Third Planned Parenthood Video Shows Aborted Baby Parts

[morfeeis]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=699&v=Xw2xi9mhmuo

Read more at http://blackcommunitynews.com/warning-third-planned-parenthood-video-shows-aborted-baby-parts/#2o7SOGCPReLXkUzq.99

I'm sorry but what these people are doing is the sickest thing i have ever seen of or heard of in my life, what makes it worse is that i as well as everyone of you is paying for and thus promoting this shit.

[donnay]

They have been doing this for a very long time...Thank God some people with a conscience is exposing them!

[Todd]

Friend of mine just told me not to watch the video. I don't need to see it to understand the brutality and amoral nature of the procedure.

[fisharmor]

Friend of mine just told me not to watch the video. I don't need to see it to understand the brutality and amoral nature of the procedure.

Its ok and sfw, they aren't human parts.

Not until they get to the lab, anyway.

[AuH20]

http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Screen-Shot-2015-07-27-at-3.11.33-PM-576x800.png

[puppetmaster]

http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Screen-Shot-2015-07-27-at-3.11.33-PM-576x800.png

scary

[juleswin]

http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Screen-Shot-2015-07-27-at-3.11.33-PM-576x800.png

I don't need a nanny, I instead choose the one that lets me make decision for myself. Do you know which one does that?

[AuH20]

scary

Talk to the average black citizen and this will totally go right over their head. It's like an inside joke that they aren't in on.

[staerker]

Staggering these releases is genius.

[Peace&Freedom]

Talk to the average black citizen and this will totally go right over their head. It's like an inside joke that they aren't in on.

That's why propaganda and emotion trump arguments. The imagery and verbal spin create a framework that is hard to rationally overcome, unless you wage a counter-infowar to displace the mindset. Supporters of legal abortion have succeeded in perpetuating a dialogue on the issue built on abstractions and bloodless euphemisms like "reproductive health" or "choice," that keeps the substance of what abortion actually involves (burning, dismembering, and trading dead unborn children) out of the picture.

The PP videos bring us back to the concrete lethal reality that abortion involves killing, then disposing of real body parts---which with time, and more staggered video releases, will change the rhetoric and emotion on the issue, including black audiences.

[juleswin]

That's why propaganda and emotion trump arguments. The imagery and verbal spin create a framework that is hard to rationally overcome, unless you wage a counter-infowar to displace the mindset. Supporters of legal abortion have succeeded in perpetuating a dialogue on the issue built on abstractions and bloodless euphemisms like "reproductive health" or "choice," that keeps the substance of what abortion actually involves (burning, dismembering, and trading dead unborn children) out of the picture.

The PP videos bring us back to the concrete lethal reality that abortion involves killing, then disposing of real body parts---which with time, and more staggered video releases, will change the rhetoric and emotion on the issue, including black audiences.

Actually, it takes no propaganda to understand why people are not outraged by what PP does. For ones, self inflicted harm is always seem as more desirable that outsider inflicted harm. Nobody is ever forced to use the services of PP, in fact they help people out when they are in a jam. Confederacy on the other hand where cool with African Americans being held in bondage working as slaves.

To use a different example, smoking and obesity related diseases would one day be responsible for more deaths than deaths due to the slave trade but nobody would ever compare the two or choose slavery over smoking or overeating because they were responsible for deaths. People will always choose self determination over slavery because it is the most rational thing to do.

Doesn't ever require any propagandizing

[staerker]

$800 for each dismembered infant. Notice the arm and the leg.

http://s2.postimg.org/z0b2sw6rp/Capture.jpg?noCache=1438118565

[Uriel999]

I can't watch it honestly and staerker....seriously...was that necessary.

[kcchiefs6465]

I don't need a nanny, I instead choose the one that lets me make decision for myself. Do you know which one does that?
Do they choose to let other people make decisions for themselves? Such as the countless who would not fund such a wicked establishment-- do they have the choice to make a decision for themselves?

Or is it just you?

I normally don't bring up race as it is more often than not irrelevant but I'll go ahead and ask this: As a black man, are you aware of the founding of PP and of its founder, Margaret Sanger? Why would you choose either?

And especially on the basis of whether or not a woman ought be able to destroy (murder) her fetus (baby/child). What would make it different if the child was a day old? Or a month? Her choice, right?

[staerker]

I can't watch it honestly and staerker....seriously...was that necessary.

I am not one to post graphic images.

But at some point, enough is enough.

If the government is going to fund it, and if our culture is going to celebrate it, then every single breathing human being should look at it long and hard.

[Danke]

I drive by Planned Parts for Sale Parenthood on my way to work. Usually a few protesters, but today many cars and people with "volunteer security" shirts on.

Next time I see that, I'll pull over and inquire what they get for a baby's heart.

[juleswin]

Do they choose to let other people make decisions for themselves? Such as the countless who would not fund such a wicked establishment-- do they have the choice to make a decision for themselves?

Or is it just you?

I normally don't bring up race as it is more often than not irrelevant but I'll go ahead and ask this: As a black man, are you aware of the founding of PP and of its founder, Margaret Sanger? Why would you choose either?

And especially on the basis of whether or not a woman ought be able to destroy (murder) her fetus (baby/child). What would make it different if the child was a day old? Or a month? Her choice, right?

Ofc I don't agree with the forced funding of PP, but that is govt for you. There are a myriad of programs funded by the US govt that I do not agree with and I do know we are never going to stop funding all of em. The question I asked that you seemed to have conveniently answered with a question is this "which of those 2 symbols support my right of self determination?" PP or the confederacy.

Also the founding of PP makes very little difference to me, the Grand wizard of the KKK could be performing the abortions himself and all I would care about is this, is there force involved? if no, then it doesn't matter to me. In the absence of a contract, I think women are the ultimate gatekeepers when it comes to reproduction, they have the final say whether a baby comes to term. If you happen to make a baby with a woman, make sure you kiss her ass and love her very well so that she doesn't ever think of aborting your kid.

If you fail in this, then its your problem not the woman's. My philosophy is generally on minding my own business unless I am invited by victim or perpetrator to intervene, so extrapolate that philosophy as much as you want for 1 day old babies and such. Is crying an invitation to help? I am not quite sure, it depends.

[staerker]

My philosophy is generally on minding my own business unless I am invited by victim or perpetrator to intervene, so extrapolate that philosophy as much as you want for 1 day old babies and such. Is crying an invitation to help? I am not quite sure, it depends.

??? That is a very odd position. What about situations where the victim is completely unable to "invite?"

Perpetrator is sniping. Victim is blindfolded and gagged. Victim is a 1 day-old baby.

[juleswin]

??? That is a very odd position. What about situations where the victim is completely unable to "invite?"

Perpetrator is sniping. Victim is blindfolded and gagged. Victim is a 1 day-old baby.

Actually its not that odd when you really think about it, "What about situations where the victim is completely unable to "invite?" then hopefully, they would be able to invite someone else or even better invite security for help. I can't be responsible for saving all of humanity, some people would slip through whatever safety system we have.

Not speaking from experience :D but you can still make a lot of distress call even while being gagged. So when an invitation comes, I would assess if it warrants my intervention. I truly think that is the most peaceful and most libertarian way of interacting with the world.

[kcchiefs6465]

Ofc I don't agree with the forced funding of PP, but that is govt for you. There are a myriad of programs funded by the US govt that I do not agree with and I do know we are never going to stop funding all of em.
Okay. Fair enough.


The question I asked that you seemed to have conveniently answered with a question is this "which of those 2 symbols support my right of self determination?" PP or the confederacy.
No, what you asked was, "I don't need a nanny, I instead choose the one that lets me make decision for myself. Do you know which one does that?"

"Conveniently" faulty quotation at best.

I answered, "Why would you choose either?"

As in, neither offer self-determination. That is with regards to your view of the Confederacy taken at face value and the destruction of black lives through the founding and funding of PP.

Oh, they offer self-determined solutions for mothers wishing to abort their babies? Well, that is hardly something to promote or tout as some free or righteous act.


Also the founding of PP makes very little difference to me, the Grand wizard of the KKK could be performing the abortions himself and all I would care about is this, is there force involved? if no, then it doesn't matter to me.
They crush baby's skulls and harvest the organs and tissue. Is there not force involved?



In the absence of a contract, I think women are the ultimate gatekeepers when it comes to reproduction, they have the final say whether a baby comes to term. If you happen to make a baby with a woman, make sure you kiss her ass and love her very well so that she doesn't ever think of aborting your kid.
And you all (generically) apparently believe to have the final say as to whether or not I support the murder of said woman's child.


If you fail in this, then its your problem not the woman's. My philosophy is generally on minding my own business unless I am invited by victim or perpetrator to intervene, so extrapolate that philosophy as much as you want for 1 day old babies and such. Is crying an invitation to help? I am not quite sure, it depends.
That is just incredible.

Yet I am unsurprised.

[staerker]

I guess this happened today.?

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/v/t1.0-9/11737869_10152981506967927_3670588068966656067_n.j pg?oh=bdecdb6af6305c0dbc6120b4744e6c9d&oe=560F3B0F

[AuH20]

I can't watch it honestly and staerker....seriously...was that necessary.

I don't want to watch it because I will become very angry.

[AuH20]

Planned Parenthood is dead, but will resurrect under a different name. Guaranteed.

[AuH20]

How can you salvage a society that openly kills their children for convenience and profit? I don't think you can. The mere fact that we have to actually go through great lengths to convince the trendies that this is not civilized behavior, reinforces the depths of this intractable problem. This is the prime reason why the Constitution never had a chance nor the Articles of Confederation. Man is a wicked animal & will not be restrained by mere parchment.

[ChristianAnarchist]

http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Screen-Shot-2015-07-27-at-3.11.33-PM-576x800.png

Yup...

[RonPaulIsGreat]

I'm just wondering where the men are that must be forcing these women to be so evil. No way women would do this. Especially not grandma looking women.

[AuH20]

Cecil the Lion is garnering bigger headlines. And I think what happened to Cecil the Lion was unjust......................But WTF is wrong with people?

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

They had the guy doing these videos on Fox last night. He said there are going to be 12 installments. That's an awful lot of pressure. Crying "edited" won't save them.

ht tp://insider.foxnews.com/2015/07/28/undercover-activist-who-exposed-planned-parenthood-there-will-be-total-12-videos

[enhanced_deficit]

Cecil the Lion is garnering bigger headlines. And I think what happened to Cecil the Lion was unjust......................But WTF is wrong with people?

Surprised Cecil beat Kardashian klohe butt headlines in google news today.

[jonhowe]

Ofc I don't agree with the forced funding of PP, but that is govt for you. There are a myriad of programs funded by the US govt that I do not agree with and I do know we are never going to stop funding all of em. The question I asked that you seemed to have conveniently answered with a question is this "which of those 2 symbols support my right of self determination?" PP or the confederacy.

Also the founding of PP makes very little difference to me, the Grand wizard of the KKK could be performing the abortions himself and all I would care about is this, is there force involved? if no, then it doesn't matter to me. In the absence of a contract, I think women are the ultimate gatekeepers when it comes to reproduction, they have the final say whether a baby comes to term. If you happen to make a baby with a woman, make sure you kiss her ass and love her very well so that she doesn't ever think of aborting your kid.

If you fail in this, then its your problem not the woman's. My philosophy is generally on minding my own business unless I am invited by victim or perpetrator to intervene, so extrapolate that philosophy as much as you want for 1 day old babies and such. Is crying an invitation to help? I am not quite sure, it depends.


As usual in abortion threads, the two sides are arguing different things.

Pro choicers are making the OBVIOUS argument if one assumes life does not begin at the moment of conception, and instead at some point later.
Pro lifers are making the OBVIOUS argument if one assumes life DOES begin at the moment of conception, and not at some point later.

NO ONE is arguing about 'taking rights' away from anyone. Pro lifers think a woman's rights end where the fetus begins, just as my right to swing my fist ends at your face. They are arguing planned parenthood is not pro self determination because the fetus has no say in its termination.


The argument is when life begins and always has been.

[Danke]

As usual in abortion threads, the two sides are arguing different things.

Pro choicers are making the OBVIOUS argument if one assumes life does not begin at the moment of conception, and instead at some point later.
Pro lifers are making the OBVIOUS argument if one assumes life DOES begin at the moment of conception, and not at some point later.

NO ONE is arguing about 'taking rights' away from anyone. Pro lifers think a woman's rights end where the fetus begins, just as my right to swing my fist ends at your face. They are arguing planned parenthood is not pro self determination because the fetus has no say in its termination.


The argument is when life begins and always has been.

How about brain activity. Without that, doctors pull the plug.

[Legend1104]

How about brain activity. Without that, doctors pull the plug.

Yeah and the real problem is when is a body invested with a soul? At that point it is actually a life. Since science can't even explain what a soul is (or even if they believe in one) how can they ever really determine when a life begins.

So, since science cannot know at this time in history when before 20 weeks a person has a soul (if they will ever know), we as libertarians should always side with life. So until it can be definitively proven when a fetus gets a soul, we should assume at conception just to be safe and avoid being wrong and murdering living humans.

[staerker]

Interview on CNN. ~10 more videos to be released. Proof of live birth abortions, and selling of non-dismembered murdered infants.

[freejack]

There goes my happy Friday vibes.

[jkob]

I can't watch any of these videos, the thought just makes me sick.

[Eagles' Wings]

Why Planned Parenthood Can’t Donate Tissue Harvested From Babies

July 29, 2015 By Katie Geary


If you haven’t watched the damning videos of Planned Parenthood officials discussing fetal tissue donation (or, in plain language, exchanging aborted babies’ body parts for money), you should watch them now before you read further.

The first alarming question is whether Planned Parenthood illegally sells aborted fetuses’ organs and tissue. This is what Planned Parenthood and its defenders have repeatedly focused on, insisting that they are compliant with all laws.

But it is what precedes that “fetal tissue donation” that needs attention. Specifically, does Planned Parenthood regularly flout the federal ban on partial-birth abortion using loopholes? How do they get away with this? Do their patients—the women who apparently choose to donate the “fetal tissue”—know what’s going on in explicit terms?

Federal law prohibits partial-birth abortion, a gruesome procedure in which an unborn baby is intentionally turned to the breech position to ensure that delivery of the body happens before delivery of the head. Once the baby’s head is stuck in the birth canal, the abortionist punctures the skull, evacuates the contents, and the baby is dead.

There’s a good reason this practice is banned—it’s barbaric. Many Americans may not know that the term “partial-birth abortion” is not a medical one but a legal one. And, according to Planned Parenthood doctor Deborah Nucatola, some abortion providers don’t consider it with any seriousness. In her own words, “It’s not a medical term, it doesn’t exist in reality.” What?

Why It’s Good to Give Babies a Heart Attack

It’s clear Nucatola thinks the law is irrelevant—or, as she says, up for “interpretation.” She explains how abortion providers get around the law by injecting a fatal quantity of digoxin, a cardiotoxic drug, into the baby’s heart before dismembering or delivering it. In Nucatola’s words, using the slang for digoxin, they “dig.” (Here’s the full footage of Nucatola and the transcript.)

Abortion providers get around the law by injecting a fatal quantity of digoxin into the baby’s heart before dismembering or delivering it.

She explains: “Providers who use digoxin use it for one of two reasons. There’s a group of people who just use it so they have no risk of violating the Federal Abortion Ban. Because if you induce a demise before the procedure, nobody’s going to say you did a ‘live’—whatever the federal government calls it. Partial-birth abortion.” The second reason providers use it is “because they actually think it makes the tissue softer and it makes it safer and easier to do the procedure.” She counts herself in the second group.

So, if you “dig,” you’re guaranteed a dead baby and a successful abortion without having to worry about the law. Moreover, you’ll find that a baby that has already died from a heart attack is apparently “softer” and easier to pull apart with metal instruments.

I wonder how candid Nucatola is with her patients about this process.

You Can’t Be Humane If You’re Extracting Baby Parts

Maybe digoxin seems humane to some—at least when compared to the primitive method of tearing a live baby apart in the womb. But unfortunately, that’s not the case when the abortions lead to Planned Parenthood’s “fetal tissue donation.”

These babies are being strategically maneuvered, crushed, and dismembered under ultrasound guidance—while still alive.

In the second video, we find out explicitly from Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter that abortions performed with feticides aren’t viable for fetal-tissue donation. If digoxin is used, it renders the fetal stem cells unusable. (See the footage and the transcript.) Knowing this, Nucatola’s graphic explanation of how to “crush” unborn babies to maximize organ retrieval requires a clarifier. These babies are being strategically maneuvered, crushed, and dismembered under ultrasound guidance—while still alive.

This poses an ethical question. Do the women consenting to fetal-tissue donation understand what’s happening during the procedure? Do they know that their babies are alive at the start of the butchering? A 2001 study showed that 91 percent of women in the study “preferred their fetuses were dead before the abortions.” How “informed” is their informed consent?

It also poses a legal question. Is Planned Parenthood breaking the law—whether in its procedures for “donating” fetal tissue or by altering abortion methods—in order to get better specimens? If so, stripping it of federal funding would be a half-measure.

If Planned Parenthood is not breaking the law, then we need to change the law. None of us, neither pro-life nor pro-choice, should support the types of practices Planned Parenthood abortion doctors casually discuss over lunch. You dig?


Katie Mumma Geary is a Princeton University graduate and the Canterbury Fellow at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. She lives in Rochester, New York with her husband and their two children. The views expressed here are her own.

[AuH20]

Sadly, PP is reflective of the citizenry. PP could not exist if this wasn't the case.

http://www.myfoxny.com/story/29678347/girls-body-in-crib-leads-police-to-review-sisters-death

[Danke]

Yeah and the real problem is when is a body invested with a soul? At that point it is actually a life. Since science can't even explain what a soul is (or even if they believe in one) how can they ever really determine when a life begins.

So, since science cannot know at this time in history when before 20 weeks a person has a soul (if they will ever know), we as libertarians should always side with life. So until it can be definitively proven when a fetus gets a soul, we should assume at conception just to be safe and avoid being wrong and murdering living humans.

And when does the soul leave?

[Danke]

Yeah and the real problem is when is a body invested with a soul? At that point it is actually a life. Since science can't even explain what a soul is (or even if they believe in one) how can they ever really determine when a life begins.

So, since science cannot know at this time in history when before 20 weeks a person has a soul (if they will ever know), we as libertarians should always side with life. So until it can be definitively proven when a fetus gets a soul, we should assume at conception just to be safe and avoid being wrong and murdering living humans.

And when does the soul leave?

[staerker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWSzr8jE-zE

Points in video:

1. Biotech technicians come to PP clinic. Zero "shipping and handling" costs.

2. Executive Vice President caught in lie: accounting and management sets prices. Videos show doctors setting prices.

3. 8-10 more videos.

4. StemExpress has had intact infants in their research facilities. Do the math.

[Slave Mentality]

How can you salvage a society that openly kills their children for convenience and profit? I don't think you can. The mere fact that we have to actually go through great lengths to convince the trendies that this is not civilized behavior, reinforces the depths of this intractable problem. This is the prime reason why the Constitution never had a chance nor the Articles of Confederation. Man is a wicked animal & will not be restrained by mere parchment.

Some would argue that the parchment is what makes it possible. I weep for humanity either way. I am pro choice in general, but this is Nazi Germany eugenics happening on a much larger scale. I do not consent.

[ghengis86]

Up next, infanticide:
http://m.naturalnews.com/news/041398_post-birth_abortion_infanticide_Melissa_Harris-Perry.html

(NaturalNews) Today Natural News denounces Melissa Harris-Perry, the latest talking head "death worshipper" to publicly imply that she supports the murder of living, breathing newborn children. According to Harris-Perry, life begins when the parents feel like life begins. And together with some twisted new "ethics" arguments from the radical left, this can include months or years after a child is born.

That's why I need to premise this article with a disclaimer: This article is not about abortion. It's about the murder of children after they are born. Because once a child is born alive, terminating that life is no longer a "choice" � it's murder by every legal and moral standard. Because while abortion friends and foes can argue about when life begins in the womb, no one disagrees that a child born alive is, well, ALIVE� do they?

Indeed, they do. MSNBC talking head Melissa Harris-Perry insists that life only begins when the parents have a "feeling" that it begins. "When does life begin? I submit the answer depends an awful lot on the feeling of the parents. A powerful feeling -- but not science," Harris-Perry said to nationwide astonishment on her July 21 MSNBC show

[AuH20]

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/sarahtweet1.png

[Chomp]

More hell with this bloody Planned Parenthood.

[Danke]

I
Up next, infanticide:
http://m.naturalnews.com/news/041398_post-birth_abortion_infanticide_Melissa_Harris-Perry.html

(NaturalNews) Today Natural News denounces Melissa Harris-Perry, the latest talking head "death worshipper" to publicly imply that she supports the murder of living, breathing newborn children. According to Harris-Perry, life begins when the parents feel like life begins. And together with some twisted new "ethics" arguments from the radical left, this can include months or years after a child is born.

That's why I need to premise this article with a disclaimer: This article is not about abortion. It's about the murder of children after they are born. Because once a child is born alive, terminating that life is no longer a "choice" � it's murder by every legal and moral standard. Because while abortion friends and foes can argue about when life begins in the womb, no one disagrees that a child born alive is, well, ALIVE� do they?

Indeed, they do. MSNBC talking head Melissa Harris-Perry insists that life only begins when the parents have a "feeling" that it begins. "When does life begin? I submit the answer depends an awful lot on the feeling of the parents. A powerful feeling -- but not science," Harris-Perry said to nationwide astonishment on her July 21 MSNBC show


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3UeluxYgo

[AuH20]

Now this creature is certainly alive. The other ones not so much.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLGRWn-VEAAJL3E.jpg

[AuH20]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=333&v=qbxRrbkk6g0

[donnay]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VszFz3bpbtI