Thursday, November 19, 2009

Abortion is Murder, 7-12, January, 2010

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

January, 2010 Vol. 7 No. 11
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – cell—484-706-4375, machine -- 610-396-0332
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 65`
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, 3057 Easton Tpk., 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 5094
10. Roeder, Scott, Sedgewick county Jail, 141 West Elm, Wichita, KS 67203
11. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
12. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
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

I left out part of Cal’s letter in the last issue, and he’s not happy about it:

John, you’re ruining the big letter. You should just take your lumps as they come and stop running away from your own tail. This is why the children have fared so badly: Their grassroots advocates (like you) don't have the courage to scrutinize the treachery of big institutions (like the Catholic Church) claiming to defend them. You should republish the whole letter and take your lumps and deal with them. It doesn't make sense for you to censor what I write only when you are the one taking the lumps. If I have to be tough it has to be for everyone. Cal

Here’s the part I left out:

Let's first expose the Pope's modus operandi. The Pope dresses up as the great shepherd and stands in front of the gate with a big sign that reads: "Mr. Wolf, please don't steal the sheep. We morally condemn this." But if you look very closely, the Pope has jammed a nail in the gate's latch to keep it open. To close the latch means to affirm the person in the whole sense without equivocation. Instead, to keep the latch open, the Pope calls it a "question" and says "the answer to this question cannot be of a 'definite kind,' but must remain OPEN, in any case, to further considerations." (emphasis added) [Final statement of the 12th General Assembly and of the International Congress on: "The Human Embryo before Implantation. Scientific Update and Bioethical Considerations" (February 27-28, 2006)] If you try to pull the nail out of the latch to close it, the wolf is going to pop out of shepherd's clothing and attack your efforts. This is why the Catholic Church has worked to defeat the Human Life Bill and the Personhood Amendments of Georgia, Colorado, Montana, and now Nevada. The reason why the Pope wants to keep the latch "open" is so that, with the gate's latch open, the wolf will do the inevitable, thereby clearing the pews, school desks, and homes of awkward pregnancy scandals.
So the modus operandi of the Pope is to deny complicity by holding up a big sign morally condemning what the wolf is doing; the Pope tries to give the impression that if anything he is such a good shepherd for the children that it is not fair to Mr. Wolf; but then with another face the Pope works behind the scenes politically, to make sure no one goes so far as to pull out the nail holding the gate's latch open. This way, with the issue of personhood still "open" to further considerations, the wolf is free to do the dirty work of clearing the pews, school desks, and homes of awkward pregnancy scandals.

I told y’all the reason I skipped Cal’s attack on the Church is that I thought we’d covered it in the third and fourth issues of last year’s newsletters. Cal’s arguments there were similar to the above and my responses still seem adequate to me. Cal’s mistake is to think the Church is monolithic, that the Pope was even aware of what the Human Life Bill and the Personhood Amendments were all about. The bishops’ organization in the USA decides policy and since the end of WWII some of its decisions have been dreadful. (The main reason is that some bishops have been men of disordered sexual inclination.) However, the decision to back an alternative to the HLA was not among the dreadful ones.
Cal asked me not to break up his letter; I still have to post his attack on the Republicans and others. But I am going to separate the sections anyway because I want those who wish to agree or disagree with Cal about the culpability of the Catholic Church in child slaughter to have time to think things out.

Meanwhile, I am posting here another writer who disagrees with the Church’s modus operandi:

Professional atheist Richard Dawkins is told about the Personal Ordinariate for Anglican converts and blows a gasket:

What major institution most deserves the title of greatest force for evil in the world? In a field of stiff competition, the Roman Catholic Church is surely up there among the leaders. The Anglican church has at least a few shreds of decency, traces of kindness and humanity with which Jesus himself might have connected, however tenuously: a generosity of spirit, of respect for women, and of Christ-like compassion for the less fortunate. The Anglican church does not cleave to the dotty idea that a priest, by blessing bread and wine, can transform it literally into a cannibal feast; nor to the nastier idea that possession of testicles is an essential qualification to perform the rite. It does not send its missionaries out to tell deliberate lies to AIDS-weakened Africans, about the alleged ineffectiveness of condoms in protecting against HIV. Whether one agrees with him or not, there is a saintly quality in the Archbishop of Canterbury, a benignity of countenance, a well-meaning sincerity. How does Pope Ratzinger measure up? The comparison is almost embarrassing.

Some years ago a British reviewer of Dawkins, lamenting his decline from conventional academic to anti-Christian polemicist, likened him to a "scientific bag lady screaming at the traffic." The screed above does nothing to weaken that estimate.
Yet I don't think it's the whole story. When a seventh-grade boy brings up three times in twenty minutes his detestation of a particular seventh-grade girl, we can be pretty sure he has a crush on her. By the same token, Dawkins' fulminations are pitched at the emotional level of an overwrought twelve-year old, and seem chosen more to say "notice me!" to the Church than to convince those still unconvinced of her villainy. Note that Dawkins disparages the Catholic Church by denying her "Christ-like compassion." Yet that implies "Christ-like" is a term of approval -- an interesting slip. A true atheist would use the phrase to damn rather than to flatter.
Dawkins is a very confused man. His white-knuckle grip on his hatred suggests that he's in terror of seeing it get away from him. Could it be that he's losing faith in his faithlessness?

Continuation of Chapter 3 of Eric Rudolph’s Abortion, the Irrepressible Conflict:

The other way societies grow larger is through conquest. DingisWayo united the Zulu tribe through conquest. The tiny Roman city-state gradually conquered the various tribes of Italy, and later went on to conquer the peoples of the Mediterranean. William the Conqueror established Norman rule over England through the manner his name suggests. The seceding southern states in America were reunited with the northern states through conquest. The Aztec Empire, the Inca Empire, the Persian Empire, the British Empire — were expanded through annexation and conquest.
In order for societies to merge peacefully, as in the case of the Cherokee or American colonists, the social groups must share an underlying culture identity. Groups of very different culture identities almost never merge except through naked conquest. And diverse groups are almost always held together within one political system through coercion and force. Insurrection and rebellion go hand-in-hand with empire. Contrary to myth, empires such as the Roman and the British were not diverse societies based on a set of abstract universal principles. Both empires were the result of one culture identity—the Roman or British—holding other identities in subjection through force and coercion. As soon as the Roman or British culture identity was no longer strong enough to keep the subject identities in form, these culture identities moved for self-determination through activism, or war. Thus the real basis of society is the organic culture identity and not the abstract principles of the “Law of Nature.” And the terms of the social contract are decided by the leaders of the people.
Conservatives are the antibodies of the organic social group. They try to stave off death and sickness, maintaining those forms that have proven effective in keeping social order and ensuring cultural continuity. Conservatives are unique to a particular group. There are Jewish conservatives, Indian conservatives, and American conservatives. Each type of conservative seeks to preserve his particular culture identity to the exclusion of all others. Conservatism is a visceral emotional loyalty, an organic attachment to the culture identity. Even though all cultures make universal claims, conservatism is not a universal philosophy with utopian aspirations. Nor is it wedded to a particular economic or political doctrine. Conservatives may adopt an economic or political philosophy that seems best for the group at a particular time, but strictly speaking the free-market thinking of Adam Smith and the limited government philosophy of Locke and Jefferson, which are now associated with American conservatism, are classical liberal concepts. Cultural issues are more important to conservatives than abstract economic and political concepts. Conservatism is more of a tendency than a formal philosophy. American conservatives today are called “social conservatives.”
The egalitarian is the direct opposite of the conservative. The conservative is the partisan of a particular culture; the egalitarian wants to destroy all the existing organic societies and create an entirely artificial society, built not on culture identity but on a theory. Reacting to the French Revolution, Thomas Paine announced with excitement that “we now have the opportunity to begin the world anew.” The egalitarian Paine was not referring to a French world, or any other particular world. He was talking about the entire world. The egalitarian begins with this totalitarian approach.
Life is rough on the egalitarian. Life makes no sense in a world where the strong protect the weak and the weak obey the strong; where superior will, talent, and intelligence put some men above others, and create hierarchies that monopolized wealth and power; where social groups are based on organic culture identity, not abstract principles; where these identities exclude those outside the group (“other”); where groups compete for power causing wars. Life in this world is not worth living. So he sets out to improve the world.
Unlike the classical liberal, the egalitarian is not content with reforming a particular organic society. His ideas are not tailored to fit into a particular cultural context. In fact, cultural difference is the primary problem to him. Differences cause inequalities, and inequality causes injustice. The egalitarian believes that we are all the same; but not in the Christian sense of being children of God. The Christian believes that God made each of us unique and gave us free-will; and therefore inequality is endemic to the human condition. The egalitarian denies the unique identity and free-will and believes that we are merely meat machines programmed by our environments. If there are differences among us, it is in the environment. Level all environmental conditions and we will return to our primeval sameness, and live in perfect equality and perfect justice.
Therefore, the purpose of society should be to eliminate differences and create equality of condition. Society should smash down barriers to equality. Society should compensate you for your weaknesses, and where needed, it should curtail your strengths, so as to level the playing field for all. Culture identity is irrational and should not form the basis of the social group. Differences of culture, religion, and nation are all superstitions. They should all be smashed down too. There will then be no more divisions in humanity: no more Americans; no Mexicans; no Muslims; no Christians; no Jews. There will be only humans, living under a human government that protects human rights, and promotes human equality. In this society, there will be no masters or servants; no rich or poor; no generals or privates; no leaders or followers. As there will be no need for competition, there will be no more wars. All things will be held in common, all people will be equal, contributing according to their abilities, and receiving according to their needs. Peace and love will return to humanity, and the world will join hands and sing John Lennon’s “Imagine.” (tbc)

Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. Psalm 139:21-22

On October 28, 2009, Hate Crimes legislation, the latest building block in the New World Order, was signed into law. Federal Crime enhancers might now be added to any crime against Race (except Caucasian), Color (except white), Religion (except Christian), National origin (except American), Gender (except male), Disability (which might include anybody), Sexual orientation (except heterosexual), whether they be bisexual, homosexual, intersexual, or heterosexual, and Gender identity, whether they be transgendered or cis-gendered. We do not want to know what these perverts do in their bedrooms. When government dictates what we may love or hate, the outcome is predictable.
In 2004, 6 men and 5 women were arrested in Philadelphia while preaching and ministering at “Outfest,” a public sodomite event sponsored by the taxpayers of “The city of brotherly lust.” These 11 Christians were accosted by a group of “Pink Angels” and were later arrested. They were charged with 3 felonies and 5 misdemeanors each, including a charge of “Ethnic Intimidation.” They were each looking at 47 years in prison and $90,000 in fines.
After spending time in jail and fighting a long and costly legal battle, the charges were eventually dismissed. The next time they might not be so lucky! Those who attacked the Christians were not charged.
Canada has silenced its opposition to the sodomite agenda with similar legislation. The intimidation of violating Federal law chills what might be free speech. Newspapers won’t print editorials, letters to the editor, or even paid religious advertisements which reflect adversely or negatively on sexual perversion. Pulpits are silenced!
Public opinion and morals spiral downward towards its acceptance and practice. Teachers and textbooks normalize it, the media portrays it, and the professing churches spiritualize it.
In my family, hate is “a family value!” Hate is a virtue in “the family of God.” We hate what God hates and we love what God loves (Psalm 139:21-22).
The fact that God hates is a revelation to most people. But the Bible has much more to say about what and who God hates than what and who God loves (Psalm 3:7; 5:5-6; 7:11-13; 9:17; 10:15; 11:4-6; 97: 10; 139:21-22; Proverbs 6:16; 8:13; John 7: 7; Luke 19:27)
I do not expect to see our prison population swell over this legislation. The Professing Church has long ago acquiesced to unjust government edicts. Baby-murder, fornication, divorce, adultery, sodomy, you name it, the Professing Church embraces it, their seminaries teach it, they invent novel doctrines and theology which make sin virtuous. There will be little resistance from the Professing Church.
Confessing Christians and Confessing Churches will suffer, but their numbers are small. Professing Christians consider Confessing Christians outlaws; they are glad when they are prosecuted and imprisoned.
“They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.” John 16:2
The Hate Crimes legislation will reveal more clearly the dichotomy that exists between the Professing and the Confessing Church. In the end there will be little excuse for deception for those who follow the apostate worldly religions of the One World Order. dan & donna holman

I’m interrupting Peter Knight’s long letter to post the first of two shorter ones I got from him at the end of October:

Greetings John, there are a couple of statements in Neal Horsley’s letter that I need to correct.
Firstly, in the context of abortion it is an obvious falsehood to say, “If one father kills his own children, every father is not deemed guilty by God – only the murderous father.” If one mother or father shows a clear intention to kill his children, or someone else’s, and others do not act to prevent him when they had the means to do so, they are all equally guilty. It’s only those who took the preventive measures who are not guilty.
Next up Neal seems to suggest that people would be able to avoid that guilt if they were able to move to a state which was murder free. Wrong again. Cowards deal with problems by running away from them and pretending they don’t exist. Rather than that, if you did happen to be somewhere where there was no problem, then it’s your responsibility to go to where the problems are, and the most serious of them, and deal with the problem.
Someone who has demonstrated a good deal more commitment than Neal, someone who I don’t think you would find running away from the problem, Eric Rudolph did say in the same issue that there were thee ways to constitutionally outlaw abortion nationwide in America:
1) an across the board ban on all abortion by the US Congress
2) for the Supreme Court to recognize a right to life of the unborn
3) a change in the Constitution
Eric gets most things right as far as these things go, but I have doubts about number one. It seems to me that there would have to be some strange laws in America if the Supreme Court is not able to strike down a law by the US Congress restricting or banning abortion when they’ve been able to.
But anyway Eric did say that the chance of any of the three happening was remote. I think I could have gone a bit further than that and used the words – “It just ain’t never gunna happen”.
There is perhaps a 4th law which is more likely to be enacted and which may have a slim chance of effectively, if indirectly, outlawing abortion. I have mentioned before that the government in this country was considerate enough some years back to “allow” each Australian taxpayer to contribute a percentage of his income to the medimurder system to allow for the cost of abortion to be subsidized. The tough as steel (that’s Australian for piss weak) anti-abortionists accepted this and paid up without so much as a whimper. As best I understand it, the government in America has not (as yet) made any such demands there. The way that usually happens, though, is that they make medical insurance compulsory, and it’s only after that that it becomes apparent that the only insurance companies that insurance can be
obtained from are those which have policies covering the cost of abortion.
Perhaps if the US government did push the button and ask the AA’s of America to perform the service of paying for the abortions themselves, maybe they might not be quite as tame and quite as docile as the Australian variety, and perhaps a very optimistic person may think that they might be pushed into doing what they should have done decades ago
Incidentally, invitro fertilization and its offshoot, so called embryonic stem cell research, are also on the list of things that the Australian taxpayers have been “allowed” to pay for.
Some very ignorant people think there’s a difference between abortion and IVF, but anyone who knows what goes on with IVF knows it’s just another branch of abortion.
I did note what Neal Horsley’s proposed solution to the abortion problem is, and let me say that that’s another one which ain’t never gunna happen.
The main thing which I wrote to correct, though, is what Neal said following his proposed solution – “I covet Peter Knight’s prayers in that regard”. That’s yet another one which ain’t never gunna happen.
After every election for the past 37 years, the self-proclaimed anti-abortionists of America have said to those whose lives depended on their help – “It’ll be right and good for another five million of you to meet the fate that the government and the abortionists have allotted to you”. There’s only one response that anyone can give to abortionists and not be guilty of saying that. Far be it from me to pray for a solution which says that.
Political action is there to resolve problems in the education system and in the transport sector and in the economy. It’s not there to resolve a problem like this.
The only thing I ever pray for is what I consider to be the best and most just solution to something. And whilst it might be nice to see some more people give the only response which is not saying that it is right and good, after decades of their failures to do so there could only be one best and just solution. That being for God to say – “I’ve had quite enough of your right and good nonsense, and here’s what you’re going to get for it.”
There’s one sure way that you can make a contribution towards getting the world wrecked, and that’s to give the “It’ll be right and good for another five million” response. And with most people that’s really the only point there is that will ever be worth making, the only one they will ever take any notice of.

Monday’s Child, by Dan and Donna Holman

Scott Roeder admitted to shooting the infamous abortionist and usher George Tiller inside the spiritual brothel of the Reformed Lutheran Church. The only issue that needs to be resolved at his trial is: Was Scott Roeder justified in killing him?
We already know that public opinion is against him. Scott Roeder is as popular in Kansas as John Brown at Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia.
In 1860, and throughout the Civil War, John Brown remained VERY popular in Kansas.
The media is setting the stage for Roeder’s crucifixion. Kansas City Star Reporter Roxana Hegeman has been in weekly contact with Roeder promising to print his story. But predictably she reneges and vilifies him. She also marginalizes his supporters. She dismisses Dave Leech’s assertion that Roeder is entitled to the “Necessity Defense” and labels him “an extremist.” It appears that Scott Roeder’s only defense will be denied him at his trial.
The Necessity Defense was allowed in a 1992 Kansas case regarding a clinic blockade. The Judge ruled those who blockaded this death camp were justified in protecting innocent human life. In 1993, the case was overturned by the Kansas Supreme Court. The justices do not know when life begins. That does not mean that a jury cannot determine whether the pre-born are people worthy of defense. Scott Roeder wants his day in court to explain to a jury of his peers his reasonable belief that the unborn are truly people worthy of defense.
In his 1994 murder trial of abortionist John Britton, The Reverend Paul Hill was denied the use of the Necessity Defense. Reverend Hill decided to identify with the pre-born children and remained silent throughout his trial. Reverend Hill's jury never heard his defense, his ONLY DEFENSE! At his sentencing, Reverend Paul Hill finally spoke: “Mix my blood with the blood of the children!”

A Christian friend of mine is troubled with my position on the justification of the use of force as I believe Mr. Scott Roeder was justified in the shooting of George Tiller. Tiller was a serial killer who preyed on the weak and the helpless. The laws of our land, and its corrupt political powers allowed him to continue his systematic slaughter of helpless innocent children under a color of law, under a pretense of medicine, and “choice.”
My Christian friend brought up his best argument. “Perhaps Dr. Tiller would have repented; perhaps he could have been a spokesman for the babies like Dr. Bernard Nathanson.”
Indeed, if George Tiller did repent, Mr. Scott Roeder would not have been justified in taking Tiller’s life. That would be vengeance on Mr. Roeder’s part. Vengeance, of course, IS NOT justifiable homicide unless it is conducted by the state under due process of law.
My friend admits that his argument is very weak. There was absolutely no outward signs of repentance. Tiller always gloated about his bloody massacres.
But for the sake of argument, let us entertain the thought that Tiller planned to repent on Tuesday; he still intended to kill one child on Monday. For the sake of Monday’s child Mr. Scott Roeder was justified in shooting Tiller at his church on Sunday.
Some argue that Monday’s baby was not in eminent danger; the sacrificial knife of George Tiller was not yet poised at baby’s throat.
Details! Details!
Suppose someone had a contract hit on you or yours, and your only opportunity to defend yourself was on Sunday. Would you wait until the assassin was squeeeeezing the trigger before you act?
What part of “serial killer” do you not understand?
One final argument is made: Mr. Roeder did not allow for George Tiller’s repentance, thereby sending him straight to hell. Tiller MIGHT have become another Dr. Bernard Nathanson!
At age 67, Tiller had plenty of space for repentance.
Yes, Dr. Bernard Nathanson repented. Yes, before the Throne Room of Christ, Dr. Nathanson’s sins are forgiven and forgotten. Dr. Nathanson’s testimony is one of many of the great salvation purchased for those who put faith and trust in the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Even a mass murder like Dr. Bernard Nathanson or a Dr. George Tiller might be reconciled to God for their crimes against humanity. This is the great hope for us all. We are all better or worse, none of us is good enough to go to heaven; we are all just good enough to go to hell. It is only through the atoning work of Jesus Christ that we, Nathanson, or anyone else might be saved. Dr. Bernard Nathanson admits to killing 10,000 babies during his reign of terror. I am sure that he would be the first to admit that his salvation is not worth one of these children’s lives!
Who would sacrifice their child in the hope that George Tiller MIGHT repent? Those who say they would are idiots! They probably do not inconvenience themselves to go to an abortion clinic, to speak up for those being killed.
Scott Roeder is entitled to use the Necessity Defense at his trial. Shame on Kansas if it this is denied to him.

Let me add this to the as usual remarkable insights of the Holmans: In war we know nothing about our enemies’ souls. All we know is that if we don’t stop them, they will kill us.
We know nothing about Tiller’s soul. Only God knows. I do suspect, though, that He will deal more sternly with those, like me, whom He has enabled to see how horrible abortion is, than to those who remain ignorant.

A Eugene (Oregon) man accused of threatening to blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic has been charged in the case, authorities said.
Gregory Paul Freeman, 56, was charged Monday with using a telephone on Dec. 30 to threaten to damage or destroy the Planned Parenthood clinic on the outskirts of Eugene.
"Uh, please go ahead and dial the, uh, United States of America, because I'm going to burn your abortion clinic down because you are a baby killer and you hate babies," Freeman is alleged to have said in the call. "You go and get sick and you go back to Portland and get sick there, and get sick there or I'm going to blow your (expletive) abortion clinic up."
The federal charge filed by the U.S. Attorney's office in a complaint follows a Eugene police investigation into a series of threatening phone calls last year to the clinic and other places and people.
An affidavit filed by the FBI to support an arrest warrant said that former University of Oregon President David Frohnmayer received one of the threats before he retired, along with a Masonic Lodge and a local doctor.
Freeman has not been charged with making any of those calls.
Court records showed his attorney is Craig Weinerman of the Federal Public Defender's office in Eugene. The office was closed Wednesday for the Veteran's Day holiday and a message was not returned.
A spokesman for the FBI and a Eugene police spokeswoman said Wednesday they had no information available during the holiday and could not comment.
Eugene police began investigating on Oct. 1, 2008, when an officer stopped by the home of David and Lynn Frohnmayer to listen to an anti-Semitic threat left on their phone, according to court documents.
David Frohnmayer, 69, is a familiar figure in Oregon politics and public service. The former state lawmaker was attorney general from 1981 to 1991 and served as University of Oregon School of Law dean before taking over as the university's 15th president in July 1994. He announced his retirement last spring.
Police checked phone records and found that the October 2008 threat left on the Frohnmayers' answering machine - along with three similar threats - were placed with a prepaid wireless card.
In late-November 2008, Eugene police responded to another report of anti-Semitic phone harassment at Eugene's Masonic Lodge 11. Police believed calls to the Frohnmayer residence and the Masonic Lodge were placed by the same man, and they traced the calls to a local phone number.
A police officer placed a call to the number on Dec. 2, and a returned voicemail message left the next day said not to call back again.
"And in the meantime, you go down and blow up an abortion clinic," the caller said.
According to the FBI affidavit, Dr. Howard R. Sampley, a physician at a local hospital, also received similar calls.

Thanks, Tobra

Neo Trades II Shade Tree Horror Stories
By James Kopp

Some parents will understandably recoil a little bit at the thought of their son or daughter going into the trades – “Isn’t it dangerous? He could get electrocuted. She could get run over by a D6,” etc.
Never fear, O timorous parent. With the grace of our Lord, and a little nudging by a Guardian Angel, your little one shan’t be zipped by electrons nor handicapped by a Caterpillar . . . oh, and with a little help and guidance, since Grace builds on Nature, from Shade Tree Horror Stories.
Actually, a lovely vestige and throwback to oral tradition – the channel here on earth of the Pentateuch – Shade Tree Horror Stories will help to rivet the attentions of your little ones, even if they are a little bit tainted by the glaze of previous offerings to the deities of videogame, i-pod or cathode ray tube . . . I say, your kids will be rapt, listening to stories about the time . . . well! Shall we start then off with a few? And, “on the job,” as we say (an expression Job laughs at every time he hears it) your kids will hear some more, and they’ll learn prudence, summat hard to teach to a virtual kid.
It reminds me of the first shade tree story I ever heard. It was lunch break. The shade tree was on St. John Island and the year was early Pleistocene (7072 year of Our Creator, [didja catch that Mrss. Darwin & Stalin, where’ere y’are?] otherwise called 1973, year of Our Lord). We were eating lunch with our hard hats on (more on this DV in a bit) and William weighed in about the day the scaffold went down.
It was a lovely backdrop, you see. We were on the precipitous volcanic slope of the north face, Caneel Bay Plantation at our feet, the most perfect aquamarine Caribbean beach in the world, playground of the Jet Set, the Beautiful People (and Richard Nixon too, bless his little Californian heart), and last refuge of Edward Teller, Mr. Manhattan Project himself, who hung out down in the Virgin Islands because he had done a little study and decided that the Virgin Islands were the dead zone in the atmospheric gyre and therefore would be preserved from toxic fallout in the feared upcoming atomic exchange; bravo for you Dr. Teller, et filles. . . and then there was B.F. Skinner’s daughter, oh yes, the very same one raised in a box, the poor thing, and she was just fine, and after a little while, you’d get an impression . . . but AML, IIF (ask me later if I forget) . . .*yawn* . . . is this sentence over yet?)
Ah yes, William. Well, William and I and crew were far and away above The Plantation and the palming palm trees and the coconutting coconut trees and the still-living corals and the cavorting fish schools . . .we were in the oh-so-steep hillside, which was hard for man or horse to perch on because it was loose volcanic tuff, but William was carrying on about the day the scaffold went down, all the more interesting, you see, because the seaward elevation of the house was thirty or forty feet tall, while the volcano caldera side was barely a story, and that was notched a bit into the mountain, even then.
I guess you need to know a little about this wee hoosie before you can understand why the scaffold came down. The house was built out of solid granite. That’s right, solid granite stones, each one quarried, busted, and shaped randomly down to the exact shape necessary to key into the last hand carved stone, with a joint gap of no more than a half inch, and you could run your hand over the finished surface with no more than a half inch bump, and that’s saying a lot because granite doesn’t split like a shale or a schist . . . . oh yes. So, it was necessary, on the top of this scaffold, to load it up with super scaffolds to lift up the four full-time stone masons who spent all day chip, chip, chipping away with their three-pound hammers at ten pounds or so that they’d hold in their left hand, and they had done it so long, you’d think there was no more to it than Santa’s elves tap, tap, tapping away at little shoes for good girls and boys.
Then there was the stone waste that accumulated at the feet of the stone masons; and the quarried tough blocks we’d throw onto their scaffolds; every guy had to have one or two to kind of mull over to find a face of corner to match his current leading edge. The blocks were the size of a pillow or two, 150 pounds or so.

Then there was the weight of the masons themselves, their tools (they’d use the 14 # hammer to persuade the quarry blocks, you see), then their buckets; each mason has his own water bucket which needs to be kept filled every minute, especially in the tropical sun because every face and stone has to be wet when you set the stone in order to set a good bond . . . and God Almighty help us, we wanted good bonds. We were so proud of that house. Pray we both get to Heaven. I’ll show it to you. (tbc)