New Undercover Video of Planned Parenthood

[Cerebrum123]

That's hypocritical coming from someone who is continually referring to "babies" rather than to "zygotes", "embryos" or "foetuses".

Roy

baby
[bey-bee]
Spell Syllables
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
noun, plural babies.
1.
an infant or very young child.
2.
a newborn or very young animal.
3.
the youngest member of a family, group, etc.
4.
an immature or childish person.
5.
a human fetus.

[Cow Poke]

As has been said repeatedly

Bill Clinton said repeatedly he did not have sekshule relations with that woman...

[Roy]

Oh yeah and their control of the language is slowly slipping. See, to justify murdering babies, you need to change up the language.

That's hypocritical coming from someone who is continually referring to "babies" rather than to "zygotes", "embryos" or "foetuses".

Roy

[Jaecp]

BINGO! All I have heard is critics constantly say that the videos were edited -- which is exactly what news organizations do (they never air the entire undercover recording but rather the pertinent parts). They never offer up anything that demonstrates that what was shown was taken out of context. They never point to parts that exonerate Planned Parenthood. They just gripe that they didn't show everything (even though as you note the group has made the entire recording readily available for those who want to see it).

Now, maybe I missed something. Perhaps there really is something that shows that this was a dishonest smear job. But I certainly have yet to see anyone show anything that indicates that is what was done and at this point I would think that they would be pointing it out if that were indeed the case.

Oh. And welcome to Tweb.

As has been said repeatedly, the edited videos remove comments about what the money is for as well as explanations on the legality of the process. They edit to make it look as though the doctors are trying to sell tissue at a profit as opposed to, as can easily be seen in the longer videos, recoup operating costs while donating tissue. (and from what I saw on the factcheck.org page a number of doctors working for labs that use this stuff talk about how the 30-100 dollar costs are cheap and that the clinics are likely losing money at those prices as hospitals charge more than the numbers quoted by either doctor)

Also, again, these videos are not equivalent to what a news station does. News is supposed to be impartial and the clips shown indicative of the facts as can best be gleamed. This is, unequivocally, not what CMP/LA is doing. So, yes, rogue, you missed something.

[rogue06]

In both cases, unedited videos have been released for anyone who wants to view them. If you're aware of any substantive differences between the full videos and the edited versions, please share them. I'd like to know what you've come up with.

BINGO! All I have heard is critics constantly say that the videos were edited -- which is exactly what news organizations do (they never air the entire undercover recording but rather the pertinent parts). They never offer up anything that demonstrates that what was shown was taken out of context. They never point to parts that exonerate Planned Parenthood. They just gripe that they didn't show everything (even though as you note the group has made the entire recording readily available for those who want to see it).

Now, maybe I missed something. Perhaps there really is something that shows that this was a dishonest smear job. But I certainly have yet to see anyone show anything that indicates that is what was done and at this point I would think that they would be pointing it out if that were indeed the case.

Oh. And welcome to Tweb.

[JonathanL]

attacking abortion directly is too damn difficult

[Jaecp]

Is this really so hard?

In the edit'd videos, bits of content are left out to give the impression that something other than what is actually occurring is occurring. It's an attempt to make it look like PP is trying to profit from the sale of fetal tissues, which in the context of the longer video is obviously not the case. How many instances of each doctor telling the fake biotech employees no were cut? How many instance of correcting them on the laws, saying that something would be illegal, or indicating that they were joking was cut?

Answer: A lot

I get that all the Christians here (and whag) dislike abortion, but try to keep your head on a swivel folks. When groups like CMP or LA release edited videos to drum up outrage and then an unedited video later its to give plausible deniability and to get a bunch of people watching the short one, sharing the short one. Most people won't watch the long one (who has the time?) and CMP/LA are well aware of this. The short versions of these videos are maliciously edited because there is no proof of wrongdoing (otherwise they could have just shown proof of criminal activity to a sympathetic DA and done just as much, if not more, damage with the added perk of a lawsuit!)

tl;dr

The short versions of these videos give the false impression that something illegal happened

The long versions of these videos give no impression that something illegal happened

It's not like this is the first time videos like these have come up. PP has been targeted like this on at least a half dozen occasions I can think of. There never seems to be any hard evidence, just some shock and awe while people try to discredit the organization with non-sense because attacking abortion directly is too damn difficult

[Papa Zoom]

In both cases, unedited videos have been released for anyone who wants to view them. If you're aware of any substantive differences between the full videos and the edited versions, please share them. I'd like to know what you've come up with.

I'd like to know as well. I've viewed the videos and read the transcripts. I see no discrepancies.

[Cale]

In both cases, unedited videos have been released for anyone who wants to view them. If you're aware of any substantive differences between the full videos and the edited versions, please share them. I'd like to know what you've come up with.

[kiwimac]

Of course the mere facts that the video [a:] is heavily edited and [b]: that the unedited version shows things in a very different light is not terribly important to some.

[Cale]

Thanks for the welcome!

[Sam]

Sam's a nicer guy than me, especially on page 16 of an abortion thread

Hey, I just got here. Give it time.

[Jaecp]

Sam's a nicer guy than me, especially on page 16 of an abortion thread

[Sam]

Thank you. Taking refuge in ridicule instead of dealing with the substance of a question is always a clear sign of capitulation, tacitly admitting that one is incapable of refuting an opposing thought.

[Jaecp]

Thank you. Taking refuge in ridicule instead of dealing the substance of a question is always a clear sign of capitulation, tacitly admitting that one is incapable of refuting an opposing thought.

Alternatively, your argument is ridiculous and people have better things to do then unpack someone making an argument about pp and abortion that involves Dred Scott as it's basis.