Neil Horsley

0 views
Skip to first unread message

seh...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/9/98
to
In article <36471C18...@one.net>,
kbrauer <kbr...@one.net> wrote:
<a href="http://www.christiangallery.com/atrocity/index.html">The
> Nuremberg Files</a>
> Hey, check out this website that has all the prochoicers britches in
> a bunch. Notice, it deals with violence against abortionists
> as a present fact, but does not advocate it.

Actually, if you see the link http://www.christiangallery.com/creator.html,
you will see that Horsely does advocate violence. Paul Hill is a hero
to this guy. Michael Bray is also recognized.

> Neil Horsley is
> collecting data on abortionists in case it ever becomes illegal so the
> abortion docs can be tried for crimes against humanity. And, apparently
> he is scaring the **** out of them too. He's getting a lot of press.

I wish that a Consistent-life group were collecting the data instead.

> A lot of people want to eliminate this kind of free speech. It
> is my theory that eliminating the ability of prolifers to speak and
> demonstrate against abortion will lead to civil war.
> Whaddaya think??

It could well lead to civil war... but the rest of this guy's site
says a lot more about what the abortion supporters are so angry about
than that one page. Horsley is pro-violence.

-S

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

coo...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/9/98
to
How could they be charged with a crime after the act becomes illegalAnd with
what would the doctors be charged - murder? For performing abortions when
they were legal? And on an indignant Canadian note: if it does become illegal
in the United States, how does the United States constitute "humanity"?

I want to play devil's advocate: The Christian Gallery does more to harm than
to help the pro-life movement, and the assumption that the list was created
for some sort of kangaroo high court of morals is preposterous. That list is
maintained exclusively to intimidate doctors who provide abortions, and to
try to coerce those doctors to stop what is a perfectly legal practice. How
do you eplain the names of the clinic workers? Worse still, why does the list
include family members? FAMILY MEMBERS!

Who are the worse? Abortionists for providing an abhorrant but perfectly legal
service? Or the radical "pro-life" side, for attempting to coerce someone into
what is believed to be a "higher moral ground" by extortion through fear? If I
saw my family's names listed on an otherwise blank website, I'd be scared. And
extortion, unlike abortion, is not legal.

I have received far too many letters from people accusing the pro-life side of
being in wide support of scare tactics and murders. I even received an
otherwise incomprehensible letter from someone who thought I was pro-choice,
and that I was blanketly accusing pro-lifers of barbaric acts because I have
been so outwardly critical of the extreme pro-life movement.

I do not like being equated with a group of heathens so utterly monomaniacal
that they feel that any action is justifiable in the struggle to make
abortion illegal. Doctors who act within the law are immoral murderers, while
pro-lifers who approve of snipers and extortive tactics are moral?

--
http://cooties.netinc.ca/op
http://cooties.netinc.ca/spice30

kbrauer

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to

coo...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> How could they be charged with a crime after the act becomes illegalAnd with
> what would the doctors be charged - murder? For performing abortions when
> they were legal?

Heehee, our EPA can penalize people for doing things legally long ago that are now
illegal. They fine people into bankruptcy for cleanups of old (formerly legal)
waste all the time. Also, Bill Clinton taxed us retroactively with his first big
increase in the first term. We're getting used to retroactive injustice.

> And on an indignant Canadian note: if it does become illegal
> in the United States, how does the United States constitute

???

> "humanity"?

???

>
> I want to play devil's advocate: The Christian Gallery does more to harm than
> to help the pro-life movement, and the assumption that the list was created
> for some sort of kangaroo high court of morals is preposterous. That list is
> maintained exclusively to intimidate doctors who provide abortions, and to
> try to coerce those doctors to stop what is a perfectly legal practice. How
> do you eplain the names of the clinic workers? Worse still, why does the list
> include family members? FAMILY MEMBERS!
>

hehe, we all know that he has the site up there to intimidate the abortionists and
make them paranoid that they are being judged. When a person becomes famous for
any reason, info about them and their families is publicized in the media. I
guess that abortion is a gross reason for a person to become a public figure, huh?

> Who are the worse? Abortionists for providing an abhorrant but perfectly legal
> service? Or the radical "pro-life" side, for attempting to coerce someone into
> what is believed to be a "higher moral ground" by extortion through fear? If I
> saw my family's names listed on an otherwise blank website, I'd be scared. And
> extortion, unlike abortion, is not legal.
>

I don't think this qualifies as extortion, since Horsley will not profit in any
tangible way.

>
> I have received far too many letters from people accusing the pro-life side of
> being in wide support of scare tactics and murders. I even received an
> otherwise incomprehensible letter from someone who thought I was pro-choice,
> and that I was blanketly accusing pro-lifers of barbaric acts because I have
> been so outwardly critical of the extreme pro-life movement.
>

Yeah, it's a bummer. As of 1996 I was out about 50,000 bucks a year in salary
due to proaborts deciding that I couldn't practice pharmacy unless I abort. (Do
you think that is extortion? ) Also, it has made me a little bit of a public
figure, and that leads to a fair amount of opposition too.

>
> I do not like being equated with a group of heathens so utterly monomaniacal
> that they feel that any action is justifiable in the struggle to make
> abortion illegal. Doctors who act within the law are immoral murderers, while
> pro-lifers who approve of snipers and extortive tactics are moral?
>

That's the thing. The Nuremburg site does not advocate violence. Horsley does an
amazing job of walking that fine line and really sending the media up a wall. He
is a really interesting guy to watch. When the media publicizes his site, it
serves his purposes. Also, you have to admit that with FACE and RICO laws, the
abortionists have stripped prolifers of a lot rights of free speech and assembly.
What do you think will happen when prolifers have no legal way left to oppose
abortion??

The media serves my purposes with their hysteria, by scaring all the med students
away from abortion practice. Abortion is aborting itself ;-) Kinda cool huh???

Hoosier Pharmer

Hoosier Pharmer's Home http://w3.one.net/~kbrauer/html%20files
Pharmacist's Rant http://w3.one.net/~kbrauer/html%20files/pharmacistsrant.htm

Alan Keyes! What a guy! http://www.keyes2000.org

sti...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to
While we're on the subject of violence in the abortion debate, I just recieved
an e-mail alert form the National Coalition for Life and Peace -- check it out
at http://www.prolife.org -- that some pro-life organizations got letters
threatening to expose them to anthrax. Any thoughts?

coo...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to
In article <729cim$a21$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
sti...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> ...that some pro-life organizations got letters

> threatening to expose them to anthrax. Any thoughts?

That happened here, yesterday (ie Canada). There were also some more abortion
clinics warned of anthrax exposure, and clinics across the country are closed
this week. We haven't had the bombings the US has had, but the death threats
and mail threats (and shootings) have been mostly Canadian-based.

I think the pro-life anthrax warnings you mention are simply a copy-cat, some
lonely guy someplace who is watching the news and impressed with the fear he
can put into people. I wouldn't want to have received on, but I doubt whether
it's valid.

Henry Morgentaller (refered to in Canada as "an abortion pioneer"...), is
opening a new clinic in the east on Friday, and stating that he won't be
intimidated by scare tactics.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------

caro...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to

> While we're on the subject of violence in the abortion debate, I just recieved
> an e-mail alert form the National Coalition for Life and Peace -- check it out

> at http://www.prolife.org -- that some pro-life organizations got letters


> threatening to expose them to anthrax. Any thoughts?

I receibed that too. Are any of the media outlets picking it up??

--

http://www.gargaro.com
http://www.rightgrrl.com

kbrauer

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to

coo...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> In article <729cim$a21$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> sti...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> > ...that some pro-life organizations got letters


> > threatening to expose them to anthrax. Any thoughts?
>

> That happened here, yesterday (ie Canada). There were also some more abortion
> clinics warned of anthrax exposure, and clinics across the country are closed
> this week. We haven't had the bombings the US has had, but the death threats
> and mail threats (and shootings) have been mostly Canadian-based.
>
> I think the pro-life anthrax warnings you mention are simply a copy-cat, some
> lonely guy someplace who is watching the news and impressed with the fear he
> can put into people. I wouldn't want to have received on, but I doubt whether
> it's valid.
>

Of course attacks on prolifers will NOT make news!
Can you imagine, the perps are going to be penalized under the RICO laws as well
as anti terrorism laws.
Could the same people be doing all of it????

>
> Henry Morgentaller (refered to in Canada as "an abortion pioneer"...), is
> opening a new clinic in the east on Friday, and stating that he won't be
> intimidated by scare tactics.
>

Yeah, but who will want to visit clinics where there might be anthrax........
This scare must really be cutting into profits bigtime!!!

Radical Conservative

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to
sti...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> While we're on the subject of violence in the abortion debate, I just recieved
> an e-mail alert form the National Coalition for Life and Peace -- check it out
> at http://www.prolife.org -- that some pro-life organizations got letters

> threatening to expose them to anthrax. Any thoughts?
so much for the pro-ABORTS saying they are peaceful

--

trillions and trillions of Liberal theories destroyed daily

PRESIDENT_CLINTON.SYS CORRUPT: DO YOU WANT TO REMOVE
PRESIDENT_CLINTON.SYS (Y/N)? YES!

Electronic mail sent to this account are automatically retreived by a
FAX machine, under the definition of Title 47 USC Sec.227 (a)(2)(B).
Therefore, unsolicited commercial electronic mail sent to this address
is in violation of Title 47 USC Sec. 227.

Radical Conservative

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to
kbrauer wrote:


> This scare must really be cutting into profits bigtime!!!
>
> Hoosier Pharmer

let's hope so!

sti...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/10/98
to

>> I received that too. Are any of the media outlets picking it up??

Yeah, right. Are you kidding? Not in this lifetime!

norman...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/11/98
to
In article <729l4d$hit$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
caro...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

<< I receibed that too. Are any of the media
outlets picking it up?? >>

You wish. Ain't liberal media hypocrisy on
violence in the abortion debate rich???

Norman

norman...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/11/98
to


Havard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz has
just contributed his Clinton spin in a just-re-
leased book with the title,"Sexual McCarthyism."
It's a slick presentation of the current Demo-
crat-liberal line, namely, "its just about sex,"
"its all Ken Starr's fault," and "just get over
it!"
And the title gets you thinking: how can an
obviously guilty president be innocent - if
one accepts what Dershowitz means by "mccarthy-
ism?" Its says a lot about Dershowitz's caliber
that he obviously can't accept the facts. Then
again, he is in good company: a lot of Democrats
and liberals apparently see enemies everywhere.
Then there is the irony in the title of his
book: the left, after decades of self-righteously
condemning McCarthy and his tactics, has finally
decided he isn't so bad after all. In other
words, taking the low road is ok if it helps your
side win. The caveat is only Democrats and lib-
erals are permitted to do whatever it takes to
win.
Dershowitz I suppose, just pities the poor
Republicans for their unfashionable and outdated
commitment to principle! So there!
Norman

kbrauer

unread,
Nov 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/11/98
to

norman...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

Doesn't stuff like this make you wonder about the sexual practices of
Dershowitz and other Clinton supporters??
There is a political rag in Cincinnati which calls Clinton supporters and
contributors "all those people who would not mind seeing the first Phallus
in their own daughters' mouths". Very gross, but it sorta makes sense!!
The circulation of this political publication, the Whistleblower, threatens
to outstrip that of the local news papers. hehehe

caro...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/12/98
to


> << I receibed that too. Are any of the media
> outlets picking it up?? >>
>
> You wish. Ain't liberal media hypocrisy on
> violence in the abortion debate rich???

Oh - of course not! Stuff like this:

http://www.gargaro.com/abortionbias.html

never happens

--

http://www.gargaro.com
http://www.rightgrrl.com

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------

caro...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/12/98
to

> Havard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz has

Uuuugggghhhhhhhhh!! This man is on Rivera live all the time.
(don't ask me why I even watch that)

> just contributed his Clinton spin in a just-re-
> leased book with the title,"Sexual McCarthyism."
> It's a slick presentation of the current Demo-
> crat-liberal line, namely, "its just about sex,"
> "its all Ken Starr's fault," and "just get over
> it!"

Right, in other words, let's ignore the real issue!
Let's ignore the Constitution!

> And the title gets you thinking: how can an
> obviously guilty president be innocent - if
> one accepts what Dershowitz means by "mccarthy-
> ism?" Its says a lot about Dershowitz's caliber
> that he obviously can't accept the facts. Then

He also thought OJ was innoccent. I am not surprised that he has
trouble with facts

Blah.

caro...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/12/98
to

> There is a political rag in Cincinnati which calls Clinton supporters and
> contributors "all those people who would not mind seeing the first Phallus
> in their own daughters' mouths".

UUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!

Nina Burleigh would be right in the front of the line!


--

norman...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/12/98
to
In article <72dg6e$qbo$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,

caro...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
< I receibed that too. Are any of the media
outlets picking it up?? >

You wish. Ain't liberal media hypocrisy on
violence in the abortion debate rich???

<< Oh - of course not! Stuff like this:

http://www.gargaro.com/abortionbias.html

never happens >>

Maybe, but after I read it - no suprise
there! How many mainstream journalists ARE
pro-life??? And pro-lifers are caricatured
as misogynist white men who want to turn the
clock back and keep women barefoot, pregnant,
and in the kitchen! That's not the true face
of the pro-life movement of course, which
counts women, feminists, and yes - surprise -
liberals among their members. Would it make
a difference if mainstream journalists had
sought out people like you and Nat Hentoff
for a quote - or are pro-life feminists AND
liberals people who just don't happen to
exist??
Norman

caro...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Nov 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM11/13/98
to

> http://www.gargaro.com/abortionbias.html
>
> never happens >>
>
> Maybe, but after I read it - no suprise
> there! How many mainstream journalists ARE
> pro-life???

Not very many I gather.

How about some of this??

(I would like to thank Nick for the following info )

One year, the NYT had for its front-page photo of the annual March for
Life a handful of Catholic bishops (celibate white guys) sitting
on folding chairs under umbrellas and laughing. No one else was in
the photo. Another year the photo was of a phalanx of Greek Orthodox priests,
in their beards and black robes, looking very severe and walking
determinedly in the direction of the camera. Again, no one else in the
photo. "These are the people who don't want you to have an abortion."

Ruth Pukaluk, representing Massachusetts Citizens for Life, was
speaking at a public forum. She's articulate, and happens to look (as
Sidney Callahan once described herself) like "a sensible Planned
Parenthood lady." A newspaper photographer got a shot of her standing
with Cardinal Law and some other guy. Pukaluk was cropped out of
the photo. The caption under the photo of the cardinal and the other guy
said they were attending an anti-abortion event.

> And pro-lifers are caricatured
> as misogynist white men who want to turn the
> clock back and keep women barefoot, pregnant,
> and in the kitchen!

I know. I guess pro-women (*ahem*) Clinton is their idea of a pro-woman guy.
It's sad. A guy can treat women like dirt but he can get away with it if he
is pro-choice!! If I hear another person say that Clinton's actions can be
excused because of his "stance on choice" I'll gag.

>That's not the true face
> of the pro-life movement of course, which
> counts women, feminists, and yes - surprise -
> liberals among their members.

Exactly. I'll faint if Feminists for Life every get media attention.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages