Category Archives: Crimes Against Children
From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
So…This is Who We Give Medals to These Days? Femi-nazi Abortionists? What else do we expect from A Baby Killing President?
From IOTW: http://iowntheworld.com/blog/
Planned Parenthood: Doing all They Can to Decrease the Black Population Because Margaret Sanger Said Blacks are Inferior
Gloria Steinem: When Obama Awards Me The Medal of Freedom He Will Be “Honoring The Work” of Racist Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger Who Advocated Genocide Against Black Babies…
There’s no way she doesn’t know about Margaret Sanger’s background, right?
Via CNS News:
Speaking at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on Monday, feminist Gloria Steinem said receiving the Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama would be “honoring the work of Margaret Sanger.”
“I hope this is retroactive in honoring the work of Margaret Sanger,” said Steinem about the woman who founded what would become Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the largest abortion provider in the United States.
“I hope that she would celebrate this recognition that reproductive freedom is a human right at least as crucial as freedom of speech and that no government should dictate whether or when we have children,” Steinem said.
In her remarks Steinem said that “the power of this honor may be even more evident in the withholding than in the giving,” noting that Sanger never got the medal.
“I was reminded by Ellen Chesler, biography of Margaret Sanger, that President Lyndon Johnson, even as he signed the first federal and international family planning act into law, refused to bestow the metal of freedom on Sanger,” Steinem said. “He feared reprisal from the Catholic Church.
“Ellen told me that when she looked at Sanger’s private history papers at Smith College – I’m proud to say the biggest archive of women history – she found a poignant little hand-written note from Sanger, asking that her body be buried here next to her husband but that her heart be removed to Japan – the only country in the world that had every bestowed a public honor on her,” Steinem said.
From WZ: http://weaselzippers.us/
Societal norms are determined by the culture at large, not by a pointy-headed, ideologically driven ruling class. Yet sometimes the ruling class demonstrates an alarming ability to stampede the masses in any direction it chooses, like drovers directing a herd toward a stockyard. For example, in 1974, the American Psychological Association, yielding to pressure from militant homosexuals, stopped listing homosexuality as a disorder. A generation later, Christian businesses are forced to close their doors for refusing to participate in blasphemous homosexual parodies of weddings. Now on to the next “civil rights” frontier:
In the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM V), the American Psychological Association (APA) drew a very distinct line between pedophilia and pedophilic disorder. Pedophilia refers to a sexual orientation or profession of sexual preference devoid of consummation, whereas pedophilic disorder is defined as a compulsion and is used in reference to individuals who act on their sexuality.
Nothing wrong with thinking about it; just don’t actually do it.
Again we see that moonbattery is imposed by increments. Otherwise the frog would jump out of the pot.
DSM VI will likely drop any reference to the subject. By DSM VII or VIII, we will see a listing for pedophobia, the shameful condition suffered by neurotically narrow-minded people who are judgmental about pedophilia.
APA’s decision has given rise to numerous pedophilia-advocacy groups, the chief of them being B4U-ACT, a non-profit grassroots organization based in Maryland. Created in 2003 primarily as a means for “minor-attracted persons” to be open about their sexual preferences in a supportive atmosphere, B4U-ACT is now widening the scope of their organization.
According to spokesperson and registered sex offender Paul Christiano, the pedophilia-advocacy group is “working towards de-stigmatizing the mental health community.” Christiano explained that negative societal attitudes towards minor-attracted persons “trickle down to policy-making and the mental health community.”
Having been down this road before, we know where the reengineered societal attitudes will take us. You can easily lose your job for failing to revere homosexuality, a practice regarded with near universal revulsion within living memory. The same will soon be true of pedophilia. Our government has already issued a pedophile stamp, so baby-rapers don’t have long to wait for their place on a pedestal.
On a tip from St. Gilbert.
From MB: http://moonbattery.com/
When decent people gag on learning that the US Post Office is issuing a Harvey Milk stamp, it is not just that Milk’s sole notable accomplishment was to be acknowledged as a pervert. He was a particularly disgusting type of pervert than any healthy society would strive to eradicate rather than deify. Matt Barber has enraged liberals by drawing attention to Milk’s “deviant sexual appetite for underage, drug-addicted, runaway boys”:
Harvey Milk’s only claim to fame is that he was the first openly homosexual candidate to be elected to public office (San Francisco city commissioner). His chief cause was to do away with the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. In 1978 Milk was murdered over a non-related political dispute by fellow Democrat Dan White.
And a “progressive” martyr was born.
Like many in the sacred (to moonbats) gay caste, Milk was drawn to the young — the illegally young:
One of Milk’s victims was a 16-year-old runaway from Maryland named Jack Galen McKinley. As previously mentioned, Milk had a soft spot in his, um, heart for teenage runaways. Motivated by an apparent quid pro quo of prurience, Milk plucked McKinley from the street.
Randy Shilts was a San Francisco Chronicle reporter and close friend to Harvey Milk. Though Shilts died of AIDS in 1994, he remains, even today, one of the most beloved journalists in the “LGBT” community.
Shilts was also Harvey Milk’s biographer. In his glowing book “The Mayor of Castro Street,” he wrote of Milk’s “relationship” with the McKinley boy: ” … Sixteen-year-old McKinley was looking for some kind of father figure. … At 33, Milk was launching a new life, though he could hardly have imagined the unlikely direction toward which his new lover would pull him.”
McKinley later committed suicide.
Milk didn’t have much use for what he called the “heterosexual model” of sexual relationships. He preferred multiple partners. This is how AIDS spreads so quickly. McKinley was hardly his only prey.
Another teen who crossed paths with Harvey Milk was Christian convert and former homosexual Gerard Dols. In a 2008 radio interview with Concerned Women for America, Dols shared of how – as a physically disabled teen – the “very nice” Harvey Milk had encouraged him in 1977 to run away from his Minnesota home and come to San Francisco.
According to Dols, Milk told him, “Don’t tell your parents,” and later sent him a letter with instructions. Thankfully, the letter was intercepted by Dols’ parents who then filed a complaint with the Minnesota attorney general’s office.
Too bad the authorities dropped the ball on this, no doubt for political reasons. If Milk had been thrown in prison where he belonged, California might have been spared the ignominy of an actual state holiday called Harvey Milk Day, and the nation as a whole might never have to behold Harvey Milk postage stamps.
You can tell a lot about people by the people they admire. Sometimes you can tell even more by the people they demand that others admire. Evidence that normalization of pedophilia will be the next great civil rights crusade continues to accrue.
On tips from R F, Python, and Scott Drummond.
WHENEVER a scene of demonic horror occurs in one of our modern indoctrination centers known as schools, we are reminded again of just how much niceness keeps these sterile, ugly, soulless places afloat. Teddy bears, candlelit vigils, a tidal surge of unanimous praise for the niceness of the victim follow nightmarish, bloody carnage. Philip Chism was only 14 years old and yet he stabbed a teacher to death with a craft knife after hiding in a suburban Massachusetts classroom and waiting to accost her. He then placed her body in a recycling bin and walked out the door. He went to the latest Woody Allen movie after dumping the body in the woods and then wandered the streets, alone with his demonic secret in a perfectly nice community.
How can we explain this? There seems to be no way to process it in the vocabulary of nice. Teddy bears, candles and pledges to remember the deceased are the best answers it can give. Even the murderer in this case is believed to have been nice. Of Philip Chism, one of the few blacks in the town of Danvers, Massachusetts, The Daily Mail reports:
Other students, who played soccer with accused 14-year-old Chism, said that he was a really nice boy but incredibly shy and hard to get to know.
One said: ‘He was nice, but really quiet. No one really knew him that well. Apparently when he was arrested he was unresponsive and barely said anything at all.
Beneath the pervasive niceness, there is breathtaking hard-heartedness. One wonders whether Philip Chism, who may have been overwhelmed with phony niceness during his few months in Danvers because he was black and may have been used to demonstrate the wonderful tolerance of others, saw through this in some childish, intuitive way. There is no real love in these places. Where love is not, hatred blooms. It erupts after a period of silent, invisible fermentation. However nice the teacher Colleen Ritzer may have been, she worked for a brutally indifferent institution. She gave herself obliviously to a system that denies God with matter-of-fact efficiency and refuses to teach a student something so basic to life as prayer. Where God is not, Satan is. And he’s just not very nice.
From Thinking Housewife: http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/
This may be the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in my life.
On Friday I mistakenly urged people to buy Barilla products, after owner Guido Barilla appeared to stand up for decency by refusing to comply with militant deviants who demand that commercials push their propaganda by featuring depraved homosexual “families.” But now it appears that the Gay Mafia has made him an offer he could not refuse. These 43 seconds of horror emblemize the sinking of a civilization into the sewer:
The “evolution of the family” means good-bye to that corny old paradigm of mother, father, and the children they produce. Now it means pairs (and eventually larger groups) of sodomites acquiring other people’s children so as to raise them in their corrupt, unholy, and exceedingly unhealthy lifestyle — and often so as to exploit them as sex slaves (e.g., see here, here, andhere).
No doubt the family will continue to evolve until children are created from clones. At that point our grotesquely depraved ruling class will be able to do away with traditional families altogether.
What do these freaks do to people like Barilla to make them grovel in such abject terror?
Needless to say, the buycott is now a boycott. Get ready to field astonished questions from your kids regarding why the “families” slurping spaghetti in the TV commercials have two daddies and no mommies.
On tips from Jim72, Matt L, Spicy Meatball, and DJ.
From MB: http://moonbattery.com/?p=37274
The sexual molestation that inevitably results (see here, here, and here) is hardly the only reason that the liberal push for more homosexual adoption is morally abhorrent. How can it be called decent to put children into situations like this?
The lesbian parents of an 11-year-old boy who is undergoing the process of becoming a girl … defended the decision, claiming it was better for a child to have a sex change when young.
Thomas Lobel, who now calls himself Tammy, is undergoing controversial hormone blocking treatment in Berkeley, California to stop him going through puberty as a boy.
[Adoptive guardians] Pauline Moreno and Debra Lobel warn that children with gender identity disorder forced to postpone transitioning could face a higher risk of suicide.
Whereas if they are freakified through grotesque medical practices best left on the Island of Doctor Moreau, they live happily ever after. Just ask Nancy Verhelst. No wait, you can’t; she had herself put out of her misery like deformed dog.
Thomas’s transition into a make-pretend girl began at age eight. His guardians are inflicting hormone suppressants to prevent him from developing a male voice, broad shoulders, and facial hair. If this doesn’t qualify as child abuse, the statutes need to be rewritten.
Whatever the motivations involved in this particular situation, given the pathological fear and hatred of males that often characterize women who base their identities on being lesbians, situations like this are an inevitable consequence of homosexual adoption and the bizarre moonbat notion that a person’s sex can be altered. The progressive ruling class is dragging the rest of society down a path that cannot lead to anything healthy.
On tips from Dan Feely and Josh F.
From MB: http://moonbattery.com/
Jihad in Kenya: Muslims shot some children five times, balconies dripping with blood, screams ringing out
The horror of this jihad is not being reported.
Kenya terrorists used new tactic to spare some Muslims Gunmen used high-stakes game of 20 Questions to separate Muslims from non-Muslims during deadly attack on Westgate mall; survivor says victims were asked name of Prophet’s mom to sing a religious verse. (more here)
One man downloaded an Arabic prayer and wrote it on his palm.
Executed as she talked to her mother on the phone: Fate of 16-year-old victim of Kenyan mall massacre as it emerges terrorists shot some children five times By Ted Thornhill, The Daily Mall
- Gunmen targeted 30 children who were taking part in a cooking event
- As many as 30 hostages were taken by the Al Shabaab terrorists
- Sources said militants hurled a severed hand and head from a balcony
- The Kenyan military didn’t believe the hostages would survive their ordeal
- Rescuers recall balconies dripping with blood and screams ringing out
Executed as she talked to her mother on the phone: Fate of 16-year-old victim of Kenyan mall massacre as it emerges terrorists shot some children five times.
Gunmen targeted 30 children who were taking part in a cooking event As many as 30 hostages were taken by the Al Shabaab terrorists Sources said militants hurled a severed hand and head from a balcony The Kenyan military didn’t believe the hostages would survive their ordeal Rescuers recall balconies dripping with blood and screams ringing out
Children as young as five were shot up to five times by the terrorists that carried out the Westgate mall massacre, it has emerged.The attack, carried out last week by gunmen from Somalia-based terrorist group Al Shabaab, left 67 people dead, including six Britons. New accounts of the extremists’ merciless assault reveal for the first time the fate of some of the 30 children who attended a cooking event at the mall. Some of them were as young as 12.
One girl at the event, 16-year-old Nehal Vekariya, was shot through the eye, according to The Sunday Times.The paper reports her father’s final phone conversation with her.
He said: ‘She said “I’m okay, I’m with friends, call Mummy fast and tell her I’m okay”.’
When her mother called her she heard yelling and then gunshots, then the line went dead. She had been cut down at close range.
The paper also reports that witnesses describe children as young as five being hit up to five times by the terrorists, as they roamed the mall looking for victims.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
Kinda gay, no?
ISLAMABAD – Taliban exploitation of young boys for sex is common in parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan, Central Asia Online has learnt through interviews with analysts, military officers, clerics and a former militant.
“I have personally done investigative reporting when they were allegedly taking away young boys from schools for sexual pleasure,” Peshawar-based analyst and author Aqeel Yusufzai told Central Asia Online in early August. “I’ve confirmed reports of militants – both in Pakistan and Afghanistan – exploiting young boys.”
The militants routinely visit schools in border towns to “select good-looking teenaged boys” in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Aqeel said. The district education officer reported the matter to the provincial government, then run by the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) (2002-2007), but the problem apparently continued.
A former militant commander-turned-fruit seller in Pakistan confirmed the abuse but told Central Asia Online that the majority of cases go unreported because of “cultural taboos.”
“Due to social fear, [the victim] keeps it secret … because in our society, the victim boy is always accused of the act,” said the former commander, who identified himself only as Mohmand. “It doesn’t matter whether he is forced or if he consented. … Once used, he is then vulnerable to blackmailing and exploitation by others – including commanders or colleagues – for their pleasure.”
Some of the abusing commanders would often “proudly share” the act and encourage their peers and colleagues also to “use” the victim, he said.
From Weasel ZIppers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Brace yourself — the ad below by Heroic Media was regarded as too controversial for publication by the Chicago Tribune, USA Today, and LA Times:
By “controversial,” the information gatekeepers mean they find innocent human life and the idea that we might want to defend it offensive.
Our liberal ruling class regards corruption as good, so why wouldn’t it see innocence as evil?
On a tip from G. Fox. Hat tip: The Right Scoop.
Thanks Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
No matter how hard Davis and her fellow late-term abortion fanatics rant and rave, more Americans are opposed to sucking the brains out of an unborn baby.
Via Washington Times:
Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Sunday that state Sen. Wendy Davis’ attention-getting filibuster notwithstanding, the Legislature is going to approve restrictions on abortion when it gavels in another special session this week.
“We’re going to pass some restrictions on abortion,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Texas is a place where we defend life. I mean, that’s the powerful message here and that’s what we’re focused on and politics will take care of itself.”
“People have relayed to me that never in the history of Texas [have] they seen that type of mob rule come in and discombobulate a legislative session,” he continued.
Mr. Perry clarified that he was not referring to Ms. Davis’ filibuster, but rather the decorum of the Senate chamber during the debate as “mob rule.”
He also defended remarks he made recently at the National Right to Life Conference, where he described Ms. Davis as “a teenage mother herself” who eventually graduated from Harvard Law School and serves in the Texas Senate.
“It’s just unfortunate that she hasn’t learned from her own example, that every life must be given a chance to realize its full potential and that every life matters,” he said.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
The Pervert Party: Democrats for abortion had
a Texas girl hold a sign declaring: ‘If I wanted the
government in my womb, I would f*** a Senator.’
Liberalism is like a Swiss Army knife, a versatile tool that makes it valuable as a substitute for whatever its users otherwise lack. If you are stupid, but espouse liberalism, you will be praised by liberals as intelligent merely for so doing — Joe Biden and Al Sharpton, for example. If you are immoral, all you need to do to receive acclaim for your virtue is to become a liberal, as Ted Kennedy’s entire career attests.
This belief that every liberal is the moral and intellectual superior of others merely because he is a liberal has a profound effect not only in politics, but also within those fields of endeavor — journalism, academia and the entertainment industry — where the authority of liberalism has become hegemonic. Nothing else can possibly explain how an idiot like Chris Matthews remains on the payroll of NBC News, or why “Women’s Studies” departments stain the campuses of major universities, or why Joy Behar has a show-business career.
Liberals will themselves occasionally acknowledge this truth. WhenMona Eltahawy went off on Max Blumenthal this week, she made the point that Blumenthal “does nothing but Tweet” — he is not, nor has he ever been, a prolific writer. Blumenthal certainly has never shown any merit that would recommend his work except that he is a liberal. Andrew Breitbart was right on target when he said that the only thing Blumenthal has ever done is use “Alinksy tactics” in his efforts to “destroy people” — cheap political “gotcha” journalism that serves no other purpose than to smear the Left’s chosen enemies.
In this, however, Max Blumenthal is not particularly unusual. Outfits like Think Progress and Media Matters employ scores of “journalists” who have never done any “reporting” other than to accuse conservatives of sexism, racism and/or homophobia. It’s as if they were seeking the Pulitzer Prize for finger-pointing and name-calling.
So when Mona Eltahawy denounced Max Blumenthal as a useless drone, an untalented do-nothing, that indictment encompassed many more such practitioners of progressive journalism. Max is not unique among those whose only real qualification as journalists is that they are liberals.
Conflating liberalism with virtue is an idea that has consequences, and among those consequences is the moralistic hubris of liberals. Believing that advocacy for liberal causes is synonymous with virtue, they are prone to an ends-justify-the-means rationalization of unethical tactics and even criminal violence in support of what they believe to be The Greater Good. This was how, after all, the 1960s “peace” movement gave rise to the hateful fanatical terrorism of the Weather Underground bombers — social justice as a license for murder.
And speaking of murder, why do liberals never pause to wonder how abortion became the sine qua non of their worldview?
Bela Kun and the Politics of Perversion
Ann Coulter was never more accurate than when she said in her bookGodless that abortion is the sacrament of the Church of Liberalism. We beheld a bizarre testimony to this truth when pro-abortion protesters at the Texas Capitol began chanting “Hail Satan.”
What was going on was that the Texas legislature was considering a bill to ban abortion after 20 weeks, a proposal that should not really be controversial. Advances in medical science have made it possible to save the lives of premature babies, so that the criterion of fetal viability would certainly justify banning the murder of babies in utero who might be able to survive if they were delivered. The vast majority of abortions (more than 95%) are performed before the 20th week of gestation, so that the Texas law would do relatively little to limit the exercise of “choice.” Yet it is on this dubious battleground that Texas Democrats have, to nationwide applause from liberals, chosen to make their stand.
No one outside Texas had ever heard of Wendy Davis until the Democrat legislator decided to filibuster this legislation, a stance so wrong and unpopular that even a liberal Democrat like Kirsten Powers was moved to remark, “It’s amazing what is considered heroism these days.” And speaking of amazing . . .
Pro-life activists who supported the bill banning late-term abortions were at the Texas Capitol in Austin and began to sing “Amazing Grace,” a timeless and much-beloved Christian hymn:
I once was lost, but now I am found,
Was blind, but now I see.
Let’s ask: How could anyone be offended by this? What kind of person hates God so much they would object to “Amazing Grace”?
It is one thing, after all, to say that you do not share someone else’s particular religious belief, but quite another thing to say that their expression of belief is offensive to you. I may believe that Buddhists are fools and that Scientologists are deluded devotees of a charlatan, but I don’t run around deliberately starting arguments with them. Somehow, though, liberals have decided that Bible-believing Christians are their mortal enemies, and I think Matt Ross has properly located the historical origins of this anti-Christian animosity:
In 1919, Georg Lukacs became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun regime in Hungary. He immediately set plans in motion to de-Christianize Hungary. Reasoning that if Christian sexual ethics could be undermined among children, then both the hated patriarchal family and the Church would be dealt a crippling blow. Lukacs launched a radical sex education program in the schools. Sex lectures were organized and literature handed out which graphically instructed youth in free love (promiscuity) and sexual intercourse while simultaneously encouraging them to deride and reject Christian moral ethics, monogamy, and parental and church authority. All of this was accompanied by a reign of cultural terror perpetrated against parents, priests, and dissenters.
Through the intellectual influence of the Frankfurt School’s cultural Marxism (Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, et al.) this attitude has been steadily woven into the ideological tapestry of the Democrat Party over the past half-century. The hegemonic dominance of liberalism within academia, journalism and the entertainment industry means that this radicalism — the embrace of perverse licentiousness and an implacable hostility to Christian faith — has been so widely diffused throughout our society that many Americans no longer even notice it, let alone question its original motives and purpose.
No one under 40 has any memory of when the Democrat Party did notstand for abortion, sodomy and socialism (not necessarily in that order) and the advance of political correctness within our educational system has deprived the young of the historical knowledge by which they might understand or critique modern liberalism. It is therefore remarkable — although seldom remarked — that mere opposition to the Democrat Party agenda is now classified as “hate,” as if buttf–king and baby-killing were synonymous with love.
Father of Lies, Party of Death
Rather than pursue that philosophical digression further, however, let us return to the scene Tuesday at the Capitol in Austin, where pro-lifers sang their hymn, for here we find an answer to the question: Who hates God so much that they are offended by “Amazing Grace”?
Abortion is wrong and its advocates are evil, and if their chants were meant in jest, there is truth in humor: Democrats want to kill babies, and thereby they make themselves servants of Satan.
BTW, Democrats chanting “Hail Satan” is no big deal. He is, after all, the spiritual founder of their party.
We may again digress briefly to note that the process by which Democrats became The Party of Death™ was fairly rapid. In 1960, when the Democrats nominated John F. Kennedy, his Catholicism was sufficiently controversial that Kennedy had to avow that he would not be taking dictation from the Pope. Ten years after JFK’s assassination, in its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling the Supreme Court manufactured a fictitious “right” to abortion, but this was not a partisan matter, and many Democrats strongly opposed it.
By 1992, however, the Democrat Party’s commitment to killing babies had become such a cornerstone of their national agenda that Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey was not permitted to speak in opposition to the party’s radical pro-abortion platform. Pro-lifers have since been purged, as Daniel McConchie explained last year:
If you tuned into the Democratic National Convention . . . and were momentarily confused as to whether C-SPAN was actually covering a huge abortion rally, you are not alone. The high-profile roles given to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan, Sandra Fluke, and Caroline Kennedy are the capstone of a two-decade-long effort to eradicate anti-abortion Democrats from the party. It is an effort that is nearly complete. An event hosted by Democrats for Life during the convention failed to attract a single politician currently in office.
Thus, in scarcely more than 50 years, Democrat have gone from being feared as too Catholic to being The Devil’s Own Party, whose adherents cheerfully offer their praise to Satan as they stand firmly in favor of killing the innocent unborn. And as every Christian knows, Satan is the “father of lies,” which brings us to Elspeth Reeve.
Ms. Reeve first came to public notice as a handmaiden of falsehood, and it is a testimony to liberalism’s influence in the field of journalism that someone so closely connected to an infamous act of dishonesty could still be employed by any reputable publication. Her disgraceful debut involved the notorious “Baghdad Diary” episode:
On August 2, 2007, the editors of The New Republic disclosed what they had learned in their July 26 chat with Beauchamp — that the “crypt keeper” episode didn’t happen in Iraq at all. They revealed also that Beauchamp had first made contact with The New Republic through one of the magazine’s yearlong researcher-reporters, Elspeth Reeve, who happened also to be Beauchamp’s girlfriend. . . .
Reeve left The New Republic just about the time (July 2007) it became evident that Beauchamp had fictionalized his atrocity tales, and one might have thought that the shame she had helped bring upon the profession of journalism would have rendered her radioactive, permanently persona non grata, as was the case with such liberal liars as Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair.
Nevertheless, The Atlantic has attempted to rehabilitate Elspeth Reeve, a fact I mentioned last year with a passing reference to her as the World’s Least Reliable Fact-Checker™ and now, in the case of the Texas abortion protests, she has disgraced herself anew.
Dishonesty, a Valuable Skill for Liberals
After video of the “Hail Satan” chant went viral Tuesday, Reeve presumed to fact-check it and generally deride conservatives who cited it “as proof of the depravity — or at least stupidity — of the pro-choice activists.” Before proceeding further with our inquiry into Elspeth Reeve’s competence as a fact-checker, let’s ask a few questions:
- Why is it that only conservative sites oppose abortion?
- Why do the words “liberal” or “Democrat” appear nowhere in Elspeth Reeve’s article? Is it really impossible to classify the general political orientation of those who think it necessary for abortion to be legal under all circumstances?
- Who assigned Elspeth Reeve to patrol the Internet, presuming to “debunk” messages on conservative sites?
You perhaps see the point: Reeve is doing the same kind of Alinksyite work as Media Matters and Think Progress do every day, and she seldom does anything else, because she has no “skill” except her liberalism. And in Swiss Army knife fashion, the universal tool of liberalism is made to serve as a substitute: If you are a habitual liar, being an outspoken liberal is accepted as proof of your honesty.
Reeve labels conservatives but does not label liberals, even though everyone knows that the only kind of people so evil as to protest in favor of abortion are liberal Democrats. However, Elspeth Reeve refers to them only as “pro-choice activists,” as if their political and ideological loyalties were unknown. But we need not be so mystified: The people who want to kill Texas babies are Democrats.
There are no Democrats who oppose killing babies, because Democrats have purged everyone who disagrees with baby-killing, and describing this policy agenda as “choice” is a purposeful deceit.
KILL BABIES! HAIL SATAN! VOTE DEMOCRAT!
Sodomy is still just an optional item on the Democrat agenda, but it’s probably only a matter of time before they make it mandatory.
Elspeth Reeve derogated conservatives for calling attention to the “pro-choice activists” who used a Satanic chant to mock pro-lifers, saying that only a handful of the “activists” took part in the chant, but one imagines that if a handful of Tea Partiers started chanting racial slurs, this would have been deemed newsworthy. Not content with dismissing the “Hail Satan” chant as trivial and insignificant, however, Elspeth Reeve thendisputed the authenticity of the photo (shown at the top of this post) of
bloodthirsty pro-abortion fanatics Texas Democrats having a young girl hold up a nearly pornographic protest sign:
However, it’s a fake. Or at least, it’s not from the Texas demonstrations. The photo was posted on a message board in December 2007. The anti-abortion crowd will have to stick with its five Satanists.
Oops! The World’s Least Reliable Fact-Checker™ strikes again: The photo is legit; Elspeth Reeve had read the date wrong on the message board; and she was forced to acknowledge her error.
Did I say “error”? I meant lie, because when you are engaged in a dishonest political propaganda campaign (which is all Elspeth Reeve’s “journalism” career has ever been) and you publish falsehoods in service of your deceitful purpose, this is scarcely an accident.
Liberals lie routinely, because they know if they ever told the truth, no honest person would support their wicked agenda. And if we fail to defeat them, it is because we do not boldly speak truth, or because we have let ourselves become confused by liberal lies.
Let me close by saying that the Texas legislature will convene again on Monday, as Thomas Umstattd Jr. says:
Where are God’s soldiers? Who will volunteer in the Army of the Lord?
From Robert Stacy McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
Smiling sisters shot dead for dancing in the rain: Pakistani girls, 15 and 16, killed along with their mother
The religion of peace strikes again.
Surely You Don’t Think the Murdering Commie Bastard Would let Anything Get in The Way of Killing Babies Did You?
The reason the media conspicuously played down the lurid and highly newsworthy Kermit Gosnell baby abattoir trial is that it is heavily invested in the political success of Barack Obama. Don’t get the connection? Maybe this will help:
Despite passing the U.S. House of Representatives, a bill to prohibit abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy faces an uncertain future as President Obama’s administration has suggested that he will veto it.
“(S)cience is on our side,” Representative Marsha Blackburn, (R- Tenn.) told MSNBC in an interview.
Blackburn joined other pro-life representatives, including Michelle Bachmann (R- Minn.) and Virginia Foxx (R- N.C.) in defending the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban abortions 20 weeks into a pregnancy and later, based on science indicating that unborn children can feel pain by this point. Exceptions in cases of rape, incest or a risk to the mother’s life were included in the final House version of the legislation.
This moral no-brainer passed the House 228-196, but now has to get through Harry Reid’s Democrat-controlled Senate — and if it does:
The Obama Administration has said that should the legislation gain the approval of both the House and Senate, the president’s “senior advisors would recommend that he veto this bill.”
Why wouldn’t he? As State Senator, Obama repeatedly fought to deny medical attention to babies who survive botched attempts on their lives by abortionists.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), who introduced the legislation, argued in a June 13 statement that “(k)nowingly subjecting our innocent unborn children to dismemberment in the womb, particularly when they have developed to the point that they can feel excruciating pain every terrible moment leading up to their undeserved deaths, belies everything America was called to be.”
Franks should have said, “everything the human race was called to be.”
Anyone who approves of tearing babies to pieces, even knowing they feel the pain and presumably the horror, will not hesitate to do the same to you when they have the political leverage. Losing to liberalism is not an option.
On a tip from St. Gilbert.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
Yeah, he really said that.
(CNSNews.com) – Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday it is “morally outrageous” to ban abortions after five months of pregnancy.
“It is morally outrageous, frankly,” Nadler said about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 1797), a bill that would ban abortions 20 weeks post-fertilization, or five months into pregnancy.
“Here we go again,” he said. “Every single year we have to go through the same nonsense with the same morally presumptuous, morally arrogant attitude that we know better. ‘We know better than women and their doctors. We know better about their health care. We know better about their moral choices in very personal decisions.’”
The House is set to vote Tuesday on the bill. Pro-abortion Democrats gathered on Capitol Hill to oppose the measure.
“This bill is particularly morally outrageous,” Nadler said. “It is also particularly unconstitutional.”
Found at American Digest: http://americandigest.org/
Posted on | June 3, 2013
You know how the “Free Kate” crowd say they have no agenda beyond “fairness” and “equality”? There is reason to doubt:
It’s difficult to describe my reaction to Kristin Ireland’s tearful “Lifetime movie” sympathy for Paige in Pennsylvania, jailed for being an 18-year-old having sex with a 14-year-old girl.
According to Ireland, this is a story about “railroading and “discrimination,” as if 18-year-old guys in Pennsylvania were routinely banging 14-year-olds without any fear of prosecution.
I think not, ma’am.
And I think Kristin Ireland wouldn’t be boo-hooing if this was a teenage boy doing time for statutory rape. No, her sympathy is reserved entirely for her fellow lesbians, and so therefore either:
- We must create a special Gay Jailbait Loophole to prevent the prosecution of “consensual” gay sex with 14-year-olds; or
- We must effectively end all prosecution for such crimes, hetero or homo, because equal application of the law would occasionally result in some 18-year-old lesbians going to jail for dating ninth-graders, and this would make Kristin Ireland cry.
Do these people ever think in terms of contingencies or unintended consequences? Can they not remove themselves from the emotional zone where tearful mothers bemoan the fate of their criminal children?
“Sure, Johnny stole that car, but lots of teenagers steal cars and get away with it. Why did they send my poor Johnny to jail?”
Nobody’s making a Lifetime movie about that, are they? No, and if Johnny the Teenage Hoodlum gets caught banging a 14-year-old, Kristin Ireland doesn’t give a damn about that, either.
It’s all about the Sacred Sapphic Sisterhood with her, and so the parents of Paige’s sexual conquest who objected to their daughter’s initiation into that sorority at age 14 are just hateful bigots.
Ditto for any parent who might object to their 14-year-old son playing naked leapfrog with 18-year-old guys, and we don’t know if Kristin Ireland if willing to extend the acceptable range beyond this specific 18/14 spread, or whether she’d grant enough leeway for a 19-year-old to take your 13-year-old to the Seventh-Grade Dance (and then go parking at Lover’s Lane afterwards, of course).
Exactly where Kristin Ireland would draw the line is hard to determine, but we can only hope it’s somewhere short of the point at which a perp tearfully tells us, “But she willingly got in the van — she said she wanted to help me find my puppy — it was consensual!”
A Lifetime movie, indeed.
UPDATE: If it’s OK for lesbians to have sex with 14-year-olds, certainly there’s no reason 16-year-olds should be off-limits, right?
On March 21, Garcia picked up the girl, and went to Starbucks for coffee. It was at the coffee shop that the teacher told the teen about her romantic dream involving the student. A week later, Garcia texted the girl to inform her she had just broken up with her boyfriend, and the pair expressed personal feelings for each other. The teen told Garcia she needed to see her, and the teacher picked her up in a rental car to drive the girl back to her apartment, “where they kissed passionately for the rest of the evening.” The following day, the pair reportedly went shopping together for a sex toy at the Katz Boutique and Sex Shop.
“Her romantic dream”! And only haters could object.
UPDATE II: Thanks to the commenter who found this July 2010 sentencing record for Warren, Pa.:
Paige Moriah Johnson, 19, of 2407 Lenhart Rd., to six to 24 months in a state correctional institution, $825 in fines and fees and pay the cost of prosecution for corruption of minors; and to six to 12 months in a state correctional institution consecutive to the first sentence and undergo a sexual offenders evaluation for corruption of minors. Johnson was ordered to have no contact with victim in the case.
This is evidently the “Paige” whose case drove Kristin Ireland to tears, and it so happens that the next case in the docket is this:
James Edward Vroman, 22, of Centerville, Pa., to 12 to 24 months in state correctional institution, pay the cost of prosecution, $750 in fines and fees and undergo a sexual offenders evaluation for statutory sexual assault; and to three to 12 months in a state correctional institution consecutive to the first sentence and 100 hours community service for interference with custody of children. Vroman was ordered to have no contact with the victim in the case.
So it’s not just females who are doing time for messing with jailbait, but Kristin Ireland weeps no tears for James Vroman.
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
Posted on | May 30, 2013
Honestly, I had to think a while about this one: Is it fair?
People have been throwing stuff at me on Twitter so fast I can barely keep up with it all. On Tuesday, the “Free Kate” controversy was actually addressed by Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:
“What we have here is an open argument made that same-sex sexual relationships should not even be seen as merely equal with opposite sex-relationships . . . but in this case, even legally privileged such that the statutory law or second-degree felony issues at stake in a heterosexual relationship of young people of the same ages would not apply to a same-sex couple.”
That was Tuesday and today is Thursday, and I’ve been focused so hard on the developing story that I didn’t even have time to notice it until a couple hours ago. Meanwhile, I came across some things on social media that would tend to seriously undermine whatever remaining credibility the “Free Kate” cause still has.
Kelley Hunt Smith has praised her daughter, accused sex offender Kaitlyn Hunt, as “wonderful . . . respected and well liked . . . the model student and child.” Similarly, Kaitlyn’s attorney told reporters that the 18-year-old is “a model citizen.” This depiction of Kaitlyn was contradicted by a fellow Sebastian High student who posted a video in which Kaitlyn can be heard inciting her younger sister in a fight with another girl: “Beat her f–king ass, Emily! Beat her ass! Get that bitch!”
Wednesday, after hurling obscenity-laced messages in all directions, Emily Hunt switched her Twitter account status to private. Before she did, however, many of the Emily’s more incriminating messages were screen-capped, including this from March 30 (click image to enlarge):
As I say, I had to think whether it was fair to post this. After all, Emily is a minor and not really competent to . . . Oh, wait.
Yeah, I had to think about it, but I really didn’t have to think long.
Nor was there any question of whether this is relevant, seeing as how (a) it indicates where the Hunt girls get their penchant for obscene language and violence; and (b) the quoted text messages from Kelley Hunt Smith to her minor daughter tell you a lot about the woman who praises Kaitlyn as a “model student and child.”
“Hunt Family Values,” as it were.
Given what we see here and given what we can learn about Kaitlyn Hunt’s value system from the arrest affidavit that describes a sexual affair with a 14-year-old that began in a school toilet stall — what kind of home environment is Kelley Hunt Smith providing for Emily and her other children? Does it seem like these children are the products of a wholesome upbringing? And what else are we likely to learn — what further evidence might prosecutors bring forth — if Kaitlyn and her supporters insist on taking this case to trial?
According to Kelley Hunt Smith, the only reason James and Laurie Smith (whom she named nine times in her May 17 Facebook post) objected to Kaitlyn’s involvement with their 14-year-old daughter is because they are “full of hate and bigotry.”
But would you want your daughter mixed up with trash like that?
And there is more to come, my friends.
Did I mention the Hunts’ lawyer hired a P.R. firm? They should have lots of work to do. Just wait until they see Nagasaki . . .
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
Race-based abortions, how progressive.
PHOENIX (AP) — Civil rights groups on Wednesday sued Arizona to block a 2011 law banning abortions based on the race or sex of the child that makes it a felony to knowingly provide a sex- or race-based abortion.
Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona said the law unconstitutionally singles out Asian and black women based on stereotypes and the sponsors’ beliefs that Asian and black women may choose an abortion because of race or the baby’s sex. Arizona is the only state that bans race-based abortions, although others bar abortions because of sex.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of two civil rights groups and wants an injunction blocking the law, which makes it a felony for anyone to knowingly perform or provide financing for an abortion sought based on race or gender. The law also requires doctors to question patients and file an affidavit swearing that’s not the reason for the abortion.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
The Boy Scouts of America’s National Council has voted to ease a long-standing ban and allow openly gay boys to be accepted as Scouts.
Of the local Scout leaders voting at their annual meeting in Texas, more than 60 percent supported the proposal.
Under the proposal drafted by the Scouts’ governing board, gay adults will remain barred from serving as Scout leaders.
The outcome is unlikely to end a bitter debate over the Scouts’ membership policy.
Some conservative churches that sponsor Scout units wanted to continue excluding gay youths, in some cases threatening to defect if the ban were lifted. More liberal Scout leaders, while supporting the proposal to accept gay youth, have made clear they want the ban on gay adults lifted as well.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
“The law is what it is, and if it is truly equality the Gay rights activists want, then they have it in this case. . . . You do not get to scream ‘special privileges’ when you break the rules.”
– Doug Hagin, “An undeniable truth, sex sells”
“Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”
– Roman Polanski
“Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining.”
– Colonel Fletcher, The Outlaw Josey Wales
Some perverts get away with it and some perverts go to prison, and there are certainly people walking around scot-free today who have done things worse than what Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt admitted doing to a 14-year-old girl in Sebastian, Florida.
Does this mean Kate Hunt should go free? I think not.
- Kate is gay and the younger girl’s parents are bigots;
- Both girls were in high school together and their sexual activity was consensual, which makes it OK;
- Heterosexual cases involving 18-year-olds and 14-year-olds have been pleaded down to misdemeanors, so it was wrong for Florida prosecutors to have offered Kate Hunt a deal that required her to plead guilty to a felony.
All three of these arguments are flawed:
- Parents do not forfeit their right to the protection of the law merely because of their opinions. Even if it were proven that Jim and Laurie Smith, parents of the younger girl, were particularly prejudiced against homosexuals (an assertion they deny), this does not nullify the Florida law against sex with 14-year-olds. The parents’ motive in reporting the crime doesn’t decriminalize Kaitlyn’s action.
- Kaitlyn Hunt was older than most high school students. I’m grateful to Phil Kerpen (who is more libertarian than conservative, I should mention) for pointing out that Hunt’s birth date (8/14/94) meant that she was already 18 before she even started her senior year in high school, whereas most seniors are 17. Kerpen wondered if Hunt may have been deliberately “held back” a year, a not-uncommon scholastic practice known as “redshirting.” Whatever the explanation, the mere fact of two people going to school together does not void Florida’s law against sex with 14-year-olds, and the same law states specifically that “consent” is not a defense.
- Prosecutorial leniency in some cases cannot be used as an argument that leniency should be extended to all cases, and the discretion of prosecutors requires them to judge each case on its merits. There may be valid reasons why other perpetrators were allowed to plead down to misdemeanor charges, whereas there may also be valid reasons why prosecutors insisted that Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt could only avoid trial by pleading guilty to a felony.
The most likely reason why prosecutors are not caving in to the#FreeKate mob, I suspect, is that this case involves certain aggravating circumstances. For example, the first sexual activity between Hunt and the 14-year-old freshman (which Hunt admitted, according to the arrest affidavit) took place on school property, in a toilet stall.
Do Floridians really want to permit such things? I think not.
Another aggravating circumstance involves the night of Jan. 4, 2013, which is described in the affidavit (“Smith” is the 14-year-old) :
[Smith] told [Sheriff's Department Detective Jeremy Shepherd] that there was one occasion that she ran away from home in January of 2013. [Detective Shepherd] researched this and learned that [Smith] ran away on January 4, 2013. [Smith] stated that Kaitlyn picked her up and took [Smith] back to Kaitlyn’s house at 231 Stony Point Drive, Sebastian, Florida. That night, while in Kaitlyn’s bedroom, [Smith] and Kaitlyn put their fingers inside of each other’s vaginas, put their mouths on each other’s vaginas, and both of them used a vibrator on each other to insert it in each other’s vaginas. . . .
During the interview [with Kaitlyn Hunt] . . . Kaitlyn also confirmed that she put her finger inside of [Smith's] vagina the time that [Smith] ran away from home and they met up. [Detective Shepherd] asked Kaitlyn if she knew it was wrong to have sex with [Smith] due to [Smith] being 14 years old. Kaitlyn stated that she did not think about it because [Smith] acted older.
No further questions at this time, your honor. Defense, your witness.
You see what an open-and-shut case this is? Kaitlyn doesn’t deny what prosecutors would call “digital penetration,” although the younger girl’ s claims about cunnilingus and penetration with a vibrator are evidently still a she-said/she-said situation.
Nevertheless, fingering a 14-year-old is sufficient offense to convict Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt on the felony charge of “lewd and lascivious conduct” under Florida law, and Hunt admits that this occurred in her bedroom on Jan. 4, while the younger girl was a runaway.
The 14-year-old’s parents, Jim and Laurie Smith, say when they woke up the next morning and discovered their daughter missing, they had no idea where she was and feared she had been abducted — every parent’s worst nightmare, a situation that any responsible adult would seek to prevent. Kaitlyn was 18 years old, an adult old enough to be considered responsible and — we might well ask — where were Kaitlyn Hunt’s parents during this Jan. 4 episode?
This is unknown, but I’ve seen enough of the arguments made by Kaitlyn’s mother to believe that she condoned her daughter’s affair with the 14-year-old, and to suspect that Kaitlyn’s home environment was one of permissiveness bordering on negligence. Leaving aside that question, however, the known facts regarding the incident of Jan. 4 qualify as aggravating circumstances which, I think prosecutors will argue, would make them negligent of their own duties if they were to let the defendant plead down to a misdemeanor.
Many of those in the #FreeKate mob have argued — and this would be Number Four on the list of their common sophistries — that the felony charge is wrong because it would require Kaitlyn’s name to be placed permanently on the sex offender registry. This argument, like all their arguments, is false.
The applicable statute includes a “Romeo & Juliet” exemption if the defendant is no more than four years older than the (consenting) victim. The age difference between Kaitlyn and the Smith girl is three years, eight months (44 months), so this exemption would be applicable, and prosecutors said quite clearly that it would be up to the judge at sentencing to determine (as the law provides) whether or not to put Kaitlyn’s name on the sex offender registry.
Most lawyers would probably advise their clients in such a circumstance to accept the deal, but Kaitlyn turned it down, and the prospect of a June 20 trial in this case is fraught with peril on both sides.
The 14-year-old (who turned 15 just last month) might be required to testify, and there is the prospect that Kaitlyn’s lawyers, having given her bad advice so far, might be foolish enough to have her testify in her own defense, which could set up a dramatic cross-examination by the prosecution. A trial like that might become the biggest tabloid-TV drama since the O.J. Simpson case.
The back-and-forth stuff between pro- and anti-Kaitlyn factions on the Internet is just a warm-up for the big show, but like the man said, “Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining.”
Right now, I don’t know what angers me more: The deceptive sophistry practiced by the #FreeKate mob, or the ostentatiously disinterested poses of legalistic even-handedness struck by Jazz Shaw and Doug Mataconis. People who care about America’s future should be angry about this case and, personally, I’m so angry I’m starting to get angry at other people for not being angry about it.
If we can’t draw the line here, folks, there is no hope at all.
Supporters of Kaitlyn Ashley Hunt are making flawed and dangerous arguments which, if we don’t argue back against them, could subvert the rule of law and bring about a culture of sexual anarchy, where school children are violated and corrupted “consensually” and parents have no legal recourse to prevent such outrageous behavior.
Are judges and prosecutors in Indian River County, Florida, reading this blog? Are the citizens of Florida reading it? Are readers concerned about the direction of our culture sharing these arguments on your Facebook pages and via e-mail with your friends?
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” Will you let it be said that you did nothing?
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
WARREN, N.H. – Bringing the national gun debate to a tiny New England town on Tuesday, the daughter of the slain principal of Sandy Hook Elementary confronted Sen. Kelly Ayotte at the lawmaker’s first town hall meeting since she voted against expanded background checks on all commercial gun sales.
Erica Lafferty, who first met with the Republican senator in Washington earlier this month after she opposed the compromise negotiated by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., was visibly angry as she spoke into the microphone at the meeting, which drew more than 100 people who came to condemn or support Ayotte’s vote.
“You had mentioned that day the burden on owners of gun stores that the expanded background checks would harm. I am just wondering why the burden of my mother being gunned down in the halls of her elementary school isn’t more important than that,” said Lafferty, whose mother Dawn Hochsprung was gunned down by Newtown shooter Adam Lanza.
I heard these remarks on my drive this morning and knew I had to respond to this pathetic display, but Jeff Goldstein beat me to it:
Answer: your mother was gunned down with a weapon stolen by a guy who killed his own mother by shooting her.
And perhaps had someone in the school been armed besides the murderer with the stolen weapon, your mother would still be alive. I know that’s no real comfort, but it has the luxury of being the truth. No extra burden put on law abiding citizens would have stopped that horror from happening. But perhaps had the murderer believed he wasn’t walking in to a turkey shoot, he would have thought twice.
Oh, and pimping out your own dead mother with the object of denying law abiding citizens their natural right to protect themselves — something your mother couldn’t do thanks to laws passed in your state — that’s some sick-in-the-head shit.
Indeed, it is, but that is the state of our Culture these days.
We live in a society where, thanks to the infection of Leftist Thinking, the personal has become political. Using one’s dead loved ones for political purposes is acceptable because this Society values ends more than it does the morality of the means. Nothing is beyond the pale. No behavior is proscribed. Prudence and discretion are seen as negatives.
But the situation is even more complex. American Society is also a Therapeutic Society, where feelings and emotions have been exalted, placed on a shiny pedestal, and where Reason has been delegitimized, where one no longer grieves in private, and where being a victim or related to a victim of crime grants someone expert status is the eyes of their fellow citizens.
Could This Be One Explanation?
American Culture is sick, it may be in grave condition because the minds within it are so poisoned.
For her own sake, for the sake of her sanity, Mrs. Lafferty should withdraw from the public eye and work on overcoming her grief in private and she should contemplate the horror that is her pimping of her murdered Mother.
_ *Enough with the exotic spelling of first names! Enough! One has to wonder if this practice isn’t a small tactic in the effort to undermine and destroy all things Western and especially all things English.
From Camp of The Saints:
Live Action’s undercover “Inhuman” series continues to deliver stunning video that adds to the perception that the murderous allegations against Dr. Kermit Gosnell may be unfolding in other abortion practices across America. The third clip was captured at Family Planning Associates Medical Group, a Phoenix, Arizona-based clinic. In it, pro-life advocates charge that a clinic counselor named Linda can be observed claiming that medical professionals would not resuscitate a baby born alive during an abortion.
When an undercover investigator went into the clinic with a hidden camera, she was given information about the procedure by at least two staff members – both are featured in the video. Linda, the counselor, noted that a digoxin injection into the belly is the best way to stop the baby’s heartbeat and to prevent suffering during the procedure, although she told the pregnant investigator that having the abortion without the drug is also an option. If the expectant mother chose the latter option, Linda said that the “there could be movement” on the part of the baby.
The undercover mother continued her questioning about babies born alive and there’s no doubt that the counselor’s responses will likely be disturbing to pro-lifers. Of particular note, the medical professional admits that some children do come out alive during the procedure.
“Sometimes they are [alive], yeah. But it doesn’t – it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will come out whole,” Linda explained. “Cause they use suction, plus they use instruments so sometimes the fetuses don’t come out – you know, it’s not complete…”
From there, the investigator asked, “But if it does come out whole… I mean, are – will they resuscitate it? Like, will I have to take care of it?” It was at this point that Linda responded, “Uh-uh… No… They will not resuscitate.”
While some outlets have taken this to mean that the baby would not be cared for if born alive, the term “resuscitate” is multifaceted and somewhat problematic. In a sense, it seems to indicate that the baby would not be brought back from apparent death. If taken from the mother dead, though, then it would appear the clinic is not in violation if it refuses to “resuscitate.” But if born alive with complications and a need for assistance, the requirements would obviously be different.
Perhaps the more problematic dialogue is captured is depicted below, as it seems to indicate that life sometimes persists after birth – and the natural question is: What does the clinic do to try and save the baby’s life at that point? (we don’t get an indication either way based on the dialogue):
Counselor: Well, if they don’t use the digoxin, they’ll just, uh, suction the baby and it’s possible that there may be movement as they’re taking out the fetus.
Investigator: Like, movement after?
Investigator: And then what happens?
Counselor: Well, then usually it stops on its own.
During the woman’s interview with another individual at the clinic, Dr. Laura Mercer, it was made clear that the preferred option and intention is to “induce a demise – an intrauterine demise.” This would mean that the child would be killed before undergoing the removal portion of the procedure.
“We do the injection, which is a quick poke through your belly, um, and that stops the fetal heart, so that makes it so, if you were to deliver, there shouldn’t be movement,” the doctor explained. “There shouldn’t be any of those things.”
Mercer also warned the woman not to go to an emergency room if she goes into labor during the multi-day abortion procedure. Rather than going to a hospital – where they will treat the baby as though it is wanted alive by the mother – she said that the clinic should first be called.
“They would intervene and do all kinds of crazy things that you don’t need to have done to you,” the doctor said of how a hospital would treat the pregnancy.
Watch the shocking video below (warning: graphic content and themes):
. Live Action founder Lila Rose believes that the clinic is in violation of federal law, purportedly the “Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002,” which defines a “‘person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’” to “include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.” It mandates the protection of those babies who are born alive. Again, though, the issues mentioned above do leave some questions unanswered.
“The testimony we’ve documented in this abortion facility strongly suggests that staff there are committing infanticide,” said Rose of the most recent clip. “The Family Planning Associates Medical Group needs to be investigated immediately, and delicensed. Women are at risk during these brutal procedures, and this is a matter of life and death for these children.”
This investigative video comes after a Washington, D.C.-based abortion doctor said that he, too, would not help a baby born alive and similarly-troubling comments were made at a Bronx, New York, doctor’s office as well. These revelations come as the jury continues to deliberate in the Gosnell abortion case (full coverage of that can be found here).
In the past, TheBlaze has explored the journalistic standards and ethics surrounding undercover videos. The central question is: Is it ever permissible to lie to get the truth? While some would quickly answer affirmatively, it’s a challenging dynamic – and one that deserves scrutiny.
Experts have a variety of opinions, but the general consensus is that, unless deceit is the only option to retrieving information of monumental importance to the public, lying to obtain it is not ethical journalistic practice. There are, of course, differing ideas on how this dynamic unfolds. In 2011, Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard told TheBlaze that these rules do not apply to those outside of media.
“It’s dishonest for anyone in journalism to pretend to be someone they’re not. This rule doesn’t apply to folks outside the profession,” he said at the time.
But not everyone agrees with this assessment. Poynter has developed a list of standards for when it is – and is not – appropriate to use undercover tactics. And read more about TheBlaze’s exploration of undercover journalistic standards here.
April 30, 2013 (LiveActionNews.org) – During the breaking “Inhuman” investigation, Live Action investigated the Washington Surgi-Clinic where Cesare Santangelo performs late-term abortions in Washington, D.C. Santangelo revealed several horrors involved with late-term abortions that America needs to know.
1) Babies are purposely suffocated or otherwise cruelly killed to ensure their deaths.
“Um, I cut the umbilical cord first, wait for the baby to expire, and then we do it that way.”
Of course, we all know that the umbilical cord is a baby’s means of receiving the vital oxygen her body needs to survive. The umbilical cord also conducts blood to the baby’s body. In order to ensure that a baby does not survive a late-term abortion at his facility, Santangelo purposely suffocates the baby and stops her vital blood flow.
And did we catch the word “wait”? This is a process – suffocation, that is. It does not happen instantly. What terror and pain does an almost-born baby experience through this process? [...]
4) Hospitals and medical professionals who save infants after attempted abortions are “stupid.”
This admission by Santangelo may just top the iceberg. (Taking the cake just isn’t an appropriate analogy here.)
First, Santangelo acts as though women should not be calling a hospital – they should only be calling him, the master of death. (Remember, no babies have ever survived in his clinic.) Apparently, women should not panic, they should not deem their pain necessary of a hospital’s intervention, and they should definitely not change their minds about the abortion.
Santangelo then goes on to claim that when a Virgina hospital helped women to deliver their babies (and saved them after an attempted, partially-completed abortion), “the hospital helped them to deliver, which was the stupidest thing they could have done.” He went on to claim that the hospital “did everything they shouldn’t have done, which was help them to deliver…”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
It’s not too harsh to say. To push a “solution” to “mass shootings” that even your side says is not a solution, is both the height of arrogance, and a cruel unfeeling joke at “protection”.
Via National Review:
Obama doesn’t care about dead children. He’s indifferent to the suffering of their parents. There isn’t a single coherent argument on his side of the case. He lies about the issue. It’s pure politics.
That’s the way the dispute would be presented if Obama’s opponents deployed the kind of demagogic language he slips on like comfortable loafers. Sounds harsh, doesn’t it — possibly even racist? Funny how touchy everyone is about the way Obama is criticized but how indifferent most are to his low accusations. His opponents are always guilty of bad faith, whereas he is concerned about preventing children from being mowed down by crazed gunmen.
Except he isn’t. The gun-control measures the president worked so hard to pass and that the Senate has voted down would have done nothing to prevent Newtown and would do nothing to prevent the next Newtown. Adam Lanza did not obtain his guns through the gun-show loophole. More rigorous background checks would not have prevented most of the mass shootings we’ve suffered in the past 15 years.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/