Friday, May 29, 2009

Abortion is Murder, June 2009, 7-2

Formerly Stop the Killing of Young People (skyp) and soon, perhaps, Stop Killing Preemies

June, 2009, Vol. 7, No. 2
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – cell--610-809-3388, machine -- 610-396-0332
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 31`
John Dunkle, Editor

Abortion is Murder, a weak, pathetic response to baby murder, is sent out at least once a month. If the gestapo hasn’t jailed you for defending the innocent realistically, you either have to tell me you want it or go the website. Faxes and emails are free but snail-mail is free only for POC’s, $100 for others.
Because I believe we should use every legitimate means, including force, in our attempt to protect those being tortured to death, I want to hear from people who’ve been forceful. I’d also like to hear from those who disagree with me.

Prisoners of Christ:
1. Evans, Paul Ross 83230-180, USP McCreary, P.O. Box 3000, Pine Knot, KY 42635
2. Gibbons, Linda - Vanier WDC, 655 Martin St. , P.O. Box 1040, Milton, ON, Canada L9T 5E6
3. Griffin, Michael 310249, Okaloosa Correctional Institution, Crestview FL 32539-6708 9/11 4. Howard, Peter Andrew 57760-097, FCI, Box 900, Safford, AZ 85546
5. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
6. Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia )
7. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, PO Box 300, Waymart, PA 18472
8. McMenemy, David Robert 08168-030, FCI Elkton, P.O. Box 10, Lisbon OH 44432
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, PO Box 474701, Des Moines, IA 50947
10. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
11. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Wasca Unit A, PO Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
12. Smart, Leland 07321-040, CAO, 801 College Rd. S.E., Grand Rapids, MI 49503
13. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25
14. Weiler Jr., Robert F. 39385-037, FCC - Delaware Hall, Box 1000, Petersburg VA 23804 (new)
15. Whitaker, Vincent , FCI, Box 699, Estill SC 29918

The Lord has asked people to make sacrifices related to opposing abortion which all but a handful have had too weak a heart to make. And they’ve looked for any pretense they could conjure up to claim that the sacrifice wasn’t required. They even deluded themselves, as people often do, into “believing” the pretense was real . . . When they get what they’ll get, they’ll fully deserve it. Peter Knight

Here are the conclusion and end notes for Chapter 1 of Eric Rudolph’s book on abortion, followed by a note from Patricia, Eric’s mother:

Using the act, Comstock arrested Madame Restelle twice. She barely escaped a lynch mob outside the courthouse after being released for lack of evidence. She was finally brought to ground after Comstock’s undercover agents purchased abortifacients from her. Facing years in prison and possible lynching, she committed suicide by slitting her own throat.
The newspapers joined the crusade. The same courageous journalists (George Jones and Editor Louis John Jennings) who used the New York Times to bring down the corrupt Boss Tweed gave extensive coverage to the abortion problem. The paper was soon filled with stories about the horrors of prostitution and back- alley abortion mills. Jennings sent a reporter, Augustus St. Clair, undercover to expose the illicit abortion trade in New York City. In a series of hard-hitting articles, St. Clair exposed the bloody business.56
Coincident with the anti-abortion crusade was the war against “white slavery”— prostitution. Maternity homes for pregnant prostitutes and abandoned women sprang up all over the country. John McDowell set up maternity shelters in New York City’s notorious Five Points area (1831). With the financial help of businessmen Arthur Tappan, McDowell founded the Magdalen Society. Helen Mercy Ward also worked with abandoned women at Erring Women’s Refuge in Chicago. These shelters were common until the 1940s. The age of consent was another problem that needed reform. Until 1874, for instance, Delaware’s age of consent was seven! By the 1870s most states had raised the age of consent to between sixteen and eighteen.

From start to finish, James Mohr’s thesis is a distortion. Marvin Olasky was right when he said Mohr went looking for history “with a handful of assumptions.”57 This is true of most Marxist historiography. Like any agenda-driven scholar, Mohr forced the facts to fit his preconceptions. First, if, as Mohr contends, abortion was widespread and accepted and the Doctors Crusade was simply a crass attempt by “regulars” to drive away their “irregular” competition, why didn’t the regulars simply ask the state legislature to make abortion a procedure that could only be performed by a licensed physician? By toughening the abortion laws they severely limited their ability to make money. If it was only about money, then why not monopolize abortion for themselves?
Second, in those days surgery was still a specialized knowledge. Abortifacients were the most common way abortionists performed their service. It was common for women poisoned by abortifacients to then seek the help of a “regular.” Doctors who worked in large cities had to deal with shoddy abortions on occasion. If they were going to monopolize abortion for themselves, why would they try to crack down on a practice that brought them more patients?
Third, at no time before or during the mid-nineteenth century campaign for better abortion laws was there a “pro-choice” lobby. The pro-abortion position doesn’t show up until the twentieth century. The socialist, feminist, spiritist minority were the only people in the 1800s talking about tolerance for abortions. But there was no pro-choice agenda. Those who imbibed Marxist or spiritist thought did so in private. They never dared to carry this nonsense into the halls of Congress or the state legislatures. To have argued in public for abortion-on-demand would have been hazardous to your health, as evidenced by the treatment given Madame Restelle. Before the twentieth century abortion was practiced primarily by prostitutes in back alley whorehouses, by spiritists and Marxists behind closed doors. It
was something the mainstream considered immoral and on the filthy edges of society. Those who performed abortions were disreputable doctors, snake oil salesman, and the dispensers of toxic abortifacients. The only opposition to the statutes came from libertarian doctors worried about more regulation. When these bills were debated, no one stood up in the state legislatures and insisted upon a “women’s right to choose”; no one demanded that the state should “keep away from women’s bodies”; no one warned the state to “stay out of its citizens bedrooms.” These hollow arguments would emerge from the sewers later on.
By 1880 every state in the Union had new statutes outlawing abortion at any stage of gestation. The Doctors Crusade was part of a larger reform movement of the nineteenth century. For the most part the anti-abortion effort was informed by the Christian ethic in the classical liberal tradition. Abortion and infanticide were never legal and acceptable in the West. But due to legal minimalism and the poverty of scientific knowledge, abortion had seeped through the cracks in American society. The Doctors Crusade was meant to push it back through, from which it would hopefully never return. Their hopes were overly optimistic. Things were changing fast. New perspectives were evolving. The anti-abortion legal regime would remain intact into the mid-twentieth century, when Roe v Wade overturned the Texas statute passed during Storer’s Crusade so many years before.

Chapter 1 References

1. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
2. James C. Mohr, Abortion in America: The Origins and Evolution of National Policy, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), p.16
3. Ibid. p. 75
4. Roe v. Wade
5. Eugene Quay, Justifiable Abortion, (P.T. 2) 49 Georgetown Law Review 395 (1961)
6..“What the Supreme Court Didn’t Know: Ancient and Early Christian Views on Abortion,” 1 Human Life Review, 1975, 5, 13
7. Miriam Johnson, Brief Lives
8. Confucius, Analects
9. Richard McKeon, ed. The Basic Works of Aristotle, (New York: The Modern Library, 1941)
10. Calvin’s Commentaries, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Broker Book House, 1981), p. 42
11. Andre Rivet (1573-1651) in Charles D. Provan, The Bible and Birth Control, (Monongehela, PA,: Zimmer, 1989), p. 87
12. Marvin Olasky, Abortion Rites: A History of Abortion in America, (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 1992) p. 31
13. Ibid, p. 30
14. Propriety v. Mitchell, in Archive of Maryland vol. 10 (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1936) pp. 182-185
15. Propriety v, Lumbrozo, in Archive of Maryland vol. 53 (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1936) p. 21
16. Olasky, Abortion Rites, p. 26
17. “The Cruel Mother,” in B.H. Bronson The Traditional Times of the Child Ballads, vol. 1 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1959) p. 292
18. Delaware Laws Chapter 22, section 6, p. 67 (1797)
19. Georgia Penal Code, section 17 (1811)
20. Minutes of the Common Council of New York City, vol. 3, p. 122
21. Mohr, Abortion in America, pp 102, 172
22. William Sanger, The History of Prostitution (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1858) pp. 579-80
23. Olasky, Abortion Rites, p. 67
24. Proceedings of the Free Convention of Rutland Vermont, July 25-27, 1858 (Boston: J.B. Yerrington, 1858) p. 9
25. Ibid., p. 10
26. Henry C. Wright, The Unwelcomed Child, (Boston: Beta Marsh, 1858) p. 21
27. Ibid, p. 114
28. Ibid, p. 102
29. Harmon Knox Root, The Love’s Marriage Lighthouse, (New York: Root, 1858) p. 8
30. Ibid, p. 348
31. Grace Adams and Edward Hutter, The Mad Forties (New York: Harper and Brother, 1942) p. 289
32. Root, Love’s Marriage Lighthouse, p. 194
33. “The Slaughter of the Innocent,” Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly, (August 29, 1874), p. 8
34. Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly, (August 29, 1874) p. 9
35. “Down With Babies,” Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly (November 29, 1873)
36. Henry Gibbons, “On Feticide,” Transactions of the California State Medical Society, vol. 8 (1877-78) pp. 27, 212
37. Benjamin F. Hatch, Spiritualist’s Iniquities Unmasked (New York: Hatch, 1859) p. 24
38. Ibid, p. 29
39. Mohr, Abortion in America, pp. 4, 8, 9
40. Boston Daily Times, (Jan. 4, 1845-Jan. 11, 1845)
41. Boston Daily Times, (Jan. 4, 1845)
42. Joseph Brevitt, The Female Medical Repository (Baltimore,1810) p 117
43. Boston Medical and Surgical Journal XXX, No. 15 (May 15, 1844) pp. 302-303
44. Olasky, Abortion Rites, p. 96
45. Ibid, p. 102
46. Ibid, p. 102
47. Journal of the Senate of the Fifteenth Session of the Legislature of the State of Minnesota (St. Paul, 1873) p. 198, 271, 343, 356, 358, 391
48. The News and Courier, (Charleston), December 5, 11, 13 1883)
49. John Beck, “Infanticide,” in Theodore Romeyn Beck, ed., Elements of Medical Jurisprudence (Albany, 5th ed., 1835) p. 199
50. Mohr, Abortion in America, pp. 35-36
51. Charles D. Meigs, The Philadelphia Practice of Midwifery, (Philadelphia, James Kay, 1842) p. 134
52. O.C. Turner, “Criminal Abortion,” Boston Medical and Surgical Journal vol. 5 (April 21, 1870) pp. 299-300
53. Horatio R. Storer, et. al., “Report on Criminal Abortion,” Transactions of the American Medical Association, XII (1859) pp. 75-78
54. Pius IX, “Apostolic Sedis,” part II, (1869)
55. Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, XVIII (Philadelphia, 1869) p. 937.
56. “The Evil of the Age,” in New York Times (Aug 30, 1871)
57. Olasky, Abortion Rites, Introduction, XIV

Thank U John for this newsletter and a continuation of Eric's book. He has asked me to thank U and to request that any comments not only be posted but also sent to him at the Supermax, both pro and con comments, since he is very confined right now for siding with Nichol's suit against the BofP on the bad food. Most of his so-called privileges have been shut down, even the use of his money for commissary items. He would appreciate hearing from U and others as to his book. I am at the present time working with printers to have it put into paperback and will sell it thru U or anyone else who wants to make $ for the unborn. Please let me know if there is any interest in getting help financially for printing this book. My latest figure for 100 copies
is $700, plus for a graphic artist for the front cover. If U know of an artist who would like to tackle this paperback cover, I would be glad to contact him. I am receiving bids from local artists now. Thanks again and continue the good fight against murdering our future generations. We, the family, believe Eric's book needs to be distributed to the public for the sake of history. Patricia

Remember this from Elizabeth Cox?

Also, I wish your newsletter included information from every prisoner on your list. How are they doing? Do you ever print a bio on these prolifers? I don't know much at all, if anything, about these people. It is hard to write to a complete stranger and know the letter is going to be a source of encouragement. (OK, guys and gal, send me stuff and I’ll post it.)

Paul Ross Evans responded throughout Vol, 6. The following, though, is inclusive. I seem to have misplaced the beginning, Paul. Send it to me again if you can.

Methodical Terrorism: How and Why

Eventually, I'd had enough. Days were spent at the local library reading countless books and accessing the Internet. There is a lot of knowledge out there, just floating around, and if you are courageous enough to obtain it, you can possess the might to torment those who are your enemies.
Who are your enemies? The United States government. Their face is hidden in the agendas of every political interest they protect from men like me: abortion on demand, the homosexual agenda, urban moral neutrality (spreading to the suburbs soon), the occult, pornography, and many others.
It's the reason they have caged me. I attempted to kill many. I followed through with many actions that I hoped would either terrorize and coerce others to change their ways or halt their actions through death. Through many circumstances, (some over which I had control, others that I did not), no one was harmed. I am caged now because of potential, and because of opinion.
The following is a detailed description of how I came to embark on these endeavors, and an examination of the ups and downs to each of these scenarios. Though I began with no money, and little or no knowledge of strategic warfare, I feel that I successfully challenged an evil government and those who oppress children and Christians in this nation.
I had a lot of little projects going on. When I was younger, and adhered for a time to the stoned 1990s generation's logic of laziness, I hated anything remotely related to work. This fact is curious because I started working at age fourteen. But somehow, something invaded my ethics. This logic of laziness landed me in the state prison; there I rediscovered my work ethic and the joys of working hard and keeping busy.
When I was back out and a free man, I stayed busy with work. Many little projects. I kept the lawn precisely, built and mended fences, built tattoo machines, tattooed and painted, assembled and disassembled electronics, and took part in anything that occupied my time.
I was a convicted felon, and had major trouble finding employment. In one month I applied for 60 jobs without receiving even a single returned phone call. I fled to the library. I read any book that remotely interested me several times over.
One day, like a thunderbolt out of the sky, I experienced several prolonged moments of keen clarity. I realized that I lived in the midst of a cesspool of moral decay and degeneration. I began to realize that, although I was responsible for my past mistakes, the modernism and moral neutrality that are currently so prevalent in our once-Christian nation had set me up to fail from the beginning. I wasn't such a failure, as the state prison system had taught me. I was confused as I saw things that I knew were wrong being called right. I was confused at having a big heart, and having it crushed in a nation where feelings, sentiment, and morals were no longer allowed. I was disgusted with mass media and how they made us all to feel that there is no hope — through news broadcasts filled with chaos — and followed with the false hope of "liberal peace." I was disgusted with the "modern" MTV culture that had made me feel indifferent for so many years, easing my mind to acceptance of sexual promiscuity, drug experimentation, drinking, committing crimes, and the like. I was also very angry that I had been caged for three years of my life and exposed to elements of society that I hadn't known existed. I was insulted by society's expectation that, after three years in such a horror house, I would go back and become an obedient and morally neutral follower.
In my younger years, I learned about the men and women who founded this country — Christians who fought violently against tyranny and oppression to establish and maintain a Christian nation. What had gone wrong? What had become of this seat of government over the years? I began to read, to research, to inform myself. At first this was difficult. Liberalism and the New American Socialist Empire (NASE) attempted at every turn to keep me from learning the truth.
But my eyes had begun to open, and I pressed on to learn the truth. In time, I assembled a hypothesis. In order to maintain power, establish control over the masses, and leave the citizenry weak enough to be easily subjugated, the rulers of America must accomplish, at all costs, two primary goals:
1. Disassemble any value system that would deem their authority illegitimate, evil, and in need of termination (or, failing that, to water it down to the point that it no longer has any real meaning)
2. Maintain numbers through population control
In time, I located sub-categories that functioned as a family to further the two primary goals. I also began to see how each of those two main goals worked to complement the other. All of this work collectively secures power at the highest level. Over the course of many hours of research I discovered offending parties in abundance. (I had already been aware of most of them.) I grouped each of these according to which of the two main goals it most worked to further.
The occult, primarily Satanism and other heathen "religions" work to undermine and replace the codes of Christianity with their primitive and barbaric ideologies. These corrode Christian morals and ethics, which teach that the things the American government currently enables are wrong, and so it is easy to see why the American government would wish to promote these occult beliefs — they directly challenge its main enemy, Christianity. These "religions" also work to cultivate a mind that questions the black-and-white moral life upon which America was founded, and instead to encourage belief in a dangerous moral gray area, which spreads at a cancerous rate throughout society. The stoned hippie in California, the flesh-peddling and money-worshipping pimp in an MTV or BET video, the promiscuous characters of the modern anglo teen drama, and the slouchy skateboarder in Anywhere, U. S. A., are all examples of what America uses to push moral neutrality on its citizenry. On all of these avenues, Americans are impartial and subjugated, exactly as "the top echelon" needs them to be.
After an American youth has listened long enough to a song telling him that it is all right to do drugs, sooner or later he is going to do drugs. God forbid anyone mention banning this type of behavior! "We must be free to express ourselves at all costs," no matter what behaviors are encouraged by such free expression.
On the flip side, teens help to fill the prison money machine when they inevitably use drugs.
Pornography works in this way as well. (For more on that topic, please see my article Identifying Atypical Fragmentation Involved in Modern Pornographic Idolatry at ) In today's society, we are not under any set of morals; it is morally acceptable to engage in any sexual act with anyone. After all, if a woman becomes pregnant, she has the option to abort. (tbc—I would say for three more issues at least)

Jim Kopp’s “Donut Discipline” continues from last issue:

In the real Red Zone, from bar closings till first garbage truck, S&H found that perfect silence, once you start listening to it, is actually a help because you can hear or see Cruisers quicker. But that works both ways, also. They can see you.
Read Red Zone “myths” worth working on:
--late night stroller, an author who has writer’s block...
--Got in an argument with my spouse/sibling and I’m walking around to cool off...
--The usual Stranger in a Strange Land myths: where’s the freeway to NY/Miami/Dallas/LA/Seattle (pick a destination and stick to it)?
-- A bag from the local Piggly Wiggly/Stop n’ Save/Turkey Hill, whatever, with a late night snack in it (ice cream pint really good: means you live close enough to go home to eat it before it thaws. Trivial sometimes can work...)

Another thought that occurred to S&H on the long runs ran along the lines of optimizing.
This is an idea that real pros get into. Anyone can have beginner’s luck, but to stick with it and concentrate on little glitches is the sign of a pro, pro anything, athlete, artist, whatever.
S&H began to think about buying paint. Why expose them selves to check-out clerks at a Home Depot (mindless as they are bless their hearts) if there were another way to do it? This is where a friend in the front office of the switch back home came in real handy.
She wasn’t even a CWA member because she was front-office staff, but she was real good friends with Stacey and in fact the two had grown up together.
One day Stacey & Betty (let’s call her Betty.. a nice name, Betty, you know...) were sort of letting their hair down. OK, they were having a beer without their husbands present, but it was in a bar where the bartender was Stacey’s next-door neighbor (the Irish immigrant guy with the handful of a teenage know the wire, big Altan fan...) and Seamus knew all about the girls and ratted them out to their husbands, and their husbands wouldn’t come down for a beer because the Super Bowl was over, and they couldn’t stand to be in a room with basketball (ptui!) on the TV.
So, back to Stacey & Betty. Stacey, asked like a good friend, Betty what her day was like.
“It was Hell,” she answered, “P.O.’s all day long, nothin’ but P.O.’s, P.O.’s, P.O.’s.”
“What the Hell’s a P.O.?”
“You never heard of a P.O.? Girl, you’re sittin’ on one.”
Stacey looked down, “A stool?”
“No, a P.O., where the Hell you think that stool came from? The goodness of the heart of the stool maker? Get a life. Seamus, my man!” she thumped her mug on the bar.
That industrious quick as quicksilver son of Hibernia did appear, quick to solve any discomfort of his loyal customers.
“Enlighten my good friend Stacey, here. She did, in fact,” (Betty said, elocuting precisely and with thinly-veiled arrogance of a cross-examining Perry Mason) “inquire as to what she was sitting on, and I did, in fact, give answer, to wit...” and she looked straight at Stacey. Stacey swung her head and looked straight in Seamus’ green eyes.
“P.O. ‘d,” she said.
“P.O. ‘d?” the capable publican rejoined, glancing (but not askance) at Betty.
“P.O.,” Betty said, “not P.O.’d. P.O.”
“Ahhh...” sighed Seamus, the centuries of the agony of his people sojourned across his face. “P.O., Ay, and there’s a ting, to be sure, and well you’ve said it, you have, ye bonnie rose.”
By this time Stacey’s mystification had, indeed, arisen to the level of the Ganges flooding over the top of the Puzzle of the Sphinxes, shrouded in mystery, wrapped in a Stimulus 5-year Plan...
“Ye are indeed settin’ upo’ a P.O., and if ye’d be so genteel as to cast yer noble gayeze upon all about,” he swept his hand, including all his duchy, “ye’ll see nawt but P.O.’s...” and he fell into a dark muse, with darker Celtic undertones.
After a pause to reflect upon the profundity of life’s sufferings, Seamus disappeared a second into his office behind bar and returned with a piece of thin, tracing, paper canary yellow, 81/2” wide and 51/2” tall, exactly one-half of a standard sheet of paper.
The edges of the paper had the little ghost shadow indicating it was an “NCR paper,” flimsy, like a credit card, flimsy, without the carbon paper.
In the upper left-hand corner was the bar’s address, typeset and printed in black ink, exactly like letterhead stationary.
In the upper right-hand corner was a series of lines, each labeled “Authorizing Purchasing Agent/Date/Originating Dept/P.O. No.” and things like that.
In the top middle it had two blocks and three blank lines, each side-by-side, that said, “Bill to” and “Ship to” and below that was a field of net-like boxes labeled at the top of each column “Quantity,” “Description,” Ordering,” “Number,” “Price per Unit,” and “Amount,” with a bottom “Total” line.
Betty picked up the P.O. and held it in front of Stacey.
“Learn to love that puppy and things come to your door. Cheap things,” said Seamus.
“Bulk things,” said Betty.
“Things with a bottom line to make your boss happy happy joy joy to tell his boss all about,” said Seamus.
“Did you say bulk things?” asked Stacey.
The two P.O. conspirators laughed – “Boxcars, Truckloads, Skiploaders, Ships, Trains, Boats, Planes, Pallets. I love it. Stuff, Bulk Stuff, cheaper by the gross, the ton, the barrel, on the dock, get my forklift.” Betty and Seamus were suffused with bulk-purchasing materialist joy.
“What about Sam’s Club?” Stacey said.
“Sweetie, there are things in P.O.-Land never heard of in Sam’s Club philosophy,” said Betty.
“Aye, that, and fer shooer, lass.”
They bought each other a beer just to celebrate volume.
Stacey stored up all these things in her noggin, and secretly couldn’t wait to be on a long trip with Hutch again, visions of paint barrels in her head.

Next issue: “Air Space Moral Theology”

Mr. Dunkle, The Lord has placed an idea in my mind. The idea really seems too simple to accomplish anything, but the Lord’s ways are not our ways. I call it the Ezekiel 33:5 Project. And it is a simple letter-writing campaign.
The idea entered my head as I was reading Ezekiel Ch. 33. I was suddenly concerned with my duty to warn others of the possible consequences of sin. I will be writing letters to abortionists, abortion mills, and pro-abortion groups warning them of God’s pending judgment. I have already started this with seven letters mailed out today. I ask that any able to do so assist by sending me addresses and names to whom I should send an “Ezekiel Letter.” Or that others join in by sending letters themselves.
I understand that on its face this seems unlikely to do much good, but it impressed upon my mind while reading the Divine Word. Therefore I shall try it.
Sincerely, Robert Weiler
P.S. Anyone sending an “Ezekiel Letter” should mark “Ezekiel 33:5” on the back flaps of the envelope.

Robert sent letters to: Alan Palmer, 7730 Davis Dr., Clayton, MO 63105; Buffalo GYN, 1241 Main St., Buffalo, NY; Planned Parenthood, 434 West 33rd St., New York, NY 10001; Alexander’s Women’s Group, 220 Alexander St., Rochester, NY 14607; The Family Medicine Center, 885 South St., Rochester, NY 14620; National Abortion Federation, 1755 Mass. Av. NW, Washington, DC 20036; Nat. Org, for Women, 1100 H St. NW, Washington, DC 20005;Met. Family Planning Inst., 5915 Greenbelt Rd., Berwyn Heights, MD 20770

I have two letters from Shelly. Here’s the March one:

Greetings in Jesus, I’m settled back in, in a good room, good bed, good roommates. They gave me nice blankets, new sheets, a big pillow, and nice clothes this time. I said I don’t want to leave now. And then we heard the ladies who went don’t like Waseca, MN., prison, so I really didn’t want to go! However, I believed it was God’s will for me to go, and I don’t want to be like Balaam. Besides, I don’t really have a choice now.
Apparently it was not the eye surgery that brought me back. Staff here says sometime they bring people back, and then they go in the next group. So I may be leaving again soon.
It was devastating when I saw the others leave, and I wondered why I was the only one they brought back. For days nobody would tell me anything, so I assumed it was the eye surgery. Then I remembered I prayed and asked God not to have me go if I shouldn’t. I was crying terribly on the way back though, and someone behind me on the bus kept saying, “It’s okay. Don’t cry.” I felt like telling her it was not okay, and to mind her own business. She was just trying to be nice, so I didn’t. Then when I got back, my dear Christian roommate got bad news and was devastated, crying terribly. I knew what not to say! 2 Corinthians 1:4
Hopefully I’ll still be sending a new address soon.
I don’t have my skyp/Abortion is Murder. I sent it to a friend. I don’t remember the young man’s name who got 40 years. He sounds very steadfast. May God bless him. I hope he’s getting a lot of mail, support, encouragement, and prayer support. May God bless him mightily in prison.
Jesus bless you too, John Love in Him, Shelley

That’s Paul Ross Evans, Shelley, and his powerful story begins above. I’ll post Shelley’s May letter next issue

I found Clay’s amended version of “The Liberty Tree Movement”:

Liberty Tree Movement
28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
Surrender The Pro-Life Movement suffered a crushing blow in the 2008 elections. Under President Barrack Hussein Obama there will be no pro-life Supreme Court appointments, so no change in abortion laws within the next two decades. It is time to surrender the Judicial battle, but not time to surrender.
The Republican Party has some promising leaders entering the national stage in 2012, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal among the front runners.
While the GOP is wisely looking for leadership within the nation's Governors, they have already started talking compromise. When asked if the GOP would move away from social issues (political speak for abortion), Flordia Republican Governor Charlie Grist said, "Republicans must strike a balance between those and more immediate concerns." While Republicans sou- search for middle-ground, they are rebuilding the Republican Platform as "Conservative-Lite." The first bridge-building plank to be removed from the Party Platform will be the Pro-life issue.
Within the political static of the day there is a glimmer of hope. That hope comes from California of all places. In the same election that gave us the most liberal president in modern history, the people of California passed Proposition 8 in a state-wide referendum. Fifty-two percent of the people of the progressively liberal State of California voted to eliminate same-sex marriage after the State's Supreme Court required the State to recognize it.
If the people of California can retake their State, we can retake our Nation. We do not have a national referendum, so there
will be no Prop 8 type national vote, but the Framers of our Constitution carefully provide us the means to correct an out-of-touch government.

Constitutional Amendment The new battle ground for the pro-life movement is found in the pages of the Constitution of the United States. The new fight is for a Constitutional Amendment, not a new Constitutional Amendment, but to return to the Constitution's orginal mandate. Had the Constitution not been changed, we would not have legalized abortion today.
Two Congressional actions, one in 1911, the other 1913, shifted the critical design of a balanced government, which our Constitutional Framers had so carefully crafted -- changes which James Madison would have labeled tyranny. "
Our Congressional Branch of Government has two Houses, each with its own mandate; The House of Representatives to represent the interest the people of its district, and the Senate to represent the interest of the State. The principle of a two-house legislature was central to the system of checks and balance built into our Constitution that no branch of government would dominate national control.
In the dawn of 1911 there were only 46 states (Arizona, New Mexico, Alaska & Hawaii were not yet states). Women could not vote (Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado & Washington being the exceptions), and many states had poll taxes and literacy requirements which prevented most blacks and the impoverished from voting.
It was a time when only men of 21 years and older counted for Congressional districting because only they could vote. It was a time demanding change and change was on the horizon. Four states had already given women the vote with California to follow the same year. With women making up more than half the population, Congress knew the new era would remove them and their tightly held ideals from power.
It was in this political landscape that Congress altered the balance of power with two dubious Congressional actions: The 1911 Reapportionment Act, and ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913.

House of Representatives Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution mandated a ratio of one U.S. Representative per 30,000 "voting citizens" (men 21 and older), a ratio the Framers judged would provide proper representation in Congress. The 1911 Reapportionment Act changed the Constitution by capping the number of U.S. House Members at 435, drastically altering constitutional intent of individual representation.
By calculating the number of 1911 voters based on today’s voting laws, we can extrapolate that had Congress not changed the Constitution we would have approximately 1,300 members of the House of Representatives today. These additional Members would return us to a House which could fulfill its mandate to represent the people of its district.

Senate Article I, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution mandated that the Senate represent the individual State's interest. For this reason the Constitution outlined that each State select two Senators by the State's Legislature. This Constitutional mandate was changed in 1913 with the ratification of the 17th Amendment. No longer would the Senate be selected by State Legislature, but by popular vote. This change has given us thirty-million dollar Senate campaigns and the special-interest managed Senate which we have today.

The Liberty Tree Plan is to return to the Constitutional Framer's mandate of a balanced Congress. Ours is a vision of two Senators selected by each State's Legislature that would represent their States. And it is a vision of a House of Representative selected at a ratio to the population synchronized with Constitutional intention that House Members could truly represent their constituents.
The results of the Liberty Tree Amendment would be to greatly reduce the power of any one member of Congress. United States Senators would again answer to their peers in State Legislature, and at a Constitutional ratio of House Members to voting public, House Members would be more responsive to their constituencies. While it may seem impractical to raise the total number of House Members from 435 to 1,300, this constitutionally mandated ratio would end special interest control of our Congress. It would change the way the House met and voted, it might even change their $180,000 per year job into a part-time position which would require them to work for a living. In this era of the Internet and Virtual Private Networks, the larger number of Representatives would not be a logistically difficult. This change would return the House Members to their communities, as the Framers of the Constitution intended.

Two Paths to Constitutional Amendment The Congress of 1911 and 1913 eagerly passed the Amendments which increased their power, but no Congress is likely to repeal the Amendment and Act to lessen their own. The Framers of the Constitution knew there would come a time when the People would have reason to propose an Amendment without the consent of the National Congress, so they provided a second path for Constitutional Amendment. Article 5 provides for a national convention called by Congress at the request of two-thirds of the State's Legislatures. This route to Constitutional Amendment has never been used, but it is the path of the Liberty Tree Amendment.

Pro-Life Battle In formulating this plan there was a temptation to press for a Constitutional Amendment to ban abortion. The direct approach was discarded after several conservative states lost pro-life referendums in 2008. That pro-life issues lost at the state level in popular vote foretold failure of such an Amendment at this point. It is for this reason that the Liberty Tree Movement seeks first to return to a true Representative Congress before pressing for a Constitutional Amendment to protect pre-born babies.

With ratification of the Liberty Tree Amendment We the People will again have a voice in our national government.

As profound a change as the Liberty Tree Amendment will cause, all of the elements are in place to make this a viable plan. In rallying the individual State Legislature to call for a national constitutional convention we provide local political bodies the opportunity to return national political power to the State Assembly. The States will approve the Amendment for the same reason the Congress of 1911 and 1913 did: to gain power. The difference being that this power will be closer to home, as the Framers of the Constitution intended.

Now all I have to do is find Jimbo’s “Red Zone II,” and I’m set.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Abortion is Murder, May 2009, 7-1

Formerly Stop the Killing of Young People (skyp) and soon, perhaps, Stop Killing Preemies

May, 2009, Vol. 7, No. 1
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – cell--610-809-3388, machine -- 610-396-0332
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 26`
John Dunkle, Editor

Abortion is Murder, a weak, pathetic response to baby murder, is sent out at least once a month. If the gestapo hasn’t jailed you for defending the innocent realistically, you either have to tell me you want it or go the website. Faxes and emails are free but snail-mail is free only for POC’s, $100 for others.
Because I believe we should use every legitimate means, including force, in our attempt to protect those being tortured to death, I want to hear from people who’ve been forceful. I’d also like to hear from those who disagree with me.

Prisoners of Christ:
1. Evans, Paul Ross 83230-180, USP McCreary, P.O. Box 3000, Pine Knot, KY 42635
2. Gibbons, Linda - Vanier WDC, 655 Martin St. , P.O. Box 1040, Milton, ON, Canada L9T 5E6
3. Griffin, Michael 310249, Okaloosa Correctional Institution, Crestview FL 32539-6708 9/11
4. Howard, Peter Andrew 57760-097, FCI, Box 900, Safford, AZ 85546
5. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
6. Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia
7. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, P.O. Box 300, Waymart, PA 18472
8. McMenemy, David Robert 08168-030, FCI Elkton, P.O. Box 10, Lisbon OH 44432
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, PO Box 474701, Des Moines, IA 50947
10. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
11. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca MN 56093 3/31
12. Smart, Leland 07321-040,
13. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25
14. Weiler Jr., Robert F. 39385-037, FCC - Delaware Hall, Box 1000, Petersburg VA 23804 (new)
15. Whitaker, Vincent , FCI, Box 699, Estill SC 29918

The Lord has asked people to make sacrifices related to opposing abortion which all but a handful have had too weak a heart to make. And they’ve looked for any pretense they could conjure up to claim that the sacrifice wasn’t required. They even deluded themselves, as people often do, into “believing” the pretense was real . . . When they get what they’ll get, they’ll fully deserve it. Peter Knight

This is the first issue of Vol. 7, May, ’09 to April, ’10, of Abortion is Murder. I’ve spent the past month online arguing with killers; so, I can’t say the two-month delay since I finished Vol., 6 was due entirely to the fact that I needed a break after posting twenty-five newsletters for that volume. But I just got back from Notre Dame, Jimbo will be happy to learn, and I’m ready to go. Here is the penultimate section of that remarkable first chapter of Eric Rudolph’s new book:

In the two decades between 1840 and 1860 the states moved slowly. The focus at that time was on slavery and secession. But after the Civil War ended, the legislatures returned to abortion and quickly passed a series of tough new laws. They passed with overwhelming majorities. Minnesota’s anti-abortion statue (1873), for example, sailed through the Senate on a 37 to 0 vote; and in the House the vote was 55 to 1.47 Those who voted against these bills did so on libertarian grounds. South Carolina’s bill, for instance, passed in the Senate 17 to 15. The opposition was against the bill solely because it called for the creation of a state board of health to license physicians.48 No one opposed the anti-abortion laws for what we would call “pro-choice” reasons. And there certainly wasn’t a “pro-choice” lobby pressuring the legislators to stay away from women’s bodies.
These laws were not changing precedent; they were closing loopholes in older laws that in some cases dated back to the colonial period. The laws needed to be brought into conformity with the latest science on embryology. And they needed to focus on the new situation created by the growth of prostitution, the penny-press, and pimps and madams such as Restelle and their “French Pills.” Also, many still believed in the concept of quickening, and the laws needed to specifically debunk that myth once and for all.
Because those leading the fight against abortion were physicians, the movement was called the “Doctors Crusade.” First on the agenda was demolishing the quickening doctrine. One of the leading medical authorities of the day, Dr. John Beck, said the quickening doctrine had a “direct tendency to countenance abortion, at least in the early stages of gestation.”49 Doctors realized that conception inaugurated a continuous process of development, which would produce a newborn baby if left uninterrupted. Contradicting his central thesis that the abortion laws were created for economic reasons, Mohr admits that “this scientific reasoning confirmed the regulars’ moral opposition to abortion at any stage of gestation. Regulars believed it immoral, in other words, to make a life and death decision on the basis of a distinction that they could demonstrate had very little relation to life or death.”50
Leading the fight against abortion were some of America’s most prominent physicians. And the language they used was moral, not economic. Dr. Meigs, one of the finest physicians of the day, instructed his interns that if they were approached to perform an abortion they should say “by common law such is an act of felony, and by the law of God murder.”51 Dr. O.C. Turner of Massachusetts blamed the idea of quickening for a lot of the abortions: Surely the child is alive. It cannot be the mere act of tying the cord that produced life. Then when did life begin? With respiration? This is only one added function. . . . The period of quickening varies, and I do not see why a fetus is not quite as much alive just before it moves or just after . . .52
The American Medical Associations (AMA) took over the fight against abortion after the 1850s. Walter Channing, Harvard professor and brother of William Ellery Channing, was prominent in the movement. Hugh L. Lodge was also instrumental in getting better laws on the book. No one, however, was more outspoken than Horatio Storer, a doctor of gynecology and obstetrics. Storer is one of the great unsung heroes in American history. Between 1860 and 1880, during the crucial period, Storer was the driving force behind the Doctors Crusade.
At the AMA’s Louisville, Kentucky Convention in 1859, Storer called for action. He identified three causes for the increase in abortion. First, was the “wide spread ignorance of the quickening as a stage of gestation.” Second, was the fact that “the medical profession itself was careless of fetal life.” And third, was “the grave defect of our laws.”53 The solution, said Storer, was better education of doctors on the stages of gestation, and an organized campaign to tighten the abortion laws. Storer wrote two books that helped the cause tremendously: Why Not? A Book For Every Woman, and Criminal Abortion. His best work, Criminal Abortion remained the most authoritative text on abortion for generations.
Another of Mohr’s assertions is that the churches were reluctant or indifferent to support the Doctor’s Crusade. This is nonsense. Pope Pius IX issued the Church’s definitive position on abortion and infanticide in 1869, which helped the cause significantly: “The murder of an infant before its birth is, in the sight of God and the Church, as great a sin as would be the killing of an infant after birth.”54 The Protestants chimed in soon after. Reverend Richard Beer of the Presbyterian Synod said, “the assembly regards the destruction by parents of their own offspring, before birth, with abhorrence, as a crime against God and against Nature.”55 Indeed, Christian morality drove the entire anti-abortion movement.
Mohr is trying to muddy the water here. In one sense he is correct; the Churches didn’t take the lead in the anti-abortion crusade of the nineteenth century. This is because they didn’t have to. Political interest groups run by religious figures like Jerry Falwell and James Dobson were unnecessary in those days. Back then Christian morality infused public debate in such a way that is difficult for us to comprehend, living as we do in an era where Christianity has been driven out of the public square. In those days, politicians, judges, prosecutors, virtually all community leaders, had to espouse a generalized Protestantism. Whether they genuinely believed in God, or were simply pandering to constituents, all public figures were expected to speak as if they were good Christians, who read their Bibles. A politician who couldn’t quote scripture was dead in the water. Political speeches often sounded like sermons (Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address). The abolitionist movement, the anti-prostitution movement, the anti-abortion movement, and the prohibitionist movement were all infused with an evangelical spirit. Hymns and prayers were often heard before any speech against slavery, abortion, or the “Devil’s drink.” The churches themselves didn’t have to organize the anti-abortion crusade because the doctors and politicians who did lead the fight all held the same views as their preachers. There were no Jerry Falwells back then because most mainstream politicians held comparable views to Jerry and had no notion of separating those views from public policy. Those who fought against abortion believed they were battling against crime, against a moral evil. Their opponents were apathetic physicians who wanted to keep their profession unregulated.
Whoremasters such as Madame Restelle didn’t have a legitimate voice in the public square in the nineteenth century.
Storer got the ball rolling; many others picked it up and ran with it. While Storer concentrated on pressuring the states to pass better anti-abortion statutes, Anthony Comstock, head of New York’s Society for the Suppression of Vice, succeeded in convincing the federal Congress to pass what became known as the Comstock Act. Murder belonged to the states, but the feds controlled the mails. Comstock’s Act prohibited anyone using the mails to traffic in pornography, contraception, and abortifacients. In an era when the mail was the primary means of communication, the act had a devastating impact on abortifacient advertisers. It brought the considerable resources of the federal government to bear on abortionists. Child murderers like Restelle were forced underground, and had to advertise on private cards and rely on word-of-mouth. (tbc)

Mr. Dunkle, I am writing to ask (if your were not already planning on it) you to include at the end of each chapter of Eric’s book, the footnotes for that chapter. There are already several references I would like to see.
I will definitely finish Eric’s first chapter next issue and I might be able to include the endnotes—if not, the issue after that.

Also, I am enclosing a response to a comment made by Josh Ryan during his exchange with Neal Horsley. Sincerely, Robert Weiler Jr.

To Josh Ryan, You said, “Jesus went around speaking the truth, not insulting everyone.” Apparently you don’t read your Scriptures:
“Ye hypocrites...” Matt. 15:7
“The Pharisees were offended...” Matt. 15:12
“You hypocrites...” Mark 7:6
“O generation of vipers...” Matt. 3:7
“A wicked and adulterous generation...” Matt. 16:4
“Ye are of your father the devil...” John 8:44
“If I should say, I know Him not, I shall be a liar like unto you...” John 8:55
Jesus pulled no punches. Once, He even used physical force and (*GASP*) a weapon to expel those desecrating his Father’s house. How much more would he approve of force to defend innocent lives (other than his own, which was set apart for sacrifice).
“He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.” Luke 22:36

And this is what happens to people like Josh:

HOLLAND — Organizers of Holland's Tulip Time Festival have told Right to Life officials the anti-abortion group can't have a float in this year's parade.
The May 2-9 flower festival marks its 80th year this year in the western Michigan community.
Festival director Tamara Bouman said Tulip Time long has had a policy against issue-oriented parade entries but didn't enforce it.
The Grand Rapids Press said the festival board decided to enforce the rule because it received a nonprofit tax status in December.
Right to Life Holland-area director Carol Brower said her group is "confused and totally shocked" after having a float in the parade for 25 years. Its float has a sign with the words, "Life is a Precious Gift."

Hi, John, thanks for your reply. Think about this: if childkilling really constitutes murder, as the Catholic church claims that they believe, and if Sebelius is complicit in those murders (she is), and if the Bible says that "no murderer has eternal life," (it does), then to offer Sebelius communion would be to offer communion to an unrepentant sinner who the Bible says is headed for eternal destruction. How does that make sense?
Whenever the Catholic Church gives communion to an unrepentant accomplice to childkilling, it makes a statement, as clear as anything could, that either the Church doesn't really hold childkilling to be murder, or else that murderers can be communicants in good standing in the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. (If you think about it too much, your head will explode.) David (Rydholm)

Dear John, I have received the questions passed on by you...pertaining to Jim Kopp's case. As to the first question: Yes, United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. ___ (2008), is the illegal child pornography case. The second question was: "Isn't it the case that the question of the defendant's beliefs are deemed admissible by Williams solely because they go [toward] the scienter element of the offense in question?" The answer to this is "no". In Williams, the admissibility of belief as evidence of a crime goes toward a more subjective element than provided by scienter. Id., at ___. This regards an important distinction. Wikipedia (the online encyclopedia) explains "scienter" this way: "For example, if a man sells a car with brakes that don't work to his friend, and he doesn't know about the problem, then the man has no scienter. If he sells the car and knew of the problem before he sold, he has scienter." Williams deals with a different genre of intentions than scienter. For example, a man sells a car HE THOUGHT had bad brakes, but IN ACTUAL FACT the brakes were good. Or, for example, a man offers powdered sugar for sale in a manner that engenders the BELIEF that he is selling an illegal drug to drug users. Or, vice versa, a man snorts powdered sugar that he thought was an illegal drug. Normally, the secular law does not have standing to punish the man for selling the car despite his BELIEF that the brakes were bad, because IN ACTUAL FACT the brakes were not bad. Instead, punishment of this sort is generally reserved to religious laws. Similarly, the law does not punish people for selling powdered sugar, even if it is advertised as an illegal drug. Likewise, the law does not punish people for consuming sugar, regardless of what they think it is. But when it comes to offenses against the child, the Williams Court made an exception to this general rule. Under the Williams exception, BELIEF is evidentiary, even if no child was offended, regardless of whether "a reasonable person would think the same"; instead, the Williams Court ruled that it suffices that the nature of the act in question is able to "engender that belief", namely, the belief that a child is being victimized, "whether or not a reasonable person would think the same." Ibid. This is not the first case in history where the U.S. Supreme Court has made an exception to a general rule when it comes to children. For example, in Belloti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622 (1979), the Court, citing the peculiar vulnerability of children, Id., at 622-623, made an exception to precedent, by allowing States to impose a chaperon requirement for minors seeking abortions. The Williams exception to the barring of belief-oriented evidence is important to Kopp's case. In view of the peculiar vulnerability of children, Kopp claims he acted to defend them from practices that engender the belief that children are being victimized. Because the specific issue of the belief is the victimization of children, under Williams, even if the Government contends that a reasonable person would not think the same, Kopp's belief-oriented defense would still be admissible. Under Williams, Kopp has the right to defend his motivations "as an objective matter". United States v. Williams, supra, at ___. For example, he may call for a coroner's statement to examine the victims of abortion practices, so as to determine the official cause of their deaths as homicide. In other words, Kopp has the right to draw on objective matter that plainly conveys the belief that was engendered in him by abortion practices, namely, that such practices victimize children. Ibid. Here is the paragraph from United States v. Williams from which the above quotes are taken: Fourth, the other key phrase, "in a manner . . . that is intended to cause another to believe," contains only a subjective element: The defendant must "intend" that the listener believe the material to be child pornography, and must select a manner of "advertising, promoting, presenting, distributing, or soliciting" the material that he thinks will engender that belief--whether or not a reasonable person would think the same. (Of course in the ordinary case the proof of the defendant's intent will be the fact that, as an objective matter, the manner of "advertising, promoting, presenting, distributing, or soliciting" plainly sought to convey that the material was child pornography.) Ibid. Under Williams, the Federal Courts cannot disallow Kopp's belief-based defense on the basis of Government claims that no children were actually harmed. For, under Williams, no child need actually be harmed in order for beliefs to be counted as evidentiary. Instead, under the Williams test, belief becomes evidentiary whenever it is engendered by "objective matter" suggesting the victimization of a child. Ibid. In view of actions that engender the belief that children are being harmed, Kopp thought he was acting to protect the children in view of their peculiar vulnerability. Under Williams, Kopp not only has the right to a belief-based defense, but he also has the right to present evidence as an objective matter in support of that belief. For example, Kopp has the right to call for an official coroner's statement in support his belief that children have been made victims of homicide based on abortion practices. Williams provides an exception to the inadmissibility of beliefs as evidence. Under the Williams test, belief becomes evidentiary whenever it is engendered by "objective matter" suggesting the victimization of a child. This criterion safeguards the interests of society in protecting children in view of their peculiar vulnerability. Because his case satisfies the criterion of the Williams test for belief-oriented evidence, if the Courts do not allow Kopp to present a belief-based defense, it would mean allowing only belief-based prosecutions in cases where the test is met. However, for the judiciary to treat a defendant’s beliefs as having only an incriminating significance would violate a vast sum of protections, including the freedoms of religion and expression. Indeed, we would have to ridicule a secular judiciary, as something of a religious cult, if it were to consider a defendant's beliefs only when they might count against him! The principle of equity precludes an imbalance disfavoring a defendant. In other words, if belief-oriented evidence can be allowed when it works against a defendant, it must also be allowed when it works in his favor. For this reason, it is clear that Kopp's right to a fair trial has been violated in Federal Court. If beliefs can count as legal evidence, then they must be no less evidentiary when they are exculpatory than when they are incriminating. We cannot tolerate a secular judiciary that allows belief-based prosecutions but not belief-based defenses! As to what appears to be a third question asked, the answer is that Kopp's asserted belief that he was only trying to disable, rather than to kill, is independent from his belief that children were being victimized. It is the latter belief that Williams gives evidentiary significance to. However, once this belief is established as an objective matter, then the suggestion that Kopp acted to disable, rather than to kill, would support an added defense that he sought to protect children while at the same time minimizing losses. As a side note, I find in Wikipedia that U.S. District Judge Richard J. Arcara told Kopp at the end of his Federal trial, “You served as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner [in killing Barnett Slepian]. You decided that you know better than any law." It is important to emphasize that this statement is prejudicial, because it implies Kopp shot Slepian as retribution for past actions. But Kopp alleges he shot Slepian not as a punishment for his past, but rather to preempt him from victimizing children. In other words, if I understand it correctly, Kopp alleges he shot Slepian not to avenge the deaths of children, but rather to safeguard children from homicide. Arcara, by such a statement, meant to cast Kopp in the light of an avenger, rather than in the light of a protector of children.To review:1. Williams established an exception to the barring of belief-oriented evidence.2. Under the test provided by Williams, belief becomes evidentiary whenever it is engendered by "objective matter" suggesting the victimization of a child. Admission of belief-oriented evidence satisfying this criterion safeguards the interests of society in protecting children in view of their peculiar vulnerability.3. Given their peculiar vulnerability, children require society’s exceptional protection not only from pornographers (United States v. Williams) and physicians (Belloti v. Baird), but even from the Government, which may lapse into tyranny and despotism at children’s expense.4. Kopp sought to protect children in view of their peculiar vulnerability to physician and governmental abuse. In doing so, he acted on the basis of a belief engendered in him by objective matter suggesting the victimization of a child. Even if a reasonable person would not think the same, Kopp’s belief satisfies the Williams test for admissible belief-oriented evidence.5. One need not be overly specific in comparing Kopp’s case to that of Williams. Belief-oriented evidence, supported by objective matter, forms the crux of the prosecutor’s case in Williams. Under the same standard set forth in Williams, belief-oriented evidence must be no less admissible when it forms the crux of the defendant’s case.6. Kopp’s right to a fair trial was violated because belief-oriented evidence admissible under the Williams test was barred in Federal Court. In other words, if Williams allows the prosecution to put on belief evidence under the child victimization test, then it should also allow the defense to put on belief evidence under the same test.I hope this helps. Sincerely, Cal.

A Meditation on the Rescue of Capt. Phillips
A great story. Most of us rejoice that our SEALs - the snipers- shot each of three African men in the head - dead. We might reckon as well that they went to hell.
I do rejoice - not at the prospect that souls might be lost, but that my countryman, Capt. Phillips, was rescued.
The men were judged to be "pirates" who were threatening the life of a civilian ship captain. And the snipers were judged to be rescuers of an innocent man.
I cannot help but think of some friends of mine: one in prison and the other executed by the state of Florida. Why do so many pro-lifers refuse to commend Jim Kopp and Paul Hill for rescuing the innocent unborn?
Has our government mislabeled children in the womb as "pirates" or "terrorists"? Do we really believe in their personhood?
We will get no where in this God-forsaking nation until we face, believe and declare the truth. –Mbray

Dear friends of Shelley Shannon, We received a call from her at 7 AM this morning---she has arrived in MN and is very happy about it. Actually she arrived about 4 AM yesterday (Tues.), but didn't get processed in till late last evening. She said she got a really good night's sleep -- on a nice thick mattress!! The kind of mattress people had to pay an extra $50 for at Dublin, but everybody here gets one. So far she says things are very nice there, and they are very strict about the rules.
She is currently in a room of 10 people, but next week will be put into a unit.
Her mailing address is: Rachelle Shannon #59755-065, FCI Waseca Unit A, PO Box 1731
Waseca MN 56093
She really enjoyed the trip -- partly by bus and partly by plane. I'm sure we're all glad to know she's arrived safe and sound and things are looking good for her right now. Said she is signing up for a class in horticulture.
Blessings to everyone, Dave & Dorothy Leach
I just received a long, wonderful letter from Shelley, which I will post nest issue.
The battle to protect young folks is really a prolifer struggle, not a fight between prolifers and killers (“pro-choice” people). I, for example, could have ended legal abortion myself if I had had the courage to follow Paul Hill’s lead, but, obviously, I lack that courage.
However, nowhere is this battle better followed than in the clashes between Neal Horsley and other prolifers. I posted at least one of those lengthy clashes in Abortion is Murder. The latest, between Neal and a pastor, Marshall “Rusty” Entrekiin, is too long to post here, but I recommend you email Neal and ask him to send it to
you, Neal has always been one of my heroes. No one says better than Neal the harsh things that have to be said during our time of horror. This, of course, hurts other prolifers, and they react angrily.
Pastor Rusty is a literate opponent for Neal but I do detect personal anger seeping into his argument, whereas with Neal the anger is never personal.

Kansas abortion doctor asks feds to find vandals
A Kansas abortion provider has asked the FBI to investigate vandalism at his Wichita clinic.
The clinic is operated by Dr. George Tiller, one of the few doctors nationwide who performs late-term abortions.
Tiller's attorney, Dan Monnat, said Friday that the Women's Health Care Services clinic was damaged May 1.
Monnat said vandals cut the wires to outdoor lights and surveillance cameras at the clinic. With rain in the weather forecast, they also sliced through about 200 feet of the roof and plugged up the downspouts. Monnat said rain poured into the clinic and caused thousands of dollars of damage.


Dear John, All of the Members of the Court who presided over Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), have been replaced. Each of the present Members is a replacement for a Member of the Roe Court, except for Justice Samuel Alito, who replaced Justice Sandra Day O’Connor (who in turn replaced Roe Justice Potter Stewart). The first replacement for any of the Roe Justices was Justice John Paul Stevens, who at 89 is presently the oldest Member of the Court.
Nearing 20 years after Roe, in a case called Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), Justice Stevens finally set the record straight for the Court. He said that from Roe’s holding that “an abortion is not the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection ... there was no dissent; indeed, no Member of the Court has ever questioned this fundamental proposition.” Id., at 913 (citations and internal quotes removed).
Roe was, and remains, the unanimous decision of a completely undivided Court insofar as the “fundamental proposition” is concerned. The fundamental proposition concerns the issue of the children’s rights. The Court has unanimously accepted Roe’s holding that the children have no rights we are “bound” to respect, because they are “so far inferior”. See Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), at 407.
In other words, in the abortion era the Court has unanimously accepted the slavery era proposition of the Dred Scott decision, namely, that the equal protection of the law does not apply to the children. Consequently, the Court in Roe held that an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. The Fourteenth Amendment was passed to extend the equal protection of the law to those considered by the Dred Scott ruling to be “so far inferior” that they have “no rights” we are “bound” to respect. Ibid.
In other words, Roe remains the unanimous decision of a completely undivided Court as far as the children’s rights are concerned. That there has been a total absence of debate in the Court on the children’s rights issue is evidenced by the fact that Justice Stevens, the longest serving Member of the Court since Roe, recalls in Casey that “no Member of the Court” has ever so much as “questioned” let alone provided any “dissent” when it comes to this “fundamental” proposition. Ibid. For, there can be no true debate without someone at least questioning the matter.
Instead, the only division in the Court has been over the secondary issue of a State’s rights. In Roe, a Court unanimously composed of pro-abatement Justices ruled in favor of depriving the children of the equal protection of the law to abate women’s pregnancies with legal abortion. But when it came to the secondary issue of a State’s rights, the Court was bitterly divided.
The Court’s minority wanted to let each State establish its own abortion policy individually, like the Court had let States do with slavery under the Dred Scott ruling. These are the so called Roe dissenters. As such, they dissented not in favor of the children’s rights but rather in favor of a State’s right to decide the fate of the children, without the equal protection of the law, just like the States were once allowed to set their own slavery policies. But the majority decided in favor of a national abortion policy, which we now know as Roe v. Wade.
Since then, the Court has continued to debate a State’s rights, but never the children’s rights. Sincerely, Cal

A Cottage Grove man who drove his truck into the front of a Planned Parenthood clinic on the anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision legalizing abortion was sentenced to the 111 days he has already served.
If Matthew Lee Derosia, 33, follows rules of his probation for the next five years, his conviction will be reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor, Ramsey County District Judge John Van de North ruled Tuesday.
Derosia pleaded guilty to one count of criminal damage to property in the Jan. 22 incident at the clinic at 1965 Ford Parkway in St. Paul's Highland Park neighborhood. When police arrived, he was standing by the truck, holding a crucifix and shouting Bible verses, according to the criminal complaint in the case.
No one was injured in the crash.
Derosia was later celebrated in a list of "prisoners of Christ" on an anti-abortion Web site.
Remember that I wrote this at the end of the last issue?

The next issue of Abortion is Murder will also be the first of Volume 7--May, 2009. I will include in it the simplified version of The Liberty Tree Movement and the 2009 state statistics that Clay mentions in his first note.
I will also post “Red Zone II,” Jim Kopp’s latest entry into the Stacey & Hutch saga, and two additional notes he submitted I don’t know when. (I hope you are saving all the Stacy & Hutch stuff after perusing it twice.)
If you have sent me something and I haven’t posted it and I haven’t told you why, I’ve

Well, I can’t find those five items. (That’s probably why this issue is so late.) It’s not the first time I’ve “misplaced” Jimbo’s stuff. I’m hoping of course that it’ll turn up. Meanwhile, Clay, can you send me another simplified version of TLTM just in case? And here’s more from those guys:

Dear John, To further explain what must have been a cryptic message from Tom – I received a letter a month or so back from “Tammy Sweeney of Lancaster, PA.” In the letter she claimed to be working on her doctoral thesis in anthropology and asked for my input as her thesis was on the anti-abortion extremist movement. I’ve received numerous such requests over the years and always declined to participate. This young woman, however, seemed very sweet and sincere so I agreed.
Today I received her Questionnaire and I could not be more alarmed. I am now convinced that this is not what was is not a “Doctoral Thesis” research project, but rather an elaborate, but not so clever attempt by the abortion industry to build a case for aiding and abetting convicted extremists (myself and others) by those whom they falsely assume to be the infrastructure for active extremism and the motivators for those would-be extremists to be moved to action.
The questionnaire is titled “ Resource Materials Consulted (anti-abortion activists).”
It asks for my name and date, but is silent on its purpose or origin. Perfect for a trial exhibit. It asks only three questions with sub-categories, which I will summarize.

1. If you met someone who was very passionate about stopping abortions and he wanted to know more about the ideology of the more extreme segments of the pro-life movement, what
resource materials would you recommend for information and for guidance?

2. If the person decided that he wanted to become an activist against abortions, what resource material would you recommend to him for information on tactics that could be used to help stop abortions? Where could he turn for guidance on what actions he could take, which methods are more effective than others?

3. If the person decided to dedicate his lift to the anti-abortion movement, what resource materials would you recommend for information on the precautions he now needs to take to ensure against possible threats from he government, the public, mainstream pro-life groups, informers, etc.

At the end of every question are blanks to fill in regarding what I would consider an extremist’s aid: books, websites, message boards, chat rooms, organizations, etc.
In other words, which websites would I, a convicted anti-abortion terrorist, recommend as helpful to someone hoping to follow in my footsteps? It does not require logical gymnastics to see how this data, if complied from multiple members on the POC List, could be used as the foundation for legal action against numerous websites, and even my own book.
We must use all wisdom Brothers & Sisters. Our enemy is still in this fight, something we can never forget. In His Service, Clay Waagner ______________________________________________-

Over-The-Road Musings Donut Discipline Ark/Air Space Moral Theology
Our story to date: Stacey & Hutch found new plateaus, which seemed to only reveal themselves along the way, over time, as they merrily stenciled their way across PBX-like Central Offices, leaving them with CWA union logos.
After months or even years, they realized that the position of overconfidence and experience allowed them to work on “little” things, although there are no little things when it comes to ongoing resistance.
Glazed Buttermilk Is OK, Too.
One of the realizations that came with time is that it’s not worth it to cheat on “donuts,” and it is worth the extra const, time, and effort to maintain donut discipline.
A donut being, the circle around where you actually sleep at night. A glazed donut on a trucker’s Rand McNally Atlas is perfect, the US map that covers 2 pages radius = 450 miles
Outside that radius, anyplace where Stacey or Hutch had ever visited, or knew someone , was also a NSP eliminated.
S&H never ceased to be amazed how many switches there were that were in towns 450 miles away, that they had never be en to.
It meant that anytime they came to a town to tag., they arrived at a town they had never been in, and didn’t know anybody in. Beyond that, switched could be eliminated for other reasons: intuition, location of the cop shop, an all-night business too close, etc.

Jimbo, I’ll continue this next issue and if I say a prayer to St. Anthony, I’ll find those three things I lost. I’ll also run that letter from Shelley I promised you and a second note from Robert that just arrived.