BY BOB UNRUH
Recordings revealed willingness to do abortions based on race
Reading the words carries an impact, but nothing compared to when you listen to them: It happened when a Planned Parenthood worker is asked to accept a donation specifically to abort a black child, and her response is: “Understandable, understandable.”
Now, however, those interested in the controversy over Planned Parenthood’s large role in the nation’s abortion industry may have to settle for seeing those words, since YouTube has decided to censor several audio recordings that had been posted by pro-life activists documenting the corporation’s willingness to accept donations on the basis of race.
That’s the word from Live Action Films, a pro-life student organization whose officials confirmed that not only did YouTube block four of their postings, YouTube has refused to respond to a request from Live Action to unblock the videos and explain the actions.
The videos included staged telephone recordings of discussions between an actor supplied by the pro-life activists and Planned Parenthood workers in which the abortion operations agree to process donations from a caller with a racist agenda.
“It is discriminatory for YouTube to selectively censor material that clearly does not contain inappropriate content,” said Live Action President Lila Rose, who also edits The Advocate, and whose work to document Planned Parenthood activities previously was reported by WND.
“We will continue to apply pressure on YouTube until it restores the videos,” she said.
The posted recordings had generated wide interest from the national media, and Live Action Media Director David Schmidt said, “These four videos have received over 160,000 YouTube views in total with the oldest video having been public on YouTube for over seven months. Why are these videos being removed now?”
The information in the recordings is significant, apparently documenting a willingness on the part of Planned Parenthood to facilitate the destruction of unborn babies based on race.
The following is the exchange on one of the YouTube postings:
The pro-life organization noted there are 1,400 African-American babies lost to abortion each day, and African-American women account for 12 percent of the female population but submit to over 36 percent of abortions.
“Their founder, Margaret Sanger, designed the organization to use sterilization and abortion to control minority populations. And today, Planned Parenthood of America sets up special funds across the country to target minority women,” the group said.
It isn’t the first time YouTube has shut down a pro-life message, the organization said. In July, a video by the Population Research Institute was closed off because it criticized a pro-abortion journalist. Just a few months earlier, YouTube removed a video from the American Life League that was critical of Planned Parenthood, although it later was restored following protests.
Rose said the banned videos documenting the response from several Planned Parenthood offices can be viewed on Live Action Films website.
WND also reported earlier when Rose posed as a 15-year-old seeking an abortion at a Planned Parenthood center in Santa Monica, Calif. She was equipped with a hidden camera when she met with an employee to discuss her options.
When Rose revealed she was 15 and her boyfriend was 23, the employee informed her Planned Parenthood was legally required to report the statutory rape, a transcript of the conversation shows.
The Planned Parenthood representative then suggested she could say she was 16 and avoid complications.
“Well, just figure out a birth date that works. And I don’t know anything,” the rep said.
The Texas-based pro-life group Life Dynamics previously conducted an extensive undercover project in which an adult volunteer posing as a 13-year-old called every Planned Parenthood clinic in the U.S., saying she was pregnant by a 22-year-old boyfriend. Almost without exception, the clinics advised her to obtain an abortion without her parents’ knowledge and told her how to protect her boyfriend, who would be guilty in any state of statutory rape.
‘We are already building practically as many ships as we did in Soviet times’
Russian Navy cruiser
Russia’s one-dominant navy is being returned to power, and it already has been successful in taking over Georgia’s Black Sea port of Poti,” according to a report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.
Officials say the navy is being refurbished and expanded and will be used to respond to what Russians perceive as growing threats to their security interests.
“We are already building practically as many ships as we did in Soviet times,” First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said during a recent visit to Severodvinsk. “The problem now is not lack of money, but how to optimize production so that the navy can get new ships three, not five, years after laying them down.”
The nation’s economy has improved because of the rise in the price of oil, so there has been a significant increase in defense spending to include more ships under construction as well as a plan to refit some older ships.
Moscow already has in place a recently approved rearmament program that runs through 2015. Now for the first time in Soviet and Russian history, development of the navy will almost equal the increase in strategic nuclear forces. The program covering the period until 2015 is expected to replace 45 percent of the navy inventory.
Russia intends to bolster its four fleets and one flotilla of the Black Sea Fleet based in Sevastopol, Ukraine; the Russian Northern Fleet headquartered at Severomorsk, Russia; the Pacific Fleet headquartered in Vladivostok, Russia; the Baltic Fleet headquartered in Kaliningrad, Russia; and the Caspian Flotilla headquartered in Astrakhan, Russia. The improvements are to be used to guard Russia’s interests.
“We’ll do all we can to build up our presence where Russia has strategic interests,” Russian Navy Commander Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky recently said.
With greater Black Sea access, Russia will have more opportunity to use the ports as bases from which to project power into the Mediterranean and then on to the Atlantic.
Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin is the premium, online intelligence news source edited and published by the founder of WND.
Urges Schwarzenegger to veto plan supported by ex-Hemlock Society
By Bob Unruh
A state senator in California has launched a campaign to urge Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto a plan approved by the legislature because he describes it as a “back-door” to legalized euthanasia.
The legislation is called the “Terminal Patients’ Right to Know End of Life Options” Act, and WND already has reported how it would allow patients under certain conditions to be drugged and then starved to death.
“AB 2747 allows a physician assistant or a nurse to opine that a patient is ‘terminal,’ and then push for unnatural death by ‘palliative sedation,’” charged Randy Thomasson, chief of the Campaign for Children and Families. “Depressed patients who succumb to this pressure will be drugged unconscious and die from dehydration.”
Now state Sen. Sam Aanestad, R-Grass Valley, a licensed oral surgeon, says he’s urging the governor to veto the proposal.
“The so-called end of life options act interferes with the medical care of people who just received the worst news of their lives,” Aanestad said in a statement sent to WND. “State government has no business intruding upon the doctor-patient relationship at that time, yet that is exactly what this bill does.”
He said the bill was sponsored by a group called Compassion and Choices, which formerly was known as the Hemlock Society and has advocated for physician-assisted suicide legislation in the past. A founder of the group has praised Dr. Jack Kevorkian for helping more than 100 people die.
“I want the governor to clearly know that this measure cloaked as compassion is actually sponsored by a group of people who want to give physicians the legal right to take part in the death of another person,” said Aanestad. “Failing to do that in the past, they have introduced this measure as a small first step which looks innocent, but opens the door to further ‘end of life’ intrusions.”
Further, he said, “It also bothers me that this legislation is a back-door approach for advocates of euthanasia. AB 2747 contains language that can easily be amended in the future to include other treatments than those it now includes – treatments like those advocated by the bill’s sponsor, the former Hemlock Society.”
Aanestad noted dozens of individuals and groups representing cancer patients, minority rights groups, members of religious communities and hospitals spoke before the Senate Health Committee in opposition to the idea.
Aanestad said he believes patients facing terminal illness need information based on who they are as individuals, not an intrusion into their relationship with their doctor.
“Patients don’t need their doctors to dispense a laundry list developed by Sacramento politicians,” he said. “It’s downright cruel to take a list of treatments that may not even apply to a patient and have the doctor say ‘here, this is what the State of California legislates I must tell you when you find out that you’re dying and you ask me what to do.’”
Annestad said part of the reason he became an oral surgeon was because of his belief that serving God means valuing human life.
“Patients facing a terminal illness have many needs. Among them are comfort, pain relief and information to make critical decisions,” he said. “They need dignity, respect and the support of those who love and care for them. They need prayer and the help of clergy, family and friends. What they don’t need is an intrusion into their relationship with their doctor.”
He said the requirement that doctors tell terminal patients “would have to be told that they could be sedated into a coma and stop eating and drinking.”
“It bothers me that AB 2747 leaves no option for the compassion of a doctor who knows her patient best. A cancer doctor caring for a depressed patient who says ‘What can I do?’ would have no recourse other than to do exactly as the bill mandates – give the information the California Legislature says she needs when they say she needs it,” he said.
Forty-two Democrats in California voted in favor of the plan: 30 Republicans and two Democrats opposed the plan.