Covenant News Wire Service: August 2005 Archives

Texas Gunman Kills 4 in Church, Then Self

Five Killed at Texas Church

SASH, Texas -- A gunman killed four people near a small-town church, then killed himself early Monday after a nine-hour standoff with police, authorities said.

Police said witnesses told them that Freddie L. Cranshaw, who lived across the street from the Sash Assembly of God church, exchanged words in the church parking lot Sunday night with church member Wes Brown, who asked Cranshaw to leave.

Cranshaw, 54, who authorities said had only a partial right arm, returned a short time later and shot Brown, 61, at close range, and then shot the pastor, James Armstrong, 42, witnesses said.

Deputies found both men dead in a grassy area next to the parking lot, Fannin County Sheriff Kenneth Moore said.

Cranshaw then drove to an intersection, where he shot at a truck towing a horse trailer and then killed the two women in the truck after they tried to flee and hide. Witnesses told police they could hear the women screaming, authorities said.

Police identified the women Ceri Litterio, 46, and Holly Love Brown, 50.

"We believe it was just random," Moore said of the women's slayings. "They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Police believe Cranshaw then returned home, pausing along the way to shoot at a house near the church but not hitting anyone.

A 10-member SWAT team made two attempts to enter Cranshaw's house but retreated when he shot at them, Moore said.

Police finally entered the house about 6 a.m. after firing tear gas inside. Cranshaw was found in a bedroom with a gunshot wound to the head, Moore said. Police believe Cranshaw had shot himself up to an hour earlier.

The guns apparently used in the shootings -- a 9 mm semiautomatic pistol and a .38-caliber revolver -- were found in the house along with a shotgun, rifle and ammunition, Moore said.

Grady Pior, who lives across from Cranshaw and next door to the church, said he and his wife had called police a couple of times about Cranshaw's disruptive behavior. He said Cranshaw would shout obscenities at them and fire a gun, but authorities never arrested him because he stayed within the bounds of his property.

Pior said he learned from church members that Cranshaw had left rambling, nonsensical notes on their cars and cursed and yelled at them then they left services. Pior said he had started carrying a gun when he mowed his yard in case of a confrontation with Cranshaw.

"I feel guilty about not being home to help somebody," Pior said. "He's the only person in my life that I've had a strange feeling about."

Moore said the shootings had shaken Sash, a community of 300 people about 120 miles north of Dallas, near the Oklahoma state line.

"It's a tragic situation," he said.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-church-
shooting,0,3038225.story?coll=ny-lilife-print&track=mostemailedlink

Posted by Editor at 12:55 AM

USAID Agrees to Transfer $50 Million to Palestinian National Authority (PNA)

U.S. to give Palestinians $50M

Source: United States Agency for International Development (USAID)

RAMALLAH, West Bank -- The American Government and Palestinian leaders have signed an agreement for the transfer of $50 million in direct assistance to the Palestinians. The U.S. officials made a formal announcement with Minister of Finance Salam Fayyad at the Palestinian Prime Minister's office on Wednesday.

The agreement between the Palestinian Ministry of Finance and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) underlines U.S. confidence in the Palestinian Authority's reform program and aims to ensure that the Gaza disengagement is a success.

With U.S. oversight, the funds will be used to rehabilitate new housing for 6000 families, roads, water facilities, schools, and health clinics in Gaza to help ease the transition after the Israeli disengagement.

"We expect that more than 700,000 person days of employment will be generated in Gaza by this direct assistance," said USAID West Bank/Gaza Mission Director Jim Bever.

U.S. Consul General Jake Walles said that the U.S. is looking forward to the Palestinian Authority's continued efforts to provide a better future for the Palestinian people. "We see this as an important opportunity to build on a successful Gaza disengagement," he added.

A special presidential waiver is necessary for direct financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority. President George W. Bush announced the direct aid last May during the White House visit of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.

This is the third time the U.S. Government has provided direct budgetary support to the Palestinian Authority.

In July 2003, USAID and the PA Ministry of Finance entered into an agreement that provided $9 million to finance the provision of utility services and $11 million to finance approximately 75 infrastructure projects in Gaza and the West Bank. Most of the projects involved the repair and rehabilitation of roads, municipal halls and water and wastewater facilities. All the projects were approved in advance by USAID.

Some 49 projects have been completed and the others are at various stages of implementation. To date, 90 kilometers of roads have been paved, more than 6,000 square meters of municipal halls have been constructed, and more than 55,000 work-days of employment have been generated.

At the end of 2004, the American Government transferred $20 million in direct assistance to the then interim Palestinian leadership. The funds were used to meet budget priorities identified by the Ministry of Finance, including the costs of utilities.

Most U.S. aid to the Palestinian people is provided through nongovernmental organizations, but under the direct assistance structure, the Palestinian Authority itself will administer and implement approved projects.

USAID will deposit the funds in a separate account managed by Palestinian Finance Minister Salam Fayyad, who has won kudos from donors for his sound management.

The funds are subject to regular, quarterly audits to monitor how the money is spent. In the latest review, the auditors reported that the documentation of expenditures was reliable, and the Palestinian Authority quickly remedied the minor deficiencies that were noted.

USAID has spent more than $1.7 billion in the West Bank and Gaza since 1993 to combat poverty, create jobs, improve education, build roads and water systems, construct and equip medical clinics, and promote good governance.

http://www.palestine-pmc.co
m/details.asp?cat=2&id=1046

Posted by Editor at 09:41 AM

Robertson Denies Calling to Kill Chavez, Then Apologizes for Doing So

Robertson apologizes for Chavez comment

MSNBC.com

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. -- Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson apologized Wednesday for calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, only hours after he denied saying Chavez should be killed.

"Is it right to call for assassination?" Robertson said. "No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him."

On Wednesday, he initially denied having called for Chavez to be killed and said The Associated Press had misinterpreted his remarks.

"I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out,"' Robertson said on his show. "'Take him out' could be a number of things including kidnapping."

When the AP had called Robertson on Tuesday for elaboration, spokeswoman Angell Watts said Robertson would not do interviews and had no statement about his remarks. He also declined several interview requests Wednesday.

He later issued the apology for the comments on his Web site, but he defended the underlying logic.

Read MSNBC.com article here.

http://www.msnbc.m
sn.com/id/9047102/

Posted by Editor at 02:42 AM

Hypocrites

by Rev. R.J. Rushdoony / The Chalcedon Foundation

The modern hypocrite plays a part and pretends to be something he is not to mislead other people. He believes himself to be superior to other people and able to fool them. He claims for example, to be a champion of equality; all men are equal, only some men, as Orwell noted, are more “equal” than others, and he is one of these superior ones. He believes in charity, but with other people’s money and tax funds. He bleeds for the poor and hungry when it will bring votes, not because he cares. He pretends to be a Christian, but only because it is respectable to be one. Our Lord said of such men, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (Mt. 23:27–28).

Help stamp out hypocrisy: live honestly before God and man, in faith and in obedience to God’s law.

http://www.chalcedon.edu/arti
cles/article.php?ArticleID=139

Posted by Editor at 10:57 AM

Media Matters calls on ABC Family to discontinue Robertson broadcasts

Media Watchdog: Cancel '700 Club'

Following his August 22 call for the United States to assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Media Matters for America is urging ABC Family to stop showing Pat Robertson's The 700 Club. ABC Family shows The 700 Club three times a day.

Robertson, 700 Club host and founder of the Christian Coalition of America, has a history of vitriolic and false statements, as Media Matters has pointed out.

In addition to urging the assassination of a foreign leader, Robertson has blamed gays for divorce, abortion, and September 11th, said that a gay-oriented event would bring about "terrorist bombs ... earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor," and stated that liberal judges are a bigger threat to society than Al Qaeda.

"Robertson's vitriol is not appropriate for children, or for anyone else, for that matter. His calls for the killing of a foreign leader certainly do not belong on a television channel that purports to offer family-friendly programming," said Media Matters for America President and CEO David Brock.

http://mediamatters.o
rg/items/200508230005

Posted by Editor at 09:26 AM

Abortion clinic seeks to shield medical records

Abortion Clinic Sues To Cover Up Child Sex Abuse

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A clinic that provides birth control and abortions has sued to block the state Health Department's attempt to review the medical records of 224 patients.

The Ohio Department of Health sought access to the records of every patient who visited the center in May and June as part of an investigation of an undisclosed complaint.

The Central Ohio Women's Center said that releasing the records could violate federal medical privacy laws. The center, affiliated with Planned Parenthood of Central Ohio, said it is not aware of any complaints against it.

The records include such sensitive information as type of birth control used, number of sexual partners and type of intercourse practiced, said Lisa Perks, the center's executive director. She called the Health Department's request a "fishing expedition."

State health officials routinely get access to medical records while keeping the information from the public, department spokesman Jay Carey said. The department is investigating whether the center is meeting requirements of its license as an outpatient surgical center.

For example, nursing home inspectors routinely examine hundreds of resident records in annual inspections, he said. He would not give specifics about the center's case.

"This is something we've been doing for a long time," he said. "We keep it on a need-to-know basis for those who are investigating."

The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Columbus is similar to lawsuits Planned Parenthood has filed to stop release of medical records to government agencies in other states.

Lawsuits are pending in Indiana and Kansas, where officials said they sought the records to investigate looking for evidence of unreported child sexual abuse. In Kansas, officials also are looking for evidence of illegal late-term abortions.

Planned Parenthood successfully prevented the release in 2004 of about 900 patient records nationwide sought by former Attorney General John Ashcroft. The organization also turned back a 2002 attempt to get the names of women who had pregnancy tests in an Iowa town where a dead newborn was discovered.

The organization has accused abortion opponents such as Ashcroft of using the records requests to frighten women from seeking abortions. Carey said that has nothing to do with Ohio's investigation.

ON THE NET

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/coh/

http://www.odh.ohio.gov

http://www.ohio.com/mld/b
eaconjournal/12455389.htm

Posted by Editor at 08:34 AM

Illegal Immigrants Win Arizona Ranch in Court

Illegals Win Arizona Ranch in Court

DOUGLAS, Ariz. -- Spent shells litter the ground at what is left of the firing range, and camouflage outfits still hang in a storeroom. Just a few months ago, this ranch was known as Camp Thunderbird, the headquarters of a paramilitary group that promised to use force to keep illegal immigrants from sneaking across the border with Mexico.

Now, in a turnabout, the 70-acre property about two miles from the border is being given to two immigrants whom the group caught trying to enter the United States illegally.

The land transfer is being made to satisfy judgments in a lawsuit in which the immigrants had said that Casey Nethercott, the owner of the ranch and a former leader of the vigilante group Ranch Rescue, had harmed them.

"Certainly it's poetic justice that these undocumented workers own this land," said Morris S. Dees Jr., co-founder and chief trial counsel of the Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Ala., which represented the immigrants in their lawsuit.

Mr. Dees said the loss of the ranch would "send a pretty important message to those who come to the border to use violence."

The surrender of the ranch comes as the governors of Arizona and New Mexico have declared a state of emergency because of the influx of illegal immigrants and related crime along the border.

Bill Dore, a Douglas resident briefly affiliated with Ranch Rescue who is still active in the border-patrolling Minuteman Project, called the land transfer "ridiculous."

"The illegals are coming over here," Mr. Dore said. "They are getting the American property. Hell, I'd come over, too. Get some American property, make some money from the gringos."

The immigrants getting the ranch, Edwin Alfredo Mancía Gonzáles and Fátima del Socorro Leiva Medina, could not be reached for comment. Kelley Bruner, a lawyer at the law center, said they did not want to speak to the news media but were happy with the outcome.

Ms. Bruner said that Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva, who are from El Salvador but are not related, would not live at the ranch and would probably sell it. Mr. Nethercott bought the ranch in 2003 for $120,000.

Mr. Mancía, who lives in Los Angeles, and Ms. Leiva, who lives in the Dallas area, have applied for visas that are available to immigrants who are the victims of certain crimes and who cooperate with the authorities, Ms. Bruner said. She said that until a decision was made on their applications, they could stay and work in the United States on a year-to-year basis.

Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva were caught on a ranch in Hebbronville, Tex., in March 2003 by Mr. Nethercott and other members of Ranch Rescue. The two immigrants later accused Mr. Nethercott of threatening them and of hitting Mr. Mancía with a pistol, charges that Mr. Nethercott denied. The immigrants also said the group gave them cookies, water and a blanket and let them go after an hour or so.

The Salvadorans testified against Mr. Nethercott when he was tried by Texas prosecutors. The jury deadlocked on a charge of pistol-whipping but convicted Mr. Nethercott, who had previously served time in California for assault, of gun possession, which is illegal for a felon. He is now serving a five-year sentence in a Texas prison.

Mr. Mancía and Ms. Leiva also filed a lawsuit against Mr. Nethercott; Jack Foote, the founder of Ranch Rescue; and the owner of the Hebbronville ranch, Joe Sutton. The immigrants said the ordeal, in which they feared that they would be killed by the men they thought were soldiers, had left them with post-traumatic stress.

Mr. Sutton settled for $100,000. Mr. Nethercott and Mr. Foote did not defend themselves, so the judge issued default judgments of $850,000 against Mr. Nethercott and $500,000 against Mr. Foote.

Mr. Dees said Mr. Foote appeared to have no substantial assets, but Mr. Nethercott had the ranch. Shortly after the judgment, Mr. Nethercott gave the land to his sister, Robin Albitz, of Prescott, Ariz. The Southern Poverty Law Center sued the siblings, saying the transfer was fraudulent and was meant to avoid the judgment.

Ms. Albitz, a nursing assistant, signed over the land to the two immigrants last week.

"It scared the hell out of her," Margaret Pauline Nethercott, the mother of Mr. Nethercott and Ms. Albitz, said of the lawsuit. "She didn't know she had done anything illegal. We didn't know they had a judgment against my son."

This was not the first time the law center had taken property from a group on behalf of a client. In 1987, the headquarters of a Ku Klux Klan group in Alabama was given to the mother of a boy whose murder was tied to Klansmen. Property has also been taken from the Aryan Nations and the White Aryan Resistance, Mr. Dees said.

Joseph Jacobson, a lawyer in Austin who represented Mr. Nethercott in the criminal case, said the award was "a vast sum of money for a very small indignity." Mr. Jacobson said the two immigrants were trespassing on Mr. Sutton's ranch and would have been deported had the criminal charges not been filed against Mr. Nethercott.

He criticized the law center for trying to get $60,000 in bail money transferred to the immigrants. While the center said the money was Mr. Nethercott's, Mr. Jacobson said it was actually Ms. Nethercott's, who mortgaged her home to post bail for her son.

Mr. Nethercott and Mr. Foote had a falling out in 2004, and Mr. Foote left Camp Thunderbird, taking Ranch Rescue with him. Mr. Nethercott then formed the Arizona Guard, also based on his ranch.

In April, Mr. Nethercott told an Arizona television station, "We're going to come out here and close the border with machine guns." But by the end of the month, he had started his prison sentence.

Now, only remnants of Camp Thunderbird remain on his ranch, a vast expanse of hard red soil, mesquite and tumbleweed with a house and two bunkhouses. One bunkhouse has a storeroom containing some camouflage suits, sleeping bags, tarps, emergency rations, empty ammunition crates, gun parts and a chemical warfare protection suit.

In one part of the ranch, dirt is piled up to form the backdrop of a firing range. An old water tank, riddled with bullet holes, is on its side. A platform was built as an observation post on the tower that once held the water tank.

Charles Jones, who was hired as a ranch hand about a month before Mr. Nethercott went to prison, put up fences and brought in cattle to graze. He has continued to live on the property with some family members.

But now the cattle are gone, and Mr. Jones has been told that he should prepare to leave. "It makes me sick I did all this work," he said.

Ms. Nethercott said she was not sure whether her son knew that his ranch was being turned over to the immigrants, but that he would be crushed if he did.

"That's his whole life," she said of the ranch. "He'd be heartbroken if he lost it in any way, but this is the worst way."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005
/08/19/national/19ranch.html

Posted by Editor at 07:52 AM

Eric Rudolph's statement at sentencing concerning the Centennial Park bombing

Eric Rudolph's statement

The purpose of the attack? "To confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand. ...The responsibility for what took place that night in the park belongs to me and me alone."

Published on August 22, 2005 by The Atlanta Journal Constitution

Statement of Eric Rudolph

Atlanta, Ga.

Listening to the many victims of the Centennial Park bombing, I cannot began to truly understand the pain that I have inflicted upon these innocent people. Many people have asked me why I did it. Many people have asked how I did it. While I harbor no illusions that it may cause any of those people who have suffered as a result of the Centennial Park blast to understand or forgive my actions, I will try to answer these questions, and I hope that an explanation and an apology may at least give them closure if not forgiveness.

In the summer of 1996, the world converged upon Atlanta for the Olympic Games. Under the protection and auspices of the regime in Washington, millions of people came to celebrate the ideals of global socialism. Multinational corporations invested billions of dollars, and Washington organized an army of security to protect the games. The purpose of the attack on July 27th at Centennial Park was to confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand.

The plan was to force the cancellation of the Games, or at least create a state of insecurity to empty the streets around the venues and thereby eat into the vast amounts of money invested. The plan was conceived in haste and carried out with limited resources, planning and preparation — it was a monster that kept getting out of control the more I got into it. Because I could not acquire the necessary high explosives, I had to dismiss the unrealistic notion of knocking down the power grid surrounding Atlanta and thereby pulling the plug on the Olympics for their duration.

The plan that I finally settled upon was to use five separate low-tech timed explosives to be placed one at a time on successive days throughout the Olympic schedule, each preceded by a 40 to 50 minute warning call to 911, giving the location and time of detonation. My intent was to thereby allow each area to be cleared, leaving only uniformed, arms-carrying government personnel exposed to potential injury.

The attacks were to have commenced with the start of the Olympics, but due to a lack of planning this was postponed a week. I sincerely hoped to achieve my objectives without harming innocent civilians. However, I knew that the use of explosives in the park was risky and could potentially lead to a disaster wherein many civilians could be killed or wounded. There is no excuse for this. I accept full responsibility for the consequences of using this dangerous tactic.

I placed the first and largest device in Centennial Park. There was a 55 minute delay on the device. After placing the device it took approximately 10 to 15 minutes to walk to the telephone booth, where I immediately called 911. The 911 operator answered the call and acknowledged that she could understand my voice. However, as I proceeded to deliver my message, the operator terminated my call, much to my chagrin.

I had to assume that the call had been traced, and that in less than a few minutes a responder would be headed to that particular telephone booth. So I walked approximately one block and frantically sought out another telephone to make another call. I was not paying attention to the time as the minutes ticked off. From a telephone by the Days Inn, I then tried to deliver a clear message while holding my nose. The crowd was pushing in and after the first couple sentences, I was closely eyeballed by at least two individuals. This caused me to leave off the last sentence which indicated the exact location of the device. The result of all this was to produce a disaster — a disaster of my making.

After the blast and the consequent chaos, I decided to discontinue the operation. I hurried back to the vacant lot I had used as a staging area, which was east of Atlanta on I-20. Off to the right side of the interstate was what appeared to be a huge vacant lot with woods and bulldozing excavations. Amid the piles of illegal garbage dumpings, I primed and detonated the other fours devices and left Atlanta with much remorse.

The second 911 call that was made on the night of the Centennial Park bombing is the only call that has been made public. After the plea agreement in April of this year, I requested that Washington search its records for the first 911 call. The prosecution indeed found the call and finally gave us a copy of the tape-recorded call. Absent the release of this tape, thinking that only one call was made to 911 some 20 minutes before the explosion, it may have been logical to assume that the purpose of the second call was to deceive any first-responders as to the exact time of detonation. This was not my purpose. I made the calls with the purpose of clearing the park of civilians. I did not intend to deceive the first-responders. The second call was made in a frantic haste. The disparity of time between the second 911 call and the actual time of detonation was a result of my not paying attention to the time and was not deliberate.

I offer this not as an excuse for the carnage produced by my actions that night. This is merely my attempt to set the record straight. The responsibility for what took place that night in the park belongs to me and me alone. Despite my belief in the justice of my cause, despite the mishandling of the 911 call, the choice to use that particular tactic was mine, and I accept full responsibility for the consequences. I fully realize that all of this may be no consolation to the victims who suffered as a result of my actions, but I would do anything to take back that night.

To these victims, I apologize.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/me
tro/atlanta/0805/22rudolphtext.html

Posted by Editor at 05:50 PM

Rudolph apologizes for Olympic bombing

CNN: "Bomber to serve multiple life sentences for Atlanta attacks"

ATLANTA, Georgia -- Convicted serial bomber Eric Robert Rudolph apologized Monday to his victims and their families for his 1996 bombing of Centennial Olympic Park, in which one person died and more than 100 were wounded.

He did not apologize for any of his other attacks, including the bombing of a family planning clinic.

"Listening to the victims, I can't begin to understand the pain I inflicted on these innocent people," Rudolph said in his statement, which he read after 14 victims or their relatives read statements. Two other statements were read into the record.

Rudolph, wearing a dark-gray suit and blue shirt with no tie, said his goal had been to confound and anger the federal government and to force the cancellation of the games -- or at least get people to stop attending them.

"I accept full responsibility for the consequences," he said. "I would do anything to take that night back and, to those victims, I apologize."

The statement came during a hearing in which Rudolph was ordered to serve multiple sentences of life in prison for the three Atlanta-area attacks to which he has confessed.

Last month, Rudolph was sentenced to two consecutive life terms in connection with the January 1998 bombing in Birmingham, Alabama, of the New Woman All Women clinic, which performs abortions. The blast killed off-duty police officer Robert Sanderson and maimed a nurse, Emily Lyons.

Though the Atlanta sentence has long been decided, Rudolph's victims and their survivors, who filled the approximately 300 seats in the Richard B. Russell Federal Building, were permitted to make statements.

John Hawthorne, whose wife, Alice, was killed by a bomb Rudolph planted at Centennial Olympic Park, read one of them.

He began his remarks by saying Monday would have been his 18th wedding anniversary.

"I want you to see my wife as I saw her," he told Rudolph. Inside the courtroom, photographs of Alice Hawthorne were displayed.

"This day, Alice can rest," the widower said, then began to choke up. "Justice is served."

Directing his comments toward Rudolph, he added, "You are a very small man. You have a Napoleonic complex: little person, big bombs. That doesn't make you a revolutionary, but a copycat."

He told the 38-year-old prisoner, "You're a young man, and may God bless you with a long, long life."

After Rudolph delivered his apology, Hawthorne told reporters outside the courthouse that Rudolph's apology surprised and pleased him. "It sounded sincere. Whether it was or not, no one will ever know other than him, but it was at least good hearing that."

Hawthorne's stepdaughter, Fallon Stubbs, who was 14 years old when her mother was killed, also testified.

"What I expressed was that, unlike a lot of others, I do not hate him, that I forgive him," the 23-year-old woman told reporters outside the courthouse.

"I just needed him to know that, whether it matters to him or not. I just needed to say it: that the love is real. As Christians and humans, we all love each other and, through him, I've learned more tolerance for people different than me."

Asked whether she believed Rudolph's apology was sincere, she said, "I think he said what he thought should have been said."

She noted that he offered no apology for any of the other bombings. "Being apologetic for one part and not the other is not enough," she said.

The bomb that killed her 44-year-old mother detonated in the crowded downtown park during a late-night concert during the 1996 Olympics.

Two other Atlanta bombings

Rudolph has also admitted bombing Northside Family Planning Services, a clinic in the Atlanta suburb of Sandy Springs in January 1997; and, a month later, a gay nightclub, the Otherside Lounge, in Atlanta. Eleven people were wounded in those attacks.

In both of those cases, Rudolph targeted federal agents by placing second bombs nearby, set to detonate after police arrived to investigate the first explosion.

In April, he pleaded guilty to the January 1998 Birmingham clinic bombing and three other attacks.

In a statement after his guilty pleas in April, he said the Olympic bombing was meant "to confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand."

Rudolph has said the attacks were part of a guerrilla campaign against abortion, gay rights and the U.S. government.

He has said he considered the bombings a "moral duty" to stop abortions from being performed, because the U.S. government "is no longer the protector of the innocent."

Five years on the run

After a witness spotted Rudolph's truck leaving the scene of the Birmingham bombing, the survivalist and former soldier evaded capture for more than five years in the hills of North Carolina.

He eluded authorities until May 2003, when a rookie police officer in Murphy, North Carolina, caught him foraging for food in a garbage bin behind a grocery store. As part of his plea agreement, Rudolph told investigators where to find caches of explosives totaling more than 160 pounds in the nearby mountains.

He is likely to serve his time at a "supermax" federal prison in Florence, Colorado, which also houses Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, Oklahoma City bombing accomplice Terry Nichols and Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. It was also home to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh before his execution in 2001.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LA
W/08/22/rudolph.sentenced/

Posted by Editor at 05:35 PM

Politics and Judicial Activism

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

The nomination of Judge John Roberts to sit on the Supreme Court has reopened a bitter cultural divide in America, and the Senate confirmation hearings in September may exhibit more of the partisan rancor that characterized the Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas hearings.

It’s sad that so many Americans see their freedoms as dependent on a single Supreme Court justice. Federal judges were never meant to wield the tremendous power that they do in modern America. Our Founders would find it inconceivable that a handful of unelected, unaccountable federal judges can decide social policy for the entire nation.

Dozens of political pressure groups stood ready to launch an immediate public relations attack on any judge nominated by President Bush, while dozens of others stood ready to support the nominee no matter what. These groups reflect the unfortunate reality that millions of Americans unquestioningly support or oppose judicial nominees based solely on the party affiliation of the current president. Once again, blind loyalty to political parties has politicized a process that our Founders never intended to be political. When we as voters and citizens allow the nomination of judges to become political, we have only ourselves to blame for the politicization of our courts themselves. When courts become politicized, judges not surprisingly begin to act like politicians.

Judicial activism, after all, is the practice of judges ignoring the law and deciding cases based on their personal political views. With the federal judiciary focused more on legislating social policy than upholding the rule of law, Americans find themselves increasingly governed by men they did not elect and cannot remove from office.

Congress is guilty of enabling judicial activism. Just as Congress ceded far too much legislative authority to presidents throughout the 20th century, it similarly has allowed federal judges to operate wildly beyond their constitutional role. In fact, many current members of Congress apparently accept the false notion that federal court judgments are superior to congressional statutes. Unless and until Congress asserts itself by limiting federal court jurisdiction, judges will continue to act as de facto lawmakers.

The congressional power to strip federal courts of jurisdiction is plainly granted in Article III, and no constitutional amendments are required. On the contrary, any constitutional amendment addressing judicial activism would only grant legitimacy to the dangerous idea that social issues are federal matters. Giving more authority over social matters to any branch of the federal government is a mistake, because a centralized government is unlikely to reflect local sentiment for long. Both political parties are guilty of ignoring the 9th and 10th amendments, and federalizing whole areas of law that constitutionally should be left up to states. This abandonment of federalism and states’ rights paved the way for an activist federal judiciary.

The public also plays a role in the erosion of our judiciary. Since many citizens lack basic knowledge of our Constitution and federalist system, they are easily manipulated by media and academic elites who tell them that judges are the absolute and final arbiters of US law. But the Supreme Court is not supreme over the other branches of government; it is supreme only over lower federal courts. If Americans wish to be free of judicial tyranny, they must at least develop basic knowledge of the judicial role in our republican government. The present state of affairs is a direct result of our collective ignorance.

http://www.house.gov/paul/
tst/tst2005/tst081505.htm

Posted by Editor at 10:20 PM

John Roberts subverted Reagan

A low life Beltway creature

By Joseph Farah / WorldNetDaily.com

"I've seen this kind of weasel all too often skulking around the corridors of our nation's capital – undermining visionary leaders like Reagan, betraying the people who elected them to office, promoting their own personal political agendas.

"Roberts is the kind of Beltway creature I most detest. He's not man enough to stand up and tell you what he really believes. He doesn't want to be accountable for defending his positions publicly. So he conspires in the dark behind closed doors and writes memos attacking righteous men who have the courage to operate in the light."

Roberts subverted Reagan

Posted by Editor at 06:30 AM

Abortion Pill Investigated in Four California Deaths

Abortion Pill Investigated

The FDA warns patients as federal, state and L.A. County agencies try to trace deadly infections.

Health officials are investigating whether there are any links in the cases of four California women — at least two in Los Angeles County — who have died since 2003 of massive infection after taking the so-called abortion pill, RU-486, and a follow-up drug.

The state and federal probe follows an announcement last month by the Food and Drug Administration, after the June death of a Sherman Oaks woman, warning doctors and patients of the potential for serious bacterial infection under certain circumstances.

At the heart of the inquiry in California are why and how the deadly infections developed and whether more women might have been harmed.

"That's something we don't have an explanation for right now," said Dr. L. Clifford McDonald, an epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which is investigating the deaths along with the Food and Drug Administration, the California Department of Health Services and the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services.

The FDA is also working with the makers of the two drugs to see if they were contaminated with an unusual bacterium found in the bloodstream of two of the women who died. Complicating matters, neither woman showed all of the usual symptoms of an infection.

The medical mystery in California is fueling the already charged debate over the risks, rights and morality of abortion.

RU-486, prescribed under the brand name Mifeprex, was approved by the FDA in 2000 over the strong objections of many abortion opponents. In recent weeks, opponents of the RU-486 regimen have renewed their call for the passage of Holly's Law, which would take the drug off the market in the U.S., arguing that there is no way it can be administered without risk.

The proposed legislation was named after 18-year-old Holly Patterson of Livermore, Calif., the first U.S. woman to die of infection after a nonsurgical abortion in 2003. The procedure is often called a medical abortion.

"We should be just as concerned about women's safety as we are about their rights," said Wendy Wright, senior policy director for Concerned Women for America, which has been working to get the drug prohibited. "I've been stunned by the comments … that some women have to pay the price of death so that women can have abortions."

Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation, said such concerns were vastly overblown. "There has been no causal relationship established between the medical abortion and the subsequent infection," she said. "This is a very, very rare occurrence…. Childbirth is 10 to 13 times riskier than having an abortion, either medical or surgical."

Supporters also say the drug combination is the safest means of terminating an early pregnancy, pointing to the World Health Organization's recent listing of the drugs as essential to healthcare needs in developing countries.

Mifeprex, which is administered in a clinic or doctor's office, is taken orally up to 49 days after a woman becomes pregnant. Several days later, the drug misoprostol is given. The first drug blocks a hormone necessary for a pregnancy to continue; the second causes contractions of the uterus.

The drugs are different from emergency contraception, which is also controversial. The "morning after pill" is supposed to be taken within 72 hours of having sex. Sold under the name Plan B, it is not effective if pregnancy has already occurred, because it works by inhibiting or delaying ovulation.

About 460,000 women have taken Mifeprex safely in this country since it was approved, according to Danco Laboratories, the New York company that distributes the drug in the United States. Misoprostol, which is not a Danco product, has been in use since the mid-1980s. Though it was initially approved for prevention of gastric ulcers, it since has been prescribed for other purposes.

Outside California, other deaths have been reported in association with use of Mifeprex, and misoprostol. One occurred in Tennessee and five were reported outside the U.S., in Europe and Canada, say doctors familiar with the drugs. But only the Canadian death involved an infection.

So far, the CDC's McDonald said, just one thing ties California deaths together.

All the women who died, he said, took the follow-up drug, misoprostol, vaginally, instead of orally. It was an "off-label use," which is allowed but not specifically approved by the FDA on the basis of testing.

Cynthia Summers, Danco's director of marketing and public affairs, said that the company's sympathies were with the families of the women who have died but that no direct relationship between the drugs and the deaths has been established. In at least one Los Angeles County case, the coroner noted the use of the drugs but said the cause of death was undetermined.

"Physicians are free to prescribe FDA-approved drugs as they wish," Summers said. "Danco uses only the FDA-approved regimen in its labeling and promotional materials and does not promote any other regimens."

At least two of the women who died were prescribed the medications at clinics in the L.A. area. Patterson got the drugs at a clinic in the Bay Area city of Hayward. Authorities have not identified the fourth woman.

The unusual bacterium Clostridium sordellii was found in the bloodstreams of two of the four women who died of infection, Patterson and Chanelle Bryant, 22, of Pasadena. Investigators are trying to figure out whether the other two women also showed evidence of the bacterium, which McDonald said produces an effect akin to toxic shock syndrome.

"In the case of Clostridium sordellii and toxic shock in general," McDonald said, "it's a bacterium producing a toxin, which has some effect on the ability to maintain blood pressure. Clostridium sordellii produces two large toxins. Either or both of these affect the lining of blood vessels that keep fluid in the bloodstream."

Oriane Shevin, 34, of Sherman Oaks was the most recent woman to die, after she took Mifeprex and misoprostol to end a troubled pregnancy. The attorney and mother of two young children was taken by ambulance to Encino-Tarzana Regional Medical Center, where she died of sepsis, a blood infection, on June 14.

Dr. Philip Darney is a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at UC San Francisco, which has done extensive research on medical abortion, and he is not involved in the California investigation. He said that the way the drugs are administered is the likely culprit.

The FDA-approved regimen for a medical abortion is 600 milligrams of Mifeprex, the generic name of which is mifepristone, followed three days later by 400 micrograms of misoprostol. But most doctors in the United States cut the amount of mifepristone by two thirds — saying it is just as effective — and instruct women to take the misoprostol vaginally 24 hours later at home.

Darney said that European practitioners also reduce the amount of the first drug but seldom prescribe vaginal self-administration of the second. Studies have shown that taking the misoprostol vaginally makes the drug slightly more effective, so U.S. health officials will "have to decide if the slight increase in efficacy and convenience of vaginal self-administration is worth the very rare, unusual infection," Darney said.

Mifeprex, Darney said, has "gotten all the attention because it's been labeled the 'abortion pill.'… We think that an explanation for these unusual deaths — only one per 100,000 cases with this unusual organism — may be the vaginal self-administration of misoprostol under unusual circumstances. That might answer the very good question of why California, why not in Europe."

The only other known infection death involving the drugs occurred during a clinical trial in Canada in 2001. None of the European cases is believed to have been caused by infection, he said, adding that half of abortions in Scotland and one third of early abortions in France are done with the drug combination.

Lynn Bryant, whose otherwise healthy daughter Chanelle died in 2004, said that it is imperative for doctors, nurses and emergency room staff to know about the potential for serious side effects and death.

"I'd like people to know that it could be life-threatening, and also for the medical people to be aware of the dangers of the drug when [women] come in for treatment," Bryant said.

Monty Patterson, Holly Patterson's father, believes that there is no way to administer Mifeprex and misoprostol safely, in part because it is impossible to tell the difference between the desired effects of the drugs and the signs of a serious infection. Women who take the drugs, he said, are told that they should expect abdominal pain and heavier bleeding than during a normal menstrual period, results that are similar to the drugs' danger signs.

In addition, the women who had Clostridium sordellii did not run a fever, a normal side effect of an infection, according to the FDA.

"That's a real issue where a woman, a young woman, has to figure out if she's beyond these so-called normal side effects … to serious adverse events," said Patterson, who has spent the last 22 months advocating against Mifeprex. "You have to figure it out, be able to call for help…. I feel the drug is not safe. There are problems. I feel a lot of these problems have not been reported."

Reporting deaths and side effects of the drug is voluntary for doctors, although it is a requirement for drug makers. Opponents of the drug believe that doctors are loath to report bad outcomes in abortion cases, making the number of problems far greater than the public knows. The FDA estimates that, in general, only about 10% of problems with drugs are reported.

Part of the investigation is a search for other deaths and additional ill effects from the drug combination.

"It may be that we've found all there are," McDonald said. "We don't know…. Until we've tried to draw the circle around the true number of cases, we can't get a sense of what the risk involved is."

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

History of RU-486

The nonsurgical abortion drug has been controversial since it was created by French researchers a generation ago. The Food and Drug Administration recently launched an investigation into the drug regimen.

1980 — Researchers at Roussel Uclaf synthesize a drug that blocks the hormone needed to sustain pregnancy. Its generic name is mifepristone.

1983 — The Population Council, a nonprofit health research organization, gets FDA approval to test mifepristone in the U.S., and more than 300 women are given the drug during studies at USC.

1989 — Mifepristone becomes available in France, after extensive protests from anti-abortion groups.

1991 — Mifepristone is approved for use in the United Kingdom. 1993 — President Clinton directs the Department of Health and Human Services to promote the testing, licensing and manufacture of mifepristone in the U.S.

2000 — The FDA approves mifepristone in September. Two months later, Danco Laboratories begins distribution of the drug under the brand name Mifeprex.

2001 — Brenda Vise, 38, of Chattanooga, Tenn., dies of a ruptured ectopic pregnancy after taking the drug combination. A Canadian woman dies of infection after that country's drug trials.

2003 — Holly Patterson, 18, of Livermore, Calif., dies of a blood infection after a medical abortion. A bill to establish Holly's Law, to take Mifeprex off the market and review its safety, is introduced in Congress.

2004 — Chanelle Bryant, 22, of Pasadena, dies of infection after a medical abortion.

2005 — Oriane Shevin, 34, Sherman Oaks, dies of infection after a medical abortion. The FDA sends out a public health advisory warning of the danger of infection when using Mifeprex and misoprostol. Calls resume for the passage of Holly's Law.

*

Sources: The Population Council, Los Angeles County coroner's office, Times research

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-aborti
on15aug15,0,5805155.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Posted by Editor at 05:24 AM

Gun Owners of America ALERT!

More Calls Needed to the House of Representatives -- Help Rep. Musgrave strip ALL gun control language from lawsuit protection bill

ACTION: Please ask your Representative to sign onto the Musgrave letter opposing the anti-gun amendments in S. 397. And then, forward this alert to your pro-gun friends and family. Even if you have already contacted your Rep., please consider doing so again. Rep. Musgrave needs a huge outpouring of support if she is to convince the House leadership that they should push H.R. 800, rather than just taking the Senate version at face value.

You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative a pre-written e-mail message such as the one below.

Or, you can call your Representative toll-free at 877-762-8762.

--- Pre-written letter ---

Dear Representative:

As you know, the Senate recently passed much-needed lawsuit protection for the gun industry (S. 397). But this bill passed with some unwanted baggage -- specifically, two amendments that chip away at the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.

One amendment imposes a handgun tax and paves the way for future requirements that gun owners lock up their guns, thus rendering them unavailable for self-defense. The second provision -- the armor piercing ammunition language -- would also pave the way for future restrictions, as explained in detail at www.gunowners.org/a081105.htm on the Gun Owners of America website.

For these reasons, I urge you to sign onto a letter being circulated by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave which deals with real efforts to gain lawsuit protection for gun makers and gun dealers, without endangering ordinary gun owners.

The letter asks the House leadership to push H.R. 800, a lawsuit protection bill that contains no gun control, rather than its Senate counterpart. H.R. 800 has been well received in the House, as it currently has 257 cosponsors.

America deserves a CLEAN bill which offers real protection for gun makers and dealers. Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Posted by Editor at 05:53 PM

Conservatives Withhold Support

Supreme Court Politics

Conservatives Withhold Support
Roberts’ Assistance To Homosexual Activists In Key Supreme Court Case Should Cause Conservatives To Withhold Support Pending Further Information
The Conservative Caucus
Howard Phillips: John Glover Roberts, Jr., George W. Bush’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, is no Antonin Scalia. It appears he is more like an Anthony Kennedy. As reported in the Los Angeles Times: Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts, Jr. worked behind the scenes for a coalition of gay-rights activists, and his legal expertise helped them persuade the Supreme Court to issue a landmark 1996 ruling protecting people against discrimination because of their sexual orientation. There are several reasons for conservatives, Christians, and Constitutionalists generally to be troubled by the voluntary assistance provided to the homosexual activists by Mr. Roberts.

Anohter Group Opposes Roberts Over 'Gay' Case
WASHINGTON -- A conservative group in Virginia said yesterday that it would oppose the confirmation of John G. Roberts Jr. as a Supreme Court justice because of his work in the reversal of a Colorado referendum result on gays. The stance by the group, Public Advocate of the United States, which describes itself as a pro-family organization, puts it in opposition to conservative groups that have endorsed Roberts. A number of liberal groups oppose President Bush's nominee.

Public Advocate to Withdraw Roberts Support
WASHINGTON-- Public Advocate President Eugene Delgaudio will announce on Wednesday morning, August 10, 2005 at 11:00 AM in front of the Supreme Court that Public Advocate of the United States, a Virginia based national pro-family group is withdrawing its support for Judge John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court. The move comes as a result of Roberts' support for the radical homosexual lobby in the 1996 Supreme Court case Romer v. Evans, which overturned a pro-family law passed by the citizens of Colorado in an appalling act of judicial activism.

Roberts Papers Being Delayed
Thrown on the defensive by recent revelations about Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr.'s legal work, White House aides are delaying the release of tens of thousands of documents from the Reagan administration to give themselves time to find any new surprises before they are turned into political ammunition. Before Roberts's July 19 selection by President Bush, there was no comprehensive effort to examine the voluminous paper trail from his previous tours as an important legal and political hand under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, administration officials said.

The Hill: Left group refine plans on Roberts
Most members of the liberal coalition on judges, including People for the American Way, have not yet announced whether they will support or oppose Roberts’s nomination. NARAL Pro-Choice America, an abortion-rights group, is the notable exception. It firmly opposes Roberts and today will start a two-week national cable-television advertising campaign criticizing his participation in the Bray case.

August 09, 2005

White House: Roberts does not oppose Roe
American View” Analysis of Bush Nominee John Roberts
On this same program, Michael Anthony Peroutka and and John Lofton report how a White House press aide called MSNBC talk show host Joe Scarborough to make it clear that Roberts does NOT want to overturn Roe v. Wade. They also refute several specific pro-Roberts statements made by various Christian “leaders” and organizations.

No on Roberts
The Los Angeles Times broke the story that Roberts had volunteered his services – pro bono – to help prepare a landmark homosexual activist case to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. The 1996 Romer vs. Evans case produced what the homosexual activists considered, at the time, its most significant legal victory, paving the way for an even bigger one – Lawrence vs. Texas, the Supreme Court ruling that effectively overturned all laws prohibiting sodomy in the United States.

Abortion group presses Republican centrists on Roberts
NARAL Pro-Choice America, the nation's leading abortion rights advocacy group, will go on the air in Maine and Rhode Island Wednesday, and nationally on CNN and Fox News, with a two-week, $500,000 television ad purchase which accuses Supreme Court nominee John Roberts of being a judge "whose ideology leads him to excuse violence against other Americans." The targets of the ad appear to be two Republican senators who are running for reelection next year: Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, whom NARAL has already endorsed, and Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. The ad assails Roberts for the legal brief he filed in Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, a 1993 case, in which he said the Civil Rights Act of 1871 did not apply to violent abortion protestors, but that state remedies were adequate to punish and deter them. The Supreme Court, in a 6-to-3 decision, agreed with Roberts's view.

August 06, 2005

Uneasy conservatives sticking with Roberts
Report of his aid to sodomites raises concerns
Some conservative Christian backers of John Roberts are expressing unease about a report that President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court donated his time to homosexual activists, but none have withdrawn support. "I'm not concerned about it at all," Jay Sekulow, the White House's point man for rallying faith-based conservatives behind Roberts, told WorldNetDaily.

GOP leader calls for swift confirmation of Roberts
PITTSBURGH -- The head of the Republican Party on Friday faulted some Democrats and liberals who want to turn "a judicial confirmation into a political campaign" and called for swift Senate confirmation of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, used an address at the organization's annual summer meeting to praise President Bush's domestic record and his selection of Roberts, criticize judicial activism and focus on the party's outreach to black and Hispanic voters.

Roberts Touted to Pro-Abortion, Pro-Sodomite ABA
CHICAGO -- Supreme Court nominee John Roberts skipped the American Bar Association's yearly meeting, but big-name conservatives like Kenneth Starr and Theodore Olson were there to promote his credentials. Roberts' nomination to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is a watershed for lawyers. And with Senate confirmation hearings just a month away, he was the inescapable subject at the meeting of the country's largest lawyers group. Top conservatives, from Starr and Olson to Reagan administration Attorney General Edwin Meese and Federalist Society leader Leonard Leo, were attending the meeting and serving as unofficial ambassadors on Roberts' behalf.

Justice Sunday II - God Save the
United States and this Honorable Court
Washington, D.C. -- Two Rivers Baptist Church in Nashville, Tennessee will host Family Research Council's simulcast television program, "Justice Sunday II - God Save the United States and this Honorable Court" Sunday, August 14. Justice Sunday II, the follow-up to "Justice Sunday - Stopping the Filibuster Against People of Faith," will broadcast live in churches across the nation in addition to being carried on hundreds of radio stations, via satellite and webcast on www.justicesunday.com.

Judge Roy Moore for Supreme Court
Conservatives have gone into ecstatic raptures over Judge John G. Roberts, President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court, on the mere basis of what others have said about him. This is, pretty much, because What Others Have Said About Him is all that anyone truly knows. Conservative radio talk show host Sean Hannity, who seems to harbor an instinctual compulsion to embrace any move President Bush makes, has wrapped his arms around Roberts and said on his radio show that Bush must have made the right decision inasmuch as he has a history of appointing conservatives to high positions, such as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice (who describes herself as "mildly pro-choice").

August 04, 2005

Jay Sekulow Says His Job To Get Bush Nominees Confirmed
In a recent interview on Fox TV”s “Hannity & Colmes” program, Mr. Sekulow told how his organization had sent out 850,000 emails that day to shape public opinion concerning the next Supreme Court nominee. He said they were on radio and TV all day. He said: “Our side is motivated.” He predicted the Supreme Court nominee debate would be “absolutely fierce.”

Senate Democrats question Roberts' pledge
WASHINGTON -- Democrats plan to use confirmation hearings to question John Roberts about his pledge to follow established legal rulings, saying his record as a government lawyer creates doubts about his commitment to privacy rights, particularly abortion, if he gets a seat on the Supreme Court. Roberts' response to a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire about "judicial activism" provides some hope but "also raises many questions," said New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, one of eight Democrats on the committee that will begin considering Roberts' nomination Sept. 6.

Supreme Nonsense
Last week there was an initial report that Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts was asked what he would do if the law required a ruling that his church considers immoral. As the news was first reported Judge Roberts was said to have responded by saying that he would have to recuse himself from a case where a law required a ruling that his church considered immoral. Since that time the Democratic Senator’s office that reported this exchange has backed away from the initial report.

August 03, 2005

Robertson/Sekulow Telemarketer Says, Falsely, John Roberts
Against Partial-Birth Abortion, Homosexual Marriage
The nice lady on the phone is telling me, with great certitude, that Bush Supreme Court nominee John Roberts “is against the partial-birth abortion, and he is against gay marriage,” and this is why a Christian should support him. The nice lady works for “InfoCision,” a Christian call center that is gathering petitions supporting Roberts for Pat Robertson’s “American Center For Law & Justice” (ACLJ) whose Chief Counsel is Jay Sekulow.

Roberts Says He'll Respect Settled Law
WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court nominee John Roberts is pledging to respect settled law if confirmed. Roberts said precedent is important in "promoting the stability of the legal system." The comments were part of a questionnaire Roberts filled out for the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee released about 100 pages of his responses on Tuesday. His views are considered critical to gauging his position on overturning the landmark decision legalizing abortion.

Documents reveal Roberts' wealth, philosophy
WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court nominee John Roberts is worth more than $6 million, according to Senate Judiciary Committee documents. A 67-page questionnaire and 16-page financial disclosure was submitted to the panel that will begin confirmation hearings on his nomination Sept. 6. Roberts offered new insights into his personal finances, his judicial philosophy and the way President Bush went about selecting him for the high court. The documents were released Tuesday.

Catholic Justice?
Quit tiptoeing around John Roberts' faith
Everybody seems to have agreed to tiptoe around the report that Judge John G. Roberts said he would recuse himself in a case where the law required a ruling that the Catholic Church might consider immoral. According to Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University, the judge gave this answer in a private meeting with Sen. Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., who is the Senate minority whip. Durbin told Turley that when asked the question, Roberts looked taken aback and paused for a long time before giving his reply.

Confirmation Hearings Set To Begin Sept. 6
A bipartisan group of Senate leaders on Friday announced that confirmation hearings on Judge John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court will begin Sept 6, when the Senate returns from its August recess, the... Los Angeles Times reports. According to an agreement reached by Senate leaders, Senate Judiciary Committee members will have until Sept. 12 to submit all questions to Roberts, committee Chair Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said in a speech on the Senate floor.

August 01, 2005

American View" Program Continues Analysis of Bush Nominee John Roberts --- Hear It Now

Click on 16: Hear it now

On this same program, we discuss why the most important question a judicial nominee can be asked is:

"Do you believe in the God of the Bible and will you obey His Law?"

Because this John Roberts/Supreme Court issue is so important, and because there has been a massive media campaign of disinformation about him being, supposedly, a conservative, we are, again, offering this show.

Catholic Judges and a Higher Authority
It's interesting to note that Catholic judges who abide by Roe vs. Wade — or say they will — have been bystanders in the recent debate over potential conflicts between a public official's religious beliefs about abortion and his official duties. But that is changing with the Supreme Court nomination of John G. Roberts Jr., who, if confirmed, would be the fourth Catholic on the Rehnquist court. According to a column on this page by Jonathan Turley, Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois asked Roberts how he would react if the law required a ruling that the church considers immoral. Roberts reportedly replied that he probably would have to recuse himself. That exchange has been denied by Durbin, but whether it happened or not, the report has unleashed a furor over what trumps what for a sitting judge, faith or law?

Confusion persists about Roberts and abortion
Washington -- Protesters from both sides of the abortion debate faced off outside a Northwest D.C. Planned Parenthood clinic with competing messages for Capitol Hill. Some 60 demonstrators carried signs and chanted slogans meant for Congress as it prepares for Judge John Roberts' Supreme Court confirmation hearings in the fall. Roberts has not publicly stated his views on abortion,[?] but has previously called for overturning Roe-versus-Wade, the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Brian Kim from the anti-abortion group Bound-Four-Life told WJLA that the nomination of Roberts shows the tide is turning against legal abortions in the U.S.

Religious Right's Blind Praise for
John Roberts Should Sicken Christians
Why is the "Religious Right" so quick to praise the nomination of John Roberts in spite of how little we know of him, how evil Bush's previous nominations have been, AND Roberts' own admission that he'll support Roe v. Wade as "settled law"? Consider these quotes from Christian leaders:

Pray tell Mr. Perkins, have Scalia and/or Thomas ever referred to Roe v. Wade as "settled law"? I highly doubt it.

Senators debate limits of what Roberts must reveal
WASHINGTON -- Herb Kohl had a "great conversation" when he met privately with Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. But when it was over, the Senate Democrat and member of the Judiciary Committee realized how little Roberts had revealed of himself. Democrats don't all agree among themselves about what questions demand answers. But some say they just want to know what President Bush presumably knows - what Roberts' judicial philosophy is and how he is likely to approach the major questions before the court.

Posted by Editor at 08:29 AM

White House: Roberts does not oppose Roe

Supreme Court Politics

White House: Roberts 'does not oppose Roe'
“American View” Analysis of Bush Nominee John Roberts
On this same program, Michael Anthony Peroutka and and John Lofton report how a White House press aide called MSNBC talk show host Joe Scarborough to make it clear that Roberts does NOT want to overturn Roe v. Wade. They also refute several specific pro-Roberts statements made by various Christian “leaders” and organizations.

Abortion groups presses Republican centrists on Roberts
NARAL Pro-Choice America, the nation's leading abortion rights advocacy group, will go on the air in Maine and Rhode Island Wednesday, and nationally on CNN and Fox News, with a two-week, $500,000 television ad purchase which accuses Supreme Court nominee John Roberts of being a judge "whose ideology leads him to excuse violence against other Americans." The targets of the ad appear to be two Republican senators who are running for reelection next year: Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, whom NARAL has already endorsed, and Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. The ad assails Roberts for the legal brief he filed in Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, a 1993 case, in which he said the Civil Rights Act of 1871 did not apply to violent abortion protestors, but that state remedies were adequate to punish and deter them. The Supreme Court, in a 6-to-3 decision, agreed with Roberts's view.