‘clinic’ in the
first place ? Some time back I did a bit of research which involved sifting
through post mortem reports of women who died as a result of abortionists.
These reports dated from the early part of the 20th century. How on earth is
this still happening in 21st century Philadelphia or anywhere else for that
matter !
- April 12,
2013 at 18:04
-
Because the women involved have been reared to believe that ‘the
government’ will provide?
- April 12, 2013 at 20:09
-
‘Because the women involved have been reared to believe that ‘the
government’ will provide?’
Is that maybe not a bit of bias showing? Certainly doesn’t look as if
they have any certainty of that…
You can also look at any of the Planned Parenthood clinics offering
abortion services, where they don’t quote prices so directly, but the gist
of the standard para is the same.
‘Prices and Payment Information
Please contact this health center
for abortion services pricing information.
Payment is expected at time
of service unless other arrangements have been previously
made.
Abortion services may be covered by your insurance. If you want
to use your insurance, please be sure to bring in your insurance
information at the time of your visit.
If you are uninsured, you may be
eligible to receive financial assistance for your procedure. You can
confidentially find out if you qualify by calling us at nnn.nnn.nnnn. If
you are eligible for financial assistance, you may be asked to bring
documentation with you to the health center. ‘
The interesting bit is you that you seem to be able to insure, a bit
like the NHS really, which is just one big insurance, partly done that way
because it’s so so much cheaper than the costs associated with the
commercial health insurance operations run elsewhere. If people don’t like
that, they can ask for the ‘policy cover’ to be changed, ie get the
politicians to change it. And then pick up the pieces, as those that can’t
afford to get it done properly go back to the cheap and dangerous places
that will inevitably spring up here
-
April 14, 2013 at 21:53
-
Ho Hum,
Re: “The interesting bit is you that you seem to be able to
insure”
You’d be mad not to have health insurance in America. Though I think
some insurance companies used to be pretty dodgy, i.e like in the film
‘The Rainmaker’. I think thats why it is important, that with regard to
things like health insurance, the government does provide, as you’d
never want to be in the situation where on discovering you are seriously
ill, you realise you have been conned and are unable to afford
treatment….
- April 12, 2013 at 14:45
-
I read in one of HoHum’s links that another difference between the UK and
the US is that all the State regulators involved, who were supposed to have
been monitoring such places, have been fired already. Over here they’d still
be suspended, earning full pay and awaiting the court outcome, before their
status could be reviewed by the appropriate authorities.
I can understand why the UK press haven’t gone overboard on such a gross
tale of cruelty but if it had happened in Britain, they would have done I am
sure.
There is a ‘live’ UK news story currently about the fact that
cremated ashes of tragic infants have been going astray.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22114517
- April 12,
2013 at 18:03
-
And another on the use of metal from cremated bodies being used as road
filler…
-
April 12, 2013 at 14:40
-
I know from my experience as a junior nurse on the gynecological ward in
the early fifties, how often illegal abortions were often so well grown. These
babes were incinerated. Conveyed to the roaring red hot furnace in a deep
silver bowl. All snuggled up together. A mixture of do it yourself and
abortionists efforts. No one mourned their passing. I often used to think, as
I took them to the fiery furnace, that one of them might have cured cancer or
been a brilliant doctor or lawyer and helped many people. Some of their
mothers were from posh country villages. Others from the mean back streets of
our dirty old town. It was many years before the Abortion Act followed, to try
and cut down this activity. Some of the mothers were so ill and some died as a
result of the assault on these poor babes. Legal abortion has its place. There
are charlatans everywhere. I’m glad this ghoul is being tried, whether the
media are interested or not. Hope he is banged up forever.
- April
15, 2013 at 17:24
-
Miss Mildred – for you to be a junior nurse in the early 50s, you must be
pretty ancient. 80-something?
- April 15, 2013 at 18:02
-
Tsk. Commenting on a lady’s age.
I had noticed that too, but on the basis that she sounded still sharp
enough to probably be pretty handy with a baseball bat, I kept schtum. And
I trust that Miss Mildred takes that as a compliment……
- April 15, 2013 at 18:39
-
I rather doubt that a lady in her 80s would be interested in blogs or
computers.
- April 15, 2013 at
19:04
- April 12, 2013 at 14:31
-
Gosh Ms Raccoon I don’t know where you get the time to research the topics
you do but I wait with anticipation each day to read your blog simply because
you pick up on topics that invariably interest me and perhaps more surprising
to me interest apparently so many others (am I right you have has 250,000 hits
on your Savile posts?).
I take your major point on the silence of the media
on this case but that is not totally unexpected to a cynic of the media (I
found your blog coz of the media’s treatment of the Savile case) but your
article above touches on some topics in particular the use of the language in
respect of abortion (but use of language goes well beyond just abortion in my
opinion) that was dealt with by a commentator called Joseph Sobran and I am
posting links to three articles by him.The first deals with language, the
second a rather prescient piece on infanticide no doubt poopooed as rabid
fantasy when it was written and the third an arguement that abortion is linked
to authoritarianism
http://www.fpp.co.uk/Sobran/Sobran4.html
http://www.sobran.com/abortion&hatred.shtml
dakotabeacon.com/entry/joe_sobran_abortion_and_authoritarianism/
Coz
I am hopeless with a computer and my attempt at sending links is probably
useless just Google Sobran Abortion and the articles and others are on the
first page that is if they are of possible interest.
I see much in Sobran’s
point about Newspeak in Orwells 1984 and the language used nowadays but
whether others will I don’t know
- April 12, 2013 at 13:24
-
BTW, as I don’t seem to be doing too well today, my apologies for the
missing words, odd grammar and incorrect reply placement. Either the coffee
was of the no-stimulant variety, or I have forgotten to take today’s
medication…………
- April 12, 2013 at 13:18
-
And the response of one particular publication’s journalist
I appreciate you might say that of course the people pointing these things
out maybe ‘would say that’, as they may be thought to have other vested creeds
or beliefs in play, but the points being made are hardly irrational or
unreasonable
-
April 12, 2013 at 12:56
-
I know you hate the Guardian but I think you will find the stats are
probably broadly correct http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/24/abortion-statistics-england-wales.
79%
of abortions are carried out before 10 weeks gestation.
-
April 12, 2013 at 12:52
-
I fail to see whyAnna appears to claim that Gosnell is somehow
representative of abortion practice in the USA, let alone here in the UK. In
fact it seems to me deeply misleading to do so. The point about Gosnell is
that he routinely performed abortions way past the legal time limit. That’s
the major reason he ended up having to ‘finish off’ the poor little humans who
unhelpfully declined to expire. He also operated in filthy conditions, made a
shedload of money, and killed some of the women he claimed to be ‘helping’.
None of these things are typical in the UK so why pretend they are?
- April 12, 2013 at 13:02
- April 12, 2013 at 13:14
-
I think the issue Anna is raising is not so much about the facts of case
per se, but why it’s not being given coverage, given that it is up there
with some of the most gruesome criminal. As someone else was saying, if he
had shot these kids, it would be on every media front page in America. So
Anna’s query is legitimate.
Others, from different viewpoints, are asking the same question. I’m
limited to 1 link at a time, if i remember rightly, so this will be a
string
First, a summary of the facts, for those that maybe haven’t seen them
- April 12, 2013 at 13:15
-
Next, other’s thoughts on the underlying ‘quietness’
- April 12, 2013 at 12:43
-
Well said Anna and, although I haven’t seen the Mails coverage, if it’s
covering this as properly, it too deserves some plaudits too
Another recent tweet was interesting. I tried it, and it’s frighteningly
true
Brittany Cohan @bccohan 27m RT @OrwellForce: “Kermit Gosnell” is the 4th
most searched topic on @Politico, but it returns 0 results
I trust we all do the search, just to keep it prominent
-
April 12, 2013 at 12:31
-
I have always been pro abortion with time scale limits, but that is
horrifying and made me have a serious rethink. Thank you for another thought
provoking piece.
- April 12, 2013 at 12:47
-
Ditto.
Anything over three months is infanticide – and three months should be
more that enough for any woman who isn’t terminally incompetent to make up
her mind.
The rights of the (unborn) child to life outweigh the rights of the woman
to avoid an inconvenience.
- April 14, 2013 at 21:16
-
JonahtheWhale,
Re: “I have always been pro abortion with time scale limits, but that is
horrifying and made me have a serious rethink”
Well, it won’t be like that if the woman goes very early on in the
pregnancy….
- April
14, 2013 at 23:58
-
Someone noted somewhere in one of these links that 79% of abortions are
performed in the first ten weeks. I think we need to keep that in mind and
not assume that Gosnell is anything other than a horrifying
aberration.
-
April 12, 2013 at 12:30
-
Gosnell sounds like a fascinating character: a man blinded to human
suffering as much by his own self-righteousness as anything else. His clinic
seems to have been a hell run by a man who thinks he’s Jesus Christ.
A reporter alleges that this is what the reserved media seats have looked like.
- April 12, 2013 at 12:26
-
The silence of mainstream media in this case is a disgrace. Almost as
disgraceful as the, alleged, conduct of Gosnell.
-
April 12, 2013 at 11:41
-
What a shocking and powerful piece
- April 12, 2013 at 11:40
-
Hi Anna. You know that title reminds me of HP Lovecraft – ‘The Dunwich
Horror’ or ‘The Shadow Out of Time’. I get expecting the characters to sprout
tentacles or some such.
Fox News has several quite balanced pieces on this.
- April 12,
2013 at 18:00
-
Even Lovecraft would be hard put to dream up a creature as devoid of
humanity as this man…
{ 61 comments }