The Abortion story that the MSM won’t cover [GRAPHIC IMAGES]


Abortion…or terminations in polite speak is a topic many dare not write about. For men to write about it we get attacked for all sorts of reasons. For women it is doubly hard. If they go too soft the hard-core feminists attack, too hard and they risk being labeled as such.

No one is prepared to have a grown up debate about abortion in the same way that we can’t have a grown up debate about same-sex marriage. The whole topic is as divisive as it is awful.

At one level I can see how abortion can be justified and I can understand it. I admit I struggle with the concept of killing a child. But I also struggle with the concept that the moment conception occurs that by the definition of the pro-life lobby that immediate it is a sentient, living being.

Science being the way that it is the time frames for survivable early birth is shortening ever more. We are getting close to over lap between legal abortion and survivability.

Personally I have a number of friends who have had terminations. They each have their own story, they each are beautiful loving people who had a choice to make. Thankfully it has never been a choice I have ever had to make. I’m not sure I could do it.

This story that the mainstream media refuse to cover though is not about them, and not about legal abortion in New Zealand, it is about late-term abortion in the United States and one doctor in particular who has been indicted for truly awful crimes. It does bring into serious question the ethics of late-term abortions. But in a society, even in New Zealand where we tolerate the killing of children even after they are born at the hands of dead beat parents is it something that we can ignore.

Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic has covered in grisly detail the case of  Dr. Kermit Gosnell. He asks why the media won’t cover the story when;

The grand jury report in the case of Kermit Gosnell, 72, is among the most horrifying I’ve read. “This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors,” it states. “The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths.”

He states at the end of his article and ask a very pertinent question;

[T]his story has numerous elements any one of which would normally make it a major story. And setting aside conventions, which are flawed, this ought to be a big story on the merits.

The news value is undeniable.

Why isn’t it being covered more? I’ve got my theories. But rather than offer them at the end of an already lengthy item, I’d like to survey some of the editors and writers making coverage decisions.

Andrew Sullivan too asks why?

What this story is about is horrifying brutality, extreme incompetence, mass murder of innocents, and a complete, consistent and continuous failure of government oversight. That the details may have been buried by a free press because of squeamishness about portraying abortion in a bad light is worrying, to say the least.

The MSM haven’t dared touch this murder “abortion” story because it is truly sickening and for once, truly outrageous.  They have been running a sanitised version.  It once again up to the blogs to expose the true nature of the story.  But be warned, this is upsetting at a number of levels.  Proceed with caution.  (The rest of the story, including graphic images, over the break). 

A procedure room at the Women's Medical Society. / Philadelphia District Attorney's Office (Note the rust and peeling paint)

A procedure room at the Women’s Medical Society. / Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office (Note the rust and peeling paint)

Conor Friedersdorf continues;

Charged with seven counts of first-degree murder, Gosnell is now standing trial in a Philadelphia courtroom. An NBC affiliate’s coverage includes testimony as grisly as you’d expect. “An unlicensed medical school graduate delivered graphic testimony about the chaos at a Philadelphia clinic where he helped perform late-term abortions,” the channel reports. “Stephen Massof described how he snipped the spinal cords of babies, calling it, ‘literally a beheading. It is separating the brain from the body.’ He testified that at times, when women were given medicine to speed up their deliveries, ‘it would rain fetuses. Fetuses and blood all over the place.'”

One former employee described hearing a baby screaming after it was delivered during an abortion procedure. “I can’t describe it. It sounded like a little alien,” she testified. Said the Philadelphia Inquirer in its coverage, “Prosecutors have cited the dozens of jars of severed baby feet as an example of Gosnell’s idiosyncratic and illegal practice of providing abortions for cash to poor women pregnant longer than the 24-week cutoff for legal abortions in Pennsylvania.”

Until Thursday, I wasn’t aware of this story. It has generated sparse coverage in the national media, and while it’s been mentioned in RSS feeds to which I subscribe, I skip past most news items. I still consume a tremendous amount of journalism. Yet had I been asked at a trivia night about the identity of Kermit Gosnell, I would’ve been stumped and helplessly guessed a green Muppet. Then I saw Kirsten Power’s USA Todaycolumn. She makes a powerful, persuasive case that the Gosnell trial ought to be getting a lot more attention in the national press than it is getting.

So why isn’t it getting coverage? Well perhaps our free press are too squeamish, and why you start to go through the full grand jury indictment including the photos you can see why.

The grand jury report includes an image of a particularly extreme case (the caption is theirs, not mine)

The grand jury report includes an image of a particularly extreme case (the caption is theirs, not mine)

Conor Friedersdorf says “[T]hat photo pertains to an unusual case, in that the mother had to seek help at a hospital after the abortion she sought at Gosnell’s office went awry. The grand jury report summarizes a more typical late-term abortion, as conducted at the clinic, concluding with the following passage”:

When you perform late-term “abortions” by inducing labor, you get babies. Live, breathing, squirming babies. By 24 weeks, most babies born prematurely will survive if they receive appropriate medical care. But that was not what the Women’s Medical Society was about. Gosnell had a simple solution for the unwanted babies he delivered: he killed them. He didn’t call it that. He called it “ensuring fetal demise.” The way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking scissors into the back of the baby’s neck and cutting the spinal cord. He called that “snipping.”

Over the years, there were hundreds of “snippings.” Sometimes, if Gosnell was unavailable, the “snipping” was done by one of his fake doctors, or even by one of the administrative staff.

But all the employees of the Women’s Medical Society knew. Everyone there acted as if it wasn’t murder at all. Most of these acts cannot be prosecuted, because Gosnell destroyed the files. Among the relatively few cases that could be specifically documented, one was Baby Boy A. His 17-year-old mother was almost 30 weeks pregnant — seven and a half months — when labor was induced. An employee estimated his birth weight as approaching six pounds. He was breathing and moving when Gosnell severed his spine and put the body in a plastic shoebox for disposal. The doctor joked that this baby was so big he could “walk me to the bus stop.” Another, Baby Boy B, whose body was found at the clinic frozen in a one-gallon spring-water bottle, was at least 28 weeks of gestational age when he was killed. Baby C was moving and breathing for 20 minutes before an assistant came in and cut the spinal cord, just the way she had seen Gosnell do it so many times. And these were not even the worst cases.

Abuse of women was also documented:

What little media coverage there’s been in the case has understandably focused on the murder allegations. The grand jury report also makes clear how horrific Women’s Medical Society was for the patients.

The unsanitary conditions were just the beginning.

One woman “was left lying in place for hours after Gosnell tore her cervix and colon while trying, unsuccessfully, to extract the fetus,” the report states. Another patient, 19, “was held for several hours after Gosnell punctured her uterus. As a result of the delay, she fell into shock from blood loss, and had to undergo a hysterectomy.” A third patient “went into convulsions during an abortion, fell off the procedure table, and hit her head on the floor. Gosnell wouldn’t call an ambulance, and wouldn’t let the woman’s companion leave the building so that he could call an ambulance.”

Often times, women given drugs to induce labor delivered before the doctor even arrived at work.

Patients have died, and children caught administering drugs:

Anesthesia was frequently dispensed by employees who were neither legally permitted nor trained to do it, including a 15-year-old high school student who worked at the clinic, the report states.

The best summary of the whole sorry tale is near the end:

Fetal feet found in Gosnell's clinic

Fetal feet found in Gosnell’s clinic

Inducing live births and subsequently severing the heads of the babies is indeed a horrific story that merits significant attention. Strange as it seems to say it, however, that understates the case.

For this isn’t solely a story about babies having their heads severed, though it is that. It is also a story about a place where, according to the grand jury, women were sent to give birth into toilets; where a doctor casually spread gonorrhea and chlamydiae to unsuspecting women through the reuse of cheap, disposable instruments; an office where a 15-year-old administered anesthesia; an office where former workers admit to playing games when giving patients powerful narcotics; an office where white women were attended to by a doctor and black women were pawned off on clueless untrained staffers. Any single one of those things would itself make for a blockbuster news story. Is it even conceivable that an optometrist who attended to his white patients in a clean office while an intern took care of the black patients in a filthy room wouldn’t make national headlines?

As I have said abortion is a sensitive subject, but even more so when you get real life stories like that outlined above. It behoves the media to talk about ALL stories not just a sanitised version. By all means warn people, as I have done, and let them choose, but tell the story.

Again this story raises many issues…give the photos above, you can’t say that “this is just a collection of cells”, this is far beyond that. The health and stress issues aside, what Gosnell is charged with doing is grotesque, barbaric and unconscionable ..and that is just in regards to his racism, his medical standards, his professional abilities and his ethics, we haven’t even touched on the issue of late-term abortions.

I prevaricated, and thought about doing this post, I prevaricated some more, perhaps it was my cowardice that had me hoping that our mainstream media might cover it, but they haven’t. And so I decided to let my commenters have a say.

Be warned, though, this post will be moderated hard. I want sensible and polite discussion. Do not hurl abuse, for that WILL earn you the ban hammer.

But ask yourself this. If the media won’t cover this story, what else aren’t they covering?


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • blokeintakapuna

    Woman’s body… Woman’s say. End of story.

    Saying that though, any female that falls pregnant as a result of a one night stand, then expects the erect penis to forever pay child support because she wishes to keep the baby is wrong. Fine… She can keep the child if she wants, but because the male doesn’t want anything to do with it, that should be the end of the story and if the female elects to choose solo-parent child raising as a lifestyle, that should be their own decision and one they have to fund themselves if that is the decision they choose, knowing full well the erect penis she enjoyed 9 months previously does not want to partake in raising children.

    Holding males hostage to female whims on this matter is wrong on numerous levels and no wonder so many men balk at such a proposition.

    There’s always options… Some religious people may proclaim they have “no option” but that’s not reality, that’s only their perception of what they believe possible/tasteful/allowed in God’s eye etc… But it’s stills choice none the less. So, if a female chooses parenthood as her choice, good on her, but don’t expect the erect penis to forever pay for her lifestyle choice… Especially as pregnancy is a choice, not a forgone conclusion or constant end result of a shag.

    • Sym Gardiner

      Arh… no. Guys need to own the consequences of their actions. There is far too much shifting responsibility onto others in our country already.

      • Precisely, i know of two blokes, each with 10 kids….one to 4 women and the other to 6…it beggars belief

    • CoNZervative

      TakyBloke, “Woman’s body… Woman’s say. End of story.” So, a woman can use her body to smuggle drugs into a country, then?

    • CoNZervative

      What about the rights of unborn women…do they have a body? or a choice, too?

    • Jimmie

      Ok so it was the female’s whim that forced the erect penis to engage in intercourse?

      Um hello – if you don’t want to be contribute to rearing a child then don’t shag in the first place duh. (or chose a non-vagina alternative)

      Most folks realize at an early age that pregnancy can follow shagging and if you ain’t prepared to do the time don’t do the crime. Obviously not you though BIT

  • Sym Gardiner

    Everyone agrees that this case is horrific and what has happened here is wrong.
    The question then is at what point does it move from horrific murder (as in this case) to acceptable patient health management. I have no answer to that.
    As for the MSM… they are cowards.

    I’d make one point before this thread degenerates… I have a lot of time and respect for those churches and families who say that abortion is wrong and then put their lives and $$$ where their mouths are an adopt unwanted babies.

    • parorchestia

      Great post Cam, but I would like to point out that adoption is a great alternative. I have many friends who were adopted and all turned out to be fine, upstanding people. The world would have been a poorer place without their lives. Why don’t we present abortion as an option to pregnant women carrying unwanted babies? Modern, open adoption can give them a satisfying relationship with their child. And there are a large number of good couples desperately wanting to adopt. What the hell has gone wrong with our society when abortion is pushed as the best option while contraception and adoption are swept under the carpet.

  • CoNZervative

    Great post, Cam.

  • Jimmie

    I was reading this story on Fox News last night – good on you WO for highlighting it.

    The chief reason why the msm won’t cover it is that abortion is one of the main dogma of the progressive – feminist faith/doctrine.

    Abortion has been portrayed over the years as a wonderful solution where unwanted pregnancies can be ‘taken care of’ in a clean and sanitary environment by trained medical folk.

    Anything that goes against this PR image must be avoided or ignored.

    This is no different to the catholic church covering up child abuse by its priests as the reality of sucking/vacuuming out forced abortion fetuses (if graphically shown) would repulse the average person in the street who has vaguely accepted the right of choice argument for several decades.

    When you accept the argument that fetuses are little more than body tissue then as an abortion doc what happens when one of these ‘body tissue’s’ starts crying and waving its arms around? Well obviously you have to finish the job as it doesn’t fit the abortion image to have basically prem babies making noises.

    Is a wonderful double standard in NZ where vets over the last three 3 years have been phasing out dairy cow inductions (deliberate aborting of growing calves to force early milk production) on the basis that it is a bad image for the dairy industry to see premature calves lying on the ground mooing for their mums.

    However it is quite fine for humans to do the same justified by the platitude that it is a woman’s right to choose? (never mind that the aborted ‘fetus’ is never consulted about whether they would like to live or die?)

  • kiwiinamerica

    The matters covered in this trial are truly sickening – it’s not often I find myself either too revolted to keep reading or in tears over the horrors perpetrated on the most innocent and fragile of all humans – new born babies.

    The cowardice of the mainstream media is of the highest order. Rush Limbaugh’s outburst about Sandra Fluke led to wall to wall outrage by the media here and all he did was tell a rather overly blunt truism about this women. Here we have callous murder, under age workers, government agency inaction and blatant racism – each one of these issues were the trial to be of a conservative defendant would have the left in high dudgeon. The silence from the left and its media allies is deafening – this story has a perfect storm of scandal but the left stays silent lest Joe Public draws the wrong conclusions on abortion. You can be pro-choice (I happen to be pro-life) and be both horrified by Gosnell’s conduct and media silence over it. This is truly a new low.

  • James Gray

    Ostensibly, the standard that makes sense to me is self awareness. Only that doesn’t happen until months after birth, and I’d still consider infanticide to be murder

    • Which is what I have been saying about people who bash their kids to death…they are really really late term abortions…the kid no longer fits their lifestyle…so away with it.

  • williamabong

    Anybody that needs to get a point across should do it soon, gods little messengers are on their way home from church as we speak, and they each have a fresh bag of fully charged lightning bolts for you non believers.

    • LesleyNZ

      You are pathetic.

  • JC

    When you look at international figures on stillborn babies you find the US record doesn’t look that great.. thats because the US fights for the survival of every child from just a few weeks after conception and declares its failures as stillborn very early in the pregnancy; other countries don’t declare a baby stillborn until much later in the pregnancy and in some countries the baby isn’t recorded as alive until well after birth.. in one place up to a year after birth. This means you have greater flexibility in killing (or starving) a baby if its got something wrong with it or is unwanted.

    I reckon the Gosnell case is being ignored because it graphically defines a baby as being a live human well before actual birth.. once you admit this then the case for late stage abortion becomes much harder to make and raises the specter of a baby being “alive” and “human” either at conception or just a few weeks later.
    Once this possibility is accepted you have to consider the baby to have human rights and the US liberal abortion case is shattered and the chances are that abortion becomes a defining political and moral issue again with advantage going to the Republicans.


  • williamabong

    Sad but true, I don’t think you would have to scratch the surface to hard in a lot of other countries to find similar or worse stories.
    But until you find a sane, clean, humane method of dealing with this problem these clinics willl continue.
    Late second and third trimester termininations seem to bring out the worst in both sides, on one hand you’ve got gods messengers all clutching bibles ranting forth, then you’ve got the feminazi screaming the ” it’s my body, it’s my right sermon “, then lastly sitting quietly in the corner you’ve got he poor old taxpayer getting another dorking, and knowing he’s going to have to pay for whatever happens, either through the welfare or justice systems.
    Perhaps the answer lies in knocking the mother on the head, and keeping the child to be raised by humans rather than as a welfare dependent punch bag.

    • Lion_ess

      What a great idea – knocking the mother on the head. People would be a lot more choosy and careful about who they screw and taking responsibility for their own contraception.

    • LesleyNZ

      In the middle is the defenceless unborn baby who has no voice and no status ………other than “gods messengers all clutching bibles ranting forth”. Good on them for speaking up and defending the rights and status of the unborn baby.

  • JC

    Here’s an excellent reason why the US liberal media won’t cover this:

    Money quote:

    “Jezebel notes that “fewer than 0.3% of abortion patients ever experience a complication that requires hospitalization,” according to a pro-abortion rights group. But even according to anti-gun statistics, there were only 33,000 gun-related deaths in 2011 for 300,000,000 guns owned in the country (fewer than .00012 percent). The violent crime rate in the U.S., in fact, is approaching a historical low.”

    In other words, if the media publish and defend abortion they invite a comparison with the much better statistics on gun death.


  • Mediaan

    They are protecting doctors, as usual.

  • LesleyNZ

    Reading about this trial makes you weep. How could any pro-abortion pro-choice person not think the little feet in the containers are not from a little human baby – yet unborn? How could they not think this darling little dead baby girl is not a human being? This little baby girl had no one to protect her – those already born made the wicked and evil choice for her – to destroy her life and murder her. I wonder what she would have looked like when she was older, what she would have become – had she been allowed to be born alive? Some babies given the saline injection to abort them are also born alive in our NZ hospitals and left to die – in a dish – but no one in the medical fraternity dares to speak out about this happening. Mainstream media are mostly of the liberal mind – the reason why this trial has not been widely publicised – until now. Who would have thought all those years ago when the feminists fought for abortion on demand and control over their own bodies that we would be witnessing an abortion trial such as this one. The pro-choice liberal feminist movement has not progressed women. As Maggie Thatcher said “The feminists hate me, don’t they? And I don’t blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison.”

    • TomTom

      “Some babies given the saline injection to abort them are also born alive
      in our NZ hospitals and left to die – in a dish – but no one in the
      medical fraternity dares to speak out about this happening.”

      Evidence, please? I doubt that this happens, since the procedure is so regulated and controlled.

      • LesleyNZ

        As you know there are a lot things that happen that are not reported. Regulations and control do not stop an aborted baby being born alive. If this happens what do the medical staff do next? Do they save the baby? We need to know what the procedure is if this happens. Does anyone know?

        • TomTom

          Just because you believe there are a lot of things “no reported” doesn’t mean that they happened. That isn’t evidence. You do know that after the abortion, it has to be removed from the uterus. It can’t stay there til 9 months “full term.” And no fetus before 2 or 3 months is going to survive 5 minutes of labour.

  • TomTom

    This is definitely sickening, and wrong. I don’t know why the abortions weren’t performed earlier during the legal period.

    Definitely, though, abortion should always be legal for the early part of the pregnancy, as the fetus has not gained sentience nor can it feel pain. Making it illegal would only force some pregnant woman to opt for risky backstreet procedures and would also overwhelm the adoption system to the point that “supply outstrip demand.” Do we really want full group homes where unwanted kids become so miserable, unloved and struggle through life?

    • LesleyNZ

      How do you know a fetus can not feel pain? So you think it is wrong to abort the above dead baby girl because she looks more like a newborn baby but right to abort because a few weeks or months earlier she didn’t look so much like a newborn baby? So much “nicer” to abort when an unborn baby is much smaller. Read this and then tell me that you think it is OK to abort – this baby’s eyes were not formed – yet it felt pain alright!
      Gosnell worker testifies: Baby being ‘aborted’ ‘screamed…like a
      little alien’…like-a-little-alien

      “Former abortion worker Sherry West testified that she heard a baby “screaming” and “screeching” during an “abortion” that took place at Kermit Gosnell’s “House of Horrors” abortion facility.The proprietor, Dr. Kermit Gosnell, asked her to help him with something and directed her to another room. There an 18-to-24-inch baby, who did not yet have eyes, was lying in a clear glass pan, she recalled in horror. It was “screeching, making this noise” that “sounded like a little alien,” she said. It “really freaked me out,” she said, causing her to leave the room.”

      It is always those who are already born who decide who is to be aborted – and with abortion on demand abortion has become a form of contraception because having a baby would be such an inconvenience.

      • TomTom

        You are, of course, twisting my words. If indeed the aborted baby did scream as per what that person saying, it is STILL a late term baby, nearly fully developed with a functioning brain and spine with neural cords delivering messages from neural receptors. That is horrible and cannot be condoned in any way.

        WHAT I DID SAY: that early term abortions should remain. Perhaps you should so kindly go back and re-read.
        Up to a certain point, it is the woman’s body and the woman’s choice to decide what should happen to a fetus. However, taking the pregnancy beyond the legal termination period should indicate a tactic agreement for the woman to carry the baby to full term. When a fetus turns into an actual human being is debatable, but it is generally agreed that the termination period ends well before that.
        You may say that it’s a human being at point of conception, I can ridicule that argument by saying that sperm are half a human being and therefore wanking off is bad, bad, bad. Or I could say that woman going through their period is totes bad too, since every period they go through, another egg is wasted.

        Further. Your type is often always the one to scream and screech whenever people talk about comprehensive sexual education in schools (which include talking in depth about contraception, including the use for preventing transmission of STDs.)

        Extreme points of view do not help in this argument. It does not help to say that women should be able to abort the pregnancy at any stage, including after the termination period. It does not help to say that women should never be allowed to abort at all. So, grow up.

        • LesleyNZ

          You are being a bit silly saying what you said about periods, eggs and sperm.

          • TomTom

            That was my point. I give up.

  • Blair Mulholland

    I have no problem in saying I do not think a woman should be arrested or be made a criminal for aborting an early term baby. But I will never ever condone it. I think it is disgusting to kill a child, whatever the stage of development.

    I saw the photo of this little girl and wept. I thought of my own when they were born. What sort of monster does this? There are always alternatives, however desperate it may seem.

    The Left like to accuse those of us who are against abortion of being concerned about people before they are born, but not after. But abortion is simply part of their control agenda – they want to control lives, whether they are in utero or ex utero. I want people to be free, and to be free means that one should be able to live.

    The Left have not covered this trial because they don’t want to face the consequences of their ideology. These babies are not collections of cells. They are real. No wonder they run a mile and will do anything to pretend this situation does not exist.

  • unsol

    I have been waiting to see the tone of the comments on here before posting my view.

    My postion: I am very pro life & do not consider pregnancy to be an accident as it is always a choice – that is what the morning after pill & contraception is for. Men – if you don’t want to pay child support for one night stands then take the responsibility that comes with shagging & use a condom. Women – always make sure men wear them (STIs) but go for the morning after pill if unsure. Sex is for grown-ups so if people can’t handle the decisions that come from the results of sex – recognise cause & effect – then perhaps they shouldn’t be doing it.

    That said I of course accept that there are times where some women feel abortion is valid (rape, unplanned pregnancy vs families, medical conditions etc). But I would expect them to be within the first month unless something unusual comes up in the 20 week scan then maybe around that time.

    But late/third trimester abortions? I see this as nothing short of murder unless the baby has medical issues & is putting the mother at risk. My reason being is I had a good friend whose baby was had spina bifida – not discovered until the 20 week scan & because they were keen not to abort, decided to wait it out. After all, many children are born with this & do go on to do very well. So-called disabilities doesn’t mean the child has no value. For my friend though things turned for the worse. At 6 or 7 months gestation it became a choice between her life & or that of her unborn baby. In the end she didn’t have to make a choice as the baby became distressed so labour was induced & the baby was still born.

    A really awful situation for which she still grieves.

    So for the above – I skimmed read – I am just horrified & heart broken. Were any of these late abortions due to the babies not being well or were they merely because they were the result of an unwanted pregnancy?

  • Pingback: Butchered at birth | Eternal Vigilance()