New CMP Planned Parenthood Video Released

In what looks to be a response to the actions in Texas regarding an investigation into Planned Parenthood there, CMP released an undercover video of a provider at PP in Austin.

As bad as this video is, it isn’t the worst of the CMP videos.

Some things to notice as you watch:

  • It still disturbs me the way these medical professionals discuss their work. Laughing and joking about ripping a baby apart.
  • CMP points out that the procedure used by this doctor sounds an awful lot like the banned partial-birth abortion procedure.
  • While her clinic didn’t provide tissue for research at that time, she sure seemed open to it. This should be a moot point now that PPFA has said they will no longer accept  any fees for the tissue they provide.
  • The provider says at 7:35- “It’s amazing… I have so much respect for development, it’s just incredible” when talking about the parts of children she had killed in the womb.

These videos from CMP have ripped the veil off the horrible practice of abortion in America. I won’t be the same after watching them.

Planned Parenthood Announces They Will No Longer Be Compensated for Fetal Parts

Today, Planned Parenthood announced that they will not longer accept compensation for fetal body parts. They say this is to strip away the “smokescreen” of activists who just want to see abortion made illegal. Oh, and women’s access to healthcare reduced.

That’s an interesting spin, but I think this was done to take the pressure off of Planned Parenthood. With this new policy, we are back to what everyone expects Planned Parenthood to do: provide minimal health care and lots of abortion services. There is no way that the Government will remove federal funding now.(Not that it was likely to anyway)

Convenient interesting timing. Today is the first Democrat Presidential Debate. This gives the media a perfect excuse for barely covering the new PP policy.

This is a win for pro life supporters. But it doesn’t slow the amount of abortions, and it allows these videos to diminish in importance. The behavior they are exposing is no longer happening.

I suspect this issue will fade away now. Laws may have been (read:were) broken, and there could be actual criminal investigations for selling for profit as well as altering procedures (both against federal law) but I doubt anyone will pursue it.

New Planned Parenthood Video

The 10th undercover video about Planned Parenthood’s practice of selling fetal tissue.

This one is called Human Capital: Episode 4 Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Criminal Enterprise.

What to watch for.

  • Right off the bat you see several PP staff saying they think it’s OK to sell tissue, and make a fair income.
  • 2:10- Dr. Westhoff, Senior Medical Advisor for PPFA, says they are concerned about Public Relations issues with this practice.
  • 2:25- Dr Cullins, VP for External Medical Affairs, says this sort of thing could destroy PPFA and the “buyer’s company, if the ydon’t “time these conversations correctly.”
  • 2:45-  Deb VanDerhei, Senior Director of CAPS. 1st question, what kinds of tissues are you looking for. 2nd question, let’s talk money. Notice how she asks the question. In all of these videos, there is this negotiation that happens between clinics and these companies. But if the money changing hands is simply to cover the costs of preserving and shipping the tissues, why not just say, you have to cover these costs. Why this negotiation?
  • 4:05- “The headlines would be a disaster.” Followed by obvious concern for what happens when clinics engage in getting paid for the tissue. “New York Times Headline”
  • 5:00- Dr. Nucatola, Senior Director of Medical Services, says there are no guidelines and there will never be guidelines for tissue procurement. Why not? If this is such a big issue, if clinics who break the law scare you, make your company afraid of big headlines, why not set down guidelines and protect everyone?
  • 6:43- VanDerhei again. She says that independent clinics generate a fair amount of income doing this. She goes on to say that they are not comfortable talking about this through email.
  • Multiple times Nuctols and VanDehei say that they don’t have policies, this could be big news stories, and generally don’t want to get involved on a national level, while also saying that it seems fair to gain income, and they do talk with their local clinics about how to handle this stuff. But they have made the choice to have no national policies.
  • Around 9:00- Vanessa Russo, Compliance Program Admin for PP Keystone, is talking to Vanderlei. It’s obvious she thinks these laws are “ridiculous”. And that people giving money for tissue is a “valid exchange.”
  • 9:55- VanDerhei talks about a hearing in Congress years ago on this subject, where the claims about changing abortion procedures for tissue sale were found to be false. Then we see Nucatola herself talking about changing abortion procedures to end up with better tissue samples for sale.

If what they are doing isn’t illegal, why not have a national policy on how to handle it? Why are they afraid of headlines?

If PPFA clinics and doctors never change their abortion procedures to aid in collecting tissue samples for “remuneration” why do some many talk about doing exactly that?

9th Planned Parenthood Undercover Video from CMP

Things to notice:

  1. Listen to Stem Express CEO talk about how they compete with non-profits, by paying the clinics to get the tissue.
  2. Perrin Larton from ABR describes abortions where the fetus is already in the vaginal canal, and drops out when the feet go in the stirrups. Se also talks about not using the poison many abortionists use to kill the baby inside the women. If the baby is practically born and falls out intact, if they don’t use poison… Just how many live births happen in these clinics?
  3. Stem express CEO accuses ABR of “hiring” staff at Planned Parenthood clinics, the ones which provide tissue to them. Oddly, I’m not sure this is illegal, though the ethics are suspect. Of course, we are parsing hairs when kids are dying.
  4. The thrust of this video seems to be the competition between the procurement businesses. if there is competition, then there is a prime climate for clinics to cash in, going with the highest bidder.

From the video description:

In an August 27 letter to Congress, Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards referenced a California Planned Parenthood affiliate that currently receives $60 “per tissue specimen” from a tissue procurement organization. The Center for Medical Progress, the group producing the videos, identified Planned Parenthood Pacific Southwest and ABR as the affiliate and TPO referred to in Richards’ letter, based on process of elimination.

“We now know from Cecile Richards’ letter that $60 per collected tissue specimen is what will ‘get a toe in’ to harvest baby parts at Planned Parenthood Pacific Southwest,” wrote CMP Project Lead David Daleiden. As multiple tissue specimens often come from a single fetus, $60/specimen can quickly add up to hundreds of extra dollars in revenue per abortion. The sale or purchase of human fetal tissue is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2).

Planned Parenthood Investigated the Investigation of Itself, Media Suddenly Interested

Planned Parenthood investigated the investigation of itself and then sent the report to Congress. Not surprisingly, their report on themselves says they didn’t do anything wrong. But this article goes over the details of the report… Which says the videos don’t really contain deceptive edits, but they asked questions that showed staff members agreeing with doing bad stuff. And they used 2 cameras, and cut out chunks of time (like when people went to the bathroom or were;t saying anything). And even though there isn’t any evidence of audio tampering, we can’t rule it out… they probably just made stuff up.

Right.

Reading thru the report itself there are numerous times when the investigators say something like- we don’t know what was cut out, or what was said in this gap, or what was said before. They do not say the video was obviously altered or doctored.

The report spends a bit of time talking about the phrases “a baby” and “another boy” which are in this video:

Apparently these phrases made Planned Parenthood very nervous. They asked for them to be examined specifically. Fusion GPS goes on at some length about how the sound during the time ‘a baby” is uttered is “incomprehensible” and then later points out that the words “another boy” might have been somehow brought out by something the journalist said. You can review these segments yourself: “a baby” at about 9:03 and “another boy” at about 11:09.

I can hear the words ‘a baby” but so what? Aside from the fact that it’s emotionally damning, who cares if the technician said that? Abortions (which pro life people already think kill babies) are not illegal. Calling a dead fetus a baby isn’t illegal or wrong. And it seems likely that the technician was doing what they must do, and making sure they had all the parts of the fetus. So when she said it’s “a baby” she likely meant she has the whole fetus. Similarly with “another boy”, who cares if the technicians talk about the gender?

Except that images of defenseless babies ripped apart, and the tone of the technicians engaged in the grisly work have an emotional impact on the viewer. It’s disturbing.

Let’s assume the journalists trapped the staff people, they were trying their hardest to get incriminating footage and using every mean necessary… The simple fact is, if the staff member were only recouping tissue sample storage and shipping costs they wouldn’t negotiate this way. The costs would be fixed, and much lower. And they would never suggest altering an abortion procedure to allow for more intact organ harvesting, which is illegal, no matter what anyone might say on or off camera, unless they do actually alter abortion procedures for that purpose.

This is the last paragraph of the Summary in the report:

At this point, it is impossible to characterize the extent to which CMP’s undisclosed edits and cuts distort the meaning of the encounters the videos purport to document. However, the manipulation of the videos does mean they have no evidentiary value in a legal context and cannot be relied upon for any official inquiries unless supplemented by CMP’s original material and forensic authentication that this material is supplied in unaltered form. The videos also lack credibility as journalistic products.

According to the article from the Blaze, CMP plans to turn over all material to the authorities. That last sentence is just hogwash. Staff members negotiating prices, offering to change how abortions are done, the testimony from former procurement techs, these all have value as journalistic products. Has anyone at Fusion GPS ever watched an undercover report before?

Who is Fusion GPS, the company that headed up this investigative endeavor? The Weekly Standard says they are a Democratic Opposition Research Firm. Here’s a Wall Street Journal article, mentioned by Weekly Standard, where Fusion GPS is identified doing an investigation into Frank Vandersloot (campaign donor to Romney) back in 2012. Frankly, this analysis done by an actually neutral party would mean a lot more.

Many of the media outlets who have been ignoring these videos as much as possible have some interesting headlines:

Politico:

Screen Shot 2015-08-28 at 7.37.09 PM

MSNBC:

Screen Shot 2015-08-28 at 7.38.52 PM

NY Times;

Screen Shot 2015-08-28 at 7.40.01 PM

Huffington post:

Screen Shot 2015-08-28 at 7.42.39 PM

I mean, who really wants to read a 10 page report, anyway? Let’s trust the company that is accused of wrongdoing to commission a report from a partisan source, and the media who ignored the story as much as they could until now.

{UPDATE} CMP released 30 minutes of footage as an addendum to the Full Footage released from the TX undercover video. They also released a detailed response explaining the gaps in the “full footage” videos they released, and said again that the entire video files would be submitted to authorities, with no gaps or cuts. This clip was not included with the original video out of human error:

A Pro Life Look at Arguments for Abortion 3

I’m doing a few posts about some of the arguments for legalized abortion from a pro life view point. I want to really look at them, and try to explain why they are not persuasive for someone who supports making abortion illegal.

Other posts in this series:

Abortion Argument 1: If abortions are illegal, we will have women dying from back alley abortions.

Abortion Argument 2: If you are so Pro Life, why don’t you care about the kids who are born into families who don’t want them?

Abortion Argument 3: It’s my body, my choice! The life of the mother is more important than the potential life of a fetus.

This argument centers on the belief that forcing a woman to carry a baby she does not want full term is not right. She should have the right to end the pregnancy. We should not force a woman to endure the pregnancy. We should not force a woman to be a mother, even if she gives the baby up for adoption. It’s her life, her body, she chooses what to do with it.

One part of this argument, that even a lot of conservatives agree with, centers on cases of pregnancy caused by rape or incest and cases that put the life of the mother in danger. Many pro-life conservatives (especially politicians) would give an exception to illegal abortion in these cases.

NCBI said in 1996 that there are over 32,000 pregnancies that result from rape each year.

A book called “Practical Aspects of Rape Investigation: A Multidisciplinary Approach” written by by Hazelwood, Robert R. (Editor)/ Burgess, Ann Wolbert, quotes a 2005 study that 3-5% of rape cases result in pregnancy. It goes on to say that this number may be higher since not all sexual assaults are reported.

Not everyone agrees with these numbers. Some pro-life sources claim numbers that are under 1000 per year.  Susan Perry from Minn Post wrote, condemning people who claim that there are not a lot of pregnancies from rape/incest:

“In a 1996 study, researchers at the Medical University of South Carolina set out to determine the rape-related pregnancy rate in the United States. They estimated that about 5 percent of rape victims of reproductive age (12 to 45) become pregnant — a percentage that results in about 32,000 pregnancies each year.

“Rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency,” the researchers wrote. “It is a cause of many unwanted pregnancies and is closely linked with family and domestic violence.”

Four years later, another study, this time conducted by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, estimated that rape led to as many as 25,000 pregnancies in the U.S. each year.

“Pregnancy following rape is a continuing and significant public health issue,” concluded the authors of that study.

Furthermore, in a 2004 national survey of a representative sample of women who had undergone abortions, 1 percent of the women indicated that they had been victims of rape. In addition, slightly less than half a percent said they became pregnant as a result of incest. At the time of that survey, an estimated 1.3 million women were undergoing abortions annually in the United States, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

The survey thus suggests that each year about 19,500 U.S. abortions are undertaken to end pregnancies that occurred as a result of rape or incest.

There is definitely a lot of swing in the numbers (1,000-32,000+), but we can all agree that any pregnancy that comes as a result of rape or incest is traumatic for the woman involved. I can’t imagine if someone I loved were forced into this situation.

But we can also agree that if we think the unborn child is a human being, then they are innocent of the crimes of the father. I know that many women may not be able to live with the knowledge that they are carrying the child caused by this brutal assault. I see that. It’s that fact that causes many pro life people to make exceptions for rape and incest.

As for the life of the mother, even if we hold (as I do) that the unborn child is a human being; if the life of the mother is threatened, then the mother should have the option to abort. No one can make another person risk their life for anyone else. If I’m walking along a cliff and see someone hanging off, about to fall, I should not be legally compelled to put my life in danger to try to save that person.

I respect the decision of any woman who is faced with the choice of their life or the child’s. I hope I never have to walk through that choice with my family.

But that’s about the only exception I can definitely agree to. A young women who just doesn’t want to carry the child, or maybe it’s inconvenient timing… I’m sorry but sex sometimes causes pregnancy. If you make the choice to have unprotected sex, then you might get pregnant. Those of us that believe the child is a human being even in the womb will never excuse killing that baby for convenience.

The whole “it’s my body” argument fails flat when you realize that from conception that little child has 23 different chromosomes and different DNA, it’s a different person. You gave up some of your rights the moment you became pregnant. (I’m stealing my thunder for the next argument)

I know we live in a world that glorifies sex and sexual identity. We live in a world that encourages sexual experimentation and sexual freedom. The freedom to have sex when you want with who you want has consequences. One of those might be unplanned pregnancy. If you are not ready to accept that, don’t have sexual intercourse. That is your choice, and that is when you have the power over your body.

But once that child is conceived, you are no longer responsible for just your own body. A choice was made that brought a new person into being. That little baby is just as much a human as anyone already born. What you do to it isn’t something you do to your own body. Abortion kills a human being. Abortion doesn’t kill part of the woman’s body, doesn’t remove an unwanted chunk of cells. It kills a person.

For the pro life person, the baby is a human being from conception. And the argument that  the woman’s body is hers to do with as she wants falls flat if you believe that the unborn baby is a complete person. And the argument that the mother’s life is more important that the baby’s life doesn’t work either. Both the mother and child are people. I believe they both have value if for no other reason than they are both made in the image of God. For one to kill the other because she doesn’t want to be pregnant is wrong.

Coming soon: Abortion Argument 4: It’s not really a child. It’s not human yet, just a bunch of cells/tissue.

8th Planned Parenthood Video

This dropped yesterday… It went by almost unnoticed in the media and on the internet.

Things to notice-

-Stem Express CEO said they have done “a lot” of intact cases. Remember, if you use a poison in the womb before delivery you can’t use the remains for research. That means… the baby is likely alive when delivered intact.

-It’s easy to imagine this is just another business meeting, talking and laughing about their work… until you remember they are talking about making money off the bodies of dead babies. gathered in places that kill the babies.

-She said she has not seen clinics that don’t make a profit from this type of thing. It’s “profitable” for them.

-Planned parenthood is a “volume” institution.

-They laugh about how lab techs freak out when reminded that these samples come from actual dead humans.