By Nancy Thorner & Ed Ingold – 

As announced on Thursday, March 8th, 2008, President Trump has agreed to sit down with his North Korean nemesis Kim Jong Un sometime in the next two months to discuss stripping the hermit nation of its nuclear arsenal.

This historic meeting was brokered by the South Korean government and delivered to the White House, outside the West Wing, by South Korean national security director Chung Eui-yong, who related that Kim Jong Un had expressed his eagerness to meet with President Trump as soon as possible.  The place and time of the meeting is still to be determined.

According to Chung, the North also agreed to suspend nuclear and missile tests during such future talks, which is a longstanding US demand. Trump’s goal is to achieve permanent denuclearization, not just a freeze.  Trump likewise expressed that the sanctions will remain in place until an agreement is reached.

The relationship between the two world leaders has been downright nasty at time, with Trump repeatedly calling Kim “Little Rocket Man” and Kim dubbing the president a “mentally deranged US dotard.”

A Difficult Row to Hoe

Trump is right about North Korea.  America and North Korea were on a collision course, but it never made sense to launch a military strike against the isolated country North Korea with its crazed leader without first having tried diplomacy.  As many times reiterated, such a strike would cause tens of thousands of casualties in both South and North Korea.

Trump will be talking with the leader of a nation that has a considerable nuclear arsenal and has made impressive missile tests.  Kim might negotiate, but behind the scenes he could continue working to perfect an intercontinental nuclear missile that can reach this nation.  Furthermore, is Kim even willing to trade his nuclear program for peace when he considers his nuclear force necessary to preserve his regime’s security?  Then too, would Kim keep his word if Trump could convince Kim to denuclearize?

Three successive U.S. presidents, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, have dealt with the threat posed by North Korea’s weapons tests. Each acted in the same way, removing sanctions almost immediately, based on promises which were never kept. There is no evidence Korea’s nuclear development ever hesitated or slowed down. It was publicly restarted each time after real or imagined affronts to the regime.  Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush made agreements with Kim’s father which were violated, but the son, Kim Jong Un, like his father, seems determined to become a nuclear power.

Lessons Learned?

In Tennessee they say you don’t learn much the second time you get kicked by a mule.

Trump could make the same mistake if he acts based on promises. On the other hand, verification through unrestrained inspections would be effective. It might be difficult to re-impose sanctions if North Korea defaults, but there are military options the previous presidents never even considered or voiced, nor would that response necessarily come close to a nuclear option.  60 cruise missiles took out the Syrian Air Force. Last fall, the US Navy took delivery of nearly 800 cruise missiles in the Far East. One can only guess how many they had on hand, but munitions aren’t distributed on a KanBan basis (a Japanese innovation for inventory control – from delivery truck to the assembly line, just in time). In the interim, Trump has pledged to keep all the sanctions in place until a verified solution is in place. The most effective sanctions, banking and shipping intervention, are under unilateral US control.

Direct talks between leaders of the two nations is a new twist, one which lends gravitas to the status of North Korea’s dictator. Trump needs to think twice and speak once (for a change) and have trusted advisors on hand (and listen to them). Unlike Kerry in Iran, Trump must be prepared to walk out if the talks aren’t going anywhere. Fortunately, that’s not how a New Yorker bargains.  If the deal isn’t good, Trump will walk out. With his predecessors any deal was better than no deal. On the other hand, meeting directly with the US President adds gravitas to the status of Kim Jong Un. Good and bad. It is a boost to his ego, but changes nothing politically, and may make him more receptive to concessions.

Firing of Rex Tillerson a positive move

A good move by President Trump on Tuesday, March 13 was the firing of Rex Tillerson who wasn’t on the same wave length policy-wise as President Trump. They didn’t see eye to eye on some very important issues, including the dirty Iran nuclear deal, North Korea, and Russia. Tillerson was also an advocate for the Paris Accord and the carbon tax.  In addition to not sharing Trump’s views, Tillerson verbally expressed disrespect toward President Trump.

Contrary to what is being reported, The White House says Chief of Staff John Kelly spoke with the now-former Secretary of State Tillerson on Friday and Saturday (March 9 and 10) to say that the President wanted him to resign. When Tillerson refused, he was fired.

Michael Pompeo, who has served as  Director of the Central Intelligence Agency since January 23, 2017,  having been nominated by President Donald Trump to that position, was chosen to replace Tillerson as Secretary of State.  Mike Pompeo earned praise from members of both parties by strengthening intelligence gathering, modernizing our defensive and offensive capabilities, and building close ties with our friends and allies in the international intelligence community.  It was reported that President Trump decided to make the change in order to have a new team in place before a planned summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in the spring.  Accordingly, President Trump is expected to lean heavily of Mike Pompeo  as talks with North Korea soon take center stage on the diplomatic front.

Popcorn, anybody?

Gosnell Movie Ad

By Nancy Thorner –

A sneak peek screening of Gosnell, America’s Biggest Serial Killer, was shown last Saturday evening to an overflow audience at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights. The film, which focuses on one of the most deadly abortionists in American history, is scheduled to be released to the public in October.

Producers Phelim McAleer, Ann McElhinney, who have so far produced six documentaries on an array of topics, have been conducting sneak peek screenings of the Gosnell movie throughout the nation since last fall as a way to promote their movie that Hollywood and others don’t want gotten out to the general public.

As a defense lawyer in the Gosnell movie for abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell said: Dr. Gosnell was only serving the needs of the poor women of Philadelphia. What he did was in keeping with a women’s right to choose.”

As independent distributors of the film, McElhinney and McAleer will continue the sneak peak screenings up until the movie is featured in 600 big screen theaters this coming October.  At that time, the censorship of the Gosnell story will end.

Rev. Calvin Lindstrom

Rev. Calvin Lindstrom

The idea of doing a movie on Gosnell as a prolific serial killer originated when Phelim McAleer was in Pennsylvania, doing a documentary on fracking. On his day off, McGosnell decided to attend a session of the Gosnell trial that was then taking place at the time. Sitting in an almost empty press section, “Baby Boy A” evidence was shown to the jurors on a large home screen (Only pro-choice jurors had been selected to serve. Later some of them did change to pro-life.).

Upon hearing jurors gasp at the notion that Dr. Gosnell had performed 40,000 such abortions, McAleer knew this story had to be told. Upon returning home, relating what he had seen, McAleer’s wife, Ann McElhinney, concurred. The consensus was that the finished product not only had to portray Gosnell’s war on abortion, but also had to show Gosnell as a criminal and the monster that he was.

Instrumental in bringing the showing to Christian Liberty Academy was Suzanne Probst, who with her son had seen Gosnell last summer at the National Right to Life Convention in Milwaukee, WI, where the movie was shown to all attendees by Phelim‘s wife, Ann McElhinney.  Returning home, Suzanne asked people from all over Illinois if they would be willing to sponsor a sneak peek. The condition was that the sponsor would need to pay for all travel expenses as well as expenses for promoting it.

Suzanne asked Christian Liberty’s Pastor Lindstrom to sponsor the movie.He agreed. Along with Pastor Lindstrom, several other organizations in Illinois helped to financially sponsor the movie:   St. Peter Church, Volo; Father Anthony Rice; Heritage Church; Pastor Skyler Goodman; Christian Liberty Academy; Pastor Calvin Lindstrom; Lake County Right to Life; Illinois Family Institute; the Probst, Swambar and Roger Williams families.

Phelim McAleer flew from Los Angeles just to do the peek screening at the Christian Liberty Academy.  The movie won’t be shown in Illinois again as a sneak peek because no one else has consented to sponsor it.  Mr. McAleer indicated that the Christian Academy sneak peek was his and his wife’s biggest one in the entire nation.

Phelim McAleer
Phelim McAleer

About the Gosnell Movie

Gosnell tells the true story of Kermit Gosnell, a Philadelphia abortionist who was convicted on three counts of first-degree murder in 2013. Gosnell was also convicted of involuntary manslaughter, on 21 felony counts of performing late-term abortions, where he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors, and on hundreds of other lesser counts, including corruption and more than 200 violations of the 24-hour informed consent law. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here, but no one put a stop to it. The Philadelphia Police Homicide Department received a complaint about Gosnell years before he was caught, gave it a cursory look, and ignored the evidence.

The 300-page grand jury report reads like a horror script of its own; it explains the doctor’s penchant for a practice he termed “snipping,” in which he killed babies born alive at his office by severing their spinal cords with scissors. Gosnell’s medical office was described in the report as a “baby charnel house,” with bloodstained furniture, unlicensed physicians and nurses and fetal remains stored in plastic jugs and bags in the basement freezer. Gosnell was ultimately sentenced to life without parole plus an additional 30 years in prison.

News Media Blackout of Trial

Despite Gosnell’s heinous crimes, the case was likewise notable because of the mainstream and liberal media outlets’ refusal to cover it.  Ignored were facts that emerged from the trial, like how the babies Gosnell murdered suffered terribly. Also discounted by the media was that Gosnell killed more people than Gary Ridgeway, John Wayne Gacey, The Zodiac Killer, and Ted Bundy combined over a 30-year killing spree, during which time Dr. Gosnell is thought to have killed thousands of babies.

During his Christian Liberty Academy presentation, Phelim McAleer placed blame on Tom Ridge, a “pro-choice” Republican governor, whose 1994 election put a stop to Pennsylvania Health Department inspections for seventeen years. Previously inspections had been done yearly.

As to Gosnell’s incarceration in Huntingdon Correctional Center in PA, Phelim McAlleer related that Kermit Gosnell is disappointed he wasn’t accepted into its poetry class, but he does play piano in its band. Gosnell is reading the Koran in two translations because he wants to know both views. Gosnell was also described as a psychopath who is still living in the weird Gosnell world.  Dr. Gosnell does call Mr. McAleer collect from prison from time to time just to talk.

Funding of Gosnell movie

Just as Hollywood had no interest in promoting an abortion film, it also had no interest in funding such a project.  McAleer and McElhinney raised funds for their Gosnell movie through a revolutionary website called Indiegogo, which allows movie makers to bypass the usual funding sources for movies. The budget to make the Gosnell film was set at $2.1 million, but with one condition.  If producers McAleer and McElhinney failed to raise their targeted $2.1 million budget, Indiegogo would return all the funds, the producers would receive nothing, and the film would never be made.  The Indiegogo campaign was a success by raising $2.25 million; however, there were many, having missed the deadline, who still wanted to contribute.  They were able to do so when Indiegogo extended an invitation for McAleer and McElhinney to join their pilot program called “Forever Funding” which allows projects to re-open their crowdfunding campaign and continue raising funds.  All total $4 million was raised to make the Gosnell movie.

Cast of Actors

The filming of Gosnell began in September of 2015. Even though the movie could be considered a low budget film, credible actors were hired to perform the key roles. Among them were Dean Cain, Michael BeachSarah Jane Morris, with Earl Billings playing the abortion doctor, Kermit Gosnell. The film was written by Andrew Klavan of True Crime and was directed by Nick Searcy, best known for his portrayal of Chief Deputy United States Marshall Art Mullen on FX’s Justified.   See here for the Full Cast & Crew of Gosnell: America’s Biggest Serial KillerView here a movie trailer for the Gosnell move.

As to how producers McElhinney and McAleer were able enlist such a fine cast of actors, related was that many actors don’t have calendars. They accept because the story is good. There were actors who having accepted a role, came up with an excuse when friends told them it would sully their careers if they did do.  Even so, some actors are apolitical.  Most of the actors haven’t yet seen the film yet.

October Showing of Gosnell Movie

Regarding the October 2018 showing of the Gosnell movie in this area and in other selected theaters here in Illinois, it is the responsibility of pro-lifers to ask 10 others go to see the movie so theaters will be filled.  Producers McAleer and McElhinney made a conscious decision to aim for a PG-rating by omitting some of the most graphic material, so as many people could see the film as possible.  Said McElhinney, “It’s not horrific but was prepared to resemble a Law and Order episode.”

Once the film becomes a success in theaters, it has a good potential to become a hit.  Remember that Hollywood wants it to fail – and that should be enough reason to prove there is a market for Gosnell-type movies.  There are people who want to make movies about issues that are controversial, but they are told they won’t be successful.  Despite how one feels about abortion, the Gosnell movie is an important story to tell.  Once a DVD comes out, it will be translated into 13 or 14 languages.

Information about where the Gosnell film in October will be shown here in Illinois will be announced by Suzanne Probst when known.

Tom Morrison

State Rep. Tom Morrison

Audience encouraged to support pro-life project

Following the showing of the Gosnell movie, Republican Illinois state Rep. Tom Morrison, District 54, spoke about the race for governor between Rep. Jeanne Ives and incumbent Governor Rauner in Illinois’ March Primary Election on March 20, 2018.  Morrison did speak to Governor Rauner about not signing HB40, which he signed on 9/28/2018, that provides state health insurance and Medicaid coverage for abortions.  Morrison specially mentioned the Hyde Amendment passed in 1976 which blocks federal funds from being used to pay for abortion outside of the exceptions for rape, incest, or if the pregnancy is determined to endanger the woman’s life. The law has dramatically limited coverage of abortion under Medicaid, as well as other federal programs.  Cashing in on taxpayer funded abortions, in the aftermath of HB 40, Planned Parenthood is opening up more abortion clinics in Illinois. Some clinics haven’t been inspected for 15 years.  Morrison cited two abortion clinics, although not as bad as the Gosnell clinic, that were shut down by the Health Department in Lincolnwood and Rockford, IL. Others were cited

Morrison revealed a plan for helping Rep. Jeanne Ives be successful in the March 20th Illinois Primary election.  That plan is for sending a mailer out to all pro-life households in Illinois at a cost of $38,000, but financial help is needed.

Morrison requested help from event attendees but also needs your help and the help of your friends. Please send your contribution to cover the cost of the Ives mailers as soon as possible to:  Illinois Citizens for Life PAC, P.O. Box 1214, St. Charles, IL   60175

Thorner/Ingold: Emotions a Poor Substitute for Common Sense in Confronting Gun Violence

Parkland students grieve after last week’s shooting | ABC phot

It is not difficult to appreciate the initial remarks from President Trump on gun violence about the need to stop just talking about gun violence but instead do things that will make a difference; however, we need ideas that are implementable and supportable by reasonable people, not knee-jerk responses that pander to a political position but are not adaptable to actual actions that will lead to a solution.

Fox News on Wednesday morning highlighted students from the Florida high school where 17 students and teachers were killed expressing their “solutions” to gun violence. Their remarks reflected a Pollyanna world view, such as, if only there were no guns (or a certain gun), all the problems would go away. The unfortunate truth is that only a good guy with a gun can effectively stop a bad guy with a gun. That principle applies to warfare, and, too often, life on the streets. Before there were guns, there were swords, arrows, sticks, rocks, hands and feet. There has always been someone undeserving who wants what you have, where you live, or resents who you are, and is willing to kill to get their way.

The worst mass killings involve fire, not firearms.  87 people died in a Bronx fire, thanks to a madman and two gallons of gasoline. Confiscate all the guns? The British were on their way to Concord (MA) to confiscate the armory maintained by the colony when Paul Revere made his eponymous ride. That ultimately worked out poorly for the Redcoats and is the main reason the Second Amendment even exists.

The shooter who perpetrated the recent massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High in Parkland, Fla., succeeded in killing 17 people. He also got Americans talking about gun control again. But there’s a much more realistic and productive conversation to be had about who can get access to guns and how we deal with people who display the warning signs of mental disturbance.

To the left side of the aisle, the solution to every act of violence is gun control. So-called “assault weapons” are only low hanging fruit. What they really want is to ban and confiscate all guns, regardless of caliber, method of operation and cosmetic features. Diane Feinstein (D-Cal) has said as much, but also said the country was not ready for that “solution.” A partial or total ban is neither practical nor constitutional. The Supreme Court has said as much in Heller and MacDonalddecided on June 26, 2008.  On the practical side, there are an estimated 300 million guns in private hands in the US, and at least 100 million owners of guns. The anti-gun crowd points to the government’s solution in Australia, but only about 650 thousand guns were taken. While described as a government buy-back, it was not optional, but rather a mass confiscation at the point of government guns.  It included not just “assault weapons”, but all repeating firearms, including pump shotguns, lever guns, and even bolt-action rifles were included in the roundup.

Australia “buy back” viewed as a success?

There were no constitutional issues in Australia, because in the Commonwealth the constitution is an act of parliament. All individual rights and privileges derive from the government (formerly the Crown). In the US, rights belong to the people, and the Constitution serves to limit the power of government.

Did it work? Not quite. The Australian action described as a “buy-back” was precipitated by a mass shooting in 1996 at a resort in Tasmania.  It is claimed that no more mass shootings have occurred in Australia. This is misleading because there was only one major incident leading up to the 1996 ban. Gun crime is increasing in Australia in the form of armed robbery, and more recently, acts of terrorism. More significantly, the violent crime rate in Australia was in steady decline even before the gun ban and continued to decline without a change in slope afterwards. There is not even a jiggle in the numbers which would imply success.

Result of 1994-2004 “assault rifle” ban

The same results have been observed in the US before, during and after the 1994-2004 “assault rifle” ban. Australians are starting to complain that they are left defenseless in the face of these attacks. A couple years ago, a farmer was arrested for leasing his land for concealment of banned firearms by people who refused to comply. They were coated with grease, placed in large plastic pipes, capped at both ends, and buried using a post hole digger. That would never happen in the US, right?

Fewer than 1% of all shooting are done using long guns of any sort. The weapons of choice are easily concealed handguns. Reports of gangs using rifles are prominent, largely for the same reason man-bites-dog is newsworthy – rarity.  According to national statistics, only 11% of guns used in crime were legally purchased.

Mental health issue in play

Mental health is arguably a better approach to mitigating the threat to schools; however, there are unintended consequences. Very few mentally ill people present a danger to themselves or others. Fewer commit acts of violence against others. Suicide rates have little dependency on the availability of firearms but are often included when describing “gun violence.” In fact, of the 30,000 or so gun deaths each year in the US, less than 9000 are considered homicide, including fewer than 500 justifiable homicides. If seeking treatment for depression or other non-violent mental illness will cause your civil rights to be abrogated, fewer people will seek treatment.

President Trump is criticized for ending the Obama era policy of denying firearm ownership to the “mentally ill” people on social security or veteran’s benefits. In fact, this applied mainly to those who need assistance in managing their finances. We’d like to see how these bureaucrats would fare on $1200 a month or so. For the protection of individual rights and for the good of society, such determinations should be adjudicated in an adversary process.

Background checks

It is likely that background checks (NICS) could be improved, but not in the sense Charles Schumer and like-minded leftists would prefer. The Schumer “universal background checks” define a transaction so broadly that you couldn’t hand a gun to a friend even to safely cross a fence while hunting. It would only be permitted on a licensed gun range or private home, not plinking at tin cans in the woods. Documented problems with NICS is that states and local governments are remiss in reporting adjudicated mental health issues and orders of protection. Even the military failed to report criminal acts committed by soldiers. Sadly, enforcement of reporting policies are poorly enforced – no carrot and no stick.

Local law enforcement is supposed to be notified if flagged individuals attempt to purchase a firearm through the NICS system, even if no laws are being broken. This is a complete failure. It is not up to gun dealers to enforce “soft” bans of this sort, and it is probably a violation of privacy laws to disseminate this information to them. Persons on the “terror watch list” might merit such an alert, but the “watch list” is maintained by faceless bureaucrats, with little or no recourse available to those on that list by mistake (or for political reasons).

Concealed carry as a deterrent

There is a strong case for allowing teachers and staff who hold concealed carry permits to carry a weapon on campus. This should probably apply to non-staff licensees as well. Most school shootings occur within a span of about 5 minutes before the assailant is stopped or commits suicide (the usual outcome when confronted by police). That is comparable to the typical response time for a 911 call, and far less than the response for a SWAT team (20-30 minutes). One or two security officers who are armed can’t cover all the areas in a school within that time limit, as demonstrated last week in Florida. They may not even know something is going down. An armed teacher, guarding students huddled in a class room, is going to be more effective against an armed attacker than by heroically blocking bullets.

Critics of this idea cite the likelihood of “blood baths,” and “OK Corral” confrontations, but this does not happen, and has not happened, despite nearly 6 million armed citizens in the US. The concealed carry mantra is simple. You carry a weapon for defense of life, not for winning arguments or settling scores. In the simplest terms, it is because you refuse to be a victim of crime. You would not be expected (nor allowed) to search the halls for the assailant, rather to establish a defensive position while waiting for law enforcement.

Many teachers object to being armed on moral or political grounds, but many more would be willing and able to take up arms in an emergency. One sheriff in Florida offered concealed carry training to teaches, up to 50 at a time. Within a week, he had received 500 applications.

Janne said…

What do you mean by HB-1 “wage slaves”.

Nancy Thorner said…

Those brought in under HB-1 visas many times take the place of American workers. There have been many reports where American workers had to train the workers brought in to take over their own jobs,for which the imported workers were paid less than what the American workers had been receiving to perform the same jobs.

Nancy Thorner said…

As to my remark, “Senator Johnson is a symbol of everything that is wrong in today’s Republican Party,” for those who might disagree with my conclusion, what does Senator Johnson intend to do about the drug culture?

Johnson should support Trump in trying to get people off drugs by tying work into welfare and food into food stamps instead of drugs.

Johnson’s support should likewise extend to Trump’s attempts to reform schools and vocational training schools so people actually get educated and are not on welfare or $100,000 in debt after learning nothing but propaganda at a liberal college?

Lastly, how abut a tax incentive to hire “problem” workers instead of more H1-B slaves like Johnson wants? Drug companies that push legal drugs like opioids can at least not be tax subsidized through Medicaid. But again, Johnson would have to buck his drug company contributors on that one. Better to bash Trump or Roy Moore.