Tuesday, June 2, 2009




The subject for this week’s meeting will be WATER and who has a right
to the water which is in Oklahoma at a particular time. Our speaker
will be Hopper Smith. When Hopper left the legislature 5 or 6 years
ago, he had the second highest lifetime average on the Oklahoma
Constitution Newspaper’s Conservative Index of anyone in the
legislature. After returning from a tour of duty in Afganistan, Hopper
became President of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. He left
OCPA several months ago to form a lobbying and consulting firm.

One of his clients is the Tyrant County Water District. In case you
haven’t heard, they want to buy water from Oklahoma. I have not dealt
with this issue before as there has been a study in process which
might determine the long term needs and opportunities for Oklahoma
water. My position, based on the outcome of the study, might surprise
some. Based on what I known now, I favor selling water from some
parts of the state and am opposed to selling water from others. I
would also relish the day our governor would respectfully tell some
federal judge to go to …? If an order was issued that we had to sell
our water. You see, I really believe in the 10th Amendment to the
Constitution. This should be a most interesting meeting. I will have a
lot of questions if no one else does.


TULSA AREA Oklahomans For Sovereignty and Free Enterprise (OK-
SAFE) has just conducted an election of officers and have made some
changes for their monthly meetings. Starting Tuesday evening, June 2nd
the meeting location will change to the HQ Building, 1008-B North
Hickory Ave in Broken Arrow. The time is from 6:45 until 8:15 p.m. and
the meetings will go under the title of OK-SAFE Action Forum. This
month’s meeting will feature a review of this year’s legislative
session. They will cover legislation that should and should not have
passed. They will also look at how particular legislators voted.
Perhaps more important is the political reality and harsh truth about
who and what is influencing Oklahoma’s legislators. The meeting will
rap up with some action ideas about what needs to be done to improve


By now everyone who lives in central Oklahoma except, for those who
live in the deepest and darkest recesses of a cave, have heard at
least some information about the South Oklahoma City pharmacist who
shot and killed a stupid young black kid who was in process of
attempting to rob the pharmacy. The other killing I want to discuss is
that of Dr. George Tiller, the infamous Wichita Kansas late term
abortion butcher, known to many pro-life people as Tiller the baby
killer. Tiller was shot and killed in the foyer of Reformation
Lutheran Church in Wichita where he was serving as an usher. I will
discuss the local killing first, but when I get to the Wichita
killing, don’t expect me to speak in terms of political correctness.

When I read the account of the local killing in the Oklahoman, on May
22nd, I thought, based on the account of the pharmacist, that the
situation was totally justified. Following is part of his account: “He
also recalls the angry voices of people who gathered outside the
pharmacy Tuesday night, shouting that he was a racist.” Reading that
account in the paper instantly sent a flush of anger across my mind,
please let me explain.

For the most part, the vast majority of white people in Oklahoma have
little tolerance toward other white people who dislike black people or
make crude jokes which intend to harm blacks or other minorities. I
believe most white people want to see people of all color do well,
succeed and prosper based on each individual’s own hard work and

However, I, along with a lot of other people are tired of people
suggesting race or hatred as motives in situations when there is
little or no evidence to support such an allegation. I am tired of
Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and others like them who in my opinion are
nothing more than race hustling, pimps trying to always stir the pot
so they will be needed as the saviors of minorities from the evil
whitey, who they claim is always wanting to suppress minority

Therefore, I almost addressed this situation in last week’s e-mail,
wanting to go after the race baiters, whomever they might have been
and defending the pharmacist all at the same time. However, I decided
to wait until after law enforcement released a report either verifying
or contradicting the story of the pharmacist. Our friend Mark Shannon,
afternoon talk show host on KTOK 1000 AM didn’t wait. He aggressively
began a defense of the pharmacist who shot and killed the stupid

Then low and behold more information began to come forth and Oklahoma
County District Attorney David Prater filed first degree murder
charges against the pharmacist. Since that time all kinds of
irrational, emotional verbiage has broken forth and I believe it will
be a huge test for conservatives, who say we believe in the rule of
law. Conservatives who say we evaluate people and situations on the
merits and are only interested in the TRUTH. Conservatives who say we
believe in absolute truth and not in situational ethics, moral
relativism or that a good end justifies any means to get there.

At first I appreciated Mark Shannon being so aggressive in the
situation as he seemed to be sending a message to any of the race
hustlers that people would not be silent nor intimidated. But the more
I listened to Shannon, the more disgusted I became. I think people who
allow themselves to be “whipped up” into a frenzy generally make very
poor decisions and policies. I think Shannon went way too far and it
really came to a head this past Friday when he said something like, he
didn’t care about a technicality of the law, what he cared about was
that this pharmacist did nothing to ask for this trouble and now his
life is being ruined because some stupid kids (and now we suspect 2
adults) started the whole problem.

Here are the determining factors based on what is known at this time.
When the alleged robbers barged in, the pharmacist had every reason to
believe his life as well as others were in danger and he had every
right to use LETHAL force to eliminate the threat. Now the DA claims,
that the robber shot in the head was still alive but unconscious,
unarmed and no longer a threat to the pharmacist. However, store
videos show the pharmacist, after leaving the store, came back in,
retrieved another gun and walked over to the robber and shot and
killed him.

According to the account of the pharmacist, he went over and shot the
robber again because he saw him trying to get up. All the video shows
is the pharmacist shooting the robber again, it doesn’t show whether
or not he was trying to get up. It is my understanding that forensics
show the robber was unconscious and no longer a threat. I believe the
LAW is clear, if you are threatened, you have the right to use lethal
force to defend yourself. However, if the threat is gone you no longer
have the right to use lethal force. There is going to be a trial and a
jury will have to decide the TRUTH of the matter according to the

I believe the trial will boil down to the word of the pharmacist
verses the forensic evidence. There was certainly one bad decision
made on that day when some people decided to try and rob the pharmacy.
The real question is, was there another bad decision made on that day?
Did the pharmacist decide to cross the line of self defense and then
become a judge, jury and executioner? Shannon talks about the
pharmacist’s life being messed up because of the robbers, yet the
truth is, had he not shot the robber again (weather the robber lived
or died) the pharmacist would be an huge hero and facing no legal
problems today. I believe the law is well thought out and carefully in
place. We all are subject to having a difficult hand being dealt to us
from time to time. Life is about how we respond to the hand that is
dealt to us. Did the pharmacist make the second bad decision on that
day which is now the real reason his life is in a mess?

Based on two things I see, DA Prater was certainly justified in filing
the charges. In the account given to the Oklahoman by the pharmacist,
the sequence of events is very different than what is shown on the
video cameras. More importantly, the pharmacist claimed he was being
shot at by the would be robbers, yet the police have said no shots
were fired in the store other than what came from the pharmacist. I
question the trustworthiness of the pharmacist’s word.

In this past Tuesday’s Oklahoman there was a picture of a fellow from
Yukon who attended the hearing the day before. He said he went to
support the pharmacist because he “FELT” he was being railroaded. The
pharmacist deserves a fair trial before a FAIR and IMPARTIAL jury. I
don’t care how people FEEL, I care about the facts and what is just.
With all the emotions and feelings that are flying around, my fear
that the thing most likely to be railroaded will be JUSTICE.

On Saturday I received a call from a lawmaker wanting to know if I
would help get a crowd together for a rally at the pharmacy on behalf
of the pharmacist. I said no. I am very concerned that there may be
some lawmakers who try to take advantage of the emotions in this
situation and grandstand for their political careers rather than let
justice take its course. We don’t need anymore emotions in this case,
and God help us if people like Mark Shannon, who has said he doesn’t
care about the law, wind up on the jury. When we no longer care about
the law and set ourselves up as a judge operating on a situational
ethics value system, we become no different the President Obama and
the kind of people he seems destined to place on the Supreme Court.


Now, for George Tiller the baby killer, the news of his being killed
produces no emotions in me at all. I have no joy nor do I have any
sadness about his death. I do feel sorry for his wife, children and
grandchildren as I am sure they may have loved each other a great

Over many years now, Tiller has killed untold thousands of unborn
babies. He has specialized in late term abortions which are some of
the most brutal and gruesome to be performed. I have been told by Mark
Gietzen, Director of Kansan Coalition for Life, that most of his
clients were from out of state because there are only 2 other abortion
clinics in the U.S. specializing in late term abortions. By the way,
Mr. Gietzen as well as all pro-life organizations either have or will
condemn such a killing.

I have also been told that the type of abortions performed by Tiller
were very expensive and he took large sums of his profits to invest
into political races to protect his business. One of the main ones to
receive large financial contributions from Tiller was former Governor
Kathleen Sebelius who just recently resigned to become President
Obama’s Secretary of the U.S. Health and Human Services. Sebelius is a
Catholic who happens to be an ardent supporter of abortion on demand.

With all that said, Tiller will never kill another baby. However, in
the court of public opinion, I believe eliminating him by killing him
will be detrimental to the movement to win the hearts and minds of
Americans on this issue. I believe we are slowly winning this battle
to oppose abortions, but this could be a temporary setback. Already
pro-abortion advocates are trying to blame the voices of talk radio
and suggest it is the pro-life community that has stirred HATE in the
hearts and minds of some people to go out and kill those in the
abortion industry.

Certainly when a person takes the steps to kill an abortion provider,
I would think that person believed the justice system or law is
broken. That person has lost faith in government to perform its
function as described in the Declaration of Independence which is to
protect man’s unalienable (God given) “right to life” (innocent life
such as that of the unborn).

Over the years I have listened to the rhetoric of many in the pro-life
movement, especially those from Operation Rescue and I believe there
was another group called “lambs to the slaughter.” The later were
usually young single people who were willing to take more extreme
measures to hinder abortionists and they were quite willing to be
arrested and spend time in jail. Also besides people in organizations,
just simply people who described themselves as pro-life.

I am not advocating what I am about write, but simply trying to
explain what might be in the head of a pro-life person who would
resort to killing an abortionist, how a person that respects life
might justify killing another person.

There are two very powerful motivating forces. One is hate and another
is love. It is not uncommon to see news stories about people hating
other people enough that they are motivated to kill them. On the other
hand, according to John 3:16, it was love that motivated God to send
his only begotten Son to the earth to die a violent death on a cross
(to be the final blood sacrifice for the sins of man) so that mankind
would have an opportunity to be restored to a righteous (right
standing) relationship with Father God.

With that in mind, was it HATE toward the abortionist which motivated
this guy to kill Tiller or was it LOVE for the ever increasing number
of the unborn which motivated this fellow to stop the killings by
killing the killer?

The law is clear that whoever killed Tiller murdered him and will most
likely be tried, convicted and executed, or spend the rest of his life
in prison. At the same time others may wrestle with a moral quandary.
Purely from a moral standpoint, not legal, over the years we have sent
millions of Americans off to war to kill an enemy. In doing so, we
have had hundreds of thousands of Americans give up their lives in
those wars.

So the question must be asked, if it was a just war, why have we sent
our men and women off to kill and die? Is it not to protect their
wives and children from an evil threat to those lives as well as the
ability to live in liberty and to be able to be blessed with a family?
Do we not honor and respect both those living and dead soldiers who
killed others to protect our liberties, wives and children?

If today we had a hostage situation where the criminal had already
killed a person and was threatening to kill children and others,
wouldn’t we applaud and honor a bystander who successfully killed the
hostage taker? If so then why is it that our society condemns a person
who might be willing to give up their own life to save unborn babies,
the most innocent of all?

Have we fallen into the condition where government is protecting a
killer and condemning a rescuer? In Isaiah 5:20 God’s Word pronounces:
“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute
darkness for light and light for darkness;” (NAS).

The scriptures teach us that we are to obey the laws of man unless
they cause us to violate the commands of God. I believe Operation
Rescue took their name from Psalms 82:4 which says: “Rescue the weak
and needy; Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.” Some might
interpret that scripture to demand they do whatever is necessary to
save the lives of the unborn, no matter what the cost.

I have tried to relate some of the reasoning or justifications I have
heard over the years that could suggest, if a person really believed
an unborn baby is an innocent human being, to be protected from
someone planning on killing that innocent little one, it might be
insight to understand how someone might justify in their own mind the
morality of killing a killer. I am frankly surprised we don’t see a
lot more of these kinds of killings.

Again I want to be crystal clear. I am not at all advocating such
actions, I have simply wanted to relate what might be in the minds of
a person who would take one person’s life and have no remorse for
doing so. I believe that was the case with James Rudolph, convicted
several years ago for killing an abortionist somewhere back

One thought of my own, while I know many Lutherans who are strongly
pro-life and serious Christians, I would not want to be the pastor of
the Lutheran Church where Tiller was allowed to be an usher and a
respected member of the church. To preach a gospel so vacant of truth
and conviction that Tiller could believe he was in a righteous
relationship with the God of love as well as justice, must be the
scriptural definition of an ear tickling false prophet. Unless he
repents and becomes a real man of God rather than the false, then God
will deal with him as well as Tiller on judgment day. From what I know
about the scriptures, I wouldn’t want to be either one of them!

I look forward to seeing everyone this Wednesday

Charlie Meadows

1 comment:

Unknown said...

In either situation I don't believe 1st degree murder is the the appropriate charge. They were both crimes of passion with elements of self-defense, or the defense of others involved. That's why we have degrees of murder charges, whatever they all are. (1st, 2nd, justifiable homicide, manslaughter, etc) Obviously I'm no legal genius. Just my thoughts. Sometimes people get so emotional, and the strictly legal course of action remains so technically tangled, that bad choices are made. I believe they are called 'mitigating circumstances'. It does seem to me that both the pharmacist and the baby-saver may have made rash or bad choices. Yes, I said baby-saver, instead of Dr-killer. And the so-called Dr should probably be called the baby-killer. Therefore the baby-saver could also be called the 'baby-killer killer'.