“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Monday, July 20, 2015

U.N. Moves to Lift Sanctions on Iran After Nuclear Deal - VOTE 15-0 for approval - The EU Also Approved the Iran Nuclear Deal

UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations Security Council on Monday unanimously approved a resolution that creates the basis for international economic sanctions against Iran to be lifted, a move that incited a furious reaction in Israel and potentially sets up an angry showdown in Congress.
The 15-0 vote for approval of the resolution, 14 pages long, was written in Vienna by diplomats who negotiated a landmark pact last week that limits Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for ending the sanctions.
Iran has pledged to let in international monitors to inspect its facilities for the next 10 years and other measures that were devised to guarantee that its nuclear energy activities are purely peaceful.
The Security Council resolution, which is legally binding, lays out the steps required for the lifting of United Nations sanctions, not the sanctions imposed separately by the United States and the European Union that have squeezed Iran economically.
The European Union also approved the Iran nuclear deal on Monday, putting in motion the lifting of its own sanctions, which include prohibitions on the purchase of Iranian oil. Europe will continue to prohibit the export of ballistic missile technology and sanctions related to human rights.
Diplomats have warned that if the United States Congress refuses to lift American penalties against Iran, the Iranians may renege on their commitments as well, which could result in a collapse of the entire deal.
The resolution takes effect in 90 days, a time frame negotiated in Vienna to allow Congress, where members have expressed strong distrust of the agreement, to review it. President Obama, who has staked much of his foreign policy ambitions on the Iran pact, has vowed to veto a congressional rejection of the nuclear accord.
The resolution will not completely lift all Council restrictions on Iran. It maintains an arms embargo, and sets up a panel to review the import of sensitive technology on a case-by-case basis.
It also sets up a way to renew sanctions if Iran does not abide by its commitments. In the event of an unresolved dispute over Iran’s enrichment activities, the United Nations sanctions snap back automatically after 30 days. To avoid the sanctions renewal requires a vote of the Council — giving skeptics, namely the United States, an opportunity to veto it.
Mr. Obama’s critics in Congress, including at least two senior Democrats, objected to the Council vote’s taking place before Congress has had a chance to debate it.
The United States ambassador, Samantha Power, speaking immediately after the vote, told the Council that sanctions relief would start only when Iran “verifiably” meets its obligations under the deal.
“We have a responsibility to test diplomacy,” she said.
In an effort to assuage critics, including Israel, Ms. Power went on to say that the United States would continue to scrutinize the “instability that Iran fuels beyond its nuclear program.”
She also called on Iran “to immediately release all unjustly detained Americans,” a reference to three Americans of Iranian descent who have been incarcerated in Iran, including one for nearly four years.
The Israeli government, which considers Iran one of its most dangerous enemies and has expressed strong opposition to the nuclear accord, quickly denounced the Council resolution.
“The hypocrisy knows no bounds,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said of the vote. He asserted that Iran had “systematically” violated prior Council resolutions and “calls for the destruction of Israel.”
“The best way to fight this hypocrisy is to tell the truth in a strong and unified manner,” Mr. Netanyahu told Israel’s parliament, according to a translation provided by his office.
“They say that this agreement makes war more distant,” Mr. Netanyahu said. “This is not true; this agreement brings war closer.”
The ambassadors from France and Russia both described the resolution as historic, but used their Council pulpit to emphasize their own positions. The French ambassador, François Delattre, said the pact must be carefully monitored. “We will judge by its actions Iran’s willingness to make this agreement a success,” he said.
The Russian envoy, Vitaly I. Churkin, indirectly nudged the United States to do its part. “We expect all countries will quickly adopt to the new conditions,” he said.


  1. George W. Bush followed the same sequencing prior to the 2003 Iraq war. His administration first went to the UN in September, 2002 to seek authorization for the use of force against Iraq. The U.N. passed Security Council Resolution 1441, which gave Iraq one final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations before it would face “serious consequences.” This UN Security Council resolution was passed a full month before Congress authorized the Iraq War Resolution on October 16, 2002.

  2. The World is moving on with or without the US Congress. The US public has no more appetite for another bullshit Neocon war. Better get used to it.

  3. Not even the Republicans can be dumb enough to not recognized the coup de grâce put to them by Obama and further disgrace themselves in front of the entire civilized World by voting against this.

  4. The world has a great victory.

    It is now legal to murder Jews.

    Congrats Deuce, your friends will be receiving hundreds of millions of dollars (if not billions) to blow up and murder jews across the globe.

    Are you happy?

    Will you celebrate with more rockets rain down from Gaza and Lebanon?

  5. The entire "civilized" world had no problem with the gassing and genocide of Rwandans, Serbians, the blacks of Sudan by the Arabs, the mass murder of Pol Pot, the genocide of the Russians by their leader Stalin, the Chinese cleansing of millions of those that actually could carry a thought, the Iraq and Iranian mass murders…

    So It's time for the world to allow Iran to flourish and solve the Jewish question once and for all…

    But just wanted to let you know that the Jews (at least in Israel) will not die without a fight.


    1. Deuce ☂Mon Jul 20, 10:51:00 AM EDT
      Not even the Republicans can be dumb enough to not recognized the coup de grâce put to them by Obama

      Obama will now continue to use the UN to circumvent the US Congress.

      Climate Change, Gun Control, Land and water usage, Redistribution of wealth…

    2. The entire “civilized” world had no problem with the gassing and genocide of Rwandans, Serbians, the blacks of Sudan by the Arabs, the mass murder of Pol Pot, the genocide of the Russians by their leader Stalin, the Chinese cleansing of millions of those that actually could carry a thought, the Iraq and Iranian mass murders…

      Just for the record, what steps did Israel take to intervene in any of these murders?

    3. Just for the record, what steps did America do to stop the holocaust?



    4. Wasn’t a US problem. we were fighting a Global War on two theaters. What has Israel ever done for another country?

    5. Wasn't a US problem…

      Great answer.

      I remember that.

    6. As for what Israel has done for many other nations?

      The list is too long to post here.

      But they have fought far above their weight.

      In fact helping the USA more times than you care to remember.

  6. As the only nation in the world not permitted to be on the UNSC?

    I doubt you would include them as part of the "civilized " world.

    Hmmm interesting standard…

    1. But for all standards of the "civilized" world?

      France, Germany,(EU), The USA, Russia, China, England are commonly considered the major powers..

      But Israel did not lift a finger during Stalin's time when he starved to death 12 million…

      Nor did Israel do anything about Pol Pot…

      Israel did help the South Sudan Africans stop the slaughter in Africa.

      But Israel is but 1/900th of the middle east, let alone, a tinier fraction of the world what would have it do?

      After all it's already is fighting for it's survival against 22 nations committed to it's own genocide….

      Or did you forget that?

      The arabs and iranians have pumped billions and billions to wipe out Israel.

      Israel is hardly in a position to be the world's cop……

      SO back at you…

      Where was France, the USA, Germany, Japan, Russia, China, the Arab league?

      Oh yeah…

      How dare I ask..

    2. Oh Israel has taken steps to prevent genocide, it has taken out the IRaqi nuclear reactor, it has pushed back the Iranian nuclear program by decades…

      It has taken out a syrian plutonium reactor (before being completed)….

      So in it's own neck of the world, Israel has taken quite a few steps to prevent genocide….

      You can send your thankyou's to Israel care of the Knesset in Jerusalem

    3. New Zealand has half the population of Israel and is a genuine asset to the US and others. The Israeli attacks on Iraqi and Syrian nuclear facilities were an example of the differences between”laudable” and “laughable”.

    4. Ah, Deuce, the New Zealand card?


      As for the dismissal by you on the attacks on both the iraqi and syrian nuclear sites?

      How do you think the world would fare if either were allowed to go online?

      On but as you say, wasn't a US problem….

      So why is the USA bombing Syrians?

      Is that a US problem?

      Such selective abilities….

  7. Oh Israel has taken steps to prevent genocide, it has taken out the Iraqi nuclear reactor, it has pushed back the Iranian nuclear program by decades…

    That can’t be possible. The Israeli Prime Minister, the distinguished Bib Netanyahu has been railing about Iran being weeks away from a nuclear weapon for close to twenty years.

    1. Sure it can…

      Israel KEEPS pushing Iran back from the finish line..

      Come on, don't argue like a child..

      ANYONE knows that if Israel had done NOTHING? Iran would have accomplished it's goal years ago.

      again, a BIG thank you card can be sent to the Knesset in Jerusalem anytime..

    2. So Deuce, WHEN America is hit by an Iranian ICBM what will you say? (or another target such as europe)

      after all, Iran doesn't NEED ICBM's to hit israel..

    3. I actually know a thing or two about ICBMs and nuclear deterrence. I also have been paying attention to history. Pound for Pound, Israel has caused more damage to US interests than any other country I know of. The payback to the US is zero. There is no way that Iran is going to launch an ICBM attack against the US. Iran will be a good trading partner and will not be shaking us down for their defense bill.

      Your team lost. Your team has seen the high water mark on their ability to influence US politics. Israel is a net producer of bad will. Israel will never goad the US into another war.

      The game is over. You lost.

    4. Your yawing seems a bit more like a high pitch squeal.

    5. Do you seriously believe anything that you actually write?

      you can't quantify a statement like: Pound for Pound, Israel has caused more damage to US interests than any other country I know of.

      It's complete bullshit you know it and I know it...

      Deuce: The payback to the US is zero.



      Once again, your words are hysteria.

      Deuce: There is no way that Iran is going to launch an ICBM attack against the US.

      Really, so now you are a General in the US armed forces? Why do the experts say otherwise?

      You continue: Iran will be a good trading partner and will not be shaking us down for their defense bill.

      Trading partner? Is that what you call a nation that sponsors international terror and puts a bounty on American Soliders? A GOOD trading partner?

      You are delusional.

      As for the "shaking down" for their defense bill?

      DO you KNOW actual numbers? Your hysterics prove the irrationality of your point.

      Israel proves VALUE for the billions the USA gives them. America doesn't give aid to anyone if it doesn't have a value or return.

      But you are so full of hatred you cannot see any value to Israel. Your solution? Let the Jews die, no value to them.

      Deuce: Your team lost. Your team has seen the high water mark on their ability to influence US politics. Israel is a net producer of bad will. Israel will never goad the US into another war.

      Israel has never goaded the USA into any war.

      Once again you lie.

      But that is your hysterics.

      Israel may have lost the Iranian Nuke agreement but it hasn't lost.

      The game is over, America, under Obama is standing with Islamic Nazis.

      America is losing.

      But the game is just getting started.

      I pity you.

  8. .

    The sides are clearly drawn now. If this deal is defeated, the American people will know who defeated it. Once the 60 day review is up and the vote taken, it will only be about a year before the election and the people will have the opportunity to make their feelings known.

    Of course, there will be polls before that but I have little faith in polls unless they trend undeniably one way. Regardless, this is a big enough deal that they should be involved enough to make their feelings known.


    1. I think it would be a very bad thing if the US Congress were to force the US out of the deal. Here's to hoping enough congress critters rise to the occasion.

    2. If the deal is passed? America will go down in history as cowards and appeasers..

      But not to worry Ash, you are hiding safe in Canada where they are not sucking Iranian dick...

    3. The sanctions were put on Iran because of their nuclear program. If they acquiesce regarding weaponization of nukes the sanctions should be lifted. Sanctions can be enacted against Iran regarding other bad behavior in the future. The goal was to limit weaponization and it appears to have worked.

    4. sanctions were put on Iran for a variety of reasons.

      only those sanctions that pertain to the specific nuclear issues should be lifted IF and only IF Iran complies.

      now those sanctions that are being lifted with no compliance?

      proves you are a coward, appeaser and a dhimmi

    5. The have to comply or the sanctions will be reinstated.

    6. LOL



      Do you actually believe that? Or are you just pulling our legs?

      ONCE the sanctions are lifted there is no putting the horses back in the barn.

      The world has too much INVESTED in cheap Iranian sweet crude and as a market to see weapons too...

      Think of the iPads and iPhones and electronics to be sold? 70 million oil rich consumers...

      Naw, the sanctions are toast.

      the only thing left is war...

      Of course, Iran will have to PROVE who is hitting it...

      It could be anyone with a grudge...

      I hear tell that 300 million sunnis are pretty pissed about the genocide that the Iranians have been doing in iraq and syria...

      paybacks are a bitch..

    7. Iran will be FLOODED with visitors...


      How many will be ISIS?

      One can only wonder.

    8. Wio wrote:

      "Naw, the sanctions are toast.

      the only thing left is war..."

      Why do you say that? Who will be declaring war on account of this accord?

    9. Ash Iran has declared war on the west.

      Strap yourself in...

    10. Death to America, Death to Israel.

      We will not back down in Yemen, Palestine, lebanon or Syria.

      America is arrogant,

      That's what they say..

      Oh yeah, Ash you don't believe their public statement by high ranking Iranian Mullahs and Officials.

    11. No, Iran has not declared war with the west - quite the opposite as they appear willing to sign on to the accord. Are you seriously suggesting they will declare war against the USA after they sign this accord?

    12. I seriously saying they declared war on USA decades ago.

      That's why they play chess and you play with yourself.

  9. .

    If the deal is passed? America will go down in history as cowards and appeasers..



    1. So says you....

      Cant stand up to Iran? Just give in? Give them 150 billions in frozen assets for simply doing nothing?

      All the while chanting "death to America"?

      Sounds like a bunch of cowardly appeasing people....

      No longer home of the brave, more like home of the dhimmi...

      don't know the word?

      look it up..

    2. Now I am sure, the majority of Americans are not appeasing cowards, but Obama and his supporters?

      total pussies..

  10. ah, Hezbollah, the lebanese proxy for Iran is going to be getting BILLIONS to do more good work..

    Inside Hezbollah’s European Plots
    The Lebanese terror group continues to operate in Europe despite warnings from the EU. What will Brussels do about it?
    Three years ago this month, Hezbollah blew up a bus of tourists in Bulgaria. The European Union then banned the military wing of Hezbollah. But despite both being blacklisted by Brussels and being heavily invested in the Syrian war, Hezbollah continues to plot attacks around the world, with a particular focus on Europe.

    Recent Hezbollah plots were exposed as far afield as Peru and Thailand, but the latest plot was thwarted in Cyprus, where Hussein Bassam Abdallah, a dual Lebanese-Canadian citizen, stockpiled 8.2 tons of ammonium nitrate, a popular chemical explosive. Last week, Abdallah pled guilty to all eight charges against him—including participation in a terrorist group (read: Hezbollah), possessing explosives, and conspiracy to commit a crime. It was the second time in three years that a Cypriot court has sentenced a Hezbollah operative to prison for plotting an attack in Cyprus. But this latest plot is different, in part because it reveals that the EU’s warning to Hezbollah not to operate on European soil have not dissuaded the group at all.

    Back in July 2012, Cypriot authorities watched Hussam Yaacoub, a dual Lebanese-Swedish Hezbollah operative, conduct surveillance of Israeli tourists and arrested him in his hotel room a few hours later (He was ultimately convicted and jailed.) A few days later, a group of Hezbollah operatives—one of them a French citizen—blew up a bus of Israeli tourists in Burgas, Bulgaria. Brussels was faced with the reality that Hezbollah was dispatching European operatives to carry out operations on European soil.

    can only make you proud to know that America is leading the chorus in additional funding for these find young men..


    2. How many gays can Iran hang for 150 billion dollars?

      Iran who put a BOUNTY on American soldiers in Iraq will now have a new and improved funding to continue to contract kill Americans, makes you happy Ash?

  11. AshMon Jul 20, 05:51:00 PM EDT
    The have to comply or the sanctions will be reinstated.

    How many times has Iran been caught cheating on previous agreements?

    I think the answer is 20.

    And now?

    Sanctions on Iran for cheating are being removed..


    Pussies. Cowards. Appeasing Dhimmis..

    1. .

      WiO, IMO, you are a nitwit. Were do you come up with this shit?

      And now?

      Sanctions on Iran for cheating are being removed.

      You and your bros are lost in the 90's. With the improvements that have been made in satellite imagery and detection technology in the last 20 years it's not your daddy's nuclear arms agreement And if we spot anything that is suspicious and Iran doesn't provide us with the answers or access we want, the 'snap-back' provisions kick in. The way I read it the snap-back kicks in automatically and can't be vetoed. It will be very hard for them to cheat.

      Pussies. Cowards. Appeasing Dhimmis..

      Moron. Whip that spittle off your chin.

      What courage does it take to 'not' sign this deal? You've got it assbackwards. It's you and your bros that are scared shitless. Or, at least, that is the talking point. But I don't buy it When it comes to the nuclear part of this deal only a fool wouldn't think we are not better off with it than without it.

      Face it, the only reason you guys are upset is because Iran's assets will end up being freed up. So why do you even argue against the cutbacks and deferral of any nuclear program Iran has. A month ago Bibi was arguing that Iran would have bomb in a few months. Now, they won't have it for at least 10 years if ever and he is still whining.


    2. Quirk, you really don't have a clue.

      150 billion in freed up assets GOING to Hamas, Hezbollah, it's proxies in Yemen, and Syria?

      Iran's entire military budget is 15 billon a year...

      so we are stripping away hard won sanctions for nothing.

      as for your "comment":

      How did that work out for you with north korea?

      do you even have a clue how stupid you sound?

      Snap Back? sat imagery?

      Iran still hasn't answered questions about plutonium from the last time it was caught and exposed by it's own citizens.

      we didn't find out shit...

      snap backs...

      Moron, back at you, you naive, simplistic twit.

    3. .

      Try reading the agreement, nitwit.

      Iran has committed to come clean on all issues associated with prior weapons work by October. If their responses are inadequate or unacceptable, the agreement becomes null and void.

      All Bibi talked about before this agreement started getting traction was 'the bomb'. Remember that cartoon bomb he drew up for the UN? Will he modify his drawing? Lower the red line? Naw, he'll just change the subject to sanctions, the same type of thing he does when talking about Palestinian statehood. If nothing else, the guy is predictible.

      150 billion in freed up assets GOING to Hamas, Hezbollah, it's proxies in Yemen, and Syria?

      Iran's entire military budget is 15 billon a year..


      Try re-reading that and after thinking about it, tell me once again whose statements sound stupid.


  12. Iran will be FLOODED with visitors...


    How many will be ISIS?

    One can only wonder.

    Iran is all in on the fight against ISIS. Your team is killing those fighting ISIS and providing medical assistance to ISIS.

    1. Iran caused ISIS to be created by slaughtering 500,000 in Iraq and 360,000 in Syria.

      Iran seeks to genocide all Jews.

      In the middle east, a place you have never been there is a saying your self declared "homies" love to say...

      "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

      Israel provides medical treatment for all, including ISIS and Hamas.

      Now your homies? Murder Jews lying in hospital beds..

    2. I have a grip.

      Now you stand with the mullahs and I stand with traditional, patriotic Americans and Israel.

    3. The deal is passed. Obama outsmarted Netanyahu. He kicked his very ample ass. The US Congress and AIPAC got stuffed. It happens.

    4. Oh by all means stand tall. I think I’ll stick with my crew.

    5. .

      Iran caused ISIS to be created by slaughtering 500,000 in Iraq and 360,000 in Syria.

      You are batshit crazy, son. Get some help.


    6. Quirk, I am sorry if you cannot face reality

      Investigate, you will not learn about the Iranian sponsored militia's in comic books and porn sites.

      In syria, assad, with hezbollah are under direct rule of Iran's revolutionary guards. In Iraq? Shia militias have killed almost 550 thousand sunnis..

      Yeah and I am bat shit crazy.....

      you are either one of the dumbest naivest nitwits in the world or you are just plain evil...

      which is it SON?

      Are you naive and stupid? Or just EVIL?

    7. .

      Have you stopped beating your wife yet, WiO?



    Secretary of State John Kerry had a blunt response Monday to U.S. lawmakers’ outcry over the United Nations Security Council’s unanimous endorsement of a resolution on the Iran deal: The rest of the world isn’t subject to the U.S. Congress.

    Frankly, the rest of the world has a very clear picture of the US Congress.

    1. The Sec Of State has gone around the people of the USA.

      Makes you proud? Eh?

    2. No, he outsmarted the showboats in the US Conga Line.

      Netanyahu and his crew, The GOP Likuds Force, were set up to have 60 days of fun and games to make Obama look bad. They all had such great mirth when The Conga Line did their bent knee performance for Bibi on his GOP Invitation gig.

      Obama and Kerry Swiftboated Colonel Cotton and his Ass Clowns.

      Aipac and Israel Inc thought they had a well oiled machine and Obama handed them the Vaseline jar. Obama begged The Conga Line not to throw him into the briar patch. It is politics at its best.

  14. .

    More on the Proclivities of the Mainstream Media: Comparing Coverage of the Confederate Flag Issue with the Planned Parenthood Organ Sales Issue

    Many years ago I interviewed for a reporting job covering government waste, fraud and mismanagement. The interview went well and my future employers mentioned that they’d had trouble keeping the position filled as many reporters had trouble coming up with story ideas. They wondered if that would be a problem. I thought they were joking, so I chuckled. But they were entirely serious.

    I thought of that when looking at media coverage of the Planned Parenthood scandal. The media seem to be really struggling to come up with any story ideas for how to cover this story...


    The shooting happened on June 17, about a month ago. The media quickly moved on from the victims and the shooting itself, even though there were many worthwhile angles to cover. Instead they went for frenzied coverage of the presence of Confederate flags. The Planned Parenthood video was released on July 14, about a week ago. If the story of harvesting organs for sale from aborted babies were deemed merely as important as the flag story, we’d expect to see many multiples of the levels of coverage we’re seeing now.

    Using Nexis, I looked at a few media outlets to see how their coverage of the Confederate flag compared to the Planned Parenthood video. For my quick searches, I put in “Confederate” and “flag,” and “Planned Parenthood” and “video,” with the appropriate dates. My search of the media companies’ web sites showed higher counts for one or the other entry than what showed up in Nexis, for what it’s worth. And for CNN, I modified “video” with “undercover.” What I found was most interesting, and goes a long way to show how the media can drum up interest in a story or work to suppress a story:


    1. .


      CNN has had 493 mentions of the Confederate flag since June 17 (only 188 of these even mention alleged church shooter Dylann Roof), and managed 167 in the first six days. In the first six days of the Planned Parenthood scandal, they managed 7 mentions, less than 5 percent what you’d expect if you considered those stories only of equal importance.

      The Washington Post mentioned the Confederate flag 624 times in the last month (only 135 of these mention Roof), and 126 times in the first six days. The Washington Post has 28 stories mentioning the Planned Parenthood video in the first six days, just over 22 percent of what you’d expect if you considered the harvesting of organs from aborted babies to be merely as important as the Confederate flag topic.

      The New York Times has run stories and essays on the Confederate flag 149 times since June 17 (and only 39 of those mention Roof), 41 of those in the first six days. That compares to three stories on Planned Parenthood during the same window, just 7 percent of what you’d expect if the New York Times considered those stories merely of equal importance.

      Finally, Nexis shows 70 mentions of the Confederate flag on in the last month (only 18 mention Roof), 29 of those in the first six days of the story. For the Planned Parenthood video, it shows 4 stories.

      Don’t forget that many broadcasters were even more zealous in their coverage of the Confederate flag, while running only the briefest mentions, at best, of the Planned Parenthood story. I’d also be curious how the pro/con arguments break down for the two issues in terms of editorials and op-eds.

      Clearly, our media are struggling to come up with any angles to cover on this story. Perhaps they don’t want to be so disparate in their coverage but, like my predecessors on the government waste, fraud and mismanagement beat, they just don’t have any ideas.


    2. .


      I don’t have any of the resources of the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, or Politico. If I did, here are just a few stories that I might have reporters look into. Feel free to add your ideas in the comments. Have at ’em, well-funded news teams:

      We’ve heard about serial murderer/abortionist Kermit Gosnell keeping trophies of his victims, abortion clinics dumping babies in the trash, and now Deborah Nucatola working to do “a little better than break even” in the sales of intact baby organs. What’s the standard procedure for disposal of the unborn children killed in abortion? Are there abortion clinic standards for this? Does it vary state by state? Do states even have regulations? Does Planned Parenthood have uniform regulations? If not, why not? If so, how are they enforced?

      How much money does Planned Parenthood receive via sales of baby organs? Do they keep records? Are those records trustworthy? How do we know? How significant are these funds to the abortion portion of Planned Parenthood’s operation? How does compensation for the children’s lungs, livers, hearts and brains vary by state, if they do vary?

      How far along in a pregnancy must a woman be for her child’s organs to be considered worthwhile for procurement, sale and transfer? How much does the value of a child’s liver, heart, lungs, etc., increase with time? Do the sales of baby organs form a significant enough part of Planned Parenthood’s business model to result in, say, filibustering of protections for late-term unborn children?

      How did the Center for Medical Progress obtain the video? Who are they? Why haven’t the media ask tough questions of abortion clinics, historically? When Indiana passed a religious freedom bill, various media outlets roamed the countryside searching for vendors with religious objections to same-sex marriage, such as the owners of Memories Pizza. What questions might be posed to abortion clinic owners and managers around the country? Does the failure of the media to cover abortion well encourage undercover journalism operations, such as the one by Center for Medical Progress?

      What are the laws on trafficking in human body parts? Who wrote those laws? Was the abortion industry involved in writing those laws?


    3. .


      How much money is made throughout the organ sale process? How do corporations make their way around laws prohibiting the express sale of human organs? What do ethicists say about these loopholes and workarounds?
      Could expert observers take us through Planned Parenthood’s various responses to the charges levied in the video? They don’t deny the charges. How is that significant?

      Clearly this was a story that generated tremendous interest among critics of Planned Parenthood. Yet reports flooded in of Facebook denying people the ability to share posts about the story or even “like” ones they saw. What is the real story there? What was going on? What does Facebook say about why that was happening? Similarly, Twitter waited many hours before allowing Planned Parenthood to be a trending topic on Twitter. Why? How is that focused? What role do social media corporations play in controlling news? Who makes these calls, and what are their criteria for doing so? How do they rate something as offensive or unsuitable?

      Who is Deborah Nucatola? What is her role at Planned Parenthood? Does she have other significant roles? What are her political contributions? Who are her political allies? If a young woman making lightly disparaging comments about the Obama family on her Facebook page merited a deep dive by the Washington Post into her high school records, what can we learn from Nucatola’s childhood friends, boyfriends, colleagues. Where did things go wrong for her? What did it mean, if anything, when Planned Parenthood said Nucatola had been lightly reprimanded for her comments recorded on the video? What, in particular, did she do to deserve a reprimand? Will Cecile Richards tell us what specific statements Nucatola said that were offensive?

      Why has the media covered this salacious and scandalous story with so much less rigor and enthusiasm than might be expected? What do managing editors have to say about the treatment of this story? Many promised to fix the problems after the Gosnell media blackout. What do they think went wrong with those efforts, if they were ever implemented?
      Why have abortion rights groups and prominent activists been so silent about this story?

      If asking every pro-life politician in the country to weigh in on Todd Akin’s impolitic remarks on “legitimate rape” made sense, let’s certainly find out what every pro-choice politician in the country thinks about the harvesting of baby organs by abortionists for sale to corporations. Hillary Clinton’s close ties to Planned Parenthood and abortion rights extremists mean her response is the lead story.

      How did sales of aborted children begin? Did Planned Parenthood seek buyers or did the baby part buyers seek out Planned Parenthood? Does it depend by affiliate? Planned Parenthood has a corner on the market of freshly dead young humans. Does this market share make them significant in the human organ trade? Who are the buyers? Who arranges the sales? How much money changes hands? Do the buyers receive any federal funds? What research is conducted?


    4. .


      Along those lines, what are the laws governing sale of tissue in other circumstances? If it was a tumor that had been removed, would the doctor have the right to sell it? Would they have the right to try and do “a little better than break even”? What governs that? How does the process specifically work and who oversees the regulation of this industry? Specifically how are sales monitored? How confident are observers and interested parties that the monitoring of this process is stringent or effective?

      What do corporations do with aborted baby parts? Is there any risk that people have unknowingly been using products or research based on parts harvested from the children killed in abortion? Do consumers have the right to know when humans are killed and then have their parts used for research?

      The undercover journalists produced one example of a form Planned Parenthood uses to obtain consent from mothers procuring abortions. Is that form standard across all Planned Parenthood affiliates? If not, how and why do they vary? Do other abortion corporations have similar consent forms? How do they vary? The one example of Planned Parenthood’s consent form specifically said that mothers understand they won’t be compensated for “donating” their children’s tissue. However, in early public relations materials from Planned Parenthood, they claimed that Nucatola’s money discussion wasn’t about selling body parts to corporations but, rather, about compensating women for their “donation.” Explain the disparity.

      Do medical ethicists think that Planned Parenthood’s consent forms are sufficient? Should women be told that abortionists may alter their abortion procedures to procure valuable livers, lungs, hearts and brains? If not, why not? If so, are any Planned Parenthood affiliates so informing the women whose abortions they perform?


    5. .


      Is Planned Parenthood able to disclose which of its affiliates are engaged in the harvesting of baby organs for sale to corporations? If not, why not? If so, how reliable are their records? Since organ sales are prohibited, organ harvesters typically charge for “shipping” or “rental space” in a clinic. How does Planned Parenthood designate its organ sales to be or appear to be reasonable? What is the range of amounts charged for these things? How and why do they vary? What is considered a reasonable amount? How is “reasonable” determined?

      Explain the various federal and state laws governing organ procurement and sales. What legal regime is in place that permits the harvesting and sale of organs? How is it monitored?

      What do medical experts say about the changes to the abortion procedure mentioned by Nucatola for the sake of procuring organs. Do these changes to the abortion procedure increase the chance of complications for the mother? Is there an incentive on the part of Planned Parenthood to target larger babies for “part conservation” by inducing breach deliveries, as mentioned by Dr. Nucatola? What rights do the mothers have to be informed about how their abortion process has been altered to procure these parts? Dr. Nucatola claims that mothers don’t have the right to be notified of her alterations to the procedure. Is that true?

      How has the Planned Parenthood video been received by those who have seen it? What parts struck them the most? How do people who deny the humanity of the unborn child explain the video discussions about harvesting their organs?

      How does the harvesting of organs fit into Planned Parenthood’s work culture? Do people who work at Planned Parenthood clinics know that this is going on? Do they all chat about it over salad or is it more a covert wing of the operation? Do new workers or volunteers learn about it and react poorly? Various prominent pro-life activists are former Planned Parenthood employees and managers. What do they know about this practice? Are secretaries at Planned Parenthood cheerfully arranging for the delivery of fetal livers immediately after booking an abortion appointment? Does Planned Parenthood have an employment hiring or retention problem?

      Tell us more about the “reimbursement” rates for various organs. Which organs are most valuable? How do those organs change in value over time? How does this relate to the late-term abortion debate?

      Is there a price differential between white baby parts and black baby parts? Is there a price differential between male organs and female organs? If so, how much?

      It’s just a few of the many angles that could be covered and should be covered. The media may have gotten a tremendously late start, but better late than never. Go get ’em, journalists! Do your jobs!


  15. Showing the broad international consensus on the P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran, both the UN Security Council and the European Union have publicly approved the deal today in unanimous votes praising the pact.

    The EU vote lifts broad amounts of economic sanctions against Iran, and German officials moved quickly to restore trade ties with Iran, hoping to get a leg up on other countries scrambling to forge new economic ties with Iran’s industrial companies, which are in dire need of major upgrades.

    The votes underscore just how isolated opponents to the deal have become recently, amounting at this point to a handful of Iranian ultraconservatives, the US Congressional leadership, and the Israeli government. With Israel not a party to the deal and the Iranian ultraconservatives in the minority, Congress is the only possible ones to “block” the deal.

    For the US Congress to actually block the Iran deal, they would need a two-thirds majority in both houses to override a veto. Though Congressional leaders say they believe they can do that, and the Israel Lobby is putting considerable money toward that, it is seen as extremely unlikely.