Thursday, June 25, 2009

George W. Bush: Back In The News & It Ain't Good

Our illustrious former leader, the first President to be known only be an initial, came out of retirement recently, and probably should think better of it. Early on in the Obama Administration, W. demurred and said the newer Commander In Chief deserved his silence. This, of course, ended as of last week.

However, it has now come to light that there was a second Downing Street memo. If you recall, the first Downing Street Memo, which was written by former UK PM Tony Blair's foreign policy adviser, Sir David Manning, said unequivocally that the intelligence and facts were fixed around the policy of invading Iraq.

Translation: President W. was creating out of whole cloth the casus belli to invade Iraq. In other words, the basis for our invasion of Iraq was a fraud. I hate to bring this up again, but hey, it's a goddam war crime.

So the new Downing Street Memo, written January 31, 2003, before the March invasion, indicates that both PM Blair and President Bush were aware that United Nations inspectors were not going to find any illegal weapons [notwithstanding the hyperventilating fear mongery going on daily; see: mushroom clouds; reconstituted weapons programs, etc.]

So, in order to manufacture a casus belli, President Bush put forth a plan to fly U-2 spy planes over Iraq, in the hopes they would be shot down. The memo also said that the invasion was already scheduled for March 10, when the bombing would begin.

If it needed to be any clearer, our former President was in an illegal conspiracy, with knowledge aforethought, to commit a war crime via the illegal invasion of a sovereign, albeit unsavory, nation.


Now for some lighter fair, during the recent weeks, with the compelling news of the protests over the faulty vote in Iran, it has come to my attention that former President George W. Bush might just be Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!!

First of all, they both have a penchant for claiming presidential victories in obviously faulty elections, and require old men in dark robes to install them into office. But have you ever looked at them closely?

Do you see what I see? Big ears, dopey mouth, and the same squinty, beady eyes? And considering the animosity that the Iranians had for the Iraqis, there is no question to me that Mahmoud is really just W. in disguise.

Still don't believe me? Well, then why don't you find one single photo of them together. Because you know as well as I do that you cannot!

Monday, June 22, 2009

The Angel of Iran, Neda Soltan

Thomas Jefferson was once famously quoted as saying: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." As of Saturday, June 20, 2009, Iran added Neda Soltan as another in that storied list of patriots.
She was 16 years old, born a decade and a half after the Islamic Revolution, lead by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini swept the Shah from power. She had only known life under the Supreme Leadership, yet she ended up becoming a martyr for liberty.
The exact sequence of events leading up to her death are not entirely clear. But as is often the case in these ever more modern times, the graphic video of her death stretched to the ends of the Earth and to the seat of power in Iran, within hours, if not minutes, of her passing.
What matters now is the Iranian protesters in the streets now have a face for their revolution. And while their leader remains the unlikely Mir Hossein Mousavi, they shall have their own saint, The Angel of Iran.
Neda is sure to become another iconic image of the small standing up to the strong; the Davids against the Goliaths; the Iranian Tankman.
Let us all hope that her sacrifice is more successful than the youths that gave their lives and futures at Tiananmen Square twenty years ago.
Neda, may you touch the face of God.
June 23, 2009 Addendum and Correction:
I was incorrect to report Neda's age as 16. According to the most recent news, she was 26. However, this does not change much. She was still a young, vivacious woman who tragically lost her life to the senseless, selfish power mongering by an illegitimate regime of old fart holy rollers.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

North Korean Enhanced Interrogation Techniques Successful!

The news out of the Hermit Kingdom (and there is blessed little of that) is that notorious international terrorists, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, confessed to their crimes.

The state-run (as in actually state run, not like we have in the United States, where we just call it state run when it reports news we don't want to hear) Korea Central News Agency reported that: "During their trial, they admitted what they did was a criminal act inspired by political motives of isolating and stifling our republic by defiling our human rights situation through fabricated video footage."

It is clear that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea uses only the latest in enhanced interrogation techniques, which are a popular export of her patron state, the People's Republic of China. Most recently, these techniques, culled from the experiences of American POW's who were captured by China during the Korean War, were used to famous effect by the United States of America, under the direction of former Vice President Dick Cheney, on such reputed terrorists as Khalid Sheik Mohammed.*

As is obvious, these techniques, which certainly included stress positions, exposure to extreme heat or cold, hard slaps to the face, threats with dogs, being placed in confined box and then filled with insects, and probably included water boarding were successfully implemented against the terrorists Lee and Ling. Clearly, such dangerous terrorists, when broken using the latest in enhanced interrogation techniques will confess to any crime you need them to in order to secure a conviction at a military tribunal.

At this time we are awaiting comment from former vice President Dick Cheney on the success of the interrogations of Ling and Lee, and how he feels these successes should bear on the policies of the Obama Administration.

*(Yes, this is entirely true. The United States, under George W. Bush, used these techniques which it learned from Communist China.)

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Cheers and Jeers Over Marriage for Queers

Sorry about the title of this post in advance, but if you are offended, I'm taking back "queer" from the hatemongers.

Anyway, here's the cheers: former New York State Senate Majority Leader, Republican Joe Bruno, was reported in yesterday's New York Daily News as coming out in favor of gay marriage. Good going!!

While he privately opposes gay marriage, he stated: "However, that view really does conflict with the rights that are afforded all of us. This is America (damn straight), and we have inalienable rights. Life is short, and we should all be afforded the same opportunities to enjoy it."

I do not think I have ever heard a more concise, nor poignant, argument in favor of gay marriage. While stating he has private reservations, he goes the extra mile, recognizing freedom and liberty are not about comfortability, but rather other people. And in so doing, realizing that failing to grant them the same rights as others is anything but "American."

So here's to Joe Bruno.

And now the jeers: to the Commander in Chief, for arguing in Federal Court in a lawsuit brought by a California couple seeking to overturn the odious Defense of MArriage Act. And not just arguing, but arguing a specious train of thought, namely that states may favor heterosexual marriages bcause they are the "traditional and universally recognized form of marriage."

Okaaaay. Where is any of that written except by some homophobic holy rollers in the late 20th century USA (who were taking a page from blackophobic holy rollers from the early 20th century USA)? Last time I checked, most jurisdictions require a marriage license and a ceremony, except those that still recognize common law marriage, which, last time I checked is the "traditional" form of marriage. So can I still shack up and be considered married? Or do I have to shell out for the ring?

And universal? Where in the universe is the form of marriage set in stone? The Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints believes in traditional marriage, where a man can have as many wives as he wants, as young as he wants. Like in Biblical times and such. And those guys are in Texas, among other places. Not to mention how marriage works under Shariah Law in the Mid-East and Afghanistan.

And to use caselaw comparing gay marriage to incestuous relationships? Why not just go and dig up some of those anti-miscegenation cases while you are at it? Disgusting.

And of course, this is all without mentioning President Obama's pledge to the homosexual community during his campaign, which now seems to have been a sham. Say it ain't so, Barry.

So I am urging President Obama to reverse his course, end "don't ask, don't tell" in military service, and work to repeal the facially un-Constitutional Defense of Marriage Act rather than submit briefs in its defense.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Hoist Them Upon Their Own Petards

After wrestling with the happening of the cold blooded murder of George Tiller, M.D., as well as the dearth of an acceptable response from the likes of those who had labelled Dr. Tiller in the past as a "killer," and in light of the the purely vitriolic yet vapid rhetoric from the right aimed at, among other things, President Obama [for example, by continuing to maintain he is not an American born citizen, inferring he is not the lawful President], I have settled on a solution of sorts.

While reasonable minds may disagree, political discourse has become poisoned.  Now we have to hear, with the party's imprimatur, actor Jon Voight term the President a "false prophet."  Really, Mr. Voight?  Really?  Like you would know?

Anyway, I am getting off track.  

My very targeted solution, and I admit it is a flawed solution, is for Mrs. Jeane Tiller, grieving widow of the murdered doctor, to sue Operation Rescue, Fox News and Bill O'Reilly.  Sue their nattering pants off.  

On what grounds, RayRay, you, my gentle readership might ask?  I say take a page from the playbook of the Southern Poverty Law Center and sue them for incitement to commit violence.

Recent lawsuits by the SPLC has gone to great lengths to bankrupt, and thereby defang, such hate groups as the Aryan Nations and sects of the Ku Klux Klan.  These successful suits use as one of their causes of action the incitement of certain individuals to commit violence.

Operation Rescue uses Biblical Apocalyptic language in their exhortations, taking its political cause outside the realm of political rhetoric.  When invoking the name of God to come and smite a baby murderer, where is the possibility of political discourse?  When past violence is but prologue to even more bloodshed, where can reasonable minds come together?  And more importantly, what can the reasonable mind infer will be the rational result of such admonitions?

Is not the "lone wolf" the intended consequence?

Bill O'Reilly is another phenomenon altogether.  Loudly self proclaimed to be the most popular man in his genre of cable "news," Mr. O'Reilly occupies another stratosphere than Operation Rescue.  He is well monied as a result of his often vitriolic and bombastic opinions.

But maybe with respect to the murder of Dr. Tiller, and perhaps the issue of abortion in general, Mr. O'Reilly has crossed the line.

Here is a Youtube link to but one discussion between Mr. O'Reilly and a pro-choice advocate, Amy Richards, speaking in depth about Dr. Tiller, his work, and abortion.  You will notice the choice of words Mr. O'Reilly uses, namely "execute babies."  He also uses the classic fallacious argument about "irrefutable evidence" which he does not deign to disclose, and therefore it is unchallengeable, yet somehow always inures to the benefit of his side of the story.  He also conflates the argument of having an abortion with permitting a rapist to "get away with" rape, without seeking to discuss the complex issues of criminal procedure and privacy.  Finally, when confounded by his opponent's intransigence, he becomes an ogre and screams at her.  Truthfully, this segment is illuminating as to O'Reilly's personality.

But his closing remarks that his opponent, Amy Richards, was working to "allow babies to be killed for any reason at all" only highlights my point.  If that were the real issue involved, then how can any right thinking person not hunt Ms. Richards down and kill her, if only to save those innocent babies.

And it is not as if Bill O'Reilly doesn't know who his audience is.  It is no secret that he is popular among the more conservative segment of the population, tending more toward the anti-choice, pro-gun crowd.

So, what is Bill O'Reilly's intended consequence when he uses such words and phrases?  I can with confidence say it is not the well being of Ms. Richards.

I for one have had enough of this baloney.  Bill O'Reilly, with his extra high soap box and his ultra self righteousness has finally crossed a line.  He, and his patron, Fox News, must pay.  This is not a matter of free speech.  This is a matter of incitement to commit violence, which is most certainly not protected free speech.

So, Mrs. Tiller, with the highest of respect for the graveness of your situation, when the terrors in your mind have quieted but a little and you can muster the strength, I ask you to bring suit against Operation Rescue, Bill O'Reilly, and Fox News.  Bring suit for their part in the incitement of that animal Roeder to kill your husband in cold blood.  Bring suit to bankrupt their bank accounts like they have already bankrupted religion and their own souls.  And even if you cannot win in Court, you will make them have to defend, on the national stage, their disgusting words about your husband.  And if you make them do that, it will be as good as if you won a verdict.  Because they will have to take off their masks of self righteousness and defend the indefensible.

And then, with a little luck, no one will listen to them anymore.  And you will have won but a small piece of solace, for yourself and us all.  

Friday, June 12, 2009

Palin-Letterman Row: Is Caribou Barbie Craving Attention?

The recent brouhaha betwixt our northernmost governor and late night talk show host, David Letterman, is heating up to a gentle simmer. Is this really that important? No, but it's Friday, and the news cycle is going to slow down any minute.

In your humble author's humble opinion, Mrs. Palin is feeling the lack of the heat from the lack of the national spotlight, and is doing anything she can to make a Federal case out of Letterman's lowbrow humor. Mrs. Palin has gone so far as to try to make a cause out of a stupid joke.

To recap, Palin was visiting New York, and at the invitation of former mayor Rudy Giuliani, she attended a Yankee's game with her 14 year old daughter, Willow. Afterward, Letterman made a crude joke about how Palin's "daughter got knocked up Alex Rodriguez." He did not specify which daughter it was.

Well, Mama Grizzly got all up in Letterman's grill, saying he shouldn't make perverted jokes about 14 year olds getting knocked up and statutory rape. Even Iron Dog racing champ Todd Palin got in on the act. Letterman apologized for his joke in bad taste, and that he was not referring to the 14 year old Willow, but her 18 year old daughter Bristol who, in fact, had been knocked up, which was notoriously revealed on the stage of the Republican National Convention. Bristol Palin gave birth to a son in December. To date there are no new reports of her being knocked up again.

Unable to just let it go, and apparently compelled make her family the center of media attention, Mrs. Palin has termed Letterman's apology a "weak, convenient excuse." She has also termed his joke as contributing to the "atrociously high rate of exploitation of minors by older men.."

She said "atrociously high rate." Wow, I didn't know it was an epidemic. Must have missed the report on Studio B.

So now she has made a cause out of a stupid joke. Next up The Willow Palin Center for the Prevention of Underage Exploitation? Come on, Governor. You put your kids front and center, which put your parenting skills front and center. So if someone, like Letterman, wants to make a joke in bad taste about your family and one of your daughters getting knocked up out of wedlock, that's your own fault for putting them out there.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Right Wing Domestic Terror: The Department of Homeland Security Got It Right

After a brief hiatus, I am back true believers. I apologize for the dearth of content over the last 5 days, but real life intrudes into the blogosphere, too.

Anywho.....remember that flap in early April when the Department of Homeland Security via Secretary Janet Napolitano issued a report warning that fringe right wing groups were potentially dangerous? Wow, was that prescient!

Since then there have been the recent murder of the controversial gynecologist, George Tiller, M.D., by anti-abortion zealot Scott Roeder, and yesterday there was a murder of a security guard, Steven Tyrone Johns, by Neo-Nazi James van Brunn at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C.

Back when the DHS released their report the right wing punditry, in particular Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Nancy Goldfarb, and Michelle Malkin, inter alia, were absolutely besides themselves at Secretary Napolitano's warning. Yet, the conundrum is that they have painted themselves into a corner, equating their positions with these obviously terrible actors, just on the basis of being to the right of Centrist. This is pretty stupid, if you ask me. It's like if Rachel Maddow or Democratic Party was trying to defend the Baader-Meinhof Gang because they are left of Newt Gingrich.

Michelle Malkin has even gone the extra mile today on her website and posted this link "Inconvenient truths: Holocaust Museum shooter hated Fox News, Murdoch; Weekly Standard possible target" (, as if this somehow mollifies van Brunn's fringe right wing associations. Uuuhhh, Michelle, he shot a black security guard at the Holocaust Museum. Have you no shame?

Why would the Right try to defend the actions of, or politics of, the maniac fringe? Once you get there you find yourself among some truly terrible people with their deplorable politics: Christian Identity, White Power, Ultra-Nationalists, Ku Klux Klan, and anti-abortion maniacs like Roeder who think cold blooded murder is the answer. You get the lynchers of America's dark past, and the Timothy McVeighs of our dark present.

And I will not be the first to say this, nor the last, I suspect, but the divisive rhetoric from the chattering classes, the language used on the campaign trail last year, the accusations of treason, malfeasance, and criminal behavior as a matter of political discourse, which mostly issues from the right wing, is not acceptable. Do not think for a second that I am considering any impingement upon the First Amendment rights of anyone. Rather, I believe that it is imperative that we stop the slinging of unfounded mud for the sake of garnering a meager 1/2 of a percentage point of temporary advantage which inures to the benefit of no one in the long view.

Please permit me to reminisce: President Obama was accused by Sarah Palin of "paling around with terrorists" due to a prior innocent association with William Ayers. Mind you, Mr. Ayers was never convicted of anything, and his "domestic terrorist group," The Weather Underground, whose actions, planned or executed, while deplorable, never killed anyone but themselves. I also doubt that Mrs. Palin knew who Bill Ayers was prior to being chosen as John McCain's running mate, but that is another matter.

Candidate Obama was called a terrorist and traitor and a Muslim [as if being a Muslim is a bad thing] by supporters at McCain campaign rallies, and Sen. McCain, to his credit, actually defended Obama's decency to the crowd at one of his rallies after a supporter said she could not trust Obama because he is "an Arab."

To this day people of such reputation as Rush Limbaugh are continuing to harangue the President for not having a birth certificate. Really? We still haven't gotten passed this?

It is one thing to say one disagrees with the ruling party, or a given policy, or the course the country is one. Lord knows I vociferously did during the last administration. But, if, as Messr's Limbaugh and Hannity, among others, have stated ad nauseum, that President Obama is trying his best to destroy the nation, and they intend to have these statements believed as true by a given portion of the population, what do they think is supposed to be the natural result?

It is time for the marketplace of ideas to make a course correction, and for us, as a nation, to choose our politicians and our pundits more on the basis of the content of their ideas rather than the bombast of their rhetoric. I prefer my political discourse like it is on such programs like The News Hour With Jim Lehrer: sober, reasoned, respectful, working out the issues, not rooting for one side or the other like it's a sports contest.

Ideas are not good or bad because they are espoused by the right or left. They are good or bad on their own merits. That they are espoused by the right or left is incidental. The American people should begin to think about it this way.

Friday, June 5, 2009

Right Wing Lie Machine

It looks like Dick Cheney, not used to this whole "video" thing, cannot keep his pack of lies shuffled properly. So much so he tried to get his daughter, Liz [not the gay one], to help out, to no avail.

As this video from Daily Kos demonstrates, the Cheney Family pasttime is looseness with the truth.

Moving on, it appears that Sean Hannity's soul must have some severe scar tissue on it, as this series of video excerpts lays bare Sean Hannity's utter moral bankruptcy.

That there is anyone I know or related to actually still listens to this man as a source of news or germane opinion shames me.

Part of the reason I get upset over Left/Right politics is that there is so much mendacity on the Right. Sure, there are plenty of liars on the Left. In fact, Speaker Nancy Pelosi may or may not be a liar regarding this CIA flap.

But Sean Hannity is not one representative from one of 435 disctricts. He is a major voice in a party and movement. And he holds himself out to be an arbiter of good and bad, truth and lies.

And he is squarely on the "pants on fire" side of the equation.

I think it has gotten to the point that Hannity is closing in on defamation, as he is knowingly stating false allegations for the sake of purposefully hurting the credibility of a fellow citizen, who just happens to be President. Just a thought.

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

The Mendacious Manuel Miranda

Remember back in the Bush days, when then Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D., was talking about a rule change to end the time honored tradition of filibustering judicial nominees? Well, the man leading the charge back then was Manuel Miranda, and his group, the Coalition to End Judicial Filibusters, aka CEJF. Fortunately for the country, the CEJF was unsuccessful, largely due to the behind the scenes work of the "Gang of Fourteen," 7 Republican and 7 Democratic Senators with the requisite respect for the rules and traditions of the Senate, who brokered a deal and preserved this limited power of the minority party.

According to Talking Points Memo,, Mr. Miranda's campaign was so successful that he is back in the news today with his newly minted group, the Third Branch Conference.

Pray tell what does the Third Branch Conference want to do? Well, they want Republican Senators TO FILIBUSTER THE CONFIRMATION OF SONIA SOTOMAYOR!!!

This is an absurd turn of events, and I call on the GOP members of the Gang of Fourteen, including Senators Lindsey Graham, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and John McCain to roundly reject the hypocrisy of Mr. Manuel.

Look, if they rightly believe that Justice Sotomayor is unfit, filibuster away. But to do so relfexively, solely because she is to the left of them is unconscionable. Elections do have consequences, and this is one of them. Instead, let's have a real debate, based on the facts and her decisions, before resorting to the filibuster.

And, seriously, the way things are looking up there in Minnesota, Mr. Manuel's suggestion might be a tad behind the curve.

Monday, June 1, 2009

Right to Life Movement Exposed as Farce Once Again.......

Scott Roeder, avowed believer in an unborn fetus' right to life brutally and premeditatedly gunned down one of the three doctors in the United States who provides late term abortions to women. According to the conservative newspaper, The Washington Times, Dr. George Tiller's clinic has been the site of two decades worth of protests, and was bombed in 1985. The doctor was also shot in both arms in 1993.

Also reported in the same paper was the founder of Operation Rescue, Randall Terry, called the murdered doctor a mass murderer and stated: "He was an evil man - his hands were covered in blood." No, sir, your hands are covered in blood. Dr. Tiller was an upstanding member of his community and church, devoted husband and father of four.

The Right to Life Movement, if I can stomach to call it such a thing, has revealed itself again to be a terrible sham. I shall know them by the company they keep, and Roeder is their company.

This is not to say that the issue of abortion is not terribly divisive, and reasonable persons can disagree a great deal. It is also not to say that good people cannot oppose abortion. It is a very tough issue, as no matter how compelling the needs of an unborn child might be, the needs of the mother, to whom that unborn child owes not just its life, but very existence, are greater. It is a tough call in a zero sum game, but when I am forced to make the decision on whose call it is on what to do, I go with the right of the mother to choose.

No, what I am saying is the Right to Interfere With a Woman's Womb Movement is an industry based upon hatred and dividing Americans. Mr. Terry, I thought you read the word of God. Am I not now quoting Jesus, Matthew 7: Judge not lest ye be judged" ? Or do you construe that very clear dictate as meaning something else?

A funny thing about the multitude of those who oppose a woman's right to choose whether or not to carry a child to full term is that they are most often pro-death penalty and pro-gun. Now, I have made no secret of my pro-gun attitudes here on the Witch Hunt, but I am diametrically opposed to the death penalty.

I always found it funny - funny peculiar, not funny haha - that the so called right to life movement was filled with so many pro-death penalty hypocrites. And not for nothing, but being pro-gun means at some level that you are pro-ability to kill. Just pointing that out.

Therefore, I don't accept the moral high ground the anti-abortion crowd attempts to talk down to me from. Rather, I tend to ignore them. Apparently, I was wrong to do so. Let's get something clear: since the 1960's there has been both left and right wing violence that we now call domestic terrorism because it gets local sheriffs more Homeland Security dollars.

The left wing variety has largely been aimed at either laboratories to free animals or environmental, attacking the logging industry and such. People have been hurt and some killed by these acts, but they are few. Not that numbers excuse such things.

On the other hand, the right wing violence has been anti-abortion and anti-government, and has consisted of many OB-GYN clinics being bombed, as well as the Centennial Park bombing during the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, and of course the Oklahoma City bombing. And lest I forget, the cowardly murder of Dr. Barnett Slepian, the fourth abortion provider to be murdered, shot in his home by anti-abortion activist James Charles Kopp. Kopp of course did the brave thing and tried to flee to Canada.

Another quixotic aspect of the anti-abortion crowd is their general disdain for universal health care, which stems from the right wing belief in small government. So, the government can't pay doctors based upon set fee schedules, like it does for the Veterans' Administration and Medicaid, but it can regulate the contents of a woman's womb? Huh?

Therefore, it is clear that the anti-abortion crowd doesn't care much for life, just the unborn. And to really hit this home, I checked out the major pundits today, going to some of the biggest right wing bloviator's websites to see what, if anything, they had to say.

Hannity: nothing.

Rush: Nada.

Levin: Zip.

Malkin: focused on how "every mainstream pro-life organization has condemned the killing." She even said it twice. What about you, Michelle?

Coulter: Niente.

Savage: yes, an article by a David Kupelian, decrying violence in the name of Right Wing goals because it may hurt said goals, and the real danger was being labeled as extremists, which could lead the establishment [read: Obama] to exploit such a label the way Hitler [!!!] exploited the Reichstag Fire against the Communists in 1933. Nothing, nothing about the tragic murder of a father of four!

O'Reilly: yes, a line saying "Infamous abortion doctor Dr. George Tiller is gunned down in church. Bill and our guests react." Infamy is usually reserved for things like the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defined infamy as "evil reputation brought about by something grossly criminal, shocking or brutal." Gee, a husband and father of four is gunned down at the door of his church and HE is the infamous one? Could this be defamation?

So, it appears that the punditry had nothing to say about this except 'Don't let it ruin our movement.' Therefore, the only soul searching I am seeing from the punditry is self preservation. Real Christian of all of you.

Then I checked Operation Rescue's website, and clicked on the "Tiller Watch" link [I am not kidding, go see:] and got this:

Operation Rescue Denounces The Killing of Abortionist Tiller

Wichita, KS – It has been learned today that GeorgeTiller was shot and killed while entering his church on Sunday morning, May31.
Operation Rescue releases the following statement: We are shocked at this morning’s disturbing news that Mr. Tiller was gunned down. Operation Rescue has worked for years through peaceful, legal means, and through the proper channels to see him brought to justice. We denounce vigilantism and the cowardly act that took place this morning. We pray for Mr. Tiller’s family that they will find comfort and healing that can only be found in Jesus Christ.

Was this the denunciation Ms. Malkin was so adamant about she said it twice on her website? That Operation Rescue who was legally trying to bring Dr. Tiller TO JUSTICE ? Who the heck are they?

I know who they are. They are accessories before the fact. They fed millions of people, 99% of them good and decent people, this divisive crapola for decades now, hoping, no, praying that someone of a fragile mind like Roeder's will act on their command to bring such physicians to justice. Allow me to quote another member of Operation Rescue, Flip Benham, in response to calls for peace after Dr. Slepian's murder:

"we are in store for more bloodshed in the streets—the likes of which willsicken even the sturdiest among us."

Kopp was one of these "pro-lifers," just like Roeder. And Randall Terry knows it, and he is the one that needs to be brought to justice. The legal way. Not the way involves murdering a father of four children and running away.