Friday, September 29, 2006

Mother of Seven Arrested Without Warning for Showing Abortion Image

HT to Marti

FREDERICTON, New Brunswick, Sept. 27, 2006 ( - A pro-life woman was arrested Tuesday for holding an image of an aborted child outside an abortion facility in Fredericton, New Brunswick.

Suzie Ryan, mother of seven, was silently holding the image outside the Morgentaler centre as abortions were being performed inside. Mrs. Ryan was charged with violating s.163 of the Criminal Code. S.163 is about the display of obscene material. She was released after being held in a jail cell for several hours. She must face the charges in court in November.

Prior to her arrest Mrs. Ryan was not warned in any way that she was committing an illegal act. Six to eight police officers arrived and forcibly put her in a paddy wagon, while confiscating her sign and umbrella.

Police Staff Sergeant Kelly later explained to Mrs. Ryan's husband, Campaign Life Coalition New Brunswick (CLCNB) president Peter Ryan, that the police were acting following instructions from the Crown Prosecutor office and some 35 complaints about the display of abortion images. Mr. Ryan believes the abortuary staff must have put in one or more complaints this morning.

CLCNB is not aware of any other case in Canada where a pro-life citizen was arrested without prior warning for simply displaying an abortion image in a public place. Such images have been repeatedly displayed by such groups as Show the Truth which has won precedent-setting cases in which it also was charged for showing graphic abortion pictures. That group visited Fredericton twice this past summer. At the time Fredericton Mayor Brad Woodside expressed displeasure with the group's tactics, but said there was nothing the city could legally do to prevent such displays.

The Morgentaler abortion facility has no legal restrictions against protest in the surrounding public area. Pro-life supporters regularly are present on Tuesday mornings when abortions usually take place.

Mrs. Ryan says she is quite shaken by the incident.
Peter Ryan says it is incredible when someone can be accused of a crime for peacefully protesting the murder of innocent children. "Here's the analogy," he said. "The Nazi death camps are exterminating Jews. Outside someone protests with an image of the Holocaust. The camp staff complains to police. The person is arrested as a criminal. The slaughter goes on. That's where we now are in this country."

See related articles:
Queen's Bench Court Rules Graphic Abortion Photos Protected by Charter"

(c) Copyright: is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use

NEWS TIPS to or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444

Supremes to reconsider landmark abortion case

HT to Marti

Plaintiff in Doe v. Bolton case says
ACLU attorney pushed her to have abortion

Posted: September 29, 2006
1:25 p.m. Eastern

© 2006

The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to reconsider next week its landmark 1973 Doe vs. Bolton abortion decision, in response to a lawsuit brought by the case's original plaintiff, who claims she was pressured by ACLU attorneys to opt for abortion and that the case was based on fraud.

Like Norma McCorvey, the original "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade, Sandra Cano was "Mary Doe" of 1973's other historic abortion decision. Together, "Roe" and "Doe" eliminated all state laws prohibiting abortion and legalized abortion. Cano's case in particular – because of the "health exception" for the mother it created – opened the door to abortion on demand, for virtually any reason, at any stage of pregnancy up to the moment of birth.

Repeated polls show that only about 1 in 4 Americans agree with unfettered abortion on demand throughout all nine months of pregnancy.

Both Cano and McCorvey are attempting to overturn the two abortion cases that bear their names, each claiming their case was based on fraud.

Cano, who at the time of the case was a pregnant, 22-year-old wife of an abusive husband and all three of her children in foster care, was just looking for a way to get her children back and leave her husband, she says. At no time was she interested in abortion, she adds, but insists she was pressured toward abortion by an aggressive ACLU attorney.

With her case scheduled to be considered by the high court next Wednesday, Cano says the justices have ignored vast advances in scientific and medical knowledge in the last three decades, and have "frozen abortion law based on obsolete 1973 assumptions and prevented the normal regulation of the practice of medicine."

According to a report in Insight magazine, Cano also will argue to the Supreme Court that the original "Doe" decision overturning U.S. abortion laws was based on fraud and lies coordinated by Margie Pitts Hames, Cano's ACLU attorney.

In her affidavit to the U.S. District Court in New Jersey, reports Insight, Cano claims the case originated when she approached a legal aid office in Atlanta to help her divorce her abusive husband and regain custody of her three children. However, says the report, Cano says she was taken advantage of by an "aggressive self-serving attorney, Margie Pitts Hames, the legal-aid attorney."

Cano, pregnant at the time, also says she never actually signed an affidavit saying she didn't want or couldn't care for another child. The affidavit even warned Cano might commit suicide.

"I am 99 percent certain that I did not sign this affidavit," she said, according to the Insight report. "I do not believe it is my signature on the affidavit, and Margie either forged my signature or slipped this document in with other papers while I was signing divorce papers. I never told Margie that I wanted an abortion. The facts stated in the affidavit in Doe v. Bolton are not true."

Saying her mother and Hames tried to force her to have an abortion, Cano says she fled to Oklahoma and returned only when she was sure she was assured that she wouldn't have to have the abortion. She was told not to speak in court, Cano adds.

On June 23, 2005, Cano testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee for the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights.

Here is her scathing testimony, in which she accused "wicked attorneys" of using her to advance a radical agenda:

… I am Sandra Cano, the former "Doe" of Doe v. Bolton. Doe v. Bolton is the companion case to Roe v. Wade. Using my name and life, Doe v. Bolton falsely created the health exception that led to abortion on demand and partial birth abortion. How it got there is still pretty much a mystery to me. I only sought legal assistance to get a divorce from my husband and to get my children from foster care.
I was very vulnerable: poor and pregnant with my fourth child, but abortion never crossed my mind. Although it apparently was utmost in the mind of the attorney from whom I sought help. At one point during the legal proceedings, it was necessary for me to flee to Oklahoma to avoid the pressure being applied to have the abortion scheduled for me by this same attorney. Please understand even though I have lived what many would consider an unstable life and overcome many devastating circumstances, at no time did I ever have an abortion. I did not seek an abortion nor do I believe in abortion. Yet my name and life is now forever linked with the slaughter of 40-50 million babies.

I have tried to understand how it all happened. How did my divorce and child custody case become the basis by which bloody murder is done on infants thriving in the wombs of their mothers? How can cunning, wicked lawyers use an uneducated, defenseless pregnant woman to twist the American court system in such a fraudulent way? Doe has been a nightmare. Over the last 32 years, I have become a prisoner of the case. It took me until 1988 to get my records unsealed in order for me to try and find the answer to those questions and to join in the movement to stop abortion in America. When pro abortion advocates found out about my efforts; my car was vandalized on one occasion and at another time, someone shot at me while I was on my front porch holding my grandbaby.

I am angry. I feel like my name, life, and identity have been stolen and put on this case without my knowledge and against my wishes. How dare they use my name and my life this way! One of the Justices of the Supreme Court said during oral argument in my case "What does it matter if she is real or not." Well I am real and it does matter. I was in court under a false name and lies. I was never cross-examined in court. Doe v. Bolton is based on a lie and deceit. It needs to be retried or overturned. Doe v. Bolton is against my wishes. Abortion is wrong. I love children. I would never harm a child and yet because of this case I feel like I bear the guilt of over 46 million innocent children being killed. The Supreme Court is also guilty.

The bottom line is I want abortion stopped in my name. I want the case which was supposedly to benefit me, be either overturned or retried. If it is retried, at least I will have an opportunity to speak for myself in court, something that never happened before. My lawyers at The Justice Foundation have collected affidavits from over one thousand women hurt by abortion. We have filed those affidavits and a Rule 60 Motion to reverse Doe which is now on its way to the Supreme Court through the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. I am also giving you a copy of my affidavit in the case. Millions of babies have been killed. Millions of women have been hurt horribly. It is time to get my name and life out of this case and its time to stop the killing.

In January, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that only the Supreme Court could reverse its own decision, sending the case to the highest court in the land.

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Abortion laws take 2nd place to dollar signs

HT to Marti

Posted: September 28, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2006

Phill Kline

Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline believes that it is his job to see that the laws are followed, but he ran into a brick wall when he concluded the laws that apply to the abortion industry, such as reporting an assault when a 10-year-old has an abortion, ALSO must be upheld.

He soon found out why: hundreds of millions of dollars that American taxpayers each year turn over to Planned Parenthood, a leading provider in the abortion industry.

So now he's working on taking that wall down, one brick at a time. He told WND in an exclusive interview that he's not giving up, and he'll win because the law is on his side.

"We've got them on the hill they will die on," he told WND in an interview. "They are defending abortion clinics as safe havens for child rapists."

When he was elected in 2002, he noticed a peculiarity of laws in most states and jurisdictions.

"Nobody has been willing to enforce the abortion laws against Planned Parenthood," he said. And some of the situations just screamed for attention.

For example, when there are abortions performed on underage children, by law and by definition there has been a sexual assault on a child. In Kansas a person under 16 legally cannot consent to sex, and abortions cannot be performed past 22 weeks. However, those cases simply weren't being reported, he said.

He started working, watching the situation, developing evidence, and assembling arguments. Soon he found that, just like in many other cases ranging from assault to homicide, he needed the medical records to pursue his investigation.

In court, he sought the redacted clinic records from 90 abortion cases across the state.

It was as if the world fell in and he discovered the reason why the opposition to his work was so fierce.

Under federal rules, the abortion industry leader must follow state laws regarding abortion, notification and other issues if it is to get tax money each year from American citizens – an estimated $227 million this year alone, Kline said.

So any prosecutor who is looking into situations that potentially could have legal implications, such as late-term abortions that don't meet the specified state guidelines, or those abortions administered on underage girls where no assault report is filed, the industry's reaction is going to be serious because of the potential threat to the cash flow.

In Kline's case he was opposed for his views on abortion during his first campaign, attacked when he started his work in office, and still is being attacked as he's seeking re-election in a few weeks.

His opponent is Johnson County District Attorney Paul Morrison, who is trailing Kline by a few points in many polls to date.

The matchup has Kline highlighting Morrison's authorship a bill that shortened paroles and released prison inmates early, and citing a Kansas Department of Corrections memo explaining that the bill allowed 800 criminals to be released early and thousands more have their paroles shortened. More than 1,500 have since revisited Kansas' court system, "and those are just the ones we caught," Kline said.

Morrison, meanwhile, portrays Kline as someone who wants to invade women's privacy by seeking medical records from abortionists.

Absolutely true that he wanted medical records, Kline told WND. Absolutely false that he was seeking medical records that are identifiable to a particular individual. He said he just wants records that can be inspected to determine whether a "medical provider" at an abortion clinic is, in fact, following the state's various laws, just like many other cases.

He recognizes the reason for the opposition. He noted that Planned Parenthood at one point listed him among the group's "domestic terrorists" list because of his work.

"They want my scalp," he told WND. "(They want to say) this used to be an attorney general, so any of you AG's thinking about enforcing the law, this is what will happen to you."

An Ohio woman, Jennifer Jiroux, who works with Citizens for Community Values, told WND the nation needs more prosecutors like Kline. She cited as an example a recent case in which a 12-year-old was taken to an abortion clinic after an assault by a soccer coach, an assault that wasn’t uncovered until some teachers overheard school children teasing the 12-year-old.

Where are those individuals who are supposed to report sexual assaults on children? she wondered.

Kline said one other AG, Steve Carter of Indiana, also is filing charges for such cases, and others are watching closely.

How Kline got the steamroller going was simple in Kansas. It's a commonly used procedure in which prosecutors have a proceeding in front of a judge, and the judge reviews evidence and can issue search warrants or compel witnesses to appear.

In the case involving 90 abortions -- for which Kline most commonly is vilified -- he did just that, and the judge, Richard Anderson, found probable cause to suspect that there had been child rape, the failure to report child rape, possible criminal late-term and partial-birth abortions, and other counts.

"I never sought the identity of the women," Kline said. "The judge had agreed to a request to redact their names when the medical records were provided."

One situation involved a 10-year-old who had an abortion. State records confirmed she was nine when she was assaulted. Records also show that in 2003 alone, 78 girls under the age of 15 had abortions in Kansas. By law, that amounts to 78 cases of sexual assault on a child.

Anderson's conclusion to Kline's records request was that, "Without access to the medical records, how is the attorney general going to make a reasonably informed judgment as to whether the records do or do not contain evidence of a crime?"

But abortion industry interests then, he said, "came loaded for bear."

That industry, he said, immediately following Anderson's ruling filed a mandamus action with the state Supreme Court, essentially arguing that somebody wasn't doing their constitutional duty.

"The whole thing is private thus far," Kline said. "I don't announce investigations."

However, the clinics made a motion with the court to make the investigation public and asked permission to contact "patients."

"We filed a motion objecting, as harmful to the investigation. Plus when you've got a 10-year-old who had a late-term abortion and nobody called the cops… Who do you think they're going to call (when they call 'patients') but the rapist?"

The Supreme Court granted that motion, and the clinics held a news conference to condemn Kline for seeking "full unredacted medical histories" of 90 adult women and children.

"At the same time," Kline said, "their website (one of the clinics involved) had a privacy policy in which they reserved the right to give names, addresses, phone numbers and the date of the abortion to political fundraisers."

"What they were denying us under the law they were giving to PACs," Kline said.

The ultimate result of the appeals process affirmed Kline's request, and there have been a number of convictions as a result.

"Now we've had cases referred out on child rape. We've actually had a prosecution and a conviction," Kline said. In one Wichita, Kan., case one defendant pleaded guilty to five counts of raping his stepdaughters.

The case involved four pregnancies and several abortions, but no one had called police, Kline said, until one of the babies was born, and the adoption agency that the family approached "saw through the ruse."

Six different counties in Kansas have been able to prosecute – so far – as a result of Kline's work.

Kline said besides the direct opposition to his efforts, another side is the financial support given to anyone who opposes him. In the last election, a donation of $300,000 was given, reportedly originally from an abortionist, to a PAC just nine days before the election.

Kline said that avoided the state requirement that PAC reports must be filed within 10 days. The money was used for a massive radio campaign criticizing Kline, he said.

Flip Benham, of Operation Save America, noted that Kansas' most famous abortionist, George Tiller of Wichita is famous for his late-term abortion services, and he compared Tiller to another Wichita man, Dennis Rader.

Rader was convicted of being the BTK (bind, torture, kill) killer who was arrested years after he killed a number of people.

Benham said neither respects any life but their own, and they both like to operate behind walls of secrecy. He also noted both are members in good standing in their respective churches.

"Unfortunately for the citizens in the city of Wichita and all of us in America, both men are inhabited by the same spirit of murder. This spirit, once unleashed … knows no bounds and only increases in ferocity," Benham wrote.

One supporter of the organization noted that Kansas current governor, Kathleen Sebelius, "is pro abortion to the max and has done everything she can, including stripping funds from the A.G. office to a minimum, to deem him ineffective."

The clinics denied any wrongdoing.

"Our clients have followed the law and will continue to do so," lawyer Lee Thompson wrote.

Kline also has sued officials in his own state – at the direction of the state Legislature – to stop state funding of abortions. Elmer Feldkamp of Baileyville, president of Right to Life of Kansas, said it is an attempt to substantiate that human life begins at conception.

But abortion promoters even were critical of Kline's decision to follow the orders from the state House.

"He continues to use his office to push extreme ideologies on the state of Kansas," Traci Gleason, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Kansas, said at the time.

Kansas AG Alarms Abortion-Rights Side

HT to Marti

Associated Press Writer

September 27, 2006, 2:08 PM EDT

TOPEKA, Kan. -- GQ magazine declared he would do anything to stop abortion and called him the future of the anti-abortion movement. Planned Parenthood put him on a list of 15 Americans it saw as major threats to abortion rights.

Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline has emerged as one of the nation's foremost foes of abortion by tangling with abortion clinics and health care providers in this heartland state, where is now running for a second term.

His opponents were even more alarmed recently after someone leaked a campaign memo he wrote in August, outlining an aggressive plan to court conservative Christians with a blitz of speaking engagements at churches.

His Democratic challenger, Paul Morrison, the Johnson County district attorney, has accused Kline of pursuing a narrow, personal agenda as attorney general and has called the memo cynical.

Kline has waged a nearly three-year legal battle with two abortion clinics to obtain information from patient medical records. He has said he needs the information to prosecute child rapists and determine whether the clinics are violating restrictions on late-term abortions.

Critics contend he is on a fishing expedition that invades patient privacy, and Morrison has promised publicly to drop the battle.

Kline also has issued a legal opinion that says health care providers and others are required under state law to report all underage sex, even between consenting youngsters. A federal judge ruled otherwise, and Kline appealed.

Kline also supported an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage, and defended a law that allowed the state to punish illegal sex involving minors far more harshly if the participants are of the same sex, until the Kansas Supreme Court struck it down last year.

"My position on the life issue is not born out of my faith but out of what I view the role of the government to be -- to protect the most innocent and the most vulnerable," Kline said recently. "I'm not doing anything but enforcing the law."

He and supporters have complained that he has received unwarranted attention for the memo, and that his other accomplishments are being overlooked.

In 2003, he intervened when the nonprofit Health Midwest hospital system was being sold to the for-profit HCA Inc. Twenty percent of the assets of that $1 billion-plus sale eventually stayed in Kansas. He also successfully argued the state's case before the U.S. Supreme Court in defending its capital punishment law.

"Phill is charismatic and out in front. People either really like that, or they don't. With personalities like Phill, there's usually no gray area," said Ryan Wright, executive director of the Kansas Traditional Republican Majority, a moderate group that is nevertheless supporting all GOP candidates.

Morrison suggested that Kline's "personal agenda" has distracted him from fighting crime.

This year, Planned Parenthood Federation of America's online magazine listed Kline as one of 15 "anti-choice extremists and political hard-liners," along with Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

"The attorney general should represent the interests of everybody in this state, as opposed to those who share your beliefs," Morrison said.

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Blame Frist if parental notification bill fails

HT to Marti

Posted: September 27, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Is it possible during the tenure of a Republican-controlled Congress and presidency that pro-life legislation with an 80 percent public approval rating won't pass?

Yes. And if that happens, the responsibility will rest solely with one man.

The measure in question would make it a federal crime for non-parental adults to traffic minor girls for abortions across state lines without notifying her parents. This closes a loophole currently enabling molesters and incest perpetrators not only to kill the evidence of their crime but repeat it.

The bottleneck on this bill is the U. S. Senate, where Republican Bill Frist is majority leader. He is the man.

The numbers could hardly be better for Frist. Senate Republicans enjoy a 55-45 majority. Its version of the bill, called the Child Custody Protection Act, passed overwhelmingly 65-34 in July. The House version, called the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, passed overwhelmingly last year 270-157. President Bush supports it.

We pro-lifers have done our part during the two months since Senate Democrats blocked CCPA from advancing. We have focused our ire on the obstructionists, who used procedural chicanery to block Senate and House designees from crafting a final, mutually acceptable version of CCPA/CIANA.

Supposed pro-life Democrat minority leader Harry Reid, who voted for the bill before trying to kill it, and second henchman in command Dick Durbin said they feared a Boxer-Ensign incest amendment wouldn't make the final cut, even though First promised it would and pro-lifers supported it.

This was, of course, a ruse. And last night House Republicans brilliantly called Senate Democrats on their ruse by passing a new version of this legislation including the Boxer-Ensign amendment and kicking it back to the Senate.

Now only three days remain that the Senate is in session until after the election, at which time Frist will become a lame duck leader for his final two months.

Does Frist have the resolve to defend our girls from rapists? Does he have the guts to battle Democrats head-on to do so?

Frist must call for a vote on this legislation by Friday. Sixty ayes will be required to stop Democrats from filibustering. Even then, Democrats could demand 30 hours of debate, but the general consensus is they won't. Do Democrats really want to spend 30 hours publicly explaining why they oppose legislation 80 percent of the country supports? Not likely, but if they do, we still win – not only the bill but the debate.

Since CCPA passed with 65 votes only two months ago, at least 60 ayes now would seem probable. But 14 of those 65 were Democrats – who proceeded to go silent on their leadership's obstruction. They are part of the ruse. Not all 14 are pro-life. Some just voted to support parental notification to allay negative PR at home.

This is why it is important to push for a vote now, before the election. At this point all 14 can still tell constituents they support this legislation. But if Frist calls for another vote, phonies will either be drawn out and publicly exposed as they deserve, or they will be compelled to vote aye for fear of negative press. This pressure will evaporate after the election.

By the way, all this last-minute stuff is Frist's own fault. DC pro-lifers implored him to present CCPA in 2005, but he did not. In early 2006, CCPA was put on the Republican Senate leadership's Top 10 list, with the same request to introduce it then, but he did not. Frist created this time crunch.

This legislation can pass or fail now, pass or fail later, or die of neglect. The best strategy is to call for a vote now. Otherwise, Democrats will have blocked this critically important pro-life bill with no consequences. And perverts will continue to get away with raping young girls with no consequences.

Sen. Frist should keep ever before him the visual of just who does suffer the consequences of no interstate parental notification bill and press forward. The clock is ticking.

Police: Teen Forced to Drink Turpentine

HT to Marti

A mother and her two cousins forced the women's 16 year old daughter to drink turpentine as a way to induce an abortion.
Click here to read the article.