Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Abortion is Murder, 8-15, April, 2011

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

April, 2011 Vol. 8 No. 15
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – 484-706-4375
Email – johndunk@ptd.net
Web – skyp1.blogspot.com
Circulation – 102
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, $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 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, 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
---------------------------------------------------------------

This completes the eighth year of “Abortion is Murder.” I figure I’ve edited about 125 issues. Where are they?
----------------------------------

I’ve been thinking about, and hoping to hear, a response to Peter Knight’s charge that I’ve posted twice: we prolifers at the mills do more harm than good. Not only do we turn away less than 1% of women planning abortion but those we do turn away are the very ones who would cause the baby killers the most trouble -- through lawsuits, police complaints, emotional distress, etc.
Finally, a response did occur to me. Peter’s charge can be leveled at every prolifer, even someone who does no more than say “abortion is wrong.” Just saying it might influence a woman to cancel her Planned Parenthood appointment. And if that’s all it would take, just imagine the distress she might cause the folks involved in the killings.
So, I’m back to my pre-Pater state – we prolifers do what we can. If we are people of courage, we are where those like Peter and Shelley are. If we are activists like me, we ask God’s forgiveness and try to do more. And if we are like the other 99%, the “go along to get along” types, well, that’s at least better than being pro-death.
I told this to my brilliant friend at the AWC and he came up with two more reasons for opposing Peter. I’ll get him to write them out because I don’t want to mess them up.

----------------------------------------------------------------

If every Pastor, Politician, Priest, and "Pro-lifer" would just be honestly true to their professed belief and agree to the following statement, abortion would be at an end within days or at the most weeks:

WE DECLARE THE JUSTICE OF TAKING ALL GODLY ACTION NECESSARY, INCLUDING THE USE OF FORCE, TO DEFEND INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE (BORN AND UNBORN). WE PROCLAIM THAT WHATEVER FORCE IS LEGITIMATE TO DEFEND THE LIFE OF A BORN CHILD IS LEGITIMATE TO DEFEND THE LIFE OF AN UNBORN CHILD.

If you cannot agree to this proclamation, then you had better re-examine your claim to be anti-abortion. You may feel emotionally sorry and have a twinge of guilt for the death of these "fetuses" (who you don't really consider kids) or think that by picketing you are earning points in heaven or being more righteous than others, but you ARE NOT anti-abortion; you are hypocrites.
Regina Dinwiddie
---------------------------------------------------------

Dear John, The true story of abortion is found lurking around the dumpster behind the abortion clinic. But the Press cannot cover the story for fear of exposing a shocking truth: The children have had help into the dumpster from both sides!
The true story of abortion is that our two-faced religious and conservative leaders quietly hired our cowardly feminist leaders as a hitman to clear our pews, school desks, and homes of awkward pregnancy scandals. That way our religious and conservative leaders will look like good shepherds after all, who still manage to keep their flocks looking "in standards" even despite the sexual revolution. In return, our feminist leaders are allowed to hold positions of authority that they would otherwise be denied if people thought women cannot control their own pregnancies, let alone their own judgment.
Of course, like anyone who hires a hitman, our religious and conservative leaders deny their complicity. But at the same time, they have to make sure it is not too difficult for the hitman to do the job.
I usually pick on the Catholics as an example. But today I will pick on the Mormons. Mormon leaders know their "honor code" is not keeping the coeds at Brigham Young University looking "in standards." They know they are getting plenty of "help" from the abortion clinic. With legal abortion, at worst a few of the girls come to school with their knees showing. But without legal abortion, there would be a lot more than just their knees showing, because pregnant bellies have a way of popping out and making a showing all their own!
So, with one face, the Mormons deny complicity, saying, "Human life is a sacred gift from God. Elective abortion for personal or social convenience is contrary to the will and the commandments of God. Church members who submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions may lose their membership in the Church."
But, then, with another face, they say, "Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer."
Some of your readers may recall the expose (or attack, as you called it) that I did about how the Mormons teamed up with the Catholics to derail the Human Life bill, which would have latched the gate shut on the issue of person status. Some of your readers may also recall the expose (or attack, as you again called it) that I did about how the Catholic Church refused to help Georgia close the latch with its Personhood Amendment.
In a nutshell, those are not the legislative models these churches want. Instead, they want something where everyone knows they deny their complicity, but at the same time the latch on the gate is left open so the hitman can come like a wolf in the night to steal the sheep, thereby clearing our pews, school desks, and homes of awkward pregnancy scandals. That way everything stays looking "in standards."
Knowing this is advance, you would not be surprised that Utah's Mormon U.S. Senator Mike Lee was one of three Republicans who voted against defunding Planned Parenthood in the Senate this year. Utah's other Mormon U.S. senator is Orin Hatch, who infamously proposed the Hatch Amendment to derail the Human Life bill with something falling short of closing the latch on the gate to affirm person status.
So the children really are being helped into the dumpster behind the abortion clinic from both sides. On the one side, the hitman wears a sign that says, "We do the dirty work." On the so called "other" side, those who hired the hitman in the first place wear a sign that says, "We deny complicity." Together both sides are busy making sure females keep their pregnancies looking in standards. Cal
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You'd think by now that Resident Obama would make a mistake and appoint a pro-life judge to sit on any court. So far Obama's residency has been one mistake after another -- his stimulus package, obamacare, no drilling off shore, no drilling in ANWAR -- Oh, I don't have time for all the rest. But, when it comes to saving the little babies, Obama never makes a mistake as he wants them all dead. Why can't just one judge who honors the sanctity of human life slip through the cracks.
Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the Supreme Court, slipped through. Reagan nominated her in 1981 thinking she was pro-life and she was confirmed 99 to 0, but she turned out to be a supporter of baby killing. In 1989, O'Connor stated during the deliberations over the Webster case that she would NEVER overrule Roe while on the Court.
So, why can't this happen in reverse -- a pro-lifer slips through, but noooooo, the devil never sleeps as he controls the mind of Obama, who already in his short time as the Resident has appointed two supporters of baby killing to the Supreme Court. Dr. Frank.
------------------------------------------------------------------

The Way We Are
By John Dunkle

Among the horrible consequences of war, the worst is the fact that the bravest, smartest, and most magnanimous young men get killed. Among Catholics these are the ones who would have become priests. The gap is filled by individuals of lesser quality.
Because of World War II, that was the condition when I grew up. Although my older brother heard the talk on chastity when he entered the seventh grade, it was no longer offered when I got there three years later (1947). When I was considering becoming a priest myself, my friend, a seminarian, told me not to worry about masturbation. Not worry about masturbation? And I had thought that chastity was the Catholic way! That was also about the time John Rock invented the birth control pill. The moral theologian at my friend’s seminary announced to his class, “Gentlemen, I think we have discovered the solution to the problem of Catholic sexuality.” The problem of Catholic sexuality? I had thought that “problem” was a gift, one of the ways we can imitate Christ, and here was this teacher of priests affirming a practice that the anti-Catholic George Bernard Shaw had called “mutual masturbation”!

Since then I’ve heard nothing. Sunday Masses still draw customers, everybody files up to receive the Eucharist, nobody lines up to go to confession, and the average number of children born to a Catholic couple is 2.3, about the same as to a pagan couple.

“The wages of sin is death,” says God, and sin did not disappear just because it was not mentioned. And so death followed. Nearly twenty years after the words masturbation and contraception disappeared from the Catholic lexicon, as midnight follows the setting sun, the word abortion entered. We made it legal to kill the innocent and to kill them in unprecedented numbers and in the worst possible way – by torture.

All this leads up to a conversation I had a few weeks ago. A gentleman my age who leads his parish’s pre-cana program was complaining about the answers they receive to one of the questions on the survey they administer to all new couples: Are you cohabiting at the present time?
“Seventy-three percent of them say yes,” he says.
“Kick ‘em out,” I bluster.
“Can’t do that. The priests don’t do anything.”
“Yea, but it would cost them. The bishop would come down hard on them when he got the protests. But not on you – you don’t have anything to lose.”
He mumbles a response which I don’t catch, and I leave smug in my one-upmanship.
I have a son who’s a Jesuit priest. I tell him this story and he says, “You do it. Ask your pastor for permission to talk to couples preparing for marriage, and then give them the message.”
“Are you kidding,” I say, “I could never do that.”

So it goes.
--------------------------------------------------------------

A Protestant’s Confession
By Royce Dunn

Contraception did not command my attention easily. Assuming it nonthreatening to existing human life, and hearing no objections from the voices I respected most, I regarded it a minor issue.
But the glass darkly began turning translucent and, eventually, transparent during my research for Sex Education and Your School Board and for Planned Parenthood: What the Facts Reveal. Not only did I observe contraception's grievous influence on youth and its abiding intimacy with abortion, but I also perceived within it a self-directing spirit. When released with government approval into an unmindful nation, contraception, I noted, worked a will of its own, and its power to injure and destroy called to mind the principalities of the air which Ephesians 6 warns against.
Today, I am among the small but growing Protestant minority who deem conception God's domain and contraception a devious intruder. If loss of human life is a major indicator, contraceptives that contain birth control components comprise the most deadly force in history. The Pill (in over 40 varieties) Norplant, Depo-Provera, Prostaglandins, and the solely abortifacient intrauterine devices (lUDs) have, by research estimates, killed in America alone over 150 million preborn citizens after their conception. (The terms contraception and birth control overlap, as seen in "contraceptive birth control" and "abortifacient birth control." The Pill is called an "oral contraceptive" or OCP, but when its pregnancy control components fail, its abortive component controls birth by preventing the child's implantation in the uterus. See "Abortifacient Birth Controls: The Leading Killer of Human Beings in America and the World," p. 2)
If contraception bears homage to the spirit world, as 1 contend, that helps explain the mystery of today's passive Church amidst an unspeakable holocaust, and it helps explain the immense divide between our boisterous pro-life rhetoric and our ineffectual pro-life action. It also helps explain our readiness to apply the same regrettable response of nonintervention that our Church forebears applied to slavery in America and to Nazism in Germany. As did they, we have yielded to a spiritual stronghold, and the senior villain is contraception rather than the surgical abortions on which prolife continues to focus. Satan knows those abortions (or the chemicals ready to supplant them) are secure so long as contraception is secure. He knows the annual loss of 1.3 million American infants to surgical mutilation today is far below the number of preborns killed in the U.S. by abortifacient birth controls, and that loss does not address the capabilities of contraception to tempt, cripple, and destroy incrementally.
Without contraception's influence, legal abortions could not endure, and so long as they do, many of us will assume the term “unwanted children” applies only to abortion defenders. Instead, God's test is surely on us His Church, for the abortion industry requires no testing. Said beloved clergyman Martin Niemoller in 1946: "Christianity in Germany bears a greater responsibility before God than the National Socialists, the SS and the Gestapo." Similarly, it was Israel's apostasy that grieved God most, not the cruelty of pagan nations. We who are “prolife” condemn abortion in bold terms and speak of the “helpless innocent children” who are mercilessly dismembered -- yet the vast majority of those children die alone, with no adults standing legally and peacefully near the abortuary door, to pray and plead humbly in their behalf. My generation has yielded to contraception because the portion of our hearts ordained for children has found other interests, and as a result we are less detached from abortion industry values than we want to assume.
Margaret Sanger, the mother of family planning, inflicted greater injury on our nation than any other person who has lived on earth this century. She wrote: "Civilization, in any true sense of the word, is based upon the control and guidance of the great natural instinct of Sex. Mastery of this force is possible only through the instrument of Birth Control." Through Sanger's relentless guidance, contraception forged the path for America's sexual revolution and its accompanying depravities. It forged the path for unrestricted abortion and its inestimable death toll. And it forged the path for the "new morality" Sanger crusaded for, while extolling "Birth Control" (a term she popularized) as "my religion." By embracing family planning values, America has sown to the wind and reaped the whirlwind. When modern contraceptives were being developed at mid-century, U.S. doctors were treating 4 sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), illegitimacy was at 4%, and abortions were estimated to be 100,000 annually. Soon thereafter, officials in our democracy decided with their human reasoning that sexuality in our nation needed institutional management and that fornication could be made safe for both single adults and youth. Today, U.S. physicians are treating more than 50 strains of STRs, illegitimacy has reached 35%, and abortions (surgical and abortifacient) are estimated to be about 10 million annually. As a result, our economists tell us that illegitimacy alone can bankrupt the U.S., and anthropologists tell us that never before in history has such a high percentage of children, in any culture, grown up fatherless. Add to these losses a 100% increase in divorce since 1960, an alarming rise in abuse and violence. As this century closes, America bears the shame God assigns to nations that reject chastity, fidelity, and procreation - the badge of Sodom. Legalization of same sex-marriages looms before us in significant measure because we who claim to know Christ have joined the grim coalition against children. Contraception has served to steal our affection for them and, thereby, our will to seriously defend them. Little should we marvel that homosexuality fills that void in our society.
Yet there is a more intimate reason for my opposition to contraception. It was reaffirmed recently when a friend told me about an elderly missionary mother. When asked to cite her "most important accomplishment in life," she replied, "Raising my six kids." She then told about her investment in her children and how each of them had become "a light in the world."
That testimony speaks eloquently to my personal loss. My wife and I have a son and daughter whom we cherish and who are developing, with diligence, the gifts God has graced to them so that they, too, can be lights to the world. Daily, I rejoice in their lives, but I wonder how many more lights God wanted to originate in our family. The evidence suggests my wife and I could have had additional children with little difficulty, and though we yielded no ground to abortion, we fell prey to its more deceptive and senior partner.
With passing years, an abiding sadness has settled into my spirit, and I do not want to lose it, for it has taught me the incomparable worth of procreation. Today, my loss is all too similar to that of grieving parents who have had to bury sons and daughters -- and it is also similar to that of regretful mothers and fathers who have by trifle aborted their preborn babies. How many children did God desire in my family? I long to know -- and long to know their interests, their gifts, their laughter, and their own family members. But most of all, I long to know the light they could have brought into the world.

May God grant that readers of this will welcome into their homes the uniquely wondrous gift -- children.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here’s the rest of Paul’s article about military tactics:

Guerrilla fighters are called upon by God, not by man. It is important to listen to God's instruction as opposed to man's. Many will circulate “the message.” After objectives have been met, the media, even of an evil-biased government, will report a generalized account of the guerrilla army's dissatisfactions. Soldiers must know The Holy Scriptures, have a sound Moral Code based on those Scriptures, and be of good-conscience and sound mind. They must be duty-bound, courageous, and have a deep respect for the value of human life -- on EITHER side of the issues. As well, patience is a virtue that will allow the triumph over the heathen in every form.

I. CREDIBLE INTELLIGENCE-

Locating, identifying, and putting an end to traitors of our nation, foreign terrorists who intend to defy The Christian West, and those who commit murder on our soil are all top priorities in the fight. Two key factors to consider, while gathering intelligence in the field, concerning a “fixed” enemy target, (fixed in this context meaning, a target associated with the enemy, operating from a stationary position, as opposed to a mobile unit of enemy personnel) are as follows:

a) never establish predictable behaviors, and never strike against the same grounds twice;

b) bring along essentials for recon; i.e., provisions to ensure intel, nourishment, and safety.

The soldier's mission in the field during reconnaissance missions is obviously, to gather intelligence. But the guerrilla fighter, after experience, knows to establish the four main preliminary positions of assault. Each location in the field of battle compliments the other superbly. Understanding the complexities of each offensive position, and realizing how they coordinate to insure mission objectives is a valuable skill to master in the field. These areas are:

a) the observation point -- at the topographical crest -- where intel is collected
b) the fire support base -- a point establ¬ished in remote locations, as a place to stage, prepare, store supplies in an occupied zone, and a place to retreat to until a full-retreat can be accomplished;
c) the firing position -- the pre-determined point of attack, as close to the military crest as possible (“military crest”, as for this application, defined as – the highest point inside of the hostile region, other than the topographical crest, that allows maximum fire-coverage, visibility, and concealment from enemy personnel)
d) the dummy position -- a place that is unoccupied and fools the enemy as to the guerrilla's exact location; i.e., the elbow of a ridge that echoes loud noises, et cetera.

One should consider the objectives of the guerrilla military unit. The guerrilla is battling an overwhelming presence. The reason that they have resorted to these tactics is because they are out-numbered, out-supplied, out-funded, and they can never attempt to attack the enemy head-on. Therefore, the guerrilla employs the use of these tactics to snipe, attack the rear, the flanks, deprive supplies to, and confound the enemy on all fronts. The leaderless resistance method is the best initial response in protecting the homeland, and protecting the citizens of our homeland. A large, and complex hierarchical organization only gives the enemy a great source to infiltrate, police, and eventually destroy. But each resister does his own work in this scenario, inevitably accomplishing certain directives.

THE GREATER-GOOD-

The wolves are at the doorstep. Will we allow radical Islam to override our control of this country? Will we allow it to fall prey to Liberal Socialists, using an “ever-transforming Constitution,” catering to each new debauchery? Citizens are being murdered in record numbers nationwide. Our children are being sent off to the Middle East, to battle our great enemies, only to return, battered-and-bruised, to be shamed by The Democratic Party, and the evil Regime in Washington/New York. Abortion is murder! All of the praying, and soul-searching, and mourning doesn't stop a single baby from being murdered if someone doesn’t get up and change the fact that a woman can walk into an abortion mill and have her child legally killed!
It is up to each Christian to decide what is right, what is wrong, and what is his or her individual duty in saving babies from being murdered through abortion. Does Washington have the power to control what you permit in your community? At present, yes. Should it listen to your resentments concerning abortion? Absolutely. But it will use every method in its vast arsenal, to make sure that roving majorities are fooled into thinking a living child is a “group of cells,” according to “scientists,” so that they are allowed to keep killing babies. Why? Because they have great interests invested in doing so.
The next decades will, no doubt, bring great changes to America’s doorstep. Where do you want your nation to be in 10 years, or 20? YOU HAVE THE POWER TO DICTATE WHERE THAT NATION ENDS UP, AND WHERE IT PLACES ITS IMPORTANCE AND VIRTUES, the time for hesitation is over. MAKE A STAND.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Here’s more of Peter Knight’s latest:

Along with many others who assess themselves to be prolife, Troy Newman, Steve Lefemine, and Greg Cunningham cry huge crocodile tears over just at the thought of an abortionist being gunned down. And they do it so well, as anyone who has seen them would know, they could easily be taken for abortionists’ twin brothers: “Oh the victimization, oh what an injustice it is, a poor innocent abortionist being given what he did not deserve.”
If you have trouble answering any of the questions, then perhaps you could contact these three “wise” men and enlist their assistance. Ask them how many justice and injustice points out of a hundred they award to allowing another 1.4 million victims to die and then ask them how many justice and injustice points they award to giving mass murderers what they deserve. From their policies and actions, as well as their rantings and ravings, it seems they’ve already told us what they award the most justice and injustice points to, but I’d be interested to know just how many they award to each of those two courses of action/inaction. When you contact them, say to them:

"Troy, Steve, Greg, this asshole in Australia has accused you and me of being 99% pro-death. He says we have zero regard for God’s law. Me and you! The very people who are the most pro-life, and the very people who have the highest regard for justice and the highest regard for God’s law. He even says that we and our actions are pro-abortion and that it’s a sick joke for people like us to claim we’re Christian . Tell me Troy, and tell me Steve, and tell me Greg, what argument can I use to show that justice demanded we allow 1.4 million unborn babies to be killed last year so we could be pro-life for abortionists? What can I do to silence this horrible rumour that the only ones we’re really prolife for are abortionists? And what points should I mention to persuade this asshole that the God who loves justice demands that we allow there to be another 1.4 million victims next year? Help me out here Troy. Teach me to cry the crocodile tears the way you fellers do. Oh the victimizations. Oh what an injustice it is. Poor, innocent abortionists being given what they did not deserve. Doing anything illegal is not an option for true Christian folks. Follow this true Christian lead.

Now you’re beginning to get the hang of it, John. You’ve become almost as good at it as they are. “I’m with you all the way, Mr. Government Sir. Anything you want, Mr. Government, you just tell me what it is. Another 1.4 million this year, Mr. Government? Yes, Sir, why not? I’ll find that 101% acceptable too. Here they are for you Mr. Obama, just as you ordered them, 1.4 million all present and accounted for. Is there anything more us prolifers can do for you Mr. Government? Mr. Government Sir."

Reduced to its simplest form and stated it its simplest manner, to be as pro-death and pro-abortion as this government demands you to be, you have got to be a prize suckhole. If you claim to be Christian, and you’re willing to let them take 1.4 million innocent young babies each year, and in the process throw away God’s law demanding that you do justice, what is there that you wouldn’t be suckhole enough to give them? With “anti-abortionists” like you, what does any pro-abortion government need pro-abortionists for? And with “friends” like you, who have allowed so much harm to come upon them, what need did any of those 1.4 million victims have of people who don’t give a damn about them?
You might say to me, “Who are you to judge me and what I do, and who cares how pro-death you think I am.” No doubt the ones who are best qualified to judge whether or not someone is anti-abortion, and whether or not someone represents them, are those 1.4 million who lost their lives to abortionists last year. Who is there, other than God himself, that’s better qualified than them? So what would they say to people who said their lives were expendable and an acceptable cost of waiting and waiting for forceful, unobtainable political change? What would they say to those who adopted a policy and used methods which didn’t have a hope in hell of saving them and then claimed they were anti-abortion? Would they be pleased with such a policy and those who chose to adopt it, or would they shit in your face? Another very, very easy question. And if they’d shit in your face then so would I.

Right at the top of the list of things not to do is to misrepresent God by preaching a false gospel or a fake Jesus. Those who claim to be Christian and adopt the policy of waiting and waiting for unrealistic political change, are, by their examples, preaching the fake, do not do for others and do not do justice gospel. They preach and promote the fake, be 99% pro-death gospel. And they preach the false message that the God who loves justice, Isaiah 61-81, demands that you allow millions of young babies to be killed.
No, it’s not that the God who loves justice is so tough as to make such a demand of his people. It’s simply that the people are so self-centered and selfish that they will search and accept any fake excuse to avoid following God’s clear and sensible instructions to do justice. Such demands come only from totally corrupt politicians and judges and their lackeys. The only thing that God’s true Gospel demands is what’s said in Isaiah 1-17: “Learn to do good. Seek justice. Rebuke the oppressor. Defend the fatherless.” And of course that includes those who for all intents and purposes have no father, or mother either, just a mortal enemy in their place who is seeking to take away their life.

In order to avoid leading as yet uncorrupted youth down the same wrong path, either by word or by example, this, wait and wait and wait for political change gospel, a gospel that preaches that the deaths of 1.4 million unborn children each year for the last thirty-eight has been, and will continue to be, an acceptable cost of their apathy. They should plaster a sign on themselves speaking the truth: “I am not a Christian. I threw God’s law away so I could prostitute myself to the government.”
I was never about to join them in preaching their fake gospel and in their misrepresenting of God and Jesus.

Paul Hill, the greatest American of the last thirty-eight years, and probably of all time, wrote the following words concerning his actions on behalf of all the victims of abortion. Perhaps you could republish them. Maybe this time they will receive the publicity they deserve:

"When I first appeared on Donohue, I took the position that Griffin’s killing of Gunn, an abortionist, was justified, but I asked the audience to suspend judgment as to whether it had been wise. I realized later, however, that using the force necessary to defend the unborn gives credibility, urgency, and direction to the pro-life movement that I had lacked and which it needs in order to prevail.
I realized that using force to stop abortion is the same means that God has used top stop similar atrocities throughout history . . . in much the same way. When abortion was first legalized in our nation, if the people had resisted this atrocity with the means necessary, it would have saved millions of children from a bloody death. It is unwise and unspiritual, thus, not to use the means God has appointed for keeping his commandments (defend the fatherless) then presumptuously expect him to work apart from them. (Presumptuously and downright stupidly expect him to work apart from them.)
I realized that many important things would be accomplished by me shooting another abortionist in Pensacola. This would put the pro-life rhetoric, about defending born and unborn children equally, right onto the map. It would bear witness to the full humanity of the unborn as nothing else could. It would also open people’s eyes to the enormous consequences of abortion – not only for the unborn but also for the government that sanctioned it and those required to resist it. This would convict millions of past neglect and also spur many to future obedience. It would also help to decide whether to join the battle on the side of those defending abortionists or on the side of those defending the unborn. But most importantly, I knew this would uphold the truths of the Gospel at the precise point of Satan’s current attack." (tbc)

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Abortion is Murder, 8-14, March 2, 2011

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

March 2, 2011 Vol. 8 No. 14
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – 484-706-4375
Email – johndunk@ptd.net
Web – skyp1.blogspot.com
Circulation – 94
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, 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

When adults say “Kids see that!” while pointing to the aborted baby picture I’m holding, I say, “It’s for the kids; we’re brainwashed. I want kids to ask Mom and Dad who pulled off that baby’s head.” Neal Horsley’s elaboration continues:

God has given all little children created in His image the ability to instinctively grasp some truth. That is what the Lord Jesus Christ was trying to communicate when He said, "...Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." As soon as little children see a picture of the mangled body of an aborted fetus, little children identify instinctively that the fetus looks like them. And they know something terribly wrong has happened. Little children instantly feel great fear because they know that if one little child like themselves could be torn apart, the same thing might happen to them. That is why parents hate it when little children see pictures of dead babies. They have to find words to calm their children's fears.
But in a nation that has legalized abortion, the only words that have the power to calm the children’s' fears are lies. Parents have to say things like, "Those pictures are not really people: they are what we call a fetus. Now a fetus might look like a person but the fetus is not a person like we are. A person is not really a person like you and I until after they are born. There are crazy people like Neal Horsley out there who think fetuses are people like you and I, but they are not. Right now the government allows crazy people like Neal Horsley to do crazy things like show those pictures in public. But I promise you son, we are going to stop people like that from frightening little children like you. They are evil and we are going to stop them. As a matter of fact son, if Neal Horsley was here right now, I'd beat him up for scaring you."
It is when hearing words like that from their parent that the little child comes to a fateful crossroad in life. The bond of communication between a parent and child is the literal lifeline for the child. Every little child understands instinctively that they need help in staying alive: they know their weakness, both physically and mentally. Just as they have enormous difficulty accomplishing physical tasks, they have much trouble understanding the meaning of things around them. The need to find some stronger and wiser helper is an ever present drive within young people. To find a parent that the child can trust is the most comforting experience a child can find.
As children grow in their language ability, the parent's words become perceived by the child to be a lifeline, a strong guideline that can quickly avert or repair danger. As long as the child can trust the words of the parent to be connected to reality, the child is comforted by the presence of one who is not weak, one who is not confused, one who does not feel baffled and threatened and defenseless in the world. "Thank you daddy for loving me like you do," such a grateful child would tell his daddy.
But what happens if the ability that God has given a child to identify the truth comes into conflict with the words told to the child by a trusted parent?
That is the truly fateful crossroad a parent who lies to their child arrives at, child in hand.

The example of the child in hand in the picture at the start of this article is a perfect example of a crossroad legalized abortion causes every child in this nation to arrive at very early in their growth as language bearing creatures. In a nation that has legalized abortion, it is inevitable that one way or another a child will see a picture--whether pictorial or verbal changes nothing, there is no difference in the image drawn in the mind of a child--that they instinctively understand seems to show a creature like themselves who has been terribly mangled and obviously killed, yet that creature is being held up in public for all to see. WHAT IS THAT?! is an absolutely guaranteed response when a child first encounters such a picture.
What the parent tells the child determines, perhaps for all time, which road the child will walk down. Will the child be able to trust the sense of truth they felt when they saw the picture of the mangled body, or will they trust the parents’ words? Make no mistake about it. The child knows they are in a strange situation. They would not have asked about the picture unless they had grasped there there was something in that picture that needed to be explained, and explained quickly. What the parent tells the child about that picture becomes a foundational view of reality for that child.
Does the child learn that even if somebody looks exactly like themselves--except for a distinction or two--that the "somebody" is not to be seen to be a person like themselves unless their parent gives the okay?
If you will think about this subject, you will see that the racist view of the world begins with an encounter very similar to the one pictured at the start of this article. A child sees someone who "feels" like they are a person like themselves but, for whatever reason, their parent teaches them to ignore their "feeling" and instead realize that there is no common personhood to be seen there.
Just as in the Old South most every caucasian was trained from early age to believe there was no true common personhood between the Negro and the Caucasian, so too today are we training our children to refuse personhood to the thing in the belly of a mother that when born we all call a person.
If you think about that preceding sentence, you will see why little children instinctively know that a fetus is a person. The Holy Spirit provides each child with the ability to identify the fetus as a person like themselves because the fetus is exactly like themselves, except unborn. It takes the lies of parents to quench the Presence of the Holy Spirit in the little children Jesus loved. And just as those lies quench the Presence of the Holy Spirit, so, too, do they destroy the lives of little children, born and unborn.
God deliver us from such lying parents!
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I think I told you that I spend time responding to posts on a pro-death blog, abortion.ws. Pat Richards, the poster, is the clearest thinking killers’ helper I’ve ever encountered. Here’s Pat’s best yet:The “Justifiable Homicide” Crowd

A few weeks ago, a reader asked me to delve a little more into the group of anti-abortion folks who claim that it is “justifiable homicide” to kill a doctor who performs abortions. The theory suggests that if you believe that it is a “baby” or “person” in the uterus and someone is going to terminate it, then you are justified in stopping the “killer,” just like you would stop someone from killing a real, already-born person.
Let me first say that this group is clearly a fringe group of the pro-life movement. I have participated in a lot of discussions with those who oppose abortion and the vast, vast majority of them believe these folks are a bunch of kooks. But then there are a few out there…
The first time I heard about this theory was after the murder of Doctor David Gunn in March, 1993. The murder was front page news everywhere as it was the first time an abortion doctor had been killed. Things became extremely tense all across the country, abortion providers were on high alert and we were all waiting for someone else to blast away. Then, out of the blue comes a soft spoken minister from Pensacola named Paul Hill. I later learned that right after the murder, perhaps sensing an opportunity to get some exposure, he called a producer at “The Donohue Show” (the pioneer of talk shows) and told her that he actually believed that Michael Griffin, Doctor Gunn’s assassin, was “justified” in doing what he did. Of course, the producer, always looking for something sensational, immediately booked him on the show. Paul Hill sat right next to me on the show that day and told the crowd point blank that it was okay to kill Doctor Gunn and other abortion doctors.
Soon thereafter, Paul and a few others saw an opportunity to scare the crap out of abortion providers, no doubt hoping that many of them would leave the field. So, they formed a loose knit group called “Defensive Action.” They gathered about 30 names on a petition from people who believed in the “justifiable homicide” defense. But they were careful. They never said “I will kill a doctor” because that would have landed them in jail. Instead, they just said it was “okay” to kill an abortion doctor, no doubt hoping that they would inspire some less-than-stable person to take up the cause.
Right after the first murder, a number of abortion doctors left the field and when word got out about this group, others fled. They were the ones who had always been on the edge anyway, so they were ripe to leave. Others, however, bought guns, bullet proof vests and other defensive devices. They were ready to do battle. One doctor out west walked me through his clinic and showed me how he had hidden a Magnum 357 in EVERY room in his clinic. “If they come in here shooting, I’m taking them all with me,” he vowed. Of course, the Defensive Action crowd got a lot of publicity. After all, fear sells newspapers, right? And Paul Hill and his crowd fed off of the hysteria.
But, while I cannot prove it, I believe to this day that they never all got together in one room and plotted murders. They were too smart for that, they knew they were being watched. Meanwhile, I had an interesting reaction to this theory. I was talking to Paul Hill one day in a hotel and told him “you know, Paul, in some weird way I think your theory is consistent with your belief. If you firmly believe that they submit and do things in a manner which reflects a true pro-life attitude, that a woman is carrying a ‘baby’ or a ‘person’, then I can see how you believe you should defend it from its impending death.” I added that it was a ridiculous notion in real life, of course, but “if we’re just talking about a non-actionable idea, then I hear what you are saying.” The next day, Paul held a press conference to let the world know that I, a staffer at the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, “supported the ‘justifiable homicide’ theory.” So much for a casual discussion about a ridiculous theory.
Of course, months later Paul picked up a gun and killed Doctor Baird Britton and he attempted to make his defense the “justifiable homicide” theory. The judge did not allow him to offer it. The movement, and that’s a stretch to call it that, quickly died down when their leader was executed in the chair a short while later.

Another reason I like Pat’s blog is I can respond without being ignored or edited: This is so good I’ll take it paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraph 1: “…if you believe that it is a ‘baby’ or ‘person’ in the uterus and someone is going to terminate it, then you are justified in stopping the ‘killer,’ just like you would stop someone from killing a real, already-born person.”

This is it exactly, Pat, except for “real.” Why did you have to insert that lie?

“Welcome back, John. Not sure what you mean. Aren’t you and I ‘real?’ Geez, i didnt realize you folks read every friggin word I write…”

Sure we’re real, Pat. Common now. What you’re saying, though, is the people you’re helping to kill, and we’re trying to protect, are not real.

“good point.”

Paragraph 2: “I have participated in a lot of discussions with those who oppose abortion and the vast, vast majority of them believe these folks are a bunch of kooks.”

Right again. That’s why I put more blame on us, not you, for the unprecedented, forty-year and continuing, slaughter of young people.

“Keep the analysis coming! Did you sign the Defensive Action petition, John?”

No one asked me.

Paragraph 3: “Paul Hill sat right next to me on the show that day and told the crowd point blank that it was okay to kill Doctor Gunn and other abortion doctors.”

Good for Paul. I would add “morally okay but maybe not strategically.” I would add that, probably, because I’m a coward.

Paragraph 4: Good. Of course I would replace “less-than-stable” with heroic.

Paragraph 5: “Right after the first murder (sic), a number of abortion doctors left the field and when word got out about this group, others fled.”

Just imagine the number of people alive today because of Paul Hill.

Paragraph 6: “you know, Paul, in some weird way I think your theory is consistent with your belief. If you firmly believe that the woman is carrying a ‘baby’ or a ‘person’, then I can see how you believe you should defend it from its impending death.”

Exactly, but just try to get that through the thick skulls of “the vast, vast, majority.”

Paragraph 7: again, exactly

Sure, I know, they’re trying to set me up, but the opportunity they give me to respond overwhelms any qualms I have about that. Besides, I haven’t lost a case in court yet! ---------------------------------------------------------------

Dear John, The cover of Time magazine recently showed a picture of an 18-year old Afghan woman named Bibi Aisha, who had her nose cut off by her husband. There are many examples in the world of those who have been victims of family violence, for example, John Bobbitt. But what makes Bibi's case different is that this was a "legal" act. So when her nose was cut off, she had no one to turn to. Why? Because the supreme law of the land, which in Afghanistan is called the Taliban, legally authorized it. But her husband was not ordered to cut off her nose. Instead, the Taliban ruled that it was her husband's right to choose. The Taliban gave him "freedom of choice" to cut off her nose. And that is what men like him are fighting to preserve in Afghanistan: freedom of choice.
In our country, the supreme law of the land is not called the Taliban. We call it the Supreme Court of the United States. I recently read the story of an American woman named Gianna Jessen. She is a lot like Bibi. In America, our version of the Taliban has authorized child homicide to cover up for embarrassing pregnancies, to maintain the outward appearances of pregnancy standards despite a climate of sexual revolution. As a consequence, Gianna was the victim of a "botched" abortion. Her picture should be on the cover of Time magazine, next to Bibi's. It is the picture of victims who still await the medical care needed to reconstruct their lives, to make their bodies whole again, like they were before someone carried out a "choice" authorized by the supreme law of the land. Like Bibi, Gianna had no one to turn to, because in America this butchery is a "legal" act authorized by the U.S. version of the Taliban.
Just like some Afghan men are fighting for freedom of choice to cut off their wives noses, some American women are fighting for freedom of choice to kill their own children. They support America's version of the Taliban, just like Bibi's husband supports the Afghan version. Yet though American soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan to save women like Bibi from the Taliban over there, ironically not a single one is fighting in the U.S. to save women like Gianna from America's version of the Taliban. Cal Mr. Eurica Califorrnia
----------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Knight continues his attack on us prolifers who will not combat Satan forcefully: Just as an anti-abortion government would always demand that people submit and do things in a manner which reflect a true anti-abortion attitude, so too, any pro-abortion government was always going to demand that you submit and do things in a manner which reflects a true pro-abortion attitude. Once again, how easy is that to see? To do things as the government demands in a manner which reflects a true pro-abortion attitude, in a manner which is pro-death for many and pro-life for so few, can only make you one thing, pro-abortion. You might say subserviently pro-abortion, or compliantly pro-abortion, but no matter what adjective you put in front of it, pro-abortion is pro-abortion.
Just the same as the one who abandons the sheep to the wolves has zero right to claim that he is the shepherd of the sheep, so too when a group of people know in advance that 1.4 million unborn children will be slaughtered by abortionists in the next year, and they make not even the slightest attempt to pull the trigger on their attackers, they have zero right to claim they are anti-abortion.
Mistakenly, you may have thought you were pro-life but the minute you decide to do as the wolves in the pro-abortion government said, and abandon the lambs, the minute you made the decision to defraud 99% of God’s persecuted unborn children of the assistance you owed them under his Goden Rule, abortionists, and those who assist them, were the only ones you could any longer be pro-life for. Them, and the paltry one percent, as you compliantly allowed the government to lead the rest of the lambs off to slaughter.
Tragically, and disgracefully, those who have accepted enslavement to the government and assess themselves as being anti-abortion have been conditioned to see this as a good. Take, for example, Neal Horsley’s comment: “To save one from such barbaric butchery is a good thing. To save 541 is 541 times better than a good thing. I really believe the previous words” (December AIM).
That’s not what I believe though, and nothing like it. I’ve not permitted anyone to subject me to the same type of conditioning which Neal Horsley and many others have been and I see things a much different way. When God has given people the tools to save many, many thousands, as is the case here, to save one from the butchery is not a good thing. Disaster and utter failure is all that it is. And to save 541 when you have been given the tools to save many, many thousands, that does not make the disaster and utter failure 541 times better. It makes it no better at all. Until it is recognized as a disaster and utter failure, and nothing else besides, no progress can be made.
So, John, when abortionists pleaded, and pleaded, and pleaded with you to give them death, when they told you, “Choose death for us or you’ll be choosing life for our many victims,” why didn’t you and the falsely named pro-life movement give them what they begged you for? Why did you decide instead to choose death for the innocent lambs? Were you following God’s law there and doing for his precious unborn children what you would want others to do for you, or did you decide to throw God’s law into the rubbish bin so you could be enslaved to the government’s z grade law?
At which stage of the enslavement process was it, John, that you developed this supreme reverence of yours for the government and its z grade law? List for me, and list for the good Lord too, the main reasons why you decided to agree with the government that God gave you his Golden Rule so that they could prove their “superiority” by getting you to have a shit on it each and every day at their request. And even more importantly, tell me, and tell the good Lord, why you unashamedly preached the fake gospel to others that the Christian thing to do was for them to have a shit in his law as well.
Matthew 7-12, God’s Golden Rule, is of course far from the only occasion mentioned in the Bible that God’s people were called upon to do justice – MK 6:6-8; LK 11:4-21; PS 82-3; IS 1:17; JS 61: 8; and Amos 5:24 are just a handful of the many. In regards to abortion, and those 1.4 million victims the government has consigned to the trash heaps of the USA over the next year, how is justice brought about? Where is the justice in passively abandoning the children and allowing abortionists to take their toll? All there is is a mountain of injustice. And where is the injustice to giving the perpetrators what they’ve begged so earnestly for for so long? All there is there is a mountain of long overdue justice.
So what’s your take, John, on this very important instruction of God’s, to do justice? Where do you think the most justice and injustice resides? (tbc) -----------------------------------------------------------------

Bible Pictures
By Jim Kopp

First One

"I'm Pregnant! Yay!”

In a previous issue, Jim talked about his childhood Bible which had beautiful paintings in it of Gospel scenes. Jim now replays those scenes in his mind, but instead of the Holy Land, he "sets" them in his family's village, a place he's familiar with.
Imagine a woman saying the words "I’m pregnant! Yay! Yay! Yay!" It is a. measure of the wickedness of our era that most couples, now, on hearing this news, would curse.
(Note to people who watch news: you can't curse babies and also kvetch about a mosque at Ground Zero. Hello?)
But back to Mary. Mary couldn't stop singing the minute she found out she was pregnant, even though she knew that in one sense she could be considered a single mom.
Why? Because not only was she a true Christian woman and rejoiced that any child should be born, but, also, that this Child would be the last nail in the coffin of all evil.
When we look at the Magnificat: "My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord," we can't help but notice that these are not the words of someone who is shy about the amount of force required to resist and conquer evil.
These are not the words of a [whine] "Can't we all just get along. . .” philosophy. Rampant evil and simple basic family life cannot coexist. One of 'em has got to go, and Mary's crystal clear who's gotta go. No Compromise, as Kieth Green sang (CD at a Christian music store, survivors! Hurry!)
A tiny note to my beloved Evangelical brothers and sisters: check out Hannah's Song ( II Sam 1). Hannah saw the spiritual impact of her son, too.

Gramma

When I pray this Bible scene, I honestly cannot tell you how my Gramma got into the picture, but she did.
I feel so deeply sorry for anyone who never had an Irish Cherokee Gramma like mine. Long before I was born, she’d married an oilfield roughneck/surgeon (. . . go figure) had descended from the Western Band Trail of Tears, survived the '06 San Francisco earthquake ( . . . being jerked by the arm over a popped-open crevasse), shot a bear in the Yukon . . . . well, you get the picture. Trouble coloring inside the lines . . .
In this Bible scene, she's just gotten the news Mary got . . . Gramma kind of "stands in" for Mary in this scene. I hope you won't think of this as an insult to Jesus' Mother. . . . know the difference between the two. I just am familiar with Gramma Katie Marie. I hope the other Mary doesn't mind.
Part of the reason Gramma crept into this "picture" maybe, is because of the other whole side of Mary, the Lord's Mother.
A moment ago I wrote about the exultation a real mom and dad realize when they know true power and dignity don’t come from a college degree or a high-falitin' title (. . . trust me on this one).

Fiat

There was another component to Mary's response to Gabriel. In fact, this part of the response came before the triumph and "boasting in the Lord" exultation of Luke 1.
Dr. Schaeffer went on and on about this in the under-read book Joshua and the Flow of Biblical History.
In that book. Dr. Schaeffer explained painstakingly that the Birth of Our Lord was not simply unlikely without Mary's true knowledge and consent, but that it was completely impossible.
Impossible? How can something be impossible for God?
Easy. He created us with free will, all of us, even the accursed Hitler, and Stalin, and Mao.
It is in the nature of His own respect for His own character qua Creator that He'd rather not mess with the free will He Himself created.
In the very end, evil will be compelled and confined to Perdition, but in this dispensation, evil gets a little more roving room (Job l), and so do those, sadly, who obey evil.
God, the Creator and Master of it all "had" to wait upon Mary's consent because of the constraints God placed upon Himself.
. . . He prefers free people to join Him in heaven, not robots.
Would she say yes? Will she say no? You can almost hear the Trinity, perhaps overheard by the patiently waiting Gabriel, musing on this point.
Part of Mary's knowing calculus at this instant has to include some knowledge that pain will be involved for her and her Son.
Otherwise, it would not be free consent.
This important pause is not explicit in Scripture, but implicit. Wouldn’t you agree?
That’s exactly and precisely why Gramma has a little sadness and resignation built into this pause, and why we suspect the real Mary had a few tears in her eyes even when she shouted the exultant Magnificat to the evil one.

Good will come of this, but not without a battle, a painful battle. (tbc)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Evans sent me two articles recently, one about mill tactics and the other about military tactics. Here’s the start of the military one: ADAPTING TO A DIFFERENT SORT OF WAR

an informative message concerning the necessity of modern Christians to understand military tactics, for use in protecting their homeland as well as to defend their neighbors, and themselves, against unlawful murder

Hypothetically speaking, if Christians found themselves fighting against an overwhelming enemy, an invading infidel, or struggling to defend themselves, and their friends and families, against murderers, they would be facing unfair odds in most cases. Many Christians today only seem to read the New Test¬ament, and forget the many Old Testament accounts of God's plan in utilizing a Christian Army to rebuild, repay, and deliver. In every
instance that Christians would encounter possible scenarios for accomplishing the above mentioned goals, the idea of the Guerrilla Army would be their ultimate goal, complete with an organizational leadership. But preliminarily, it would be better to consider the path of the leaderless resister.
First of all, it is every Christian's duty to encourage the end of the abortionist's operations, in killing innocents through the evils of abortion-on-demand. There are many ways to resist, and they can all be derived from studying the following conceptual study of how a guerrilla fighter resists an over¬whelming enemy organization.
Effective resistance can be executed and maintained, focus¬ing on 3 major elements:
a) credible intelligence- obtained during reconnaissance missions;
b) capabilities of being mobile and executing measures of counter-mobility -- the ability to breach enemy occupied territory as well as the ability to pursue a mobile enemy unit and, contrarily, how to prevent the enemy's pursuit if the tables are turned;
c) offensives with specific directives
i. pierce enemy flow-and-function-as-usual by actively disrupting murder,
ii. deny the enemy of “figure-head types,” leaders, icons, and spok¬esmen ;
iii. demoralize the enemy through psychologically-crushing onsla¬ughts, keeping them on edge;
iv. cut off the enemy's commun¬ications, supplies, complex machinery many times operated by numerous personnel, electricity, and any luxury whatsoever. (tbc)