Center for Medical Progress

originally posted by: SpaDe_
a reply to: kaylaluv

Oh, so edited = fake now! Got it! So that documentary I watched on global warming was all fake then, because it was obviously edited. Glad about that, was almost worried there for a minute.

Did you ever see the movie "Psycho"? Remember the shower scene? It looks like the woman was stabbed repeatedly. Editing magic. You don't actually see the knife pierce the skin, but you think you did. It was fake.

Editing can be done for various reasons, including trying to fool someone into thinking something happened when it didn't.

a reply to: greencmp

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Because, TITLE X

Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services.

originally posted by: SpaDe_

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Putting words in my mouth... Classy.

No, that's how you worded your position about PP. You should be more clear with your statements if you don't want them misinterpreted. So, you are pro PP and you did know about them before this then? Which is it?

Ugh... I can't believe I have to sit you down and give you a lesson on grammar... Here is EXACTLY what I said:

I've never stepped foot in a PP clinic in my life and if it weren't for this manufactured controversy I'd know next to nothing about them.

When someone says they know "next to nothing" about something it means that their knowledge about that thing isn't non-existent. They ARE somewhat aware of it, they just aren't very informed on the topic.

originally posted by: kellyjay
a reply to: kaylaluv

were the transcripts fake too or?

You mean these transcripts?

“Affiliates are not looking to make money by doing this. They’re looking to serve their patients and just make it not impact their bottom line.”

“No one’s going to see this as a money making thing.”

“Our goal, like I said, is to give patients the option without impacting our bottom line. The messaging is this should not be seen as a new revenue stream, because that’s not what it is.”

Those are quotes from the unedited video.

www.factcheck.org...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ok, so you need more time, believe it or not I think that position is valid.

But, that position would ordinarily be followed by patient silence in anticipation of the results of the official investigation.

Reticence is not normally so audible.

The pro-life crowd didn't even WANT an official investigation at first. It wasn't until they lost their attempt to defund PP that this even became a discussion point. -I- was calling for an investigation to settle matters once and for all after the second video was released.

Also again, talk to me about CMP. Why do you trust them?

That's a good question.

I don't suppose I do trust them but then, I don't trust any organization. It honestly didn't occur to me that it was relevant.

Ratiocinatively, I guess I have concluded that they have very little to gain from fraud considering what lengths they have gone to and the moral imperative that underpins their activity.

I could very well be proven wrong, all of us could but, I can't say that I haven't picked a side.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: greencmp

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Because, TITLE X

Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services.

If you read the second paragraph of that comment, you would see that PP is not the only women's health clinic and the $500 million would have been redirected to those other clinics.

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Not many are suggesting radical changes in the laws (yet but, this debacle makes that a hell of a lot more likely), this is about public funding to this one organization (so far, granted), funding that would have been redirected to other women's health clinics, not withdrawn from its intended purpose.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

I've never stepped foot in a PP clinic in my life and if it weren't for this manufactured controversy I'd know next to nothing about them. But I've been forced to do all sorts of research about them, CMP (ala this thread), and the laws surrounding them because the PRO-LIFE crowd can't bother to actually fact check all the ridiculous claims they are making.

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Not many are suggesting radical changes in the laws (yet but, this debacle makes that a hell of a lot more likely), this is about public funding to this one organization (so far, granted), funding that would have been redirected to other women's health clinics, not withdrawn from its intended purpose.

And then what happens another fictitious video emerges centering on "other women's health clinics?"

Then do we retract their funding based on fabricated misinformation as well?

Why should any legitimate eligible entity lose their taxpayer funding based on lies?

Just because the willfully ignorant choose to believe the lies?

HARDLY!

PP is already prohibited under federal law from using any taxpayer dollars for the purpose of performing abortions, but for the anti-choice crowd that's not enough.

The simple truth is, because of the fact that they still offer abortion as an option, (despite the use of tax dollar limitations) the anti-choice crowd won't be satisfied until they're completely eliminated by whatever means necessary.

PP provides a whole host of services to the uninsured poor that I would just bet actually saves the taxpayers a lot more money than they're providing to PP and other clinics like them.

Things like contraceptives and cancer screenings are preventative measures that save a lot of money in the long run.

Unless they are "proven" to have violated the law, there is no valid reason to retract funding other than ignorance and spite.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: kellyjay
a reply to: kaylaluv

were the transcripts fake too or?

You mean these transcripts?

“Affiliates are not looking to make money by doing this. They’re looking to serve their patients and just make it not impact their bottom line.”

“No one’s going to see this as a money making thing.”

“Our goal, like I said, is to give patients the option without impacting our bottom line. The messaging is this should not be seen as a new revenue stream, because that’s not what it is.”

Those are quotes from the unedited video.

www.factcheck.org...

yeah these transcrispts

Buyer: And are we agreed that $100 would keep you happy.
Laurel: I think so—
Dr. Gatter: Well let me agree to find out what other affiliates in California
are getting, and if they’re getting substantially more, then we can discuss it
then.
Buyer: Yes.
Dr. Gatter: I mean, the money is not the important thing, but it has to be big
enough that it is worthwhile.
Buyer: No, no, but it is something to talk about. I mean, it was one of the
first things you brought up, right? So.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Now here’s another thought, is we could talk about specimen, per
specimen per case, or per procured tissue sample.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: So if we’re able to get a liver/thymus pair, maybe that is $75 per
specimen, so that’s a liver/thymus pair and that’s $150.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Versus if we can get liver, thymus, and a brain hemisphere, and all
that, then that’s—
Dr. Gatter: Okay.
Buyer: So that protects us so that we’re not paying for stuff we can’t use.
And I think it also maybe illustrates things—
TRANSCRIPT BY THE CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS
Page 24 of 26
Dr. Gatter: It’s been years since I talked about compensation, so let me just
figure out what others are getting, if this is in the ballpark, it’s fine, if it’s
still low then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini. [laughs]
Buyer: [Laughs] What did you say?
Dr. Gatter: I said I want a Lamborghini! [laughs]
Buyer: Don’t we all, right?
Dr. Gatter: [laughs] Exactly! I

www.centerformedicalprogress.org...

originally posted by: greencmp
That's a good question.

I don't suppose I do trust them but then, I don't trust any organization. It honestly didn't occur to me that it was relevant.

It's very relevant. Many are trying to disregard PP's defenses against the allegations as lies based on them TRUSTING the information originating from CMP.

Ratiocinatively, I guess I have concluded that they have very little to gain from fraud considering what lengths they have gone to and the moral imperative that underpins their activity.

Then why can we show that they are committing fraud to present the evidence? Again, look at all the information I presented in the OP.

I could very well be proven wrong, all of us could but, I can't say that I haven't picked a side.

What happened to picking the side of justice no matter WHO ends up being the injust? So many pro-lifers are pretending like they are on the side of justice because PP performs abortions. So they use this flimsy evidence to confirm their preexisting biases or as a springboard to attack PP, but that isn't justice. That is just mob rule. JUSTICE requires you to be honest about ALL sides of the argument and be willing to defend even the supposedly undefendable.

Boston Massacre

Eight soldiers, one officer, and four civilians were arrested and charged with murder. Defended by the lawyer and future American president, John Adams, six of the soldiers were acquitted, while the other two were convicted of manslaughter and given reduced sentences. The men found guilty of manslaughter were sentenced to branding on their hand. Depictions, reports, and propaganda about the event, notably the colored engraving produced by Paul Revere (shown at right), further heightened tensions throughout the Thirteen Colonies.

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

I've never stepped foot in a PP clinic in my life and if it weren't for this manufactured controversy I'd know next to nothing about them. But I've been forced to do all sorts of research about them, CMP (ala this thread), and the laws surrounding them because the PRO-LIFE crowd can't bother to actually fact check all the ridiculous claims they are making.

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Not many are suggesting radical changes in the laws (yet but, this debacle makes that a hell of a lot more likely), this is about public funding to this one organization (so far, granted), funding that would have been redirected to other women's health clinics, not withdrawn from its intended purpose.

And then what happens another fictitious video emerges centering on "other women's health clinics?"

Then do we retract their funding based on fabricated misinformation as well?

Why should any legitimate eligible entity lose their taxpayer funding based on lies?

Just because the willfully ignorant choose to believe the lies?

HARDLY!

PP is already prohibited under federal law from using any taxpayer dollars for the purpose of performing abortions, but for the anti-choice crowd that's not enough.

The simple truth is, because of the fact that they still offer abortion as an option, (despite the use of tax dollar limitations) the anti-choice crowd won't be satisfied until they're completely eliminated by whatever means necessary.

PP provides a whole host of services to the uninsured poor that I would just bet actually saves the taxpayers a lot more money than they're providing to PP and other clinics like them.

Things like contraceptives and cancer screenings are preventative measures that save a lot of money in the long run.

Unless they are "proven" to have violated the law, there is no valid reason to retract funding other than ignorance and spite.

Please read the second paragraph.

a reply to: kellyjay

Answer me this: do you think the preserving, storing and transporting costs of tissue donation are zero?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: greencmp
That's a good question.

I don't suppose I do trust them but then, I don't trust any organization. It honestly didn't occur to me that it was relevant.

It's very relevant. Many are trying to disregard PP's defenses against the allegations as lies based on them TRUSTING the information originating from CMP.

Ratiocinatively, I guess I have concluded that they have very little to gain from fraud considering what lengths they have gone to and the moral imperative that underpins their activity.

Then why can we show that they are committing fraud to present the evidence? Again, look at all the information I presented in the OP.

I could very well be proven wrong, all of us could but, I can't say that I haven't picked a side.

What happened to picking the side of justice no matter WHO ends up being the injust? So many pro-lifers are pretending like they are on the side of justice because PP performs abortions. So they use this flimsy evidence to confirm their preexisting biases or as a springboard to attack PP, but that isn't justice. That is just mob rule. JUSTICE requires you to be honest about ALL sides of the argument and be willing to defend even the supposedly undefendable.

Boston Massacre

Eight soldiers, one officer, and four civilians were arrested and charged with murder. Defended by the lawyer and future American president, John Adams, six of the soldiers were acquitted, while the other two were convicted of manslaughter and given reduced sentences. The men found guilty of manslaughter were sentenced to branding on their hand. Depictions, reports, and propaganda about the event, notably the colored engraving produced by Paul Revere (shown at right), further heightened tensions throughout the Thirteen Colonies.

We have obviously reached opposite conclusions.

originally posted by: kellyjay

yeah these transcrispts

Buyer: And are we agreed that $100 would keep you happy.
Laurel: I think so—
Dr. Gatter: Well let me agree to find out what other affiliates in California
are getting, and if they’re getting substantially more, then we can discuss it
then.
Buyer: Yes.
Dr. Gatter: I mean, the money is not the important thing, but it has to be big
enough that it is worthwhile.
Buyer: No, no, but it is something to talk about. I mean, it was one of the
first things you brought up, right? So.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Now here’s another thought, is we could talk about specimen, per
specimen per case, or per procured tissue sample.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: So if we’re able to get a liver/thymus pair, maybe that is $75 per
specimen, so that’s a liver/thymus pair and that’s $150.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Versus if we can get liver, thymus, and a brain hemisphere, and all
that, then that’s—
Dr. Gatter: Okay.
Buyer: So that protects us so that we’re not paying for stuff we can’t use.
And I think it also maybe illustrates things—
TRANSCRIPT BY THE CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS
Page 24 of 26
Dr. Gatter: It’s been years since I talked about compensation, so let me just
figure out what others are getting, if this is in the ballpark, it’s fine, if it’s
still low then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini. [laughs]
Buyer: [Laughs] What did you say?
Dr. Gatter: I said I want a Lamborghini! [laughs]
Buyer: Don’t we all, right?
Dr. Gatter: [laughs] Exactly! I

Yea... Though you can pretend the joke the doctor made about the lambo was anything other than a joke, I'd think the laughter afterwards is a dead giveaway.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: greencmp
That's a good question.

I don't suppose I do trust them but then, I don't trust any organization. It honestly didn't occur to me that it was relevant.

It's very relevant. Many are trying to disregard PP's defenses against the allegations as lies based on them TRUSTING the information originating from CMP.

Ratiocinatively, I guess I have concluded that they have very little to gain from fraud considering what lengths they have gone to and the moral imperative that underpins their activity.

Then why can we show that they are committing fraud to present the evidence? Again, look at all the information I presented in the OP.

I could very well be proven wrong, all of us could but, I can't say that I haven't picked a side.

What happened to picking the side of justice no matter WHO ends up being the injust? So many pro-lifers are pretending like they are on the side of justice because PP performs abortions. So they use this flimsy evidence to confirm their preexisting biases or as a springboard to attack PP, but that isn't justice. That is just mob rule. JUSTICE requires you to be honest about ALL sides of the argument and be willing to defend even the supposedly undefendable.

Boston Massacre

Eight soldiers, one officer, and four civilians were arrested and charged with murder. Defended by the lawyer and future American president, John Adams, six of the soldiers were acquitted, while the other two were convicted of manslaughter and given reduced sentences. The men found guilty of manslaughter were sentenced to branding on their hand. Depictions, reports, and propaganda about the event, notably the colored engraving produced by Paul Revere (shown at right), further heightened tensions throughout the Thirteen Colonies.

We have obviously reached opposite conclusions.

Well you appear not to be addressing the evidence I've presented against CMP, so I can't say that I know why.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I have but, I would say the same thing to you.

I'm pretty used to brick walls by now.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: kellyjay

yeah these transcrispts

Buyer: And are we agreed that $100 would keep you happy.
Laurel: I think so—
Dr. Gatter: Well let me agree to find out what other affiliates in California
are getting, and if they’re getting substantially more, then we can discuss it
then.
Buyer: Yes.
Dr. Gatter: I mean, the money is not the important thing, but it has to be big
enough that it is worthwhile.
Buyer: No, no, but it is something to talk about. I mean, it was one of the
first things you brought up, right? So.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Now here’s another thought, is we could talk about specimen, per
specimen per case, or per procured tissue sample.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: So if we’re able to get a liver/thymus pair, maybe that is $75 per
specimen, so that’s a liver/thymus pair and that’s $150.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Versus if we can get liver, thymus, and a brain hemisphere, and all
that, then that’s—
Dr. Gatter: Okay.
Buyer: So that protects us so that we’re not paying for stuff we can’t use.
And I think it also maybe illustrates things—
TRANSCRIPT BY THE CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS
Page 24 of 26
Dr. Gatter: It’s been years since I talked about compensation, so let me just
figure out what others are getting, if this is in the ballpark, it’s fine, if it’s
still low then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini. [laughs]
Buyer: [Laughs] What did you say?
Dr. Gatter: I said I want a Lamborghini! [laughs]
Buyer: Don’t we all, right?
Dr. Gatter: [laughs] Exactly! I

Yea... Though you can pretend the joke the doctor made about the lambo was anything other than a joke, I'd think the laughter afterwards is a dead giveaway.

you miss the point...finding out what "other affiliates" are getting isnt talking about cost incurred thats talking about profit....if they are getting more i want more!

please!

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I have but, I would say the same thing to you.

I'm pretty used to brick walls by now.

Have you now? I must have missed the part where we discussed Daleiden's connection to Lila Rose and Live Action. About how Live Action has, in the past, attempted similar video smear campaigns that have all been thoroughly investigated and shown to be complete lies. About how Daleiden ALSO worked at Live Action and likely learned these tactics from Lila. That these tactics are likely on display AGAIN with the most recent PP videos.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

I've never stepped foot in a PP clinic in my life and if it weren't for this manufactured controversy I'd know next to nothing about them. But I've been forced to do all sorts of research about them, CMP (ala this thread), and the laws surrounding them because the PRO-LIFE crowd can't bother to actually fact check all the ridiculous claims they are making.

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Not many are suggesting radical changes in the laws (yet but, this debacle makes that a hell of a lot more likely), this is about public funding to this one organization (so far, granted), funding that would have been redirected to other women's health clinics, not withdrawn from its intended purpose.

And then what happens another fictitious video emerges centering on "other women's health clinics?"

Then do we retract their funding based on fabricated misinformation as well?

Why should any legitimate eligible entity lose their taxpayer funding based on lies?

Just because the willfully ignorant choose to believe the lies?

HARDLY!

PP is already prohibited under federal law from using any taxpayer dollars for the purpose of performing abortions, but for the anti-choice crowd that's not enough.

The simple truth is, because of the fact that they still offer abortion as an option, (despite the use of tax dollar limitations) the anti-choice crowd won't be satisfied until they're completely eliminated by whatever means necessary.

PP provides a whole host of services to the uninsured poor that I would just bet actually saves the taxpayers a lot more money than they're providing to PP and other clinics like them.

Things like contraceptives and cancer screenings are preventative measures that save a lot of money in the long run.

Unless they are "proven" to have violated the law, there is no valid reason to retract funding other than ignorance and spite.

Please read the second paragraph.

I already read both paragraphs in your post. So, what's your point?

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

I've never stepped foot in a PP clinic in my life and if it weren't for this manufactured controversy I'd know next to nothing about them. But I've been forced to do all sorts of research about them, CMP (ala this thread), and the laws surrounding them because the PRO-LIFE crowd can't bother to actually fact check all the ridiculous claims they are making.

Why can't PP just be a private company, non-profit or not, with no taxpayer funding?

Not many are suggesting radical changes in the laws (yet but, this debacle makes that a hell of a lot more likely), this is about public funding to this one organization (so far, granted), funding that would have been redirected to other women's health clinics, not withdrawn from its intended purpose.

And then what happens another fictitious video emerges centering on "other women's health clinics?"

Then do we retract their funding based on fabricated misinformation as well?

Why should any legitimate eligible entity lose their taxpayer funding based on lies?

Just because the willfully ignorant choose to believe the lies?

HARDLY!

PP is already prohibited under federal law from using any taxpayer dollars for the purpose of performing abortions, but for the anti-choice crowd that's not enough.

The simple truth is, because of the fact that they still offer abortion as an option, (despite the use of tax dollar limitations) the anti-choice crowd won't be satisfied until they're completely eliminated by whatever means necessary.

PP provides a whole host of services to the uninsured poor that I would just bet actually saves the taxpayers a lot more money than they're providing to PP and other clinics like them.

Things like contraceptives and cancer screenings are preventative measures that save a lot of money in the long run.

Unless they are "proven" to have violated the law, there is no valid reason to retract funding other than ignorance and spite.

Please read the second paragraph.

I already read both paragraphs in your post. So, what's your point?

The money wasn't going to be withdrawn from its intended purpose.

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: kellyjay

yeah these transcrispts

Buyer: And are we agreed that $100 would keep you happy.
Laurel: I think so—
Dr. Gatter: Well let me agree to find out what other affiliates in California
are getting, and if they’re getting substantially more, then we can discuss it
then.
Buyer: Yes.
Dr. Gatter: I mean, the money is not the important thing, but it has to be big
enough that it is worthwhile.
Buyer: No, no, but it is something to talk about. I mean, it was one of the
first things you brought up, right? So.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Now here’s another thought, is we could talk about specimen, per
specimen per case, or per procured tissue sample.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: So if we’re able to get a liver/thymus pair, maybe that is $75 per
specimen, so that’s a liver/thymus pair and that’s $150.
Dr. Gatter: Mhm.
Buyer: Versus if we can get liver, thymus, and a brain hemisphere, and all
that, then that’s—
Dr. Gatter: Okay.
Buyer: So that protects us so that we’re not paying for stuff we can’t use.
And I think it also maybe illustrates things—
TRANSCRIPT BY THE CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS
Page 24 of 26
Dr. Gatter: It’s been years since I talked about compensation, so let me just
figure out what others are getting, if this is in the ballpark, it’s fine, if it’s
still low then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini. [laughs]
Buyer: [Laughs] What did you say?
Dr. Gatter: I said I want a Lamborghini! [laughs]
Buyer: Don’t we all, right?
Dr. Gatter: [laughs] Exactly! I

Yea... Though you can pretend the joke the doctor made about the lambo was anything other than a joke, I'd think the laughter afterwards is a dead giveaway.

you miss the point...finding out what "other affiliates" are getting isnt talking about cost incurred thats talking about profit....if they are getting more i want more!

please!

It is not talking about profit. It is talking about getting enough to not lose too much money in the process of donation. Obviously the doctor doesn't know exactly what the costs are for preserving, storing and transporting the tissue. She wants to know what the other affiliates are getting so her clinic doesn't lose too much money.

Did you read any of the bio-research experts' comments? They said the prices discussed were low, as far as recouping any costs. No chance there is any profit at those rates.