For Sale: Baby parts

[BigTex]

Blackshoe LCDR

[Castle Doctrine]

Blackshoe LCDR

Interesting...peers. When did you retire? I retired in 96. Maybe we bumped into each other.

[BigTex]

94
Not many pork chops on my end of the spectrum. Blackshoes, airdales, and bubbleheads.

[Castle Doctrine]

94
Not many pork chops on my end of the spectrum. Blackshoes, airdales, and bubbleheads.

Ah, we were everywhere. You only noticed us when we screwed up.

[millergrovesue]

"millergrovesue" "What you said doesn't surprise me."

I guess you missed this part: I am not saying I am pro or con on the issue, just getting this out there for you all to see.

Oh I'm sorry. I did not make myself clear at all. One of the problems with writing rather than speaking face to face. What I meant was that your statement that they were agendized doesn't surprise me.

[millergrovesue]

94
Not many pork chops on my end of the spectrum. Blackshoes, airdales, and bubbleheads.

Ah, we were everywhere. You only noticed us when we screwed up.

Ah military speak. A language unto itself.

[Castle Doctrine]

94
Not many pork chops on my end of the spectrum. Blackshoes, airdales, and bubbleheads.

Ah, we were everywhere. You only noticed us when we screwed up.

Ah military speak. A language unto itself.

Yes it is. Did you know that there is a Naval Abbreviation Dictionary? Yep, the NAVABDIC. I couldn't make this stuff up.

[millergrovesue]

Yes it is. Did you know that there is a Naval Abbreviation Dictionary? Yep, the NAVABDIC. I couldn't make this stuff up.

I can believe it. I remember there were a staggering number of abbreviations in the Air Force. I had a very hard time learning them. Had never been around military people much till I married.

[Castle Doctrine]

So, how did we go from a bogus story bout "baby parts" to the NAVABDIC. That is some epic thread drift.

[BigTex]

For starters, selling human organs is illegal. Good thing for them this isn't Oregon, where all laws are followed to the letter.

Good thing for them they aren't selling human organs, really. They aren't you know. And I don't know about Oregon following all laws to the letter; but, they do enforce them when someone blatantly ignores them and the victim files a complaint. That isn't always the way I remember it working in Texas.

Hey, I appreciate you ...um, confirming...my remarks about senior officers and discipline/promotion. I haven't read a lot of your posts but what I have put me in mind of a senior enlisted or Warrant...you a retired Chief? I was a Pork Chop myself...very cush jobs.

[Red Oak]

Iron on target Commander BT !

[Castle Doctrine]

Well, I certainly contributed with my conversational inquiry about your background...after a relevant element in the post. And I am guilty of chatting. But, the topic drifted after I challenged the veracity of the story. Maybe I am to blame. How about that. As soon as it was clear the story was mostly carefully staged fiction and open lies no one wanted to talk about it. Everything just died except chit-chat.

But, I will be glad to go back to the original thread. No one has responded to my comments on the thread. I'm still here.

[Sangersteve]

Well look at this, good old Media matters to the rescue to defend PPA. They found part of the video that PPA is really happy to profit from the sale.

NUCATOLA: I think for affiliates, at the end of the day, they’re a non-profit, they just don’t want to — they want to break even. And if they can do a little better than break even, and do so in a way that seems reasonable, they’re happy to do that. Really their bottom line is, they just, they want to break even. Every penny they save is just pennies they give to another patient. To provide a service the patient wouldn’t get otherwise.

From the math I learned in school "a little better than break even" is called making a profit. But what do I know?


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... arvesting/

[Red Oak]

The Selling off the corpse after the murder, should be of secondary concern ?

[GFB]

Liberals always argued that babies in the womb were just.."unviable tissue masses."

Gee, I guess they're pretty viable after all..you can even sell off their parts after you kill them..(while they were busy sucking their thumb, of course)

Then after..you can BRAG about it!

[jellowrestling]

Liberals always argued that babies in the womb were just.."unviable tissue masses."

Gee, I guess they're pretty viable after all..you can even sell off their parts after you kill them..(while they were busy sucking their thumb, of course)

Then after..you can BRAG about it!

People who lie about killing babies would never spin the selling of fetal tissue.

People have been duped for decades, but the leaders of this holocaust are pure evil. I don't know about y'all, but I couldn't eat and drink while talking about killing fetal babies by crushing their fetal baby parts.

[jellowrestling]

To me this is pure evil. I did support an abortion of a baby who did not have a brain stem as the mother was near a nervous breakdown knowing there was no possibility the baby could live. She and her husband were so hopeful of having this baby. But going through pregnancy is hard enough but usually when seeing your baby, your heart is filled with joy. She knew that wouldn't be the case. I'm so glad her minister supported their decision as did the rest of us. It was a very sad occasion. But it was early enough that the fetus shouldn't have felt pain. But who of us could actually know. They now have 3 beautiful children.

But to sell an unborn baby's organs is evil, evil, evil.

It sure would be if there were any truth to the claims they were really "selling" fetal tissue. What we have here is a carefully crafted piece of propaganda. These people spent three years scamming PPA and collecting video be to manipulated into this totally false set of claims. Fetal tissue donation is represented as "selling" body parts. The only compensation is an allowable expense offset to cover costs of collection and storage/transport. That is not SELLING. Selling an unborn baby's organs would be evil. I was very glad to find out that that wasn't the case...it is just a bunch of lies supported by carefully edited (and very misleading) video.

But, look at the comments...one other person tentatively suggested that there MIGHT be more to the story than met the eye. The anti-choice element didn't question this for a moment because they WANTED to believe this and any other lies they are fed. It fits what they already have been primed to believe. Also, the whole deal is based on stripping harmless, routine remarks of context to make them seem to be something different than they truly are.

Another thing the propagandists stress is the callous attitude of the PPA people (we can overlook the callousness of the scam artists...they were just doing their job setting up the PPA people). And, with this edit of the video it is easy to cause that impression...that was the purpose of this video. Those of us with experience in fields that routinely deal with horrible things understand that you get very detached and callous about anything...no matter how horrible it may be. It gets to be business as usual to discuss these things without passion or personal involvement.

Again, I want to stress, this has been a carefully orchestrated "long con". It makes the Sting look like a casual caper movie. This colossal stinker was three years in the making...for a two hour video. All you terribly upset folks are being played. And how many of you looked any further than the totally bogus initial story? I'm going to guess NONE. This story stunk right from the start. I waited to comment until I had a better understanding of the truth here. It took some digging and thinking to get it all in perspective and understand what was being done.

This has only caused this stir because the people outraged WANT to believe this...maybe already believed it. What we are seeing here is "confirmation bias" at work. If it agrees with what I want to believe there is little chance I will question it...as is the case here.

There now, that ought to stimulate the conversation. Glenn was just too reserved and circumspect in telling you guys you are being played for gullible fools. But, again, I want to stress that if this were actually true I would be outraged. I was very glad to find it isn't...but not terribly surprised.

Lenin referred to your ilk as "useful idiots". Congratulations on making the team.

[ann jusko]

I watched the videos a couple times. I still want to reach into the video and shove that damn fork down her throat. I watched the rebuttal. I don't believe for one minute that B**** was lying about the body parts and the money received.

I have a nurse practitioner friend. She accepted a job at PP thinking she'd be doing well woman checkups, ordering mammograms, blood work, etc. She called one day and said "Let's go to lunch." She told me she quit. She is discrete and when she said "It isn't what I thought it would be and I needed to get out of there." I didn't press and won't. But shortly afterwards, she went to work at one of Parkland's clinics. She's a lot more satisfied with her life now, some frustrations with non-compliant patients, but she's knows she's doing the right thing.

Castle - believe what you want, but I'm not believing any of it. I know you think your position and critical thinking is better than most. But most people do think their position is the correct one. If you can stomach the "being careful not to "use the grabber" on the parts that are for the client, then you will need to live with that.

[mayhem]

A major piece of being a useful idiot is the willingness to discuss an issue using a biased version of the issue as the starting point.

Another way to put it: a useful idiot eagerly substitutes a biased version of an issue rather than discussing an issue on its own merits.
Obviously, thus, a Strawbaby (or Strawman) fallacy.

Why discuss, for example, a video cobbled together (read: massively edited) rather than the video(s) it/themselves?

My way of thinking? Those who cobbled the video together have a much greater burden to explain themselves than those whose position has been described by the ones who manufactured that video.

PPA may be thoroughly disagreeable or shamelessly wrong. We cannot make that determination until some time after an honest discussion of the issue(s) at hand. And one issue that is on the table is the fact that the video has been (to whatever degree) manufactured.

(Hang around for a further word. Thank you.)

[mayhem]

Further: whomever tries to dismiss my argument above, please show me (before you characterize me or my contentions in any way) how my argument is incoherent, obfuscating, or otherwise falsifiable and I'll correct the same so we can be certain we're both discussing the same thing(s).

If you are willing, of course.