Yea, sure, let’s extradite an American to that hellhole.
The ZANU-PF leader saw in his 92nd year with the slaughter of wild animals, including an elephant, which were cooked and served to his guests.
His party took place at an exclusive lodge, spa and golf course in Victoria Falls, and it was estimated to have cost $1million (£648,000). During the celebrations, Mugabe released 91 balloons into the sky with the help of his wife, Grace.
An estimated 20,000 people attended the party at Elephant Hills resort, which was put on to celebrate the birthday of the leader who has been accused of abusing human rights and democracy.
His guests were fed a young elephant, and two buffaloes, two sables and five impalas were also donated to the president by a local landowner. He also threw in a lion and a crocodile to be stuffed as an extra gift for Mugabe. On top of this, 40 cows were offered to the president by two members of his government. A second elephant is going to be shot and given to the Victoria Falls community.
“Perhaps the ultimate argument for the belief in God is history’s lesson that we have no reason to expect mercy from men.” [Darleen Click]
It isn’t just that #PlannedParenthood and NAF are desperately trying to suppress the CMP videos from publication, but that in any discussion with pro-aborts devolves into an exercise of dealing with people who willfully avoid any discussion of what is happening on those tapes. The obfuscation, distraction, ad hominem — every tool of the school of yelling “SQUIRREL” is brought in.
This is, indeed, “willful ignorance” …
One of the most common reactions to the Planned Parenthood body parts scandal is along the lines of “I can’t bear to watch the videos of those horrible people laughing and talking about the sale of babies. It’s just too upsetting to see”. This exactly captures the reason why the videos are so dangerous: they have forced society at large to watch what many must have always suspected was true, but hoped never to confront directly.
Willful ignorance “is a term used in law to describe a situation in which a Person seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting him or herself in a position where he or she will be unaware of facts that would render him or her liable.” Apart from its legal utility it has a lot of psychological usefulness because it allows society to put certain things where they don’t have to deal with it. […]
Now that the cat is out of the bag the objections to looking the issue straight in the face, without eupemism, must vanish. Even those who, like Geraldo Rivera, argue that the end justifies the means can have no further reason for refusing to tell us “what end in exchange for these means?”. And in that matter, handwaving will not suffice. If Geraldo’s so proud of “medical research”, surely our admiration for it can only grow after all 300 hours of undercover video have been broadcast.
In our modern, post-religious age society needs to know what ethical taboos, if any, remain. What won’t we do? Now that we have resolved to live without God and must perforce live under men that is all the more reason to know what those men believe. Sigmund Freud believed that the secular motives of “educated people and brain-workers” would be a reliable substitute for what was formerly regarded as natural law. Can these educated people spare a moment then to explain what their secular motives are? Besides money that is. […]
The trouble with 19th century atheism is that it had not completely freed itself from the sentiments of Christianity: in many subtle ways they assumed that man after God would still have limits. They failed to understand until the middle 20th century that man’s need for power did not necessarily contain limits. They learned, too late, that like the Bill of Rights understands, it is in the “won’ts” on men’s actions that earthly freedom lives.
The people who in the videos merrily describe the prices they can obtain for this or that body part may one day be old and as helpless as the infants they have dismembered. Then they will be in the care of men like themselves. And on that far day these young — then old — may want water. On what grounds will they demand it? On what basis will they ask for care, love or compassion?
Note Geraldo’s attempt to dismiss the issue because it is “legal.” (along with his assertion it is all politics that will cause the Republicans to lose).
Heck of a job, Barry!
Five years before he was shot to death in the failed terrorist attack in Garland, Texas, Nadir Soofi walked into a suburban Phoenix gun shop to buy a 9-millimeter pistol.
At the time, Lone Wolf Trading Co. was known among gun smugglers for selling illegal firearms. And with Soofi’s history of misdemeanor drug and assault charges, there was a chance his purchase might raise red flags in the federal screening process.
Inside the store, he fudged some facts on the form required of would-be gun buyers.
What Soofi could not have known was that Lone Wolf was at the center of a federal sting operation known as Fast and Furious, targeting Mexican drug lords and traffickers. The idea of the secret program was to allow Lone Wolf to sell illegal weapons to criminals and straw purchasers, and track the guns back to large smuggling networks and drug cartels.
Instead, federal agents lost track of the weapons and the operation became a fiasco, particularly after several of the missing guns were linked to shootings in Mexico and the 2010 killing of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in Arizona.
Soofi’s attempt to buy a gun caught the attention of authorities, who slapped a seven-day hold on the transaction, according to his Feb. 24, 2010, firearms transaction record, which was reviewed by the Los Angeles Times. Then, for reasons that remain unclear, the hold was lifted after 24 hours, and Soofi got the 9-millimeter. […]
In May, Soofi and his roommate, Elton Simpson, burst upon the site of a Garland cartoon convention that was offering a prize for the best depiction of the prophet Muhammad, something offensive to many Muslims. Dressed in body armor and armed with three pistols, three rifles and 1,500 rounds of ammunition, the pair wounded a security officer before they were killed by local police. […]
Asked recently for an update on the Garland shooting, FBI Director James B. Comey earlier this month declined to comment. “We’re still sorting that out,” he said.
Officials at the Justice Department and the FBI declined to answer questions about whether the 9-millimeter pistol was one of the guns used in the Garland attack or seized at Soofi’s apartment.
I’m sure the investigation is ongoing and is expected to last until sometime in January 2017.
Somehow I don’t think Leftist pro-aborts would ever tolerate this kind of behavior directed toward newborn puppies and kittens, and yet …
[D]oes Planned Parenthood regularly flout the federal ban on partial-birth abortion using loopholes? How do they get away with this? Do their patients—the women who apparently choose to donate the “fetal tissue”—know what’s going on in explicit terms?
Federal law prohibits partial-birth abortion, a gruesome procedure in which an unborn baby is intentionally turned to the breech position to ensure that delivery of the body happens before delivery of the head. Once the baby’s head is stuck in the birth canal, the abortionist punctures the skull, evacuates the contents, and the baby is dead.
There’s a good reason this practice is banned—it’s barbaric. Many Americans may not know that the term “partial-birth abortion” is not a medical one but a legal one. And, according to Planned Parenthood doctor Deborah Nucatola, some abortion providers don’t consider it with any seriousness. In her own words, “It’s not a medical term, it doesn’t exist in reality.” What?
It’s clear Nucatola thinks the law is irrelevant—or, as she says, up for “interpretation.” She explains how abortion providers get around the law by injecting a fatal quantity of digoxin, a cardiotoxic drug, into the baby’s heart before dismembering or delivering it. In Nucatola’s words, using the slang for digoxin, they “dig.” […]
She explains: “Providers who use digoxin use it for one of two reasons. There’s a group of people who just use it so they have no risk of violating the Federal Abortion Ban. Because if you induce a demise before the procedure, nobody’s going to say you did a ‘live’—whatever the federal government calls it. Partial-birth abortion.” […]
So, if you “dig,” you’re guaranteed a dead baby and a successful abortion without having to worry about the law. Moreover, you’ll find that a baby that has already died from a heart attack is apparently “softer” and easier to pull apart with metal instruments.
I wonder how candid Nucatola is with her patients about this process. […]
In the second video, we find out explicitly from Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter that abortions performed with feticides aren’t viable for fetal-tissue donation. If digoxin is used, it renders the fetal stem cells unusable. (See the footage and the transcript.) Knowing this, Nucatola’s graphic explanation of how to “crush” unborn babies to maximize organ retrieval requires a clarifier. These babies are being strategically maneuvered, crushed, and dismembered under ultrasound guidance—while still alive.
This poses an ethical question. Do the women consenting to fetal-tissue donation understand what’s happening during the procedure? Do they know that their babies are alive at the start of the butchering?
The inspiration …
A story …
“First right,” Jan waved the brochure, “This way, Stan!”
He reluctantly trailed behind her. They’d scrimped and saved for this vacation. Bragging rights would last for years, yet on the shuttle Jan talked of little else but this exhibit.
The room opened out, the ceiling soaring overhead, an honor guard at the far side window. As they approached Stan looked through the soldiers.
The suit with bones, the skull exposed in the helmet, then a hologram of a smiling face, cycling over and over.
“The Armstrongs got fucked,” Stan thought, “when they agreed to the interment of Neil at DisneyLuna.”
Now, your turn.
Animals can be killed, but the term “murder” is specific to human beings.
ISIS commits mass murder in the most horrendous ways possible. Ethnic cleansing of ancient Christian communities and the destruction of antiquities by ISIS goes unabated. Planned Parenthood is as a fetal organ factory where the technicians pick their way through babies, cracking skulls and jokes, and top officials haggling over pricing.
And the Left is bored, indifferent, incurious or, feeling one of its sacraments exposed, suppressing the information by any means necessary.
Yet when a lion is hunted and killed, the hunter is not only denounced, but threatened with death.
Whatever one’s feelings about hunting, use of the word “murder” is not only inappropriate but alarming enough that anyone who uses it much be directly challenged.
Anthropomorphizing animals does not raise their status, it lowers human beings and blurs the distinction between animals and humans.
I understand why the Left does it. It makes it easier to posit policies that define individuals by their utility, their usefulness to The Group.
This must be stopped.
Campus Rape Epidemic — how conveniently the Settled Science™ dovetails with Left Feminist anti-male rhetoric [Darleen Click]
“The problem with David Lisak’s serial predator theory of campus sexual assault.”
David Lisak’s serial predator theory of campus rape has made him a celebrity. Once a virtually unknown associate professor at the University of Massachusetts-Boston, his work is now cited by White House officials and reporters for major newspapers. […]
Much of the urgency around the topic of sexual assault on college campuses traces back to Lisak’s repeated claim that campus offenders are violent sociopaths who use “sophisticated strategies to groom” their targets and “terrify and coerce their victims into submission.” Lisak asserts that 90 percent of campus rapes are committed by serial offenders who average six rapes each. He has said that “every report should be viewed and treated as an opportunity to identify a serial rapist.”
Yet for all the attention paid to David Lisak, the problematic paper on which his fame rests has been left largely unscrutinized. And as it turns out, the paper relies on survey data not collected by Lisak, with no direct connection to campus sexual assault. […]
In March, when I pointed to the differences between the men in Lisak’s paper and the student population on which his popular campus presentations focus, Lisak responded: “Are you asking if there are comprehensive studies about sexual offenders on traditional college campuses? No, there aren’t.” Yet this is exactly how Lisak’s work has been treated.
Even the serial nature of the assaults reported in Lisak’s paper is speculation, since he did not distinguish between multiple offenses committed against multiple victims and multiple offenses committed against one victim. In fact, when asked about the high number of assaults by individuals who allegedly remained “undetected” by law enforcement, Lisak stated that “a number of these cases were domestic violence,” i.e., ongoing abuse in intimate partnerships, including marriages.
This is an important revelation. Even a single rape is abhorrent. Even one woman, victimized multiple times, endures trauma. But campus training and government policy, citing Lisak, are being built around presumptions of serial, predatory behavior from most campus rapists, a fact not established in the data and potentially contradicted by Lisak’s own characterization of the men included in his paper.
The high rate of other forms of violence reported by the men in Lisak’s paper further suggests they are an atypical group. Of the 120 subjects Lisak classified as rapists, 46 further admitted to battery of an adult, 13 to physical abuse of a child, 21 to sexual abuse of a child, and 70—more than half the group—to other forms of criminal violence. By itself, the nearly 20 percent who had sexually abused a child should signal that this is not a group from whom it is reasonable to generalize findings to a college campus.
Yet in spite of the peripheral relationship between his research and college campuses, Lisak has called for draconian action against students accused of sexual assault: “These men,” he has said of “undetected rapists” and “serial sexual predators…cannot be reached or educated. They must be identified and removed from our communities.”
What an indecent, mendouchious twatwaffle …
To Republicans who are trying to defund Planned Parenthood: Good luck with that.
— Senator Harry Reid (@SenatorReid) July 28, 2015
I have no idea how the Planned Parenthood abortion advocates, ever more hysterical in their condemnation of the first two videos, can ever get a handle on how to spin this one (very graphic video at link)
In a new video just released by the Center for Medical Progress, a former clinical worker at StemExpress described her job of identifying pregnant women “who met criteria for fetal tissue orders and to harvest fetal body parts after their abortions.”
Holly O’Donnell, a licensed phlebotomist, said she “unsuspectingly took as job as a ‘procurement technician’” at the fetal tissue company StemExpress, which was allegedly the primary buyer of fetal body parts from Planned Parenthood.
She said she fainted on her first day on the job when she was asked to dissect a “freshly aborted” baby.
Concerning Planned Parenthood’s repeated denials that they make any money from the exchange of body parts for cash, something that would be illegal under federal law, O’Donnell said, “For whatever we could procure, they would get a certain percentage. The main nurse was always trying to make sure we got our specimens. No one else really cared, but the main nurse did because she knew that Planned Parenthood was getting compensated.”
The new video also shows undercover footage of Dr. Savita Ginde, vice president and medical director of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, who operates abortion clinics in Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Nevada.
She was secretly videotaped in the Planned Parenthood pathology lab, where babies are taken after being aborted. She also talks about making money for body parts: “I think a per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.”