Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Abortion is Murder, 8-13, March, 2011

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

March, 2011 Vol. 8 No. 13
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – 484-706-4375
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 91
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 PFC’s, $10 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 for 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, Michael F. Griffin #310249 Walton C.I., 691 Institution Rd, Defuniak Springs, FL 32433 9/11
4. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
5. Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia
6. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, P.O. Box 300, 3057 Easton Tpk., Waymart, PA 18472
7. Little, David SJRCC, 930 Old Black River Road, Saint John, NB E2J 4T3
8. Moose, Justin – Piedmont Regional Jail, PO Drawer 388, Farmville, VA 23901 (new)
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, FCI Pollock Federal Correctional Institution, P.O. Box 4050, Pollock, LA 71467
10. Roeder, Scott P. 65192, PO Box 2, Lansing Kansas 66043
11. Ross, Michael, Custer County Jail, 1010 Main St., Miles City, Montana 59301
12. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
13. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
14. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25

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

Peter Knight's attack continues. Prolifers who ignore God's law because we are too afraid to disobey man's law are the target:
Since whilst ever there are abortionists, there will be deaths for their victims, by demanding that you allow there to be abortionists, the government also demands that you submit and allow that there be death for their victims. How easy is that to see? Consequently, they’ve got both barrels aimed at you. The government demands that you be pro life for abortionists, and since y has an equal value and is the equivalent of z, if they can get you to be pro life for abortionists, then they’ve got you to be pro death for their victims. All this is derived from the very obvious fact, which can be seen in practical operation at every single abortion center, that when you make the decision to allow there to be abortionists, you’ve decided to allow there to be death for their victims.
So the question arises, in regards to abortion, just how many does the government demand that you be pro death for? The government permits you to remove from abortion centers those unborn babies who are brought there by very weak-minded parents who have been incapable of making a firm decision whether they want the abortionist to do what abortionists do or not. These ones, with such indecisive, unstable parents, are the only ones it is possible to remove by complying with the government’s objections, and they are the only ones who are removed. They amount to about one percent of those who are taken to abortion centers. By complying with the government’s restrictions, those who attempt this removal process do not have a hope in hell of removing the other 99%, and they are destined for the scrap heap. You cannot sell something like this to people who just do not want what you’re selling. So that one percent is the number the government permits you to be pro life for. Once again you may see this one to ninety-nine result in practical operation at any abortion center where picketers are present. There’s always been many, many less that one percent of the total number removed though, since in reality picketers are in attendance at very few abortion centers.
So there is a demand by the government that you be at least 99% pro-death, and provision is made for you to be as much as one percent pro life. That 99% translates to another 1.4 million babies in the rubbish bins of the USA by the end of the year. That’s what it translated to last year. That’s how many the government required you to be pro-death for the year before, and the year before, and the one before, and on and on and on. And yes, as you would probably realize after 38 years of it, if you once again decide to sign the government’s pro death contract, that’s what the inevitable cost next year and the year after that too.
The only way it is possible to avoid signing that pro death contract, and change that 1.4 million result, is to adopt the active policy and make the activated decision that all abortionists should be dead. Unlike some people, the government did have the very minimal amount of sense necessary to work out that whilst ever you choose to allow abortionists, you, at the request of the government, are choosing to give your consent to the killing of 1.4 million victims each year. And, attesting to their “superiority” over God and his Golden Laws.

That’s the easy part. The two thirds to come are tough.

Terry Hughes died recently. He taught science at the University of Maine and was an active pro-lifer, I never realized just how active. Here’s a letter he sent to friends:

Dear Hans and Julia: Yesterday I returned to Rapid City for one of my IV treatments for pancreatic cancer. The nurses found all veins in both hands had hardened or collapsed from earlier treatments so I had to have a minor operation to install a hose through a vein from my upper arm to my heart. In the process the doctors and assistants asked about all my scars. So I told them. I've known you both a long time, you've supported my career, so I owe you an explanation too.
The s-shaped scar on the inside of my right elbow was from an attempt to reconnect my right bicep, which had been ripped out by six cops who arrested me when I and 200 others were engaged in a peaceful sit-in at an Abortion Auschwitz in Providence, Rhode Island. That attempt was made after I spent a full field season in Antarctica with the detached bicep.
The scars on my left shoulder were from an operation to cut away arthritic spurs on my left shoulder joint that developed after it had been dislocated after cops who cuffed my hands behind my back, put a long billy club under the chain, and dragged me across pavements, up and down the stairs of police wagons, and (later) across the floors and up and down stairs in prisons.
Scars on my right knee were from knee-replacement surgery after cops had twisted my knee in un-natural directions while arresting me.
There are no scars from the times cops shoved their thumbs into my eyes, so many times my vision is now permanently blurred when it had been better than 20 - 20.

All of these injuries are a result of legal pain-compliance techniques cops use to force people to cooperate in being arrested. In my case, a baby would be ripped to pieces and murdered if I cooperated. I can endure a lot of pain if I can delay that from happening, and I certainly won't be an accomplice to it by complying. I'll let them murder me first. At least I'll be in solidarity with the victims.
You may believe, like many people, that abortion liberates women. That "liberation" consists in having their bodies being strip-mined of human beings in surgical abortions and made a toxic dump site in which no human being can survive in chemical abortions. All so men can have their three-second thrill without any consequences. Professional environmentalists love abortion. The fewer people the better. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg gave the real reason for legalizing abortion
in an interview published by the New York Times last year. She stated it was to get rid of "people we don't want too many of."
To that end, over 70 percent of Abortion Auschwitzes are in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. Federal, State, and City Governments give over $400,000,000 every year to Planned Parenthood for this purpose (funding much increased by Obama, our Black president, and much more as Obamacare--Obamascare--goes into effect).
By the way, Bev. and I took two dozen sexually abused women into our home, aged from 2 to 34, and all but four pregnant. One had aborted nine babies by age 20 and ended up with cervical cancer. Abortion does not liberate women. It liberates men (and it doesn't even liberate men; it only encourages their selfish behavior).
As you probably know, I've had trouble getting much of my funded research published. Lately it's gotten so bad the editor of Quaternary Science Reviews couldn't find even one qualified reviewer in fourteen he contacted who was willing to just read a manuscript I submitted that is pertinent to the debate over catastrophic man-caused global warming: "A Simple Holistic Hypothesis for the Self-Destruction of Ice Sheets." If it gets published, it will be one of my most important and topical papers in my half-century as a scientist, including my years as a graduate student at Northwestern, as anyone who reads it will see.
In my reply to getting your Christmas Card, I mentioned the work I've tried to get published in 2010. At the end I added a short sentence, "Hughes versus the World." You may have found that puzzling. Many of my scientific colleagues are aware of my response to legalized abortion, especially those who have read the last chapter, Eternity Bound, of my autobiography, ICE MAN, either the original 2009 version or the 2010 version edited by John Splettstoesser and Henry Brecher. I can't help but wonder if their knowledge has led to some of them refusing to review my manuscripts, or to recommend rejection if they
do review them. In the past, reviewers have for the most part made quite constructive criticisms that made the manuscripts much better, as anyone can see who reads my Acknowledgments at the end of my papers. That still happens, but it doesn't account for refusing even to read my manuscripts and sometimes being "assassins" if they do submit reviews.
Lately, these kinds of reviews have affected the careers of co-authors, including graduate and undergraduate students
(Katherine Pingree and Max Lurie), new glaciologists (Aitbala Sargent--two Ph.D.'s), and top glaciologists (James Fastook). Fortunately, the editors of some journals have recognized this (the Journal of Geophysical Research, Quaternary Research, and Quaternary Science Reviews being outstanding in this regard), and found ways to get our work published anyway.
So perhaps you can understand from both these experiences in my personal and professional life that sometimes it seems to me like "Hughes versus the World." And yes, I know many scientists criticize reviews of their work. But I think I'm unique in also being a scientist who has been very public in a contentious social issue that has nothing to do with my scientific work. It's especially damaging when it affects my co-authors who agree to work with me in good faith. Best wishes in 2011, Terry

(Anniversary of Roe. v. Wade, 2011) I find it impossible to avoid sarcasm when I talk about the American Christian response to legalized abortion. That's because the American Christian response has been double-minded (on the one hand we say God wants legalized abortion stopped, on the other hand we do nothing with the power to stop it) from the first day American Christians were confronted with the fact that the federal government of the USA through the agency of the Supreme Court had literally legalized the murder of unborn children. How else except with sarcasm can I respond to the specter of Christians who claim to be instruments of the will of the Lord Jesus Christ when those Christians have found a way to tolerate such murder for 38 years?
Did I say tolerate? I should have said Christians not only tolerate the murder of unborn babies, they SUPPORT the government that authorizes such murder. In fact, the determination to support the federal government's increasingly insane "legal logic" has been the only consistent part for the last 38 years of the American Christian teaching on the meaning of what the federal government of the USA has done.
For the latest example that explains what I'm talking about (only one example in a string of similar examples that can be tracked back to the day the Supreme Court issued its decision in Roe v. Wade) look at how the pro-life movement is crowing today about having had an abortionist and his staff arrested for murder. Today on Roe v. Wade day, the headlines (everybody who thinks about it knows the timing of the headlines have been decided long ago) read, "Abortion Doctor Charged With 8 Murders".
And at first glance everyone thinks this is a great example of how the pro-life movement is making progress in bringing justice to bear on the plight of unborn babies who are being legally murdered by the millions in the USA. After all, the abortionist and his staff were caught red-handed murdering babies. They were arrested, refused bail, and today sit waiting for the wheels of American Justice to squash them into prison for the rest of their caught-red-handed-in-murder lives.
Nobody but me seems to even have noticed that the arrest of the abortionist and his staff not only does nothing to protect the life of one unborn baby, but is in fact a validation of the idea that the existing criminal justice system in the USA is worthy of the support of Christians.
Do you see what I'm looking at? Arresting and prosecuting a person for murder of born babies has literally nothing whatsoever to do with the battle that abortionist abolitionists have been fighting for the last 38 years. Nothing! Everyone knows it is murder to murder a born child! There is no argument--YET!--about whether born people deserve the protection of the American criminal justice system if somebody murders them.
When pro-life Christians get all righteous feeling because they have helped arrest a murderer of born children, they do nothing whatsoever to protect the unborn babies being legally butchered in this nation. Can you see that? Do you understand that we are supposed to be focusing our energy, resources, lives, fortune and sacred honor on defending the UNBORN babies who are being legally murdered in this nation? It's already understood to be illegal to murder born babies! Can you see why I can't avoid sarcasm when I deal with such self-imposed ignorance, such studied ignorance?
But, as this present arrest of the abortionist murderer of the born babies proves, pro-life Christians have an amazing ability to ignore, literally ignore, the unborn babies by shifting attention to the pro-life movement's ability to prosecute the murder of born babies.
All the pro-life movement does when it supports prosecution of murderers of born babies is support the existing criminal justice system! The very system we are supposed to be trying to change! Furthermore, giving Christians whose greatest desire in life is to ignore the fact that we the people are culpable in the slaughter of every baby being legally butchered in this nation a way to feel like we are defending the unborn babies who are literally being torn limb from limb under sanction and ORDER of the federal government of the USA while all we're actually doing is helping the government prosecute the murder of born children makes the whole world see that this generation of American Christians is in Denial--clinical denial, fleshly clinical denial. Rather than being an example of the Body of Christ on this green earth, our response to legalized abortion in this generation proves we are just like everybody on earth, totally shut off from the Spirit of Truth, totally committed to serving the flesh as the god of this world.
This criticism is not some Sunday School class: I'm trying to get you to see how our ignorance, how our ability to confuse these things literally perpetuates the slaughter of the unborn babies. Can you see what I'm talking about?
Okay, if you don't see it, here's how: the very feeling that pro-life Christians are making progress in helping the unborn babies who are being murdered when they successfully prosecute a murderer of born children totally takes the focus off what Christians should be fighting and makes Christians the fervent supporters of the American status quo--a status quo that allows any unwanted, unborn baby to be butchered alive up to the moment some appendage of that baby slips out the birth canal of its mother. When we act like the criminal justice system is working because it prosecutes murderers of born people, we literally take our eyes of the GOAL we are all supposed to focused on. The GOAL is to outlaw abortion, the murder of unborn people. Murder of born people is already against the law!
It is this process of continuing support of the federal government, the government that has legalized the murder of unborn babies, that Satan has used to allow this generation of Christians to feel like they're forever making progress in the battle against legalized abortion when, in fact, it's easier today for a mother to murder her unborn baby than it was 38 years ago. Literally any mother who wants to murder her baby can do so in this nation. There is not a State, City, or town where that unwanted child can find a place of refuge. Nowhere in the USA. That ease of slaughter occurs because Virtually Nobody is willing to focus on the federal government of the USA as the enemy of God that has to be corrected or destroyed. No third option.
Christian pro-life leaders are THIS VERY DAY parading themselves in front of a new generation of Christians talking about all the awesome PROGRESS that has been made by the pro-life movement.
I'm telling you, I don't know how to restrain the sarcasm that rises in my craw in the face of all this self-congratulation I hear from pro-life leaders and pro-life followers. It's enough to gag a maggot if the maggot had the capacity to see the bizarre, utterly macabre dance with death that the annual anniversary of Roe v. Wade has become in this nation. Neal Horsley

Neal, with Peter above, is obviously right here, isn’t he? Pro-lifers are more responsible for the legal killing of our young than those who support the culture of death, aren’t they? Only the incarcerated escape responsibility, don’t they?

The “Syllabus of Errors” concludes (from December):

63. It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel against them.
64. The violation of any solemn oath, as well as any wicked and flagitious action repugnant to the eternal law, is not only not blamable but is altogether lawful and worthy of the highest praise when done through love of country.
65. The doctrine that Christ has raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament cannot be at all tolerated.
66. The Sacrament of Marriage is only a something accessory to the contract and separate from it, and the sacrament itself consists in the nuptial benediction alone. -
67. By the law of nature, the marriage tie is not indissoluble, and in many cases divorce properly so called may be decreed by the civil authority.
68. The Church has not the power of establishing diriment impediments of marriage, but such a power belongs to the civil authority by which existing impediments are to be removed.
69. In the dark ages the Church began to establish diriment impediments, not by her own right, but by using a power borrowed from the State.
70. The canons of the Council of Trent, which anathematize those who dare to deny to the Church the right of establishing diriment impediments, either are not dogmatic or must be understood as referring to such borrowed power.
71. The form of solemnizing marriage prescribed by the Council of Trent, under pain of nullity, does not bind in cases where the civil law lays down another form, and declares that when this new form is used the marriage shall be valid.
72. Boniface VIII was the first who declared that the vow of chastity taken at ordination renders marriage void. --
73. In force of a merely civil contract there may exist between Christians a real marriage, and it is false to say either that the marriage contract between Christians is always a sacrament, or that there is no contract if the sacrament be excluded.
74. Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by their nature to civil tribunals.
75. The children of the Christian and Catholic Church are divided amongst themselves about the compatibility of the temporal with the spiritual power.
76. The abolition of the temporal power of which the Apostolic See is possessed would contribute in the greatest degree to the liberty and prosperity of the Church.
77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.
78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship.
79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism.
80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization. You’re welcome, Jimbo

Cal writes from Hawaii:

John, I had a chuckle when you wrote in the December 2010 issue, "Wow! Many of these 59 grounds are even longer than “B”!. Can you imagine what work went into this?" I had a chuckle because apparently Jimbo filed the whole thing--in the dumpster! I still have not heard from him as to why he decided to go with something else instead. But he still has a chance if he wants to pursue it as a straight habeas corpus case, not a motion attacking sentence. Or, he could add it as an amendment.
I also wanted to ask if you have had any contact with the Moose. My letter to him was returned. See the January 2011 issue for a copy. I have re-sent it to him at his new address at the Piedmont Regional Jail, but I have not received any response. I would bet the judge disregards the plea deal and gives him the maximum sentence anyway. That is what happened with Evans, who got 40 years. So the plea deal is really just a carrot-on-a-stick. The same happened with Scotty. He thought he would be allowed to confess in court to a voluntary manslaughter defense, but after he took the stand to confess, the judge reeled in the carrot and slapped him with the maximum sentence--a hard 50!
The moral of the story: Duplicity has become the rule. So I would advise the Moose to take his chances with the First Amendment. At worst he will get the maximum sentence he will probably get anyway. But at least he will get to raise important issues in the process.
I also wrote the Moose's court appointed attorney, but he has been unresponsive. I feel the Moose needs to stand up for his First Amendment rights, as outlined in my letter. If child pornographers have First Amendment rights, why shouldn't those who actually want to protect children instead? I think this is an important issue to raise, and one that deserves national attention. But if he does not withdraw his plea, he will lose the opportunity.
Perhaps you could make the trip to NC and talk with him in person. Ideally, he needs to withdraw his plea before March.

Cal’s second letter arrived last week:

John, What I think is happening here is that the federal government has taken a new step. For example, with electronic stalking, the government is now crawling at will
under people's cars at night and attaching electronic tracking devices without a warrant. The courts then chime in with a chorus that goes: "Dey can do dat. Dey can do dat. Let us turn our backs." But this does not appear to be the only area where the government has taken a new step. In the old school, the government used informants to obtain convictions. But in politically motivated prosecutions, the government faces an additional problem: Preventing politically sensitive issues from being drawn out in court and reaching the ears of the public.
So let's analyze the government's new strategy.
You find a small fry to pick on, perhaps someone a little
confused. You publicize the arrest to make it look like you
are really cracking down, and that the people who have
political motivations contrary to the government's are
dangerous nutjobs like the guy under arrest. Sounds simple, but it could backfire. What if the defendant is coaxed by someone with legal savvy into pursuing legal strategies that turn it all around and rub everything back in the government's face? What if the defendant uses the trial and related procedures to spotlight the issues? How would you avoid this?
Well, let's say you have a prominent political dissident who gets a lot of publicity for his anti-abortion views but then gets himself into a bit of trouble. The government cuts the guy a deal--if he will work as the government's conman. From then on, when they arrest someone on anti-abortion charges, the conman serves as the arrestee's confidant.
Because the conman is known as a prominent activist, the arrestee thinks he is on his side. But little does he know that he is working as the government's conman by tricking the arrestee into taking legal courses that avoid any meaningful confrontation with the government over the issues. For example, the conman might convince the arrestee to take a plea bargain, so that no issues come out in court and there are no appeals. Then, to top it all off, the judge disregards the "bargain" and doles out the maximum sentence anyway! The government has make its point without having to face any (potentially damaging) points from the other side.
So, when politically sensitive issues are involved in the prosecution, it appears the government isn't just relying on informants anymore. Instead, the government now appears to be using conmen, who trick the arrestee into pursing legal strategies that steer clear of the issues.
When the government is finally caught at it, the courts will probably chime in with the same chorus they use now after being caught doing electronic stalking: "Dey can do dat. Dey can do dat. Let us turn our backs." After all, the original prosecutorial conmen have long been the public defenders anyway. So why not allow a little outside help as well? In return, the conman is let off the hook, or rewarded in some other way, just like traditional informants have been.
In the Moose's case, the First Amendment issues are VERY prominent, and have GREAT potential to be
politically DAMAGING to the government. For example, how can the First Amendment protect child pornography advocates more so than child protection advocates?
But by convincing the Moose to plead guilty, no issues will be raised. There will be no trial, no jury, and no appeal. The public will never have to learn about the
political issues, and there is no risk of a backfire. To top
things off, the judge will probably dole out the maximum
sentence anyway, or something close to it. For example,
Evans received 40 years in return for his guilty plea.
There can be other variations as well. For example, the conman can get the defendant to confess.
In Kopp's case, the federal government employed his state attorney as a conman to coax him to confess in return for favors for federal defendants who were his friends. In other words, the government obtained his conviction by way of conning him through a breach of attorney-client privilege.
Remember, a gang that kills its own children to cover up for the sexual imbecility of its females is not going to lose sleep when it stoops so low as to cheat at cards. The government's desperate effort to keep abortion policy intact has led to all sorts of political cheating. Cal

When adults point to an aborted baby picture and say, “Kids see that,” I say, “It’s for the kids; we’re brainwashed.” Neal elaborates:

Why Parents Hate Dead Fetus Pictures

Parents hate the pictures because they force parents to lie to their children. It's one thing for a parent to tell a helpful lie like Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy so that your child can be delighted and comforted in the world, but it's quite another thing to lie to your child when your child knows full well you are lying, not to serve them, but to protect yourself.
I focused on this subject because I recently received a message from an irate father. He said:

I went to a local restaurant last night and before I was seated, my 2 sons and I went to the bathroom to wash our hands. My boys are 9 and 6. My oldest turned to me and said dad, what is abortion???? He had found a pamphlet of yours...My question to you is this, is there any other way to get a point across that will not completely mess up the mindset of a 6 and 9 year old???? I honestly feel like you need to redirect your tactics.
I was so MAD last night that I would have been ready to fight the person that put that pamphlet in the bathroom. Please think about what reality is. Yes abortion is wrong but kids do not need the violent pictures in your ads. My kids do not comprehend life or death. Please read this and think about what you are doing to the innocence of the children who see this!!!!!!!!!!!

Here's how I replied to the man:

You know as well as I do that if your son is old enough to ask you about abortion, he is beginning to do what you say he is not capable of doing, namely, "comprehend life or death."

What you are really angry about is you are having to explain to your six year old child why he lives in a nation where his daddy lets people get away with murder. What you call anger is really shame that you feel for yourself because you are having to try to find words that will allow your son to avoid having to figure out that his daddy is a man who allows little babies even younger than your son to be legally murdered every day around you.

The anger you feel toward me is the spirit of murder you are collaborating with every day of the week because you do nothing with the power to arrest the legalized murder you consent to.

The real tragedy is when you figure out how to explain things to your son you will end up teaching him that it's all right for him to be the kind of man who collaborates with people who make a living killing defenseless little babies.

Unless you want your son to have to grow up to be the kind of man you are now, you need to change and join us in arresting legalized abortion. (tbc)

Monday, January 10, 2011

Abortion is Murder, 8-12, February, 2011

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

February, 2011 Vol. 8 No. 12
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – 484-706-4375
Email –
Web –
Circulation – 103
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 PFC’s, $10 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 for 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. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
5. Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia
6. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, P.O. Box 300, 3057 Easton Tpk., Waymart, PA 18472
7. Little, David SJRCC, 930 Old Black River Road, Saint John, NB E2J 4T3
8. Moose, Justin – Piedmont Regional Jail, PO Drawer 388, Farmville, VA 23901 (new)
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, FCI Pollock Federal Correctional Institution, P.O. Box 4050, Pollock, LA 71467
10. Roeder, Scott P. 65192, PO Box 2, Lansing Kansas 66043 (new)
11. Ross, Michael, Custer County Jail, 1010 Main St., Miles City, Montana 59301
12. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
13. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
14. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25

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

Forgetting Our Lady of Guadalupe?
By Matthew Hanley

From the cross, Jesus gave us his Mother as our own; the beloved disciple John, by the design of providence, was not to be her only son. On December 12, 1531, Our Lady of Guadalupe – the “merciful Mother of all mankind” as she identified herself – spoke in the tenderest of terms to another one of her sons, Juan Diego:

Hear and let it penetrate into your heart, my dear little son. Let nothing discourage you, nothing depress you. Let nothing alter your heart or your countenance. Also do not fear any illness or vexation, anxiety or pain. Am I not here who am your mother? Are you not under my shadow and protection? Am I not your fountain of life? Are you not in the folds of my mantle, in the crossing of my arms? . . .Is there anything else that you need?

One would be hard pressed to find more comforting words; they are positively riveting given their intimate connection with the miraculous image of Mary imprinted on Juan Diego’s tilma. How to explain, among many other things, the reflection, verified with modern technological equipment unavailable in earlier centuries, of Juan Diego (and others in the room when he unraveled his tilma) in the eyes of the Blessed Mother? And all beautifully depicted on coarse fabric that, unlike others of its kind, which last a couple decades at the very most, has not appreciably deteriorated in 479 years, despite over a century of exposure to the elements?
The extravagance of Mary’s reassuring words is magnified by the fact that they came the day after Juan Diego did not follow through with his promise to meet Mary again at the appointed time and place. He had spent that day tending to his gravely sick uncle. Knowing that he just went AWOL on the Queen of Heaven, though, he decided to take a shortcut to his destination the next day in order to avoid her. Haven’t we all, knowing our own shortcomings, or facing the hardships and counter-cultural demands that come with faith in Christ, taken shortcuts in one form or another? He was nonetheless greeted by Our Lady and heard these soothing words – even after she had explicitly told him earlier: “Do not forget me.”
Does this hold some significance today – as large numbers of people with at least some exposure to the Church are choosing to take other paths? Ex-Catholics, it is said, comprise the largest religious affiliation in our country today after Catholics themselves. For some, a painful personal experience led them away. For others, a particular doctrine is discomfiting. I’ve always wondered, though, what those consumed with the demand for women’s ordination, for example, make of the fact that Mary is exalted above all other creatures. L.A. is not the “City of the Angels” but of their Queen: Our Lady of the Angels. (Dude, you have to admit: that is mind-boggling!).
Many adopt a secular perspective chiefly to evade Catholicism’s moral code – even though peace depends on it; violating what’s stamped on the heart ensures disquietude that no amount of protest or self-styled spirituality can quell. Still others in the West today turn to the East (or some New Age amalgamation that leaves out the demanding asceticism and morality of Eastern religion, too) for the same reason, or simply because it is the in-thing to do, though some are also genuinely seeking meaning, truth, and spirituality. Even if the reasons ex-Catholics have for avoiding the Church do not quite resemble how Juan Diego sought to avoid Mary that one day – still, the Blessed Mother understands our humanity and stands ready to shower us with her maternal love.
While Yoga has been in vogue here in the affluent West, National Geographic reports that some Mexicans, particularly those surrounded by the plague of drug-cartel related violence and “the prospect of such a terrible death”, are turning “to death itself for protection”; the cult of La Santa Muerte (Holy Death) has, curiously, become the “guardian of the most defenseless and worst of sinners.”
Is not a certain forgetfulness – of Our Lady, of the Church – at work under such duress here as well? (There can be no doubt that vicious persecution, not just forgetfulness, officially characterized the Mexican government’s relations with the Church for much of the last century). Drugs today, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, “point to an interior longing in man which breaks out in perverted form if it does not find its true satisfaction.” Such perversion comes full circle when this unholy image is held up as a means of coping with the chaotic fallout of drugs, which “reveal the vacuum in our society” in the first place.
Shortly after Our Lady’s appearance, the Aztec peoples of the region converted by the millions – and as a result, abandoned their practice of human sacrifice. How could we, with our state-sanctioned toleration of the taking of innocent human life in the womb, have forgotten about such basic injunctions? Our modern-day barbarity not only far exceeds in scale the Aztecs rituals; it has flourished in a culture that, unlike the Aztecs, was formed by Christian sensibility. Their gods ceased having power to make exacting claims upon human life; the idol of absolute individual autonomy – “choice” and the “right to privacy” – still demands its pound of flesh.
Our Lady said she came to give all her love and protection to the people, to hear their weeping, and “alleviate all their multiple sufferings.” There could scarcely be a more inviting and urgent message for an anxious, secular age – particularly one that has forgotten what matters most.

Conspiracy? By Judy L. Thomas The Kansas City Star

More than 18 months after a Wichita abortion doctor was gunned down in his church, a federal investigation into a possible conspiracy continues in Kansas City. Federal agents have questioned more people in the past few weeks, while a grand jury convened after the murder of George Tiller is still under way.
The focus, according to those who have been interviewed, still appears to be on a Bible study group that Tiller’s killer attended.
At the same time, abortion-rights advocates are concerned that a recent North Carolina case signals an escalation in the threat of clinic-related violence.
Tiller was shot to death in May 2009 in the foyer of his Wichita church while serving as an usher. Scott Roeder of Kansas City was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 50 years. David Lloyd, a Warrensburg attorney who used to attend Roeder’s Bible study group, said an FBI agent called him at the end of November. “I think they’re just barking up the wrong tree,” Lloyd said. “None of us were involved in any kind of vast conspiracy or whatever it is they’re looking for.” In October, two of Roeder’s former roommates who were members of the Bible study group told The Kansas City Star that they and several other members had testified before the grand jury in late September. The questions they were asked, they said, focused on whether Roeder had acted alone. More of Roeder’s former associates say they have been contacted by authorities since then, including two additional members of the Bible study. The group met in members’ homes on Saturdays. Those attending described themselves as Messianic Jews who, unlike mainstream Jews, believe that Jesus was the Messiah. “They’ve interviewed me at least nine times,” said Roeder’s former roommate, who led the study sessions at their house and testified before the grand jury in September. He asked that his name not be disclosed for fear of repercussion. “There wasn’t any conspiracy within the Bible study group,” he said. “We were not part of this pro-life movement. We were never involved in that.” After Tiller’s death, the Department of Justice announced it was looking into possible federal charges against Roeder, including a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE, which was signed into law in 1994 to prevent clinic violence. Federal investigators also said they were looking into whether anyone else played a role in Tiller’s death.
Abortion-rights advocates have been pressing the Justice Department to investigate the possible existence of a network of anti-abortion extremists involved in clinic-related violence, including the murder of Tiller. They point to the recent case of a North Carolina activist as a reason for concern. In November, Justin Carl Moose signed a plea bargain with federal prosecutors on charges of distributing information on manufacturing and using an explosive. According to court documents, Moose provided detailed information and instructions on explosives to a person he thought was going to bomb a North Carolina abortion clinic. That person actually was a confidential informant. Moose told the informant that he was a member of the Army of God, a name associated with an underground network of anti-abortion extremists.
“I have set up groups,” the informant said Moose told him. “I have trained people and this is not my first rodeo.”
Authorities said Moose also used his Facebook page to advocate violence against abortion clinics and their employees and posted instructions on how to make explosives. One Facebook post, according to court documents, said, “End abortion by any means necessary and at any cost. Save a life, shoot an abortionist.”
Soon after Moose was charged, Justice Department investigators showed up in Kansas City to conduct more interviews on the Roeder case. So far, none of Roeder’s supporters — many of whom vocally support the killing of abortion doctors as an act of justifiable homicide — have been subpoenaed by the grand jury.
The Justice Department has remained tight-lipped.
“Our investigation remains ongoing,” said spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa. She declined further comment.
This isn’t the first federal investigation into a possible conspiracy of abortion clinic violence. In 1994, then-Attorney General Janet Reno called for an investigation, and a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Va., subpoenaed abortion foes around the country.
The investigation focused on about three dozen activists who advocated killing abortion doctors, including several from the Kansas City area. Many of those who were subpoenaed by that grand jury are now supporters of Roeder. The grand jury disbanded in 1996 without finding evidence of a nationwide conspiracy.
Kathy Spillar, executive vice president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, said Moose’s case, along with other recent incidents, indicate that the situation is escalating.
“Moose is with the Army of God,” Spillar said. “You’ve got an intersection of Army of God elements purported to have been talking with other anti-abortion leaders, and this intensified targeting and stalking of doctors. It points to how critical this federal investigation is.” Roeder’s supporters, however, call the investigation a witch hunt and say there’s nothing to uncover.
“Despite the tremendous budget devoted to building any kind of case possible, and especially how rare it is that there is even an illegal action any more, (another grand jury) reminds me of Chicken Little with his warning that the sky is falling,” said Dave Leach, an Iowa anti-abortion activist and friend of Roeder.
The Rev. Donald Spitz, director of Pro-Life Virginia who operates the Army of God website, said he recently discussed the grand jury investigation with Roeder. “He assures me there’s nothing there,” Spitz said. “And I agree. I think Scott would know better than to involve others.”
Spitz said Roeder wasn’t like Moose in North Carolina, who had been publicly advocating abortion clinic violence. “We communicated a lot on Facebook,” Spitz said of Moose. “I was telling him, you don’t need to be posting that stuff on bombmaking. If people want that information, they can get it themselves. But evidently, he didn’t listen.”

Because I maintain publicly that you may defend yourself against someone who is trying to kill you, I myself have been accused of being part of ”this conspiracy,” not only by the government and the enemy but by “pro-lifers” as well. Here’s a section from the tabs I’m keeping on one of these folks:

Thursday, April 8, In that case, Mrs. Koestel, Kathy is using you the same way she has used others. It is clear to me now that she hired you to try to prevent me from responding to her latest attack, which appears on page 3 in the April issue of her newsletter:

Several people have asked what or who is the "Army of God". According to Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia, the "Army of God" (AOG) is a Christian terrorist anti-abortion organization that sanctions the use of force to combat abortion in the United States. AOG activity began around 1981. "The Army of God uses 'leaderless resistance' as its organizing principle..."
The AOG considers those who have killed or injured an abortionist and/or abortion providers, or used violence against an abortion facility to be heroes. Scott Roeder, who killed the late-term abortionist "Dr. George Tiller last May, is their latest "hero".
Locally, John Dunkle has affiliated himself with this group. He is listed on the AOG website and he has a similar statement of the use of force on his blog and in his newsletter. He also thinks these killers, such as Paul Hill, Jim Kopp, Clayton Waagner, Eric Rudolph and Scott Roeder are heroes. Thus the reason we have been warned to stay away from John and for John to stay away from the rest of us.
While we all deplore the great evil of abortion, most pro-lifers do not condone the use of force to stop it. We know the power of prayer is stronger than any gun or bomb. The slow change in public opinion to now favor life is due far more to changing hearts, one person at a time, than from the use of bullets.

So, respond I will (Mrs. Koestel, Kathy’s lawyer, had told me to have no contact with her whatsoever):

In paragraph 1 Kathy quotes Wikipedia -- the AOG is “a Christian terrorist anti-abortion organization.” That is pro-abortion propaganda. Kathy has spread pro-abortion propaganda before and it’s why I started to suspect that she is pro-abortion herself.
The truth is that many years ago someone distributed clandestinely a booklet with that name. The booklet described ways to break the laws that enable legal abortion (similar to Joe Scheidler’s Closed: 99 Ways to Stop Abortion). Pro-aborts jumped on the secrecy to claim that it was put out by a large and very dangerous group of pro-lifers. Someone the pro-aborts would consider dangerous, someone like Shelley Shannon or Eric Rudolph or James Kopp, comes along about once every five years. The existence of “a terrorist anti-abortion organization” is pure fiction.
Today The Army of God is the name of the Reverend Don Spitz’s website, and that’s all it is. The Rev. posts pictures of the bloody parts of babies that have been aborted, like the pictures Kathy herself displays. He also posts biographies and writings of most of the seventeen people who are incarcerated for having used force in our abortion war.
In paragraph 2 Kathy calls killers “abortion providers” and a killing mill an “abortion facility." Pro-aborts, not pro-lifers, talk that way. Her use of pro-abortion language is another reason I suspect her of being a pro-abort.
The second sentence in paragraph 3 is accurate. I do edit a newsletter written mostly by the jailed prolifers mentioned above, and I use The Army of God website to find out who’s in prison, who’s out, and where the transfers are. The other three sentences are inaccurate: sentence 1 – there is no group; sentence 3 – Clayton Waagner did not kill anyone. (Moreover, thirteen of the seventeen incarcerated prolifers did not kill anyone either. See how Kathy twists the truth?); sentence 4 -- I have not been told to stay away from anybody other than Kathy, and I don’t know of anyone except her who’s been told to stay away from me.
Paragraph 4 is one response to thirty-seven years, and counting, of legally killing each year over a million innocents, but I think it is a woefully weak response. I’ll talk more about that later.

“Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” John 1:46

Many of us over 50 feel like aliens in the land of our birth. We have been conquered from within. The Christian mores which were the bedrock of civilization are forsaken. Sodomy, fornication, adultery, and aborticide are normalized and considered as American as apple pie and Chevrolet!
Social upheaval begins with humanizing God and deifying man. We reject God so we might reject God’s law. “Science” is become a god word, while God’s word is mocked as a myth.
Scientific theory is inferior to theology because it denies the existence of the Creator. Scientific theory substitutes the theory of Evolution for God’s revelation declared in His word. The fine instruments which help us study the cosmos and micro cosmos are useless to dogs, pigs, and blind ignorant savages.
Worldly Christians accept whatever the world accepts. A cultural Christian accepts whatever the culture accepts. A biblical Christian’s opinions are shaped and honed by the bible. Cultural Christian’s opinions are shaped by popular mainstream media. Cultural Christians want to fit in; their biggest fear is to be radically different from the people around them. Most American churches breed “cultural Christians.” Cultural Christians, rather than seeking God’s will for their lives, make Jesus Christ into their image, after their likeness. “What would Cheeses do?” they ask. Their Cheeses loves everybody and goes along to get along. Have you hugged a sodomite today? Cheeses is their smiling teddy bear in the sky wishing everybody a nice day and a fine time. Cultural Christians have women, sodomite, and lesbian “pastors” praying for God to bless their wicked enterprises and ungodly lifestyles, while sheltering and healing them from the consequences of their sin.
We should not be surprised that the pro-life movement is made up of cultural Christians. They are not so different from their pro-abortion counterparts. We should call them “lame duck pro-lifers” (LDPs) because they give lame arguments about “fetal pain” while ducking the real issue of rank murder. LDP’s oppose personhood efforts in several states. “The culture isn’t ready for this!” they complain. Lame duck pro-lifers prefer the aborting mom over the womb child. They quibble over rules, regulations, proper methods, procedures, and timing of baby-murder. They disavow civil disobedience to protect baby, and frown upon graphic displays of aborticide. After years of pouting and whining, some LDP’s have come around to accepting graphic displays only because they are so widely used and recognized as effective in saving lives. Most LDP’s are too fearful to use graphic signs. They are afraid of offending someone. The opposite of offense is defense. Lame Duck Pro-lifers have been waging a losing 38 year old defensive war.

America is doomed; she is in her death throes.
• We should not fight to preserve a military which is led by lesbian and sodomite officers.
• We shall not fight alongside lame duck pro-lifers over the proper etiquette of child sacrifice.
• We should not try to resuscitate a depraved school system which lacks common sense.
• We should not revive the American dream of a godless Bohemian lifestyle and perpetual adolescence.
• We do not support government which permits, protects, and promotes with our tax dollars the wanton killing of human beings here and abroad.
• We cannot support America’s endless wars and wasteful spending sprees. A body politic which “eats out our substance, and corrupts our manner.” Much more could be said.

We have seemingly lost the fight for the soul of our nation. It has been handed over to the devil for further torment. Though our efforts seem futile we shall continue to fight for a lack of anything better to do. We shall warn, rebuke, and continue in hope of plucking a few brands from the fire as we patiently await our Master’s return. dan holman

Hello, folks, Over the years I have kept in contact, off and on, with Michael Griffin. Right from the beginning, when I first began to correspond with him in 1994, I avoided any discussion with him of the use of force in the defense of preborn children, as it was my understanding that Mr. Griffin had strongly repudiated his own act of killing the abortionist David Gunn. It was my object to serve him, not to argue with him or attempt to change his mind about anything.
In his Christmas card to me this year, Mr. Griffin mentioned that he had given an interview to 60 minutes,* and sent me the URL so that I could find the transcript of the broadcast on the internet. (See the URL and the text below.)
It was quite a surprise to me! If these borts who produced this program have quoted Mr. Griffin correctly, he now no longer repudiates his killing of the abortionist Gunn! This came as total news to me, and a bit of a shock actually. I really don't know what the facts are, if Mr. Griffin has changed his view and now believes his killing of Gunn was a righteous act, or if he always believed it was righteous, or what. I do hope, if the Lord be willing, to send Mr. Griffin a copy of the transcript, in case he does not already have access to one, so that he can have the opportunity to make corrections, should he believe that the program misrepresented his views in any respect.
If I get any further info on this, I'll try to send that to you as well. If you yourself can shed any light on it, beyond what I have written here, I'd be grateful to hear from you. Also, please feel free to forward this to anyone if you think it might be something that he or she might benefit from reading.
Just a note, Mr. Griffin has written to me that he has been exercising and taking care of his health for several years now, much more than he did when younger. It's nice to see him looking so well in the photo that accompanies the story below.
May God bless you, David Rydholm

The cross is near extinction in the ancient lands of its origin By Jeffrey T. Kuhner

An Iraqi policeman stands guard at the scene of a car bomb attack in front of a Syrian Catholic Church, in Baghdad, Iraq, Monday Nov. 1, 2010. Islamic militants held around 120 Iraqi Christians hostage for nearly four hours in a church Sunday before security forces stormed the building and freed them, ending a standoff that left dozens of people dead, U.S. and Iraqi officials said. (AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed)
As Americans celebrate Christmas in peace in our nation, many Christians across the Middle East are in peril: Muslim fanatics seek to exterminate them.
Over the past several years, Christians have endured bombings, murders, assassinations, torture, imprisonment and expulsions. These anti-Christian pogroms culminated recently with the brutal attack on Our Lady of Salvation, an Assyrian Catholic church in Baghdad. Al Qaeda gunmen stormed the church during Mass, slaughtering 51 worshippers and two priests. Father Wassim Sabih begged the jihadists to spare the lives of his parishioners. They executed him and then launched their campaign of mass murder.
Their goal was to inflict terror - thereby causing chaos in the hopes of undermining Iraq's fledgling democracy - and to annihilate the country's Christian minority. After the siege, al Qaeda in Mesopotamia issued a bulletin claiming that "all Christian centers, organizations and institutions, leaders and followers, are legitimate targets for" jihadists.

Since the 2003 war in Iraq, Christians have faced a relentless assault from Islamic extremists. Many of these groups, such as the Assyrians, consist of the oldest Christian sects in the world, going back to the time of Christ. Some even speak Aramaic, the language used by Jesus. The very roots of our Christian heritage are being extirpated.
Religious cleansing is taking place everywhere in Iraq - by Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. Before the toppling of Saddam Hussein, there existed more than 1 million Christians in Iraq. They are now mostly gone - scattered to the winds, sacrificed on the altar of erecting an Islamic state. Churches have been closed or blown up. Hundreds of thousands have been expelled. Nearly two-thirds of the 500,000 Christians in Baghdad have fled or been killed. In Mosul, about 100,000 Christians used to live there. Now, just 5,000 remain. Soon there will be none.
The rise of radical Islam threatens Christian communities not only in Iraq, but across the Middle East. In Egypt, Coptic Christians routinely are murdered, persecuted and prevented from worshipping - especially during religious holy days such as Christmas and Easter. In the birthplace of Christ, Bethlehem, Christians have largely been forced out. In Nazareth, they are a tiny remnant. In Saudi Arabia, Muslim converts to Christianity are executed. Churches and synagogues are prohibited. In Turkey, Islamists have butchered priests and nuns. In Lebanon, Christians have dwindled to a sectarian rump, menaced by surging Shiite and Sunni populations.
The Vatican estimates that from Egypt to Iran there are just 17 million Christians left. Christianity is on the verge of extinction in the ancient lands of its birth. In short, a creeping religious genocide is taking place.
Yet the West remains silent for fear of offending Muslim sensibilities. This must stop - immediately. For years, Pope Benedict XVI has been demanding that Islamic religious leaders adopt a new policy: reciprocity. If Muslims - funded and supported by Saudi Arabia - can build mosques and madrassas in Europe and America, then Christians - Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox - should be entitled to build churches in the Arab world. For all of their promises, however, Muslim leaders have failed to deliver. In fact, the situation has only deteriorated.
Clearly, some Muslims cannot live in peaceful coexistence with non-Muslim peoples - especially in countries where Muslims form the majority. Christian minorities living in the overwhelmingly Muslim-dominated Middle East pose no possible danger to Islamic hegemony. Hence, why the hatred against them?
This is a repeat of an old historical pattern: the periodic ebb and flow of Islamic jihadism. From its inception, Islam has been engaged in a struggle with Christian civilization. Led by the Prophet Muhammad some 600 years after the birth of Christ, the Muslim faith spread across the Middle East through violence and war. Christians were either forcibly converted or slowly expelled from their ancestral lands. Following the conquest of the Arabian Peninsula, Muslim armies invaded North Africa, Spain, France and the Balkans. At one point, they even reached the gates of Vienna - until they were repelled by the brave knights of Catholic Croatia. The sword of Islam sought to conquer Christian Europe.
Bernard Lewis, the foremost historian on the Middle East, rightly argues that the Crusades were not the result of Western imperialism; rather, they signified a belated - and only partially successful - effort to liberate once-Christian territories from Islamic aggression. Europe was saved; Jerusalem and the Middle East were not.
Today's anti-Christian pogroms are not new. They are what Christians have historically faced - persecution, death and martyrdom. In Roman times, Christians were thrown to the lions in the Coliseum. In the Islamic world, they are being murdered, raped, beheaded and thrown out of their homes. The only difference is the means, not the end.
The Christians of the Middle East are dying for their convictions, as did so many others before them. For this, they will receive their just reward in heaven. Their deaths are a salient reminder that, contrary to liberal myth, Islam is not a "religion of peace." Instead, it contains a militant segment bent on waging a holy war against infidels and erecting a global caliphate.
There is, however, a true religion of peace. It began with a baby boy born in a manger in Bethlehem. Jesus, the Prince of Peace, came to shine a light into the dark souls of men. As Christians recall and celebrate that humble birth, we also should stand in solidarity with those who are, 2,000 years later, still being persecuted in His name.

Dr. Frank comments: It states, "radical" Islam, when in reality it should be just plain "Islam" that's killing Christians. They all read from the same Koran and the message they get from this unholy book is to kill all the infidels if they do not convert to Islam.
I am sick and tired of hearing that it's not all Muslims who are terrorist, that it's just the radicals. This is bull-crap. There should be no compartmentalization. If some take from the Koran that they should kill Christians then the Koran is an evil book, period, and all people of the Islam faith are guilty and to blame for the killing of Christians throughout the world as well as the attack on the Twin Towers that killed about 3,000 people.

I comment: Why do Catholics and Jews, but not Muslims, kill their children? (That’s the sign I place every Tuesday morning outside Planned Parenthood here in Reading.)

Hello John, I decided to post a copy of those two recent letters I sent to you to someone else. Rather than get a photocopy of the two of them and send it in that haphazard and hashed up form, I decided to write the thing again and combine the two. The temptation was there to change a couple of things and add a bit more and I succumbed to it, mainly just toward the end, about the last three quarters of a page. I’ve sent you a photocopy of it. If you do print this, the better thing to do is to use it rather than the others. This that I’m writing now is on the reverse side of the last page of it.
It’s quite a while since I’ve done so, but I happened to read the introduction to your newsletter in the last issue. I noticed the $100 price tag you’ve got listed for post office delivery. By gee that’s steep, 7 or 8 dollars an issue. I can’t imagine you get many poor people placing orders at that price. For that matter, I can’t imagine you getting orders from anyone at that price. I seem to recall a time, maybe 4 or 5 years ago, when I saw a $6 per annum price tag there. Maybe you’re trying to deter mail orders though. You’ve certainly gone the right way about it if you are. I know it would take at least a couple of hours and probably more to publish each issue, but if I wanted people to read something, I don’t think I’d be charging a dollar a page for mail delivery.
There are still plenty of people around who don’t have a computer and can’t afford a hundred dollars. I’ll likely be one of them when I leave prison next year. When that issue comes out that has a hundred million prospective mail order readers, you are going to miss out on a lot of business at $100. With a hundred million prospective mail order readers it still can’t be imagined that any more than a handful are going to be keen enough to shell out $100. I’d be lowering the price way down and hoping to get most of those hundred million to order, even if it meant hiring a mail handler or two or three.
I don’t know how much Eric Rudolph got paid for writing his book. I suppose probably nothing. Probably just put in the long hours hoping someone would benefit from it.

I took a couple zeros off that price tag. Here’s the start of Peter’s article:

Dear John, “Meanwhile, if you think Peter is on to something, two courses of action remain. One of them illegal. Since for me, doing anything illegal is not an option, I have only one.”

That quote I’ve just given is from the November AIM and it’s your reply to what I said in my previous letter. The number one question here, John, is this: Has this devotion of yours to the government and its corrupt laws come at a cost, a high cost, an incredibly high cost, at the cost of throwing God’s law into the rubbish bin after you’ve defecated on it, or do people who claim to be Christian find that having a shit on God’s law is an acceptable cost for the “privilege” of paying homage to pro murder politicians and judges? That’s a very easy question, so you should have no troubles coming up with the answer.

Whether you and your many fellow government worshippers considered it to be a high cost at all when the government demands that you defecate on God’s law, it’s perfectly clear that you didn’t consider it to be an unacceptable cost. Because you’ve done it. And done it repeatedly just so many times. It’s also perfectly clear that the millions of lives lost as a result of your devotion to the government were not considered an unacceptable cost either.
God’s law in Matthew 7:12 demands, as you would only ever expect from God, that his people do for others what they would want others to do for them. That’s a great law. It’s no wonder it’s called The Golden Rule. As with all his laws, this great law was given for us by God for the purpose of bringing about justice.
That’s not what the government sees as the purpose of God’s Golden Rule though. As you would only ever expect from completely corrupt people, the government views God’s Golden Rule as having been given to us by God so they could “prove” their “superiority” by getting you to have a shit on it each and every day of your life at their request. The government and their laws demand that you do not do for God’s persecuted unborn children what you would want others to do for you if a murderer was about to take your head off.
Specifically, what does the government demand of you? The government demands that you allow there to be abortionists. Since whilst ever there are abortionists, there will be deaths for their victims; by demanding that you allow there to be abortionists, the government also demands that you submit and allow there to be death for their victims. How easy is that to see?

Although this is not as long as Peter’s previous letter, it’s only the first page of eight. Hang in there. I will.