Sibby Online

Hezbollah staged Qana

From Rush Limbaugh:

The Art of War by Sun Tzu is still something that's regarded as timely, even though it's thousands of years old. The one thing that you just don't do these days is kill civilians. It used to be the name of the game in war. And it was done on purpose. Now, it was done to end wars, and it was done to achieve decisive victory, and it was done to save the lives of your own troops in the field. All of those things were factors. So we had this episode at Qana. You know who really killed those people are the Hezbos. Hezbollah killed those people. Hezbollah put those people in that building and brought the rocket launchers in close by, knowing full well that the launcher would be targeted. That building didn't fall for eight hours after it was hit. What do you bet that the Hezbos finished the job that the Israeli bomb did not actually complete? What do you bet they killed their own people for the PR aspect? These people cannot compete militarily with any industrialized nation, so they have to fight the PR and the spin war. And it is amazing to me to see how easily the duped US and world media is.

The truth of what happened at Qana has been as distorted as what has happened and did happen in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It's almost identical. The Media is proving that they are incapable of accurately covering a war now, perhaps because they don't want to. You'll see what I mean when you take a look at this website. It's eureferendum.blogspot. When you see this photo display, this guy has gone through a lot of work to show how the Hezbos are milking this, parading their own dead in front of the cameras, posing them at different times, taking them in and out of ambulances, covering them with dust, holding them for hours on end, and these are still photographers taking the pictures, obviously, and these photographers are obviously willing to participate in propaganda. They know exactly what's being done, all these photos, bringing the bodies out of the rubble, posing them for the cameras, it's all staged.

Every bit of it is staged and the still photographers know it. Yet they send these pictures out without saying all of this is being staged for us. They send these pictures out as though they are in a timeline of an exact sequence, which they are not, which you will see when you read it.

…

There’s an inverted morality here. There's a totally upside down world. Hezbollah is making sure as many of it's civilians as possible die each time Israel launches a salvo into a Hezbollah stronghold area. And then they parade the bodies of the kids around and pose them for photographers who are willing to pass on the propaganda, knowing full well they're being propagandized, willing to do it nevertheless. Again, if you're just joining me, there is an incredible illustration and poof of all this. I linked to a blog site at RushLimbaugh.com, and that blog site is holding up pretty well. We haven't shut down their servers. It's a European bunch, and they've documented some proof with Reuters and AP photographs.

The photographs are grisly. They are quite disturbing. I should warn you about that before you go see them, but you have to see how the PR and the spin war is being managed and how our Drive-By Media and the rest of the world media is just falling for it hook, line, and sinker because it's their action line. Action line is, Bush is wrong, Israel sucks, Rice is bad, Bolton's bad, gotta get rid of Rumsfeld and all these people, Bush is horrible, Israel's horrible. In fact, Israel may have replaced Bush now in terms of being the primary target of the Drive-By Media. Bush will get it back. But they're covering Israel in this war the way they've covered Bush in practically everything since he was inaugurated back in 2001. I'm just telling you when you go look at these pictures, and I urge you to do so, to understand just how the spin PR battle is being waged. You've got to exercise caution because they're not bloody and gore, just really disturbing.

Limbaugh listeners knowledgeable

From Pew Research:

Judged by their answers to three news knowledge questions, the most informed audiences belong to the political magazines, Rush Limbaugh's radio show, the O'Reilly Factor, news magazines, and online news sources.

No surprise to me, that is why he is a major source for my search for the truth.

Comments anyone.

Chad Schuldt a liar

That I knew. But know Ken Blanchard has his suspicions. Excerpt:

I can interpret this only in one of three ways: Chad is too stupid to read; Chad is too lazy to read before shooting his mouth off; Chad is a liar. Just right now I can't tell in which direction charity would point.

I don’t think Schuldt is stupid, just misguided. And lazy, that is debatable. A member of the lying left? Read the whole thing.

Democrats lie to get elected

The South Dakota Democrats continue using the tactics of the lying left. Now they think their secular socialism is in line with Thomas Jefferson. The Rapid City Journal has the report:

Eric Abrahamson, South Dakota Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor, helped launch "100 Days-100 Doors" with a rallying speech at the Thomas Jefferson statue at Seventh and St. Joseph streets.

"It’s great to be here with the Democratic team. I think we have an incredible slate of candidates, and things are about to change in western South Dakota," Abrahamson said.

As a start to the next 100 days of campaigning, Abrahamson said they wanted to encourage candidates to meet with their constituents but also to urge people to vote in the November election.

Abrahamson said he loves campaigning.

"What I love is the chance to get out and talk to people, to listen to them and share those ideas back and forth and to try to figure out where are the places where we can bring people together," he said.

The biggest job of leadership is to figure out where people come together on political ideals, he said.

"You build consensus, reach a decision and move forward," he said.

Before the candidates began their 100-door campaign, he talked about the appropriateness of meeting at Jefferson’s statue.

Jefferson believed that the concentrated power of government was inherently corrupting, and that is why he believed that the government that governs least governs best, Abrahamson said.

It’s also one of the reasons that Jefferson was so strongly in favor of a separation of church and state, he said. "It didn’t mean he didn’t believe in God. But Jefferson had his own notion of what he thought the Christian faith was about," Abrahamson said.

He said too many people have been trying to enforce a religious uniformity that would have been opposite of Jefferson’s view of a democracy.

"One of the reasons why we’re here today is we believe that Jefferson represents the kind of Democratic Party that we are seeking to revive and rebuild in South Dakota; one that celebrates individual sovereignty and individual conscience in our role in government," Abrahamson said.

I don’t think Thomas Jefferson would consider the Democrat’s welfare state as a good example of a "government that governs least governs best".

Here is what Jefferson said [in part] to the Danbury Baptists:

I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

David Barton explained:

Jefferson’s reference to "natural rights" invoked an important legal phrase which was part of the rhetoric of that day and which reaffirmed his belief that religious liberties were inalienable rights. While the phrase "natural rights" communicated much to people then, to most citizens today those words mean little.

By definition, "natural rights" included "that which the Books of the Law and the Gospel do contain." That is, "natural rights" incorporated what God Himself had guaranteed to man in the Scriptures. Thus, when Jefferson assured the Baptists that by following their "natural rights" they would violate no social duty, he was affirming to them that the free exercise of religion was their inalienable God-given right and therefore was protected from federal regulation or interference.

So clearly did Jefferson understand the Source of America’s inalienable rights that he even doubted whether America could survive if we ever lost that knowledge. He queried:

And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?

Jefferson believed that God, not government, was the Author and Source of our rights and that the government, therefore, was to be prevented from interference with those rights. Very simply, the "fence" of the Webster letter and the "wall" of the Danbury letter were not to limit religious activities in public; rather they were to limit the power of the government to prohibit or interfere with those expressions.

The pro-abortion Democrats have no clue who Thomas Jefferson is or what he stood for.

And then we have this from District 32 House candidates Pam Hemmingsen:

"In formulating my campaign, I talk about smaller government, less intrusion into our private lives and helping agencies do their jobs better, and a lot of people will tell me that I sound like Ronald Reagan," she said.

The Democrats are for more taxes, not less. That's not Reagan. And if the Democrats want to attack banning abortion as promoting an intrusive government, here is what Ronald Reagan said about that issue in 1983:

Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court's result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right. Shortly after the Roe v. Wade decision, Professor John Hart Ely, now Dean of Stanford Law School, wrote that the opinion "is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be." Nowhere do the plain words of the Constitution even hint at a "right" so sweeping as to permit abortion up to the time the child is ready to be born. Yet that is what the Court ruled.

As an act of "raw judicial power" (to use Justice White's biting phrase), the decision by the seven-man majority in Roe v. Wade has so far been made to stick. But the Court's decision has by no means settled the debate. Instead, Roe v. Wade has become a continuing prod to the conscience of the nation.

Abortion concerns not just the unborn child, it concerns every one of us. The English poet, John Donne, wrote: ". . . any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life — the unborn — without diminishing the value of all human life.

The Democrats are far from Thomas Jefferson and Ronald Reagan. Shame on them for lying to get elected.

Glenn Reynolds challenged on rape

From Judith Reisman:

Would you try to put out a fire with gasoline?

No? Then you might disagree with an MSNBC online article, "Porn: Good for America!" by Glenn Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor. Reynolds suggests that pornography reduces rape!

As proof, Reynolds quotes a U.S. Department of Justice claim that in 2004 rape of "people" over age 12 radically decreased with an "85 percent decline in the per-capita rape rate since 1979" (DOJ's National Crime Victimization Survey of "thousands of respondents 12 and older").

But the FBI also estimates that "34 percent of female sex assault victims" are "under age 12" (National Incident-Based Reporting System, July 2000).

Since the DOJ data excludes rape of children under age 12, child rape may be up 85 percent, for all we know.

Although the FBI and local police departments are now swamped with teachers, police, professors, doctors, legislators, clergy, federal and state bureaucrats, dentists, judges, etc., arrested for child pornography and for abusing children under age 12, the Department of Justice excludes those small victims from its "rape" rates. Why?

…

Reynolds, writes less like an objective scholar than a pornography defender:

Since 1970 … porn has exploded. … But rape has gone down 85 percent. So much for the notion that pornography causes rape. … [I]t would be hard to explain how rape rates could have declined so dramatically while porn expanded so explosively.

He opines that pornography possibly prevents rape (the old discredited "safe-outlet" theory).

The DOJ's preposterous "85 percent" decrease in rape ignores the obvious. The U.S. FBI Index of Crime reported a 418 percent increase in "forcible rape" from 1960 to 1999. That fear means we now keep our doors, windows and cars locked. Women seldom walk alone at night. Parents rarely let children go anywhere unaccompanied. Many states let people carry guns for self-defense. Rape Crisis Centers do not report rapes to police. More women perform as sexually required. A conflicting DOJ 2002 report says "almost 25 percent of college women have been victims of rape or attempted rape since the age of 14."

…

In 1950, 18 states authorized the death penalty for rape; most others could impose a life sentence. Following Alfred Kinsey's "scientific" advice in 1948, many states redefined "rape" so the crime could be plea-bargained down to a misdemeanor like "sexual misconduct."

Missouri redefined rape to mean 11 different crimes for 11 different sentences, magically lowering "rape" rates. Like all states that have trivialized rape, Missouri relied on the Kinsey-based 1955 American Law Institute Model Penal Code.

"Rape" was eliminated from New Jersey's laws and replaced with a variety of terms during a 1978 penal law revision.

For example, Dr. Linda Jeffrey notes that the charge to which child-molesting teacher Pamela Diehl-Moore pleaded guilty was reduced to a second-tier crime, "sexual assault" – i.e., sexual contact with a victim under 13, or penetration where the "actor" uses physical force or coercion, but the victim doesn't suffer severe personal injury, or the victim is 16 or 17, with aggravating circumstances, or the victim is 13 to 15 and the "actor" is at least four years older. (Whew!)

So here is how Reisman refuted Reynolds:

DOJ experts should read reports such as "Sex-Related Homicide and Death Investigation" (2003). Former Lt. Comdr. Vernon Geberth says today's "sex-related cases … are more frequent, vicious and despicable" than anything he experienced in decades as a homicide cop.

In "Journey Into Darkness" (1997), the FBI's premier serial-rape profiler, John Douglas wrote, "[Serial-rape murders are commonly found] with a large pornography collection, either store-bought or homemade. … our [FBI] research does show that certain types of sadomasochistic and bondage-oriented material can fuel the fantasies of those already leaning in that direction."

In "The Evil That Men Do" (1998), FBI serial-rape-murderer-mutilator profiler Roy Hazelwood quotes one sex killer who tied his victims in "a variety of positions" based on pictures he saw in sex magazines.

"Thrill Killers, a Study of America's Most Vicious Murders," by Charles Linedecker, reports that 81 percent of these killers rated pornography as their primary sexual interest. Dr. W.L. Marshall, in "Criminal Neglect, Why Sex Offenders Go Free" (1990), says based on the evidence, pornography "feeds and legitimizes their deviant sexual tendencies."

In one study of rapists, Gene Abel of the New York Psychiatric Institute cited, "One-third reported that they had used pornography immediately prior to at least one of their crimes." In 1984, the U.S. Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence reported, "Testimony indicates that an alarming number of rape and sexual assault offenders report that they were acting out behavior they had viewed in pornographic materials."

More pornography equals more rape of children and women. We need to ask whether Big Government is now selling out to Big Pornography as it did to Big Tobacco for half a century.

Florida abortion clinic under investigation

From LifeNews:

A Florida abortion business in a Miami suburb has closed after it appears a baby was born alive following a botched abortion. Police in Hialeah are investigating the abortion facility after reports surfaced that a dead baby's body was located there.

According to witnesses, an unnamed young woman who was 23 weeks into her pregnancy went to the A Gynecologists Diagnostic Center abortion facility for an abortion.

Police say the 18 year-old woman went for the abortion on Thursday and came back the next day complaining of sever stomach pains. Abortion facility staff told her the abortion practitioner was not available and that she would have to wait.

After being taken to a waiting area, the woman allegedly gave birth to the baby that she thought had been aborted the day before. The teenager was sent home after a brief examination.

''Employees cut the umbilical cord, put the baby in a bag and walked away with it," Hialeah Lt. Ralph Gracia told a local CBS television station.

Officials say an anonymous caller, who they believe is an employee at the abortion business, alerted them to the birth and the infanticide of the child afterwards. However, when police arrived at the abortion facility, the baby's body was missing.

The came back a second time Friday evening and found the dead baby in a biohazard bag. Detectives say abortion facility staff likely moved the baby's body the first time to avoid detection.

The baby was reportedly 12 inches long and weighed 2-3 pounds, according to the CBS station. Medical examiners performed an autopsy on the baby Saturday but it may take weeks for the results to be released.

Regina DeMoraes-Millan, a lawyer for the abortion business, told the Miami Herald that no crime was committed and that the teen had a successful abortion and no complications.

''My clients run an abortion clinic. It's a legal business,'' she said.

"In 24 years in law enforcement, I have never seen a case like this," Hialeah Detective Tony Rodriguez, the lead investigator, told the CBS station.

Hialeah Police Chief Rolando Bolaсo ordered the Gynecologists Diagnostic Center abortion facility is closed while the investigation continues.

Belkis Gonzalez of Miramar, Florida, owns the abortion facility and another in Miramar, which has run afoul of state regulations on numerous occasions. It was closed last year after three employees were found to be unlicensed.

Democrats back to Daschle’s obstruction

Even with the bipartisan passage of the Child Custody Protection Act, the Democrats are holding up the conference process:

The battle over a block on a Congressional bill that would help uphold parental involvement laws on abortion across the country is continuing. Both pro-life lawmakers and organizations have criticized leading Senate Democrats for blocking the bill while the Senate Republican leader says he has enough votes to move things forward.

Shortly after the Senate cast a strongly bipartisan 65-37 vote for the Child Custody Protection Act, Sen. Dick Durbin, the number two Democrat, issued a block on the bill.

Durbin objected to the appointment of members to a conference committee to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the measure.

The Senate version of the bill prevents taking a teenage girl to another state for an abortion that violates her home state's notification or consent law. The House bill does that as well but also requires abortion practitioners to notify the parents when a teen is brought to the abortion facility from out of state.

Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican who sponsored the Senate bill, told the Washington Times newspaper that the Democrats' hold on the bill goes against the bipartisan vote for the measure.

"What the Democrats are doing is not fair, not right," adding, "There is not an issue that separates people more than the abortion issue. ... We finally found some common ground. For the Democrats now to step up and block this is really outrageous."

Here is the comparison to what Tom Daschle did as Minority Leader:

National Right to Life legislative director Douglas Johnson also blames Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid.

Johnson compares Reid to former Democratic Leader Tom Daschle "who would go back home to South Dakota and tell people he was for various pieces of legislation, then would work very skillfully to prevent those pieces of legislation from going all the way through."

Since Senator Tim Johnson voted for the bill, I wonder if he is also supporting the obstruction? Would he risk getting Daschled in 2008.

Feminists using schools to attack boys

Gerry Garibaldi has a column where he mentions a book I read some time ago:

Since I started teaching several years ago, after 25 years in the movie business, I’ve come to learn firsthand that everything I’d heard about the feminization of our schools is real—and far more pernicious to boys than I had imagined. Christina Hoff Sommers was absolutely accurate in describing, in her 2000 bestseller, The War Against Boys, how feminist complaints that girls were "losing their voice" in a male-oriented classroom have prompted the educational establishment to turn the schools upside down to make them more girl-friendly, to the detriment of males.

As a result, boys have become increasingly disengaged. Only 65 percent earned high school diplomas in the class of 2003, compared with 72 percent of girls, education researcher Jay Greene recently documented. Girls now so outnumber boys on most university campuses across the country that some schools, like Kenyon College, have even begun to practice affirmative action for boys in admissions. And as in high school, girls are getting better grades and graduating at a higher rate.

As Sommers understood, it is boys’ aggressive and rationalist nature—redefined by educators as a behavioral disorder—that’s getting so many of them in trouble in the feminized schools. Their problem: they don’t want to be girls.

So here we have feminists achieving equality by not raising the girls to the boys level, but by lowering boys. This is the same for the far-left’s socialism. Instead of making the poor wealthy, they instead try to make the wealthy poor.

And then there is this insight about Special Ed:

To get into special ed, however, administrators must find something wrong. In my four years of teaching, I’ve never seen them fail. In the first IEP (Individualized Educational Program) meeting, the boy and his parents learn the results of disability testing. When the boy hears from three smiling adults that he does indeed have a learning disability, his young face quivers like Jell-O. For him, it was never a hustle. From then on, however, his expectations of himself—and those of his teachers—plummet.

Special ed is the great spangled elephant in the education parade. Each year, it grows larger and more lumbering, drawing more and more boys into the procession. Since the publication of Sommers’s book, it has grown tenfold. Special ed now is the single largest budget item, outside of basic operations, in most school districts across the country.

Special-ed boosters like to point to the success that boys enjoy after they begin the program. Their grades rise, and the phone calls home cease. Anxious parents feel reassured that progress is happening. In truth, I have rarely seen any real improvement in a student’s performance after he’s become a special-ed kid. On my first day of teaching, I received manila folders for all five of my special-ed students—boys all—with a score of modifications that I had to make in each day’s lesson plan.

I noticed early on that my special-ed boys often sat at their desks with their heads down or casually staring off into space, as if tracking motes in their eyes, while I proceeded with my lesson. A special-ed caseworker would arrive, take their assignments, and disappear with the boys into the resource room. The students would return the next day with completed assignments.

"Did you do this yourself?" I’d ask, dubious.

They assured me that they did. I became suspicious, however, when I noticed that they couldn’t perform the same work on their own, away from the resource room. A special-ed caseworker’s job is to keep her charges from failing. A failure invites scrutiny and reams of paperwork. The caseworkers do their jobs.

And the feminist have also changed society’s male role of disciplinarian. Ted Byfield points this out as he also addresses the behavior problems of boys:

After I read professor Judith Kleinfeld's report last week, exposing the feminist hoax of the early '90s that purported to show girls as disadvantaged in American schools, I discussed the matter with a friend who teaches "problem" children in a suburban Alberta system.

The Kleinfeld report shows that the disadvantaged kids in American schools, as indisputably evidenced by dropout rates, university registrations and chronic behavioral problems, are not girls. They are boys.

"How many of your 'problem' children are boys?" I asked my friend. Nearly all of them, he said. "How many of the problems are discipline problems?" Nearly all of them, he said. "How many of these discipline problems could be solved if teachers and parents were to routinely swat these kids across their bottoms for misbehavior?" Nearly all of them, he said.

"Then why don't they do it?" I asked.

He looked at me amazed. "Because, of course, society doesn't approve of that anymore," he said.

"Then tell me this," I said. "As far back as written human records go – about 5,500 years – parents and teachers have spanked misbehaving children. So what has 20th century society discovered about children that all these earlier societies didn't know?"

He pondered briefly. "I don't know that they discovered anything," he said.

"Then on what basis," I wondered, "did we conclude that 20th century society was right, and all the previous societies wrong?"

That is the question us conservatives ask when we hear the left calling themselves "progressives". They are destroying boys for the sake of feminism.

Democrat watch dog issues partisan attack

The Argus Leader has the latest attempt by the left to protect their ability to kill unborn babies:

A Washington, D.C.-based watchdog group on Wednesday filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service claiming two Sioux Falls-based nonprofits that discourage abortion and promote sexual abstinence have violated federal tax laws.

The complaint, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, alleges that the National Abstinence Clearinghouse and the Alpha Center - both headed by well-known abortion opponent Leslee Unruh - failed to report lobbying activities as required under the tax code.

The two "have a clear pattern of flagrantly flouting the laws that govern charitable organizations," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW. "The IRS should immediately investigate these organizations and revoke their tax-exempt status."

CREW, a liberal-leaning group, is calling for the IRS to revoke the two Sioux Falls-based groups' tax-exempt status and impose fines and other penalties. According to federal tax law, public charities' lobbying efforts are limited to "no substantial part" of their work. The group claims that newspaper accounts from 2003 to the present show Unruh has lobbied legislators extensively to fund abstinence programs and to ban abortion.

KELO-TV reported this:

The complaint is based on tax forms filed by the Alpha Center and National Abstinence Clearing House for 2003 and 2004. Unruh was registered as a lobbyist for the South Dakota legislative session this year, but not for 2003 or 2004.

That was also mentioned in the Argus report. This makes CREW's tactic appear desperate. According to Wikipedia CREW is normally dedicated to fighting corruption by government officials. But now they have reversed course by using the government's taxing authority to attack conservative citizens who are politically active.

Here is what the Argus said about CREW:

Once CREW heard about the two South Dakota organizations and conducted its own investigation, it brought the situation to the attention of the IRS, Sloan said.

"We got a tip about this one, but they're not the first organizations we've filed an IRS complaint against," said Sloan, who added that she does not know who called CREW's attention to the two South Dakota organizations.

CREW most often is involved in congressional ethics, Sloan said. CREW often is described by the Washington media as a liberal-leaning organization, and some of its members have close ties to Democratic politicians, but Sloan said it has criticized both Republican and Democratic members of Congress.

The group recently named the "13 most corrupt members of Congress," targeting legislators associated with former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

But here is what the Argus did not say about Sloan:

"Amid the many attacks on House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, some of the loudest come from an organization called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington," the Wall Street Journal reports.
"To the average listener, that sounds like a nonpartisan group interested only in good government.
"But it isn't that simple," reporter Brody Mullins said.

"The 'Citizens' behind the group have strong partisan ties. Board members of the group, including former Clinton White House pollster Mark Penn, have contributed $340,000 to Democratic causes in the past four years and $6,000 to Republicans. Melanie Sloan, executive director of the group, is a former aide to Democratic Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan and Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware.

"Details like that don't typically appear when news organizations quote Ms. Sloan's attacks on Mr. DeLay, as they have done some 140 times in the past two years."

They also attacked the Swift Boat Vets. Funny that they haven’t gone after Planned Parenthood’s nonprofit status as they also lobbied heavily on the abortion issue. Lets not forget these facts that I posted on June 14:

Last week, Life News released the following:

Planned Parenthood (PP), supposedly a non-profit organization, made a profit of $63 million last year.

Planned Parenthood has net assets of more than $784 million. All that money is drawing interest and making more profit for Planned Parenthood.

While depicting itself as a benign health service for women, Planned Parenthood conducted 20 percent of the nation’s abortions –– over 255,000 abortions in 2004 (up 4.3 percent over 2003).

While claiming to be pro-adoption, Planned Parenthood referred only slightly more than 1,400 customers to adoption agencies (down 20 percent from 2003).

Nearly one third ($272.7 million) of Planned Parenthood’s income comes from taxpayers. That’s four times the amount given to abstinence programs.

Planned Parenthood sold nearly one million (up over 21 percent over 2004) "emergency" birth control kits in 2004 (these include the morning after pill –– Plan B).

"Planned Parenthood continues to be the nation’s primary abortion provider," Dr. Crouse said. "Few people stop to look at the facts and realize that Planned Parenthood is, primarily, an abortion provider. Abortion is where its profit lies and abortion is the heart of its so-called ‘service’ to women."

Crouse continued, "Planned Parenthood presents itself as a service organization meeting the needs of women. It has become entrenched in communities as one of the nation’s top charities. It is regularly honored by legislatures and public servants for community service. For many people, Planned Parenthood is very respectable. Some of those folks would be horrified to realize that abortion is Planned Parenthood’s main mission. It’s time the nation woke up to realize that our tax dollars and corporate grants are underwriting a very profitable, immoral business – Planned Parenthood’s abortion industry."

So when is CREW going to complain to the IRS about Planned Parenthood? I am not going to hold my breath.

UPDATE: Dakota Voice has more. Excerpt:

According to the CREW website, the organization seeks to function as a "parallel" of "conservative" watchdog groups like Judicial Watch, the Rutherford Institute and others. CREW has worked against Texas representative Tom Delay, presidential advisor Karl Rove, and has sought to portray President Bush as failing to take action during Hurricane Katrina.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW has worked for Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) who has a 100% rating from National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and Planned Parenthood, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) when he was in the U.S. House of Representatives (Schumer also has a 100% rating from the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and Planned Parenthood) and Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) who has a 100% NARAL rating and a 75% Planned Parenthood rating.

Naomi Seligman, the deputy director of CREW, was formerly the communications director of Media Matters, a watchdog group that claims there is a conservative bias in the mainstream media.

Roger Hunt receiving death threats?

From Life News:

The state representative who was one of the lead sponsors of a measure that would ban all abortions in the state has become the victim of repeated harassment. He has received harassing calls and emails at both the legislature and his home and they have included death threats.

South Dakota state Rep. Roger Hunt says he and his family have been victimized by harassment from abortion advocates upset that the state has been working to ban abortions.

"We've received some at home, and we've gotten emails," he told Family News in Focus. "The governor did arrange for the state highway patrol and local county sheriff to pass through our neighborhood more often than usual and look for things, but I haven't had anybody actually initiate any actions."

The state legislature has also removed any personal contact information for Hunt from its web site to make sure people opposed to the ban don't get it to further harass him.

Hunt told CNS News that That "it is the people's right to voice their feelings to a politician," but the harassment has apparently gone further than that.

The lawmaker indicated that the threats have included hateful messages wishing that his family would be raped or that he would burn in hell. Hunt told CNS News that other legislators have received threats as well and one lawmaker received a bunch of bent coathangers in the mail.

"People will say things when they're disgruntled," Hunt said. "It doesn't mean they'll follow through with it."

Hunt told Cybercast News that most of the harassment has come from out-of-state people and that most of them, when asked, appear to be uninformed about the abortion ban legislation.

South Dakota voters will consider an attempt in November by abortion advocates to overturn the abortion ban. Should they support the ban at the polls, Planned Parenthood, which runs the only abortion business in the state, can still take the measure to court.