Surprise! Multiple Investigations of Planned Parenthood Show No Wrong Doing

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: ~Lucidity

You do know he was baiting you to promote the propaganda on your thread? He of course knew what the videos claimed...Wiley Fox

I do know. Many know.

Planned Parenthood Pushes Back as States Target Funding

Planned Parenthood says it donates fetal tissue with the permission of abortion patients and receives only reimbursement from research institutions to cover its costs, in accordance with federal law.

Planned Parenthood runs such donation programs only in California, Oregon, and Washington. Officials in five other states—Arkansas, Utah, Louisiana, Alabama, and New Hampshire—have announced plans to terminate Medicaid funds for the organization, the Times reports, and Florida health officials took action Monday against three Planned Parenthood clinics there, claiming regulatory violations.

Money from the joint federal/state health program supports family planning, cancer screening, and other non-abortion-related services at Planned Parenthood clinics. The Obama administration has warned states that withholding the funds could breach U.S. law.

we have confirmed that HHS researchers working with fetal tissue obtained the tissue from non-profit organizations that provided assurances to us that they are in compliance with all applicable legal requirements.

They "confirmed that HHS researchers" ... What about all the other researchers who work with such tissue? HHS researchers are not the only ones.

The non-profits "provided assurances to us that they are in compliance" ... In other words, they did their own internal investigations. They were not audited by outside investigators.

I see no reason to believe this was a thorough or very comforting assurance that there is nothing to see here.

originally posted by: ketsuko

we have confirmed that HHS researchers working with fetal tissue obtained the tissue from non-profit organizations that provided assurances to us that they are in compliance with all applicable legal requirements.

They "confirmed that HHS researchers" ... What about all the other researchers who work with such tissue? HHS researchers are not the only ones.

The non-profits "provided assurances to us that they are in compliance" ... In other words, they did their own internal investigations. They were not audited by outside investigators.

I see no reason to believe this was a thorough or very comforting assurance that there is nothing to see here.

HHS was just the government portion of the investigation. If you've been actually following this story in its entirety, you know what that is about. If you only follow one-sided sources, you may still be laboring under the illusion that they refused to investigate or even who approved their research to begin with.

Why don't you let us know who they, the other researchers, are and we'll look into that for you.

We all know what already happened to StemExpress and what the consequences for many people will be due to the curtailing of their ability to do research.

Who are "all the other" researchers, specifically? That the Planned Parenthoods in only five states dealt with in regard to tissue donation.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ~Lucidity

"Just you wait, they're going to find summtin, even if they have to make it up."

Shades of Benghazi.

This same scenario played out in 1999-2000 in an attack on Planned Parenthood then.

Some of the same people were involved in making fraudulent videos.

Some of the SAME CONGRESSIONALS were involved with that crap-show too. Short memories I guess.

Obsession. It's the reason for the Salem Witch Trials; the reason McCarthyism & the Red Scare happened; the reason they're still fuming over Benghazi; and the reason for this witch hunt. It's like they're so bored w/daily life that they have to find some minuscule or imaginary monster to slay in order to pass the time.

The funny thing is, I wouldn't mind if they focused their supposed obsessions for morality onto society's real criminals, like organized crime families, cartels, mafioso, yakuza, etc. Or at least had a "crusade" against child abuse, spousal abuse, or human trafficking rings.

But nope, they don't care about those things. Maybe it's because they're actual threats that can harm them?

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Would now be a good time to look at these laws and change them?

Would now also be a good time for the mods to delete every one of those hoaxed video threads?
Yes, yes it would.

These people have set the anti-choice movement back decades.

There is no reason to lie. Lies usually, though not always, guarantee defeat.

I am appalled, however, at some of the most vociferous defenders of these fraudsters now acting like "who said anyone did anything illegal?"

There's hypocrisy, and then there's appalling, gut-wrenching, mind-boggling hypocrisy.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: TexasTruth
Yes, of course. The 'new'ish' laws of this this once great land are just wonderful. Selling aborted baby parts, NDAA, AHCA, eminent domain laws, looking to give Iran billions, protecting Monsanto through the FDA. Quite the legacy we are building here.

You seem mighty confused...

Baby parts are not being sold...tissue is being donated.
NDAA is over 50 years old..
AHCA is new...People getting dropped by their insurance when they get sick is "old"
Eminent Domain is over a hundred years old...mostly employed by folks in your home state of TX to build pipelines for oil.
Not sure what your beef is with the FDA...I do know that the GOP have dramatically and repeatedly defunded the FDA in recent years..

Let me know if you would like links to any of the above to clear things up.

The catch with that part is they defund something until it can't work properly, then point out that it isn't working properly as an excuse to reduce its funding even more.

It's actually a pretty basic strategy called "Starve the Beast" which has been deployed by conservatives ever since Reagan. And yeah, it's actually called the "Starve the Beast" policy.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
Obsession. It's the reason for the Salem Witch Trials; the reason McCarthyism & the Red Scare happened; the reason they're still fuming over Benghazi; and the reason for this witch hunt. It's like they're so bored w/daily life that they have to find some minuscule or imaginary monster to slay in order to pass the time.

The funny thing is, I wouldn't mind if they focused their supposed obsessions for morality onto society's real criminals, like organized crime families, cartels, mafioso, yakuza, etc. Or at least had a "crusade" against child abuse, spousal abuse, or human trafficking rings.

But nope, they don't care about those things. Maybe it's because they're actual threats that can harm them?

They're Narrativists (note: this blog post is old and the term PJ uses here is (A)uthoritarian; this is not the same as (a)uthoritarian and due to the confusion, she's since switched the better-fitting term Narrativist)...

Narrative: The first concept i want to discuss about Authoritarians is what I call "Narrative". Contrary to the common view that Authoritarians live by the dictates of some unseen and vengeful God, they actually base their decisions/live their lives based upon a narrative of which a vengeful petty God is always a feature. Whether it be a Fundamentalist Zealot or an Objectivist ****, Authoritarians always have a narrative that determines everything they say, think, or do. Narrative is the true God of the Authoritarian, which is why what God actually says or does has very little practical worth. What Authoritarians care about is what God (Or for Objectivists the Free Market) should be doing according to the narrative. No matter what is actually happening, they will believe and behave as if the narrative is playing out exactly as they expected it too. Regardless of actual real world circumstances, outcomes, situations, or influences, Authoritarians always prize the narrative above all else.
Narrative works on three primary levels (Grand, Outer, Inner) that I will describe in detail here.
...
Narrative Convergence: When Authoritarians perceive a threat (which is often) their first instinct is to strike at the jugular with overwhelming force. It does not matter how insignificant the threat really is or how wide the gap in power between them and their target is, they want to hit a vital spot with every ounce of force they can muster. The goal is to establish dominance by firstly destroying the threat and any trace of it, and secondly, having witnesses so that other potential threats learn their place. Authoritarians are always look for a big dramatic battle, they are looking for every conflict to go down like the final battle of a Lord of the Rings trilogy. Fierce, fast, big, that is how an Authoritarian wants to fight every battle be it a swordfight or a debate.

They look for big showy fights and hills to die on... they think it will lead to The Apocalypse or The Paradise, depending on which end of the Grand Narrative they adhere to.

Lol, did anyone expect Obama administration to find anything a liberal organization does to be illegal. If this follow suit, someone will get a promotion or a cushy lobbyist job

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes they have. And the saddest thing is that abortion rates were already dropping anyway, that there can be a more civil and less hateful conversation about the root causes (which I'm sure many rabid anti-choicers simply don't want to face) and there is every chance that they are driving people back to the darker ages with their shutting down of organizations like Planned Parenthood.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
Obsession. It's the reason for the Salem Witch Trials; the reason McCarthyism & the Red Scare happened; the reason they're still fuming over Benghazi; and the reason for this witch hunt. It's like they're so bored w/daily life that they have to find some minuscule or imaginary monster to slay in order to pass the time.

The funny thing is, I wouldn't mind if they focused their supposed obsessions for morality onto society's real criminals, like organized crime families, cartels, mafioso, yakuza, etc. Or at least had a "crusade" against child abuse, spousal abuse, or human trafficking rings.

But nope, they don't care about those things. Maybe it's because they're actual threats that can harm them?

They're Narrativists (note: this blog post is old and the term PJ uses here is (A)uthoritarian; this is not the same as (a)uthoritarian and due to the confusion, she's since switched the better-fitting term Narrativist)...

Narrative: The first concept i want to discuss about Authoritarians is what I call "Narrative". Contrary to the common view that Authoritarians live by the dictates of some unseen and vengeful God, they actually base their decisions/live their lives based upon a narrative of which a vengeful petty God is always a feature. Whether it be a Fundamentalist Zealot or an Objectivist ****, Authoritarians always have a narrative that determines everything they say, think, or do. Narrative is the true God of the Authoritarian, which is why what God actually says or does has very little practical worth. What Authoritarians care about is what God (Or for Objectivists the Free Market) should be doing according to the narrative. No matter what is actually happening, they will believe and behave as if the narrative is playing out exactly as they expected it too. Regardless of actual real world circumstances, outcomes, situations, or influences, Authoritarians always prize the narrative above all else.
Narrative works on three primary levels (Grand, Outer, Inner) that I will describe in detail here.
...
Narrative Convergence: When Authoritarians perceive a threat (which is often) their first instinct is to strike at the jugular with overwhelming force. It does not matter how insignificant the threat really is or how wide the gap in power between them and their target is, they want to hit a vital spot with every ounce of force they can muster. The goal is to establish dominance by firstly destroying the threat and any trace of it, and secondly, having witnesses so that other potential threats learn their place. Authoritarians are always look for a big dramatic battle, they are looking for every conflict to go down like the final battle of a Lord of the Rings trilogy. Fierce, fast, big, that is how an Authoritarian wants to fight every battle be it a swordfight or a debate.

They look for big showy fights and hills to die on... they think it will lead to The Apocalypse or The Paradise, depending on which end of the Grand Narrative they adhere to.

I agree with most of that. But I think they pick & choose their targets very carefully as opposed to going after all threats. They only go after "weak" targets that reinforce the perception of their dominance. So they go after nonviolent groups like ACORN, Planned Parenthood, activists, or organizations that won't show up at their houses, etc.

Even after the South Carolina church shooting, they did the same thing. They went after the issue of displaying the confederate flag instead of going after the actual hate groups that fueled the shooter. And they go after the poor illegal immigrants instead of going after the wealthy & well armed Sinaloa Cartel, for example. Even though that cartel & its South American competitors have shell companies all over the US, and funnel billions of dollars and countless tons of products throughout North & South America (including human trafficking).

a reply to: enlightenedservant

So in other words, they're cowards?

Authoritarian cowards. Nice.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Simmderdown

It isn't saying that is all they did. That was just part of it.

If memory serves "Selling Baby Parts, Selling Baby Parts" has been the talking point for the last month.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

LOL Dept of Human service the same people who are appointed by Democrats investigating Democrats. U really think it's for reals and not for show? puahahaha leftists would fall for anything.

originally posted by: amfirst1
a reply to: ~Lucidity

LOL Dept of Human service the same people who are appointed by Democrats investigating Democrats. U really think it's for reals and not for show? puahahaha leftists would fall for anything.

Republicans Repeatedly Voted To Use Aborted Fetuses For Scientific Research

n 1988, during the Reagan administration, a panel of experts from the National Institutes of Health overwhelmingly voted in favor of allowing scientists to study biological material obtained from legal abortions. By a 19 to 0 vote, the group concluded that the practice should be considered morally acceptable because aborted fetal tissue is analogous to cadaver tissue, which is often used in scientific research.
And in 1993, members of Congress on both sides of the aisle voted to legalize fetal tissue research, even in cases when the samples were obtained from legal abortion procedures, when they approved the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act.
Spurred by pressure from groups looking for cures for degenerative diseases, that legislation lifted a previous ban on using fetal tissue in scientific research put in place during the Reagan administration. McConnell voted in favor — along with several other staunchly pro-life Republican lawmakers, like John McCain, Orrin Hatch, Fred Upton, and Lamar Smith.
In addition to the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act, the Senate had several other opportunities to vote on the issue of fetal tissue donation during the 1990s. Each time, a bipartisan majority indicated support for the practice. In 1992, for instance, most Republicans — including McConnell — voted against a proposal to limit fetal tissue research to samples procured from miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. In 1997, the Senate voted down an amendment to the Udall Parkinson’s Research Act that would have prohibited funding for research on aborted fetal tissue.
Although some Democratic lawmakers have started to point out the apparent hypocrisy at play here, most of the politicians speaking out against Planned Parenthood have not addressed the 1993 vote on the NIH reauthorization bill.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yea nothing to be mad about Benghazi, Not like you knew the people that died.

Nevermind. Not playing this derailing the topic game.

Acorn deserved it,I want a Lamborghini.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

So if someone you loved was murdered you wouldn't be mad?

Sad how people act like little kids on ATS...."But momma the other kids...."