• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Planned Parenthood Video - Helping The sex trade

snilloctjc said:
I am pretty sure you were not on the moon with N. Armstrong either, did he actually go there?
Click to expand...

There is a difference between a heavily documented event, and a videotape made by an organization opposed to PP and heavily edited. It is, always, not a good idea to rush to judgment.
 
Planned Parenthood should be de-funded anyway. It's a racist organization that supports abortion. I really don't believe that they care about women's health at all.
 
snilloctjc said:
I am pretty sure you were not on the moon with N. Armstrong either, did he actually go there?
Click to expand...
If the tape was edited, one must ask the reason why the editing was done.
 
pbrauer said:
If the tape was edited, one must ask the reason why the editing was done.
Click to expand...

Unless the edited in the comments by the manager - she convicted herself pretty clearly with a number of her statements
 
Redress said:
There is a difference between a heavily documented event, and a videotape made by an organization opposed to PP and heavily edited. It is, always, not a good idea to rush to judgment.
Click to expand...

And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. The manager's comments were pretty darn clear to me. What do you think they edited out? The part where they said here is X$, please just read your lines from the teleprompter
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
My MO is to deal with facts. Shame on me.
Click to expand...

You're MO is claiming anything that's edited you don't agree with is suspect, and therefore not to be believed.

Redress said:
It is impossible currently for any one without both the unedited video and details from every one involved to judge this, which makes the question in the poll of no value.
Click to expand...

You're not dealing in facts, you're dealing in dissent and seeding doubt. At the same time you claim there's not enough information, you provide links and opinion supporting actions PP took, while casting doubt on what was edited. You fail because you cannot provide an opinion based on face value when you disagree with the intent. You believe and support abortion, PP and organizations like them, therefore, anything that casts those things in a bad light, you try to defend by attepting to discredit the source material. Very Alinskyesque I might say.
 
digsbe said:
Planned Parenthood should be de-funded anyway. It's a racist organization that supports abortion. I really don't believe that they care about women's health at all.
Click to expand...

Planned Parenthood is not a racist organization, the claim is made by fraudsters O'Keefe and Giles in another 'sting' operation.
 
pbrauer said:
Planned Parenthood is not a racist organization, the claim is made by fraudsters O'Keefe and Giles in another 'sting' operation.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. It was started by a racist. There is evidence that shows they accept donations to abort black babies. Not only this, but a disproportional amount of pp "clinics" are in minority areas. They are an evil racist organization that should be de-funded and eventually destroyed (and before people start with the straw man, no I do not support nor do I plan on blowing up a pp facility).
 
Ockham said:
You're MO is claiming anything that's edited you don't agree with is suspect, and therefore not to be believed.

You're not dealing in facts, you're dealing in dissent and seeding doubt. At the same time you claim there's not enough information, you provide links and opinion supporting actions PP took, while casting doubt on what was edited. You fail because you cannot provide an opinion based on face value when you disagree with the intent. You believe and support abortion, PP and organizations like them, therefore, anything that casts those things in a bad light, you try to defend by attepting to discredit the source material. Very Alinskyesque I might say.
Click to expand...

No, what I do is question things that are questionable. Edited video tape = questionable and therefore not safe to draw conclusions from. Op/ed's not safe to draw conclusions form since they do not offer all the facts and slant them. Media Matters/Newsbusters present comments out of context, not safe to draw conclusions from. This is across the board and not partisan.

I notice the obligatory Alinsky reference though, which is hilarious. Some of you conservatives love to raise the specter of Alinski, and yet seem to know his works better than I and most conservatives. Hilarious.
 
HOAX VIDEO EXPOSED: Planned Parenthood Already Reported "Sex Trafficking" To FBI | Media Matters for America

Today, anti-abortion rights propagandist Lila Rose released her latest in a series of heavily edited videos seeking to demonstrate that Planned Parenthood engages in criminal activities. Rose's organization, Live Action, claims their video exposes what they call "Planned Parenthood's cover-up of child sex trafficking."
Except that isn't what the video shows at all.

Rather, the Live Action video shows edited comments made by a single Planned Parenthood employee. Live Action has so far refused to publicly release the full video of the incident, instead posting what the organization itself admits is an "abridged 11-minute video." (Live Action claims they are "sending full footage" to law enforcement officials.) [UPDATE: Live Action subsequently released what they say is the full video.]...
 
pbrauer said:
HOAX VIDEO EXPOSED: Planned Parenthood Already Reported "Sex Trafficking" To FBI | Media Matters for America

Today, anti-abortion rights propagandist Lila Rose released her latest in a series of heavily edited videos seeking to demonstrate that Planned Parenthood engages in criminal activities. Rose's organization, Live Action, claims their video exposes what they call "Planned Parenthood's cover-up of child sex trafficking."
Except that isn't what the video shows at all.

Rather, the Live Action video shows edited comments made by a single Planned Parenthood employee. Live Action has so far refused to publicly release the full video of the incident, instead posting what the organization itself admits is an "abridged 11-minute video." (Live Action claims they are "sending full footage" to law enforcement officials.) [UPDATE: Live Action subsequently released what they say is the full video.]...
Click to expand...

Conservapedia disagrees. Planned Parenthood - Conservapedia
 
Redress said:
You tell me. What conclusions did you draw from the heavily edited videotape? What is your objection to how PP handled the situation? Don't evade, actually stand up for what you believe.
Click to expand...
I could say the same about you. PP is a bit of a liberal sacred cow, isn't it? I doubt any video showing wrongdoing, no matter how clear, would sway your faith in them.
 
X Factor said:
I could say the same about you. PP is a bit of a liberal sacred cow, isn't it? I doubt any video showing wrongdoing, no matter how clear, would sway your faith in them.
Click to expand...

Thread after thread you try and tell me what I believe, and thread after thread, you prove yourself wrong. I am mostly indifferent to PP, and I have a long history on these boards of condemning wrongdoing and illegal acts no matter who does them.
 
Redress said:
No, what I do is question things that are questionable. Edited video tape = questionable and therefore not safe to draw conclusions from. Op/ed's not safe to draw conclusions form since they do not offer all the facts and slant them. Media Matters/Newsbusters present comments out of context, not safe to draw conclusions from. This is across the board and not partisan.
Click to expand...
Can you prove it's across the board by, I don't know, quoting some of your zeal when it was a conservative cause or video tape which was edited?

Redress said:
I notice the obligatory Alinsky reference though, which is hilarious.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it fits so damn good it's laughable. I agree.

Redress said:
Some of you conservatives love to raise the specter of Alinski, and yet seem to know his works better than I and most conservatives. Hilarious.
Click to expand...
Sun Tzu had a saying about that:

"Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster." - Sun Tzu
"Fight the war, **** the norm" - RATM

I noticed more what you omitted... you didn't defend the accusations that your prime need here is to both defend PP and to detract from the source material in order to discredit it. Nor did you deny support of causes such as abortion in this case. That tells me more than anything else, and it tells me your views are not genuine. Glad you verified I nailed that part of it.
 
X Factor said:
This will be immediately disregarded due to the same of the source. You watch.
Click to expand...

I wasn't expecting it to be taken seriously. I was countering a bias source with another bias source. Neither Media Matters nor Conservapedia should be trusted, as both are partisan and misinform to push for an agenda that they support.
 
Councilman said:
It is no surprise that people with no moral compass would have this attitude.

I fits perfectly with the two faced who claim to be in favor of human rights and then fight for late term abortions etc.

It's just another example of Liberalism run a muck but then they were always of questionable mental acuity.
Click to expand...

Read the thread -- past #2 shows how this story has already been debunked.

PP reported the matter last month. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/fact_AG_Holder_011811.pdf

And read this Who Is Lila Rose? and get a better idea of how deceitful these videos are.
 
Redress said:
Thread after thread you try and tell me what I believe, and thread after thread, you prove yourself wrong. I am mostly indifferent to PP, and I have a long history on these boards of condemning wrongdoing and illegal acts no matter who does them.
Click to expand...
Suuuuuuure you do. ;)

I'm just joking, Redress. I really have no reason to doubt this. There are indeed some, though, that would defend PP no matter what was proven about them.
 
Grim17 said:
heavily edited - The excuse that my side used with ACORN, and the same excuse we are going to use now, to completely dismiss the morally deplorable actions of the organizations we support.
Click to expand...

And then you want us to believe you're 'unbiased' in your observation of the 'liberal media'. Haha.
 
the tape in question records office manager amy woodruff from 2:01 into the tape to 4:10 unedited advising the fake pimp and ho how to instruct the fake girls to lie to their real questioners about their fake ages and the ages of the fake men they've slept with

ms woodruff (who is suffering from a rather nasty cough, tho she correctly shields her clients from contagion by hacking into her forearm) then explains from 4:10 to 5:28, uncut, how to get an underage girl an abortion (she should go to the metropolitan medical assn which has loser protocols than new jersey pp---LOL!)

from 6:01 to 7:25 she makes plain that "we want to make this look as legitimate as possible"

for the next 2:16, uncut, ms woodruff advises the phony pair to make sure that when they bring "the girls" they see ms woodruff personally, or karin, ms w's "partner in crime," to "alter the story and tweak the information" because the nurse practictioner, tho "she's a very good woman, clinically," she's a "f****** c***, we hate her"

cuz "just between the 3 of us, we're already cool..."

i'll leave someone else to breakdown the remainder

either way, it's pretty clear ms woodruff's gist

stay up
 
Last edited:
Ockham said:
Can you prove it's across the board by, I don't know, quoting some of your zeal when it was a conservative cause or video tape which was edited?
Click to expand...

So you claim something is my "modus operandi", I point out it is not, and now you want me to prove that your unsubstantiated claim is false? Well done, try and get the other person to disprove your claim and you avoid doing any work. That is not how it works though. You made the initial claim, you back it up.

Yeah, it fits so damn good it's laughable. I agree.
Click to expand...

Saying something is true does not make it so. Hint: I have never read more than about 5 pages of Alinsky and was bored stiff by it.

Sun Tzu had a saying about that:

"Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster." - Sun Tzu
"Fight the war, **** the norm" - RATM
Click to expand...

I don't consider other American's my enemy, nor do I consider debate war.

I noticed more what you omitted... you didn't defend the accusations that your prime need here is to both defend PP and to detract from the source material in order to discredit it. Nor did you deny support of causes such as abortion in this case. That tells me more than anything else, and it tells me your views are not genuine. Glad you verified I nailed that part of it.
Click to expand...

Except I have done just that. I have no need to defend PP. In this case PP acted appropriately as an organization. An individual may very well have acted inappropriately, and they already have been punished for it, and may face more if any laws where broken. That is as it should be. The source material is questionable not because of any beliefs on my part, but because an edited video from an interest in the outcome is not reliable, no matter how you try and spin it.

What is funny is you claim my comments are based on my support of abortion rights. It's not, but there is no way to prove it either way. However, you seem to fail to realize that the exact same could be said of your reasons for defending the source. In fact, people tend to assign motivations to others that they find believable based on their own motives, so I would consider it likely that the reason you want to make a big deal about this is your anti-abortion rights stance.
 
X Factor said:
I could say the same about you. PP is a bit of a liberal sacred cow, isn't it? I doubt any video showing wrongdoing, no matter how clear, would sway your faith in them.
Click to expand...

How about this. Don't pick a side and clear your mind. Read the facts and come to your own conclusion.
 
Middleground said:
How about this. Don't pick a side and clear your mind. Read the facts and come to your own conclusion.
Click to expand...
In all honesty, MG, even if this is true, this pales in comparison to what PP does openly every day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom