Sunday, October 30, 2022



Thanks to Chuck White for picking up what we had to put down a couple years ago. I am unable to continue so it's great that Chuck has decided to put this together. It appears that the format of a "discussion group" will be the same and I'm glad to see that the group will be beginning with a study of the Roman Catechism (Council of Trent) in which Catholic teaching was infallibly and clearly proclaimed. Thank you for your years of faithfulness to our study group which continued for almost 15 years. So now may it continue and many prayers and hopes that it will continue to benefit and edify all those who attend. Please contact Chuck directly for more information. See attached. 

Sincerely, Tim

Thursday, October 27, 2022


 Posted by Frenchie.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing"

This famous phrase, often attributed to John Burke, was in fact part of a longer speech by John Stewart Mill during an 1867 inaugural address at the University of St Andrews.

"Let not anyone pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm, if he takes no part and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man, who without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject."

Both messages are clear, in the sense that like the Pharisees of last Sunday's gospel, many people of this Church of Nice on Guam, continue to exalt themselves, for all the "good work" they do, rather than taking an humble approach about the things they fail to do.

Lets explain....

Four years ago we elected the most vociferous advocate for infanticide on Guam, as governor of our island.

 Tim Rohr justly pointed this out in his recent letter to the editor (which can be found in our archives) .

This was done with the acquiescence of many Catholics, if not with their active participation. We have often demonstrated the impossibility for Catholics to allow for the murder of innocent children, while claiming to be Catholic, and presenting themselves to receive the sacraments of the Church, and/or  put forward both their advocacy for murder, and their claim that they belong to the Church.

This creates what is known as a scandal.

During the last four years, Governor Lou Leon Guerrero-Cook has spent unknown amount of Guam's taxpayers' funds to search for an abortionist to come on Guam. Her partner in crime and willing enabler widely known as "Calamity Jane" aka Jane Flores, has been plotting to bring the plan forward, and ultimately created a situation of false narrative to allow for murder activists from Hawaii to be able to prescribe the "morning after pill" to women wanting to abort chemically. ( a dangerous procedure which can have catastrophic consequences for the women involved.)

Four years ago, when pro life Catholic activists were getting ready to confront then candidate LLG for her position on child murder, the all powerful Fr. Richards advised them (wrongly) that the Church had to remain neutral on the subject, in order not to lose its Tax exempt status. We, in these pages denounced such decision, as being cowardly, unethical and immoral. This was enabling evil by remaining silent.

Later, after her election and the return of Archbishop Byrnes from one of his many absences, he sent to the governor a personal admonition (as suggested by canon law) through a hand delivered letter to the Governor. 

Move forward four years.

Fr Richards has returned to the frozen steppes of Michigan, Archbishop Byrnes is still on medical leave, and the Archdiocese is as silent as ever, regarding the evil done in our names.

This in itself would still be upsetting, but unfortunately, there is a lot worse.

None other than the Archdiocese official press apparatus: Umatuna Si Yu'us was clueless enough to allow on their official Facebook page, pictures of some of the influential Catholic groups on island: namely the Court of our Lady of Kamarin #2047 of Hagatna and the Court of Maria Rainan y Familia #2450 of the St Anthony St Victor Parish, meeting with the Governor for photo ops, subsequently used as political ads, "to embrace works of faith, acts of love and the promotion of justice, equality and the advancement of human rights and dignity for all" (I am choosing not to translate this woke language into English, as to not insult our readers)

This apparently is okay for the chancery, and Tony Diaz who appears to opine this was part of the neutrality necessary not to loose the Archdiocese tax exempt status.

The dystopian world that surrounds us, has seeped within the ranks of the Church of Nice, thinking it is okay to endorse advocates of child murder, just as they kept silent for years when some of the same monsters were abusing sexually our own children

As Jesus reminded us last Sunday: "whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted"

Do not remain silent this upcoming election. Do not allow evil to move forward because you did nothing to stop it. Our Archdiocese is painfully attempting to close the chapter of sexual abuse in our ranks. This was only possible thanks to the silence of people in the know. Lets not allow Lou Leon Guerrero-Cook to continue to advocate for the holocaust of the innocent children of our island.

Shame to the Catholics in Name Only who are considering doing so. 


This letter was published in the Pacific Island Times on August 8, 2022.


Attorney General Leevin Camacho marshaled enough judicial authority to employ the magic words, “void ab initio,” to deep-six PL 20-134, former Sen. Belle Arriola’s anti-abortion law. 

“Void ab initio” means having no legal effect from inception. A law, agreement, sale, or other action that is void has no legal effect. A void action cannot be ratified or validated. End of story, right?

Maybe not. The answer one gets depends on the question he asks. Here’s what Leevin said, “We limit our opinion in this case to instances where laws are passed in clear violation of established constitutional rights.” So Leevin limited the question he asked. 

But try this: type in “effect of an unconstitutional statute” on Google search. The first hit you’ll get is an ancient Indiana U. law review. 

Thumb through the pages and you’ll find this entry: “…the theory that the statute is void ab initio should be tested. Suppose a case where the court declares a statute unconstitu­tional today, and then six months hence reverses this decision and decides that the statute is constitutional. If the void ab initio doctrine be applied, the first decision would leave a situation similar to that described by the Indiana court, as if no statute had been passed.

“[But] All courts seem to agree that the void statute (if such a contradiction be permitted) is resurrected and is effective as from the date of its enactment. The purported enactment which was said to have been fatally smitten at its birth by the constitution has by some legal hocus pocus been cured of its congenital disease. This is also the Indiana rule.” 

So, the “Indiana rule”— take note, all courts!— mandates the resurrection of a void ab initio (dead) statute. What Leevin didn’t do is ask this question: “Is an unconstitutionally void ab initio (dead) statute resurrected when a court overrules the constitutional infirmity?” 

Sure, we’re closer to Indonesia than Indiana but Leevin might have reached a different result had he plumbed the depth and tested the breadth of the Indiana rule in American jurisdictions.

Leevin told us: “We recognize that ‘[a]n analysis of the constitutionality (or organicity) of a local statute must begin with the general rule that legislative enactments are presumed to be constitutional.’” Along the same lines, attorneys general routinely defend the statutes in their respective jurisdiction if such can be accomplished absent the use of an antiemetic. 

If it can be argued that the Dobbs decision is the talisman that resurrects Belle Arriola’s law, then Leevin should move to dissolve the district court injunction that prevented the enforcement of that law. Otherwise, the answer to his truncated question is the death of Belle Arriola’s law. If he moves to dissolve the injunction, then we’ll have a judicial declaration of the viability of Belle’s law. (There’s no need to seek a hokey declaratory judgment as Leevin did in the quarantine hotel procurement matter.)

In the benediction of his opinion, Leevin tells us, “Moving forward, difficult moral and policy questions such as the decision of whether to allow or limit abortion must be decided by the Legislature, not the courts.” 

Our legislature has spoken unanimously on the moral and policy question. The reason that the voice of the people, i.e., the legislature, is muted and mooted is apparent. 

Because the 20th Guam Legislature did not have the power to pass P.L. 20-134 in the first place, it is void ab initio and has had no legal effect on Guam since its passage.

It’s not what Leevin did; it’s what Leevin didn’t do.

Bob Klitzkie is a former senator and Superior Court of Guam judge pro tem. He hosts the talk show, “Tall Tales,” on KUSG-FM (93.3 FM) weekday afternoons from 4 to 6 p.m. Send feedback to

Tuesday, October 25, 2022


Letter to the editor

Looking at data, abortion doctors have nothing to fear on Guam

Tim Rohr

Per an Oct. 21 news story in this publication, “lawyers for two Hawaii-based doctors have filed their answer to the brief submitted by the Office of the Attorney General in the ongoing appeal of an injunction placed on Guam's in-person consultation mandate for abortions.”

From the story it appears that the Hawaii-based doctors have nothing to support their “answer” other than Guam is a scary place:  


Monday, October 24, 2022


It's been a rough road these last five years and I've had important personal matters to address. They have been addressed. I want to thank Frenchie for keeping the blog going during my hiatus. Frenchie will continue to contribute and administrate the blog along with myself. See you soon.