Follow the money: anti-abortion groups and Schiavo...there's a plot.

Question: who funded the schindlers?

follow the money.

Answer: right-wing (some of them linked to terrorist threats against doctors) anti-abortion groups.

why? Do they really care about this basically heretofore unknown woman?

because they ALREADY WANTED TO MAKE A CONNECTION TO ABORTION. Otherwise, why the interest?

obviously, this was intended, and still may end up, an end run around Roe v Wade, by semantically linking the prohibition to ending a life merely because it is no longer (or NOT YET) conscious or functioning.

Next question: Who attempted to overturn the courts?

follow the power.

right wing politicians

why? did they make a law about a single person (which is unconstitutional, btw) because they were concerned about the rights of one woman, to the point of cutting short vacations and rushing through legislation?

because THEY WANTED TO RESHAPE THE JUDICIARY BRANCH, by using this event to highlight their mantra of "activist judges" and find a way to pull down and discredit a judiciary system that might actually hold to the constitution instead of the whim of the republican majority. Did they care about Schiavo, really? Or are they looking ahead, trying featherbed the judicial system with their own sycophants to protect THEMSELVES from being called on their excesses of power in the future. They didn't want to have constantly watch their back as they plundered and raped the country and the world. They didn't want to have to face judicial inquiries into election fraud, and other crimes they have already committed and intend to commit. If you don't want to stop being a criminal, preemptively remove those that would catch you.

QUESTION: Why make an intensely private matter a vainglorious fellini spectacle?

Follow the beneficiaries of fanaticism.

Did the bizarre "supporters of Terri", the jesus on a trailer hitch, the juggling for jesus freaks, the bizarro whackjobs really care about the dignity of the woman, or her family (either side), or the unconnected families at the same hospice who had to suffer a guantlet of clowns and police and security measures in order to see their own loved ones?

No. So what was their intent? To GET ON THE NEWS and spread their own warped view of righteousness to a wider audience than they normally have access to. The proof is their moving the debacle to the ME's office. how were they supporting her THEN? the answer is they weren't, they never were, and the reality of her condition was never going to get in the way of their own view of religious ecstacy.



QUESTION; Who framed the event in such a way to influence public opinion (even though they failed)?

Follow the complicit.

Was the media so outraged and concerned over this woman's plight that they forgot to fact check and verify information? Was it their zeal and concern that made them run roughshod over actual experts and attempt to demonize Schiavo, to add a hyphenated version of schiavo to schindler-schiavo? Was it in their best interests, did it help the story, did it enhance their integrity and improve their ability to inform the public? Was that question even asked?

No. But it DID prove their complicity to the money, to the power, to the influence of the politicians, the idealogues, the fascist theocracy, to the COVERUP AND DISSOLUTION OF truth, of credibl information, essentially, their complicity to undermine THEMSELVES, to throw themselve prostrate on the alter of neocon fascism, to fawn in the trappings of propaganda and spin in the hopes of a seat next to the unclothed emperor.
To become Quislings in hope of a future boon.

Thanks for posting this-- it's as good a summary as any I've seen.

it had been percolationg for a day, and had to write it down.

Even Death Does Not Quiet Harsh Political Fight
By CARL HULSE and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Published: April 1, 2005


WASHINGTON, March 31 - The political battle over Terri Schiavo erupted anew on Thursday as conservatives portrayed her death as the result of an unaccountable judiciary and Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, threatened retribution against the judges who refused to intercede in the case.

"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today," said Mr. DeLay, who was instrumental in pushing emergency legislation that gave the federal courts jurisdiction over Ms. Schiavo's care, only to see them decline to order her feeding tube restored. Saying that the courts "thumbed their nose at Congress and the president," Mr. DeLay, of Texas, suggested Congress was exploring responses and declined to rule out the possibility of Congressional impeachment of the judges involved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/01/politics/01pols.html?th&emc=th

i have been on the same theory all morning. It is so obvious. Link this to abortion and such, make a huge political play and bring the end into the spotlight for ALL to see, sit back and watch the courts do what they are there to do (they knew nothing was going to change), now they have the justification to blow away the filibuster and get the judges they want! SAD!!!:evilfrown:

The Bush brothers running from this case proved that. They didn't care at all about Schavio and not even the Schindlers. They were only pawns in their little games. Hence why they sold their name's of people to rightwing "pro-life" groups. So all in all the Schindlers got what they wanted (money) and so did the republican politicians who were in on this. They learned their little religious base will jump whenever they say even if it's over a bridge into the ocean with rocks at the bottom that'd surely kill them. They'd still jump.

This deserves wider attention. Home Page at least.

with a bone to promoting the incredible gall of a Jeb Bush candidacy in 2008.

Regardless, note how FAR the MSM is from reporting on the story behind the story, the opinions of most Americans or even a glimmer of suspicion about what you have posted that MUST spring to any reasonable mind, moreso any REAL journalist.

The fact the loonies criticized the failures of the Bushes to really intervene shows the story is not even crafted to the loon's side but totally to whatever odd spin Rove might like to take as events unfold.

The MSM reflects and creates the distraction and weakening of America and no one is allowed to break the illusion.

A big :thumbsup: from me.

You're very on with your post. In Bush's little public speech about protecting the innocent in life was a dead key with what you say and that's when I knew for sure this was about abortion. They will indeed be trying soon to get rid of Roe V Wade. I give it a couple more months before they try something else with this. Right now they are probably working on the judges and then they can start working on Roe V. Wade.