Terrorism is a worldwide phenomenon. It could be defined as the low-intensity warfare against the common man and the State. Terrorism in India has made us believe to coexist with virtuous path during the past decade.

What actually is terrorism-it is the spread of terror, as the name indicates. It could be spread, just by frightening the other, either by loot or killing. Terrorism at home has surpassed the latter variety, someone killing indiscriminately for pride or power. It has taken recourse to slow but sure poisoning of India by a continuous war of nerves, with our neighbour Pakistan exporting the act by training of unemployed infidels.

The objective of terrorism is to make people run out of the territory. Once terror spreads, people run away for cover thereby the perpetrator of the crime achieves the objective. This menace needs to be shelved out in Kashmir with an obvious intent of annexing Kashmir. For, if the caste Hindus flee and the ballot caste, there is no chance for a vote for India.

Terrorists have struck the bait across the state during 1990s, so much so that eighty per cent of Hindu community has fled from the scene to make home elsewhere. Such tragedy made people homeless in their own country. Now, new band of terrorists have spread hatred wings in other parts of the world. It appears the entire world has to work with constant vigil, tooth and nail, against the menace, before the orgy of destruction spree through the length and breathe of the world.

Methinks terrorism could be wiped off the scene provided the think-tank of the developed and developing world unites for the cause. No country could face the scenario and end this plan of destruction.

    How are you personally affected by this issue?

Terrorism has plagued the world since 1972 when a terrorist group in Munich, Germany killed two Israeli athletes and taking nine hostages. We see terrorism now as a daily threat after many traumatic events such as 9/11. As a citizen of the United States I am already grantee that I can be threatened by a terrorist attack such as 9/11. The reason for this is because the U.S. has earned a brutal and cold name from its many wars against countries. Not only does tiresome threaten my life but also those around as well such as my family and friends. Now with terrorists using biological agents such as anthrax, I now have to worry about tainted letters or pakcages that could have been tampered by with biological agents. I even now have the ever growing fear that my plane can be hijacked at anytime making me feel unsafe and venerable. Of course this is the goal that terrorists seek, they seek to form some sort of intimidation or make a person vulnerable. After 9/11 the U.S. took new security measures to ensure the safety of its citizens but is it at the same maybe making us too preapred. These new laws and measures to ensure our saftey can possible allow us only to see the dangerous and bad making us just as more fearful then when the terrorists attacked. This issue affects me because it not only threatens my safety and my family’s safety as well, but it also can affect my judgment and mental condition.

·         What do you think is the future of this issue in America?

There is never going to be a solution to terrorism because it will always be present in society, but we can help prevent it. Am not saying that profiling and targeting a specific group of people is right. The measures that American government has already taken has almost violated civil rights, and because it did the U.S. government created a new act called the “patriot act”, this act allowed anyone suspicious of terrorist activity to be held in prison or jail without being convicted of a crime. The patriot act violates the ninth amendment which states that citizen rights cannot be taken away by congress. This act is most likely to strike up more controversy and cause more harm then help. Also the method of profiling we use also has brought up anger with specific groups such as the Muslim people. The fight on the war on terrorism will continue forever as there is no way of completely solving. The future of terrorism is going a never ending fight against other already target countries and a continues dispute with foreign nations. We are making are selves already prone for threats as we are making accusation on innocent countries. Why fight when we know one country will win and the other will lose? This battle continues forever because both sides are determined to win.

·         In your opinion, what is the solution or greatest possibility for your issue?

The solution of terrorism is to try and come together and be united because we can’t get anything achieved with a constant of disputes between all these nations. The solution is not to profile Muslims or target places we think are terrorist headquarters because all we are doing is kicking up dirt and making more conflicts. Tighting airport security is not going to help because all it does is make us more worried what could and might happen. We have the ability to stop terrorsiom we just need to stop being over prideful and accept the fact that we can’t always be on top. The war on terrorism is a coward’s way out of it because these tourists are not facing us upfront instead there using decoys to fight. The death of Osama bin Laden was just the tip of the iceberg because there are more figure heads for the U.S. to worry about because Al-Queada is an organization that won’t fall unless a signifgant amount of them are taken out. In conclusion personally I would end all terrorism, not by profiling or bombing terrorist headquarters, I would focus making alliances to tie together the nations of the world so that we can all agree and work as a team.

“I am hopeful that we will be able to, candidly, kill this bomb maker and kill some of these other associates, because there is a dangerous process in play at the present time,” Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told “Fox News Sunday.”

The bombs, intended to be smuggled aboard an aircraft undetected and then detonated, bear the forensic signature of suspected al-Qaeda bomb maker Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri, who is believed to be hiding in Yemen, officials have said. They said a bomb obtained in a recent intelligence operation appeared to be an upgraded version of the so-called “underwear bomb” that failed to bring down a passenger jet over Detroit on Christmas Day 2009.

A bomber from the al-Qaeda affiliate in Yemen sent to blow up a US-bound airliner last month was actually a double agent who infiltrated the group and volunteered for the suicide mission, intelligence agency officials have confirmed.

Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency, working with British intelligence and the CIA, placed the operative inside al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, with the goal of convincing his handlers to give him a new type of non-metallic bomb for the mission, officials said. Western intelligence agencies have identified AQAP as among the most dangerous and determined al-Qaeda affiliates in the world, dedicated in part to attacks on the West.

The double agent arranged instead to deliver the device to US and other intelligence authorities waiting outside Yemen, the officials said. The main charge was a high-grade military explosive that “undoubtedly would have brought down an aircraft,” the New York Times reported, citing a senior US official.

Feinstein said a leak early last week on the operation to the Associated Press “is very serious.” “The leak did endanger sources and methods, and the leak I think has to be prosecuted.”

” … It gives a tip off to AQAP to be more careful about who they use as their couriers, as their bombers. … Criminal charges will go to the Department of Justice.”

Represenatative Peter King, chairman of the House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee, told CNN’s “State of the Union” the premature leak of the operation to the AP was criminal and damaging.

“The FBI has to do a full and complete investigation because this really is criminal in the literal sense of the word to leak out this type of sensitive, classified information on really almost unparalleled penetration of the enemy,” King said. “This was more secret than any operation I’m familiar with, even more secret than (the assassination of Osama) bin Laden.”

Yet “the Associated Press apparently had the entire story.” The leak put lives at risk and the operation had to be cut short, King said. “It sends a signal to countries willing to work with us that we can’t be trusted to keep a secret if in fact we are the ones who leaked it out.” “I think there was a bit of premature chest-thumping in this whole thing,” Representative Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“No national security operation ever should be used for a headline under any circumstances,” suggesting someone with ties to the intelligence community had sought political gain from the operation. Feinstein was asked if current screening technology would necessarily identify this kind of bomb on an airline passenger.

“For this particular material,” she said, “candidly, no.”

“I think Americans have to understand that this particular kind of explosive, non-metallic, is not easily detectable.” Consequently the flying public is going to have to tolerate more invasive searches, she said. “The American public has not been terribly sympathetic” to this, she said, but “it’s very important that TSA (the Transportation Security Administration)keeps up its efforts.”

As the government probes the embarrassment which on Sunday sparked protests from traders in Lahore, they are closely looking at the possibility of an Indian intelligence operative having been hoaxed by Pakistani tricksters who have been seeking to exploit India’s anxiety to prevent terror attacks from across the border.

Sources in the government said that post-26/11, conmen have been approaching Indian agencies and journalists; in one case even a politician, offering “credible information” for money.

The usual modus operandi is to offer “information”; for instance a photograph of what is claimed to be an ISI facility or a terrorist training camp at an undisclosed location deep inside Pakistan. Although the veracity of “inputs” cannot be ascertained, Indian agencies with their dire need for intelligence on terror plots are compelled not to disregard them. Confidence gained, the tricksters are in business, regularly peddling information for amounts which have increased considerably after the attack on Mumbai.

Only in this instance, the swindlers artfully raised their game by passing off photographs of the “terrorists” who had sneaked in Mumbai via the sea route and the details of their plan to target Mumbai. The Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) deemed the intelligence so sensitive and credible that it was instantly shared with the Intelligence Bureau, leading the Multiple Agency Centre to alert police in Maharashtra and Gujarat against what appeared to be an attempt to repeat 26/11. Sources don’t rule out the possibility of “sources” having been even handsomely rewarded for the information.

In the event, three of the terrorists turned out to be mobile phone traders operating from Lahore’s popular electronic market Hafeez Centre. Another member of the group is an employee with one of the shops, while the remaining one is a security guard working there.

All of them approached Lahore Police for protection after they got to know about reports in Indian media about the alert against their presence in Mumbai for a major terrorist attack.

The bungle, which has many in Pakistan gloating, has led to calls for setting up a national data base of intelligence sources who could regularly be audited for credibility. It has also underlined India’s continuing inability to access reliable real-time information on Pakistan-based terror groups who represent a major security challenge.

With no credible network of their own in Pakistan, Indian agencies are forced to depend on paid contacts, many of them smugglers and petty criminals, who move across the border and return with sensational claims for a payment. It is feared that the shadowy set could well be working for agencies in Pakistan too. In fact, many in the Indian security establishment suspect that one such double agent could be behind the May 6 fraud perpetrated on RAW.

Yet, intelligence agencies are compelled to remain engaged with the cross-border operatives who, besides being paid, are also allowed to carry on with their criminal activities. “These cross-border contacts seem to know the helplessness of our agencies, and are adept at exploiting it,” an official said.

So there is no let up in the flow of “information” from “Pakistani contacts”. Just before Republic Day this year, RAW came up with a sensational claim that over 100 Pakistan-trained terrorists had gathered at various launch pads across the international border and Line of Control, waiting for an opportunity to sneak into India. These terrorists were to target Mumbai and Delhi. Of them, some 20 were trained for underwater operations, the alert claimed. After several rounds of meetings in the security establishment, serious questions emerged about the credibility of the information, leading RAW to quietly withdaw the alert.

A similar “intelligence” industry exists, although on a much smaller scale, along the Bangladesh border too. Last year, the West Bengal police “sourced” photographs of two alleged terrorists who were planning to attack Mumbai. A detailed scrutiny revealed that the photographs were fake.

In fact, Assam police for years kept issuing alarming terror alerts based on their cross-border contacts. They have stopped doing so after an overwhelming majority of warnings turned out to be spurious.

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa was under intense pressure from India, United Kingdom and France to stop the Eelam War IV in April of 2009.

But “he did not cave in to external pressure,” Mr. Weeratunga has revealed.

Mr. Weeratunga was privy to the meetings. The Indian team, led by its then National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan, had arrived here in April, just as the Lok Sabha elections were on in India, and just before Tamil Nadu went in to vote. For different reasons, Foreign Ministers of England and France were here too, with the same agenda.

‘Violated sovereignty’

The book launch function, meant to celebrate Defence Secretary and President’s brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s contribution to the war, turned out to be an India-bashing session: India aided and abetted terrorism, and repeatedly violated Sri Lanka’s sovereignty. Its High Commissioner during the period dictated terms to Sri Lanka.

“…When the Vadamarachchi operation commenced, the Prime Minister of India at that time, Rajiv Gandhi, issued a strong statement against the operation…Sri Lanka could have been rid of terrorism [at that time, but for the] high-handed interference of the then Indian envoy, Mr. J.N. Dixit,” said Mr. Weeratunga, to an audience that comprised all top elected leaders and officials and diplomats in Sri Lanka, including President Rajapaksa and the Indian High Commissioner Ashok K. Kantha.

Sri Lanka firmly believed that if this operation had gone on, the country could have been rid of terrorism more than two decades ago. Reading from the book, Mr. Weeratunga said: “While the Vadamarachchi operation was on, the Indian Envoy Mr. J.N. Dixit had met President Jayawardene and bluntly told him that India will not stand by idly and allow Jaffna to fall into the hands of the Army, and if the military operation continued, there could be unforeseen consequences. Asked to explain what these ‘unforeseen consequences’ could be, Dixit had told Jayawardene that military aid may be given by India to the LTTE leading to the possible dismemberment of Sri Lanka.”

The two countries reached an understanding on withdrawing troops during President Asif Ali Zardari’s visit to New Delhi on April 8, ‘The Express Tribune’ quoted unnamed military and diplomatic officials as saying.

The withdrawal of troops to peacetime positions is among the first substantial overtures since the two sides resumed peace talks after a two year gap in the wake of the Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people.

A formal announcement about the withdrawal is likely when the Indian Prime Minister visits Islamabad, possibly during the latter half of this year.

“It is going to happen in September or October,” an unnamed official told the daily.

Political figures privy to the President’s day-long visit to India said the major development was a result of talks through backdoor channels, which had been active for the past couple of years.

Officials said the Indian government had mobilised troops to take wartime positions at the disputed border with Pakistan, particularly in Kashmir, immediately after terrorists launched the attacks in India’s commercial hub of Mumbai. The attacks in Mumbai were blamed on the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba.

According to experts, in a wartime scenario, the regular Army starts manning the border instead of special forces meant for protecting boundaries.

India has the Border Security Force and Pakistan has Rangers for this purpose.

Officials said Pakistan responded to the Indian move by sending troops to “concentration areas” or forward bases along the working boundary at Sialkot and some other locations.

A senior military official said that though troops were mobilised by India, there was no serious tension at the border like in 2002, after an attack on Parliament that was blamed on two Pakistan-based groups.

“There has never been an alert. Neither on our side nor on the other,” said the military official.

Defence experts said any move by India will provide Pakistan space to deploy more troops in the north of the country, where the military is busy fighting al-Qaeda and the local Taliban.

The US and other Western states fighting the insurgency in Afghanistan too want Pakistan to curb terrorists on its soil.

Besides the withdrawal of troops, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh might have other “pleasant” surprises, the report said.

Officials said “major announcements” were expected on Siachen, the glacier known as world’s highest battlefield, and the Sir Creek boundary dispute.

They said there is a possibly that both sides might agree on troop withdrawal from Siachen, where an avalanche buried 139 people at a high-altitude Pakistan Army camp on April 7.

Pakistan’s civil and military leaders, including Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, have said both countries should withdraw troops from the border to divert resources to development.

When there was an abortion clinic bombing in 2000 the left wing press was ablaze with concern about the one death due to the bombing. I too am very concerned about that death.  I counsel no one to take a life without due process no matter how righteous the cause may seem. I except here self defense and defense of someone in mortal danger because time does not permit judicial process.  Allow me to state further that if I were on a jury and a person who killed an abortionist was on trial, I would be willing to convict if the evidence pointed to guilt just the same as if they had killed a child.

Allow me to settle some confusion.  The word ‘kill’ in many versions of the Bible is translated from the Hebrew word ‘rastach’ would be far more accurately translated ‘murder’.  Most of the newer bible versions in fact use the word murder, not kill.  Remember that the KJV was translated about 1615 and is contemporary to Shakespeare’s writing which most do not understand because of the style and the shift in meanings of words in the last 400 years.

    Exod 20:13     Thou shalt not kill.    (KJV)

But I am also concerned about the deaths that occur at abortion clinics every day. The deaths that are the result of a medical procedure that is successful only if fifty percent of the patients die. These deaths are each arrived at without due process. In fact the rush to judgment that anti-death penalty persons decry when dealing with criminals has become the law of the land as we eliminate any waiting period for an abortion. We have not only taken away due process, we have even eliminated a cooling off period.

These people decry an officer shooting a suspect because the officer is judge, jury and prosecutor no matter what the circumstances. Yet in abortion, the judge, defendant, jury, and prosecutor are the woman who is seeking the abortion. The only role she does not play in the drama is that of the executioner;  the abortionist she procures. If we were to offer money to anyone but an abortionist to murder a human being, we would be guilty of a felony. Most of us could easily sit on a jury and send someone to jail for hiring a killer.  The defendant’s attorney is not present to plead the case.  Let’s get this together, nearly fifty million deaths versus one?  (Note: There have been over 1.25 million abortions each year for the last thirty nine years.  That is well over fifty million.)   And the pro-death forces get concerned when one of their accomplices, a hired killer, legal as his act may be, engaged in the slaughter of innocents dies? But do they blanch if at millions of deaths? They call evil good and good evil.

    Isa 5:20-21  20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!  21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight.    (KJV)

This was predicted by Jesus 2000 years ago. He also said that they would say, “Blessed is she who is barren.”

    Luke 23:29   For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.  (KJV)

Another View of Abortion 2/4/2000

I watched Dr. James Kennedy last Sunday and found his discussion of abortion presenting something that I have not heard from anyone else. Just as he was beginning the discussion I saw where he was going.

He likened Abortion to Slavery, in the process it is somewhat similar. I believe that we are in a critical period, one that will determine how our generation will be viewed.

There is a lot of discussion about the issue of slavery and The War of the Rebellion that started in 1861. Those who would continue slavery say that war was for state’s rights. What is the reason for their argument?  They claim it because Lincoln did not declare the Emancipation Proclamation until near the end of the war. Let us examine this premise.

The events that lead up to the war, the issues that made the conflict inevitable were all tied to the one issue of slavery. The rules for admitting new states, the Dread Scott Decision, the lengthy debates in the legislature were all centered on slavery, not state’s rights. The only issue of state’s rights was if the state could continue to allow slavery within its borders. There was no other even minor states rights issue.

And if we look at the things associated with the war we see more of the same. The soldiers in Grey were called Rebels, not states righters. The songs of the times were interesting at best. One famous one from that era has a line, “As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.” It is the well known “Battle Hymn of the Republic,” sung by the men of the Union and written to the tune of its contemporary “John Brown’s Body.” Both were the result of the times. The newspaper articles of the time were tied to the issue. It divided many.  Yes, I read period literature to discern the thought of the time, not the liberal interpretations of them formed years later by people who will lie to prove a point and who have an axe to grind.

Sure, there were those who fought for the rebellion that did so because of home ties and family. They could not go against their families. But there were many who would have looked at conflict as not their thing that fought for the Union. One example is Joshua Chandler, a College Professor, Mathematician and Theologian from Maine. He is one of the standout American citizen soldiers of all time. He had a good grasp of what the war was about, and he was a man that required a cause that was more than a political issue.

But the war brought slavery out into the open and it made it unacceptable.

And Roe v Wade may have been the watershed of abortion if we have the fortitude to make it such. Roe V Wade brought abortion out of the back alleys and placed it on the front page of the newspapers. It took it out of the back room and put it in the store front. Where it was once done in secret, it now could be done in public.

But doing it in public had a price. When it was done in a back alley, nobody but the police noticed and even they tended to call it a victimless crime. A crime where at least one of the two victims die and it is victimless! I think not!

And the price was light shed on it. When something is brought out into the light it is scrutinized.

Roe v Wade made people take a stand. You were for it or against it, there was little fence to sit on. And the fence has gotten narrower and narrower. There is so little room that even politicians, the fence sitting experts have found it difficult.  And sitting on the narrow fence is painful.

Without this exposure abortion might have gone on for years in the back rooms without being challenged. With this exposure the doctors (persons) performing the surgery had to come to work in day light and leave in day light. The clinic had to be marked so the victims could find it. And when marked the protestors could easily find it. The victims had to go there in the open.

Let’s face it, all rhetoric aside, many of the abortions before Row v Wade had to be done under reasonably safe conditions.  Few women died from the procedures.  Even under the so called safe conditions today there are women who die.  It is a surgical procedure with anesthesia and both procedures and anesthesia carry risks.

I believe this light on abortion provides us with the opportunity to rid our nation of this scourge. There are many who have left the battle, like the deserters of an army. It is time to be there. Our first duty is to prayer. “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal.” Our next duty is to seek God’s face and determine if this is where we are to enter the ranks. If He does not call you to the battle, support those in battle with your prayers and encouragement. If He does, take your place, but like a good soldier, follow the command of our leader. Let no man draw you into activity that is not Godly.  This has happened to those who have committed violent acts.

We have the opportunity with abortion that the people of the 1860’s had with slavery. It persisted for years before they were able to rid the country of the curse. Let us be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves. Let us stand firm and do His will.

And the real slaves of the abortion movement are the women they claim to serve.  They are slaves to people who put their lives at risk and hold them captive.

Planned Non-parenthood

The first abortion lie is encountered when the potential client enters the facility. She is not called a patient.  This would carry the connotation that she might be undergoing some form of medical procedure or surgery with risk to her life or health. She is a “client”, nice, tidy and clean. There is no indication of the blood-letting that will be done before she is through with the “procedure”. During it she will lose enough blood to weaken her, generally more than she would lose if she donated a pint of blood – she will feel tired for weeks, just from the physical impact of the blood loss. This is a procedure that is not without risk.  Again, if we were to call it surgery we might just elicit some emotional reaction and the woman might just change her mind. She might realize her life and ability to have children could be in jeopardy (they are) and consider the impact on the life inside her body (it is about to be snuffed out).  If she knew this she might just walk out without becoming a paying client. If this were to happen too often the clinic might just have to close its doors. This happened to Hillcrest Clinic here in York, PA and it became unprofitable and was closed by the owners. I personally believe that praying people in the community caused this demise.

A second lie is that what is growing inside the woman is nothing more than a bunch of tissue. This might wash from a physical standpoint for the early first trimester surgery, but the partial birth abortion procedure which kills a child that would be viable if delivered is not distinguished in any way by those who tout abortion as a fix-all. In this later procedure the baby is much more than a blob of tissue, it is viable outside the womb. If it were just let out into the world it would live. Maybe it could be adopted if the woman, a “higher animal” had the instinct for keeping her children alive that is inborn in the “lower animals.”

Understand, I do not condone or agree with the early first trimester procedure but all of the arguments from the pro-abortion forces in pushing this early pregnancy procedure are contradicted in the partial birth and if you claim it to be the same you impeach yourself. In early first trimester they say the fetus is not viable outside the womb, it does not feel, it is a part of the mother’s body, and it is not a separate living human. So it is OK to kill it. Let’s give them that this is the case. Partial birth FLUNKS on all counts yet they make no differentiation between the two procedures. We see the pro-abortion forces caught in their own rhetoric. They find it easy to strain on a gnat and swallow a camel.

    Matt 23:23-24

    23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

    24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

    (KJV)

Jesus tagged it well. He called those who had this myopia Blind Guides.  They claim to do good but they ignore the weightier matters of the law. The people who run and promote the abortion mills are such.  They claim to be getting someone out of a problem.  In the movie “COMA” a young woman dies during a D&C that is only necessary because the woman is pregnant with a baby that is the result of an affair.  The doctor jokes early in the procedure that he is getting the lady out of a real mess.  Although this is a piece of fiction, it poignantly displays the attitude that is held by the people who provide these services for women.

A third and bigger lie is – the procedure is safe. If all risks to the non-mother, including increased breast cancer, increased suicide, infection, anesthesia risks, bleeding and other complications are considered, even a “simple early first trimester abortion” is a real risk. Even the threat of sterility that can occur has a health risk, the drugs and procedures necessary to later conceive a child all carry risks. All too often, a woman who has undergone an abortion changes her mind AFTER the procedure and gets pregnant (if she can) later.

The next invalid argument of the feminists is as follows. If you find yourself pregnant, (as if you had nothing to do with it and one morning something miraculous had happened to create this situation) and it is not convenient to carry and birth a child at this time, abort the baby, you can have another when it is more convenient. How many women do you know who have had a failed pregnancy through no fault of their own, who have never been able to become pregnant again? (I’ll answer that, “all too many.”) Why should someone expect to abort one fetus and be entrusted by God or nature if you don’t believe in God, with another? Two significant risks of abortion are sterility and bleeding that requires drastic surgery to save the woman’s life. If the uterus is badly damaged, that surgery is called a hysterectomy, surgery that at our present level of medical expertise renders the woman permanently and totally unable to have children. We may come to a point that uterine transplants are viable, but that is not the case at this time.  The last time I checked there had been one experimental uterine transplant and it had to be removed before a pregnancy was achieved.  I am sure some day we will do it successfully but at what cost?  Will the average woman be able to afford it?  What risks will she take having the procedure? For the “fortunate ones” who contracted infections, infertility clinics are making real money on women who believed that lie when they were fifteen and now at thirty they cannot have a child without medical intervention. It is interesting that the same practitioners that kill babies with the procedures that render women less fertile then benefit from procedures that help them have babies!  Still others are less fortunate.  There is no procedure to help them have a child. The old adage was pay me now or pay me later. In abortion it is pay me now and pay me later, for the surgery now, for infertility treatments, for depression, for bareness, for breast cancer later.

The forth lie – abortion is a right. It is not a right, it is not mentioned in the constitution, EVEN THOUGH THE PRO-ABORTION people say it has existed since long before that document was written. I could understand something being called a right that did not exist when the framers wrote the document, that they would not known about but for some reason they did not include abortion in the list of rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Abortion is big business, and moreover is one of the current methods of exploitation of the females in our society. The person who controls abortion controls the body of the woman who is enslaved to the procedure.  It is an enabler for men who want free sex in that they can tell the woman, if it goes wrong you get an abortion. 

Often this exploitation of women is by other women. Abortion became a right based on a court case that was a lie. The Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal was based perjury by many of those who testified. There are more than a few people who perjured themselves to make this a reality. This certainly does not make the cause more just! Can pure water come from a well that is polluted?  Even the courts use the term, “fruit of the poisoned tree” to describe evidence improperly obtained.  If evidence can be poisoned by improper action, why is a case based on lies not likewise poisoned?

There are some in the pro-abortion forces who feel abortion must be preserved at all cost. One well known feminist leader said that if abortion were outlawed, “blood would run in the streets.” This sounds to me like a threat of armed insurrection. The right to advocate such is not protected by free speech defined constitution. Nowhere is the right to break the laws of the land protected. I suggest that these be investigated for racketeering or terrorism.

When former NOW president Molly Yard heard that the Supreme Court would review Roe v. Wade in its Webster case, she said on January 8, 1989; “We are now declaring a state of emergency for the women of America. We will not go back to illegal abortions. We aren’t going to obey the law.”

Such is the immorality of the pro-abortion forces. Such is their blindness to right and wrong. They lie, and they not only advocate disobedience of a law, they advocate ARMED and VIOLENT overthrow of the government.

The fifth lie — The people promoting abortion are good people who want to help women who have a problem. (See Molly Yard’s statement in lie 4, is she considered an example of this?) This may be true in a few cases, but there are those who have run for-profit clinics under shoddy conditions to increase profits. The state of Maryland closed several such clinics in the 80’s and Pennsylvania tightened rules on clinics  in 2011 to match those for other surgical outpatient clinics. The abortionists yelled like a stuck hog.  There are also government funded ones, clinics that get government money to exist. The abortions may not be paid directly out of taxpayer funds, but many other services that help make them viable are paid for by tax monies, the abortions are a part of the services offered. Consider these economics. If a clinic has 1000 pregnant “clients” this year and gets “X” dollars, and the director’s salary is based to some degree on the budget amount so she knows if the budget increases she gets a raise, (In government it is) is it better for the director to have 1000 or 2000 pregnant clients next year? Let’s rephrase the question, “Is it better to teach abstinence and/or good birth control so the “client” doesn’t return or is it better to have the client return in a few months with another “problem pregnancy” that increases the workload?  I think anyone can figure that out.

Lie number six — We need abortion to help a woman who is a victim of rape or incest. FINE, let’s pass the law to allow abortion only if the woman wants it and if she is a victim of rape or incest. This situation accounts for less than one percent of the million (1,000,000) abortions each year. One percent of one million is ten thousand (10,000). A million is about 3000 babies a day, ten thousand is about 30 a day. The one is big business, it is mass murder. Although I do not think I could not condone it, the other is compassion for someone in distress. I personally would settle for this decrease in the slaughter, as a temporary measure, IF IT WAS STRICTLY BASED ON A CONVICTION OF THE CRIMINAL not a lie.

Lie number seven — We need abortion to help a woman with serious medical problems terminate a pregnancy that threatens her life. Again, this is a very small percentage, far lower than the one percent above. Here I feel we must leave the decision to the advice of the doctor and the conscience of the mother. The percentage is small and every day fewer medical conditions contradict the continuation of a pregnancy. If this were really the reason the number of abortions in the US every year would be measured in hundreds, not millions.  Although these are still hard for me to accept I could not prevent one of these abortions or even pressure the woman to take grievous risks.  That must be her decision.  But ironically, many women with serious medical conditions do almost anything to carry their baby.

Lie number nine, also called by me, the big lie – If abortion is made illegal, women will be forced into the back alleys to have them and be butchered. They ignore that birth control methods and distribution are better, the number should be smaller than it was before, that is unless all of the arguments by organizations like Planned Parenthood are not correct. But it is appearing that these measures are not working and in fact the efforts of Planned Parenthood and their fellow travelers could be better be likened to pouring gasoline on a fire.  The more they spend to reduce teen pregnancies the worse the numbers get.  First, pregnancy prevention devices and medications have to be deployed if they are to be effective.  Second, there is one sure way of not getting pregnant; not have intercourse.  But for these people that concept is so foreign it isn’t considered.  After all, there are choices.  Women and men can decide to not have sex outside marriage which is the root cause of most unwanted pregnancies.  They can decide to deploy birth control by taking pills, using condoms, foam, etc.

But they say that millions (thousands, tens of thousands, depending on who is talking) of women would die each year at the hands of the illegal abortionists. Come on, we are having only a million and a quarter abortions a year with abortion being legal. Will we have more abortions if it is illegal?  I think that what we are hearing is rhetoric. We have no statistics on how many died of botched abortions before Roe vs. Wade and we don’t not know how many die today.  Why?  Because the death certificate does not show complications of abortion, it shows hemorrhage, infection, anesthesia reaction, heart failure, or suicide. This is done to protect the illusion that abortion is legal and safe and to protect the abortionist.  There is no statistic on infertility and sterility that point to abortion because a woman’s right to have an abortion is private and it is protected from being passed to develop statistics. The pro-abortion crowd has made it impossible to know how many they have maimed by laws that prohibit release of information that would provide these crucial statistics. If they did not believe the numbers to be bad, why do they fight their release?

Finally, the tens of thousands of deaths argument has one killer problem.  Let’s suppose that there were ten thousand deaths of women to illegal abortions.  That would mean that for the ten years between fifteen and twenty five there would be roughly a thousand deaths a year per year of age in the years before Row V Wade, that is before 1973.  And more so, between 1972 and 1975 there should be a reduction in deaths of women in those ages.  There isn’t.  The death rate in the US for women in the 15 to 25 age range is low enough that even a change of 100 would have been noticeable.   Another lie. 

Let me ask the question, if we have to lie to preserve something, is it valid?

Let me give you some Abortion Definitions

Successful surgery – A procedure during which exactly one half of the patients die.

Therapeutic Abortion – One done for the convenience of the mother and to enhance the financial future of the doctor.

Using explosives and assorted guns, the gunmen attacked the market around 6p.m.

The attack was believed to be in revenge for an incident earlier in the day, when traders fought off a gang which tried to rob the market. Police and residents said a member of the gang was caught and doused in petrol before a tyre was placed around his neck and he was burnt to death.

Residents described a terrifying scene at the market usually crowded with traders, with scores of cattle burnt, the market razed and dozens of people killed.

A resident said firefighters were at the scene on Thursday morning searching wells out of fears that residents had fallen in and drowned while trying to flee.

Residents crowded a local hospital to determine if their relatives were among the dead.

The gang had sought to use a well-known technique of causing panic at markets and forcing traders to flee so that they could steal their goods.

The spokesman for the state police command, Mr. Toyin Gbadegeshin, confirmed the incident, saying, “At 18.00 hours, gunmen using assorted rifles and explosive devices attacked the cattle market in Potiskum.

“Over 20 explosive devices and assorted guns were used in the attack on the market.

“As at now, we cannot ascertain the number of casualties but there were deaths and some of those wounded are receiving treatment.”

Gbadegeshin said the police recovered one AK-47 rifle from the scene of the attack.

“Thirty-four bodies were deposited at the hospital,” the emergency official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak publicly. He said the toll was likely to be more than 50 dead because families were also burying relatives’ bodies without bringing them to the hospital while about 22 other people were being treated for injuries.

Also on Wednesday, unknown gunmen killed a police corporal at Kawo in Nasarawa Local Government Area of Kano State.

An eyewitness told the News Agency of Nigeria in Kano on Thursday that the incident happened at 8p.m when the gunmen trailed the policeman to his residence.

“They trailed him to his house on a motorcycle around 8p.m and shot him dead in front of his house,” the source said.

When contacted, the Police Public Relations Officer, Mr. Magaji Majiya, confirmed the incident.

Majiya said the gunmen trailed the deceased to his house and killed him, adding that investigation into the case had since commenced.

Wednesday’s attacks were the latest in a string of killings and bombings in parts of the North in the past few days.

Last Thursday, Boko Haram attacked the Abuja office of ThisDay Newspapers and the offices of ThisDay, Sun and Moment newspapers in Kaduna, killing eight persons.

On Sunday, two  professors – Jerome Ayodele and Andrew Leo Ogbonyomi –  and 13 other Christian worshippers were killed in coordinated attacks at the Bayero University, Kano. Also killed in the attacks was a senior non-accademic member of staff, Mr. Sylvester Adah.

The attacks took place at the Indoor Sports Hall, where the Catholic faithful in the university had their Sunday mass, and an open air theatre where Protestants worshipped.

Also on Sunday, Boko Haram gunmen killed a pastor and some worshippers at a church in Maiduguri.

On Monday, a suicide bomber attacked the convoy of the Taraba State Commissioner of Police, Mr. Mamman Sule, as he made his way to the office in the state capital, Jalingo.

Kalido Sheikh Mohammed, accused as the mastermind of terrorist attacks on the United States of 11 September 2001., and his four accomplices, Valid bin Attaché, Ramzi Binalsiba, Ali al-Aziz and Ahmed al-Hodsavi, will be transferred to trial before a military commission in  Guanatanamo prison based in Cuba, said the U.S. attorney General Eric Holder.

Sheikh Mohammed admitted that he was “brain” of terrorist attacks in the U.S. in the 11th September 2001.

The public prosecutor charged five men suspected of terrorism, kidnapping, conspiracy, murder and destruction of property.

The death penalty is required for all five of them.

Obama administration’s decision represents a complete turnaround from earlier plans that the trial should be helded in civilian federal court in New York, where the indictment was filed under seal on 14 of December 2009.
U.S. President Barack Obama argued that the trial is pending before the civil court in Manhattan, but the Republicans in Congress thwarted this proposal.
  
One of the biggest critics of the military court system, and a former prosecutor Morris Davis believes that history will show that trial like this is a mistake.

The trial caused a lot of attention and more than 200 stakeholders including 60 journalists will attend it.

The attacks with hijacked passenger planes on the Twin Towers of the WTC in New York and the Pentagon building near Washington, killed nearly 3000 people.

A year after the death of Osama bin Laden want the United States will this week publish records that were seized from the hideout in the use of Al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan. The documents complaining bin Laden, among other things, that his organization “disaster after disaster” suffered, said the most important anti-terrorism adviser to the U.S. Government, John Brennan. The documents should be released in the coming days on the website of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

Before his death, was the Al-Qaeda leader thought about a new name for his group to get them back to make it more attractive, said Brennan. Bin Laden had complained that the U.S. is now no longer the “war on terror” and spoke of fewer Muslims felt insulted. His followers of al-Qaeda leader was asked to avoid the Pakistani tribal areas, where they had to fear U.S. aerial surveillance and bombardments.

Drones weakened group

A year after the death of bin Laden’s Al Qaeda drew Brennan of the image of a weak organization that will be defeated in the course of this decade. Al-Qaeda suffered among others by U.S. drone attacks, “bad” losses and was only a “shadow of its former self,” said the anti-terrorism expert.

The core of the Al Qaeda leadership would soon be “not relevant”. Due to the ongoing persecution in Pakistan’s tribal areas, Al Qaeda has fewer places to educate their children. The recruitment of new members she experienced increasingly difficult. “The morale is bad,” concluded Brennan.

Whether by the tactics of the U.S. government in the fight against terrorism of Al-Qaeda nearly impossible to plan large-scale, potentially catastrophic attacks and to perpetrate. “Al-Qaeda has only a handful of capable leaders and officials and in view of the ongoing persecution of their pressure on the road to destruction.”

Brennan also stressed, consider the threat to the world from terrorists. “While the core of Al-Qaeda is tottering, he tries to transfer his murderous mission to his followers and branches,” warned the expert. Troubling example is the merger of Al-Qaeda with the Islamist Shebab militia in Somalia. The group Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) ask remains a threat

Since the attacks of 11 September 2001 on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, with nearly 3,000 dead Bin Laden, public enemy number one in the United States. Nearly a decade ago, he could hide until the U.S. intelligence tracked down him and his family in Pakistan’s Abbottabad. A U.S. special forces stormed the property in the night of 2 May 2011 and shot the Al-Qaeda leader.