Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
9/10/2015 11:18:18 PM

Al Qaeda Leader Al-Zawahiri Declares War on ISIS 'Caliph' Al-Baghdadi

ABC News


Al Qaeda Leader Al-Zawahiri Declares War on ISIS 'Caliph' Al-Baghdadi (ABC News)


Just ahead of the fourteenth anniversary of al Qaeda's 9/11 attacks on the U.S., the leader of the terrorist group took aim in an angry speech at a mortal enemy -- but not American “crusaders” this time. Rather, the object of his tirade was the leader of ISIS in a declaration of war that will “irreconcilably” divide the two terror groups in a way the U.S. may be able to exploit, experts say.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian doctor who replaced Osama bin Laden as the head of al Qaeda four years ago, in a new audio message accused ISIS top leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of “sedition” and insisted the Iraqi terrorist recluse was not the leader of all Muslims and militant jihad as “caliph” of the Islamic State, as al-Baghdadi had claimed 14 months ago in a Mosul mosque.

“It’s pretty interesting,” said former National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen. “Zawahiri until now has not been willing to openly condemn Baghdadi and ISIS. It highlights how deep the division is between al Qaeda leadership and ISIS. It suggests that the differences are irreconcilable.”

Had ISIS and al Qaeda realigned by joining forces, it “would be terrible,” said Olsen, an ABC News contributor.

DIGITAL FEATURE: What Is ISIS?

American Al Qaeda to ISIS: No Paradise for You

'Annoying' But Deadly? The Debate Over Killing ISIS's 'Twitter Tough Guys'

That division -- now formally declared by the highest ranking official of the group that slaughtered almost 3,000 Americans 14 years ago in multi-pronged aviation attacks -- could provide an opening that American counter-terrorism operatives could find a way to exploit, he added.

Olsen said the U.S. could use misinformation to further pit the two jihadi menaces against each other and encourage the series of gunfights and assassinations each has waged against the other -- like when ISIS reportedly killed a top Zawahiri emissary trying to broker a ceasefire between the fighters in Syria in February 2014.

The fledgling franchise in Afghanistan and Pakistan, known as IS Khorasan Province, “has been fighting non-stop” with the Taliban and al Qaeda there, a counter-terrorism official told ABC News. “Fighting each other makes our job easier,” said the official in Afghanistan.

In the new audio tape, which was released online Wednesday and accompanied by a still image or al-Zawahiri and text of his speech, the al Qaeda leader appeared to confirm that he had not directly addressed infighting among the jihadis of ISIS and al Qaeda’s Syrian wing, Jabhat al-Nusra or the al Nusra Front, for fear of legitimizing ISIS.

ISIS, formerly the al Qaeda branch in Iraq, split from the larger group two years ago. In the tape, al-Zawahiri complained that Baghdadi had ignored Muslims suffering in Gaza and in Pakistan.

“We preferred to respond with as little as possible, out of our concern to extinguish the fire of sedition,” Zawahiri explained, “but Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his brothers did not leave us a choice, for they have demanded that all the mujahideen reject their confirmed pledges of allegiance, and to pledge allegiance to them for what they claim of a caliphate.”

“Everyone was surprised” by Baghdadi’s declaration anointing himself the fourth caliph in Islamic history, Zawahiri remarked, saying al-Baghdadi had done this “without consulting the Muslims.”

Do you have information about this or another story? CLICK HERE to send your confidential tip in to Brian Ross and the ABC News Investigative Unit.

Al-Zawahiri's sour grapes speech, however, appeared to have been recorded last spring, analysts said, and reiterated past pledges of loyalty to Taliban leader Mullah Omar, who recently was confirmed dead by the Taliban. That appeared to mark a rare misstep for al Qaeda and al-Zawahiri, who once was able to leak his videotaped response to news events as quickly as one week later, but who now is in hiding with a $25 million U.S. bounty on his head.

Nicholas Palarino, a recently retired senior congressional counter-terrorism adviser who teaches about terrorism at Georgetown University, said al-Zawahiri being forced to call out al-Baghdadi weakens the power of both al Qaeda and ISIS and may offer Arab governments a window of opportunity to drive a wedge between the jihadi groups and those who are flocking to fight in Syria and Iraq.

“Moderate Muslims need to exploit this rift. The leaders of Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt can explain the differences between these two groups to the world’s Muslims,” Palarino said.

Though it didn't foresee the rise of ISIS, former CIA Director Michael Hayden said the intelligence community had predicted a rift in al Qaeda emerging after bin Laden's death -- something like what's happening now between ISIS and al Qaeda, which the U.S. could use to its advantage.

"It would be a good idea to do so. We always thought that the death of bin Laden could create a rift between the Egyptians and the other Arabs inside al Qaeda since Zawahiri was an Egyptian. Seems to have played out," former CIA Director Michael Hayden told ABC News.

When it comes to exploiting the rift between two deadly extremist groups, however, Hayden cautioned, "You need to be careful."

CLICK HERE to follow the Brian Ross Investigative Unit on Facebook.





Ayman al-Zawahiri, who succeeded Osama bin Laden, challenges Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s claims.
Sour grapes speech


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+2
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
9/10/2015 11:39:54 PM

Migrants' long and winding road to Europe turns cold, muddy

Associated Press

Refuggees and migrants pass from the northern Greek village of Idomeni to southern Macedonia, Thursday, Sept. 10, 2015. Thousands of people, including many families with young children, braved torrential downpours to cross Greeceâs northern border with Macedonia early Thursday, after Greek authorities managed to register about 17,000 people on the island of Lesbos in the space of a few days, allowing them to continue their journey north into Europe. (AP Photo/Giannis Papanikos)


BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) — Soaked to the bone and ankle deep in mud, thousands of people seeking refuge in Europe are finding that their path to a new life is growing harder by the hour.

Torrential rains poured as an unprecedented 7,000 trekkers crossed the Greek border into Macedonia on Thursday past rows of camouflage-jacketed police. Children stumbled into mud-filled potholes and had to be pulled back out, bawling, into their mothers' arms. People struggled to find anything — plastic sheets, garbage bags, even a beach umbrella — to shield themselves from an unrelenting deluge.

And yet nothing could dampen their hopes of reaching the heart of Europe, where asylum and border security systems are already in danger of being overwhelmed in the migration crisis.

"I'm not going to be afraid of anything," said Waseem Absi, a 30-year-old from Ariha in northern Syria, as he held a disassembled pup tent over his head and trudged up a muddy slope alongside four friends. He said he hopes to reunite with relatives in the Netherlands.

The sudden onset of autumn has taken tens of thousands by surprise all along the Balkans route from Greece to Hungary, the main gateway to Western Europe for more than 160,000 asylum seekers already this year.

As recently as last week, those making the epic journey, much of it on foot, were baking in a region-wide heat wave and free to sleep under the stars. Now they're without shelter and struggling to keep campfires burning, highlighting the inadequate support provided by several European governments at each border crossing.

Conditions also rapidly deteriorated on Hungary's southern border with Serbia, where an estimated 3,000 crossed at an approved rail site or illegally by ducking under the razor-wire marking that frontier. Garbage-strewn fields turned to mud, trapping relief agency trucks whose wheels spun and flecked passing migrants with sodden earth.

With Hungary and other nations providing few facilities on their borders, travelers have poured into the few tents erected recently by relief workers trying to compensate for the lack of government support.

"The medical tent is full of people — people who aren't actually sick, by the way, but just want a warm place to sit down. We can't get rid of them," said Gabor Gyurko, a volunteer for the Catholic charity Caritas, which is providing medical care at a police-supervised collection point. Medics gave first aid to several mothers and their children and covered them with thermal blankets.

Gyurko said he expected the volume of ill people to surge with the chilly, wet weather "especially among people living in such close quarters."

International aid workers said Hungary has failed to provide sufficient shelter at migrant bottlenecks on the border, particularly near the village of Roszke. The country instead is investing in a new security regime, supposed to begin Sept. 15, designed to close its border with Serbia backed by more than 3,000 troops, many of whom conducted drills Thursday in cooperation with Serbian colleagues.

"The situation here is really a big disaster because a lot of refugees are coming every hour from the border from Serbia to Hungary, to Roszke, and we don't have real infrastructure here," said Kathrin Niedermoser, whose Austrian charity for asylum seekers provided what food it could keep from getting wet. "We have small tents, now it's raining, and all the things are getting wet."

She said Hungary should deploy "big tents where people can come, sleep and have a rest. We don't even have electricity, which means we don't have warm water during the whole day."

Conditions improved farther north on the route. Austrian police said more than 6,000 crossed Thursday from Hungary, chiefly near the town of Nickelsdorf, where authorities struggled to find enough buses, trains and emergency shelter. Most went to nearby towns, but more than 1,000 stayed in huge halls filled with beds near the border.

Earlier, Austria's rail company suddenly canceled all of its cross-border service with Hungary, citing what it called "a massive overload."

That raised tensions at Budapest's main Keleti station, where dozens of daily trains were scheduled to reach the Austrian capital, Vienna. Several hundred people from the Middle East, Asia and Africa waited up to 10 hours with tickets in hand as police penned them into one area. Volunteers from the Migration Aid charity used bullhorns to try to reassure the crowd in both Arabic and English that the trains would come.

Confusion reigned as Keleti's huge arrivals and departures board showed many westbound trains to Austria, but two dozen police in surgical masks and gloves — a measure they take fearing the foreigners might have contagious diseases — blocked their access to the platforms. Hungarians and other international passengers were ferried by police along the edge of the asylum seekers to the trains.

As rumors spread that Austria was canceling services, officials scrambled to shift train schedules. After hours without clear information and amid tears of joy and relief, police gradually allowed the crowd through to trains to the border near Nickelsdorf, where they faced short walks to Austrian aid workers.

"My husband is waiting for me in Vienna. I cannot wait to see him," said Nuha al-Gumaa, a native of Aleppo, Syria, who was traveling with two brothers and her four children, including daughters Gaber, 3, and Nadine, 4. "We were on the border (with Serbia) a day ago, but reached here by walking and by bus. We slept in a garden last night. We all want so badly for this journey to be done."

The International Organization for Migration reported Thursday that 432,761 people have entered via Mediterranean routes, either from Libya to Italy or from Turkey to Greece, so far this year. That shattered previous forecasts that such traffic might reach 400,000 by the end of 2015.

Germany, the most popular destination for asylum seekers because of Chancellor Angela Merkel's pledge to provide refuge particularly to Syrians, has received more than 30,000 people since Saturday, when it and Austria struck an emergency deal with Hungary to accept thousands who had marched out of refugee camps and Keleti station toward Austria.

But Austria said it was reviewing its policy of permitting Germany-bound migrants to pass through without even registering and expressed hope that Hungary's tougher border measures would allow the country to regain control of its own asylum system.

A growing immigration crisis (video)


Denmark initially sought to block hundreds of asylum seekers from trying to pass through the country to Sweden, another top destination because of its strong reputation for welcoming refugees.

But Denmark's police chief, Jens Henrik Hoejbjerg, said the country would permit all asylum seekers to reach Sweden unimpeded. That decision flies in the face of European Union rules that refugee claims should be made in the first EU entry point.

"We can't detain foreigners who do not want to seek asylum here," Hoejbjerg said. "There is no other option than to let them go, and we cannot prevent them from traveling wherever they want."

More than 3,200 had entered Denmark from Germany since Sunday, of which just 668 people have sought asylum, he said.

Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lofven expressed surprise that Denmark hadn't stopped the asylum seekers because "all countries must register refugees."

In the Syrian capital of Damascus, the government of President Bashar al-Assad made a rare comment on the migration crisis, saying Europeans only had themselves to blame for backing rebel groups fighting the government for the past four years.

Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi said people mostly were fleeing areas held by anti-government forces, including the Islamic State group. He said Europe "sent terrorists" to Syria and imposed economic sanctions designed to drive people from the country. Government-held territory remained safe, he said, and "any Syrian abroad can return to his country any time he wants."

___

Associated Press writers Costas Kantouris in Idomeni, Greece, Alexander Kuli and Balint Szlanko in Roszke, Hungary, Philipp-Moritz Jenne in Nickelsdorf, Austria, Pablo Gorondi in Budapest, Jan Olsen in Copenhagen, Denmark, Jamey Keaten in Geneva, Switzerland, and Albert Aji in Damascus contributed to this report.

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
9/10/2015 11:59:25 PM
Despite Republicans launching an all-out campaign against the nuclear deal, President Obama grabs a big win:

Iran nuclear deal survives: Democrats block disapproval vote

Associated Press

Speaker of the House John Boehner of Ohio, left, followed by Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., walks into a news conference about the Iran deal after meeting with members of the House Republican leadership in Washington, Wednesday Sept. 9, 2015. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)


WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Senate voted to uphold the hard-fought nuclear accord with Iran on Thursday, with Democrats overcoming ferocious Republican opposition and delivering President Barack Obama a legacy making victory on his top foreign policy priority.

A disapproval resolution for the agreement fell two votes short of the 60 needed to move forward as most Democratic and independent senators banded together against it. Although House Republicans continued to pursue eleventh-hour strategies to derail the international accord and Senate Republicans promised a re-vote, Thursday's outcome all but guaranteed that the disapproval legislation would not reach Obama's desk.

As a result the nuclear deal will move forward unchecked by Congress, an improbable win by Obama in the face of unanimous opposition from Republicans who control Congress, Republican candidates seeking to replace him in the Oval Office and the state of Israel and its allied lobbyists in the U.S.

Beginning next week, Obama will be free to start scaling back U.S. sanctions to implement the agreement negotiated by Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers. The accord aims to constrain Iran's nuclear ambitions in exchange for hundreds of billions of dollars in relief from international sanctions.

"This vote is a victory for diplomacy, for American national security and for the safety and security of the world," the president said in a statement. "Going forward, we will turn to the critical work of implementing and verifying this deal so that Iran cannot pursue a nuclear weapon."

Frustrated Republicans railed against Democrats for using a procedural vote to block final passage of the disapproval resolution, and issued grim warnings about a deal they contend could serve only to enrich Tehran and leave it closer to building a bomb when constraints begin to ease in 10 or 15 years. They promised that Thursday's vote would not be the Senate's last word, and moments after it was over Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell set the stage for another next week.

"No amount of saying this issue is over makes it over," McConnell declared, adding that if a Republican wins the White House next year, "I say to Iranian observers of the debate, (the deal) will be looked on anew."

But Democrats led by Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada promised that any further votes would have the same outcome "and are just simply a waste of time."

"People around the world should know today's outcome was clear, decisive and final," Reid said.

In the House, Republicans had not given up on blocking the deal against all odds. After backtracking on plans to vote on the disapproval resolution when it began to look short of support in the Senate, House Republicans lined up votes on several related measures.

Late Thursday they agreed on a party-line 245-186 vote to a measure specifying that Obama had not properly submitted all documents related to the accord for Congress' review, and therefore a 60-day review clock had not really started.

That will be followed Friday by votes on a bill to approve the accord — which is doomed to fail, but Republicans want to force Democrats to go on record in favor of the agreement — and on a measure preventing Obama from lifting congressionally mandated sanctions on Iran.

"This debate is far from over, and frankly, it's just beginning," said House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican. "This is a bad deal with decades-long consequences for the security of the American people and our allies. And we'll use every tool at our disposal to stop, slow, and delay this agreement."

Underscoring the fierce politics, the National Republican Senatorial Committee sent out press releases within moments of the Senate vote criticizing Democratic senators for their votes.

Some House Republicans, buoyed by a favorable ruling this week in a lawsuit they filed over Obama's health care law, have begun suggesting a lawsuit to stop the accord. Boehner called that "an option that is very possible."

Yet the House Republican maneuvers seemed to have little chance of bearing results, and White House officials sarcastically branded them the "Tortilla Coast Gambit," a reference to a Capitol Hill restaurant where tea party lawmakers plan their moves. Even before the Senate voted, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was boasting of the administration's success.

___

Associated Press writers Darlene Superville, Nancy Benac, Alan Fram and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
9/11/2015 11:13:17 AM

No end in sight for 9/11 suspects’ trial

Liz Goodwin
Senior National Affairs Reporter
Yahoo Politics
September 11, 2015

Yahoo News Photo Illustration/AP

Fourteen years since the Sept. 11 attacks transformed the nation and launched two wars, the five men accused of masterminding the crime are still waiting for their trial to begin in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four associates have been in U.S. custody for more than 10 years. But the latest in the military’s hapless effort to try them — which began in 2012 — has ground to a halt, as the judge, Col. James Pohl, addresses allegations that an FBI informant attempted to infiltrate one of the defendants’ legal teams. The court hasn’t been in session since last April when Pohl declared the proceedings suspended again after 30 minutes. Even if he solves this particular problem when the court reconvenes next month, dozens of other motions and complaints that have been on hold for a year and a half await him.

The handful of people who have been watching the excruciatingly slow case closely — journalists, family members of those killed on Sept. 11, attorneys — say they believe it will be years before a jury is selected and the trial actually begins. Some have given up hope that the five accused mass murderers will ever face justice.

“I don’t know if it’s going to happen in my lifetime,” said Rita Lasar, 83, whose brother died in the 9/11 attacks. Lasar formed an organization called Sept. 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, which lobbied unsuccessfully for the accused plotters to be tried in the federal court system.

The Obama administration attempted to move the five men from Guantánamo to be tried in a federal court in Manhattan in 2009, before fierce political blowback led by a vocal faction of 9/11 families killed the plan. (The Bush administration had set the five on course to be tried in a military tribunal before the Supreme Court knocked down that approach.) Congress passed a law blocking all transfers of Guantánamo detainees to U.S. soil. Obama reformed the military commissions, to be more palatable to human rights critics, and restarted the proceedings there in May 2012.

Rita Lasar (Photo: Gordon Donovan/Yahoo News)

Those opposed to the move to federal court wanted swift military-style justice for the accused plotters in a tribunal that made it easier to get convictions and guard government secrets. But the result has been very different. The untested system is a “defense lawyer’s absolute dream,” according to David Remes, who represents several Guantánamo detainees. Attorneys are able to file motion after motion, delaying the start of the death penalty trial, in part because no one really knows what the rules are. In the meantime, the federal court system has successfully convicted terrorist after terrorist.

“There’s no question that if these cases were tried in federal court, they would have been over long, long ago,” Remes said.

But Jason Wright, a former attorney on Mohammed’s defense team before resigning last year, said that the ever-changing rules of the new court were not a bonus for him or his team.

“I think the biggest challenge is trying to litigate in an environment where the rules change constantly, where Kafka controls the design,” he said. “You’re told to follow rules that you’ve never been shown, especially the classification rules, and it’s just extraordinarily difficult.”

The commissions are carefully set up to guard government secrets. The court proceedings are shown to family members and observers via video feed on a 40-second delay. A court censor is able to cut the feed whenever classified information is shared out loud — triggering a large, red flashing light in the courtroom. In the early days of the proceedings, even just the word torture would trigger the flashing light and cut feed, according to Carol Rosenberg, a Miami Herald reporter who has covered the proceedings since the beginning.

Slideshow: 9/11: Then and now >>

Now, the classification rules are loosening slightly. James Harrington, who defends accused plotter Ramzi bin al-Shibh, said that one small sign of progress in the proceedings is that the defense lawyers are signing a memorandum to finally grant them access to classified discovery materials from the prosecution. For years, the defense lawyers were not allowed access to materials that showed that their clients were tortured in CIA custody, even though several news agencies had reported that information publicly. The release of portions of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s “Torture Report” last year has given defense attorneys greater access to this material.

The prosecution, led by Brig. Gen. Mark Martins, said it will fight for convictions no matter how long it takes.

“We are committed to a sustainable justice under law, however long that takes,” a Defense Department spokesman said in a statement. “In the meantime, those who stand accused of crimes are detained securely, humanely and legitimately while facing specific charges.”

But time takes its toll. Rosenberg, the Miami Herald reporter, notes that few Americans seem to even realize this trial is taking place. Ten years ago, many news outlets predicted the Sept. 11 proceedings would be the “trial of the century.” Now, they barely register as a blip on the national consciousness, despite the country’s ongoing fixation with the events of Sept. 11 and their aftermath.

“It is disappointing that so many people don’t realize the Pentagon is trying to hold the Sept. 11 trial at Guantánamo and so don’t know about the fundamental issues that have bogged it down​,” Rosenberg said in an email.

Colleen Kelly, another Sept. 11 family member who opposes military commissions, said she thinks having the trial far away in Cuba has given the proceedings an “out of sight, out of mind” quality.

“There’s no doubt in my mind that if this pretrial hearing was in midtown Manhattan, there would be more media coverage,” Kelly said.

That’s unlikely to happen any time soon, however. Congress shows no sign of wanting to change its law preventing the transfer of Guantánamo detainees to U.S. prisons or courts. And as long as the trial remains forgotten, there’s no pressure to change that.


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+0
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
9/11/2015 11:24:34 AM

Investigation or Political Theater? 6 Facts About the Congressional Hearing on Planned Parenthood

Jennifer Gerson Uffalussy
Contributing Writer
September 9, 2015

Which was it? You be the judge. (Photo: Getty Images)

On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee commenced the first of its series of hearings intended to examine the abortion practices of Planned Parenthood.

The hearings, officially titled “Planned Parenthood Exposed: Examining the Horrific Abortion Practices at the Nation’s Largest Abortion Provider,” were triggered by a series of undercover “sting” videos released by the antiabortion activist group the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) over the past two months; the CMP alleges that Planned Parenthood is illegally selling donated fetal tissue specimens for profit and has used the videos to relaunch a national conversation regarding the implementation of a federal 20-week abortion ban.

House Democrats say that the highly edited videos have been widely discredited by experts and that the continued reaction by Republicans is a blatant attempt by conservatives in the party to curb women’s reproductive rights and bring the issue of abortion to the forefront during an election year.

The CMP now faces mounting legal threats regarding the practices they utilized in executing their undercover “stings.” But its videos have spurred pro-life activists to call for the defunding of Planned Parenthood, which receives federal money for women’s health services but not for providing abortions.

On Wednesday, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told the Associated Press that the investigation of Planned Parenthood was intended to “protect taxpayers” from the kind of “horrors” suggested by the secretly recorded videos. And Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., stated that 31 House members have signed on to a letter demanding the defunding of Planned Parenthood, with threat of a government shutdown otherwise — making it apparent that GOP leaders will have to strike some sort of deal with their Democratic counterparts to keep the government open next month.

Related: What I Learned Working the Front Desk at Planned Parenthood

But Wednesday’s hearing seemed to be stacked in favor of antiabortion activists, casting aside women’s health and general medical expertise. By a Fox News estimate, an average congressional hearing costs taxpayers $125,000. In the spirit of “protecting taxpayers,” here’s a glimpse into the hearing, which, in a statement, Planned Parenthood called “political theater.”

Was it? You be the judge.

1. “Abortion survivors” were being called as expert witnesses

Two of the four witnesses called to testify were so-called “abortion survivors” — that is, individuals who were born following unsuccessful abortions. As their only firsthand experience with abortion was before they were even born, it is difficult to conclude that they would have any true expertise regarding the matter.

One of the two “abortion survivors” who testified is Melissa Ohden, the founder of the Abortion Survivors Network. In 1977, Ohden’s biological mother, a 19-year old college student, experienced pregnancy complications that led her to choose to terminate her pregnancy while in her second trimester. Five days into the procedure to induce termination — which was conducted at St. Luke’s Hospital in Sioux City, Iowa — Ohden was delivered, still alive, by a nurse. She was then placed up for adoption.

In her testimony, Ohden asked the committee to remember her story while they “consider the horrors of what happens at Planned Parenthood each day,” despite the fact that her birth mother admittedly had not been treated at a Planned Parenthood affiliate clinic.

“We may not have survived abortions at Planned Parenthood, but the expectation for our lives to be ended by abortion are the very same as those who do lose their lives there,” she said. “And I have long believed that if my birthmother’s abortion would have taken place at a Planned Parenthood, I would not be here today. Completing over 300,000 abortions a year provides them with the experience to make sure that ‘failures’ like me don’t happen.”

Related: The Female Face Behind the Senate’s Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood

She concluded by saying, “My own tax dollars and yours go to fund an organization that has perfected the very thing that was meant to end my life.”

The other “abortion survivor” called to testify, Gianna Jessen, is no stranger to congressional hearings, having twice provided anti-choice testimony for previous hearings. She was also invited to attend the signing into law of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by President George W. Bush in 2002. Jessen’s activism focuses especially on ensuring that abortion bans do not provide exemptions for fetal abnormalities; she herself has cerebral palsy.

In her testimony, Jessen made multiple comparisons of Planned Parenthood to the actions of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust, notably comparing Planned Parenthood’s assertion that other health centers could not absorb the need to care for women who would otherwise not have access to health care to Hitler’s own propaganda machinations.

And like Ohden, she told the committee, “Planned Parenthood receives $500 million of taxpayer money a year, to primarily destroy and dismember babies.”

Not only do Jessen and Ohden have no medical expertise, no experience as a pregnant woman seeking an abortion, and no experience with Planned Parenthood as an organization, but they also fail to understand the critical detail that, already, no tax dollars go to fund abortion — at Planned Parenthood or anywhere.

2. Planned Parenthood was not asked by the committee to testify

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) has confirmed to Yahoo Health that no representatives from their organization were ever asked to testify at the hearing about the practices of their own organization.

3. Committee staff told the witnesses it called not to comment on the Center for Medical Progress or its founder, David Daleiden

During questioning following his testimony this morning, James Bopp Jr., the general counsel for National Right to Life, was asked by committee member Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, about his knowledge of CMP founder David Daleiden’s involvement and actions while “engag[ing] in the false and misdirected, distorted and maybe criminal videos” that the CMP had released.

Bopp replied that he had “been advised by the committee staff that this hearing is not on that subject and that I should not comment.”

4. A committee member admitted that the House Judiciary Committee has neither seen nor asked for the unedited CMP videos

Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., disclosed that the committee had watched only the highly edited videos that are available to the general public online.

Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., asked Rep. Franks repeatedly if the committee was in the possession of the unedited version of the CMP tapes.

At first, Franks told Cicilline, “The unedited full footage of these videos is online. All you have to do — is that incorrect? CMP has stated they’ve released it online months — weeks ago. And so the point is, I would only hope that my friends on the minority would actually look at that video.”

When Cicilline pointed out that even the versions of the tapes that the CMP claimed were unedited were actually confirmed to be edited and asked again if the committee had the original source footage from the CMP, Franks replied, “The answer is no, we do not. But I would suggest we’re in possession of enough of it to indicate that living human, viable babies are being murdered at Planned Parenthood and their bodies parts are being harvested.”

Franks refused to answer Cicilline’s questions about whether the committee had even requested the original source material from the CMP.

5. No medical experts have been called to testify

Only four experts were called to testify at the initial hearing: the general counsel of the National Right to Life, the two “abortion survivors,” and a professor at Yale Law School.

Not a single scientist, physician, or biomedical researcher was asked to weigh in on the science of abortion, fetal development, or fetal tissue donation or research.

6. Only one our of four witnesses who testified were pro-choice

The sole pro-choice voice heard at the hearing was that of Priscilla “Cilla” Smith, the director of the Program for the Study of Reproductive Justice at the Information Society Project at the Yale Law School, who has twice argued cases before the Supreme Court.

Smith gave the longest testimony of any of the four witnesses. First she pointed to the heavy distortion and unreliability of the tapes released by the CMP, noting that it “is not surprising then that the forensic experts found that the manipulation of these videos means ‘they have no evidentiary value in a legal context.’ In fact, it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusions from these videos.”

Smith also testified that the videos also misrepresent the terms of the federal fetal tissue statute by citing the first portion of the statute outlawing “the transfer [of] any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration” without including the statutory section providing that “valuable consideration” does not include “reasonable” payments reimbursing costs. As Smith pointed out, this omission “leaves the misleading impression that Planned Parenthood is violating the law.”

She also offered clarification regarding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and the repercussions and meaning of the word “intact” when discussing a fetus, noting that the physical state of the fetus — whether it is “intact” or not — “doesn’t matter one way or the other under the partial-birth abortion statute. Rather, as interpreted and explained by the U.S. Supreme Court, the relevant fact for determining if a physician has performed a so-called partial-birth abortion under the statute is whether the physician had the intent ‘at the outset’ of the procedure” to both deliver a living fetus and to then “perform a separate step [following delivery] that causes fetal demise.”

Smith also called attention to the continued attempts to restrict women’s access to abortion, which is constitutionally guaranteed by Roe v. Wade, as well as the significant impact that defunding Planned Parenthood would have on women’s health care in general. As Smith noted, “Last year, Planned Parenthood provided birth control, lifesaving cancer screenings, STD testing and treatment, and other services to 2.7 million patients, and sex education to 1.5 million people.”

National polling has indicated that defunding Planned Parenthood is unpopular with the majority of voters.

In a press conference on Wednesday, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., whose home state saw a Planned Parenthood clinic under an arson attack last week, emphasized that “just like two years ago, people across the country are going to be very angry if Republicans allow the Tea Party to win the day and cause yet another unnecessary crisis.

“So once again, for the umpteenth time, we are here to ask Republican leaders to do the right thing — to join us at the table, put politics and partisanship aside, and build on the bipartisan deal we reached in 2013.

“We know it can be done — we’ve done it before — and it shouldn’t take another crisis for us to be able to do it again.”

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1