From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: "Assault Media Militia" Cause Terror In Paris, France Date: 01 Sep 1997 06:46:36 -0400 (EDT) "When people are abusing their liberties, you have to move to limit them." Seems to me to be the epitome of that statement by Clinton. Tom At 11:15 PM 8/31/97 -0400, you wrote: >In the wake of the terribly tragic death of Princess Diana, crushed to >death in a high-tech Mercedes Benz as she was being pursued by a pack of >paparazzi wild dogs, it has been interesting to watch the "mainstream >press", i.e., CNN, ABC, CBS, NBS, BBC, etc., attempt (desperately!) to >distance themselves from the photographers and reporters who were chasing >Princess Diana and who, after the motor vehicle in which she was riding >had crashed, rushed up and snapped photos instead of contacting police >and rescue squads and rendering aid to the seriously injured parties in the >motor vehicle. Barbara Walters, Peter Jennings, Linden Soles, et al. have >all but whined, "We, the 'good media', *did not do this*, the paparazzi >did!", as if rabid paparazzi photographers and reporters were not part of >the media. Yeah, right. Give me a break. Uh huh. Sure. > >I made a polite reference today to dangerous "assault media militia." In the >wake of this demonstration of egregious irresponsibility by members of the >press in Paris, can the "lunatic press" can be trusted with the freedoms >given to them, courtesy of the First Amendment? Because the media blame all >gun owners for isolated incidents of crime, should it not then be fair for >gun owners to blame the media (*every last one of them*) for the misdeeds >of the photographers and reporters in Paris? While a total ban on "assault >media militia" may not yet be in order, perhaps President Clinton and his >pals in Congress should consider imposing "reasonable controls" in the form >of "reasonable censorship" on "assault media militia" talking heads such as >Boy George Steffie, Bill Press on CROSSFIRE, Eleanor Clift, Carl Rowan, >Jesse Jackson, etc. Wouldn't sealing Boy George Steffie's mouth constitute >a step in the right direction?" And shouldn't private watchdog groups be >tracking activities and movements of "assault media militia hate groups", >clearly a threat to the stability of society? > >If just one life can be saved ... > >1. by banning the future sale of all high priced "assault" photographic > equipment and accessories >2. by banning possession of telephoto lenses, the weapon of choice of > "assault media militia" >3. by controlling and tracking sale of film, and marking film with taggants >4. by restricting the capacity of all rolls of film to ten frames only >5. by banning sale and possession of non-manual cameras of any type >6. by requiring media members to demonstrate a "compelling need" to the > federal government before being licensed to own or use any photographic > equipment and by disallowing possession of "arsenals" of photographic > equipment and accessories >7. by focusing the attention of the DOJ's and FBI's joint domestic counter- > terrorism center on the grave threat to public safety posed by "assault > media militia" and their radical extremist supporters in Congress >8. by involving Sarah Brady, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara > Boxer in a new, unified effort to ban black semi-automatic cameras > and to demonize all those persons who would advocate their use >9. by getting Super Prez Wee Willie involved in this new "cause celebre" >10. by working diligently to demonize the "camera culture" worldwide > >... then our world could be made safer if the CEOs of all major media groups >worldwide were to jump on board and begin to push to achieve the ten simple >objectives outlined above. And if millions of innocent media members who >had nothing to do with causing the death of Princess Diana and others in >Paris have to give up * their freedoms * to make us all safer, well, maybe >they can then join the NRA and take up recreational shooting after their >Nikon cameras and film have been confiscated and their news reports have been >censored by GS-9 bureaucrats laboring in the Secretary of Media Control's (a >newly created Clintonista cabinet post) basement offices? > >(Special note: Please know that I am * not * trying to trivialize the loss >of Princess Diana and her companions in the motor vehicle that crashed in >Paris. As the father of two daughters, I can hardly imagine how Prince >Charles was able to explain to Prince William (15) and Prince Harry (12) >what had happened to their beloved mother. A nightmare come true? Absolutely. >My prayers are with the bereaved families of those innocent persons who lost >their lives in the needless crash in Paris. May they rest in eternal peace >in a quiet, beautiful place far, far away from this troubled Earth of ours.) > >Regards, > >Chris Ferris >Litchfield NH >ferriscc@mainstream.net > > > "Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't." Unknown-Thanks to E Pluribus Unum ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: Media Extremists in Idaho Date: 01 Sep 1997 09:46:27 -0700 Lewiston Morning Tribune: The Bill Hall article below, which was forwarded to the internet, serves as a reminder to me of a couple of things. One, it's an example of why I generally don't bother to read the mainstream media's publications. And two, it reminds me of why we at The Idaho Observer started our newspaper last January in Post Falls: somebody needs to tell the truth. As part of the "extremist" movement here in North Idaho (we "extremely" want our Constitutional Republic back and we "extremely" want our elected officials to obey the law), it amazes me to see the depths to which people like Bill Hall will "humorously" sink to prove how unaware he is of the reality America is living in today. We don't hate our government; according to the Constitution (an old, outdated document, right?) we ARE the government! Our elected officials have greatly usurped powers that were never intended to be theirs (that old, outdated document explicitly details what powers are legal for them to have), and we'd like to see them reigned in and obeying the law - the Supreme Law of the land, the U.S. Constitution. As for federal informants and the like, we don't much worry about them. We know they're there; they're generally pretty obvious; but since in most cases the only people advocating illegal activities will be the informants/provacateurs themselves, it's usually pretty easy to steer clear of them. For example, when the Georgia militia folks were arrested and tried a year or so ago, the BATF informant admitted on the stand, under oath, that HE had buried the "bomb-making materials" on Bob Starr's property himself, without Mr. Starr's knowledge or approval. The militia people themselves did nothing illegal, but they're now in prison anyway. Remember the World Trade Center bombing? The FBI admitted that they provided the explosives and - oops - forgot to switch them for harmless powder. And then there's Oklahoma City, where the coverup is so massive it would be laughable, were it not for the deaths of 168 people. Explosives experts by the dozens have stated that only shaped charges on the columns of the building could have done the damage we saw on the tube for days (along with the shrill mainstream media cries of "evil militia, evil right-wing talk-show hosts, evil assault weapons" etc.). You won't print this letter; you don't have the guts to do so. But again, that's why there's an Idaho Observer. Somebody's got to tell the truth. And the interesting thing is that, not just here in Extremist Idaho but all over America, people are waking up by the thousands (if not millions) and realizing that the pabulum they've been fed for decades by the likes of the Lewiston Morning Tribune is exactly that. - Jeff. Adams Maybe your wife and dog are FBI agents Bill Hall The intriguing question is not how many latter-day Nazis, militia members and defiant racists now live in Idaho. The intriguing question is what percentage of them are FBI undercover agents. That question is probably not half so intriguing to me as it is to latter-day Nazis, militia member and defiant racists. It's the sort of question that could make a person itchy if he is a regular at extremist meetings and goes out for a beer afterward with one of the boys. If that really is one of the boys? Or is that one of the G-men? Is it one of THEM? The strange part is that the few hundred political oddballs who have taken up residence in Idaho in the past few years tend to be kind of paranoid without any help. They tend to see government agents manipulating everything in this society. And they're probably wrong except for their own meetings where the guy presiding may be an FBI undercover agent. Or maybe it's you, brother. Or maybe you, sister. Or maybe it's me. We could be everywhere. We may even be you. That's how strange you are. You could be us and we could be you and you would never know for sure. If I thought like that, I'd go hide in the hills, too. The great tidal change in all of this is that the prime targets for undercover infiltration by federal agents today are more on the right than on the left. A generation and more ago, it was the opposite. The anti-war movement probably included dozens of long-haired, tie-died FBI agents. And in the generation before that, it was generally and probably accurately suspected that a fair percentage of the members of the American Communist Party were FBI agents. Without those federal dues the American Communist Party might have been even more anemic than it was -- perhaps too weak to survive. But it boggles the mind to realize that some of the cookies brought to the fund-raising bake sales of the American Communist Party were baked from ingredients purchased at government expense. Thus the Communist Party was the only political organization during those years enjoying the luxury of government subsidized dessert. Similarly, today a certain percentage of the folks hanging out in Idaho are some sort of federal agents willing to undergo the humiliation of putting on a shrunken T-shirt and riding around Idaho in a pickup truck with their beer guts hanging out, their agent wives in the back and their federal bird dogs sitting in the warm cab beside them where a good Idaho bird dog belongs. As an Idaho native, cringing at each overdone national news report on the bizarros of Idaho, I take solace in knowing that whatever the alleged number of racist, government-hating survivalists, the actual number is somewhat less because a certain percentage of these people are feds and therefore don't count. A certain percentage of them don't actually hate the government. They are the government. And maybe some of the county commissioners and school board members and city council people and even the congressmen around here aren't really as far out as they pretend. There couldn't be that many of them in one little state without federal infiltration. I just hope if Congressman Helen Chenoweth actually is a federal agent infiltrating the Idaho delegation that she isn't doubled-dipping by drawing both salaries. Actually, if I were an Idaho extremist (and I am, but of a different sort), I would be most suspicious of the people who appear to be most loyal to the movement. It is human nature when posing inside an organization to go a bit overboard and try to appear so fervent that you leave no one in doubt as to your alleged loyalty. Thus the more loyal a person seems to be to white American constitutionalist causes of the oppressed white males, the more likely that person is to be a faker. As far as I'm concerned, if I were in an organization like that, I wouldn't trust anybody but my bird dog (and sometimes he has a hint of the police dog in his eyes). Of course, you can always trust the kids and the missus. Well, at least some of the kids. And the missus, for sure. On the other hand, you better not forget her birthday if you know what's good for you. Sometimes you rile a woman and she'll go to work for THEM! For all you know, you may be sleeping with an FBI agent. - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oh Lord, lead us into Your Glory - bathe us in the holy & pure light of Your Spirit; let Your righteous fire burn away all that is in us that is not of You, so that we might worship the Living God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. Amen. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: FCC Public File Auto-FAQ Date: 01 Sep 1997 09:21:01 PST This "FAQ" is auto-posted once a month via cron triggered script, and may be triggered off by hand from time to time in between if the info is requested by someone, such as when the House recently voted down the AW Ban and the Media threw a hissy fit. The purpose of this FAQ is to inform people what they can do about Media generated lies and misinformation. While the FCC only handles Broadcast Media, (TV and Radio), some of these techniques will work for magazines and newspapers too. If I've missed something, or you find errors, let me know and I'll add/fix it. 1.a. Send letters of complaint to the Station Manager every time it happens with all the time, details, other info, and your complaint(s). 1.b. Send an additional copy for their FCC (Federal Communications Commission) Public file. 1.c. Send an additional copy to the FCC itself, in case they don't put it in their Public file. 2.a. Send a letter of complaint to their Station Owner as per above, with copies as per above (1.b and 1.c). 3. Send copies of their replies to you along with yours to them to their FCC Public file, so that it gets nice and fat, again, with copies to the FCC itself. 4. If you can afford it, send all corespondence by Certified Mail with Return Receipt Requested. Send a copy of the Return Receipt with everything that goes to the FCC itself, so that they will have additional evidence if the Station is cheating on their Public File. 5.a. Go to the Public Library and look up "Standard Rate and Data Services" (SRDS) "Directory of National Advertisers." It is found in many major Libraries (in the business/reference stacks), and lists EVERY current advertiser, who the players are at both the company and advertising agency(s), and the appropriate telephone and fax (and probably E-Mail by now) addresses. If your Library doesn't have it, it can be requested. Otherwise you can watch their commercials for a few days to a week, listing all their advertisers. There are other references that have the addresses for the nation's business headquarters too. look them all up and pass the addresses and phone/FAX numbers etc., around so that everyone can bitch to the sponsors. IF enough people do that, it'll get back to the Station. Tell them if the Station continues their nastiness you'll _consider_ changing to brand(X), (otherwise they'll just write you off as a loss). 5.b. The above, (5.a.), can be a lot easier and less time consuming if you're dealing with a newspaper's or a magazine's ads, as they are right in front of you for the listing. 6. If they put on something good or even just more reasonable, call and compliment them on it, but do _not_ send any kudos to their FCC file, or write to them about it. That way they have to keep it up and hope, as there is nothing good in the file or in writing that they can show the FCC to justify their Station's License. 7. Federal Communications Commission, Complaints and Compliance Division Room 6218, 2025 M Street NW Washington, D.C. 20554 FAX: 202-653-9659 FCC Attn: Edythe Wise -- An _EFFECTIVE_ | The _only_important_difference_ between Nazi-ism, Fascism, weapon in every | Communism, Communitarianism, Socialism and (Neo-)Liberalism hand = Freedom | is the _spelling_, and that the last group hasn't got the on every side! | Collective brains to figure it out. -- Bill Vance ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: TWA800: French Investigators Barred (fwd) Date: 02 Sep 1997 08:12:50 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- http://www.yahoo.com/headlines/970829/politics/stories/twa_1.html http://biz.yahoo.com/finance/97/08/29/ba_z0000_1.html French families of TWA 800 victims are raising cane over the fact that the FBI/NTSB/Navy have never allowed French investigators access to the investigation. The illogical spin the lawyer of the French families, Jose Cremades, puts on it is that it's a cover-up to suppress a mechanical failure conclusion. Uh ya... FBI trying to suppress mechanical failure... sure. I have to wonder if Cremades reads the news.? Of course it's easier to sue a private business than the government, and his job is to bag a hefty lawsuit. The Reuters article states: ...U.S. National Transportation Safety Board has denied Perdrix access to evidence on grounds the French authorities cannot provide adequate guarantees that it will ---> be kept confidential, Cremades said. ---> "In the case of Flight 800, everything is ---> secret. We are challenging this approach..." Cremades said. He said that if U.S. authorities continued to deny evidence to French investigators, the group might appeal to President Jacques Chirac for help. The barring of France (which lost many of its citizens in the accident) from the TWA800 investigation is absolutely unprecedented in the history of international aviation disasters, where all effected countries get involved. But as we can see, TWA 800 is a top secret "investigation." We have a right to the truth, not to a cover-up!! FYI: when Richard Russell offered Boeing the radar tape, which that indicates Boeing may not be at fault, they didn't want to see it... "Don't question our guilt." Uhh... gee?? Well, Boeing is a major military contractor. Loosing this case would be less harmful than loosing military contracts for implicating the military. And Clinton just paved the way for a merger of Boeing and McDonnald Douglas. Why rock the boat now when things are going so perfectly: Boeing to Absorb McDonnell Douglas in Merger, A Defacto $16 Billion Corporate Welfare Program?: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1997/news_release_970731c.html "Center fuel tank? $16 billion? ...it's our fault." Anti-trust laws??? Never heard of 'um. Boeing Responds to European Commission, Objections to McDonnell Douglas Merger: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1997/news.release.970716.html Boeing Absorption of Rockwell International Corp: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1996/news.release.961213.html Anti-trust laws??? Those are for the little guys. Boeing Awarded $8 Million Missile Contract (4/30/97): http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1997/news.release.970325a.html Boeing Awarded $8 Million Navy Missile Contract (3/25/97): http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1997/news.release.970325a.html Boeing Awarded $13 Million Missile Trainer Contract (11/5/96): http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1996/news.release.961105.html Boeing Awarded $660 Million Fighter Contract (11/16/97): http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1996/news.release.961116.html Boeing Awarded $26 Million Missile Contract (pre-TWA-800): http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1995/news.release.950614-b.html Now why on earth would Boeing want to do the military a favor? ******************************************************************* Visit Ian Williams Goddard ------> http://www.erols.com/igoddard ___________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: An Attaboy for Mike O'Hare, et al!! (fwd) Date: 02 Sep 1997 08:20:43 PST Yi - HAW!!!!! On Sep 02, Eugene W. Gross wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Hi Folks, This has got to warm the cockles of your heart!!! En Agape, Gene =================================== UN FLAG LOWERED AND US FLAG RAISED IN RACINE, WISCONSIN RACINE, WISCONSIN (October 24, 1996)-- Freedom loving activists in Racine Wisconsin took down a publicly displayed UN flag and replaced it with an American flag today. Police arrived on the scene and told the 63 patriots to take down the American flag and hoist back up the UN flag. The activists led by Mike O'Hare and Jeb Haas refused and formed a human barricade around the flagpole asking the question, "Who do you (the police) work for, the United Nations or We the People of the United States?" Police considered the ramifications of making arrests and opted to refrain from making any arrests. The group also burned a UN flag during the demonstration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MICHAEL O'HARE, 414-534-9440. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: Full Auto Assault Media "Machine Gunning" Militia Run Amok, Says , Paris Accident Witness Date: 02 Sep 1997 20:24:24 -0400 (EDT) Tonight, ABC news reported that a witness who had responded to the scene of Diana's motor vehicle accident and who wished to render aid to the passengers of the crushed vehicle, was quoted as saying: "The photographers were 'machine-gunning' the car with their cameras!" What a *priceless* quote, and on national news, no less! I wonder if the "full auto assault media militia" members had paid a $200.00 transfer tax to BATF on each of their full auto cameras? And if they had registered their portable arsenals with French authorities? My inquiring nobanning mind wants to know. And, on tonight's other local TV talk shows, Boston media jabber-boxes are yammmering on and on about their "sacred First Amendment" and how it "should not be under attack", yadda, yadda, yadda. Watching the media rant and rave about the incredible importance of safeguarding "their First Amendment" constitutes, well, quite a different sort of "reloading" than I would experience sitting in front of my old RCBS Rockchucker press (yes, I would like to buy a Dillon ... some day), but this media hysteria over "their rights" is almost better than factory new ammunition for Second Amendment proponents' "argument ammo boxes." My boxes are, right now, filled with juicy sound bites, straight from the mouths of media slickies who hate guns and gun owners with a passion. What goes around, does indeed, (sometimes), come around. (I only wish that this terrible tragedy in Paris did not have to be a causative factor. I still grieve for the bereaved families and friends of all persons who lost their lives or were seriously injured in the needless crash.) Best regards, Chris Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net Some bumper sticker ideas: REMEMBER PRINCESS DI THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ABC CBS CNN NBC STOP MEDIA MURDERERS MURDERED PRINCESS DI KILLED PRINCESS DI MERCILESS MEDIA JACKALS THE NEWS MEDIA MURDERED PRINCESS DIANA ARE PRINCESS KILLERS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA? MEDIA MURDERERS KILLED GUILTY OF MURDER IN PARIS PRINCESS DIANA These are *harsh slogans*, but I sense that it is high time for the press to take some *hard thumping*. Again, my feeling is "what goes around, comes around." And had media morons not been chasing the Mercedes-Benz, the car's speed would have been much more reasonable, even if the operator had consumed too much alcohol prior to driving, for which offense there is also no excuse. Bottom line: no media morons, no deceased Princess Diana, no two sons overwhelmed at the loss of their beloved mother. If my slant on this tragic affair is off base, please so advise. I do not want to be insensitive to the overwhelming grief which is consuming the Spencer family and the families of the other killed and injured persons. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: Full Auto Assault Media "Machine Gunning" Militia Run Date: 03 Sep 1997 06:20:48 -0400 (EDT) Chris, No I don't think you are being insensitive to the terrible loss of life as a result of the media's abuse of their "First Amendment Rights". In my mind they are all culpable of manslaughter in this incident. Maybe it's time for the same restrictions on the "freedom of the press" as is currently suffered by those who excersize their Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Tom At 08:24 PM 9/2/97 -0400, you wrote: >Tonight, ABC news reported that a witness who had responded to the >scene of Diana's motor vehicle accident and who wished to render aid >to the passengers of the crushed vehicle, was quoted as saying: "The >photographers were 'machine-gunning' the car with their cameras!" What a >*priceless* quote, and on national news, no less! I wonder if the "full auto >assault media militia" members had paid a $200.00 transfer tax to BATF on >each of their full auto cameras? And if they had registered their portable >arsenals with French authorities? My inquiring nobanning mind wants to know. > snip >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Some bumper sticker ideas: > >REMEMBER PRINCESS DI THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ABC CBS CNN NBC >STOP MEDIA MURDERERS MURDERED PRINCESS DI KILLED PRINCESS DI > >MERCILESS MEDIA JACKALS THE NEWS MEDIA >MURDERED PRINCESS DIANA ARE PRINCESS KILLERS > > THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA? MEDIA MURDERERS KILLED >GUILTY OF MURDER IN PARIS PRINCESS DIANA > >These are *harsh slogans*, but I sense that it is high time for the press >to take some *hard thumping*. Again, my feeling is "what goes around, comes >around." And had media morons not been chasing the Mercedes-Benz, the >car's speed would have been much more reasonable, even if the operator >had consumed too much alcohol prior to driving, for which offense there is >also no excuse. Bottom line: no media morons, no deceased Princess Diana, >no two sons overwhelmed at the loss of their beloved mother. If my slant >on this tragic affair is off base, please so advise. I do not want to be >insensitive to the overwhelming grief which is consuming the Spencer >family and the families of the other killed and injured persons. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > "Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't." Unknown-Thanks to E Pluribus Unum ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Starr's Office's Response to News of Bribe Attempt Date: 03 Sep 1997 06:28:50 -0400 (EDT) >Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 17:35:00 -0400 >From: E Pluribus Unum >To: E Pluribus Unum Email Distribution Network >Subject: Starr's Office's Response to News of Bribe Attempt > >AEN News >Jim Ross > > In the Washington Times OP ED section today is a letter under >the >heading "Clinton is bribing witnesses and Starr should speak up". > The full text of the letter to the editor follows. > > "As the Miami lawyer for former Arkansas State Trooper L.D. Brown, I >was >gratified by the Washington Times story and editorial about the Clinton >administration's efforts to extort Mr. Brown's silence. > > "I was dismayed, however, by the response of Ken Starr's office to my >making the bribe attempt public. > > "Mr. Starr's Deputy Independent Counsel W. Hickman Ewing, Jr. called >me >to covey his office's fury that I would let President Clinton's >extortion >efforts see the light of day. > > "The epithets he hurled at me for encouraging Mr. Starr to do his job >would have been better directed at James Carville. > > "How dare I think that in a democracy the people ought to know about >witness tampering by a president. > > "The Starr office call convinces me, and it should suggest to others, >that the folks who are looking to Mr. Starr to remedy what's wrong in >this >White House should look elsewhere." > >Signed: >John B. Thompson >Coral Gables, Fla. >Regards, > >Jim > >********************************************************** >James A. Ross - Ross Engineering, Inc. - Sterling, VA USA >Surveillance and Countersurveillance Services Worldwide >Telephone: 800-US-DEBUG - Facsimile: 703-450-2204 >email: jross@rosseng.com - home: http://www.rosseng.com >********************************************************** > > > > "Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't." Unknown-Thanks to E Pluribus Unum ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: [RightNow] The Clintons Knew About The Money (fwd) Date: 03 Sep 1997 07:39:32 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 21:14:19 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: RightNow@MailList.Net Our nomination on this month's best article on why impeachment hearings may begin before the end of the year: Excerpted From August 31, 1997 L. A. Times: Clintons Knew of Trust Fund's Ills, Sources Say By GLENN F. BUNTING, Times Staffwriter WASHINGTON--In the six months leading up to last fall's election, the trustees of President Clinton's legal defense fund acted with the knowledge of the president and first lady to conceal the potentially embarrassing story of disciples of a Taiwan-based sect donating $639,000, according to interviews and newly available documents. The decision to later refund the money and keep the matter under wraps followed two meetings with White House officials. Under its rules, the trust fund -- which was set up to raise money for the Clintons' personal legal bills--is to operate independently of political influence. On May 9, 1996, six administration officials--including Political operatives Bruce R. Lindsey and Harold M. Ickes--attended An hourlong White House briefing on the sensitive issue with Three representatives of the private Presidential Legal Expense Trust. The trust reported that the checks and money orders were delivered in a Manila envelope by Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie, a former Little Rock, Ark., restaurateur and longtime acquaintance of the president, but had originated from the followers of the supreme master of a Buddhist "cult." To underscore the concern that public disclosure of the fund-raising affair would embarrass the president, one senior White House official at the meeting scrawled tabloid-style headlines linking Clinton to cult money. By June, the trustees had settled on accounting steps that would allow them to refund the money without reporting the transactions until after the November election. When the donations and refunds were finally revealed in December, six weeks after the election, the defense fund and White House contended that the trustees needed nine months to thoroughly review the contributions. But confidential congressional records, internal defense fund papers and private meeting notes reveal a concerted effort by the White House to deal with the issue months earlier. The documents Show the depth of White House involvement and provide new details on how much top officials knew of the controversy. White House special counsel Lanny J. Davis strongly denied Any attempt within the White House to withhold information about Trie's activities. -------------------------------------------------------------- If you're not hearing about what's wrong with the Clinton Adminstration, you must be getting your news from Tom Brokaw." - Elefanceros -------------------------------------------------------------- Elephants R Us Home Page http://www.enteract.com/~wdcook/republicans Home of the Hillary-Ometer =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= To unsubscribe from this mailing list, DISREGARD ANY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE and go to the Web page at http://www.maillist.net/rightnow.html. New subscriptions can also be entered at this page. If you cannot access the World Wide Web, send an e-mail message to RightNow-Request@MailList.Net and on the SUBJECT LINE put the single word: unsubscribe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Here it is the ultimate Princess Di Conspiracy (fwd) Date: 03 Sep 1997 08:37:28 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 10 Num. 95 ======================================= ("Quid coniuratio est?") "Ru Mills" -- WHOEVER CONTROLS PRINCESS DIANA CONTROLS THE WORLD ================================================== [Here is Ru Mills' account of the death of Princess Diana. "Ru Mills" is a pseudonym; formerly she published the "Rumor Mill News." Consider all of what follows, unless specifically noted otherwise, as "according to Ru Mills."] Princess Diana and her soon-to-be husband, Dodi Fayed, were fatally injured in the Pont de l'Alma tunnel. The site is ancient, dating back to the time of the Merovingian kings (ca. 500 - 751 A.D.), and before. In pre-Christian times, the Pont de l'Alma was a pagan sacrificial site. Note that in the pagan connotation, at least, sacrifice is not to be confused with murder: the sacrificial victim had to be a willing participant. In the time of the Merovingian kings, the Pont de l'Alma was an underground chamber. Founder of the Merovingian dynasty was Merovaeus, said to be descended from the union of a sea creature and a French queen. Merovaeus followed the pagan cult of Diana. In Middle English, "soul" (Alma) has as etymology "descended from the sea." "Pont," has as a Latin root "pontifex," meaning a Roman high priest. (See also pons, pontis -- bridge; passage.) "Alma" comes from the Latin "almus," meaning nourishing. One translation of Pont de l'Alma would be "bridge of the soul." Another would be "passage of nourishment." All true European royalty is descended from the Merovingians, which are believed to be descendants of Jesus Christ. During the Merovingian era, if two kings had a dispute over property, it was settled in combat at Pont de l'Alma. According to legend, anyone killed there goes straight to Heaven and sits at the right hand of God, watching over all his foe was to do. The person killed in combat was actually considered to be the "winner," since he became God's eyes on earth and even could manipulate events. The current British royal family are imposters. The House of Windsor is a fraud. But the lineage of Lady Diana Spencer goes back to Charles II of the House of Stewart. The House of Stewart is of *true* royal blood. Diana's sons, William and Harry, have 3-quarters true nobility in their blood. Princess Diana was in a powerful position. Two main factions vied for control over her: (1) the New World Order faction, founded on an alliance between King William III (Bank of England, modern system of finance, and "national debt" all beginning during his reign) and later, the Rothschilds, and (2) the true nobility of Europe. *Within* the New World Order faction, there are smaller, warring factions, exemplified by Rothschilds vs. Rockefellers. The plan of the New World Order faction was to marry Lady Diana to an American. Even though Bill Clinton has bastard roots in the Rockefeller clan, he is rejected by them and is aligned with the Rothschilds. Bill Clinton was the designated future husband for Lady Diana, with Hillary Clinton to be eliminated through divorce or even murder. The Rockefellers were furious; in no way would they allow a marriage between Bill Clinton and Lady Diana. In Great Britain, Prince William would be on the throne by age 25; if Prince Charles did not abdicate, he would be assassinated. Then, Prince Harry and the living Lady Diana would have moved to the U.S. Harry would become a U.S. citizen and go into politics, becoming perhaps a U.S. Senator. By then, whoever controlled the two boys -- Prince William and Prince Harry -- would control the world. But in her last visit to the White House, circa January 1997, Lady Diana informed Mr. Bill Clinton that in no way, shape, or form would she *ever* marry him. (While in America, Lady Diana also met with John Kennedy, Jr.) Diana chose, instead, to marry for love. (Jackie Kennedy married Aristotle Onassis for power; he could protect her.) Dodi Fayed, beloved of Lady Diana, is a cousin of Adnan Khashoggi, a CIA asset involved in sales of arms to Iran -- he and Oliver North. Adnan Khashoggi is part of the Saudi royal family. Through marrying Dodi Fayed, Diana would have been marrying into the Saudi royal family. She might have had to convert to Islam. British intelligence (MI-6) arranged the deaths of Lady Diana and Dodi Fayed. It was imperative that the Saudi royal family not have control over Diana. The driver of the ill-fated Mercedes was a "Manchurian candidate" (brainwashed tool), with connections to the French military. How did so much alcohol get into his system? Amounts suggested in mass media reports are truly staggering -- so much alcohol that the driver would have had to been carried to the car. The way it happened was, the driver was made to swallow special slowly-digestible balloons containing high-potency alcohol. While he drove, the balloons were slowly digested and he became dangerous behind the wheel. But even within British intelligence there are factions. A rogue faction in MI-6, powerless to prevent the assassination, arranged for the deaths of Lady Diana and Dodi Fayed to happen at Pont de l'Alma. Cleverly, it was known that a death at that historic location would not only "send a signal"; it would eventually lead to the creation of a "Saint Diana." In Roman paganism, Diana is "Queen of Heaven," a triple-goddess. "Al-mah," in mideast language, means "moon goddess." One aspect of the Roman triple-goddess is the "lunar virgin." The *al-mahs* served as maidens of Diana, the lunar virgin. In France, the Cult of Diana was so powerful that it wasn't until the Middle Ages until the French gave up worship of the pagan goddess. The *true* Knights Templar (not to be confused with imposters) are sworn to protect the Merovingian blood -- i.e., that of the *true* royals, such as Lady Diana. Before too long, Project Blue Beam holographic imaging will be used to create "miraculous appearances" of Lady Diana. Children at various locations will be randomly selected to witness "saintly apparitions." These children will receive a "message" from "Diana." Some of the children will claim that "Diana" has given them healing powers -- and what is more, these children *will* be able to "heal." Locations of these "miraculous appearances" will become known as places of healing and sacred shrines. "Saint Diana's" two children, William and Harry, will become akin to two living Jesus Christs, walking the earth. It will be the start of "the new religion." Who controls the new religion controls the world. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + For related stories, visit: http://www.shout.net/~bigred/cn.html http://feustel.mixi.net Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of Conspiracy Nation, nor of its Editor in Chief. I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation." Mailing List Yanked for "Policy Reasons." New Mailing List Planned. DONATIONS APPRECIATED Send to: Brian Redman, 310 S. Prairie St. (#202) Champaign, IL 61820 Want to know more about Whitewater, Oklahoma City bombing, etc? (1) telnet prairienet.org (2) logon as "visitor" (3) go citcom Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt. Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et pauperem. -- Liber Proverbiorum XXXI: 8-9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Ford Windstar Transmission failure at 51,000 miles Date: 03 Sep 1997 09:07:52 -0500 (CDT) Well my fears just came true. Just put my 1995 Ford Windstar in the Ford shop to check out the slipping trans and they want $1981 for a factory rebuilt. It has 51,000 miles on it and is 3 years old this month. I guess Ford still has not learned how to build a sturdy front wheel drive transmission. I thought after all the Ford Aerostar and Taurus problems with transmissions they would have improved by the Windstar model. Not, Thats what I get for thinking. Anyone know if there are any hidden warranty or technical bulletins on this? This makes me want to hire the Lawyer who just won the lawsuit against the local Catholic Dallas church for the child molestation. I would love to do a class action law suit against Ford for not making transmissions that at least make it to 70,000 miles. Any advise? Regards, Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu Senior Buyer UTD The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 972/883-2307,fax# 972/883-2348 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack@minerva.com Subject: Re: Ford Windstar Transmission failure at 51,000 miles Date: 03 Sep 1997 07:34:22 PDT roc@mail.xmission.com wrote : >Well my fears just came true. Just put my 1995 Ford Windstar in the Ford >shop to check out the slipping trans and they want $1981 for a factory >rebuilt. It has 51,000 miles on it and is 3 years old this month. >I guess Ford still has not learned how to build a sturdy front wheel >drive transmission. I thought after all the Ford Aerostar and Taurus >problems with transmissions they would have improved by the Windstar model. >Not, Thats what I get for thinking. >Anyone know if there are any hidden warranty or technical bulletins on >this? >This makes me want to hire the Lawyer who just won the lawsuit against >the local Catholic Dallas church for the child molestation. I would love >to do a class action law suit against Ford for not making transmissions >that at least make it to 70,000 miles. > >Any advise? >Regards, >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu Senior Buyer UTD >The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 972/883-2307,fax# 972/883-2348 >-------------------------------------------------------------------- My brother had a Buick that did about the same thing. The transmission went out just above 50,000 miles. He had extended warranty. They said he had abused it by not having it serviced properly. He had all the papers showing it had been maintained at all the required milage points at the same Buick dealer where the car was bought. They said no he had to have it serviced more often since he was using it in an agressive mode since it had accumulated miles so fast .....of course most in California put miles on cars at a great clip. However, in this case he and his wife had taken a trip to New England.....but then what does one by new cars for. At any rate he gathered up all his papers and went to small claims court and easily won. Limits on small claims court are low and perhaps you might only get 1500 of a 2000 bill .....but if you go to real court and get all 2000 and pay the attorney 1000 you have much less left. Granted in small claims court you can not have an attorney .....but neither can the Ford Dealer As an after thought you must realize that if the warranty is good for 50,000 miles the transmission will go out at 51,000, while if the warranty is for 70,0000 miles the transmission will utterly collapse at 70,500 miles Jack > > > > > > > > Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming, Inc | 626-798-6574 | ---------------- | 1175 No. Altadena Drive | fax 398-8620 | jack@minerva.com | Pasadena, CA 91107 US | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: boydk@wrq.com Subject: Re: Full Auto Assault Media "Machine Gunning" Militia Run Date: 03 Sep 1997 08:19:38 -0700 Chris, the "harsh slogans" are not only harsh enough to gaurantee a serious backlash if they ever became public but they represent facts that are simply -not- in evidence. YOU don't know what caused this accident, no one does even in the land of swift napoleanic law (shudder). The French of course don't have a first amendment, but if they did I would no more support a trampling of the first then I do of the second. As repulsive as these (so called papparazzi) slime are, they have the same natural rights that you and I do. -Boyd Kneeland ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Author: ferriscc@Mainstream.net Tonight, ABC news reported that a witness who had responded to the scene of Diana's motor vehicle accident and who wished to render aid to the passengers of the crushed vehicle, was quoted as saying: "The photographers were 'machine-gunning' the car with their cameras!" What a *priceless* quote, and on national news, no less! I wonder if the "full auto assault media militia" members had paid a $200.00 transfer tax to BATF on each of their full auto cameras? And if they had registered their portable arsenals with French authorities? My inquiring nobanning mind wants to know. And, on tonight's other local TV talk shows, Boston media jabber-boxes are yammmering on and on about their "sacred First Amendment" and how it "should not be under attack", yadda, yadda, yadda. Watching the media rant and rave about the incredible importance of safeguarding "their First Amendment" constitutes, well, quite a different sort of "reloading" than I would experience sitting in front of my old RCBS Rockchucker press (yes, I would like to buy a Dillon ... some day), but this media hysteria over "their rights" is almost better than factory new ammunition for Second Amendment proponents' "argument ammo boxes." My boxes are, right now, filled with juicy sound bites, straight from the mouths of media slickies who hate guns and gun owners with a passion. What goes around, does indeed, (sometimes), come around. (I only wish that this terrible tragedy in Paris did not have to be a causative factor. I still grieve for the bereaved families and friends of all persons who lost their lives or were seriously injured in the needless crash.) Best regards, Chris Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net Some bumper sticker ideas: REMEMBER PRINCESS DI THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ABC CBS CNN NBC STOP MEDIA MURDERERS MURDERED PRINCESS DI KILLED PRINCESS DI MERCILESS MEDIA JACKALS THE NEWS MEDIA MURDERED PRINCESS DIANA ARE PRINCESS KILLERS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA? MEDIA MURDERERS KILLED GUILTY OF MURDER IN PARIS PRINCESS DIANA These are *harsh slogans*, but I sense that it is high time for the press to take some *hard thumping*. Again, my feeling is "what goes around, comes around." And had media morons not been chasing the Mercedes-Benz, the car's speed would have been much more reasonable, even if the operator had consumed too much alcohol prior to driving, for which offense there is also no excuse. Bottom line: no media morons, no deceased Princess Diana, no two sons overwhelmed at the loss of their beloved mother. If my slant on this tragic affair is off base, please so advise. I do not want to be insensitive to the overwhelming grief which is consuming the Spencer family and the families of the other killed and injured persons. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: boydk@wrq.com Subject: Boyd goes to Full Auto Assault rant... Date: 03 Sep 1997 08:43:06 -0700 As long as we're all pinning our beliefs about this incident on unconfirmed reports from isolated media outlets (you know, the media we all proclaim to dismiss as uncreditable) how about the -pictures- of the car and the confirmed reports no one was wearing seatbelts. Ever seen anybody hit by an airbag who wasn't wearing a belt? I have, it ain't pretty. A beautiful young blond lady I used to work with spun her MR2 and impacted at around 50mph (One -half- the reported impact of this full sized mercedes). The bag (wich undoubtedly saved my friends life) turned her face to half burnt mush. A long hospital stay later she's as beautiful as ever and nobody I know gets into a car in my sight without a belt on or getting a ton of personal crap from me. To bad I wasn't hangin' with Dodie and Di that night. Speaking of pictures, did we all notice that this full size Benz hadn't just accordianed but had bent up? Doing the accordian on a car that size takes a lot of force, the backup design of having the acccordianed pieces fold under (pushing the passenger compartment up away from most accidents) would take more. Of course, since I see damage to the roof probably pushing the passenger compartment up (wich, for all we know was down if the car was rolling at the time) may not have been a "feature" in this incident. So, not to put to fine a point on it, but tell me again how this one lone good samaritan was going to save lives when the professionals were there in about 5 minutes using hydraulic jaws? Time for a reality check kids. This is not a propaganda star to hitch your wagons to IMHO. And NO I'm not saying the slimearazzi deserve anything less then jail, they deserve it and in France they'll get it. All IMO Boyd. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Ford Windstar Transmission failure at 51,000 miles Date: 03 Sep 1997 08:25:37 -0700 wrote : >>Well my fears just came true. -snip- >>Any advise? ----- Jack@minerva.com wrote: My brother had a Buick that did about the same thing. ----- It must be true, that 'they' don't make them as they used to. I have a 1980 IH Scout, diesel. No mechanic has ever laid a hand on it. When I bought it new, the warrantee was for 5 years or 100,000 miles. It currently has over 170,000 miles, and does nicely. Paul? I'd say "get a Scout", but they ain't made anymore. ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: sabutigo@teleport.com Subject: Re: Here it is the ultimate Princess Di Conspiracy (fwd) Date: 03 Sep 1997 14:27:28 -0700 (PDT) At 08:37 AM 9/3/97 -0500, you wrote: > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 23:49:11 -0700 (PDT) >From: Unprivileged user > > Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 10 Num. 95 > ======================================= > ("Quid coniuratio est?") > > >----------------------------------------------------------------- > >"Ru Mills" -- > WHOEVER CONTROLS PRINCESS DIANA CONTROLS THE WORLD > ================================================== > >[Here is Ru Mills' account of the death of Princess Diana. "Ru >Mills" is a pseudonym; formerly she published the "Rumor Mill >News." Consider all of what follows, unless specifically noted >otherwise, as "according to Ru Mills."] This is pure balderdash. I happen to have sources who say that the woman in the Mercedes was decoy Diana (a la Churchill) who was supposed to only pretend to die. The set up was to make it appear that Diana died so that she could escape the constant publicity, change her identity, and continue on with her good works for the rest of her life without the glare of publicity. Of course, the Royal Family was pleased to help her out because she was always such an embarassment to them. So friends of the Royals, the owner of Harrad's, offered to help by having their playboy son appear to "fall for" Diana and be seen everywhere with her. Tragically, the set-up went wrong and the faux Diana and the Harrod's heir really died (they weren't even wearing seatbelts, which shows how self-assured they were about surviving the set-up accident). Naturally it is in everyone's best interest to continue the sham and being able to blame the photographers and everyone else. Meanwhile, Diana has had plastic surgery in Rio and will soon embark on her noblest good work yet. She will enter a secret enclave in New Delhi run by Mother Teresa, where she will devote full time to assisting Elvis who is there dying of AIDS. S. "Getting the facts right is a fundamental requirement of morality." -- Peter W. Huber ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Boyd Subject: Re: Ford Windstar Transmission failure at 51,000 miles Date: 03 Sep 1997 14:20:49 -0700 Hi, I forget what neck of the woods your in, but up here in the NW (Seattle area) I'm actively persuing the purchase of a 78-80 scoutII either diesel or the 345. I've found a couple (only) in the $4k range. If you know anybody who's selling please feel free to have them contact me or (better yet) let me know how I can contact them. A friends parents had an 80 travelall when we were in high school, it's still used daily and looks/runs like new. IH products were a testament to design and engineering, as they used to say "anything less, is just a car". Boyd Kneeland ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Brad Dolan Subject: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls (fwd) Date: 03 Sep 1997 17:43:42 -0400 (EDT) Watch out. These guys get their way, and it will be a crime for me to send you these messages: "YSON OOT SI IBF EHT" "The fat lady has a black mustache" One if by land and two if by sea. etc., unless I first tell the FBI in advance what these things mean. bd ---------- Forwarded message ---------- All encryption products sold or distributed in the U.S. must have a key escrow backdoor "like an airbag in a car," law enforcement agents advised a Senate panel this afternoon. FBI Director Louis Freeh also told a Senate Judiciary subcommittee that "network service providers should be required to have some immediate decryption ability available" permitting agents to readily descramble encrypted messages that pass through their system. This marks the most aggressive push to date for mandatory domestic key escrow (or "key recovery"), which means someone else other than the recipient can decipher messages you send out. Now, the easiest way to win such a political tussle in Washington is to control the terms of the debate. And nobody understands that rule better than Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Arizona), chair of the Judiciary subcommittee on technology, terrorism, and government information. Kyl opened today's hearing not by saying its purpose was to discuss crypto in a balanced manner, but that he wanted "to explore how encryption is affecting the way we deal with criminals, terrorists, and the security needs of business." Then he talked at length about "criminals and terrorists" using crypto, and child pornographers "using encryption to hide pornographic images of children that they transmit across the Internet." Kyl also stacked the three panels. Out of seven witnesses, five were current or former law enforcement agents. No privacy or civil liberties advocates testified. Some companies including FedEx apparently dropped out when told they'd have to pay lip service to key escrow if they wanted to speak. Dorothy Denning, a Georgetown University professor of computer science, did testify. Kyl made a point of asking her if she still supported key escrow systems (two recent articles by Will Rodger and Simson Garfinkel said she was changing her mind). "I think key recovery offers a very attractive approach," Denning said. What about export controls? "In the absence of any controls, the problem for law enforcement would get worse," she replied. But when Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) asked if Denning would support a *mandatory* key escrow system, the computer scientist said she wouldn't. "No, because we don't have a lot of experience we key recovery systems... a lot of people are legitimately nervous." (Keep in mind that although Feinstein supposedly represents Silicon Valley, she's no friend of high tech firms. She opposes lifting export controls; in fact, she says that "nothing other than some form of mandatory key recovery really does the job" of preventing crime. Of course, Feinstein doesn't have a clue. She talks about whether businesses would want "a hard key or digital key or a key infrastructure." Yes, folks, this is in fact meaningless blather.) Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, DC, says, "Simply stated, the Senate train is headed in the wrong direction. But of course this doesn't answer the question of what will ultimately be resolved by Congress? There's a very popular measure in the House right now that's heading in a different direction." Rotenberg is talking about Rep. Bob Goodlatte's SAFE bill, which is much more pro-business than S.909, the McCain-Kerrey Senate bill that Kyl supports. Now, S.909 doesn't mandate key recovery; it only strongly encourages it by wielding the federal government's purchasing power to jumpstart a key recovery infrastructure. But Kyl would go further. At a recent Heritage Foundation roundtable on encryption, I asked him, "Why not make key recovery technology mandatory -- after all, terrorists, drug kingpins and other criminals won't use it otherwise. Kyl's response? Not that it would be a violation of Constitutional due process and search and seizure protections or a bad idea. Instead, he told me he simply didn't have enough votes... -Declan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: boydk@wrq.com Subject: sorry for my last Date: 03 Sep 1997 14:46:45 -0700 Obviously didnt meant to send that to the list. (hmm... if on the other hand...) Boyd Kneeland, aka boydk@wrq.com aka boyd@seanet.com ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Author: boyd@seanet.com Hi, I forget what neck of the woods your in, but up here in the NW (Seattle area) I'm actively persuing the purchase of a 78-80 scoutII either diesel or the 345. I've found a couple (only) in the $4k range. If you know anybody who's selling please feel free to have them contact me or (better yet) let me know how I can contact them. A friends parents had an 80 travelall when we were in high school, it's still used daily and looks/runs like new. IH products were a testament to design and engineering, as they used to say "anything less, is just a car". Boyd Kneeland ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fritz Sands Subject: WE-CARE Date: 05 Sep 1997 10:46:40 -0700 > Please support (i.e., send money NOW to) the Washington Citizens > Against Regulatory Excess (WE-CARE). This is the group that has been > organized to fight I-676 here in WA state. > > If you think this only affects us in WA, you are wrong. If this > measure passes here (remember, WA is not an anti-gun state. We have > had "shall issue" concealed weapons permits for years and 5% of the > population has such a license) you can expect it in your state next. > > I-676 would mandate a license for owning or possessing a handgun. We > will need to waive confidentiality of medical records in order to get > such a license. And the state Department of Licensing would come up > with a "safety" test that we would need to pass. Check out the web > site below for more details. > > You can contact WE-CARE at > > WE-CARE > P. O. Box 50270 > Bellevue, WA 98015-0270 > > (206) 454-4915 Fax (206) 451-3959 > > //www.halcyon.com/wac/support > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacques Tucker Subject: WACO film showing in MO Date: 08 Sep 1997 19:22:56 -0500 WACO: The Rules of Engagement showing at the Tivoli Theatre-Manor Square Kansas City, Missouri Running time: 2:15 Fri-Sun Sep 19-20-21 1345 1:45 pm $3.50 1645 4:45 pm 4.00 2000 8:00 pm 6.00 Mon-Thur Sep 22-23-24-25 1700 5:00 pm $3.50 2000 8:00 pm 6.00 Hope to see you there. Cap'n Jacq' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Sylvester Subject: UnArmed Peasants, Is this us in few years? Date: 08 Sep 1997 22:29:37 -0500 (from USA Today digest service) ALGERIANS ARM THEMSELVES AGAINST MARAUDERS BENI MESSOUS, Algeria - Residents of an Algiers suburb hid behind barricades and armed themselves with hatchets and knives Sunday after marauders massacred at least 87 people over the weekend. A second night of killing late Saturday reportedly left 45 more people dead in Beni Messous, a suburb 12 miles outside Algiers. Government soldiers came to the scene Sunday to allay residents' fears after reports of unexplained gunfire. Details of the attack were not available Sunday, and there was no immediate confirmation of the death toll from hospital sources. The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution. ---Doug McKay" Joe Sylvester Don't Tread On Me ! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: SWAT, "MEN IN BLACK" Date: 09 Sep 1997 09:05:08 -0500 (CDT) ======================================================================= What I Think is a modestly-sized weekly column by R. H. Wheatley and/or Lila Hoffman-Thome. A mental sorbet to clear and re-focus the mind. A new issue is available each Friday at noon. What I Think may be found at http://www.pookas.com/ and includes links to other web sites. What I Think is Copyright, 1995, 1996, 1997 by Lila Hoffman-Thome. Comments and letters are welcomed. Post to Editor@pookas.com ======================================================================= Men in Black There's a boom market in black ski masks these days. Last week, in the pre-dawn hours in Phoenix, Arizona, five armed men wearing body armor and black ski masks sledgehammered down a door, terrorized the residents -- including children -- and then killed a man who was foolish enough to try to defend the occupants of the house as well as his girlfriend. Turned out the black-masked toughs were self-styled bounty hunters with the wrong address. Whoops, so sorry. The five are now under arrest, charged with homicide. In the past week, much has been written about bounty hunters, the lack of regulations, the paltry "reward" of $2,500 (to be split five ways!) for the sake of which two innocent young people were killed. But what I find fascinating are the black ski masks. Black ski masks are all the rage these days among fashion conscious law enforcement types, official and self-appointed. Authorized-to-kill SWAT teams all wear them. What is the rationale behind the masks? Twenty years or more ago, the TV police show "Hill Street Blues" had a character who was fascinated by military equipment and tactics. He ran the SWAT team, with a full complement of heavily-armed troops, an armored personnel carrier, and armed robots. Then, Lieutenant Howard Hunter was a bit of a figure of ridicule. Today, every tiny municipal and counter police force has a cadre of fully-equipped Howard Hunters. And, they all wear black ski masks. Now, the paramilitaries and those on the fringes of law enforcement have adopted the masks. (Incidentally, they are always black. Never Navy blue, red, green, or paisley. Another clue to their purpose, perhaps?) What do the masks do? Apart from catering to adolescent male fantasies of superheroes and masked avengers, they set the wearer apart from ordinary society. And this is a grave danger. Law enforcement personnel increasingly see the citizenry as part of the enemy. By wearing masks, police begin to identify with the criminals, rather than with law-abiding citizens. The conventional wisdom when I grew up was that only a coward hid behind a mask. Maybe there are other reasons to wear one. But it is a question worth consideration the next time a cop, a supposed servant of the people, feels the need to pull on a black ski mask in order to do his job. R. H. Wheatley 5 September 1997 ========================================================================== This mailing list is for discussion of Clinton Administration Scandals. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com. In the message body put: unsubscribe cas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Patent law emergency Date: 09 Sep 1997 09:32:08 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Subj: Patent Law Emergency Dear Friends, Through I have received information about U.S. Patent Laws disclosing we are in danger again of losing intellectual property rights. The warning about Senate Bill S.507 is another attempt like a previous bill. I would like to point out that there is a concerted effort by some in Congress to destroy the U.S. patent system. The last recent attempt was with legislation, HR 3460. If it had not been for the valiant effort of Rep. Dana Rohrabacher in warning of the dangers of this bill it might have been passed. Few at the time understood the real danger of the bill. If HR 3460 had passed all patent information could have been publicly disclosed the first six months after application for a patent had been applied for. Congress generally supported this bill. Most did not realize the dangers of disclosing such information to the world, and had no regard for individual rights of ownership. The HR 3460 incident is exactly the kind of economic horror people like Dr. Noam Chomsky have been warning about. Chomsky proposes that the Military Industrial Complex that promoted lobbying for the Viet Nam War, have taken steps to create American society into a police type security state. There is evidence that this is the case. Certainly, the effort to promote HR 3460 would help to create America right into a third world economy. The dangers of not protecting patents for individuals are numerous. HR 3460 failed. The new patent laws that will be proposed must not fail to protect individual rights. If they do they could create very serious consequences in our economy. It is likely that the supporters of HR3460 will support any legislation like it. They were: Moorehead, Shroeder, Sensenbrenner, Coble, Gekas, Gallegly, Nadler, Canady, Hoke, Conyers, Berman, Beshena, Boucher, and Bono. Please be aware that these Congressmen care nothing about preserving American rights to private property and will continue not to care as long as they think nobody is watching them. Political activists should be alert for laws that threaten american freedom like threats to intellectual property. Sincerely, Tom Saunders Bill Of Attaider Project ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacques Tucker Subject: WACO film showing in MO Date: 09 Sep 1997 12:59:44 -0500 WACO: The Rules of Engagement showing at the Tivoli Theatre-Manor Square Kansas City, Missouri Running time: 2:15 Fri-Sun Sep 19-20-21 1345 1:45 pm $3.50 1645 4:45 pm 4.00 2000 8:00 pm 6.00 Mon-Thur Sep 22-23-24-25 1700 5:00 pm $3.50 2000 8:00 pm 6.00 Hope to see you there. Cap'n Jacq' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: boydk@wrq.com Subject: Re: SWAT, "MEN IN BLACK" Date: 09 Sep 1997 13:04:15 -0700 Nice article, well written, but the questions to easy (uh oh, there goes Boyd again = 8 | ) Without wanting to defend (_without_ defending) the nefarious War on Some Drugs, the Onerous RICO laws or the rediculous asset seizure frenzy, there are perfectly good reasons for -some- (not many) law enforcement officers to wear ski masks. I agree it shouldnt be the "fashion craze" the author so rightly points out that it seems to be (and I love the Howard Hunter reference. But extortion, blackmail and murder of LEOs working against organized crime is something that predates 1920's abolition (yet another example of the criminal systems criminal failures). I thank Paul for forwarding this excellent piece, and I agree that many of the Howards out there in LEOland should re examine why they are hiding. BUT for a few of them there are excellent reasons to hide having more to do with innocent children and wives (or husbands) then with cowardice. A 2 dollar ski mask is cheap insurance for the life of that LEOs family. -Boyd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: IRS does direct withdraw; CEO's get even richer Date: 10 Sep 1997 09:34:59 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- For an enhanced HTML version of the Money Daily, visit http://moneydaily.com. IRS plans direct withdrawal By 1999, taxpaying may become so simple that all you'll have to do is let the IRS withdraw taxes from your bank account, reports the New York Times. The government said Tuesday that it hopes this method of direct withdrawal will encourage more taxpayers to file electronically -- which the government hopes will cut processing costs and reduce errors. But paying by credit card -- another measure authorized by the budget-balancing legislation passed this summer -- may not become reality so quickly. The legislation contains a provision that prevents the government from paying fees or providing "any other consideration" to credit card companies, and that could keep these companies from doing business with the IRS. CEOs get even richer According to an annual survey by KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, there's no need to cry for CEOs of financial companies. Their total compensation packages more than doubled last year, with the median pay package rising from $1,152,000 to $2,615,000. Stock options and other long-term incentives accounted for about half of their compensation. On average, salary only accounts for about 25% of a CEOs package. Long-term incentives are 45% and annual incentives, which generally depend on achieving short-term financial goals, are about 30% of the package. The upshot for company heads is that it's most lucrative to run a company in the Northeast. The median annual incentives for Northeast CEOs was $2,797,000, compared to the national median of $2,066,000. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Bite-size Pieces of GOALS 2000 (fwd) Date: 11 Sep 1997 17:08:54 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Reply-To: liberty-and-justice@pobox.com This article may be copied provided it is duplicated in its entirety without changes. Bite-size Pieces of GOALS 2000 to Ruminate On by Kathy Finnegan Ever since publication of my 350-page book, analyzing GOALS 2000, title-by-title, I've been asked to summarize what's in the law and to comment on its current and anticipated fallout. Since everyone is affected by this legislation signed by Bill Clinton on March 31, 1994, it's important that all of us - taxpayers, parents, concerned relatives of school-age children - have a general grasp of what the law actually contains. As I'm sure most are aware, GOALS 2000 is our national centerpiece educational reform/restructuring plan, backed up by the force of federal law (P.L.103-227) to be carried out "voluntarily" by the states. Although I find it difficult to create "sound bites" out of 155 pages of complex legislation, knowing that summaries can sometimes accomplish what a book cannot - here goes! Introduction: We are told (twice) in the very first paragraph that this is "framework" legislation. A framework, as anyone who has ever seen a house under construction knows, is only the skeletal outline of what the finished product will look like. It's a "work in progress" - and that's what GOALS 2000 is - a law subject to change and expansion with every reauthorization. Those of you familiar with the Johnson administration's Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) passed in 1965, but reauthorized every five years since, will recognize how the "framework game" is played. The ESEA received more than 12 billion dollars at its last funding go-round. Despite the repeated usage of the word "voluntary" throughout the law, we're also told in the first paragraph that GOALS 2000 provides a "framework for reauthorization of all Federal programs." How voluntary can this be when other federal education programs (like the ESEA cited above) are now expected to line up with the aims and objectives spelled out in GOALS 2000? Is any state going to risk losing other federal education funding for non-compliance? All 50 states are currently receiving some form of GOALS 2000 money. There were a few initial holdouts, but in 1996, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) offered individual school districts the option of applying directly for GOALS 2000 funds. The government will not accomplish its purposes unless all schools participate, so they bent over backwards to bring everyone on board. Title 1 The eight National Education Goals are spelled out in Title l. Summarized they are: 1. School readiness 2. School completion 3. Student achievement and citizenship 4. Teacher education and professional development * 5. First internationally in math and science 6. Adult literacy and lifelong learning 7. Safe, disciplined & alcohol & drug-free schools 8. Parental participation * * These 2 goals were added to the original 6 in AMERICA 2000. Many people think of these eight goals as the heart of GOALS 2000, probably because they are the only part of the law which received any real media attention. The eight goals grew directly out of six earlier national education goals contained in AMERICA 2000, the Bush administration predecessor to our current law. Those six goals, in turn, parallel six international education goals adopted at a U.N. sponsored conference in Jomtien, Thailand within months of the launching of AMERICA 2000. I have taken considerable space in my book to document the role of the United Nations and other internationalists (often abetted by wealthy, liberal foundations) in shaping the steady socialist drift of U.S. education. Too many are unaware of the behind the scenes manipulations that go into making our educational policies. Title 2 This title formally sets up a new entity, the National Education Goals Panel (NEGP). In addition to issuing an annual "report card" on progress toward the national education goals, this body will review and be the final judge of national "standards and assessments." Is this a powerful group? Well, it is if you believe that curriculum and testing are at the heart of any educational program. A national standards and improvement council was also called for in Title 2, but proved so controversial it never got Congressional funding. Critics referred to it as a "national school board." However, what the U.S.DOE doesn't get one way, it usually gets another, and at the Governor's Summit held in 1996, a new "national information clearinghouse" called "Achieve" was formed out of a concern that the standards movement was losing momentum. Achieve, funded by governors and business leaders, is apparently carrying on the work of the defunct national standards council. The Goals Panel will also be looking at "Early Childhood Assessment." (More about this in Title 4.) They're also charged with coordinating a national strategy to infuse technology into all educational programs. If you listened to Clinton's State of the Union address earlier this year, all these themes will have a familiar ring. And I see nothing in the law to prevent the NEGP from adding additional national goals if they choose to. Title 3 Title 3 called for each state to submit to the U.S.DOE a Statewide Systemic Improvement Plan (SIP) showing that they are in compliance (or working hard at getting in compliance) with the many "suggestions and guidelines" spelled out in GOALS 2000. Wasn't this supposed to be "voluntary?" Most states dutifully submitted their SIPs, but since some were balking, the absolute requirement was eliminated in 1996. Whatever it takes to get all states on board! One of the prominent features of this title is the partnershipping of schools with a myriad of outside agencies, services, and businesses, in order to provide non-educational services such as child care, nutrition, health care (including school-based health clinics), social services (including welfare, counseling, and Social Security services), and to establish mechanisms to get students into the work force (emphasizing vocational training and apprenticeships). GOALS 2000 refers to all this coupling of the schools with non-educational activities as "coordinated access." What we did not know at the time of passage of GOALS 2000, but can now see is that Hillary Clinton's failed national health care plan is being brought in through the "back door" using our school children and the public schools as the point of entry. Medicaid funds are being used for a broad range of these services This is, in fact, one of the radical changes now taking place in our schools. These non-academic programs and services increase the state's primacy in the lives of our children and push Americans ever deeper into a cradle-to-grave managed society. We will, at the present rate, soon be no different than the socialist countries we've seen in this decade imploding under the weight of their failed systems - systems we now seem eager to emulate! Lifelong learning (part of the 6th National Education Goal), and a concept developed by UNESCO, is to be included in every state's Systemic Improvement Plan. Title 4 This enables the first national educational goal: By the year 2000, all children in America will start school ready to learn. It does this by funding in every state "Parental Information and Resource Centers." In many states the available money will be used to expand and operate already existing programs such as PAT (Parents as Teachers), Home Instruction for Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) or Success by Six. By whatever name, these are parental training programs aimed at children from birth to (usually) three years. GOALS 2000 affects us all because it addresses the entire lifespan of every citizen from programs like PAT through lifelong learning (whatever that may evolve into over time!) The PAT program combines group interaction with home visits and while anxious first-time parents might glean some tips on child development and rearing, few are aware that the "nice" social worker who has just visited their home goes back to her office, pulls up the child's cumulative electronic portfolio and enters data on all she has observed in the home. These "certified parent educators" are especially concerned about "risk factors" that might necessitate the services of the health clinics and social service agencies with whom the program is coordinated. Though still voluntary, we see in these programs, the state pushing to assert its primacy over the family. They're sold as parental assistance, but in reality they advance an agenda of parental obsolescence and replacement by state agencies. Title 5 This creates a National Skill Standards Board charged with establishing a set of national job-related standards, complete with the mechanism for testing and certification. To really understand this title, it is necessary to know that at almost the same time GOALS 2000 was signed into law, a related law, The School-to-Work Opportunities Act, P.L.103-239, was also passed. S-T-W established a formal partnership between the U.S. Departments of Education and Labor. One of the collaborations between the two agencies has been to work on an outcomes-based apprenticeship program, complete with "portable credentials" (already popping up across the country as Certificates of Mastery). S-T-W is one of the federal laws where grant money is tied to compliance with GOALS 2000 - one of the points of juncture between the "framework" legislation of GOALS 2000 and "reauthorization of all Federal programs." We have certainly not heard the final word on S-T-W and other education-labor linked legislation. Last year we narrowly avoided a managed economy scheme called the CAREERS bill which would have consolidated and greatly expanded S-T-W, the National Skills Standards Board, and many other federal programs that deal in some way with education/labor training. The move away from broadly educating students and leaving it up to them how and where they will apply that education to a much narrower vocational training that fits into a government-designated slot is well underway! Keep your eyes on this; it's a very important socialist agenda item not yet honed to the satisfaction of the one-world economy crowd. Title 6 This sets up international education exchanges through our U.S. Department of State! These are to be primarily with former Soviet-bloc countries in the areas of civics, government, and economics. Does it surprise you to find this in our centerpiece educational restructuring legislation? To see where such an idea comes from, I begin my book with a 70-year chronology of important events in American education. A look through this should make very visible the normally unseen hand of the United Nations and others of like mind in shaping our educational system. Heading into a one-world economic, political, and eventually religious system - as I contend we are - it makes sense to have the school systems of the world as much in sync as possible. Title 7 This title began its life as a stand-alone bill, the Safe Schools Act of 1994. As often happens with federal legislation,this one got folded into and became a part of the much larger, fast-track GOALS 2000 bill. Title 7 enables the seventh national education goal, which states: By the year 2000, every school in the United States will be free of drugs, violence, and the unauthorized presence of firearms and alcohol and will offer a disciplined environment conducive to learning. Not surprisingly, we get more partnershipping in title 7 - this time between the schools and various law enforcement and community agencies. Emphasis is on programs involving the whole community - the now familiar "It takes a whole village {read that "government bureaucracy"} to raise a child" concept popularized by Hillary Clinton and parroted by the media. Half of the Title 7 money is for a model project to be carried out in Wash. D.C. Title 8 This provides funds for Minority-Focused Civics Education which apparently is yet another term for diversity/multicultural training. The grant money is to develop and operate accredited summer seminars for teachers and other staff. How likely is it that special presentations to minorities (who are not defined in the law) and Native Americans will do anything other than further divide and polarize an increasingly heterogeneous and contentious nation? What has become of the old "melting pot" where we accepted ourselves and each other as simply Americans, one and all? Clearly that notion, which was once one of the stated missions of American public education, has been tossed out the window. Title 9 Title 9 is the bloated behemoth of GOALS 2000- nearly 1/3 of the total 155-page law! Like title 7, it began its life as a stand-alone bill, supposedly a "routine" reauthorization of the U.S.DOE's Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI). The OERI is the large office (with field offices and "labs" scattered around the country) from which emanate many of the experimental programs that end up in our classrooms. A close look at this reauthorization quickly revealed that it was far from "routine." In addition to funding for already existing programs, title 9 of GOALS 2000 adds to the OERI empire: a new policies and priorities board, an office of reform assistance and dissemination, a national library, and - the biggest expansion of all - five Institutes (patterned after the National Institutes of Health). Each of the five Institutes is assigned a special mission (one or more of the top priority reform/restructuring agendas). Title 10 This is the landfill of GOALS 2000. All sorts of odds and ends that didn't fit anywhere else were dumped here. There are no less than 14 separate and unrelated items (sections). Here you will find everything from "Sense of the Congress" sentiments to grants for midnight basketball leagues. Although one of these sections is entitled "Protection of Pupil Rights," and spells out some legal rights in much the same manner as did the Hatch Amendment, parents are going to find enforcement as difficult to come by as the proverbial hen's teeth. How many parents are aware this is included in the final pages of a 155-page law that many still have not even heard of - and fewer still have read? Anyone reading through the GOALS 2000 legislation will probably be struck with how little it has to do with academics. Yet this is our centerpiece educational restructuring plan and it's the law! I think it apparent that GOALS 2000 is about far more than restructuring/reforming our schools (the stated agenda). When fully played out - paired with other federal legislation and programs - the net result (the real agenda/intended outcome) will be revealed as the total restructuring of American society using schools as the medium of change. The change agents who brought us this law were very smart to choose one of America's most familiar, trusted, and used institutions - our public schools. And, to be sure, with the well publicized problems of recent decades, the climate was definitely right for federal "crisis intervention" in the name of reform. I find parents are still pretty trusting of their local schools and tend to think the serious problems are occurring in someone else's district or city. However to ignore what's happening everywhere through mandated federal and state programs is to put your children, their future, and the future of our republic at great risk. If you have a child in the system, you need to be very concerned because that child ("human capital") has been targeted as a valuable resource to the state. The 13 years children spend in government schools is more than ample time to mold the desired attitudes, values, and behaviors sought by those minding the store. While you still have the choice, I urge you to do the one thing that will make GOALS 2000 and related statist plans fail: DON'T GIVE THEM YOUR CHILDREN! If you wish to learn more about GOALS 2000, my book is: GOALS 2000: Restructuring our Schools, Restructuring Society It's published by and available from: Hearthstone Publishing, Ltd. 500 Beacon Drive Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73127 1 800 652-1144 >> ------------------------------ "A tiny chip implanted inside the human body to send and receive radio messages, long a popular delusion among paranoids, is likely to be marketed as a consumer item early in the next century." CHICAGO TRIBUNE May 7, 1996 ------------------------------- To subscribe to the PropheZine newsletter for free, use our form at the PZ www site... http://www.prophezine.com God never closes a door, without opening a window. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::ATTENTION, IF YOU NO LONGER WISH TO GET PROPHEZINE:::::: ::::::YOU MUST GO TO THE PZ WWW SITE AND USE THE UNSUBSCRIBE FORM. :::::::: HTTP://WWW.PROPHEZINE.COM :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with "unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject) Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Sylvester Subject: Sinking Deeper into the Quagmire Date: 11 Sep 1997 21:30:25 -0500 U.S. deploys aircraft for Bosnian broadcast mission September 11, 1997 Web posted at: 12:00 p.m. EDT (1600 GMT) WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States is sending three specialized aircraft to Bosnia in an attempt to curb the inflammatory rhetoric of Bosnian Serb television and radio, a Pentagon spokesman said Thursday. The EC-130E aircraft, which are capable of broadcasting and jamming local radio and television waves, will be accompanied by about 120 personnel from a specialized Air Force National Guard unit in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, said spokesman Col. Richard Bridges. The deployment of the planes was requested by NATO commanders in Bosnia "in response to the perceived pattern of vehement rhetoric and incitement to violence" broadcast on Bosnian Serb television and radio, Bridges said. The planes, nicknamed "Commando Solo," will be based in Brindisi, Italy, and are slated to fly over Bosnia during this weekend's crucial round of municipal elections. The United Nations is to produce broadcasts that can be transmitted from the planes to the Bosnian people. The planes could also be used to jam Bosnian Serb broadcasts. One of the specially outfitted aircraft departed on Wednesday, but has been delayed by technical problems in Gander, Newfoundland. One was to depart Thursday, and a third on Friday, Bridges said. The EC-130E is a C-130 cargo plane that contains an airborne television station. The aircraft was used in Somalia and Haiti to relay announcements to local people or to interfere with radio broadcasts on the ground. The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution. ---Doug McKay" Joe Sylvester Don't Tread On Me ! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: AP: `Conniving' media ignorant on gun issues, Heston says Date: 11 Sep 1997 20:34:34 PST Sounds like, "Old Mose", is finally coming up to speed. On Sep 11, Richard L Hartman wrote: > > > WASHINGTON (AP) - Speaking as an officer of the National Rifle >Association, actor Charlton Heston said Thursday the Second Amendment right >to bear arms should take precedence over free press and free speech >guarantees in the Constitution. > ``The Second Amendment must be considered more essential than the First >Amendment,'' Heston said in a luncheon speech at the National Press Club. >``This may be a bitter pill to swallow.'' > He said the nation's forefathers realized that individually owned >weapons are needed to protect the rights of individuals. > ``A free press is vital to a free society,'' Heston acknowledged. But >he added, ``The right to keep and bear arms is the one right that allows >`rights' to exist at all ... There can be no free speech ... without the >Second Amendment to fight for it.'' > ``All dictators began by confiscating arms,'' he said. > Heston said that too often a ``conniving'' media uses the First >Amendment in attempts to erode the guarantees of the Second and urged more >balanced reports when reporting on gun issues. > ``Again and again, I hear gun owners say how can we believe anything >the anti-gun media says when they can't even get the facts right?'' Heston >said. ``For too long you have swallowed manufactured statistics and >fabricated technical support from anti-gun organizations that wouldn't know >a semiauto from a sharp stick. And it shows.'' > The 72-year-old actor was named first vice president of the gun lobby >in May after he was elected to the association's board of directors. > Heston said he had three goals while in office: seeing the American >people elect a pro-gun president, help rebuild an NRA ``with the political >muscle and clout to keep a pro-Second Amendment Congress in place'' and to >raise $100 million for NRA programs and education by the year 2000. -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Thugs & Drugs & So What Else Is New? (fwd) Date: 12 Sep 1997 10:43:57 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Hey, nobody got shot this time, so what's the BFD? Drug Agents Apologize for Raid .c The Associated Press LEE, Mass. (AP) - A federal drug agent publicly apologized Thursday for raiding the home of a local building inspector on the mistaken suspicion he was a marijuana trafficker. A spokesman for the couple said, however, they were awaiting a personal apology and intended to press forward with complaints. ``This is the all-American family. If it could happen to them, it could happen to anybody,'' said state Rep. Chris Hodgkins, a relative who acted as their spokesman Thursday. ``They are law-abiding citizens, and I'm very, very sorry this happened,'' said George Fester, the agent in charge of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration's operations in New England. Daniel Keenan, who serves as building inspector in Lee and neighboring Stockbridge, said he was reading the newspaper in his front yard on Sept. 5, with his son playing nearby, when six state and federal officers drove up in separate cars. The agents told him they had reason to believe that 300 pounds of marijuana had been in his garage. Keenan said the agents didn't have a search warrant, but he signed a consent form allowing the house and garage to be searched. They were told that if they refused, they would be put in handcuffs, a search warrant would be issued, and their belongings would be tossed into the middle of their rooms, Hodgkins said. The agents claimed to have video showing a drug delivery to the house. As neighbors and the couple's three young children gathered to watch, the agents used a drug-sniffing dog to search the house and garage. After a fruitless two-hour search, they left. But the agents said they might return for further interrogation. Festa said an internal investigation was under way to determine just how the Keenans came to be targeted. He said he was sending a regional supervisor to talk to the family and also planned to make a personal visit to apologize. Hodgkins acknowledged that two agents had returned earlier to the house to discuss the raid with the family, but he said they refused to apologize in front of the children. ``I want to know how they came to the conclusion this house was the house, how they came to be so wrong,'' Keenan's wife, Laurie, said Thursday. ``We're concerned about the shadow of doubt this has created around us.'' ``We had these cowboys of DEA agents violating their rights,'' Hodgkins said. ``The kids were terrified. Everybody's still terrified.'' He said he was writing complaints on behalf of the family to U.S. Attorney Donald Stern and state Attorney General Scott Harshbarger. AP-NY-09-11-97 1835EDT =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with "unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject) Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Bill Of Attainder Project (fwd) Date: 12 Sep 1997 10:47:14 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- ******************************** BILL OF ATTAINDER PROJECT ******************************** Ending Asset Forfeiture Recently Attorney Elizabeth Macron was featured on the cover of the L.P. News for her work in winning an asset forfeiture case in New Jersey. The case involved an elderly lady whose car was seized when police stopped her son and found drugs in the vehicle. Hundreds of thousands of these cases exist but few are won by defense attorneys. Macron won the case on the basis that the owner of the car was denied a trial. The case will now go to the Supreme Court. The car is still in the hands of the government. The Bill Of Attainder Project congratulates Ms. Macron on her effort. Any victory over asset forfeiture is welcome, but, these victories will not end the practice. The practice must be stopped on the basis that asset forfeiture is theft, and therefor has no place in American justice. It was Samuel Adams who noted, "Now what liberty is this when property can be taken without permission?" There are several organizations who have fought asset forfeiture for years. Forfeitures Endanger American Rights, and the Institute for Justice are two organizations who have fought valiantly in our courts but to no avail. Macron's victory in New Jersey is the exception and not the rule. What can happen in this case is what happened in the Walker Chandler case against urine testing in Georgia. Chandler won a victory against the use of urine tests for political candidates in Georgia. Soon after his victory the U.S. Congress passed a bill requiring drug testing for Congress. Winning a battle is not winning the war. What is at stake is American rights to private property. The New Jersey case so far hinges on the idea that the owner of the car did not receive a trial. This is only one aspect of the forfeiture dilemma. There are many. In this case the government may have to give the owner a trial. She may not only lose the car but she may have to pay for the cost of litigation. If this is the case Elizabeth Macron's prediction that her victory will hinder asset forfeiture will not come to be. Since the case, Bennis v Michigan, in which a wife's car was confiscated from her husband caught soliciting a prostitute, asset forfeiture has been stepped up. There are over 300 laws which permit the government to confiscate private property. Legislators all over the country are proposing more in spite of the growing number of Americans who are protesting the practice. There are considerations about the asset forfeiture laws which have not yet been noticed by most Americans. Most folks have no idea these laws exist, and certainly do not realize their serious ramifications, one of which is that the burden of proof is shifted to the accused. Upon the advent of these laws Americans lost their right to private property. This has seriously damaged the position of citizenship and the power of citizenship once held by Americans. These laws were introduced to fight the "War On Drugs" but quickly spread into other aspects of the law. One aspect of asset forfeiture is that in many places prosecutors have discretion over what should be confiscated. The rising costs of litigation do not always offset the cost of prosecuting and processing property. Some forfeitures have resulted in prosecutors spending thousands to get property worth far less than the cost of getting it. One position held by some legislators is to pass laws that would make the asset forfeiture process fair. Henry Hyde, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, introduced legislation that would change how asset forfeiture is used. Chairman Hyde's intentions were good but soon after his legislation was introduced others in the Congress mutilated any significant changes. Asset forfeiture cannot be fair. It is theft. The corruption now associated with asset forfeiture is a clear sign that laws which permit the police to be thieves are as bad a tragedy as any other band of thieves. The government since 1985 has stolen about two billion dollars more property than what has been recorded from street thieves. The total is over $5 billion. A definite social dilemma has been seen since the advent of asset forfeiture. We have seen judicial activism in the administration of these laws and public corruption. The sinister "black masked" violent police tactics now employed upon society have created a much larger segment of our population that fear and/or hate the police and this government. Nothing in the formulation of asset forfeiture laws has sought to protect the rights of innocent people, and especially protect them from police corruption. The American underclass cannot be expected to learn the premise, "thou shalt not steal" if the overclass does not base the law on the same principle. It is ludicrous to believe these laws protect American society. The majority of asset forfeitures have occurred by property itself being charged with a crime. There are two considerations that strip Americans of civil liberties when the justice system uses this methodology. The obvious is that it robs people of their ownership and right to private property. The other is far more sinister due to its religious and spiritual connotations. Henry Hyde in his work to promote fairness of forfeiture, uncovered the use of the court's power to use personification of property to administer confiscation laws. Personification of property proposes the idea that property has the free will or power to commit crimes. This idea is deeply rooted in Witchcraft, the Occult, and even in Christianity but the court has perverted the idea. In religious dogma material objects can have power through association of a controlling force like a curse from a definite entity. The Court just automatically deems that property has its own power. This practice enforces a religious and spiritual idea upon Americans which may violate the government's restriction to enforce a particular religion, or religious idealism. How many judges would present the idea of personification of property in their own church? Historically asset forfeiture laws have been administered for over two hundred years. Some of these practices were stopped on the basis that the confiscation of private property was a bill of attainder. If the phrase "bill of attainder" was defined in the law as a thing, it would end the confiscation of private property. As it is now bill of attainder can mean anything the court decides. Asset forfeiture is often promoted during times of social outlawing. One example was during the "McCarthy" era. The whole American society was moved to expose and punish anyone associated or accused of being a Communist. An attempt was made to confiscate payroll checks of government workers accused of being Communists. In the case, U.S. v. Lovett, the Court ruled that this case of asset forfeiture was a bill of attainder. A few other cases in which the confiscation of property by the government was considered a bill of attainder exist but in modern asset forfeiture there is no bill of attainder protection of private property. (See "Defining Bills Of Attainder" and other works by the Bill Of Attainder Project for more information.) Other important Constitutional guarantees have been abused in modern society. Aside from Americans being deprived of their rights to be protected from bills of attainder, they have lost protection from Fifth Amendment rights that forbid the confiscation of property and the suspension of due process under the law. The 104th Congress made ex-post facto laws in addition to other laws which plunder American life, liberty, and property. The courts and legislatures will not provide American protections against these laws unless Americans demand it. America is in a state of emergency concerning civil liberties. Americans today seem to have forgotten the implications of the right to private property in the wars Americans have died in. The right to private property played a huge role in the American Revolution. British soldiers abused Colonials with the exact same kinds of plunder American police are allowed to use. This abuse was a major factor in prompting Americans to demand liberty. Modern legislatures seem to have little interest in protecting the right of private property or individual liberty.. This must change if Americans wish to avoid living in a total police state. We are dangerously close now. We urge all Americans to demand asset forfeiture be abolished from American justice. American society is changing with world modernization equiped with electronic efficiency. Congress has enacted "The Debt Collection Improvemnt Act." It is not clear as of yet what this law will do for collecting debt, but as of January 1st, all federal payments will be made electronically. Changes like these that effect everyone's life are being made by legislatures who do not have an interest in preserving American individual liberty. This lack of interest in our Congress is mirrored by the media. It is up to Aemricans to make sure the right to private property is restored. If America is to be preserved as a nation of, by, and for the people we must never forget that our law should be based upon the protection of theft. It makes no sense for a nation of, by, and for the people to make laws that permit stealing. It makes us all theives. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kenneth Mitchell Subject: Re: Thugs & Drugs & So What Else Is New? (fwd) Date: 12 Sep 1997 20:32:26 -0700 At 10:43 AM 9/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 09:41:11 -0500 (CDT) >From: Todd Gillespie > > >Hey, nobody got shot this time, so what's the BFD? It only goes to show that the only way you're going to get an apology is if your relatives are big shots in the government. >Drug Agents Apologize for Raid > >.c The Associated Press > >LEE, Mass. (AP) - A federal drug agent publicly apologized Thursday for >raiding the home of a local building inspector on the mistaken suspicion he >was a marijuana trafficker. A spokesman for the couple said, however, they >were awaiting a personal apology and intended to press forward with >complaints. > >``This is the all-American family. If it could happen to them, it could >happen to anybody,'' said state Rep. Chris Hodgkins, a relative who acted as >their spokesman Thursday. > >``They are law-abiding citizens, and I'm very, very sorry this happened,'' >said George Fester, the agent in charge of the federal Drug Enforcement >Administration's operations in New England. > >Daniel Keenan, who serves as building inspector in Lee and neighboring >Stockbridge, said he was reading the newspaper in his front yard on Sept. 5, >with his son playing nearby, when six state and federal officers drove up in >separate cars. The agents told him they had reason to believe that 300 pounds >of marijuana had been in his garage. > >Keenan said the agents didn't have a search warrant, but he signed a consent >form allowing the house and garage to be searched. > >They were told that if they refused, they would be put in handcuffs, a search >warrant would be issued, and their belongings would be tossed into the middle >of their rooms, Hodgkins said. The agents claimed to have video showing a >drug delivery to the house. > >As neighbors and the couple's three young children gathered to watch, the >agents used a drug-sniffing dog to search the house and garage. After a >fruitless two-hour search, they left. But the agents said they might return >for further interrogation. > >Festa said an internal investigation was under way to determine just how the >Keenans came to be targeted. He said he was sending a regional supervisor to >talk to the family and also planned to make a personal visit to apologize. > >Hodgkins acknowledged that two agents had returned earlier to the house to >discuss the raid with the family, but he said they refused to apologize in >front of the children. > >``I want to know how they came to the conclusion this house was the house, >how they came to be so wrong,'' Keenan's wife, Laurie, said Thursday. ``We're >concerned about the shadow of doubt this has created around us.'' > >``We had these cowboys of DEA agents violating their rights,'' Hodgkins said. >``The kids were terrified. Everybody's still terrified.'' > >He said he was writing complaints on behalf of the family to U.S. Attorney >Donald Stern and state Attorney General Scott Harshbarger. > >AP-NY-09-11-97 1835EDT > > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with >"unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject) >Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman > > > > Ken Mitchell Citrus Heights, CA kmitchel@gvn.net http://www.gvn.net/~creative/ "Roaming the world as a foreign correspondent for more than a decade, I was able to observe how a variety of vastly different nations organized themselves economically. The inescapable conclusion was that no politician anywhere on the planet has ever actually created a rupee's worth of prosperity." Louis Rukeyser, "Louis Rukeyser's Wall Street" newsletter, Nov 96 !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: Ruby Ridge Date: 13 Sep 1997 11:36:56 -0700 Last night I went to the very center of hatred and discontent for the whole universe - the absolute mecca of right-wing extremists - the Holy Grail Land of the patriot movement - Sandpoint, Idaho, for a meeting. At said meeting, we saw a video called "The Ruby Creek Massacre." A number of the people at the meeting were actually up at Ruby Creek (below the Weavers' house) protesting, when Vicki Weaver was murdered; Sandpoint is only a few miles from there. The video was about an hour and a half of actual footage, with commentary, of the whole siege. Folks, this was an incredibly powerful thing for me to see. Understand that several of the folks in that room *lived* what happened, they didn't just hear about it from Peter Jennings. They were there, at Ruby Ridge, during the siege. There was a lot of footage of the people protesting at the bridge over Ruby Creek during the siege; it was extremely touching. Friends and neighbors of the Weavers, as well as people from all over the Northwest were at the bridge with signs saying things like "Leave Them Alone" and "You Call This Freedom?" After Vicki was killed, they modified the Dead End sign at the bridge to say "Dead Mother and Child." As trucks and soldiers and tanks drove by, men, women and children kept shouting things like "Shame on you - shame on you!!!" to the drivers. While not on the film, apparently many of the fedgoons made lewd and obscene sexual gestures at many of the women who were protesting; of course, they didn't do it while there was a camera in evidence. Bo Gritz showed up in the middle of the siege; I'd always thought he just arrived at the end and talked Randy and his family down off the mountain. But the first time he went up and spoke to Randy was earlier. His return was filmed and is on the video. It's after dark, and Bo calls the people together, asks them to press in tight, because he has good news and bad news. He says the good news is that the girls and Randy are all right, and Kevin has been wounded, but he's OK. Then he again asks them to move in tight and hold hands; he then says that Vicki has been killed. People start crying immediately, and Bo tries to comfort them. The emotion in this film is incredible, and again I remind you that several people in the room last night were there when it happened. I found out that many of them actually met for the first time on the bridge at Ruby Creek and have become friends and patriots as a result. People, the contrast between the Weavers, a simple family with real Christian beliefs who simply wanted to live in peace on a mountain away from the sin of the world, and the jackbooted thugs that framed him (I'm coming to believe that the shotgun thing was totally fabricated), murdered his wife while she held an infant and opened a door for her just-wounded husband, shot a 14-year-old in the back and killed him, and then harassed women protesters with obscene gestures - the contrast is absolutely incredible. The absolute EVIL that has taken over this country was personified to me last night probably stronger than it ever has been. Randy Weaver just wanted to raise his family in the presence of God, on a mountaintop. The feds wanted him to be an informer on the white separatist movement, and he said no. And destiny was set at that moment - no one says no to the federal government and survives. They had 400-800 federal jackbooted thugs there at Ruby Creek, with machine guns, tanks and helicopters. The cost was one million dollars a day during the siege. For a man that allegedly sold 2 sawed off shotguns??? And again, I'm doubting the veracity of that little tale more and more. The whole point was, nobody says no to the feds; nobody. I wish you all could have been there last night; your lives would be changed, I guarantee it. - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oh Lord, lead us into Your Glory - bathe us in the holy & pure light of Your Spirit; let Your righteous fire burn away all that is in us that is not of You, so that we might worship the Living God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. Amen. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: For Your Reading Pleasure... (fwd) Date: 13 Sep 1997 11:43:02 PST On Sep 13, Dugga@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >From: Robert Tuzzalino >Subject: Capital Research Center on tax exempt nonprofit foundations >X-Sender: rpt3934@pop.draper.com >To: ma-firearms >Sender: ma-firearms-approval@world.std.com >Reply-To: ma-firearms@world.std.com > >It seems that in 1993, the Joyce Foundation funded Harvard School of Public >Health's Center for Health Communication to develop the public health >menace of guns causing violence. > >The following from: >http://www.capitalresearch.org/crc/fw/fw-0796.html >---begin excerpt--- >"GUN VIOLENCE"? SQUASH IT! > >Grants in the area of "gun vio lence" are the most evident sign of Leff's >impact on the Joyce Foundation. Under her personal supervision _ Leff is >listed as program officer in the Foundation's annual report _ Joyce gave >$1,170,392 to ten projects last year. Among them were the Handgun Epidemic >Lowering Plan in Chicago, which got $140,000 for "a national coalition of >groups committed to a public-health approach," $42,500 to Johns Hopkins >University's Center for Gun Policy and Research "to develop and promote an >advertising code for firearms," and $200,000 to the Violence Policy Center >in Washington, DC. (For more about gun-control groups see "Gun Control: Is >theTide Turning?" by Austin Fulk, Organization Trends, June 1996.) Leff >says she first became aware of the issue when she worked at ABC News and >"looked at the number of gun deaths in Bangladesh compared to the number of >gun deaths in Harlem. To hear that men in Harlem lived less long than men >in Bangladesh was shocking." Perhaps because of the Kennedy assassinations, >Daly is also a strong proponent of initiatives to deal with crimes >committed with guns. Leff argues that since "nobody wants 40,000 Americans >to die of gun violence," the solution is obvious: "Let's take it out of the >political debate and make it a consensus." To achieve consensus on an issue >that turns on the interpretation of the second amendment to Constitution, >Leff resorts to the popular appeal of therapy and the authority of medicine >rather than law. She went to Jay Winsten, a biology Ph.D. on the faculty of >the Harvard School of Public Health's Center for Health Communication, >whose specialty is public relations campaigns -- most famously for the >"Designated Driver." Leff gave Winsten $50,000 in 1993 "to develop >strategies to get the public to think of gun violence as a public health >problem." That same year Joyce gave the Harvard School of Public Health >$93,500 to conduct a Harris poll to determine "how the connection between >guns and health can be made." In an April, 1996 Weekly Standard article >called "Handgun Control, M.D." Tucker Carlson described the logic >underlying Leff's approach: "Framed in medical terms, gun-related mayhem >begins to look like one of society's most easily solved problems _ nothing >at all like the complex affliction that has stymied the best efforts of >police, judges, and criminologists for better than a century. If violence >is a disease, the cure is simple: Get rid of the guns." But as Carlson >points out, "guns aren't pathogens; not biologically, not even >metaphorically. Genuine pathogens, as any doctor knows, cause disease when >introduced into a pathogen-free environment. Considering that there are >more than 200 million privately owned firearms in the United States, only a >miniscule fraction of which are ever used in acts of violence, guns don't >qualify under this definition." Carlson argues there is no shooting >epidemic, since the incidence has remained fairly steady in recent years >and even declined in some localities. The medical metaphor won't work. No >matter. The facts of criminal justice won't stand in the way of Leff's >goal: "changing social norms." >---end excerpt--- > >Hmmm, the liberal left is definitely using the many billions it has >available in these nonprofit tax exempt foundations. Just think, the Ford >Foundation has $8 billion, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur >Foundation has $3 billion. If you want to see what other damage they are >doing, point your web browser to: >http://www.capitalresearch.org/ > >According to a CRC paper, the Ford Foundation is fostering racial hatred. >Read about it in their paper, "Inside the Ford Foundation's Plan to Split >Apart America ," at: >http://www.capitalresearch.org/crc/fw/fw-1196.html >---begin excerpt--- >In its eagerness to mobilize social discontent, the Ford Foundation has >occasionally helped its operatives go over the line that separates dissent >from incitement to violence. In 1969, Jose Angel Gutierrez, founder of the >La Raza Unida political party in Texas, told a group of reporters at a >press conference that, "We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I >mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him." >Gutierrez was affiliated with the Mexican America Youth Organization (MAYO) >which had received a $10,000 grant from a Ford Foundation grantee. Texas >Democratic Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez was so enraged by Gutierrez' >rhetoric that he took to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives to >accuse him of promoting racial hatred. Gonzalez attacked the Ford >Foundation for indirectly supporting La Raza Unida through its grant to >MAYO. >---end excerpt--- > >While the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation funds the Institute >for Policy Studies for pushing, "international governance" and >international taxes. The CRC's paper at: >http://www.capitalresearch.org/crc/fw/fw-0996.html > >states the following: >---begin excerpt--- >To finance an expansion of the U.N.'s military, environmental and >population control programs the MacArthur Foundation is leading a chorus of >voices that over the last several years has been advocating the imposition >of international taxes on the United States and other countries. >"International governance" has become a euphemism for encouraging >nonprofits, governments and international bodies to undertake projects, >task forces, conferences, seminars, monographs, reports and other >activities that will help build a constituency for world government that >will be supported by ordinary American citizens through payments to an >international version of the I.R.S. > >MacArthur is careful not to use the term "world government" to describe >this ambitious agenda. But the projects underwritten by the foundation, in >particular the private Commission on Global Governance, are partly designed >to give the U.N. an independent taxing authority. If successful, the >cash-strapped world body would have the wherewithal to become a >full-fledged government and it would become independent of U.S. influence. > >Of course, this is a sensitive topic that is subject to countless >qualifications and preconditions. Warnings of "world government" are easily >dismissed as fever swamp fantasies. But those who follow foundation >grantmakers notice that they increasingly seek to fund "global solutions" >to problems that do not suffer interference by national sovereignty, >constitutional limits, individual rights or private property ownership. > >The MacArthur Foundation refused to respond to our inquiries. Asked to >comment on global taxes and MacArthur's grant to the Commission on Global >Governance, Ray Boyer, communications director for the foundation, >declared, "We choose not to do an interview with Foundation Watch." The >"no-comment" may reflect MacArthur's uneasiness over previous Capital >Research Center disclosures of its activities. CRC visiting fellow Martin >Morse Wooster, in his work The Great Philanthropists & the Problem of >"Donor Intent," described the foundation's failure to honor the intentions >of its benefactor, John D. MacArthur, whose $3 billion fortune is being >used to further the goals of individuals and groups for which its founder >had no documented sympathy. A champion of free enterprise, MacArthur >intensely disliked government bureaucracies and regulations and opposed >attempts to restrict economic development. > >Yet the MacArthur Foundation has underwritten groups that are dedicated to >more taxes, more public spending and more regulation of the private sector. >The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) is only the most radical example of >this trend. IPS sympathies for leftist revolutionaries, apologies for >communist tyranny, and strident attacks on U.S. foreign and domestic >policies were notorious before the collapse of Communism. The current >interest in "international governance" by grantmakers like MacArthur merely >represents the worm's turn in new-plowed soil. The impulse to create new >international bureaucracies that impose proscriptions and issue mandates is >irrepressible. >---end excerpt--- [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: [gcrick@main.org: encryption legislation] (fwd) Date: 13 Sep 1997 11:45:05 PST On Sep 13, Bill Campbell wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] And yet another forward. Bill -- INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Systems, Inc. UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 2835 82nd Avenue S.E. S-100 FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676 URL: http://www.celestial.com/ A child can go only so far in life without potty training. It is not mere coincidence that six of the last seven presidents were potty trained, not to mention nearly half of the nation's state legislators. -- Dave Barry this for you general information... Software that protects your privacy is a controlled substance that may no longer be sold, a Congressional committee decided today. Meeting behind closed doors this morning, the House Intelligence committee voted to replace a generally pro-encryption bill with an entirely rewritten draft that builds in Big Brother into all future encryption products. (The Senate appears to be moving in a similar direction.) The new SAFE bill -- titled in a wonderfully Orwellian manner the "Security and Freedom through Encryption" act even though it provides neither -- includes these provisions: SELLING CRYPTO: Selling unapproved encryption products (that do not include "immediate access to plaintext") becomes a federal crime, immediately after this bill becomes law. Five years in jail plus fines. Distributing, importing, or manufacturing such products after January 31, 2000 is another crime. NETWORK PROVIDERS: Anyone offering scrambled "network service" including encrypted web servers or even "ssh" would be required to build in a backdoor for the government by January 31, 2000. This backdoor must provide for "immediate decryption or access to plaintext of the data." TECHNICAL STANDARDS: The Attorney General will publish technical requirements for such backdoors in network service and encryption products, within five months after the president signs this bill. LEGAL TO USE CRYPTO: "After January 31, 2000, it shall not be unlawful to use any encryption product purchased or in use prior to such date." GOVERNMENT POWERS: If prosecutors think you may be selling, importing, or distributing non-backdoor'd crypto or are "about" to do so, they can sue. "Upon the filing of the complaint seeking injunctive relief by the Attorney General, the court shall automatically issue a temporary restraining order against the party being sued." Also, there are provisions for holding secret hearings, and "public disclosure of the proceedings shall be treated as contempt of court." You can request an advisory opinion from the government to see if the program you're about to publish violates the law. ACCESS TO PLAINTEXT: Courts can issue orders, ex parte, granting police access to your encrypted data. But all the government has to do to get one is to provide "a factual basis establishing the relevance of the plaintext" to an investigation. They don't have to demonstrate probable cause, which is currently required for a search warrant. More interestingly, this explicitly gives the FISA court jurisdiction (yes, the secret court that has never denied a request for a wiretap). If they decode your messages, they'll tell you within 90 days. GOVERNMENT PURCHASING: Federal government computer purchases must use a key escrow "immediate decryption" backdoor after 1998. Same with networks "purchased directly with Federal funds to provide the security service of data confidentially." Such products can be labeled "authorized for sale to U.S. government" ENCRYPTION EXPORTS: The Defense & Commerce departments will control exports of crypto. Software "without regard to strength" can be exported if it includes a key escrow backdoor and is first submitted to the government. Export decisions aren't subject to judicial review, and the "president may by executive order waive any provision of this act" if he thinks it's a threat to national security. Within 15 days, he must send a classified briefing to Congress. ADVISORY PANEL: Creates the Encryption Industry and Information Security Board, with seven members from Justice, State, FBI, CIA, White House, and six from the industry. INTERNATIONAL: The president can negotiate international agreements and perhaps punish noncompliant governments. Can you say "trade sancation?" (Other provisions barring the use of crypto in a crime and some forms of cryptanalysis are also in the bill.) Next the Commerce Committee will vote on SAFE, and a former FBI agent-turned-Congressman is vowing to ensure that similar language to this is included. (The committees are voting on the bill in parallel, and a four-person team of Congressmen is working to forge a compromise before Commerce votes.) Then the heads of the five committees that have rewritten the legislation will sit down and work out another compromise. If it's acceptable to the House Rules committee -- and if the FBI/NSA get what they want it will be -- the bill can move to the floor for a vote. That's why the encryption outlook in Congress is abysmal. Crypto-advocates have lost, and lost miserably. A month ago, the debate was about export controls. Now the battle is over how strict the //domestic// controls will be. It's sad, really, that so many millions of lobbyist-dollars were not only wasted, but used to advance legislation that has been morphed into a truly awful proposal. I wrote more about this at: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1385,00.html - -Declan [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: OPS TEST (fwd) Date: 15 Sep 1997 08:18:17 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Fellow OPS Members, Here is my new address < bion8549@uidaho.edu > . My alternative address is < bion8549@novell.uidaho.edu >. I will be transferring my webpage from the UW to the UI as soon as I recieve my new computer and add some software to it. In the meantime, let me encourage you to subscribe to the Idaho Observer - a patriot newspaper coming out of Post Falls, Idaho. I have found it to be quite informative and has a lot of potential in the future. You can visit their webpage at www.proliberty.com/observer . Sua Sponte, Richard R. Biondi OPS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mestetsr@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu Subject: Masters of War Date: 15 Sep 1997 14:30:09 -0400 Received this today (mainframe was down for the weekend). Thought y'all might be interested. Rachel >Subject: Masters of War >X-Comment: PA Alliance for Democracy List > >Today, the United States refused to sign a global treaty banning >anti-personnel landmines. The treaty was drafted by a multinational >conference in Oslo, Norway. The late Princess Diana spent the last six >months of her life passionately advocating for a worldwide moral >consensus on the ban. > >Over 100 nations have signed the treaty. Only the war-mongering rogue >states of America, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, and Israel have >refused to sign the so-called Ottawa Process. > >LS > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: One "Assault Weapon's" True Story (fwd) Date: 15 Sep 1997 21:18:31 -0400 (EDT) Dear fellow nobanners: The anti-gun / anti-freedom jackals on Capitol Hill, aided by media allies, are now demonizing the M-1 carbine (as well as the Garand and the M-1911A1) in an all out hysterical attempt to kill the Murtha amendment, tacked onto a Treasury appropriations bill, to allow for the importation of surplus M-1 carbines, Garands and M-1911A1s. I will not sit on the sidelines and allow freedom haters to demonize guns which my own family members (see below) carried with great honor during World War II. Please read or reread this (now) timely message and consider reforwarding it to your respective U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators with appropriate polite commentary attached. Best regards, Chris Christopher C. Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Hello, America. I am talking to you not from a podium occupied by some pontificating, freedom-fearing politician in Washington, D.C., but from the quiet solitude of the Fort Knox gun safe of a gentleman named Christopher Ferris, my present owner, a heck of a nice guy, a resident of New Hampshire, a state where the motto is "Live Free or Die". How fitting. You see, as a semi-automatic .30 caliber carbine manufactured in Saginaw, Michigan late during World War II, I have paid my dues in defense of liberty. And then some. Yes, I was the difference between life and death for American G.I.s who stormed ashore at Normandy and raced across France to liberate Nazi death camps. I was the essence of survival for cold, battle-weary soldiers and Marines on lonely hills in Korea when Chinese bugles sounded and valleys below me swarmed with enemy troops. Later, I traveled to Viet Nam and Cambodia where I was loaned to village defense forces formed to fight off assaults by Viet Cong and Khmer Rouge who took no prisoners and enjoyed "making examples" out of village chiefs and their families. I saw my share of pain, of grief, of suffering. But also, in the hands of honorable, brave men, I saved the lives of many good people who were at risk of being struck down by evil. I did my part when asked to do so. I saved lives. I kept good and great people alive to return safely to the arms of their loved ones. I still feel good about that. Really good. Mr. Ferris, my current owner, reveres my presence in his safe. Why? Because his late uncle died a hero with one of my fellow carbines in his hands on a dusty North African hill in 1943. His uncle, his carbine and his pistol saved the men under his command from certain death, but he gave up his life in so doing. A grateful nation honored him with a Distinguished Service Cross, a Silver Star and a Purple Heart. Mr. Ferris' late father also carried one of my fellow carbines ashore at Omaha Beach and that semi-automatic beauty was his "girlfriend" until V-E day. His "cutie". Perhaps now you will understand why Mr. Ferris cares for me with such passion and fervor. I am surely not an "assault weapon", an inappropriate misnomer applied to semi-automatic firearms by Capitol Hill know-nothings who fail to see the inexorable connection between me, honor and honorable men whose hands have borne me in time of war and peace. I am a powerful symbol of great deeds done by simple, honest men who loved freedom, the U.S.A. and their families with all of their hearts. Yes, I have seen combat. But I have also stood guard at lonely outposts in the hands of homesick soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen who willingly went far away from family and friends to insure that freedom endured. I have known the necessary boredom and routine of peacetime military service. I have done my duty, as have my assigned handlers, without complaint. Month after month, year after year, I was there when America called. I answered that call. For almost two generations. Weary though I was, I never failed my nation when needed. And now my role may be family defense. That's fine with me. No problem at all. I am ready. If needed. As usual. After many years of valiant service, fate brought me into the hands of Mr. Ferris, who cried openly as he reviewed letters from G.I.s describing his late uncle's heroic, futile efforts to fight off a horde of advancing Afrika Korps infantry, using my brother carbine in that doomed effort. Even the fast firing action of my brother carbine and a companion semi-automatic .45 ACP pistol could not save Mr. Ferris' uncle, but his comrades escaped to fight another day, to bring down Hitler's horrific machine which brought death and destruction to so many innocent people. Yes, we carbines were and are a hardy bunch. We hated tyranny and we still do. As do our current owners such as Mr. Ferris. Now, at rest in the gun safe of Mr. Ferris, I can reflect back on my years of service to my country, many battles in which my action made the difference between life and death to many Americans, and I can look forward to my "retirement" years. Mr. Ferris knows that .30 caliber semi-automatic carbines played an important part in his uncle's heroic death and in his father's devoted service to God and Country. Mr. Ferris has every right to cry tears of remembrance as he every so often cleans my metal and wood surfaces, fires me at a local range, or cleans my 15 and 30 round magazines. Do not laugh at his tears, Bill Clinton, Sarah Brady and Chuck Schumer! Merely hang your heads in utter shame that you do not understand why he cries and, if you did, that you would not care. So, America, this is my tale. I am the so-called "assault weapon" about which Patrick Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Al Gore, Janet Reno and Bill Clinton were moaning and groaning last week and every chance they get. Forget them, America. They are but tragic fools who fail to value freedom. Remember me, America. Remember what I have done, where I have gone, the men whose lives I have saved. Remember why Christopher Ferris cries when he ponders my role in his family's and nation's history. The evil is not in my action, but in the hearts of those freedom-haters who forget what I have done to preserve the lives of fine Americans and to insure that freedom has remained intact. Forget Bill Clinton, America. Remember me, and remember your fellow Americans who have borne me, and still do so, with great pride and distinct honor, each and every day of their lives. Christopher C. Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: http://www.cyberhighway.net/~artspawn/united.html (fwd) Date: 16 Sep 1997 08:42:59 -0500 (CDT) This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. ------=_NextPart_000_01BCC202.FD21B8A0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1 Content-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Got your email address from Citizens for Legal Reform page. I've seen your name several times relating to this subject. I thought you'd be interested in the things on the attached web page URL.....it seems to put things together very well.............download and listen to the two RealAudio files on the page by John Quade; I think you'll find them interesting. Don Woodson ------=_NextPart_000_01BCC202.FD21B8A0 Content-Type: APPLICATION/OCTET-STREAM; NAME="PUPILS.url" Content-ID: Content-Description: Pupils (Internet Shortcut) [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cyberhighway.net/~artspawn/united.html ------=_NextPart_000_01BCC202.FD21B8A0-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: (fwd) World War III Plans Exposed Date: 16 Sep 1997 09:32:48 -0700 The following is forwarded, originally from Christopher Goodheart... >Return-Path: >X-Sender: safetrek@mcn.net >Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 22:35:54 -0600 >To: safetrek@mcn.net >From: Christopher Goodheart >Subject: World War III Plans Exposed > >URGENT NEWS - World War III Plans Exposed > >An Open Letter To Our Representatives On Capitol Hill >by Christopher Goodheart, URGENT NEWS Editor > >"The strength of the Constitution lies in the will of the people to defend >it."=20 >- Thomas Edison > >FORWARD: Consider here the documented facts that include CDC's shameful >role in developing contaminated vaccines AS PART OF A FAR MORE SERIOUS >THREAT TO THE SOVEREIGN RIGHTS OF AMERICANS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. Please >block Clinton's current nomination of CDC Director David Satcher as U.S. >Surgeon General and assistant secretary for health at the Department of >Health and Human Services. > >Dear Vigilant Friend of Freedom: > =20 >This letter has been e-mailed to our representatives in the House and >Senate as a last-ditch effort to defend the Constitution and avert the >terror, death and hell that is planned for the American people by the same >people behind the death of the Kennedy=92s, behind the massive Mena= Arkansas >drug imports, and behind many other "black operations" ranging from >Cambodia=92s Golden Triangle to the unexploded bombs that were found on the >columns inside the Oklahoma City Murray Building. (go to >www.urgent.safetrek.com/big.htm for details) > >This is a serious warning to all of US regarding domestic enemies that are >planning an attack on the America people with biological warfare agents >that could kill thousands if not millions of Americans=85 creating chaos in >major cities nationwide, collapse of the stock market, and nuclear attack >by China and North Korea. Both of these arch-enemies of America have been >accelerating war preparations this last year with unprecedented financial >and technology aid from top power elite insiders; there=92s uncanny= parallel >to Wall Street aid behind the arms industry build-up of Germany and Japan >prior to World War II. > >The method to this madness and the virtual insanity of insane =96 virtually >satanic -- "powers that be" behind the scenes of big business/big >government (Big Brother) collusion can now be understood easily and quickly >by the masses of Americans through the video or book called EMERGING >VIRUSES by Dr. Len Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H. (Masters in Public >Health). Speaking at Safe-Trek=92s Round-Table Seminar* of experts about a >week ago, Horowitz documents the paper trail behind the intrigue and >treachery of those who created and deployed AIDS in America and worldwide. >And he details the insidious nature of "Project Paperclip" that not only >brought over top NAZI rocket scientists after the war (for NASA) but also >brought over Hitler=92s top geneticists and virologists who continued their >"ethnic cleansing" agenda in our bio-warfare labs in collusion with the >medical industry. > >Horowitz has uncovered the irrefutable evidence that proves the who, what, >where and how behind hepatitis B vaccines laced with live AIDS virus that >targeted homosexuals and blacks in New York, San Francisco and Central >Africa (via the UN=92s World Health Organization), and this is exactly= where >the AIDS disease exploded from. > >Concerning a much broader population reduction agenda, Horowitz names the >names and prints the contracts that show who and how the power elite >insiders within the defense establishment have initiated the genocide of >millions of American people with the contamination of polio vaccines that >has "seeded" the entire baby boom generation with cancer viruses; as age >takes it=92s toll and our immune systems can no longer keep these= laboratory >created retroviruses in check, these "biological time bombs" are now >activating with one out of three boomers getting cancer. =20 > >And Horowitz details the complete story behind the intrigue and treachery >whereby the population control agenda of this power-mad power elite has >killed millions of "sheeple" they consider "useless eaters" or "potential >militia" through a wide range of vaccines ranging from DPT shots for >children to the shots given to Gulf War vets. Horowitz relays the most >compelling information to date to confirm that designer viruses in pre-war >vaccines are the cause of the Gulf War Syndrome that has killed or >seriously sickened more than 200,000 vets already and is rapidly spreading >among their children and wives. > >A common sense, non-emotional and otherwise objective evaluation of the >information provided by Horowitz at this seminar will reveal what any >serious student of unadulterated history will tell you. That the same >people who financed and profited from both sides of World Wars I and II, >the Vietnam War, and many other global conflicts have likewise made a >killing by creating and treating disease through the military/medical >industrial complex. Clearly the "War on Cancer" was a medical Vietnam and >the medical-industrial complex is now far more entrenched and bigger than >the military-industrial complex ever was. Indeed, the first thing the >Clintons did after the election was to follow the directive of David >Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission founder and Chairman, to take over >(socialize) 1/5th of the economy -- the health care system =96 that the >Rockefeller oligarchy monopolizes. > >Studies show that 97.5% of what we call "health care" is in fact disease >care - the diagnosis and treatment of disease rather than it=92s= prevention. >The most powerful special interests in the United States are driven by >corporate law that favors shareholders before the public whenever profits >are at stake. This gives incentive to the interlocked food and drug >companies to sell the American public on the Big Lie of disease care as >health care. From cradle to grave, population control is waged on the >American public through mass media mind control; food and drug adds >dominate the mass media, indirectly causing disease through highly >processed chemical-laced "food"=85 and then directly treating disease= through >more chemicals (drugs) for whatever ails you. > >This sick "health care" system thus creates and manages a sickly, >weak-willed and dumbed-down public that is too sick and tired to realize >how "we the people" are manipulated by mass programming of the mass mind. >The fact is that more than a million American die prematurely every year >because our "health care" system cares far more for the creation and >treatment of disease than its prevention. > >There=92s no one more enslaved than those who THINK they are free when, in >fact, all of their choices are manipulated, programmed (TV) or otherwise >orchestrated by politically correct power elite special interests.=20 > >Common sense has become uncommon regarding the huge self-destructive >disease-care system called "health care" because the politics and economics >(for power and profit) are far more complex and intimidating to the >"sheeple" than the science of biological correct health-building and >disease prevention. Indeed, common sense has been turned on it=92s head for >financially expedient profits. It=92s just "good business" (for profit)= that >a pound of cure is worth 16 times an ounce of prevention. And the most >powerful special interests in America have a corporate responsibility >(vested interest) in keeping it that way. =20 > >Now we have proof that their agenda is to reduce US population to 45% >current levels. The issue is that the Internet is waking up the world to >the power trips of the power elite, and the need to make them accountable. >Which explains why they want to accelerate their agenda and formula for >success; the creation and management of disease and death. > >This would be much more difficult to understand if you did not know the >history of the key players who have been getting away with murder for >generations. Early in the century, robber barons Rockefeller and Carnegie >created a medical monopoly by financing 1640 medical schools with >pharmacology at the core of the curriculum, turning out "ethical" >drug-pushers every since because they outright owned or indirectly >controlled most of the drug companies. This same Rockefeller (John D.) >also financed legislation that virtually destroyed the dominance of natural >cure modalities such as naturopathy (herbs) and homeopathy. Later he >merged his cartel of monopolies in numerous fields (oil, chemicals, drugs, >banking and communications) with the IG Farben cartel of monopolies in >Europe that brought Hitler to power. Rocky even loaned out his >image-maker, Ivy Lee, to appraise the PR potential of Hitler before they >brought him to power as their front man. > >While old John D. was destroying nature-based medicine in America and >setting up Hitler to enforce his IG Farben cartel agreements throughout >Europe, he had a naturopathic and homeopathic doctor keeping him in peek >shape into his 90=92s. Rocky=92s oil tankers kept Hitler=92s war machine= going >through the war along with his coal-gasification technology. Insider >collusion pulled strings at the highest levels and we now know that >Roosevelt had prior knowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor even as the >insiders had prior knowledge (actually set up) the bombing of the Murray >Building in Oklahoma City. > >Horowitz documents how much of the NAZI war chest went into purchasing >controlling interest in America=92s largest pharmaceutical companies who= then >contracted for biological weapons development via Hitler=92s in-house >scientists. The chilling conclusion to the chain of events since then is >undeniable to any mature adult who would rather know a grievous truth than >live in wishful fantasy. > >The Trilateral Commission "insiders" have already published their intent to >reduce world population to 10% current levels (Global 2000 Report) and the >CFR=92s own insider newsletter has expressed it=92s intent to help that= process >along in the US to approx. 45 % current population levels. This agenda is >well on its way through immune-whacking vaccines they injected us with when >we were children. > >Given a little radiation =96 for a huge whack on our collective immune >systems -- and you=92ll see a massive pandemic of cancers virtually >overnight. To finish off what an anthrax and/or plague bio-attack doesn=92= t >accomplish, the international power elite long ago created the nuclear arms >race with their "MAD" system of "Mutual Assured Destruction". Horowitz >documents how it was Kissenger leading both nuclear and bio-warfare >initiatives.=20 > >You can expect that biological warfare attack to come from a "black >operation" directed by the insiders here in America. Why? BECAUSE THEY=92= VE >ALREADY MADE SUCH AN ATTACK, KILLING MILLIONS OF US WITH CONTAMINATED >VACCINES! And they can easily clone another Lee Harvey McVeigh scapegoat >if not implicate the entire patriot movement as a pretext to putting the >true defenders of America into the "detention centers" (concentration >camps) that FEMA has ready and waiting around the US. =20 > >Horowitz clearly shows the pattern whereby the insiders have consistently >announced their evil intent in veiled messages through their mass media >mouthpieces. They almost always set us up with pre-programming to get us >used to the agendas they have planned for us. Like self-fulfilling >prophecy they warn us of dangers and then create the very same problem they >would "save us" from. But their "salvation" is anything but! For example, >in the name of saving the children at Waco, they fried =91em. In the name= of >saving the children of America, they=92ve injected them with contaminated >vaccines for more than 20 years. And right now, in the name of the urgent >"health" needs of children, Clinton is pushing hard with an agenda to >vaccinate every child with Hepatitis B vaccines; Horowitz says that recent >checks have shown these vaccines to be extremely contaminated. =20 > >Another "set up" is more ominous; almost everyday we are being warned in >the media that a "biological attack" is imminent at any time. This would >be a convenient tactic to transfer blame for the collapse of the stock >market which the insiders fully intend to milk all the way down as they did >with the S & L fiasco. The savings and pension funds of millions of >Americans will be gone, and that in itself will depress the immune system, >triggering the seeded viruses in many adults. > >It=92s critical that people prepare physically, mentally and spiritually= for >what will come if our representative in government do not soon make >accountable or otherwise bring under control the numerous tentacles of the >"octopus" of big business/big government (fascist/Big Brother) vested >interests in America.=20 > >I suggest that THE MOST IMPORTANT PLACE TO BEGIN IS RON PAUL'S HR 1146. In >Ron Paul's own words: > >>"One of the most popular pieces of legislation I have introduced is HR >>1146, The American Sovereignty Restoration Act. >>"In short, this bill calls for the immediate withdrawal of the United >>States from the United Nations, including an end to the participation of >>US troops in UN police actions. This legislation is so important because >>it is a first step in stopping the march toward a "one world government" >>through the many other multilateral agencies, such as the IMF, the World >>Bank and the newly created World Trade Organization. >>AND THE UN'S WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION THAT DEPLOYED AIDS VACCINES) >> >>"Our Constitution does not give Congress the authority to cede our >>national sovereignty to an international body. Even under the treaty >>provisions of the Constitution, it is not permissible.=20 > >Our reps quite often do not see the light until they feel the heat. Let >them know that HONOR for America and a future for our children begins with >Ron Paul's legislation that restores sovereignty "of, by and for the >people". Tell our reps that you want the medical monopoly in America >deregulated so that alternative health cures for cancer, AIDS and emerging >viruses can be encouraged. Demand a full investigation of the >military/medical industrial complex and their CIA/NAZI connections since >World War II. And above all, read Horowitz=92s book or view his video on >"Emerging Viruses"; this is perhaps the most scholastic documentation to >date to expose the treachery of those among us who began a silent war >against the American people 20 years ago and are now about to trigger World >War III via biological and nuclear warfare meant to enslave us if not kill >us outright. I also recommend Steve Quayle=92s definitive preparedness >manual for biological/chemical warfare called, "Breath No Evil" (800/424-7870) > >For Christ=92s sake, "Feed my sheep"; warn the American public of the= infamy >of this arrogant, corrupt and virtually satanic power elite (and political >lackeys) who have promised safety, health and security for our loved ones >while in fact setting us up for the kill. > >To deny what is about to happen in America is to deny the documented proof >that Horowitz provides right before your eyes. Order his books and tapes >from his home page at www.tetrahedron.org or, for a limited time, get his >594 page/$29.95 book free along with 4 hours of his recent lecture (9-1-97) >where he details the Rockefeller-Kissenger-Bush NAZI connection and the >rise of the 4th Reich in America. > >That free offer comes with a one year order of food from SafeTrek. >Personally, I don=92t care were you order your food reserves from, but I= can >tell you that SafeTrek Food Reserves are competitive (quality and price) >with other suppliers. Wherever you get them, I suggest you do it fast. >The government just made it illegal to order army surplus MRE=92s and they >may soon make long-term food storage illegal. Why? To force you to turn >in your guns to get food rations. Food is always used as a weapon when >corrupt governments turn to genocide of their own people. They=92ve= already >done that with vaccines in America. And their time is short because their >"fruits" are apparent. > >The true test of spirituality is practicality. Hope and pray for the best >and specifically for the binding of the wolves in sheep=92s clothing among= us. > >Prepare for the worst. Stick to your guns. And shoot straight. > >Yours for a safe trek,=20 > Christopher Goodheart > >PS - It was revealed at the last week=92s SafeTrek Seminar that numerous= top >secret underground cities have been built around the United States for the >power elite to escape into when World War III begins. Col. Hammerman >witnessed to the giant nuclear tunneling machines he has seen that melt the >rock tailing into a glass-like wall lining. I=92ve heard multiple reports= of >the 14 giant underground retreats beneath the resorts that the Rockefeller >cartel families have recently built along the east coast of Australia where >the prevailing winds of the world are least likely to bring the radiation >they know will be circulating big time. In two weeks, the lethal level of >radiation following detonation is down to livable levels. Radiation is >very survivable when you know how, even with expedient back yard >preparations. Quite often, the "chosen" are often those who simply choose. > > "Evil will succeed only if enough good people do nothing." - Burke > > > > > - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oh Lord, lead us into Your Glory - bathe us in the holy & pure=20 light of Your Spirit; let Your righteous fire burn away all=20 that is in us that is not of You, so that we might worship=20 the Living God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. Amen. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Democrats use IRS to attack Conservatives Date: 16 Sep 1997 12:39:32 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Organizations Targeted by IRS=20 Under Audit or Have Completed Audit: Western Journalism Center=20 National Rifle Association=20 National Review=20 American Spectator=20 National Center for Public Policy Research=20 American Policy Center=20 Heritage Foundation=20 American Cause=20 Citizens Against Government Waste=20 Citizens for Honest Government=20 Freedom Alliance=20 Progress and Freedom Foundation=20 Concerned Women for America=20 San Diego Chapter of Christian Coalition=20 The following groups have received warnings or other indications that they are under audit:=20 PAULA JONES Free Congress Foundation=20 Fortress America=20 Christian Film and Television Commission=20 Center for Bioethical Reform=20 Groups whose applications for 501(c)3 status have been delayed:=20 Christian Coalition=20 Three chapters of American Family Association=20 Life Legal Defense Foundation=20 Copyright 1997. All rights reserved.=20 =A91997, Western Journalism Center, Inc.=20 ************************************************ Tuesday, June 24, 1997=20 Just how political has IRS become?=20 At least 20 groups critical of Clinton targeted=20 By Joseph Farah and Sarah Foster=20 =A91997, Western Journalism Center=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- At least 20 non-profit organizations "unfriendly" to the Clinton administration have faced Internal Revenue Service audits since 1993, a survey by the Western Journalism Center, one of the groups targeted, has found.=20 Coincidence? Many conservative leaders and attorneys familiar with IRS practices laugh at that suggestion. Groups of all sizes and purpose are currently under audit, have gone through the process or are threatened with it -- from large, well-known organizations such as the Heritage Foundation, Citizens Against Government Waste and the National Rifle Association to small, local pro-life and patriot groups. Even the two most popular conservative magazines -- American Spectator and National Review -- are feeling the inquisitorial wrath of the IRS.=20 Though officially no one at National Review will even confirm the audit, sources close to the journal say the audit is the first in the magazine's history.=20 "We're not talking about an attack on conservative philosophy, per se," says attorney William Wewer, a specialist in nonprofit law. "Clinton doesn't care about ideas. He cares about power and he's using the most feared enforcement tool in the government to attack people who are opposing him politically. He's using government to achieve personal political goals."=20 The IRS denies any political motivations for its choices. Yet not a single prominent public policy organization friendly to the Clinton administration has apparently been targeted for audit in the same period, according to two random samples and research into the non-profit community. Many tax-exempt organizations are, however, loath to discuss such matters because of its potentially devastating impact on fund-raising efforts.=20 According to Wewer, who represents about a thousand charities, the groups singled out include many which have challenged the Clinton administration in a "high-profile fashion."=20 "Every one of our clients who is under audit has taken on the Clinton administration vigorously, usually through a direct mail campaign," he says. His observation applies to most of the groups so far identified.=20 For example, there was the American Policy Center and its "Fire Jocelyn Elders" campaign in 1993. In addition to a request for contributions, would-be donors were asked to mail an enclosed card to President Clinton demanding prompt dismissal of the former surgeon general. About six months ago, the group was notified that it was being audited.=20 "The idea that someone can write to them and say 'I don't like their politics, so go investigate them' is outrageous," says APC President Tom DeWeese,=20 The IRS claims it is increasingly dependent on these "citizen complaints" and maintains the ongoing investigation and audit of APC is simply normal routine checking. Wewer dismisses that idea as "bogus."=20 "I know of many citizen complaints that never get acted on," he says. "I've filed several myself against organizations that were promoting terrorism -- some of the extreme green groups and animal rights groups. Nothing was done, not even when I laid out the entire case for them."=20 Then there's the strange case of the newly formed Wisconsin non-profit Fortress America. Just last November the group received its 501(c)4 tax-exempt status -- a classification that entitles=20 the organization to engage in some lobbying and political activities. A month later Fortress America sent out a fund-raising letter that was critical of Hillary Clinton. In January, two IRS agents began investigating the group.=20 Fortress America is so new it hadn't even filed its first tax return, hence, no actual audit was possible. Washington attorney Alan Dye, who represents the targeted group, says he can't recall being involved in a case where the IRS began investigating an organization before an audit was even begun.=20 "The coincidence of this occurring within 30 days of a negative letter about Hillary Clinton is pretty striking," Dye observes. "If the IRS doesn't mean to be biased, they're doing everything they can to make it look like they are."=20 Another IRS target was Amy Moritz Ridenour's National Center for Public Policy Research. The group played a prominent role in the political defeat of the Clinton health-care plan in 1993 and 1994, focusing public attention on Hillary Clinton's role withe the president's advisory task force and its secret meetings. In 1995, the group was audited. The group also challenged the first lady's access to classified information, secured without a security clearance. The group called for congressional hearings to determine guidelines about such unprecendented clearances.=20 By IRS standards, the group's ordeal was brief -- about two weeks. At one point during the examination, Ridenour asked the IRS field agent why the group was targeted. The disturbing answer: "You probably made someone mad."=20 "Now why would he say, 'probably'?" Ridenour wonders. "You'd figure he'd say oh, it's just a routine audit, even if that weren't true. To me it shows there's an assumption at the IRS that decisions [like who gets audited] are made for political reasons. It must be part of the environment."=20 The Western Journalism Center shared a similar experience. When an IRS field agent began asking questions about the content of the group's work, the motivations for investigative reporting about White House scandals and suggesting that the center should be reclassified from an educational 501(c)3 status to a 501(c)4, group's accountant protested.=20 "Look," said Thomas Cederquist, the IRS auditor, "this is a political case and the decision is going to be made at the national level." Asked what he meant by that statement, Cederquist repeated it. Only recently, months after the center went public with accusations that the audit was politically inspired was Cederquist replaced as the lead investigator on the case.=20 None of this is surprising to Wewer who has been involved in conservative political activism for 33 years.=20 "They're trying to destroy the very warp and woof of what makes us work as a country," he said. "The democratic system is a robust system, but it can be very fragile when it comes to this type of attack."=20 In response to the Western Journalism Center's story of apparently politically motivated IRS audits broken last fall in the Wall Street Journal, Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation began an investigation. Hearings are set to begin some time next month and a final report will be issued in September.=20 Last February, IRS Commissioner Margaret Milner Richardson, a long-time political ally and friend of the Clintons and a self-described "yellow-dog Democrat," announced she was stepping down from her post to pursue other interests. The New York Post, however, suggested in an editorial that the revelations of politically motivated audits may have been a central factor in her decision. No replacement for Richardson has yet been named.=20 Joseph Farah is executive director of the Western Journalism Center. Sarah Foster is a center associate. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Investor's Business Daily - Editorial (09/16/97) Jones Vs. Clinton - And The Taxman =20 There are plenty of ways to ask for trouble from the=20 Internal Revenue Service, like declaring income of $20,000=20 and driving a late-model Ferrari. But standing up to the=20 president shouldn't be one of them. So why is the IRS auditing Stephen and Paula Jones,=20 a husband and wife of modest means. Could it be that Mrs.=20 Jones is, indeed, THAT Paula Jones, who has accused the=20 president of sexual misconduct? The official IRS word is ''no comment'' - as with=20 any audit. The White House denies any involvement. So=20 we can only wonder at the timing of it all. Early last week, Paula Jones parted ways with her=20 lead lawyers, who wanted her to settle her lawsuit against=20 Clinton for money and a mere statement of regret from the=20 president. A few days later, on Friday, the Joneses got=20 an IRS letter telling them they had been picked out for=20 an audit - their first ever, according to Paula Jones'=20 spokeswoman, Susan Carpenter-McMillan. McMillan says Stephen Jones pulls down $37,000 a year.=20 Paula Jones, a housewife and mother of two, has no earnings.=20 They don't own a home. So you have to ask why the IRS would=20 bother with them. Even if they do owe back taxes, the amount=20 could hardly be worth the agency's time. Even then, this audit might not raise eyebrows if it=20 weren't for the IRS' track record during the Clinton years. Led by Commissioner Margaret Milner Richardson, a former=20 Democratic Party activist, the IRS has sent its auditors=20 after well-known conservative groups - including the Heritage=20 Foundation, National Rifle Association and the Christian=20 Coalition - to gauge their tax-exempt status. It has also homed in on individuals who have tangled=20 with the Clintons. Fired White House Travel Office head=20 Billy Dale was one victim. Another was lawyer Kent Masterson=20 Brown, who sued to open up Hillary Clinton's secretive=20 health-care task force. One Chicago couple who yelled, ''You suck,'' at the=20 president during a 1996 campaign appearance got an IRS=20 letter accusing them of owing $200 in back taxes. With a record like that, what are we to think? You=20 don't have to be paranoid to suspect that IRS harassment=20 has become the new price of political dissent. =20 Copyright (c) 1997 Investors Business Daily,=20 All rights reserved. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D The Washington Times September 16, 1997 EDITORIAL: Paula Jones and taxes We may do dumb things from time to time, but we are not certifiably=20 insane. The IRS, and IRS solely, is the one that makes decisions about=20 the enforcement of tax laws," said Clinton spokesman Mike McCurry in=20 response to the suggestion that someone in the White House might have=20 had a hand in instigating an IRS audit of Paula Jones.=20 =2E . . . Mr. McCurry's statement seems credible enough. True, the Clinton= =20 administration has not been shy about using the power of the White House=20 for its own purposes: siccing the FBI on longtime travel office Director=20 Billy R. Dale, for instance, because the Clintons wanted to turn his=20 office over to their friend and financial backer Harry Thomason; using=20 the office of the White House counsel as a sort of taxpayer-funded=20 personal law firm; using the Lincoln Bedroom as a fund-raising perk for=20 rich Democrats. But setting IRS auditors on a someone who earns less=20 than $40,000 a year, and whose wife claims to have been harassed by the=20 president, might indeed be madness. =2E . . . Nevertheless, one can't help agreeing with Mrs. Jones'=20 spokeswoman, Susan Carpenter-McMillan, that the timing of this audit is=20 "very peculiar." Mrs. Jones and her husband Stephen were notified that=20 the IRS would be going over their 1995 tax return with a fine-tooth comb=20 within days of Mrs. Jones' rejection of a settlement offer in her sexual=20 harassment complaint against the president. And then there's the=20 puzzling matter of the Joneses' very modest income. Mrs. Jones herself=20 is what used to be called a homemaker, with two small children; she=20 earns no salary. Her husband makes $37,000 a year. =2E . . . There is, of course, Mrs. Jones' legal defense fund, which has=20 raised somewhere between $200,000 and $300,000 to pay her legal bills in=20 the sexual harassment case. But that fund is, at least according to Mrs.=20 Jones' lawyers and spokeswoman, not at her disposal. "She never signed a=20 check," said Mrs. Carpenter-McMillan. "She doesn't even get the [defense=20 fund's] bank statements." =2E . . . So, just why would the IRS be auditing a couple who seem to have= =20 just about nothing worth auditing? The IRS refuses to comment; but when=20 a flurry of audits of notably Republican think-tanks raised eyebrows,=20 IRS officials explained it frequently takes its audit cues from the=20 press. Thus, a figure or institution much in the news might very well=20 elicit IRS attention. =2E . . . That's certainly as credible as the White House denial of=20 interference. After all, it's no secret that the IRS is perfectly=20 capable of bulling into the lives and pocketbooks of American citizens=20 without any prodding from the political powers that be. And Paula Jones=20 surely has had more than her share of publicity over the past four=20 years. =2E . . . But auditing an established think tank, which comes fully=20 equipped with computer records, bookkeepers and high-priced accounting=20 firms, not to mention millions of dollars in spending money, is one=20 thing. Taking out after a family of very limited means simply because=20 they are involved in a high-profile case against the president -- and/or=20 because they've established a fund to help defray the cost -- is quite=20 another. It does indeed smack of some kind of harassment, wherever the=20 move originated. And it's just the sort of action that has many=20 wondering whether the IRS itself needs some serious auditing by Congress=20 and the American people. Copyright =A9 1997 News World Communications, Inc. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This mailing list is for discussion of Clinton Administration Scandals. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com. In the message body put: unsubscribe cas The Washington Times September 16, 1997=20 White House denies role in audit of Jones By Jerry Seper and Bill Sammon The White House yesterday denied using the Internal Revenue Service to=20 attack Paula Corbin Jones, but Republicans insist an IRS audit of the=20 former Arkansas state employee is punishment for her sexual misconduct=20 suit against the president.=20 =2E . . . "We may do dumb things from time to time, but we are not=20 certifiably insane," White House Press Secretary Michael McCurry said in=20 denying the allegation. "The IRS, and IRS solely, is the one that makes=20 decisions about the enforcement of tax laws." =2E . . . But Rep. Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, said the IRS audit of=20 Mrs. Jones is the latest example of the Clinton administration's=20 increasingly brazen retaliation against people and organizations=20 perceived as enemies of the president. =2E . . . "This is misuse of government resources. This is intimidation.=20 This is dead wrong," said Mr. Burton, chairman of the House Government=20 Reform and Oversight Committee. "One case might be a coincidence. Two=20 cases might be a coincidence. But what are the chances of this entire=20 litany of people -- all of whom have an adversarial relationship with=20 the president -- being audited?" =2E . . . Since January, The Washington Times has identified numerous=20 conservative individuals and groups -- including the Heritage Foundation=20 and the National Rifle Association -- that have been subjected to IRS=20 - -- Continued from Front Page --=20 audits. A check of prominent liberal groups found no such scrutiny. =2E . . . "This administration has politicized the IRS beyond anything=20 that's been seen since John F. Kennedy," said Grover Norquist, executive=20 director of Americans for Tax Reform. "I think they're in real trouble=20 for this Paula Jones thing." =2E . . . Mr. Norquist was one of 16 persons who served on the National=20 Commission on Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service, a panel=20 created by Congress last year to recommend IRS reforms. He said the=20 bipartisan commission, which disbanded in July, was unable to get the=20 IRS to adopt safeguards against political manipulation. =2E . . . "We asked the IRS for structural assurances that this would not= =20 happen," Mr. Norquist said. "We got zero assurance beyond 'trust us.'" =2E . . . IRS spokesman Steven Pyrek said federal law bars the IRS from=20 discussing audits or other interactions with taxpayers. Asked to respond=20 to criticism that the agency has become politicized, Mr. Pyrek said,=20 "When we audit returns, it's for the purposes of administering the tax=20 law." =2E . . . The Jones audit adds fuel to what many hope will be the IRS'=20 funeral pyre. In August, House GOP leaders announced they would give top=20 priority to legislation that would restructure the IRS this fall. =2E . . . The House Ways and Means Committee was scheduled to begin two=20 days of hearings today on legislation that would create an outside IRS=20 management board of appointees from the government and private sectors. =2E . . . The White House objects to private appointees setting tax policy= =20 and claims it would lead to conflicts of interest. The administration=20 has endorsed a Treasury Department proposal -- scoffed at by Republicans=20 - -- that would give the White House greater control over the IRS. =2E . . . On Sept. 23, the Senate Finance Committee will begin three days= =20 of hearings on horror stories from taxpayers who say they were=20 mistreated by the IRS. The committee has been in contact with more than=20 1,000 taxpayers and has spent $300,000 on the investigation, which began=20 in March. =2E . . . At least a dozen right-of-center nonprofit groups are currently= =20 under scrutiny by the IRS, which can revoke an organization's tax-exempt=20 status and essentially put it out of business. These include Citizens=20 Against Government Waste; the Western Journalism Center; Freedom=20 Alliance, an advocacy group headed by Oliver North; and various policy=20 groups linked to House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Georgia Republican. =2E . . . The Times also reported that "Travelgate" figure Billy R. Dale=20 and lawyer Kent Masterson Brown, who sued to open up the first lady's=20 secret health care task force, have been audited. =2E . . . According to Mr. Burton, audits by the IRS are not the only=20 weapon in the Clinton administration's arsenal of retaliation. He=20 complained that FBI agents showed up at his offices last month to demand=20 campaign-finance documents dating back five years. =2E . . . The agents were armed with a subpoena that Mr. Burton says was=20 backdated by 12 days. They arrived just two days after Mr. Burton sent a=20 subpoena of his own to Attorney General Janet Reno, seeking documents on=20 her preliminary investigation of former Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. =2E . . . Last year, the Justice Department began an investigation into=20 accusations by a lobbyist and longtime Democratic activist who said he=20 was "shaken down" by Mr. Burton for contributions. =95John Godfrey contributed to this report. Copyright =A9 1997 News World Communications, Inc. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: OKC County Grand Jury Badly Compromised... (fwd) Date: 16 Sep 1997 14:17:02 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Forwarded by an associate in the field after I asked questions wrt statements they made about a scandal with the County Grand Jury in Oklahoma City. In freedom, Tony Sgarlatti tonys@the-truth.org http://www.future.net/~thetruth/okc.html ----- Begin Included Message ----- Dear Tony: This old post from my archives (dated 08/19/97) may help give you a small taste of what we are dealing with here concerning the OK County Grand Jury. It's old, and a lot more has occurred since this was posted -- none of it good -- but this will help get you a little caught up at least. Hope this helps. Dear : Regarding (from your previous post): -------------- >Its very interesting that he wants to do this, in view of the >fact that there is still a Grand Jury investigation IN Oklahoma >be conducted by Rep. Charles Key. Some of the information that >has come out in the Grand Jury already points to Federal >complicity. And yet, Clinton just ignores it. Its as though >the individual states don't even exist. No mention of some >communications with Oklahoma state representitives, just >barge in and do what you please. It makes his hurried actions >to bury things, like immediate bulldozing of the remnants of >the Murrah building, all that more suspicious. Some small corrections are in order for clarity. The county grand jury investigation is *not* being conducted by Rep. Charles Key. In fact, now that Key has testified (an appearance lasting about 45 minutes only), he is done with the g.j.; and unless recalled, will not appear again before them. His participation is over. Mr. Key only filed for the right to petition the public to have a g.j. convened; and after being refused twice, won on appeal, did the public petitioning, got the signatures, and thus the g.j. was seated. The g.j. is actually being conducted by District Attorney Bob Macy (VERY corrupt) and Judge Burkett (equally corrupt). It is true the Mr. Key participated in the jury selection process (with his attorney), but at NO TIME did Key or his attorney challenge the seating of ANY of the grand jurors. The entire jury (12 jurors + 3 alternates selected from a pool of 100) was put together in a little under three hours on one afternoon. In essence, the grand jury was chosen by the judge and by Bob Macy alone. Very Bad Sign. This was EXTREMELY irresponsible of Mr. Key -- moreso of his attorney -- and now the g.j. itself is stacked. Take a look: The jury fore-woman is the manager of the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission (appointee of Gov. Keating); one juror is a retired federal worker whose wife is retired from the Soc.Sec.Adm. -- both had close associates killed in the bombing; one woman manages a federally-funded youth program and owes her paycheck to the feds; one juror helped pull the injured from the building immediately after the bombing; and then there is Ben Baker, a former Marine (now electrician) who was quoted in the newspaper as saying: "Everyone I've talked to believes this is a waste of time and taxpayers' money. I believe the same thing." And then there is grand jury alternate Oklahoma City Police Lt. Kenneth Rickenbrode. Rickenbrode worked at the bomb site as a homicide investigator, is on the homicide division and the Internal Affairs department for the OKCPD. The I.A. boys have been giving much grief to the police officers who have been trying to come forward with what they know of the corruption and cover-up of the events of the bombing. Rickenbrode was a participant in the persecution of one of the K-9 officers, who has now had to resort to secretly making reports for releasing information to the independent investigators out of fear of losing his job. And as a homicide investigator, Rickenbrode has knowledge of the murder and the cover-up of the death of Sgt. Terrance Yeakey, who also was collecting and disseminating evidence about the bombing cover-up. Since the grand jury was seated on July 1, one woman has already been replaced by an alternate. So now, the body of available jurors consists of 12 jurors and only 2 alternates. The grand jury met for a couple of weeks in July, heard 6 witnesses only, and then recessed while the judge went on vacation from July 20th until August 10th. On Aug. 11th, they reconvened, supposedly to hear another 11 witnesses, but met for about 30 minutes and recessed again until Sept. 8th. The reason: one of the alternates had been in a motorcycle accident the day before, suffering 2nd and 3rd degree burns on his legs; and one of the jurors had a medical condition requiring surgery. And here we are. Key and Macy agreed together early on (both publicly and privately) that this grand jury should finish its work before the Nichols trial begins on Sept. 29th. While this doesn't seem likely, stranger things have happened. Grand juries meet as long as it takes them to determine what they are convened to determine. Some meet for years. There is a definite push to get this matter over and done with -- and an equal push to avoid presenting all of the available evidence. These are matters under Macy's control. In addition and to confuse matters, Macy decided there were two other issues he wanted to piggy-back onto the bombing investigation before the grand jury -- the murder of Kenneth Trentadue at the Federal Transfer Center and another local murder. These other investigations should be handled in sequence, not simultaneously with the bombing investigation. No one seems to be questioning that this was a special grand jury seated for a specific purpose. These other matters of investigation should be set before the regular grand jury, not before this one. As for: "Some of the information that has come out in the Grand Jury already points to Federal complicity": This is not exactly an accurate statement of fact. There have been witnesses who spoke of seeing other John Does, other McVeighs, and other unnamed participants. While *WE* may understand the significance of these things, it has become obvious that the g.j. does not. And the media here is going bananas with comments about how the witnesses "cancel each other out." Until and unless the grand jury comes to an understanding of the multiple trucks, multiples JDoes, multiple McVs and multiple explosions, they're never going to put this event together properly so that any of it makes sense. The only witness whose "testimony" (such as it was) might be considered indicative of federal complicity would be Dennis Mahon. Mahon, of course, gave only his name and then invoked the 5th Amendment to every other question. He asked for (but has not been given) transactional immunity at both the state and federal level before he will be willing to testify. However, the trick in dealing with Mahon is that he will testify about activities at Elohim City which will leave us essentially with what has become the official story -- "white supremacist with Waco anger blows up building with truck bomb." The grand jury will have to investigation Mahon from the perspective that he has been on the payroll of the Iraqi government since 1991 -- a fact he openly admits and which has been documented oodles of times and was mentioned in the defendant's Petition for Writ of Mandamus, filed March 25, 1997 with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. [For more information about this, download the petition and read it -- available in one zipped document at: http://www.telepath.com/believer]. This aspect of Mahon's involvement, in tandem with the documented involvement of the foreign terrorist cell operating out of Las Vegas, would DEFINITELY be indicative of involvement and foreknowledge by the U.S. intelligence community (NSC, CIA, DIA, US Marshals Service, and FBI). But will he ever testify to this stuff, and more importantly, will the grand jury ever ASK about this? Probably not. You have to understand how the grand jury works. You don't appear before it and just tell your story. You appear before it and answer specific questions, most posed by the D.A. If they don't ask, you are not given the opportunity to volunteer additional information... unless you really plan ahead and word your responses carefully to cause additional questions to be asked -- and even then, there is no guarantee. It was in this way, and because of this procedure, that Mr. Davis (who delivered Chinese food to the Dreamland Motel in Junction City, Kansas to a Robert Kling who was neither McVeigh nor any of the John Does) was able to testify before the federal grand jury without ever being given the chance to say that he DIDN'T see McVeigh or any other known suspect. All he got to say was that he delivered Chinese food to Robert Kling. Period. It was only AFTER the indictments were handed down that the grand jurors learned that this "other" Kling wasn't anyone who was a known suspect. It was all terribly misleading... deliberately. I don't mean to be the skunk at the picnic, but I do not see this grand jury accomplishing anything of meaningful substance in this investigation. They are being directed by corrupt officials and they themselves are compromised. In addition, Judge Burkett, in his opening instructions to the jurors said: "Do not accept hearsay. Hear only those witnesses who would present facts, which if true, would substantiate an indictable offense and not needlessly delay the courts in their other functions by listening to radical persons or facts about which you could do nothing if it were true." Oh, EXCUSE ME??????? According to Oklahoma Statutes, Title 22, Section 331 (General powers and duties of grand jury), Notes of Decisions: "Grand jury functions as an inquisitorial body; once it is convoked by the court, its duty is to investigate law violations [Tweedy v. Oklahoma Bar "Ass'n, Okl. 624 P.2d 1049 (1981)] ... Investigation by grand jury or a preliminatry examination by magistrate is not a trial, and the rules of evidence are not to be applied as rigidly as in trial of case before court. [Magill v. Miller, Okl. Cr., 455 P.2d 715 (1969)]...." Judge Burkett is attempting to impose trial rules of evidence upon the grand jury, thereby excluding hearsay -- which in every other grand jury that has ever convened has comprised a big part of their investigation. It is by hearsay that the grand jury determines others to be questioned and learns of additional leads. This is an investigation, NOT a trial. Hearsay is most definitely admissible, and in this case, is absolutely necessary to get to the real perps. And, I might add, Mr. Key (who DID appear before the grand jury) offered nothing *BUT* hearsay testimony and a list of suggested witnesses that the jurors might subpoena to appear before them. Does this mean that Key's appearance was a violation of Burkett's instructions? Seems to be the case. But does Key have the full picture, and did he offer a COMPLETE list of others to appear before the grand jury? No. Not at all. He only presented a list of 38 persons. Most of the other independent investigators can name 38 persons who were involved in some way or were witnesses without ever getting to the heart of the matter. What about the EOD specialists on assignment at the building who reported finding massive amounts of residue of fulminate of mercury all over the site? How about calling the FBI agents who have intimidated witnesses who saw the "wrong" truck, or who observed identifiable Middle Eastern, Pakistani, and Philippine terrorists at the scene, or who have falsified the 302 statements of several witnesses? How about calling those witnesses themselves? How about calling in members of the bomb squad -- both from OKC and from Tulsa? How about calling in the tow truck drivers -- both of them -- who towed the yellow Marquis from the side of I-35... twice! How about viewing the Sheriff's Dept. videotape that shows BATF Agent Luke Franey in front of the building, clean and uninjured, at the same time he testified in the Denver trial that he was trapped on the 9th floor inside the building? How about questioning the OKC police officers who were asked to file falsified reports that would reflect what the FBI told them and not what they actually observed or experienced? How about calling the clean-up crews and the engineers operating the heavy equipment who were told by federal agents on numerous occasions during the 16-day post-bombing period: "You didn't see that," or "You didn't hear that," and asking them what it was that they were told they didn't see or hear? Etc., etc., etc., etc. This list of "how abouts" could go on for pages and pages. I am hopeful that the grand jury will work properly and do a good investigation. But quite honestly, I am not at all optimistic that this will occur. Too many things have already occurred to indicate that this whole thing is a wash, that nothing of substance or significance will come out of this investigation. And I think that Bob Macy and Judge Burkett will make sure that it doesn't. As for Key -- his part is over. He just wants it all to end so he can go back to life. I don't blame him, but I think history will judge his recent actions as irresponsible. What about Burkett's comment about not hearing "...radical persons or facts about which you could do nothing if it were true." Radical persons? Would that include General Partin who asserts internal explosives on the building columns? Would that include retired Tulsa police officer and FBI assistant Craig Roberts who reports the recovery of additional bombs from the building and the possible recruitment of McVeigh out of Special Forces and into U.S. covert ops? Would that include Louise Elkins Alexander who observed a large helicopter hovering over the Murrah Building moments before the bombing, immediately after, and watched it fly away? Would that include the hotel/motel employees who have positively ID'd a known gov't informant as being in OKC the week before the bombing (and the day of) in the company of the identified foreign terrorists observed at the scene? Would this include ANY person with information of federal foreknowledge and complicity? What exactly, in Burkett's mind, is the definition of a "radical person"? And what about not hearing "...facts about which you could do nothing if it were true." The fact is the building blew up and a bunch of people were killed. I don't think anyone can do anything about that. Are the jurors not to consider THAT?? And why shouldn't they hear FACTS??? If Burkett had said "rumors" or "guesses" or "speculations" or "flights of fancy," I could make sense of his perspective. But why not hear about documented facts? Isn't that what the grand jury is supposed to do? Burkett is making no sense whatsoever. One has to question who is pulling his strings. Everything he has advocated in his instructions to this grand jury are in violation of Oklahoma Statutes, Titles 21 and 22. Why isn't Charle Key, his attorney, or any other person authorized to appear challenging this matter? We'll wait and watch. But honestly, it doesn't look good. And as for Clinton: he showed up in Oklahoma City after the bombing and met with state officials who have quoted him as saying, "Get this mess cleaned up," ...meaning get rid of it all before anything can be discovered. They tried to do that, but they will never be able to silence everyone who saw something or everyone who knows something. Some of those folks are now dead... about a dozen of them -- including James David Rause of the Oklahoma County Bomb Disposal Unit who was killed in a motorcycle accident on June 1, 1997, and Maxwell D. Hames of the Oklahoma City Police Department who died on June 8, 1997 of unexplained and undiagnosed intestinal problems, an unknown sudden illness, and whose cause of death has STILL not been determined. When will there be an investigation into ALL of those deaths? Probably never. On that somewhat depressing note, I will close. Keep your eyes open and your ear to the rail. Things are not at all what they seem with this grand jury. Expect a continuation and an intensification of the cover-up. It is in progress. ----- End Included Message ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: [RightNow] Column, Sept. 16 (fwd) Date: 17 Sep 1997 10:24:01 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 06:56:48 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: RightNow@MailList.Net FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED SEPT. 16, 1997 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz 'To secure the blessings of liberty' It was 210 years ago -- Sept. 17, 1787 -- that the delegates of the 12 states, gathered in Philadelphia, signed the new Constitution, "to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." Rhode Island boycotted the proceedings, concerned that a gathering purportedly called to "fine-tune" the existing Articles of Confederation might become a runaway convention, succumbing to the siren song of big-government advocates like Alexander Hamilton of New York, who favored a unified treasury and central state bank, the better to fund the standing military which he saw as necessary for the nation to fulfill its territorial "manifest destiny" and take its place at the council tables of the great nations. The skeptics were largely correct. But the bargain was struck, upon the promise that a Bill of Rights (more accurately, a Bill of Prohibitions on government action) would be added, a promise duly kept on Dec. 15, 1791. The federalists argued themselves hoarse that their "weak" federal government, fenced in by the very act of itemizing each and every one of its "few" powers in Article I, Section 8, could never get away with attempting to disarm free citizens, never institute bug-worship as a state religion, never allow anyone to be imprisoned without trial by a randomly-selected jury ... nothing like that. The Constitution did let slavery stand in the Southern states. The proper remedy to that was the 13th Amendment, but it was to come only after the erosion of many of the very rights the Union was established to protect (the tyrant Lincoln introducing the first unconstitutional income tax, the first mandatory conscription into the army, etc.), all admirably detailed by Jeffrey Rogers Hummel in his recent history of the failed War of Secession, "Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men." Still, the notion of a limited federal government, master only in foreign relations and national defense, deferring to the states or the citizens in most other matters, held on valiantly for more than a century, crafting an example of relative liberty and domestic tranquility to which the peoples of the world still look with envy and awe. Until the rise of the "Progressive era" in 1912, of course ... followed by the Farley-Roosevelt "New Deal." Suddenly, the Federal Reserve system gave Washington City the centralized control over banking envisioned, lo those 125 years before, by the Hamiltonians. The popular election of senators permanently weakened oversight by the state legislatures that had previously appointed that house, while a newly-authorized federal income tax finally realized the dreams of the collectivists -- direct transfers of income from the undeserving rich to the wide-mouthed, braying poor, warehoused on the welfare state's new plantations. The founders rightly suspected Congress would continually seek to expand its power, but assumed General Washington's firm veto pen and John Jay's strict reading of Article I Section 8 would suffice to nip such wacky adventures in the bud. Yet now the foxes guard the henhouse. When was the last time our high court -- so considerate of the government's endless new-made list of "compelling interests" in keeping us all well-burped and diapered -- ruled an entire federal department unconstitutional ... ordered its functionaries discharged, its headquarters leveled? There are hopeful signs. In its recent decisions throwing out parts of the "Brady Bill" gun-owner registration scheme along with "Gun-Free School Zones," the Supreme Court for the first time in 60 years seems to acknowledge the Tenth Amendment still exists ... that there may be (start ital)some(end ital) limit to endless expansion of power to regulate "interstate commerce." Though there's little evidence the bureaucrats, in their hubris, yet understand they cannot protect every field mouse, shield every self-anointed victim from having his feelings hurt, make every product "safe." Pleasant-sounding goals. But in pursuing these goals, the lunging, unwieldy juggernaut of government inevitably tramples and destroys more than it "protects." And these are not the purposes for which we establish governments, anyway. As every American knows, all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and it is to secure these (start ital)rights(end ital) that governments are instituted among men. The chroniclers give her no first name, but report that Mrs. Powel asked President Franklin (duly elected President of the sovereign Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) upon his emergence from the hall, what his convention had given us ... a monarchy, or a Republic? "A republic, madam," Mr. Franklin wisely answered, "if you can keep it." Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. The web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "A well-regulated population being necessary to the security of a police state, the right of the Government to keep and destroy arms shall not be infringed." =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= To unsubscribe from this mailing list, DISREGARD ANY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE and go to the Web page at http://www.maillist.net/rightnow.html. New subscriptions can also be entered at this page. If you cannot access the World Wide Web, send an e-mail message to RightNow-Request@MailList.Net and on the SUBJECT LINE put the single word: unsubscribe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: Finally: A Trial Date for My Daughter's Assailant! Date: 17 Sep 1997 16:11:09 -0400 (EDT) For you nobanners out there who have been so very supportive of the Ferris family (in so many kind ways) since my nineteen year old daughter was assaulted late last year: Well, after numerous wheeling and dealing sessions and a lot of back room conniving and countless continuances, her assailant is * finally * going to be tried at 8:30 a.m. on Thursday, September 18, 1997, in Merrimack (NH) District Court. Initially, he faced four counts of aggravated felonious sexual assault. Now, he faces one lone count of violating the court's temporary restraining order. The police prosecutor who is handling the case is top notch and will do his damnedest to make the TRO violation charge stick. Don't even get me started about why the county prosecutor saw fit to drop the felony assault charges, especially since my daughter had to undergo three hours of reconstructive surgery last July to repair a "condition" aggravated by the assault. Believe me when I tell you that the only system that works is self-defense, period. The C.J. system is an absolute, total, unequivocal joke. But, as a sad Dad, I am not laughing. Not at all. After the trial concludes, my daughter will be sending out personal notes of thanks to all nobanners who sent words of encouragement or contributed to her legal defense fund. We will *never* forget your kindness in her time of greatest need! (And may the good Lord have mercy on the poor male moron who next lays a hand on her to harm her and meets the serrated edge of her Spyderco Delica folder, which, I might add, has a cute stylish pink handle. Most folks think that she is carrying a comb in her right front pocket. Nobanners out there who love your wives, girlfriends and daughters, hurry on down to your Spyderco dealer and order up a Delica (with a serrated edge) in lady-like pink. Do it *now* before you wish you had. And, yes, my daughter will be carrying something else "airy in weight" in due time. No, not her purse. That's heavy, crammed chock full of female "kit" ... i.e., enough make-up, lip stick and other gear to live for a month!) Best regards and may God bless all of you, Chris Christopher C. Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Are these lists still alive? Date: 17 Sep 1997 16:20:17 -0500 (CDT) I don't believe I've received anything from these lists in almost a year. Are they still alive? Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: Are these lists still alive? Date: 17 Sep 1997 17:40:50 -0400 Steve, Was wondering if you were still alive!:-{)> Good hearing from you. Yes, they still breathe, but have been so quiet that I'm afraid that everyone's worried they might break the silence. Sure a different place from a year or so ago. Tom At 04:20 PM 9/17/97 -0500, you wrote: >I don't believe I've received anything from these lists in almost a year. Are >they still alive? > >Steve Silver >Vice President >The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. >18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 >Encino, CA 91316 >(818) 734-3066 >(The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) >Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html >Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com > for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. > >Remember: >Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. > *** >Self-defense is not a crime. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: Forwarded from "Great" Britain Date: 17 Sep 1997 17:13:20 -0700 Yup, a guy can see why those colonists did what they did 220+ years ago... - Monte >From: Steven Kendrick/UK >To: @compuserve.com >Subject: [SIG-L] my hand-in >Date: Wednesday, September 17, 1997 12:31 > >Well, the fateful moment has come to tell about my hand-in, at West >Mids police HQ. > >I actually didn't think I would ever be writing this, as I had no intent >of handing my guns in. I wanted my day in court. Unfortunately, my >FAC expires on 26th September so all that would have happened would be >a conviction for failure to renew my FAC, which seemed rather trivial. >(Handguns become prohibited on 30th September). > >It just wouldn't have the same impact on a jury, I think. > >I nearly killed myself getting my spare safe out of the loft. Thing >almost hit me on the head. > >I weighed down my Toyota and drove it all down there, left hand Galco >shoulder holster, a variety of mag pouches, a heap of brass, a state- >of-the-1987-art IPSC racegun, a clapped out SIG-Sauer P220, two rusty >safes, etc. Basically a heap of rubbish, worth about three grand. To >think I am going to get paid for all this junk. > >They sat me down in the press room and went through it all, took about >half an hour, they weren't happy that all my brass was under Option C >(valued) because they would have to put it in store. Everything under >Option C was put into a big West Mids Police evidence bag and my FAC >number was stuck onto it. My guns were put in Bianchi bluebags, as were >the mags. I didn't hand in any mags with my SIG-Sauer P220-1, and they >wrote that down on the valuation. Likewise they reduced the number >of CZ-75 mags by one because they included one as part of the gun. > >All of the Option A and B (listed values) stuff was thrown into a big >burlap bag. > >The PC doing the paperwork gave me my copy back, which has "customer's >copy" printed across it. I opined: "Oh, so I'm a _customer_ am I?" > >"Yeah, pretty bizarre terminology. Maybe you'll get your guns back >if you're lucky." he responded. > >After it was all done, my firearm licensing officer sat me down >at the back of the room to go through my renewal. He called in another >PC and pulled out a questionnaire identical to the referee forms I had >refused to complete because that law isn't effective yet. > >We went through what kind of guns I had applied for authority for, why >I needed them and so on. The Section 1 shotgun caused some confusion, >as they wanted to know where I would shoot it. I mentioned that I >was a member of the NRA, member of the UKPSA and they responded they >needed to see proof of membership. I had my NRA card on me, and >promised to send them photocopies of the rest. They also wanted me >to name specifically what kind of shotgun I was going to get, pump >or semi, presumably because they didn't want me going out to get >a coach gun. In the end I told them I was getting a Benelli M3 >Super 90, (the truth) which is selective action anyway. > >They weren't too happy about the slug. I have only applied for >authority for 50 rounds, and told them I would only be using it at >certain competitions. The PC who usually deals with me seemed happy >to take my UKPSA membership as being good enough reason, but the >other PC wanted me to name at least one place I would be using it >regularly. I eventually thought up the Shooter's Rights Association >range, as I am a life member. "Oh, Jock, didn't we get some memo or >something from Dyfed Powys about them?" > "Yeah, what's that chappies name? Er..." > "Richard Law?" I ventured. > "Yeah, better not use the SRA as a good reason, mate." > >The other PC started making some bizarre statements about how 12g >slug would destroy target frames, what kind of backstop they had, while >my local PC sat and rolled his eyes. Then the other PC said: "You >know, some of our officers went deaf shooting those things." At >which point my local firearm officer nearly burst out laughing. > >We went through various other questions on the form, and I could tell >my local PC was getting brassed off with the whole deal: > "Oh, here's another bloody stupid question, 'Describe your >friends and associates'. Well, better not put Richard Law down." > >In the end, he basically said: "What this boils down to mate, is are >you going to shoot a bunch of people in a school? No? Didn't think >so." And he got up and went off in a huff. The other PC was a bit >taken aback but after conferring with my local PC they said they would >have my renewal through on time and would trust me to send in my >UKPSA membership details. > >I did get the impression that they were probably being a bit more >suspicious about me than is usual, basically because of all the hassle >I've been giving them everytime they screw up. > >Anyway, I have to say I am feeling a bit despondent. > >A line out of the Bible has been running through my mind since all >this started: "And the Lord said unto Satan: 'Man does not live by >bread alone'." Luke 4:4 (Not bad for an atheist, eh?) > >And that seems to sum up the problem with what the Government is >trying to force everyone in this country to do: be one homogenous mass >of mediocre weak-minded people who are easily directed at the whim of >the Government. If you don't like soccer, watch TV and drink at the >pub as your primary hobbies, you're "strange" and sooner or later >you're going to be marginalised and discriminated against. You must >only eat bread. Anything else, you're a weirdo and God help you. > >The concept of Liberty is totally supressed. You can sit and argue >what Liberty is all day and night, suffice to say it has an ineffable >quality and you're certain of one thing about it: you know when you've >lost it. > >On the way out of the police station, I walked past the Assistant >Chief Constable, giving an interview outside because we were using >the Press room. I didn't catch all of it, but I caught "Armed Response >teams deployed... earlier today." > >So it seems the gun ban is working wonderfully. > >Steve. > - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oh Lord, lead us into Your Glory - bathe us in the holy & pure light of Your Spirit; let Your righteous fire burn away all that is in us that is not of You, so that we might worship the Living God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. Amen. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: Forwarded from "Great" Britain Date: 17 Sep 1997 22:10:17 PST On Sep 17, Liberty or Death wrote: >Yup, a guy can see why those colonists did what they did 220+ years >ago... > >- Monte [snip] Not to mention why so many are getting their dander up lately.....:-/ -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: Forwarded from "Great" Britain Date: 18 Sep 1997 07:19:07 -0400 I must have missed this one, what was it about???????? Tom At 10:10 PM 9/17/97 PST, you wrote: >On Sep 17, Liberty or Death wrote: > >>Yup, a guy can see why those colonists did what they did 220+ years >>ago... >> >>- Monte > >[snip] > >Not to mention why so many are getting their dander up lately.....:-/ > >-- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** >____________________________________________________________________________ >An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep >weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your >hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder >on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Giant Sucking Sound (fwd) Date: 18 Sep 1997 11:52:46 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Thursday September 18 10:08 AM EDT Trade deficit higher WASHINGTON, Sept. 18 (UPI) _ The U.S. trade deficit jumped by more than 25 percent in July to $10.3 billion. The Commerce Department reports exports of both goods and services fell for the second straight month, while imports grew. Exports of goods declined by $900 million to $56.5 billion, while imports of goods increased by $1 billion to $73.6 billion. Lower sales of industrial supplies and materials, primarily precious metals, accounted for much of the loss in exports. Imports of motor vehicles, parts and engines were the biggest gainer. Exports of services fell $200 million to $20.9 billion. Imports of services were virtually unchanged at $14.2 billion. The deficit with Japan was the highest in two years at $5.2 billion. China fell to second place at $4.7 billion. _- Copyright 1997 by United Press International. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Retired General Partin talks to Grand Jury (fwd) Date: 18 Sep 1997 12:38:11 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Bomb Theory Offered By Brian Ford And Barbara Hoberock World Capitol Bureau 9/18/97 Other Devices in Murrah, Ex-General Says
 OKLAHOMA CITY -- A county grand jury heard Wednesday from a retired Air Force general who maintains the truck bomb used by Timothy McVeigh was not enough to cause the damage that killed 168 people at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.
``My conclusions were there had to have been demolition charges in the building,'' said retired Brig. Gen. Benton K. Partin. Partin testified for several hours before the grand jury, which is examining various allegations concerning the 1995 bombing. ``The so-called 4,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil could not have possibly done the damage.''
Partin, 71, says he served 31 years of active duty in the Air Force and was involved in the testing and analysis of weapons systems. He wrote a position paper assessing the bombing damage. His analysis, which is posted on the Internet, was based on various reports and photographs of the Murrah site. His analysis does not cite direct physical examination by Partin of the bomb site.
Timothy McVeigh, who was sentenced June 13 to die, allegedly drove a rental truck containing 4,800 pounds of ammonium nitrate and other materials and detonating it outside the Murrah Building on April 19, 1995. Co-defendant Terry Nichols goes on trial Sep. 29.
``To cause the damage pattern that occurred to the Murrah Building, there would have to have been demolition charges at several supporting column bases, at locations not accessible from the street, to supplement the truck bomb damage,'' Partin said in his analysis.
However, a bomb expert at McVeigh's trial said the damage to the building was consistent with the characteristics of an ammonium nitrate and fuel oil bomb.
Partin maintained that an ammonium nitrate bomb would not have enough velocity to do the amount of damage seen at the Murrah Building. The bomb expert at McVeigh's trial said the blast velocity of an ammonium nitrate fertilizer bomb varies with the ingredients that were used to detonate it.
The grand jury was sparked by Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City, and the late Glenn Wilburn, who died of pancreatic cancer earlier this year.
Key said Wednesday he has raised $32,543 in private donations, in part to hire investigators to find potential witnesses and evidence that are recommended to the grand jury. Key believes that McVeigh was accompanied by one or more men at the time of the bombing; that the federal government covered up bomb warnings it received prior to the blast, and that more than one bomb may have been used.
Also Wednesday, Oscar ``Dude'' Gooden, a federal General Services Administration elevator inspector, testified before the grand jury.
Another witness testified earlier this summer that Gooden was among a group of General Services Administration employees who took the witness home after he was injured in the blast. V.Z. Lawton, a Department of Housing and Urban Development employee, testified that the GSA employees who drove him home that day said they had been told the day before to perform a ``security check'' on the Murrah Building.
Gooden works out of the GSA office in Fort Worth. A GSA supervisor in Fort Worth said Gooden was in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, to inspect the building's elevator system, but never picked up Lawton. The supervisor said another GSA employee named by Lawton was on an airplane at the time of the bombing.
Gooden said he was told not to speak with reporters and is expected to return Thursday to complete his testimony.
Former Oklahoma City television reporter Jayna Davis, 33, said she will take the stand on Thursday to authenticate a summary of statements she provided to prosecutors.
Davis said the documents are abstracts of what her sources told her regarding the identity of others who are possibly connected to the bombing.
Davis said one of her reports was about a witness who picked out a person believed to be with McVeigh several days before the bombing.
"I believe my witnesses are being truthful when they say they believe others were involved, that they have first-hand knowledge of that," Davis said.
In January or February, Davis, who quit working for KFOR in March, provided the information to Oklahoma County District Attorney Bob Macy but took out the names of her sources.
"I can't violate their confidentiality," Davis said. "This is a detailed investigation I turned over. It spans nearly two years. The question that will most likely be before me is `Jayna, did you talk to some of the same witnesses before the grand jury?' "
Davis said she couldn't confirm or deny that some of the witnesses are the same, but said to the best of her knowledge, the grand jury hasn't heard any evidence regarding the evidence trail she says she discovered.
Davis lost a battle last week when a judge ruled she had to testify before the grand jury.
Davis said her attempt to avoid testifying was an effort to protect her sources.
Her sources want the information out, but don't want their names released unless they are given police protection, she said.
Davis said she expects her testimony will be short and limited to saying she supplied the abstract of information.
Davis' stories were the target of a lawsuit filed by Al-Hussaini Hussain, who says her stories were libelous and invaded his privacy. Davis, her former employer and others were named as defendants.
Davis said her stories never identified the person her sources said had possible links to the bombing.
Gary Richardson, a Tulsa attorney who represents Hussain, said Hussain is living out of state.
"We dropped the lawsuit for reasons at the time of being unable to locate a witness we needed," Richardson said. "We were able to locate that witness and the case is going to be refiled hopefully fairly soon. The lawsuit would be refiled either in Oklahoma County District Court or possibly in federal court'' in Oklahoma City, he said.
Richardson said he has not heard anything about his client being called before the grand jury.
Copyright 1996, World Publishing Co. All rights reserved.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: The Dysfunctional Criminal Justice System Speaks, Again (fwd) Date: 18 Sep 1997 15:51:16 -0400 (EDT) See my message below, and make plans now about how to handle pure evil if it ever invades your respective families' personal space. And don't plan on seeking any justice whatsoever through the C.J. system. We just wasted an entire year of our lives in a completely useless effort to attempt to bring a criminal to justice. We will never again make that same mistake. Best regards, Chris Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Cc: Well, folks, it's over. LPD's police prosecutor spent well over an hour in the judge's chambers at Merrimack District Court with my daughter's assail- ant's public defender, paid for by your tax dollars, and when they emerged, the judge advised that he was "dismissing the TRO violation charge without a finding" because he believed that "police entrapment" could be argued, since my daughter had a telephone conversation with the investigating LPD officer just before and while the alleged TRO violation was occurring. (So, the message here from a judge is: "*Don't call the police* when a crime is occurring." Huh? What? Now, I am really confused.) Wait, it gets better. While the private conversation was taking place in the judge's chambers, the defendant and his mongol horde were laughing, smirking, snickering and having a wild, grand old time. Their behavior was so upsetting to my daughter that my wife asked for a bailiff to intervene. The bailiff advised the defendant and his mongol horde to settle down and behave. They did, for about one minute. Then, they started up again. My wife looked right at the bailiff, who swiftly approached the defendant and his mongol horde and said, sternly, that they would have to leave the courtroom if they wanted to laugh and misbehave. They quieted down, but just a bit. They behaved as if they were male circus clowns in an arena, and in their presence was a shaken and nervous female crime victim. The defendant's and his party animals' "celebration mode" kicked in big time as soon as they cleared the courtroom, including high fives with his mongol horde and his public defender. How nice. How sensitive. I do not have to tell you how my daughter feels. I do not have to tell you how my wife feels. I do not have to tell you how my daughter's new boyfriend (a consummate gentleman) feels. I do not have to tell you how I feel. The system began to fail as soon as the police turned over the reins to the county attorney, it continued to fail, court appearance after court appearance, from 12/96 through 09/97, and now, it has failed, miserably and totally, in the end. The courts are truly courts of law, not of justice, and the law is a complete ass. It's as simple as that. Trust me, should violent crime ever visit you or your loved ones, except for local police who may respond to help and be empathetic, you are on your own, and be prepared to be sorely disappointed by a criminal justice system which is so dysfunctional as to be unworthy of further comment. Best regards, Chris P.S. I am prepping for "weekend visitations" on Friday or Saturday by celebrating idiots, just in case. Yes, they are that stupid and reckless. Any response to "night riding harassment" or "backyard booms" will be legal and lawful and moral, if perhaps not politically correct. LPD will be entirely supportive, of that I am certain. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Forwarded from "Great" Britain (fwd) Date: 18 Sep 1997 21:34:05 PST Ok, here ya go, Tom. On Sep 17, Liberty or Death wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Yup, a guy can see why those colonists did what they did 220+ years ago... - Monte >From: Steven Kendrick/UK >To: @compuserve.com >Subject: [SIG-L] my hand-in >Date: Wednesday, September 17, 1997 12:31 > >Well, the fateful moment has come to tell about my hand-in, at West >Mids police HQ. > >I actually didn't think I would ever be writing this, as I had no intent >of handing my guns in. I wanted my day in court. Unfortunately, my >FAC expires on 26th September so all that would have happened would be >a conviction for failure to renew my FAC, which seemed rather trivial. >(Handguns become prohibited on 30th September). > >It just wouldn't have the same impact on a jury, I think. > >I nearly killed myself getting my spare safe out of the loft. Thing >almost hit me on the head. > >I weighed down my Toyota and drove it all down there, left hand Galco >shoulder holster, a variety of mag pouches, a heap of brass, a state- >of-the-1987-art IPSC racegun, a clapped out SIG-Sauer P220, two rusty >safes, etc. Basically a heap of rubbish, worth about three grand. To >think I am going to get paid for all this junk. > >They sat me down in the press room and went through it all, took about >half an hour, they weren't happy that all my brass was under Option C >(valued) because they would have to put it in store. Everything under >Option C was put into a big West Mids Police evidence bag and my FAC >number was stuck onto it. My guns were put in Bianchi bluebags, as were >the mags. I didn't hand in any mags with my SIG-Sauer P220-1, and they >wrote that down on the valuation. Likewise they reduced the number >of CZ-75 mags by one because they included one as part of the gun. > >All of the Option A and B (listed values) stuff was thrown into a big >burlap bag. > >The PC doing the paperwork gave me my copy back, which has "customer's >copy" printed across it. I opined: "Oh, so I'm a _customer_ am I?" > >"Yeah, pretty bizarre terminology. Maybe you'll get your guns back >if you're lucky." he responded. > >After it was all done, my firearm licensing officer sat me down >at the back of the room to go through my renewal. He called in another >PC and pulled out a questionnaire identical to the referee forms I had >refused to complete because that law isn't effective yet. > >We went through what kind of guns I had applied for authority for, why >I needed them and so on. The Section 1 shotgun caused some confusion, >as they wanted to know where I would shoot it. I mentioned that I >was a member of the NRA, member of the UKPSA and they responded they >needed to see proof of membership. I had my NRA card on me, and >promised to send them photocopies of the rest. They also wanted me >to name specifically what kind of shotgun I was going to get, pump >or semi, presumably because they didn't want me going out to get >a coach gun. In the end I told them I was getting a Benelli M3 >Super 90, (the truth) which is selective action anyway. > >They weren't too happy about the slug. I have only applied for >authority for 50 rounds, and told them I would only be using it at >certain competitions. The PC who usually deals with me seemed happy >to take my UKPSA membership as being good enough reason, but the >other PC wanted me to name at least one place I would be using it >regularly. I eventually thought up the Shooter's Rights Association >range, as I am a life member. "Oh, Jock, didn't we get some memo or >something from Dyfed Powys about them?" > "Yeah, what's that chappies name? Er..." > "Richard Law?" I ventured. > "Yeah, better not use the SRA as a good reason, mate." > >The other PC started making some bizarre statements about how 12g >slug would destroy target frames, what kind of backstop they had, while >my local PC sat and rolled his eyes. Then the other PC said: "You >know, some of our officers went deaf shooting those things." At >which point my local firearm officer nearly burst out laughing. > >We went through various other questions on the form, and I could tell >my local PC was getting brassed off with the whole deal: > "Oh, here's another bloody stupid question, 'Describe your >friends and associates'. Well, better not put Richard Law down." > >In the end, he basically said: "What this boils down to mate, is are >you going to shoot a bunch of people in a school? No? Didn't think >so." And he got up and went off in a huff. The other PC was a bit >taken aback but after conferring with my local PC they said they would >have my renewal through on time and would trust me to send in my >UKPSA membership details. > >I did get the impression that they were probably being a bit more >suspicious about me than is usual, basically because of all the hassle >I've been giving them everytime they screw up. > >Anyway, I have to say I am feeling a bit despondent. > >A line out of the Bible has been running through my mind since all >this started: "And the Lord said unto Satan: 'Man does not live by >bread alone'." Luke 4:4 (Not bad for an atheist, eh?) > >And that seems to sum up the problem with what the Government is >trying to force everyone in this country to do: be one homogenous mass >of mediocre weak-minded people who are easily directed at the whim of >the Government. If you don't like soccer, watch TV and drink at the >pub as your primary hobbies, you're "strange" and sooner or later >you're going to be marginalised and discriminated against. You must >only eat bread. Anything else, you're a weirdo and God help you. > >The concept of Liberty is totally supressed. You can sit and argue >what Liberty is all day and night, suffice to say it has an ineffable >quality and you're certain of one thing about it: you know when you've >lost it. > >On the way out of the police station, I walked past the Assistant >Chief Constable, giving an interview outside because we were using >the Press room. I didn't catch all of it, but I caught "Armed Response >teams deployed... earlier today." > >So it seems the gun ban is working wonderfully. > >Steve. > - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oh Lord, lead us into Your Glory - bathe us in the holy & pure light of Your Spirit; let Your righteous fire burn away all that is in us that is not of You, so that we might worship the Living God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. Amen. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: Forwarded from "Great" Britain (fwd) Date: 19 Sep 1997 07:44:01 -0400 At 09:34 PM 9/18/97 PST, you wrote: >Ok, here ya go, Tom. > Bill, Thanks much, Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pwatson@utdallas.edu Subject: Dysfunctional Criminal justice Date: 19 Sep 1997 09:03:08 -0500 (CDT) > Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 15:51:16 -0400 (EDT) > From: Chris Ferris > To: noban@Mainstream.net > Subject: The Dysfunctional Criminal Justice System Speaks, Again (fwd) > > Well, folks, it's over. LPD's police prosecutor spent well over an hour in > the judge's chambers at Merrimack District Court with my daughter's assail- > ant's public defender, paid for by your tax dollars, and when they emerged, > the judge advised that he was "dismissing the TRO violation charge without > a finding" because he believed that "police entrapment" could be argued, Chris, that is sicking and sad, a real live example of justice for us honest people. I would bet 2 things are going on. We found the entire Texas criminal system is run like this. The defense lawyer gives or his firm gives a large amount of business or campaign finance contributions to the Judges reelection campaign. Here in Texas we got a list of the top 15 contributors to Judges, guess what the #1 contribution law firm had the highest win rate before that judge, #2 contribution the #2 win rate and so on down the line to you the honest victim, guess what, you loose. Also as with the Branch Davidians old meth Lab thrown out by David Korish a large amount of the drug profits goes to the judges in various forms to protect the mob. If this guy is involved with the drug trade that also can explain why and how he got off. The Dallas police have told us that some of the Dallas Criminal Judges run, own and protect a couple of the local drug labs and the police have been powerless to stop it. I saw a show on the History Channel about the Chicago Mob and the Tommy gun during Prohibition, it was the same thing then. One of the largest breweries never shut down production and just put all the police on the payroll. They had the only beer production in the whole USA and it was such an lucrative cash cow it led to the gang war with the St. Valentines day massacre. This led to the machine gun tax and first national gun control acts. Of course that did not work, expecting Mafia Criminals to pay a gun tax when they ignore all other laws is really stupid. It finally stopped when they ended prohibition and the price fell below what the mafia could make money on. By the way the breweries just across the water from Chicago in Canada were not allowed to sell to Canadians but could legally sell to Americans. The number one customer who had one of the exclusive agencies for US sales was one Joseph Kennedy. Also scuttlebutt is that Joseph used his old Chicago Mob/Labor connections to get out the vote that was just enough to push JFK over Nixon. Then JFK appoints his brother Robert Kennedy as Attorney General who sets up a special team to attack the mafia. The mafia is a little upset over the back stabbing after helping dad elect JFK. There was the project "Mongoose" set up by the CIA to kill Castro using hired Mafia hit men. The mafia used the mongoose team to take out JFK as revenge. All of this per the History Channel. Regards, Paul Watson ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Dysfunctional Criminal justice Date: 19 Sep 1997 09:02:33 -0700 Paul, [...] Also as with the Branch Davidians old meth Lab thrown out by David Korish a large amount of the drug profits goes to the judges in various forms to protect the mob. If this guy is involved with the drug trade that also can explain why and how he got off. [...] Would you mind delving into this a bit further? As I recall things here, the drug connection was tossed in by the feds to allow the utility of military assets in the standoff. Is there another bit of info which is not widely known? ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Dysfunctional Criminal justice Date: 19 Sep 1997 09:02:33 -0700 Paul, [...] Also as with the Branch Davidians old meth Lab thrown out by David Korish a large amount of the drug profits goes to the judges in various forms to protect the mob. If this guy is involved with the drug trade that also can explain why and how he got off. [...] Would you mind delving into this a bit further? As I recall things here, the drug connection was tossed in by the feds to allow the utility of military assets in the standoff. Is there another bit of info which is not widely known? ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wbg Subject: Re: Dysfunctional Criminal justice Date: 19 Sep 1997 11:17:34 -0700 (PDT) > > Would you mind delving into this a bit further? > As I recall things here, the drug connection was > tossed in by the feds to allow the utility of military assets > in the standoff. > Is there another bit of info which is not widely > known? > > ET I think fairly widely known - one of the splinter elements of the BDs, the one with which Koresh's faction earlier had contended for control of the Mt. Carmel property, had at one time operated a meth lab on the property. When Koresh's faction took over the property, they shut down and razed, or whatever, the lab. That's how I remember it, anyway. Brewster -- *********************************************************************** "Corruptissima republicae, plurimae leges." Tacitus W. Brewster Gillett wbg@hevanet.com Portland, Oregon USA *********************************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Republicans Quid Pro Quo, duck and run (fwd) Date: 19 Sep 1997 16:30:07 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Bill Nalty > Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 10:39:47 -0500 > Subject: GOP Senators Offer to End Hearings, Seek Reform > > Los Angeles Times > September 19, 1997 > > GOP SENATORS OFFER TO END HEARINGS, SEEK REFORM > > By Glenn F. Bunting, Edwin Chen > > WASHINGTON--In a surprising development that could improve > prospects for an overhaul of the campaign finance system, > Senate Republicans tentatively agreed Thursday to pull back > on their investigation into political fund-raising abuses to > pave the way for a full floor debate on fund-raising reform. (cut) > The shift in strategy was embraced by Republicans and > Democrats on the committee. > > Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she strongly backed > the decision to concentrate on passing a reform measure. > "I think most of the information [on fund-raising > practices] is out at this point," Collins said. So freaking what, all I care about is the information on current law breaking not some nebulous future reform. How can anyone expect people who break all the current laws to respond to new ones? > > The unexpected developments came as the Senate > Committee on Governmental Affairs was wrapping up > its seventh week of hearings into campaign finance > abuses. > > Thompson clearly indicated his belief that the hearings > reached a high point this week, with incriminating > testimony by former National Security Council aide > Sheila Heslin about political interference in U.S. > foreign policy and frank discussion by donor Roger > Tamraz about his efforts to buy his way into the > White House. (cut) > Thompson proposed that Democrats give up their three > days of hearings into Republican fund-raising activities, > which were scheduled to begin next week. In exchange, > Republicans would agree not to continue scrutinizing > Democratic fund-raising practices for the remaining two > weeks of the initial phase of the hearings. > So, like every hearing, just when we think there is a real chance of exposing the real story another "Quid Pro Quo" is fixed to cover up the truth. It is obvious the Democrats blackmailed the Republicans with something so damaging they dropped the whole investigation to avoid it. Just like the House and Senate Waco hearings, The Fisk investigation, the Starr investigation and now this, it is all a smokescreen. They are all filthy dirty and it's just a fight about who has the rights to rape and pillage the common citizen. Rush said yesterday that all the campaign finance reform is nothing but the greatest hope of the Socialist Democrats to silence the Rights ability to get funds. The whole Media will still be able to push Socialism. The labor unions can run their million dollar attack ads, the Government workers union can still fund their attacks and the Conservatives will be left with far less money if this reform goes through. How can the Republicans explain any of this when they control both houses and had yesterdays climax of real dirt on Clintons administration? How on earth can they explain throwing in the towel at this high point? The show is over, its another fix, back to TV, beer and football. It was a great Republic before we let it slip away.. Regards, Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu Senior Buyer UTD The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 972/883-2307,fax# 972/883-2348 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Branch Davidians and the Meth Lab Date: 19 Sep 1997 17:15:45 -0500 (CDT) > Topic No. 10 > > Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 09:02:33 -0700 > From: "E.J. Totty" > To: roc@mail.xmission.com > Cc: Multiple recipients of list , > Subject: Re: Dysfunctional Criminal justice > Message-ID: > > Paul, > > [...] > Also as with the Branch Davidians old meth Lab > thrown out by David Korish a large amount of the drug profits > goes to the judges in various forms to protect the mob. If this > guy is involved with the drug trade that also can explain why > and how he got off. > [...] > > Would you mind delving into this a bit further? > As I recall things here, the drug connection was > tossed in by the feds to allow the utility of military assets > in the standoff. > Is there another bit of info which is not widely > known? > > ET When David Korish who was a carpenter by trade was erecting one of their new buildings and was digging holes he found to his surprise the remains of a meth lab. It had a bunch of rubber stamps with bogus company names all with the same po box address in Waco. It looks like Groden(sp) the ousted owner was running a meth lab and a big one. David picked up the phone and called the local sheriff who told him thanks but we know all about that just re-bury it. After the final fire a friend went two weeks later and found a small metal storage shed on the outskirts of the Branch Davidian property with all the remains of this lab inside that the BATF had missed in their destruction and cover up of all evidence. This friend and his friends still have all this stuff hidden. They thought it would be useful in the Davidian trials but no one used it. Now back to the late 1980's. BELO broadcasting WFAA TV did a series of expose's on how the DA in Waco no-billed or plea bargained a very high percentage of all the drug dealing people in his county to very light or no jail times. As if he was kind of on the take with the local drug mafia. He sued Belo and they payed an out of court settlement rumored to be 10 million. Those are the facts, here is the real speculation: The richest man in Waco is a guy named John Rappaport(sp) who is a fund raiser and rumored to be the head of the Waco Mafia. Some think David Korish came in and unknown to him threw out Groden who was running this Meth lab for the local drug mafia. They did not like this and set him up with the BATF raid as a kind of revenge. John Rappaport was a University of Texas Board of Regent. President Clinton came down to Austin a few years ago and publicly thanked Rappaport as one of the most important people who funded and pulled his presidential campaign out of the Gennifer Flowers doldrums. John Rappaport is who hired Webster Hubble right after he resigned from the White House and he refused to cooperate anymore with the Whitewater investigation. Webster Hubble was the lead man in charge of the Waco hearings and investigations for the White House. Regards, Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: The "Uni-Ted Nations" Date: 19 Sep 1997 20:15:11 -0400 (EDT) Well, folks, the big glass tower in Manhattan that employs thousands of do-nothing, insufferable Euro-trash and fourth world bureaucrats now has a brand spankin' new name, thanks to (the supremely arrogant) Ted Turner's gift of $10 billion: The Uni-Ted Nations I wonder if Sanka Decaf Koffee at Nine, the U.N.'s new head cheese from Oh Ghana (as in, "Oh, Ghana, Oh, Ghana, we sent you millions which you flushed down the drain, but since you're P.C., Bill Clinton feels your pain, etc."), will now feel compelled to redesign the U.N.'s blue flag ... and perhaps to install a ZU-57 hand-cranked Soviet AAA gun (NVA surplus) outside U.N. HQs to make for a nice "deja vu" Jane Fonda photo op when she and hubby-Teddy next visit Uni-Ted Nations HQs? Best regards, Chris Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: EPA "Special Agents" Profiled in WSJ 09/18/97 Date: 19 Sep 1997 21:42:08 -0400 (EDT) The 09/18/97 issue of the Wall Street Journal contains a movie review on page B1 entitled "Steven Seagal as an EPA agent? Get Real." The article is a review of his movie "Fire Down Below", in which he allegedly portrays an EPA special agent. Seagal's Hollywood screen arm-snapping and leg-breaking aside, here are some choice quotes in the review made by a real, honest to goodness EPA super oh so very special agent: "Mr. (name of EPA special agent) says he would never face evil polluters alone like Mr. Seagal does in 'Fire Down Below' even if he could karate chop a dozen thugs in less than 30 seconds. 'From an officer-safety perspective,' Mr. (name of EPA special agent) says, a team must be involved so 'so human life is not impacted adversely.' A team, he explains solemnly, helps in 'furtherance of our multifaceted mission.'" ("Multifaceted mission" ??? Was this clown a "5 o'clock follies" dog and pony show briefer for MACV in Saigon back in the 60's?) The reporter comments that there are 200 EPA "special agents" countrywide. (Staking out all local Jiffy Lubes, no doubt?) "Like Mr. Seagal, Mr. (name of EPA special agent) and other EPA agents carry guns they have been trained to use. Also at the ready - batons, a sort of new age billy club for blocking assaults and perhaps knocking down a bad guy. Some agents are even black belts, though they are taught to use their skills only in self defense and with the least amount of force possible." "While no harm has befallen (name of EPA special agent), 'that doesn't mean the potential's not there,' he points out. 'At any moment you could pay the ultimate price.'" (Who, the poor guy who tips over a can of 10W-30 oil, or the special agent? Just wondering. Hey, this is Bill Clinton's America, after all, where Americans can get shot by any number of "Wheel of Fortune, Pick Any Vowel" federal SWAT teams formed and (dis)organized under a wide range of cabinet departments and sub-departments. I guess Bill-N-Al would call them "diverse multi-cult-hunting-all SWAT teams seeking common killing ground.") Give them a break ... "To Rake a Village, It Takes A While!" The article continues on, mentioning that Seagal asked the EPA to volunteer his time to "lead an EPA strike force team (I kid you not, read the darn article!) on a real life mission, teaching it martial arts, with himself (Seagal) carrying an EPA badge and gun." (Oh, spare us!) If someone has access to the WSJ on line, could they please post this article to roc@xmission.com and to noban@mainstream.net? It is relevant in the sense that it shows how a Hollywood "hero" whose next movie has him fighting alleged "right wing patriots in Montana" (straight from a Blockbuster Video brochure!) can, behind the scenes, be a buffoon and an Elvis-Presley-like tool-fool of the Clinton Administration ... remember when Presley asked President Nixon to appoint him as a BNDD (soon to be renamed DEA) agent? Check out this article, and then reflect on all of the articles you have reviewed in which Seagal has been "outed" as a CIA wanna-be, etc. It appears that the WSJ may indeed have exposed Jiffy Lube Seagal as being a favor-currying suck up to Carol Browner's SWAT teams of EPA special agents. I know that many Americans may be disappointed that Seagal is sucking up to the EPA. Oh well. So sorry, amigos and amigas. Remember this story the next time you see Seagal's mug in a gun magazine with a badge on his belt and a .45 ACP in his right hand. A legend in his own mind, even if he is an accomplished martial arts expert. As for me, I will check my surroundings very, very carefully before I next pull my Ford truck into the Jiffy Lube in Nashua NH for a routine oil and filter change. If Seagal and his EPA pals are hiding down in the pits, who knows what might happen when a highly trained Jiffy Lube technician spills a drop of Pennzoil 10W-30 on the floor? Bullets could be flying left and right, and Seagal might just snap my arm in half if I made a bad joke about his wooden acting or his ponytail. Remember, folks, there's nothing routine about a "routine oil and filter change" in Bill Clinton's America. Best regards, Chris Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Branch Davidians and the Meth Lab Date: 20 Sep 1997 12:27:02 -0700 Paul, [...] John Rappaport is who hired Webster Hubble right after he resigned from the White House and he refused to cooperate anymore with the Whitewater investigation. Webster Hubble was the lead man in charge of the Waco hearings and investigations for the White House. [...] Damn . . . The implications here are, shall I say: pregnant? ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jim bohan Subject: [Fwd: Update @ www.ruddynews.com] Date: 20 Sep 1997 23:51:25 -0600 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------68C6214E8788137FF06BCF7C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------68C6214E8788137FF06BCF7C Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from georgetown.digiweb.com by ICSI.Net (8.8.5/SMI-SVR4) id WAA10755; Sat, 20 Sep 1997 22:56:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by georgetown.digiweb.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA17401; Sat, 20 Sep 1997 23:59:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199709210359.XAA17401@georgetown.digiweb.com> News Alert! Read Thomas Sowell's nationally syndicated column on Christopher Ruddy's new book, "The Strange Death of Vincent Foster" [Free Press]. The book is now available in bookstores nationwide. Chris Ruddy is available for radio interviews. To book him, please call Bob Newman at 617-254-4500. "Book Raises More Questions About Foster's Death" Facts are Disturbing By Thomas Sowell Nationally Syndicated Columnist September 19, 1997 Washington - I was very skeptical when I found a copy of "The Strange Death of Vincent Foster" in my mail. I began to leaf through the book and saw immediately that this study of the death of White House aide Vincent Foster was very carefully put together and very systematic in its analysis. Moreover, it had no grand conspiracy theory, just a lot of very disturbing facts. Two facts are indisputable. The most important of these facts is that the White House impeded the investigation of Foster's death in gross and subtle ways. This was painfully clear from last year's U.S. Senate Report 104-280. These blatant attempts at covering up suggest that a full investigation might have brought out other things that the Clinton preferred to keep quiet. The second conclusion that seems undeniable is that the U.S. Park Police, which investigated Foster's death after finding his body in a federal park, immediately jumped to the conclusion that it was a suicide committed in that park. Clues that might suggest otherwise were just not followed up. Various independent forensic experts have been scathing in their criticisms of how the Park Police handled the case and neglected the evidence. Even if you accept all the sins of omission and commission charged by author Christopher Ruddy against the Park Police, this does not mean there was some kind of conspiracy between the Park Police and the White House - nor does he claim there was. But once bureaucrats botch something, their next move is to cover it up or lie about it. Any number of things might have happened on July 20, 1993, when Foster's body was discovered in Marcy Park. The hardest thing to reconcile with the evidence is that he committed suicide in the park. He may have committed suicide somewhere else, where it would have been embarrassing to have the body discovered, so that it was moved to the park. Some experienced detectives have suggested this, partly because the small amount of blood found with the body in Marcy Park is inconsistent with what happens when someone puts a .38 revolver in his mouth and pulls the trigger. Another possibility is that Foster might have been killed somewhere else and a suicide faked. Far out as this sounds, it is more consistent with the book's diagram of the pattern of powder burns on Foster's hands than the notion that he pulled the trigger himself. To produce that same pattern of powder burns by shooting himself would have required some real contortions. The book raises more questions than it answers. But these are very serious questions that cannot be swept under the rug with some pat phrase such as "conspiracy theories." http://www.ruddynews.com/ --------------68C6214E8788137FF06BCF7C-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: The Cost of Government (fwd) Date: 20 Sep 1997 22:47:08 PST Well, now there's another study to verify what everyone sort of allready knew..... On Sep 20, Eugene W. Gross wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Hi Folks, This was sent to me by a pastor friend of mine. Something to think about!! En Agape, Gene ============================================== WHAT GOVERNMENT REALLY COSTS 20 September 1997 Copyright 1997, Rod D. Martin "Vanguard of the Revolution" http://members.aol.com/RodDMartin/vanguard.htm In the book of First Samuel, God's people Israel decide that they want a king, "to be like the other nations." Up to that point they had had very limited, decentralized government, but as in our own day, the ancient Israelites were increasingly enchanted with what big government could give them. Having been out of Pharaoh's Egypt three hundred years, they had forgotten the truth of Gerald Ford's famous statement that "any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take from you everything you have." In granting their wish, we are told, God first warned the Israelites of the tyranny that would be possible if and when they someday had a king who was evil. It should be a huge eye-opener for most Americans that one of the things listed as tyranny was a tax rate as high as ten percent. My, my, those must have been the days. Today, we live in an America where the average taxpayer works until July 2 just to pay the government; less than half of what he makes is his own. It was not always so: a hundred years ago, the average American faced a tax burden of around five percent. And the cost of this taxing spree is just beginning to come to light. A study by University of Texas at Dallas economist Gerald W. Scully, completed last year, described the effect of our over-high tax rate on U.S. gross national product since 1949. Rather than looking at the method of tax collection, as does most current debate over flat tax vs. sales tax vs. whatever, Scully merely looked at the disincentive effects of the average tax rate, the overall amount of tax paid by each family as a share of their income. Regardless of how it was collected, the damage to the economy was, in the words of the report, "staggering." Scully used an econometric model which assumed the sort of government spending we've had in post-World War II America, but which assumed an average tax rate of 21.5% to 22.9%, and compared this to reality. This tax rate range was not merely pulled out of a hat: Scully's model showed this to be the optimal range of taxation to support New Deal/Great Society era spending levels. Note that this tax rate is still high by historical standards, but less than half what we currently pay. Scully's discovery? By 40 years of taxing at more than double this rate, successive U.S. governments have succeeded in stunting the U.S. economy by more than half. Actual U.S. GNP in 1989 was $6.2 trillion; Scully shows the proper figure should have been a whopping $13.6 trillion. Cumulative GNP loss from 1949 to 1989 was $94.2 trillion, or $750,000 in lost income over the lifetime of every American family. And most ironic of all, all that extra GNP growth would have funded all government programs during the period, AND wiped out every deficit since 1949. These numbers are enough to make you catch your breath, but even they do not begin to tell the story. What would all those extra investment dollars, all that extra consumer freedom, have meant for American industry? For American jobs? For technological advance? For cancer research? For improving education and fighting poverty? The mind cannot begin to imagine it: all these things work together, and the synergy between them is unpredictable. Yet we can look at today's America, compare the material blessings we have and the quality of life they create to a time when we had half our present GNP -- the late 1950s -- and begin to get some idea. Anyone who would rather have an Edsel than a new Mustang, please step right up. Even assuming Scully's tax rate and government spending numbers, both of which this column will vigorously fight as long as it exists, our government has stolen the equivalent of forty years of progress from us. But America's government is truly of, by and for the people: it did nothing we didn't ask it to do. The medical treatments we don't have, the homeless people who would have been middle class, all these are attributable to our votes. And it is on that note that the question must be asked: at that Biblical tax rate -- and formerly American tax rate -- of less than 10%, how much richer would we all be? And would an America that rich need all these government programs in the first place? Scully's study certainly points the way. Copyright: Rod D. Martin, 20 September 1997 [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Time to Fight Back. Date: 22 Sep 1997 17:21:03 -0500 (CDT) [PLEASE CROSS-POST AND RE-POST] Dear fellow pro-Second Amendment activists: Those of you in California know we played out AB 23 (the "assault weapons" expansion) to a draw (for now) and we lost on SB 500 (so-called "Saturday Night Special" ban), and several other unconstitutional, anti-gun and anti-self-defense bills. We are now reduced to begging the governor to save us from our own elected representatives. While it is still of the utmost importance that we continue to write, fax and call the governor and prevail upon him to veto those bills which got through, we must begin to fight back. Now. Here's the proposal. Our people, especially those in the Member's Councils, are already in the "letter-writing mode." We have been tying up the Legislature's and governor's phone lines, and filling up their mail bags, for several months. We need to keep up the barrage, but direct it at a new target. And we just happen to have the perfect target. As you probably know, several weeks ago the major newspapers in California ran a coordinated, anti-gun editorial/news article (what's the difference?) blitz timed to coincide with the Legislature's consideration of AB 23, SB 500 and other anti-gun bills. We cannot fight back directly against the newspapers, but we can take some action which will get their attention. Specifically, a concerted, state-wide (or even national) campaign directed against one of their major advertisers, with the possibility of reducing their ad revenues, may do the trick. The target: Big 5 Sporting Goods. Big 5 does a major business in California, as well as in Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas and Washington. It advertises in all major newspapers in California (and, presumably in the other states as well). Ironically, Big 5 caters to hand gunners, target shooters and hunters, at the same time it is giving its advertising dollars to newspapers which are editorializing that the private ownership of most firearms should be banned. Indeed, many of the firearms, and much of the ammunition, Big 5 sells would be banned or severely restricted if the newspaper editors got their way! The Campaign: A letter-writing and telephone campaign directed to Big 5 to implore it reduce or cease advertising in any newspapers which editorialize against our right to self defense. This is not a boycott. Boycotts are only effective if hundreds of thousands or millions participate. Rather, we are capitalizing on the idea that retailers abhor negative press, are in a fiercely competitive business, and are very sensitive to their customer's whims. The theory is to direct several hundred, and hopefully thousand, well-written letters all to the president of Big 5. Letters should politely make the following points: (1) As a Big 5 customer and gunowner, the writer is very displeased to see Big 5 spending its ad money on The Los Angeles Times [or other anti-gun newspaper] which has repeatedly gone on record as opposing the right of self-defense, and of poor people to purchase firearms to protect their families; (2) Big 5 is thereby opposing the writer's constitutional right to defend himself/herself and his/her family; (3) If Big 5 continues to support anti-self-defense newspapers, the writer will stop patronizing Big 5, and will tell all of his/her friends and family to do the same. (4) Remind Big 5 that as shooting enthusiasts, there are plenty of other retailers out there who would love to do business with gun owners. (5) A [legitimate] return address. Write Big 5 at: Mr. Steve Miller, President United Merchandising Corp. Big 5 Sporting Goods P.O. Box 92088 Los Angeles, CA 90009 Or telephone him at: (310) 536-0611 For this campaign to be effective, we will need every Member's Council, every pro-gun organization and every activist in California and the Western U.S. to participate. Remember: be polite, do not threaten and remind him you spend $$$ on firearms. That's a language Mr. Miller will understand! Final note: this project is a grassroots effort, and it is _not_ sponsored by any Members Council or other organization. Now let's get to work and fire off those letters and calls! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mestetsr@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu Subject: FWD: Privacy Alert Date: 22 Sep 1997 18:45:48 -0400 I received the following from a "democracy" list (pretty liberal, other than this): Rachel >Summary: > >What: A House bill that eases controls on "strong" computer encryption. We >expect a vote this week on an amendment that would allow law enforcement >easier access to all Americans' computer files. > >Who: The House Commerce Committee. Of 51 members, we only see about four >sure votes for our position. Many members are still unclear about their >positions. > >When: Subcommittee vote on Tuesday, a full committee vote scheduled for >Thursday. > >Action: Any and all constituent calls to committee members (listed at the end >of the email) this week would be appreciated. The message is "No compromise >on my privacy; vote NO on the Oxley-Manton amendment to H.R. 695, the SAFE >Act." Capitol switchboard (202) 225-3121. > >This amendment is opposed by groups from across the political spectrum. > Below is some more detailed information. Please feel free to get in touch >with me at kearneyclu@aol.com, or call (202) 675-2307 for additional >information. Thanks for your help! > >Background: > >The FBI is pushing Congress for a new law that -- for the first time ever -- >would limit the kind of encryption technology that Americans could get and >use inside the United States to protect the privacy of their telephone and >computer communications. > >The House Intelligence Committee has already approved an amendment to outlaw >encryption inside the United States unless it has a "backdoor" that allows >the coded message to be read by police and other agents. But encryption >experts warn that creating a "backdoor" for police would also reveal private >messages to competitors, hackers, prying neighbors and others seeking to >profit from illicitly gained information. > >The House Commerce Committee will act this week on a similar anti-privacy >amendment (Oxley-Manton) that would also require communications networks like >phone companies and online services to decode the messages of their >customers. > >These and other anti-encryption proposals are amendments to Rep. Bob >Goodlatte's bill, H.R. 695 -- the "Security and Freedom through Encryption" >or SAFE Act -- a bill that would ease controls on export of strong encryption >technology. > >Talking Points > >**Widespread use of strong encryption in the US is the "key" to free speech, >privacy and a competitive America in the Information Age. Encryption programs >scramble information so that it can only be read with a "key" -- a code the >recipient uses to unlock the scrambled electronic data. As more of our >messages are sent via computers, digital switches, and wireless phones, they >must be encrypted, otherwise our messages can be seized and read by others. > >**There are no laws that now prohibit using as strong encryption as possible >inside the United States. The Oxley-Manton amendment would put a "back door" >on every computer, which would allow the FBI (or anyone who could gain access >to the back door) access to your personal encoded information, sometimes >without your consent or knowledge. > >**Protecting the privacy of communications inside the United States must be >the number one priority on this issue. There can be no so-called "compromise" >where export controls are relaxed a little (or even a lot) while controls are >imposed on encryption here at home. All efforts, direct and indirect, to >restrict your right to get the greatest possible privacy protection for your >family and business communications must be rejected. Whether you are sending >sensitive corporate documents or your family's travel plans, you have a right >to speak privately! > >Committee Members (by state): > >Anna G. Eshoo, CA >Christopher Cox, CA >Brian P. Bilbray, CA >James Rogan, CA >Henry A. Waxman, CA > >Diana DeGette, CO >Dan Schaefer, CO > >Michael Bilirakis, FL >Peter Deutsch, FL >Cliff Stearns, FL > >Nathan Deal, GA >Charlie Norwood, GA > >Michael D. Crapo, ID > >John Shimkus, IL >J. Dennis Hastert, IL >Bobby L. Rush, IL > >Greg Ganske, IA > >Ed Whitfield, KY > >W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, LA > >Albert R. Wynn, MD > >Edward J. Markey, MA > >John D. Dingell, MI, RANKING MEMBER >Fred Upton, MI >Bart Stupak, MI > >Karen McCarthy, MO > >Bill Paxon, NY >Eliot L. Engel, NY >Thomas J. Manton, NY >Edolphus Towns, NY >Rick Lazio, NY > >Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ > >Richard Burr, NC > >Sherrod Brown, OH >Ted Strickland, OH >Thomas C. Sawyer, OH >Michael G. Oxley, OH >Paul E. Gillmor, OH > >Steve Largent, OK >Tom Coburn, OK > >Elizabeth Furse, OR > >James C. Greenwood, PA >Ron Klink, PA > >Bart Gordon, TN > >Ralph M. Hall, TX >Joe Barton, TX >Gene Green, TX > >Tom Bliley, VA, CHAIRMAN >Rick Boucher, VA > >Rick White, WA > >Scott L. Klug, WI > >Barbara Cubin, WY > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: It's time to write a letter to Congressman Dan Burton Date: 23 Sep 1997 08:30:12 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970922205918.002c9120@inet.skillnet.com> <<< PLEASE CROSS-POST FREELY >>> It's time to write a letter to Congressman Dan Burton. Burton is chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. That committee will soon begin its hearings into the campaign fundraising scandals of the Clinton Administration. Until last week, Thompson's Senate committee had been investigating these scandals. The last few days of those hearings have revealed many damaging pieces of evidence. Enough force Reno to start the process toward an independent counsel. Enough to make the scandals the top story in many media channels. But just when the public was finally starting to take notice, Thompson has suddenly and mysteriously stopped pursuing the scandals. That leaves everything up to two groups: 1) Burton's committee in the House, and 2) us, the concerned citizens of our country. Burton's committee has all of the information revealed by the Senate hearings. The media is already listening; liberal and conservative alike are printing the details as fast as they become known. Clinton and Gore are becoming defensive, both in speech and action (witness Gore's hiring of new lawyers last week). "Leaks" are developing from anonymous sources just as in Watergate days. In other words, a flame - small but cheerful - has appeared in the long-smoldering scandal. OUR job is to turn that flame into a bonfire. To feed it enough fuel that nothing can stop it. To demonstrate that the pressure of public opinion will keep BURTON digging for the truth no matter what pressure may have stopped Thompson. To convince Burton that the public wants answers and that the hearings must continue until those answers are known. The very best fuel is a letter... traditional, paper-based, US Postal Service delivered letters. Calls are cute, faxes are fine, but nothing gets the attention of an elected official like a huge mountain of letters from concerned citizens. Burton will notice. His staff will notice. The media will notice. Most importantly, the Republican leadership and those who oppose these hearings will notice. Burton will be able to show them piles and piles of letters, all demanding justice, and it will become obvious why the hearings must continue. THAT will make the difference. The letters should be short and polite. Long "extremist" letters are ignored, but one or two paragraphs requesting open and honest hearings will get attention. A few hundred such letters will make a statement. A few thousand will be a mandate. Tens of thousands spilling into the hallways will be an unstoppable force, and will give Burton the influence he needs to overcome any opposition. So please, write a letter to Burton. His office and committee addresses appear below. Do it today. Forward this message to every person, group, and organization who will do likewise. For the cost of a stamp or two, you can help fill the hallways outside of Burton's offices with polite letters from the American people who want - who need - to see justice served. It's time to stop turning our backs on corruption, and thumbing our noses at the Constitution. It's time to start holding our highest elected officials TO the law, rather than ABOVE the law. And it's time to restore the people's faith in their government. Congressman Dan Burton 2185 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Chairman Dan Burton Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 2157 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: Wee Willie Clinton And You Can Call Him Al Gore Endorse Multigunculturalism and Diversity in Self Defense Date: 23 Sep 1997 10:00:52 -0400 (EDT) THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE Speaking at a Rosie Garden O'Donnell ceremony at The White Supremacist House where they were surrounded by a horde of pro-Prez activists such as (Francis) Marian (Swamp Fox) Wright (Wing) Edelman of the Children's (Self) Defense Fund, Kweisi Mfume (Tobacco) of the National Association for the Advancement of Calibered Pistols, the Reverend Al (Not So) Sharp (But He Does Weigh a) Ton and the Reverend Jesse Jackson of PUSH (People Urged To Shoot Home-Invaders), President Wee Willie Clinton and Vice President You Can Call Him Al Gore wholeheartedly embraced multigunculturalism and diversity in self defense. Speaking on the record, Wee Willie intoned, "The Veep and I believe that, for too long now, Americans have embraced a narrow Eurocentric view of guns which focused only on their utility as either hunting tools or target shooting implements for use by the elite. Well, as recent citizen support for Proposition 357 (encouraging persons to own and become proficient in the safe defensive use of a wide variety of firearms) grows in state after state, I can only say that the time has come for all Americans to find common ground and to agree that the concept of "multigunculturalism", i.e., accepting the reality that each of us owning a rainbow coalition of guns of all types: hunting guns, semi-auto black guns, rifles, shotguns, pistols, revolvers, machine guns, self defense guns, etc., only serves to make us a stronger, more unified nation. Adding to Wee Willie's commentary, You Can Call Him Al stated, "The Prez is absolutely right. We want all Americans to see the inherent benefit of multigunculturalism. We want all Americans of all races, creeds and national origins and from all socio-economic backgrounds to move aggressively to diversify their gun collections. Some may call this a 'quota system' or 'affirmative action', and I must say that we are proud to stand for Americans' right to ignore quotas, to buy as many guns of any type as they might wish, and yet to act affirmatively to redress past wrongs, e.g., the disarming of African-Americans in the South through use of racist gun control laws. We believe in diverse self defense: all American family members should feel free to use the widest possible range of guns in safeguarding their homes against armed criminals. Ladies and gentlemen, my fellow Americans, multigunculturalism today, multigunculturalism tomorrow, multigunculturalism forever! Just say 'no', and say it loudly, to those who would dismiss multigunculturalism as a domestic extremist viewpoint." The ceremony ended as all speakers and members of the audience stood, joined hands and sang a rousing, heartwarming rendition of "We Shall Overgun!" THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE Christopher C. Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: [RightNow] Margaret Sanger's friend H.G. Wells favored eugenics (fwd) Date: 23 Sep 1997 09:14:07 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:34:58 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: RightNow@MailList.Net 20 September 1997 Margaret Sanger's friend H.G. Wells favored eugenics (article in the PUBLIC DOMAIN) This week in the Financial Post (Canada) author and broadcaster Michael Coren wrote an eye-opening piece, The origin of social engineering. He starts, "It was revealed recently that in the 1920s the Swedish government forcibly sterilized 60,000 people who were thought to be 'genetically inferior'." Coren goes on to inform: One man who was convinced he knew best, who was massively influential both in his native Britain as well as in Canada, and who was a dominant social activist for half a century, was the novelist H.G. Wells. The author of The Time Machine, The Invisible Man and The War of the Worlds also wrote extensively of the need for widespread and often forced abortion, birth control, euthanasia and sterilization. [his friend Margaret Sanger also advocated forced sterilization] He advocated murder of those "who did not fit in." One of his key books on the subject was entitled Anticipations. Wells wrote in this volume the mentally and physically handicapped should not be allowed to be born, but that if they did manage to come into the world they should be "removed." There was more. "And how will the New Republic treat the inferior races? How will it deal with the black? how will it deal with the yellow man? how will it tackle the alleged termite in the civilized world, the Jew?" He replied to his rhetorical question that these people would be discouraged, by any means necessary, from procreation. [in her autobiography Margaret Sanger talked about her friend H.G. Well but denounced none of his ideas] He went on to say that "the ethical system that will dominate the world-state will be shaped primarily to favor the procreation of what is fine and efficient and beautiful in humanity -- beautiful and strong bodies, clear and powerful minds -- and to check the procreation of base and servile type." For these poor souls "the men of the New Republic will have little pity and less benevolence." Then there was euthanasia. The new order would "naturally regard the modest suicide of incurably melancholy or diseased or helpless persons as a high and courageous act of duty rather than a crime." This book, and other like it, received mostly glowing reviews. The socialist writer Arnold Bennett claimed he was "absolutely overwhelmed by the sheer intellectual vigor" and Beatrice Webb, one of the founders of Britain's Labour party, said Anticipations was "the most remarkable book of the year; a powerful imagination furnished with the data and methods of physical science working on social problems." Indeed Wells' views were so popular amongst the socialists of the Edwardian age that one prominent thinker proposed him to become a member of the esteemed Fabian Society, an intellectual think-tank that shaped much of European and North American socialism. This man said everything Wells had written was eminently correct and it was true the new world order would demand extensive social engineering. His name was George Bernard Shaw. We in Canada have name both an important theatre and a major drama festival after him. There are those people who genuinely believe the debate over social engineering is long dead. Not so. It never stopped, and some of us would argue that the advance of science and the decline in the belief in universal truth it is really just beginning. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you, Michael Coren The socialist Well of bad ideas is always full, Mike Richmond =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= To unsubscribe from this mailing list, DISREGARD ANY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE and go to the Web page at http://www.maillist.net/rightnow.html. New subscriptions can also be entered at this page. If you cannot access the World Wide Web, send an e-mail message to RightNow-Request@MailList.Net and on the SUBJECT LINE put the single word: unsubscribe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Chris Ferris Subject: Gov Control Lobby Marches on Capitol Hill Date: 23 Sep 1997 10:27:03 -0400 (EDT) THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE U.S. Capitol Police had to call in reinforcements today to deal with a peaceful rally of over 200,000 persons belonging to the newly formed lobbying organization Gov Control, Inc. Speaking for the organization, GCI President Justin Amerricun made this statement to media reporters who were present: "Gov Control, Inc. does not seek to ban government. We only seek 'reasonable controls' on government. We have seen the violence which uncontrolled government can do to innocent Americans. So, working in harmony with federal legislators, we hope to be able to take 'steps in the right direction' to control U.S. governmental excesses and law breaking. Gov violence is a plague in our society, and only through a concerted effort can we stem the tide. If just one life (or, as long as Clinton remains in office, one wife) can be saved, then our efforts to promote and enact gov control will have been worth the sacrifices we have made. The Shady Law and an Insta-Check program, where government officials will have to undergo background checks and obtain citizens' approval before enacting any new legislation, may constitute steps in the right direction. I would encourage interested Americans to contact our sister organization 'The Center To Prevent Gov Violence' to obtain additional information about grassroots efforts to rein in out-of-control government. In the end, we, the pro-active members of GCI, shall send a clear message to those Clintonistas now in power who delight in singing "We Shall Overgov" at every opportunity." THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE THIS IS A SATIRE Christopher C. Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: State of the World Forum II (fwd) Date: 23 Sep 1997 10:24:24 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Fellow OPS Members An OPS member has pointed out that Gorby is holding another State of the World Forum soon. Be sure to get all the scoop on the event at: http://www.well.com/user/wforum/index.html Heck, if you have 4 to 5 grand to throw away you can even attend! Sua Sponte, Richard Biondi OPS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Fwd: Re: Time to Fight Back. Date: 23 Sep 1997 13:57:14 -0500 (CDT) ------Begin forward message------------------------- I spoke to Steve about this earlier today. I suggest that anyone who writes to Big 5 include the following points: 1. Include an itemization of the purchase you plan to make within the next six months or so (shotguns, ammo, rifles, hunting/camping equipment, etc.). Include an estimated dollar amount of the merchandise you could have purchase at Big 5. 2. Explain that you know of a store (if you actually do, name it) that is pro-RKBA (for example, in Culver City, we have a store, Martin B. Rettings, that is very supportive of the RKBA; also, the Turner's Outdoorsman chain is very pro-RKBA) and that, even though you might have to pay a little bit more, you'll gladly do so b/c you know the owners support your RKBA, whereas Big 5 is advertising in a the L.A. Times which is advocating doing away with the RKBA. 3. Then send Big 5's Pres. copies of your cash receipts from the other pro-RKBA stores. Dan Daniel J. Schultz Pres. & Co-founder The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Disarming law-abiding citizens is morally wrong. ------End forward message--------------------------- I heartily agree. Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack@minerva.com Subject: Congressional E-mail addresses Date: 23 Sep 1997 12:25:00 PDT [01] Congressional E-MAIL addresses Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby senator@shelby.senate.gov Rep. Spencer Bachus sbachus@hr.house.gov Rep. Sonny Callahan callahan@hr.house.gov Rep. Bud Cramer budmail@hr.house.gov Rep. Terry Everett everett@hr.house.gov Alaska Sen Ted Stevens senator_stevens@stevens.senate.gov Sen. Frank Murkowski email@murkowski.senate.gov Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl info@kyl.senate.gov Sen. John McCain senator_mccain@mccain.senate.gov=20 Rep. J. D. Hayworth hayworth@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Kolbe jimkolbe@hr.house.gov Rep. Ed Pastor edpastor@hr.house.gov Arkansas Sen. Dale Bumpers senator@bumpers.senate.gov=20 Sen. Tim Hutchinson senator hutchinson@hutchinson.senate.gov Rep. Jay Dickey jdickey@hr.house.gov Rep. Tim Hutchinson timhutch@hr.house.gov California Sen. Barbara Boxer senator@boxer.senate.gov Sen. Dianne Feinstein senator@feinstein.senate.gov=20 Rep. Brian Bilbray bilbray@hr.house.gov Rep. George Brown talk2geb@hr.house.gov Rep. Tom Campbell campbell@hr.house.gov Rep. Chris Cox chriscox@hr.house.gov Rep. David Dreier cyberrep@hr.house.gov Rep. Anna Eshoo annagram@hr.house.gov Rep. Sam Farr samfarr@hr.house.gov Rep. Vic Fazio dcaucus@hr.house.gov Rep. Jane Harman jharman@hr.house.gov Rep. Tom Lantos talk2tom@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerry Lewis khuiskes@hr.house.gov Rep. Zoe Lofgren zoegram@hr.house.gov Rep. Howard McKeon tellbuck@hr.house.gov Rep. George Miller gmiller@hr.house.gov Rep. Ron Packard rpackard@hr.house.gov Rep. Nancy Pelosi sfnancy@hr.house.gov Rep. Richard Pombo rpombo@mail.house.gov Rep. George Radanovich george@hr.house.gov Rep. Frank Riggs repriggs@hr.house.gov Rep. Fortney 'Pete' Stark petemail@hr.house.gov Rep. Lynn C. Woolsey woolsey@hr.house.gov Colorado Rep. Dan Schaefer schaefer@hr.house.gov Rep. David Skaggs skaggs@hr.house.gov Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd. sen_dodd@dodd.senate.gov Sen. Joseph Lieberman. senator_lieberman@lieberman.senate.gov=20 Rep. Sam Gejdenson bozrah@hr.house.gov Rep. Christopher Shays cshays@hr.house.gov Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden senator@biden.senate.gov=20 Rep. Michael Castle delaware@hr.house.gov Florida Sen. Bob Graham bob_graham@graham.senate.gov=20 Sen. Connie Mack senator_mack@jec.senate.gov Rep. Michael Bilirakis truerep@hr.house.gov Rep. Charles Canady canady@hr.house.gov Rep. Peter Deutsch pdeutsch@hr.house.gov Rep. Alcee Hastings hastings@hr.house.gov Rep. John Mica mica@hr.house.gov Rep. Dan Miller miller13@hr.house.gov Rep. Cliff Stearns cstearns@hr.house.gov Rep. Karen Thurman kthurman@hr.house.gov Rep. Dave Weldon fla-15@hr.house.gov Georgia Sen. Paul Coverdell senator_coverdell@coverdell.senate.gov=20 Rep. Saxby Chambliss saxby@hr.house.gov Rep. Mac Collins rep3mac@hr.house.gov Rep. Newt Gingrich georgia6@hr.house.gov Rep. John Linder jlinder@hr.house.gov Rep. Charlie Norwood ga10@hr.house.gov Hawaii Sen. Daniel Inouye senator@inouye.senate.gov Rep. Neil Abercrombie neil@abercrombie.house.gov Idaho Sen. Larry Craig larry_craig@craig.senate.gov Sen. Dirk Kempthorne dirk_kempthorne@kempthorne.senate.gov=20 Rep. Helen Chenoweth askhelen@hr.house.gov Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun senator@moseley-braun.senate.gov=20 Rep. Jerry Costello jfcil12@hr.house.gov Rep. Harris Fawell hfawell@hr.house.gov Rep. Luis Gutierrez luisg@hr.house.gov Rep. Dennis Hastert dhastert@hr.house.gov Rep. Ray LaHood lahood18@hr.house.gov Rep. Bobby Rush brush@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerry Weller jweller@hr.house.gov Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar lugar@iquest.net Rep. Lee Hamilton hamilton@hr.house.gov Rep. John Hostettler johnhost@hr.house.gov Rep. David McIntosh mcintosh@hr.house.gov Rep. Tim Roemer troemer@hr.house.gov Rep. Mark Souder souder@hr.house.gov Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley chuck_grassley@grassley.senate.gov Sen. Tom Harkin tom_harkin@harkin.senate.gov=20 Rep. Jim Nussle nussleia@hr.house.gov Kansas Rep. Todd Tiahrt tiahrt@hr.house.gov Kentucky Sen. Wendell Ford wendell_ford@ford.senate.gov Sen. Mitch McConnell senator@mcconnell.senate.gov=20 Rep. Jim Bunning bunning4@hr.house.gov=20 Rep. Ed Whitfield edky01@hr.house.gov Louisiana Sen. John Breaux senator@breaux.senate.gov Rep. Jim McCrery mccrery@hr.house.gov Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe olympia@snowe.senate.gov Sen. Susan Collins senator@collins.senate.gov Rep. John Baldacci baldacci@hr.house.gov Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski. senator@mikulski.senate.gov Sen. Paul Sarbanes senator@sarbanes.senate.gov Rep. Ben Cardin cardin@hr.house.gov=20 Rep. Robert Ehrlich, Jr. ehrlich@hr.house.gov Rep. Albert Wynn alwynn@hr.house.gov Massachusetts Sen Edward Kennedy senator@kennedy.senate.gov Sen. John Kerry john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov Rep. Martin Meehan mtmeehan@hr.house.gov Rep. Joe Moakley jmoakley@hr.house.gov Rep. John Olver olver@hr.house.gov Michigan Sen. Spencer Abraham michigan@abraham.senate.gov Sen. Carl Levin senator@levin.senate.gov=20 Rep. Dave Camp davecamp@hr.house.gov Rep. John Conyers, Jr. jconyers@hr.house.gov Rep. Vernon Ehlers congehlr@hr.house.gov Rep. Peter Hoekstra tellhoek@hr.house.gov Rep. Lynn Rivers lrivers@hr.house.gov Rep. Nick Smith repsmith@hr.house.gov Rep. Bart Stupak stupak@hr.house.gov Rep. Fred Upton talk2fsu@hr.house.gov Minnesota Sen. Rod Grams mail_grams@grams.senate.gov Sen. Paul Wellstone senator@wellstone.senate.gov=20 Rep. Gil Gutknecht gil@hr.house.gov Rep. Bill Luther tellbill@hr.house.gov Rep. David Minge dminge@hr.house.gov Rep. James Oberstar oberstar@hr.house.gov Rep. Collin Peterson tocollin@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Ramstad mn03@hr.house.gov Rep. Martin Sabo msabo@hr.house.gov Rep. Bruce Vento vento@hr.house.gov Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran senator@cochran.senate.gov=20 Rep. Bennie Thompson ms2nd@hr.house.gov Rep. Roger Wicker rwicker@hr.hosue.gov Missouri Sen. John Ashcroft john_ashcroft@ashcroft.senate.gov=20 Sen. Christopher Bond kit_bond@bond.senate.gov Rep. Jo Ann Emerson jemerson@hr.house.gov Rep. Richard Gephardt demldr@hr.house.gov Rep. James Talent talentmo@hr.house.gov Montana Sen. Max Baucus max@baucus.senate.gov Sen Conrad Burns conrad_burns@burns.senate.gov=20 Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey bob@kerrey.senate.gov=20 Rep. Jon Cristensen talk2jon@hr.house.gov Nevada Sen. Harry Reid senator_reid@reid.senate.gov=20 Sen. Richard Bryan senator@bryan.senate.gov=20 Rep. John Ensign ensign@hr.house.gov New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg mailbox@gregg.senate.gov Sen. Bob Smith opinion@smith.senate.gov Rep. Charles Bass cbass@hr.house.gov=20 Rep. John Sununu Rep.Sununu@Mail.House.Gov New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg frank_lautenberg@lautenberg.senate.gov=20 Rep. Robert Andrews randrews@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Franks franksnj@hr.house.gov Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen njeleven@hr.house.gov New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman senator_bingaman@bingaman.senate.gov Sen. Pete Domenici senator_domenici@domenici.senate.gov New York Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan senator@dpm.senate.gov=20 Sen. Alfonse D'Amato senator_al@damato.senate.gov Rep. Sherwood Boehlert boehlert@hr.house.gov Rep. Eliot Engel engeline@hr.house.gov Rep. Michael Forbes mpforbes@hr.house.gov Rep. Maurice Hinchey hinchey@hr.house.gov Rep. Amo Houghton houghton@hr.house.gov Rep. Sue Kelly dearsue@hr.house.gov Rep. Peter King peteking@hr.house.gov Rep. Rick Lazio lazio@hr.house.gov Rep. Nita Lowey nitamail@hr.house.gov Rep. Carolyn Maloney cmaloney@hr.house.gov Rep. Thomas Manton tmanton@hr.house.gov Rep. Michael McNulty mmcnulty@hr.house.gov Rep. Susan Molinari molinari@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerrold Nadler nadler@hr.house.gov Rep. Bill Paxon bpaxon@hr.house.gov Rep. Charles Rangel rangel@hr.house.gov Rep. Jose Serrano jserrano@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Walsh jwalsh@hr.house.gov North Carolina Sen Lauch Faircloth senator@faircloth.senate.gov=20 Sen. Jesse Helms jesse_helms@helms.senate.gov Rep. Cass Ballenger cassmail@hr.house.gov Rep. Richard Burr mail2nc5@hr.house.gov Rep. Sue Myrick myrick@hr.house.gov Rep. Charles Taylor chtaylor@hr.house.gov Rep. Mel Watt melmail@hr.house.gov North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad senator@conrad.senate.gov Sen. Byron Dorgan senator@dorgan.senate.gov=20 Rep. Earl Pomeroy epomeroy@hr.house.gov Ohio Sen. Mike DeWine senator_dewine@dewine.senate.gov=20 Rep. Sherrod Brown sherrod@hr.house.gov Rep. John Kasich budget@hr.house.gov Rep. Michael Oxley oxley@hr.house.gov Rep. Rob Portman portmail@hr.house.gov Rep. Deborah Pryce pryce15@hr.house.gov Rep. James Traficant telljim@hr.house.gov Oklahoma Sen. Don Nickles senator@nickles.senate.gov Rep. Ernest J. Istook, Jr. istook@hr.house.gov Oregon Sen.Ron Wyden senator@wyden.senate.gov Rep. Peter DeFazio pdefazio@hr.house.gov Rep. Elizabeth Furse furseor1@hr.house.gov Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum senator@santorum.senate.gov Sen Arlen Specter senator_specter@specter.senate.gov=20 Rep. Jon Fox jonfox@hr.house.gov Rep. Paul Kanjorski kanjo@hr.house.gov Rep. Paul McHale mchale@hr.house.gov Rep.John Murtha murtha@hr.house.gov Rep. Curt Weldon curtpa7@hr.house.gov Rhode Island Sen. John Chafee senator_chafee@chafee.senate.gov South Carolina Sen. Ernest Hollings senator@hollings.senate.gov Sen. Strom Thurmond senator@thurmond.senate.gov=20 Rep. James E. Clyburn jclyburn@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Inglis binglis@hr.house.gov Rep. Mark Sanford sanford@hr.house.gov Rep. John Spratt jspratt@hr.house.gov South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle tom_daschle@daschle.senate.gov Tennessee Sen. Bill Frist senator_frist@frist.senate.gov Sen Fred Thompson senator_thompson@thompson.senate.gov Rep. Bob Clement clement@hr.house.gov Rep. J.J. Duncan jjduncan@hr.house.gov Rep. Harold Ford hford@hr.house.gov Rep. Bart Gordon bart@hr.house.gov Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison senator@hutchison.senate.gov Rep. Joe Barton barton06@hr.house.gov Rep. Lloyd Doggett doggett@hr.house.gov Rep. Martin Frost frost@hr.house.gov Rep. Henry Gonzales bnkgdems@hr.house.gov Rep. Gene Green ggreen@hr.house.gov Rep. Sam Johnson samtx03@hr.house.gov Rep. Ron Paul rep.paul@mail.house.gov Utah Sen. Robert Bennett senator@bennett.senate.gov Sen. Orrin Hatch senator_hatch@hatch.senate.gov=20 Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords vermont@jeffords.senate.gov Sen. Patrick Leahy senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov=20 Rep. Bernie Sanders bsanders@igc.apc.org Virginia Sen. Charles Robb senator@robb.senate.gov Sen. John Warner senator@warner.senate.gov=20 Rep. Rick Boucher ninthnet@hr.house.gov Rep. Thomas Davis tomdavis@hr.house.gov Rep. Bob Goodlatte talk2bob@hr.house.gov Rep. Jim Moran repmoran@hr.house.gov Rep. Lewis Payne lfpayne@hr.house.gov Rep. Owen Pickett opickett@hr.house.gov Washington Sen. Slade Gorton senator_gorton@gorton.senate.gov=20 Sen. Patty Murray senator_murray@murray.senate.gov=20 Rep. Jennifer Dunn dunnwa08@mail.house.gov Rep. George Nethercutt grnwa05@hr.house.gov=20 Rep. Linda Smith asklinda@hr.house.gov Rep. Rick White repwhite@hr.house.gov West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd senator_byrd@byrd.senate.gov Sen. John Rockefeller III senator@rockefeller.senate.gov=20 Rep. Nick Rahall nrahall@hr.house.gov=20 Rep. Bob Wise bobwise@hr.house.gov Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold senator@feingold.senate.gov Sen. Herb Kohl senator_kohl@kohl.senate.gov=20 Rep. Thomas Barrett telltom@hr.house.gov Rep. Jerry Kleczka jerry4wi@hr.house.gov Rep. Scott Klug badger02@hr.house.gov Rep. Mark Neumann mneumann@hr.house.gov Rep. Tom Petri tompetri@hr.house.gov Rep. James Sensenbrenner sensen09@hr.house.gov Wyoming Sen. Craig Thomas craig@thomas.senate.gov Sen. Mike Enzi senator@enzi.senate.gov=20 Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming, Inc | 626-798-6574 | ---------------- | 1175 No. Altadena Drive | fax 398-8620 | jack@minerva.com | Pasadena, CA 91107 US | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Congressional E-mail addresses Date: 23 Sep 1997 12:45:01 -0700 Jack, [...] Congressional E-MAIL addresses [...] Thank, Jack! Been in need of that a bit. ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: Big Five ????????????? Date: 23 Sep 1997 15:30:56 -0500 (CDT) On 09/23/97 10:24:13 Brian Beck wrote: > >I tend to aggree. Seems like we may only succeed in alienating Big5, and not having any impact on the times. We already have enough enemies. I cannot recall exactly your approach, but if the letters are written in a positive tone, perhaps it would not be such a bad thing. I would not threaten a boycott; at least at first. > >Pickett lines at Robinson and Macys would be the most effective in my mind, but this takes REAL work and commitment. BB My response: 1) I do not think we will "alienate" Big 5 if we write _polite_ letters in which we advise it we will shop elsewhere if it continues to advertise in anti-self-defense newspapers, such as the LA Times. I doubt it will immediately stop advertising with such newspapers; however, Big 5 quite likely would discuss the problem with the Times if it gets enough customer complaints. _That is the point of the campaign!!!_ 2) Big 5 does not love us for our cause; it loves us for our money. The only thing which will "alienate" Big 5 would be if we, in fact, shopped elsewhere. And before we take such action, we are giving Big 5 a chance to correct its behavior. 3) Frankly, even if we did "alienate" Big 5, who cares? I would not lose any sleep over it. It's not like Big 5 has done anything to help us. I am not aware of Big 5 having spent even a single dollar supporting our civil rights. I suppose Big 5 could stop selling guns and ammo to us at good prices, which is highly unlikely (see item #2, above). And even if they did, I would gladly pay a little more to a dealer such as Turner's or Martin B. Retting which actively supports our RKBA. 4) Remember, the idea is not necessarily to get Big 5 to advertise in other newspapers. Obviously, Big 5 has few advertising alternatives to the LA Times, SF Chronicle and other such rags. The idea is to concentrate enough customer complaints on Big 5 so as to force it to complain to the Times, Chronicle, etc., about editorial policies which are hurting Big 5's business. 5) I don't think picketing has a realistic chance of doing anything. First, we would need a lot of people to show up at five or six Macy's or Big 5s or Robsinson's, over several weeks or months. We cannot even get a lot of people to show up to a Member's Council meeting. (Let's face it: it's a lot easier to get people to write a letter or make a call) Second, I would not count on anything but negative press coverage. In fact, it would be the perfect opportunity for the media to ridicule us as a "small group of gun fanatics and malcontents displeased with the Times's eminently reasonable gun control proposals...." 6) We are not proposing a boycott. Boycotts are guaranteed to fail unless they have 100,000s of supporters, which we don't. All we're suggesting is a simple letter-writing and telephone call campaign. >------------------------------ >Date: 9/23/97 9:28 AM >From: Jim Cammarano > >Dear Folks --------- > >I have to say that I DISAGREE with the proposed action outlined below. The >Big Five folks cannot possibly advertise with Pro-Gun newspapers because >there simply aren't enough around. The only newspaper I know of that leans >toward us is the Orange County Register. My response: See items 1-6, above. >If we want to "pay back" the anti-gun politicians we should get them out of >office period. The media bias toward gun control is strong. If they are >publicly held companies we should buy stock in them, become the majority >stockholders and replace their board of directors. If they are private >companies we should buy them out. My response: I am reminded of Steve Martin's famous routine about how to become a multi-millionaire: "First, you take a million dollars, then you invest it wisely...." I agree, we "should" get the anti-gun politicians out of office. But, in case anyone hasn't noticed, we just got our butts kicked in Sacramento. The anti-gun politicians are in office, and there's no sign they're leaving anytime soon. Let's get real, here. We're not winning and I doubt we have the votes to "get them out of office." We've got to deal with the problem in front of us. And unless Ted Turner decides to siphon a little of the UN's money to us, there is not a snowball's chance that anyone on this list has the financial wherewithal to become a "majority stockeholder" or buy out Big 5. It just ain't gonna happen. Further, why spend millions of dollars (even if we had it) if we could achieve the same result for the cost of a postage stamp and the time it takes to make a telephone call and write a letter? >I wish that I could cancel my subscription to the Soviet Union Tribune, I >mean the San Diego Union Tribune but then I wouldn't know what anti-gun >activities they were engaging in. >Jim Don't kid yourself, you can quit. I cancelled my subscription to the LA Times 2 1/2 years ago. I haven't looked back since, and I don't miss a thing. I get my news quicker and more accurately via the Internet, and I don't have some socialist editor deciding which "news" stories I should read about. I know what our enemies are up to, what they think and how they think, anyway. I read their literature, I go to their meetings and I snoop around their web sites. I don't need to read the Pravda to figure this out. Besides, I cannot in good conscience pay money to any newspaper which is actively trying to deprive me of my constitutionally guaranteed rights. Again, I implore _everyone_ to write Big 5 and complain about the fact it is advertising in the LA Times, SF Chronicle, and other anti-freedom newspapers. Write Big 5 at: Mr. Steve Miller, President United Merchandising Corp. Big 5 Sporting Goods P.O. Box 92088 Los Angeles, CA 90009 Or telephone him at: (310) 536-0611 For monitoring purposes, please also send us an e-mail at cyrano@ix.netcom.com once you send your letter. Thanks again. Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: Big Five ????????????? Date: 23 Sep 1997 18:53:50 -0400 At 03:30 PM 9/23/97 -0500, cyrano@ix.netcom.com wrote: >On 09/23/97 10:24:13 Brian Beck wrote: >> snip > > And unless Ted Turner decides to siphon a little of the UN's money to >us, there is not a snowball's chance that anyone on this list has the >financial wherewithal to become a "majority stockeholder" or buy out Big 5. >It just ain't gonna happen. > more snippage Each of us wouldn't have a chance at this, but how about if we formed a coalition for the purpose of buying stock with the dividends going back into purchasing more stock? Each of the members would donate a small sum each month to purchase stock in one company(like NBC for instance), and the coalition would continue until it becomes a majority stockholder. A hostile takeover by bits and pieces. Then once majority position is established, move on to another target, while dramatically overhauling the former. This is the only way we would stand a chance to become majority stockholders in any major company. Sure it'll take time, but with the addition of the dividends going back into more stock that time would be reduced. Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack@minerva.com Subject: very interesting link on protecting right to encryption Date: 23 Sep 1997 17:03:21 PDT Orlin has a very interesting link on his www page www.aci.net/kalliste if one clicks on the place that asks you to find out how your representative voted on safe you get a world of information and a look at how activist politics perhaps should be run. Since this is just a link on his page it is worth investigating independent of one's thoughts about Orlin The link in question is the 2nd thing on his www page.....at least as of a few minutes and follows this delightful thing from the telgraph Welcome to the Home Page of J. Orlin Grabbe . . . inspecting the global underbelly: privacy, money laundering, espionage. Maybe They Could Just Give It to Sollog, to Help with His Important Predictions THE income from a cash legacy left to Jesus Christ in the event of a Second Coming is henceforth to be rendered unto the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ernest Digweed, a religious recluse, died 21 years ago surrounded by crucifixes in a tent in his living room. His will stipulated that his estate should be invested for 80 years after his death. It reads: "If, during those 80 years, the Lord Jesus Christ shall come to reign on Earth then the Public Trustee, upon obtaining proof which shall satisfy him of His identity, shall pay to the Lord Jesus Christ all the property which he holds on behalf of my estate. "The Public Trustee shall allow the income from my investments to accumulate for a term of 21 years and shall periodically invest these accumulations. After that he shall pay the income from these accumulations to the Crown." It concludes: "If at the expiration of the said 80 years the Lord Jesus Christ has not come, then the Public Trustee shall pay to the Crown all the property which he holds on behalf of my estate." Mr Digweed, a former teacher from Portsmouth, Hants, died aged 81 on September 20, 1976 leaving a gross estate of £26,406. His now celebrated will has become something of a headache for its executors, the Public Trust Office. Three volumes of files, each six inches thick, contain the details of hundreds of claims to the bequest, including one from an American door-to-door salesman. >>>>>>>>>>>He claimed that he was entitled to the money on the basis that whenever he knocked on a door, he was greeted with the response: "Jesus Christ, not you again!" In the early Eighties, Mr Digweed's distant relatives challenged his will and were awarded a substantial portion of his estate. The remainder is thought to amount to a few thousand pounds. Julia Lomas, the Public Trustee, said: "Clearly Mr Digweed, in making his will, was very serious. I would also say that most of those who actually make a claim are acting genuinely." A Treasury spokesman said yesterday that the bequest would be accepted and added to public funds. He said: "I can't comment as to what the Lord may have wanted - but it seems this is what the testator wanted." Electronic Telegraph, September 23, 1997 >>>>>>>>>>> right below is the desired link What does your Congressional representative think about email privacy? search by zipcode Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming, Inc | 626-798-6574 | ---------------- | 1175 No. Altadena Drive | fax 398-8620 | jack@minerva.com | Pasadena, CA 91107 US | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: Big Five ????????????? Date: 23 Sep 1997 19:23:29 -0500 (CDT) On 09/23/97 18:53:50 you wrote: > >At 03:30 PM 9/23/97 -0500, cyrano@ix.netcom.com wrote: >>On 09/23/97 10:24:13 Brian Beck wrote: >>> >snip >> >> And unless Ted Turner decides to siphon a little of the UN's money to >>us, there is not a snowball's chance that anyone on this list has the >>financial wherewithal to become a "majority stockeholder" or buy out Big 5. >>It just ain't gonna happen. >> >more snippage > >Each of us wouldn't have a chance at this, but how about if we formed a >coalition for the purpose of buying stock with the dividends going back >into purchasing more stock? Each of the members would donate a small sum >each month to purchase stock in one company(like NBC for instance), and the >coalition would continue until it becomes a majority stockholder. A hostile >takeover by bits and pieces. Then once majority position is established, >move on to another target, while dramatically overhauling the former. This >is the only way we would stand a chance to become majority stockholders in >any major company. Sure it'll take time, but with the addition of the >dividends going back into more stock that time would be reduced. > >Tom > That's all well and good. My only request is, during the time we are trying to buy a controlling interest in NBC (or whatever other media outlet), would everyone please be kind enough to send at least one letter to Big 5 asking it not to advertise in anti-gun newspapers. It will only cost 32 cents and take about 20 minutes, which will be a lot cheaper--and easier- -than taking over NBC. Thanks again, Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: Big Five ????????????? Date: 23 Sep 1997 19:23:29 -0500 (CDT) On 09/23/97 18:53:50 you wrote: > >At 03:30 PM 9/23/97 -0500, cyrano@ix.netcom.com wrote: >>On 09/23/97 10:24:13 Brian Beck wrote: >>> >snip >> >> And unless Ted Turner decides to siphon a little of the UN's money to >>us, there is not a snowball's chance that anyone on this list has the >>financial wherewithal to become a "majority stockeholder" or buy out Big 5. >>It just ain't gonna happen. >> >more snippage > >Each of us wouldn't have a chance at this, but how about if we formed a >coalition for the purpose of buying stock with the dividends going back >into purchasing more stock? Each of the members would donate a small sum >each month to purchase stock in one company(like NBC for instance), and the >coalition would continue until it becomes a majority stockholder. A hostile >takeover by bits and pieces. Then once majority position is established, >move on to another target, while dramatically overhauling the former. This >is the only way we would stand a chance to become majority stockholders in >any major company. Sure it'll take time, but with the addition of the >dividends going back into more stock that time would be reduced. > >Tom > That's all well and good. My only request is, during the time we are trying to buy a controlling interest in NBC (or whatever other media outlet), would everyone please be kind enough to send at least one letter to Big 5 asking it not to advertise in anti-gun newspapers. It will only cost 32 cents and take about 20 minutes, which will be a lot cheaper--and easier- -than taking over NBC. Thanks again, Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: RE: Big Five ????????????? Date: 23 Sep 1997 19:38:50 -0500 (CDT) On 09/23/97 15:57:14 you wrote: > > >If I understand the discussion so far... > >A non-pro-active sporting goods store is paying money to put firearms >advertisements in anti-gun newspapers. Gun ads in anti-gun newspapers sound like a good thing to me... don't they to you? > >I would think it would be anti-gunners that would upset that apple cart... >pro-active or not, the sporting goods store stirs the pot with every ad. I >would expect that antis occasionally or constantly petition the newspaper to stop the advertising, and a riff could open in the anti-community... the >unreasonableness of the anti philosophy vs. the reasonable expectation of the newspaper that they sell advertising to make a buck. As a minimum, it has to rub some of them raw. > >If you haven't noticed :-), I like the fact that an anti-gun newspaper prints gun ads... sort of makes all the antis scare-tactic cries ring hollow. Page one might be describing how we need a new gun ban, but on page 23B they're selling guns. > >I for one don't understand rkba-supporters wanting to remove the ads. It >seems reactionary to me... throwing the baby out with the bath water, so to >speak. > >Just my .002 of an inch... > >Mike Haas Mike: I think you are missing my point. The idea is not to punish the newspapers for running Big 5 ads. The idea is to get Big 5, which spends mucho ad bucks on the Left Angeles Times, SF Comical, Examiner, SJ Mercury-News, Sac. Bee, etc., to complain to those newspapers that their anti-self-defense and anti-Second Amendment editorializing and news slant is hurting Big 5's business and leading to many (hopefully thousands) of customer complaints. In essence, the idea is to try to pressure the newspapers to back off of their anti-gun editorializing, not to make Big 5 stop advertising. With all due respect, I doubt these newspapers get much, if any, flack about running Big 5 ads, anyway. After all, the ads feature all kinds of sporting goods, and only a portion is devoted to firearms and ammo. I understand you like the idea of anti-gun papers running gun ads. I look at it differently: I ask, what the heck is a gun dealer doing paying good money to advertise in an anti-gun paper? So again, I implore everyone receiving this e-mail, to please write Big 5 and lodge a complaint about where it places its print ads. Write Big 5 at: Mr. Steve Miller, President United Merchandising Corp. Big 5 Sporting Goods P.O. Box 92088 Los Angeles, CA 90009 Or telephone him at: (310) 536-0611 Thank you, Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fw: Designing Effective Action Alerts for the Internet Date: 24 Sep 1997 07:25:04 -0400 >Date: Tue, 23 Sep 97 19:48:20 PDT >From: Jon Roland >Subject: Fw: Designing Effective Action Alerts for the Internet >Apparently-To: > >From: Phil Agre >Subject: Designing Effective Action Alerts for the Internet >URL: http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/rre.html > > >Designing Effective Action Alerts for the Internet > >Phil Agre >Department of Communication >University of California, San Diego >La Jolla, California 92093-0503 >USA > >pagre@ucsd.edu >http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/ > >Version of 17 September 1997. Copyright =A9 1997, all rights reserved. You >are welcome to forward this article in electronic form to anyone for any >non-commercial purpose. > > >An action alert is a message that someone sends out to the net asking >for a specific action to be taken on a current political issue. >Well-designed action alerts are a powerful way to invite people to >participate in the processes of a democracy. Having seen many action >alerts in my twenty years on the Internet, I have tried to abstract some >guidelines for people who wish to use them. Even if you do not plan to >construct any action alerts yourself, I do not recommend that you >forward anybody else's alerts unless they conform to at least the spirit >of these guidelines. If I sometimes seem stern or didactic in my >prescriptions, please forgive me. It's just that I've seen badly >designed action alerts do an awful lot of damage. > >Although an Internet action alert should always be part of an issue >campaign with a coherent strategy and clear goals, I won't discuss the >larger strategic questions here. Instead, I will simply divide action >alerts into two categories, single messages and structured campaigns. >Single alerts are broadcast in the hope that they will propagate to the >maximum possible number of sympathetic Internet users. Structured >campaigns are typically conducted through mailing lists specially >constructed for the purpose, and their intended audience may include >either the whole Internet universe or a narrower group of already- >mobilized partisans. > >Both types of action alerts are obviously modeled on things that have >been happening on paper, through telephone trees, and lately via fax >machines, for a long time. What computer networks do is make them a lot >cheaper. A networked alert can travel far from its origin by being >forwarded from friend to friend and list to list, without any additional >cost being imposed on the original sender. This phenomenon of >chain-forwarding is important, and it behooves the would-be author of an >action alert, whether a single message or a whole campaign, to think >through its consequences: > >(1) Establish authenticity. Bogus action alerts -- such as the notorious >"modem tax" alert -- travel just as fast as real ones. Don't give alerts >a bad name. Include clear information about the sponsoring organization >and provide the reader with several ways of tracing back to you -- >e-mail address, postal address, URL, phone number, etc. Including this >contact information makes sense anyway -- you want people to join your >movement, and this means establishing contact with you. One way to >establish authenticity is by appending a digital signature, presumably >using PGP. Few people will check the signature, though, and many people >will remove the signature when they forward your message to others. So >there's no substitute for clearly explaining who you are and giving >people a way to reach you. > >(2) Put a date on it. Paper mail and faxes get thrown away quickly, but >action alerts can travel through the Internet forever. Even if an alert >seems to have faded away, it can sleep in someone's mailbox for months >or years and then suddenly get a new life as the mailbox's owner >forwards it to a new set of lists. Do not count on the message header to >convey the date (or anything else); people who forward Internet messages >frequently strip off the header. Even better, give your recommended >action a clearly stated time-out date, e.g., "Take this action until >February 17, 1998". If you think there will be follow-up actions, or if >you want to convey that this is part of an ongoing campaign, say so. >That way, people will contact you or look out for your next alert. > >(3) Include clear beginning and ending markers. You can't prevent people >from modifying your alert as they pass it along. Fortunately, at least >in my experience, this only happens accidentally, as extra commentary >accumulates at the top and bottom of the message as it gets forwarded. >So put a bold row of dashes or something similar at the top and bottom >so extra stuff will look extra. That way it will be very clear what you >and your credibility are standing behind. > >(4) Beware of second-hand alerts. Although it is uncommon for someone to >modify the text of your alert, sometimes people will foolishly send out >their own paraphrase of an alert, perhaps based on something they heard >verbally. These second-hand alerts usually contain exaggerations and >other factual inaccuracies, and as a result they can easily be used to >discredit your alert. If you become aware of inaccurate variants of your >alert, you should immediately notify relevant mailing lists of the >existence of these second-hand alerts. Explain clearly what the facts >are and aren't, implore the community not to propagate the misleading >variants, and provide pointers to accurate information including a copy >of your own alert. This action has two virtues: first, it may help to >suppress the mistaken reports; and second, it positions you (accurately, >I hope) as a responsible person who cares about the truth. > >(5) Think about whether you want the alert to propagate at all. If your >alerts concern highly sensitive matters, for example the status of >specifically named political prisoners, then you will probably want to >know precisely who is getting your notices, and how, and in what >context. If so, include a prominent notice forbidding the alert's >recipients from forwarding it. > >(6) Make it self-contained. Don't presuppose that your readers will have >any context beyond what they'll get on the news. Your alert will >probably be read by people who have never heard of you or your cause. So >define your terms, avoid references to previous messages on your mailing >list, and provide lots of background, or at least some simple >instructions for getting useful background materials. In fact, you might >consider making the e-mailed alert relatively short and include the URL >for a Web page that provides the full details. Your most important >audience consists of people who are sympathetic to your cause and want >to learn more about it before they can take action. Write your alert >with that type of reader in mind, not the complete insider or the >apathetic stranger. > >(7) Ask your reader to take a simple, clearly defined, rationally chosen >action. For example, you might ask people to call their representatives >and express a certain view on an issue. In this case, you should provide >a way to find that representative's name and number, and explain how to >conduct the conversation: what to say, how to answer certain likely >questions, and so on. The purpose of such a script is not to impose your >thinking but to help people to learn a skill that might otherwise be >intimidating. Decide whether to ask for e-mail messages (which can be >huge in number but near-zero in effect), written letters (which will be >fewer but more effective), or phone calls (which fall in between). >Consider other options as well: perhaps the sole purpose of your alert >is to solicit contacts from a small number of committed activists, or to >gather information, or to start a mailing list to organize further >actions. > >(8) Make it easy to understand. It is absolutely crucial to begin with a >good, clear headline that summarizes the issue and the recommended >action. Use plain language, not jargon. Check your spelling. Use short >sentences and simple grammar. Choose words that will be understood >worldwide, not just in your own country or culture. Solicit comments on >a draft before sending it out. > >(9) Get your facts straight! Your message will circle the earth, so >double-check. Errors can be disastrous. Even a small mistake can make it >easy for your opponents to dismiss your alerts -- and Internet alerts in >general -- as "rumors". Once you do discover a mistake, it will be >impossible to issue a correction -- the correction will probably not get >forwarded everyplace that the original message did. > >(10) Start a movement, not a panic. Include a phrase like "post where >appropriate" toward the beginning so that people aren't encouraged to >send your alert to mailing lists where it doesn't belong. Do not say >"forward this to everyone you know". Do not overstate. Do not plead. Do >not say "Please Act NOW!!!". Do not rant about the urgency of telling >everyone in the world about your issue. You're not trying to address >"everyone"; you're trying to address a targeted group of people who care >about the issue. And if the issue really is time-critical then just >explain why, in sober language. Do not get obsessed with the immediate >situation at hand. Your message may help avoid some short-term calamity, >but it should also contribute to a much longer-term process of building >a social movement. Maintaining a sense of that larger context will help >you and your readers from becoming dispirited in the event that you lose >the immediate battle. > >(11) Tell the whole story. Most people have never heard of your issue, >and they need facts to evaluate it. Facts, facts, facts. For example, if >you think that someone has been unjustly convicted of a crime, don't >just give one or two facts to support that view; most people will simply >assume they are getting half the truth. If your opponents have >circulated their own arguments, you'll need to rebut them, and if they >have framed the facts in a misleading way then you'll need to explain >why. On the other hand, you need to write concisely. Even if you're >focused on the actions, good explanations count more. After all, one of >the benefits of your action alert -- maybe the principal one -- is that >it informs people about the issue. Even if they don't act today, your >readers will be more aware of the issue in the future, provided that you >don't insult their intelligence today. > >(12) Don't just preach to the converted. When you are very caught up in >your cause, it is easy to send out a message in the language you use >when discussing the issue with your fellow campaigners. Often this >language is a shorthand that doesn't really explain anything to an >outsider. If you really care about your issue, you'll take the time to >find language that is suitable for a much broader audience. This can >take practice. > >(13) Avoid polemics. Your readers should not have to feel they are being >hectored to go along with something from the pure righteousness of it. >Some people seem to associate non-polemical language with deference, as >if they were being made to bow at the feet of the king. This is not so. >You will not succeed unless you assume that your readers are reasonable >people who are willing to act if they are provided with good reasons. > >(14) Make it easy to read. Use a simple, clear layout with lots of white >space. Break up long paragraphs and use bullets and section headings to >avoid visual monotony. If your organization plans to send out action >alerts regularly, use a distinctive design so that everyone can >recognize your "brand name" instantly. Use only plain ASCII characters, >which are the common denominator among Internet character sets. Just to >make sure, do not use a MIME-compliant mail program to send the message; >use a minimal program such as Berkeley mail. MIME is great, but not >everybody uses it and you don't want your recipients getting distracted >from your message by weird control codes. Format the message in 72 >columns or even fewer; otherwise it is likely to get wrapped around or >otherwise mutilated as people forward it around the net. > >(15) DO NOT use a chain-letter petition. A chain-letter petition is an >action alert that includes a list of names at the end, inviting people >to add their own name, send in the petition if their name is the 30th or >60th or etc, and in any case forward the resulting alert-plus-signature- >list to everyone they know. This idea sounds great on the surface, but >it really doesn't work. The problem is that most of the signatures will >never reach their destination, since the chain will fizzle out before >reaching the next multiple of 30 (or whatever) in length. What's even >worse, a small proportion of the signatures will be received in the >legislator's office many times, thus annoying the staff and persuading >them that they're dealing with an incompetent movement that can never >hold them accountable. > >(16) Urge people to inform you of their actions. If you are calling on >people to telephone a legislator's office, for example, you should >provide an e-mail address and invite them to send you a brief message. >Explain that you'll use these messages to count the number of callers >your alert has generated, and that this information will be invaluable >when you speak with the legislator's staffers later on. > >(17) Don't overdo it. Action alerts might become as unwelcome as direct- >mail advertising. Postpone that day by picking your fights and including >some useful, thought-provoking information in your alert message. If >you're running a sustained campaign, set up your own list. Then send out >a single message that calls for some action and include an advertisement >for your new list. If you must send out multiple alerts on the same >issue, make sure each one is easily distinguishable from the others and >provides fresh, useful information. > >(18) Do a post-mortem. When the campaign is over, try to derive some >lessons for others to use. Even if you're burned out, take a minute >right away while the experience is still fresh in mind. What problems >did you have? What mistakes did you make? What unexpected connections >did you make? Who did you reach and why? Which mailing lists was your >alert forwarded to, and which of these forwardings actually caused >people to take action? Good guesses are useful too. > >(19) Don't mistake e-mail for organizing. An action alert is not an >organization. If you want to build a lasting political movement, at some >point you'll have to gather people together. The Internet is a useful >tool for organizing, but it's just one tool and one medium among many >that you will need, and you should evaluate it largely in terms of its >contribution to larger organizing goals. Do the people you reach through >Internet alerts move up into more active positions in your movement? Do >you draw them into conferences, talk to them by phone, meet them in >person, become accountable to them to provide specific information and >answer questions? If not, why do you keep reaching out to them? > >(20) Encourage good practices. The Internet is a democratic medium that >provides us all with the time and space to do the right thing. So let's >use the Internet in a positive way and encourage others to do the same. >You can help by passing these guidelines along to others who might >benefit from them (including people who have sent out badly designed >alerts), and refrain from propagating alerts that do not conform to >them. Remember, forwarding a badly designed action alert actually harms >the cause that it is supposed to support. Modeling thoughtful, >constructive action on the Internet, however, provides everyone with a >living example of democracy in action. > >Acknowledgements. I appreciate the comments and suggestions of Steven >Cherry, Nathan Newman, Steven Snedker, and Larry Yates. > >[This is an updated version of an article from the January 1994 issue of >The Network Observer, http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/tno.html] > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825 >916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM Date: 09/23/97 Time: 19:48:21 >http://www.constitution.org/ mailto:jon.roland@the-spa.com >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: [RightNow] Wash. Times (9/22/97): Convicted juror fights to reverse judge's fine (fwd) Date: 24 Sep 1997 09:14:03 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 03:01:20 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: RightNow@MailList.Net THE WASHINGTON TIMES September 22, 1997 Convicted juror fights to reverse judge's fine Woman didn't disclose arrest for LSD By Valerie Richardson Feedback: letter@twtmail.com DENVER-- Living among the hippies and ski bums who inhabit the tiny mountain town of Nederland, Colo., is the young hemp activist who has the nation's legal community in an uproar. Her name is Laura Kriho, and she's a 33-year-old research assistant who was called two years ago for jury duty in a drug-possession case in Gilpin County, Colo. During jury selection, she said nothing about her support for legalizing industrial hemp or her arrest at 21 for possession of LSD. Once jury deliberations began, she refused to vote to convict the defendant, instead trying to convert fellow jurors to her position by discussing the criminal penalties involved and the rights of jurors to nullify the law. When word reached the judge, he declared a mistrial. Two months later, he took the highly unusual step of charging Mrs. Kriho with criminal contempt of court. She was convicted in March and fined $1200. Her case is believed to be the first in which a juror has been so charged since a jury refused to convict William Penn for preaching to an unlawful religious assembly. That was in 1670, and in his case, the appeals court sided with the jury, thus establishing the right of jurors to weigh the law along with the facts of the case. Her critics, who include judges, prosecutors and prominent lawyers, have blasted her as a rabble-rouser who deceived the court in order to insert her pro-drug views into the judicial process. The prosecutor, James Stanley, said at the time of her conviction that she "played games" to "further her personal agenda." "This woman would like to make herself out to be a martyr, but what she did and failed to do was really not commendable," said Miles Cortez, a past president of the Colorado Bar Association. But her supporters in the jury nullification movement see her as no less than a constitutional heroine, someone with the courage to defy the court by upholding the jury's historical role as a check on government tyranny. What exactly she is will now be decided by another round of judges. Her attorney, Paul Grant of Parker, Colo., filed a brief yesterday with the state Court of Appeals, but says he may ultimately leapfrog that body and instead bring the case directly to the Colorado Supreme Court. If she loses, that would clear the path for an appeal to the Supreme Court, where Mr. Grant believes the issue ideally should be decided. "It's unprecedented, prosecuting a juror. It's just out of control," said Mr. Grant. "There's too much control by the court and prosecution, and it threatens to destroy the purpose of having jury trials." "The jury is a check on the government's power, and it's not surprising the government resents it," he said. Her conviction has lent legitimacy to the small but resurgent jury-nullification movement which is based on the principle that jurors should decide whether the law is just or unjust instead of confining themselves to the facts of the case. Not surprisingly, groups such as the Fully Informed Jury Association have made her their "poster child," she says, while helping raise money for her defense. Even those uncomfortable with jury nullification say her case has raised crucial questions about how far the court may go to sanitize a jury of any preconceived opinion or bias. Her supporters note that defendants are supposed to be tried by juries of their peers, and in places like Gilpin County, their peers are bound to include those in favor of some form of drug legalization. "Sure, Kriho has been an active hempie -- a strange but not uncommon breed in our mountains," said the Rocky Mountain News in a Feb. 15 editorial. "But it's not the business of the court to ascertain juries' political philosophies. When you command their appearance, you should take what you get and be grateful for it." Critics say the crux of the debate centers on her conduct during the jury-selection process, not in the jury room. The case dealt with a 19-year-old woman accused of felony possession of methamphetamine, and Mrs. Kriho was one of the last in a long procession of prospective jurors to undergo questioning. While waiting in the gallery, she heard prosecutors ask prospective jurors whether they had ever been arrested. But when it came to her turn, she was asked instead, "You listened to all of our topics; would you have answered anything differently?" She replied "No." Mrs. Kriho was picked for the jury, something that prosecutors say never would have happened if she had brought up her 1985 arrest for possession of LSD. But Mrs Kriho notes that she received a deferred judgment, and that the charge was supposed to have been erased from her record after two years of probation. In addition, she argues, prospective jurors were asked about 350 questions that day. Her crime was failing to do the prosecutors' job by volunteering information her attorney said. "They were trying to compel jurors to volunteer information not connected to the trial," said Mr. Grant. "She's being punished for not answering questions they didn't ask. Well, jurors aren't going to do that --they're intimidated as hell." But in his ruling against her, First Judicial Chief Judge Henry Nieto insisted her crime lay in misleading the court by refusing to reveal her past involvement with drugs, not her advocacy for nullification in the jury room. "It is one thing to laud the efforts of a jury fairly picked and honestly chosen to decide a case in conformity with their conscience" he wrote in his decision. "It is quite another thing for a juror to deliberately mislead the court in an effort to obstruct the administration, of justice." For her part, Mrs. Kriho doesn't buy it. "If we'd come back with a guilty verdict," she says, "none of, this would have happened." ### Washington Times 3600 New York Ave., NE Washington, D.C. 20002 Phone: (202) 636-3000 Fax: (202) 269-3419 Web: http://www.washtimes.com Feedback: letter@twtmail.com Re-distributed by the: Jury Rights Project (jrights@welcomehome.org) Background info.: http://www.fija.org To be added to or removed from the JRP mailing list, send email with the word SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE in the title. Note: The JRP is using this new email account for email for the time being. It will either be a temporary or permanent change. We will let you know. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= To unsubscribe from this mailing list, DISREGARD ANY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE and go to the Web page at http://www.maillist.net/rightnow.html. New subscriptions can also be entered at this page. If you cannot access the World Wide Web, send an e-mail message to RightNow-Request@MailList.Net and on the SUBJECT LINE put the single word: unsubscribe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Documents show DNC-Teamsters traded money Date: 24 Sep 1997 14:01:21 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Thompson has announced he will reconvene his committee to look into these allegatiosn. Sullivan, Hartigan and McAuliffe oughtn't go near FMP. - --- Jim http://www.washtimes.com Clinton-Gore campaign implicated in union's money-laundering scheme By Jerry Seper and Bill Sammon THE WASHINGTON TIMES he Clinton-Gore Re-Election Committee and the Democratic National Committee conspired with Teamsters officials to divert, hide and swap illegal contributions during union boss Ron Carey's 1996 re-election campaign, court records show. =2E . . . Democrats even asked a foreigner to make a $100,000 donation to t= he Carey campaign, which refused the illegal contribution. =2E . . . It was an attempt to compensate the Teamsters for $236,500 the un= ion gave weeks earlier to state Democratic parties, according to documents file= d in U.S. District Court in New York. =2E . . . Although the laundering of union funds to the Carey campaign was exposed last month by a federal election officer, her ruling did not implic= ate the Clinton-Gore campaign or the DNC. =2E . . . In contrast, documents filed last week by federal prosecutors leave little doubt that Democrats exploite= d the money-laundering arrangement to secure hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations. =2E . . . The records were filed by prosecutors in plea agreements with thr= ee Carey aides -- Martin Davis, Jere Nash and Michael Ansara --who last week admitted their guilt on felony charges of diverting funds through various political groups to the Teamsters. -- Continued from Front Page -- =2E . . . Eager to make as much as a fivefold return on donations they promised to steer to Mr. Carey, officials from the Clinton-Gore campaign and the DNC repeatedly discussed the money-laundering scheme with Davis, Mr. Carey's campaign consultant, over three months last year, the records show. =2E . . . Even after it became clear Democrats were having trouble living u= p to their end of the bargain, prosecutors said, they returned to the union mone= y trough again and again, seeking donations larger than they would have expected if they had not agreed to line up donors for Mr. Carey. =2E . . . For example, less than two months after receiving nearly a quarter-million dollars in donations from the Teamsters, the DNC asked for another $1 million in August 1996. Before that request could be granted, another was made. =2E . . . "In early October 1996, a Clinton-Gore official asked if I would attempt to raise $500,000 from the Teamsters for an entity that was a joint fund-raising effort of the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee," Davis told a federal judge last week. =2E . . . "It was understood between us that he and others would try to ide= ntify a person who would contribute a hundred thousand dollars to the Carey campaign," he said. =2E . . . Although Davis did not say who asked for the money, the Clinton-Gore campaign's top fund-raiser was Terence McAuliffe. His attorney, Richard Ben-Veniste, said that his client is not a target of the federal probe and that Mr. McAuliffe is "cooperating fully" in the investigation. =2E . . . Lawyers and others close to the federal probe said Davis told Lau= ra Hartigan, who worked for Mr. McAuliffe, about the plan to swap contributions last year. She is said to have ghost-written the DNC request for $1 million in union funds in August 1996. =2E . . . That memo bore the name of Richard Sullivan, the DNC's finance director, who knew about the plan. Miss Hartigan also wrote a memo to Davis two months earlier, seeking union donations for state Democratic parties. =2E . . . "Laura Hartigan never conspired with anybody at any time to viola= te any laws," said her attorney, Jeffrey Stone. "She has cooperated fully with the U.S. Attorney's Office." =2E . . . Mr. Carey said he was unaware of any illegal fund-raising schemes= in the 1996 election. He told reporters he was the "victim" of trusted subordinates. He also has said he is cooperating in the probe. . =2E . . DNC spokesman Steve Langdon said any union plan to swap funds was not sanctioned by the Democratic Party. If it took place, he said, "it was done without authorization of the DNC leadership." . =2E . . It is not illegal for the Teamsters to make contributions to Democr= atic causes. In the spring of 1996, the 1.4-million-member union was planning to make routine donations to candidates considered pro-union. =2E . . . But Davis came to see these planned contributions "as a means to induce the DNC to raise money for the Carey campaign," U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White said in the court filings. He discussed the plan with officia= ls of the Clinton-Gore campaign and the DNC. =2E . . . "I told them that I wanted to raise more money from the Teamsters than they originally anticipated," Davis said in court. "I also asked them = if they could help Mr. Carey by having the DNC raise $100,000 for the Carey campaign. The people I was talking with agreed to try to find a contributor= =2E" =2E =2E . . Davis does not name his DNC or Clinton-Gore contacts in the court papers. But he met with Miss Hartigan and Mr. Sullivan for lunch at the Palm restaurant in Washington to discuss the plan. =2E . . . The $100,000 contributor, according to court records and other sources, was Judith Vasquez, a Filipina who runs a business in California. Miss Vasquez had sought to give $100,000 to the DNC last year but was barred from doing so by federal election law, which prohibits foreigners from contributing to U.S. political candidates. =2E . . . So a DNC official asked Miss Vasquez "to contribute instead to th= e Carey campaign," Miss White wrote. Campaign lawyers declined the gift because Miss Vasquez is an employer -- an off-limits source of funding under federal rules governing Teamsters elections. =2E . . . Although the grand jury probe began by targeting improprieties in= the Carey campaign, it has widened to include the Clinton-Gore campaign and the DNC. No one in the two organizations has been charged, but several officials have been questioned by the FBI and federal prosecutors. Click here for today's story on the resignation of the Teamsters' federal overseer, and here for details of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee's plans to pursue the Teamsters-DNC link mentioned above. - -------- jhofmann@erols.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This mailing list is for discussion of Clinton Administration Scandals. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com. In the message body put: unsubscribe cas e The Washington Times September 24, 1997=20 Clinton-Gore campaign implicated in union's money-laundering scheme By Jerry Seper and Bill Sammon The Clinton-Gore Re-Election Committee and the Democratic National Committee conspired with Teamsters officials to divert, hide and swap illegal contributions during union boss Ron Carey's 1996 re-election campaign, court records show.=20 =2E . . . Democrats even asked a foreigner to make a $100,000 donation to the Carey campaign, which refused the illegal contribution. =2E . . . It was an attempt to compensate the Teamsters for $236,500 the union gave weeks earlier to state Democratic parties, according to documents filed in U.S. District Court in New York. =2E . . . Although the laundering of union funds to the Carey campaign was exposed last month by a federal election officer, her ruling did not implicate the Clinton-Gore campaign or the DNC. =2E . . . In contrast, documents filed last week by federal prosecutors leave little doubt that Democrats exploited the money-laundering arrangement to secure hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations. =2E . . . The records were filed by prosecutors in plea agreements with three Carey aides -- Martin Davis, Jere Nash and Michael Ansara --who last week admitted their guilt on felony charges of diverting funds through various political groups to the Teamsters.=20 =2E . . . Eager to make as much as a fivefold return on donations they promised to steer to Mr. Carey, officials from the Clinton-Gore campaign and the DNC repeatedly discussed the money-laundering scheme with Davis, Mr. Carey's campaign consultant, over three months last year, the records show. =2E . . . Even after it became clear Democrats were having trouble living up to their end of the bargain, prosecutors said, they returned to the union money trough again and again, seeking donations larger than they would have expected if they had not agreed to line up donors for Mr. Carey. =2E . . . For example, less than two months after receiving nearly a quarter-million dollars in donations from the Teamsters, the DNC asked for another $1 million in August 1996. Before that request could be granted, another was made. =2E . . . "In early October 1996, a Clinton-Gore official asked if I would attempt to raise $500,000 from the Teamsters for an entity that was a joint fund-raising effort of the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee," Davis told a federal judge last week. =2E . . . "It was understood between us that he and others would try to identify a person who would contribute a hundred thousand dollars to the Carey campaign," he said. =2E . . . Although Davis did not say who asked for the money, the Clinton-Gore campaign's top fund-raiser was Terence McAuliffe. His attorney, Richard Ben-Veniste, said that his client is not a target of the federal probe and that Mr. McAuliffe is "cooperating fully" in the investigation. =2E . . . Lawyers and others close to the federal probe said Davis told Laura Hartigan, who worked for Mr. McAuliffe, about the plan to swap contributions last year. She is said to have ghost-written the DNC request for $1 million in union funds in August 1996. =2E . . . That memo bore the name of Richard Sullivan, the DNC's finance director, who knew about the plan. Miss Hartigan also wrote a memo to Davis two months earlier, seeking union donations for state Democratic parties. =2E . . . "Laura Hartigan never conspired with anybody at any time to violate any laws," said her attorney, Jeffrey Stone. "She has cooperated fully with the U.S. Attorney's Office." =2E . . . Mr. Carey said he was unaware of any illegal fund-raising schemes in the 1996 election. He told reporters he was the "victim" of trusted subordinates. He also has said he is cooperating in the probe. =2E . . . DNC spokesman Steve Langdon said any union plan to swap funds was not sanctioned by the Democratic Party. If it took place, he said, "it was done without authorization of the DNC leadership." =2E . . . It is not illegal for the Teamsters to make contributions to Democratic causes. In the spring of 1996, the 1.4-million-member union was planning to make routine donations to candidates considered pro-union. =2E . . . But Davis came to see these planned contributions "as a means to induce the DNC to raise money for the Carey campaign," U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White said in the court filings. He discussed the plan with officials of the Clinton-Gore campaign and the DNC. =2E . . . "I told them that I wanted to raise more money from the Teamsters than they originally anticipated," Davis said in court. "I also asked them if they could help Mr. Carey by having the DNC raise $100,000 for the Carey campaign. The people I was talking with agreed to try to find a contributor." =2E . . . Davis does not name his DNC or Clinton-Gore contacts in the court papers. But he met with Miss Hartigan and Mr. Sullivan for lunch at the Palm restaurant in Washington to discuss the plan. =2E . . . The $100,000 contributor, according to court records and other sources, was Judith Vasquez, a Filipina who runs a business in California. Miss Vasquez had sought to give $100,000 to the DNC last year but was barred from doing so by federal election law, which prohibits foreigners from contributing to U.S. political candidates. =2E . . . So a DNC official asked Miss Vasquez "to contribute instead to the Carey campaign," Miss White wrote. Campaign lawyers declined the gift because Miss Vasquez is an employer -- an off-limits source of funding under federal rules governing Teamsters elections. =2E . . . Although the grand jury probe began by targeting improprieties in the Carey campaign, it has widened to include the Clinton-Gore campaign and the DNC. No one in the two organizations has been charged, but several officials have been questioned by the FBI and federal prosecutors. Copyright =A9 1997 News World Communications, Inc. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack@minerva.com Subject: Global Economy Date: 25 Sep 1997 05:11:24 PDT The current issue of the ECONOMIST has a very long article on the Global Economy .......24 pages actually. I do not support much of what it says but think it ought to be read for the talking points it contains. Early on it points out that the current ethic discourages economic freedom but encourages political freedom: That is one can not use his property as he wishes (economic freedom) but is free to rant about not being able to use his property (political freedom) This issue has a big hand with lots of managers pointing at you on the cover Jack Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming, Inc | 626-798-6574 | ---------------- | 1175 No. Altadena Drive | fax 398-8620 | jack@minerva.com | Pasadena, CA 91107 US | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: L&J: An Open Letter to Senator Roth (fwd) Date: 25 Sep 1997 07:17:24 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Reply-To: liberty-and-justice@pobox.com September 24, 1997 Senator William V. Roth, Jr. Chairman, Committee on Finance United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Roth: Just two short years ago, I would have been delighted to learn of your Committee's inquiry into IRS abuses but now, after intensive research into the legal authority, history and origins of the Internal Revenue Service, my enthusiasm is more than a little diminished for reasons explained below. It is a well-established rule of law that a duly constituted office of the federal government must be either created by the Constitution itself or established by some Congressional Act. Under this rule, the Internal Revenue Services is not a duly constituted office of the federal government. Although the Internal Revenue Service has published internal documents (specifically, IRM 1100) claiming that the Act of July 1, 1862 "is the organic act of today's Internal Revenue Service" and that the Act of March 3, 1863 shows that "Congress had intended to establish a Bureau of Internal Revenue, or thought they had [emphasis added]," in fact, neither the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Internal Revenue Service was created by either of these Acts. Moreover, both the Act of July 1, 1862 and the Act of March 3, 1863 were repealed by the adoption of the Revised Statutes of 1873 and never reenacted. Therefore, the Internal Revenue Service was not established by the Constitution, has never been created by any act of Congress, and is not a duly constituted office of the federal government. It has no legtimate authority to make rules, impose fines, attach wages or seize property. Whenever it confiscates property, it engages in an unlawful taking under the color of authority. The extra-legal status of the IRS and the illegality of its conduct is not merely an interesting question, a matter of opinion, or, as one Senate staffer told me only last week, "a good point." It is a question of fact that goes to the very heart of the trust that must be the foundation of the people's relationship with their government. Every American who has ever been intimidated by or lost property to the IRS has been denied the due process that is the right of every free man and woman. However, that problem, serious as it is, only the tip of the iceberg. Until shortly before World War II, few Americans paid federal income tax. Since then, professional politicians and career bureaucrats have employed an orchestrated campaign of misrepresentation and deceit to extort trillions of dollars from the American people in a theft of unprecedented magnitude that continues to this day. In the process, businesses have been destroyed, reputations and lives ruined, jobs lost, unimaginable economic hardship inflicted, homes seized, and families wrecked. Nothing in Title 26 of the United States Code or the Code of Federal Regulations provides a legal basis for the raw power which your public comments yesterday attributed to the IRS. Except for people in a few narrowly defined categories, there is no language in the Internal Revenue Code and implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations that: *Requires anyone to file a federal income tax return. *Classifies a person as a "taxpayer" for purposes of the federal income tax. *Classifies as taxable income for purposes of the federal income tax any money a person earned. *Authorizes the Internal Revenue Service to seize a person's assets, issue liens against property, or levy salaries or wages. *Requires that anyone pay federal income taxes. The only exceptions are people in the following categories: U.S. nationals involved with revenue taxable activities pertaining to liquor, tobacco or firearms; employees of any branch of government; United States citizens residing in a foreign country; nonresident aliens subject to Federal income tax filing requirements; and residents of the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. The American people have been systematically robbed, bullied and laughed at by federal politicians, judges and bureaucrats for more than 60 years. Successive Congresses and Administrations have overlooked the Internal Revenue Service's patently illegal activities because it was to their political benefit to do so. The elected and appointed officials who knew the truth and concealed it from the American people are guilty of constructive fraud and a breach of public trust so massive and so serious as to call into question the very legitimacy of the government. I most urgently request that you act in your capacity as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance and immediately introduce emergency legislation to rescind this fraudulent and deceitful "tax code," abolish the Internal Revenue Service, and recommend for prosecution those current and former elected and appointed officials who have perpetrated sixty years of lies and theft upon the people. The American people have a right to demand nothing less of elected officials sworn to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law. Sincerely, Frank Brady Executive Director Coalition for an American Future caf@sky.net http://www.sky.net/~caf =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with "unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject) Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: NRA Board Member resigns (fwd) Date: 25 Sep 1997 07:59:38 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Reply-To: texas-gun-owners@zilker.net Posted to texas-gun-owners by nocompromise ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- August 12, 1997 Mrs. Marion Hammer President, The National Rifle Association of America Dear President Hammer: Being nominated and elected to serve on the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association was a great honor. Like most Directors, I've spent much of my life laboring for freedom and the right to keep and bear arms; rights our Founding Fathers tried to guarantee by the 2nd Amendment, and which I forever hold dear. Nonetheless, events of the past year have forced me to reassess my long-standing affiliation with the NRA. Over the years, as we've continued losing our rights in California and elsewhere, activists have wondered why NRA is not more effective given the passionate belief in the right to arms held by NRA members, a large segment of the American public, and, presumably, the NRA Board. Like most, I believed this could be accounted for by relatively benign factors such as institutional paralysis, bureaucratic incompetence, turf-protection, and the not-invented-here syndrome. I now know otherwise. Those factors are not insignificant, though there are many hard-working, competent people working for NRA. Rather, as I've learned, NRA's ineffectiveness largely springs from an unholy alliance between NRA's senior paid staff (including you and other Board Members with undisclosed conflicts of interest), some of the vendors NRA does business with, and elements of the Republican Party, all with the acquiescence of a Board which has long shirked its moral and fiduciary duties. Many members have suggested that there is anti-gun or other infiltration at play. While such a cancer would not be inconsistent with the symptoms, I've seen no direct evidence of it. NRA has been bled by some of its vendors and their self-serving advice. The lack of competitive bidding makes the US Government look responsible by comparison. The PR firm used by NRA, Tony Makris' Ackerman-McQueen/Mercury Group, is an example. They've been with NRA for some 20 years, and recently had an $80,000-a-month basic retainer proposal on the table. Few companies would keep a PR firm that long, let alone one that would help senior staff wage war on Board Members. One of the leverage strategies used by "Ak-Mac" is to spend millions of NRA's dollars turning NRA officers into celebrities, who in turn protect Ak-Mac. Hence your effort to keep the management audit away from Ak-Mac even before it started. Those who question the Ak-Mac status quo are subjected to the vilest of personal attacks. For example, when former President Tom Washington wanted to look at your finances, and Ak-Mac's, he was smeared. Apparently, Charleton Heston, NRA's new 1st VP, neither requests nor receives compensation from NRA. But it's well known that he works with NRA through Tony Makris/Ak-Mac/Mercury and that much of their pay is for making him available to NRA. When they're threatened they play the Heston card. For example, as you know, Mr. Heston threatened to resign from NRA unless Chief Kayne Robinson was elected 2nd VP in Dallas. Though Mr. Heston is probably sincerely acting on misinformation spoon fed to him by Mr. Makris and others, the threat to Ak-Mac is the real reason Mr. Heston was ushered in, not fear of "extremists." A strange hypocrisy drenched the interviews in the wake of his coronation. The same Charleton Heston so fond of clenching a gun and uttering the ominous threat to law enforcement officers, "from my cold dead hands," touted the virtues of "mainstream" over so-called "extremist" gun owners, later following up with sound bites like "AK-47s are entirely inappropriate for civilian ownership". In Seattle, he was flanked on one side by Director Sandra Froman, a one-time cover-girl for Machine Gun News who refers to her machine guns as "my babies." He was also flanked by Director Manny Fernandez, who pleaded guilty in the face of illegal machine gun possession charges. I have no problem with machine guns; they're within the intent of the 2nd Amendment. But I've never owned one, nor have I endorsed killing police officers who come to confiscate our guns, should it ever come to that. The only thing I've advocated is political action. So who are the "extremists" here? You pushed Mr. Heston for 1st VP and Mr. Fernandez for the nominating committee, and kept Ms. Froman in charge of grassroots, hardly because they're "moderates," rather because they were part of your coup de etat. By labeling former 1st VP Neal Knox and the reform camp "extremists," you and your fellow Machine Gun Moderates rendered less viable some of the core 2nd Amendment beliefs held by Mr. Knox and the reform camp - beliefs you supposedly hold. If indeed you hold them, then you trashed your own beliefs for personal gain. How many Directors and others with a hand in your coup de etat have personal, financial, or political conflicts of interest? How many are directly or indirectly getting paid by NRA? As for the role of neo-conservative and Republican elements in this unholy alliance, it's easy to understand why they protect NRA's failed leadership: They want our money, our A-ratings, our endorsements, and our grassroots support, but they don't want to make the tough votes required to earn them. So they applaud Wayne LaPierre's "mainstream" positions like federally mandated instacheck - the same Wayne LaPierre who himself was widely denounced as an extremist for referring to federal officers as "jackbooted thugs"! Writer David Brock, admitted repentant political hit man for the right, made it clear that protecting the Republican Party was a prime motive for his American Spectator piece which smeared the NRA reform camp (note that letters to the Spectator exposing the smear were never printed - so much for accuracy and fairness in the neo-con media). That's why NRA leaders are so opposed to putting an end to ILA's penchant for giving A ratings to legislators who vote for gun control. Republican politicos were mobilized out of fear that straw man Neal Knox and other reform-minded Directors would end their free ride. Never mind that NRA would be far more effective once it was no longer married to one party and began seriously enticing Democrats and disciplining sellout Republicans. Your word was given in September, 1996 that the motion to stop ILA from giving A's to legislators who trample on gun rights would come before the Board for a vote in May. It did not, but you publicly committed in May to bring it up in September. You've frequently broken your word before, and I expect you'll break it this time. I urge Directors to hold you to it and pass the motion. Like others, I got heavily involved in 1989 largely because NRA had effectively abandoned California. A focused five-year struggle ended with the political demise of our two highest-profile gun grabbers, setting an example for other legislators that dammed up the torrent for three years. But such examples don't last forever. Legislators forget, especially when they see NRA leadership attempting to destroy those who set the example, and NRA never followed up with the no-compromise dealing, serious organizing, and contingency planning we'd hoped for. So we're back where we were in 1989, only worse. A slate of anti-gun-rights bills is moving that makes Roos-Roberti look tame. As generally happens with California gun control laws, if any of these bills pass, the enemy will be emboldened and rights will be threatened across the country. And yet, NRA is once again running from California. Mr. Heston's candidacy was sold to members on the promise that he could open any political door, yet he apparently hasn't lifted a finger to save his home state (by contrast, Neal Knox, a Maryland resident, flew to Sacramento with some activists who had asked for his help, including former Roberti Recall Chair Bill Dominguez and Santa Barbara NRA Members Council President Larry Rankin). When asked what the plan to save California was, Tanya Metaksa, Executive Director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, said "we're looking for one." I believe NRA leadership has decided to sell out on the "assault weapon" issue, and is preparing to sell out California, as quietly as possible to preserve the "Winning Team" fiction. A high-profile defense has the potential downside of a high-profile loss - unacceptable for an ILA that blows members' money to shower them with glossy 4-page "ILA Victory" brochures touting ILA's "success rates." Like a district attorney who excessively plea bargains to maintain a high conviction rate, ILA's statistics are bolstered by supporting anti-gun candidates, pushing unnecessarily compromised legislation, and ignoring legislative losses. The pattern is unsettling: Giving A's to legislators who voted for the assault weapon ban then pushing a go-nowhere vote to pacify members; Mr. Heston's attacks on Ak-47s and so-called "extremists," and his failure to act in his home state; ILA's pressuring of grassroots into fundraising and NRA Board politics when they should be focused on action; the non-plan for California. But perhaps Mr. Heston will make a cameo appearance after all. Perhaps he's waiting for bills to reach the governor, then he'll ask for a veto. It's never worked before with this or any other Republican governor here, despite all the free money, endorsements, and support we give Republicans. We'll see. The unholy alliance of NRA leaders, vendors, and Republican elements is the reason why NRA is declining in stature. It was used by you, President Hammer, and by others in leadership, to protect the status quo, and with it your power, positions and financial self-dealing from reform. To hide your unwholesome goals, motives, and tactics, you preemptively accused others of having them - a page out of the Clinton-Goebbels-Lenin play books and a transparently hypocritical ploy you've long put to great use. Your coconspirators accused Neal Knox of attempting a coup de etat and a corporate takeover. The only corporate takeover I know of was by Ak-Mac, which can write its own ticket now: They have you, 1st VP Heston, 2nd VP Robinson, EVP LaPierre, and others, all in place and in pocket. Mr. Knox and other reformers were accused of wanting jobs, diverting attention from the fact that many Directors had personal, financial, and political incentives to preserve the status quo (e.g., your undisclosed $10,000 a month; how much is it now?) Mr. Knox was also accused of using Machiavellian tactics to control the Board. If that were true, your "Winning Team" wouldn't be in power today. Fact is, Mr. Knox used his influence to help get the "Winning Team" and most of its supporters onto the Board and into the positions they used to betray him. And, as you know too well, Machiavelli would never have allowed your coup to succeed. Compared to Mr. Knox's influence, you run the Board like a concentration camp commandant, trying to break prisoners by taking away their privileges. For starters, those who opposed the status quo generally got a powerless committee assignment or none at all. And Neal Knox has never stooped to the kind of lying smear campaign which your "Winning Team" so zealously carried out. As you know, in just one year you've appointed 3 Finance Committee Chairs. Rick Carone, one of the two most qualified chairs in NRA's history, resigned because of the Board's unwillingness to deal with you. Then you fired Donna Bianchi for exercising her conscience and running against Wayne LaPierre's mismanagement. Now we have Mr. Sigler, who with all due respect, is unqualified for the position compared to his predecessors - including former Coors Chief Max Goodwin - all of whom sounded the alarm on NRA's financial position ($50 million in the red, $300 million spent without proper authorization, D credit rating, unqualified management, etc., etc., etc.). As to the rest of the Committee, you replaced most of the experienced members with generally unqualified people (one publicly admitted she knows nothing about finance), increasing the Board's liability. Considering that the Finance Committee has a lot of power, small wonder why you're now making more appointments based on cronyism and political allegiance rather than ability. Then we have Sue King as Chair of the Ethics Committee: the fox in charge of the hen house. I have first hand knowledge of her involvement in the smear campaign. She violated her oath and the Board's trust by libeling me after I had answered questions about my FPPC case in the confidence of executive session. If anyone's unethical it's Sue King. Likewise, Ms. King's control of publications is shockingly without merit and appears to be for the sole purpose of consolidating power by controlling future Board elections through the magazines. That is, unless you're giving her credit for something the rest of us don't know about. The vicious (and, of course, anonymous) "COUP DE ETAT NEWS," perhaps? Jeff Cooper is one of the most renowned firearms instructors in the world. Your bizarre purge of Mr. Cooper from Education and Training proves that the "Winning Team" put its coup de etat, and the indulgence of your petty vindictiveness, ahead of the good of the NRA. Is Mr. Cooper an extremist? Accomplished instructors TJ Johnston and Leroy Pyle were also purged. By acquiescing to your whimsical purge of the most qualified committee members, by general inaction, and through bad faith, Board Members are putting their personal assets at risk to lawsuits, as malfeasance, misfeasance and dereliction of duty are reportedly not covered by NRA's Director insurance, which is nominal in any case compared to the potential claims. Looking back, ignorance was bliss. I wish I didn't know what I know today. Not that ignorance is an excuse. But with graduate degrees from UCLA specializing in economics, finance, and accounting, a decade in the financial industry, and my participation in an internal study of NRA finances, I could hardly claim ignorance of the financial atrocities committed by NRA leaders with members money and the consent of an irresponsible board. NRA's liabilities are dreadful, and I cannot stand by while Officers and past Presidents explain away NRA's moral obligations to its members. Quoting Wayne Stump's resignation earlier this year - "the Board did nothing." At least I tried, as did others, to perform my fiduciary duty. But I can tell you it's no fun being sued for a large amount of money, even if you think you're in the right. I've enough liability on my plate to last a lifetime. I'm not taking on any more, certainly not for an institution corrupted by its own power and money. When a minority of the Board tried to exercise their moral and fiduciary duty to the members, they were not answered by a reasoned defense of NRA's leadership. The response by staff officers, vendors, neo-cons, and certain Board members, was to create a smokescreen by smearing those Directors who had been tasked by the Board to conduct a special review of NRA finances and management. By tolerating, encouraging, and participating in the smear, you have irrevocably lowered the standards of the Board. Any Director is now fair game, even those who deemed themselves non-aligned in the recent conflict. I urge them to prepare themselves. It's hard to convey a true feeling for what it's like to see fabricated stories told about yourself in a national magazine, then see ILA immediately hire - as an apparent pay-off - those who smeared you (e.g., Paul Pain). That's how much top staff thinks of the Board. The old saw that NRA eats its young came only too true in my case. In under a month I went from a standing ovation by the Board to the realization of how expendable I was in the "Winning Team's" power game, even after the bullets I took for them and the cause. The struggle for the right of the people to keep and bear arms is at the core of a fundamental struggle for freedom that began in ancient times and will surely persist into the distant ages to come. This struggle is political, though it has not always been. Like diplomacy, the politics of such a struggle is an extension of war by other means, though perhaps further removed. In any conflict, if those on the front lines cannot trust and rely on the honor of their comrades, the cause is doomed. While there are many good and honorable people on the Board with various stands on the current power struggle, there are some who cannot be trusted and are without honor. The most recent proof of this is your own slander, telling Board members that I cashed my management review consulting check and left 1st Union Bank with hundred dollar bills stuffed in my pockets. In fact, on the advice of Judge Paul Heath Till, I wired the money to California so I could avoid the clearing delay (and the risk of a stop payment - that's right, I don't trust you), and pay my attorney who faced a hearing just days later. But then you knew that, of course. Just another in your long string of lies. President Hammer, with victory under your belt and ruthless consolidation of power underway, with control of the magazines and millions in image-building expenditures to keep members barraged with fairy tales, and with NRA's powerful lobbying and PR cannons now turned on many of those who helped build them, I'm sure you're confident of a place in the constellation of NRA leaders. History, on the other hand, favors the truth. I got into this cause 20 years ago to do my part for my country because I never had to go to war, unlike my father, Rick Carone, General Foss, Col. Brown, Jeff Cooper, Wes Grogan, Jerry Allen, Jim Fotis, Jim Land, Bob Kramer, and many others who risked the ultimate price for our freedom. I'd like to continue to serve, but for many reasons I simply cannot. I took my Board position seriously. Members trusted me and I repaid them by performing my moral and fiduciary duty. Even in better times an NRA without major problems would require a major commitment from a diligent Director. But considering the shape NRA is in, the "Winning Team's" eagerness to destroy the reputations of Directors who perform their fiduciary duty and refuse to tow your party line, the oppression of the FPPC, and other factors, it is all-consuming. I paid my dues and then some. My conscience is clear. As of today, the voluntary portion of my tour of political duty for NRA is over. I hereby resign from the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association. Sincerely, C. Russell Howard cc: T. Makris, Chairman 1st Vice President C. Heston NRA Secretary J. Land The Board of Directors 2nd Vice President K. Robinson -- ********************************************************************* The Paul Revere Network http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/home.html >>> Subscribe to the PRNet mail list <<< Email to:LISTSERV@AIRGUNHQ.COM, in body:SUBSCRIBE PRN ********************************************************************* -- For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net with the word help in the message body. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Global Economy Date: 25 Sep 1997 09:44:05 -0700 Jack, [...] Early on it points out that the current ethic discourages economic freedom but encourages political freedom: That is one can not use his property as he wishes (economic freedom) but is free to rant about not being able to use his property (political freedom) [...] Can you say: Lip service? I knew you could! Which is the essence of world government: Take away all your Rights and let you ramble on all you might. That is the first step in finding the strong ones: they know how to express themselves. Once they are found out, they are eliminated, one at a time. The rest will fall into line. ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Global Economy Date: 25 Sep 1997 09:44:05 -0700 Jack, [...] Early on it points out that the current ethic discourages economic freedom but encourages political freedom: That is one can not use his property as he wishes (economic freedom) but is free to rant about not being able to use his property (political freedom) [...] Can you say: Lip service? I knew you could! Which is the essence of world government: Take away all your Rights and let you ramble on all you might. That is the first step in finding the strong ones: they know how to express themselves. Once they are found out, they are eliminated, one at a time. The rest will fall into line. ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: (fwd) What goes around... (fwd) Date: 25 Sep 1997 13:13:03 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Reply-To: texas-gun-owners@zilker.net Posted to texas-gun-owners by chasm@insync.net (schuetzen) X-No-Archive: Yes FORWARDED On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 11:03:57 -0700, jon wrote: Score one for the good guys. J. September 25, 1997 Shotgun-Wielding Man Outgunned A.P. INDEXES: TOP STORIES | NEWS | BUSINESS | SPORTS | ENTERTAINMENT Filed at 12:37 p.m. EDT By The Associated Press JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) -- A would-be robber with a shotgun strode into a diner and ordered everyone to the floor -- then two elderly customers pull guns of their own on him and start firing away. When the masked gunman grabbed waitress Amy Norton and tried to get her to open the cash register at Sam's St. Johns Seafood, 69-year-old Oscar Moore pulled out his .22-caliber revolver and shot the gunman in the abdomen. ``That gun I didn't trust to try to go for a head shot,'' said Moore, who carries a gun with him everywhere he goes. ``If I'd another gun with me, I'd have gone for a head shot, taken care of it from here to eternity.'' Another diner, 81-year-old Robert Guerry, pulled out a .22-caliber derringer and fired at the teen as the foiled robber fled the restaurant where about 30 patrons were eating Monday evening. Later that night, police arrested Dervonne Marquise Moore, 17, of Jacksonville, when he arrived at a hospital to get a gunshot wound treated. The suspect was charged with armed robbery, and was listed today in fair condition. ``I'm glad (Moore and Guerry) were here because if that girl couldn't open the register, and he didn't get no money, he might have started shooting,'' said restaurant co-owner Sam Bajalia. Police said the gun-toting customers won't be charged. Moore, who's unrelated to the suspect, had no qualms over his quick response to the robbery. ``Somewhere along the line, we the people have to start protecting ourselves,'' he said. -- _______________________________________ Charles L Hamilton (chasm@insync.net) Houston, TX X-No-Archive: Yes -- For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net with the word help in the message body. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: IRS abuses Date: 25 Sep 1997 16:37:27 -0500 (CDT) National Center for Policy Analysis POLICY DIGEST Thursday, September 25, 1997 In Today's News AUDITING IRS ABUSES Witnesses testifying yesterday before a Senate committee investigating the Internal Revenue Service painted a picture of sloppy investigations that harm innocent taxpayers, audits targeted at those less able to defend themselves and bungled management of new computer systems. One of the witnesses, a Syracuse University researcher, presented a computer analysis of government data which showed startling trends: * The number of audits assigned to inexperienced junior personnel rather than experienced professional auditors rose from 20 percent just a decade ago to 58 percent by 1995. * Meanwhile, the conviction rate on cases the IRS referred for criminal prosecution dropped from 61 percent to 43 percent -- while the number of cases the Justice Department found unworthy of prosecution nearly tripled to 2,000 a year. * The audit rate on individuals earning $100,000 or more dropped from 11.4 percent to 2.8 percent between 1988 and 1995, while the audit rate on those earning under $25,000 doubled to 2 percent -- even though these audits involved much less money. * Audits of large corporations, which produce 58 percent of underpayments the IRS finds, have dwindled to 0.2 percent -- but audits on smaller businesses, which yield only 11 percent of underpayments, have doubled to nearly 6 percent. Critics say this is evidence of a pattern of going after individuals and businesses which are less able to contest IRS claims. Although the IRS has spent about $8 billion on new computer systems in the past decade, they are reportedly poorly engineered and frequently malfunction -- creating havoc among taxpayers and the IRS alike. Source: Editorial, "Abuses, Mismanagement Show IRS Needs Shakeup," USA Today, September 25, 1997. **************************************************************************** NATIONAL CENTER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS DALLAS, TEXAS "Making Ideas Change the World" Internet Address: http://www.ncpa.org **************************************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heston's Remarks: Full Text (fwd) Date: 25 Sep 1997 21:52:19 PST On Sep 25, Mike Riddle wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Here is the full-text of Mr. Heston's prepared remarks before the National Press Club. Whoever wrote it for him did a fairly decent job. Now if he can learn to handle the question-and-answer periods (and there's some evidence he's getting better at it).... o / -------------------X-----------cut here------------------- O \ The Second Amendment: America's First Freedom By Charlton Heston At the National Press Club, September 11, 1997 Today I want to talk to you about guns: why we have them, why the Bill of Rights guarantees that we can have them, and why my right to have a gun is more important than your right to rail against it in the press. I believe every good journalist needs to know why the Second Amendment must be considered more essential than the First Amendment. This may be a bitter pill to swallow, but the right to keep and bear arms is not archaic. It's not an outdated, dusty idea some old dead white guys dreamed up in fear of the Redcoats. No, it is just as essential to liberty today as it was in 1776. These words may not play well at the Press Club, but it's still the gospel down at the corner bar and grill. And your efforts to undermine the Second Amendment, to deride it and degrade it, to readily accept diluting it and eagerly promote redefining it, threaten not only the physical well-being of millions of Americans but also the core concept of individual liberty our founding fathers struggled to perfect and protect. So now you know what doubtless does not surprise you. I believe strongly in the right of every law-abiding citizen to keep and bear arms, for what I think are good reasons. The original amendments we refer to as the Bill of Rights contain ten of what the constitutional framers termed unalienable rights. These rights are ranked in random order and are linked by their essential equality. The Bill of Rights came to us with blinders on. It doesn't recognize color, or class, or wealth. It protects not just the rights of actors, or editors, or reporters, but extends even to those we love to hate. That's why the most heinous criminals have rights until they are convicted of a crime. The beauty of the Constitution can be found in the way it takes human nature into consideration. We are not a docile species capable of co-existing within a perfect society under everlasting benevolent rule. We are what we are. Egotistical, corruptible, vengeful, sometimes even a bit power mad. The Bill of Rights recognizes this and builds the barricades that need to be in place to protect the individual. You, of course, remain zealous in your belief that a free nation must have a free press and free speech to battle injustice, unmask corruption and provide a voice for those in need of a fair and impartial forum. I agree wholeheartedly... a free press is Vital to a free society. But I wonder: How many of you will agree with me that the right to keep and bear arms is not just equally vital, but the most vital to protect all the other rights we enjoy? I say that the Second Amendment is, in order of importance, the first amendment. It is America's First Freedom, the one right that protects all the others. Among freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, of assembly, of redress of grievances, it is the first among equals. It alone offers the absolute capacity to live without fear. The right to keep and bear arms is the one right that allows "rights" to exist at all. Either you believe that, or you don't, and you must decide. Because there is no such thing as a free nation where police and military are allowed the force of arms but individual citizens are not. That's a "big brother knows best" theater of the absurd that has never boded well for the peasant class, the working class, or even for reporters. Yes, our Constitution provides the doorway for your news and commentary to pass through free and unfettered. But that doorway to freedom is framed by the muskets that stood between a vision of liberty and absolute anarchy at a place called Concord Bridge. Our revolution began when the British sent Redcoats door to door to confiscate the peoples' guns. They didn't succeed: The muskets went out the back door with their owners. Emerson said it best: "By the rude bridge that arched the flood, Their flag to April's breeze unfurled, Here once the embattled farmers stood, And fired the shot heard round the world." King George called us "rabble in arms." But with God's grace, George Washington and many brave men gave us our country. Soon after, God's grace and a few great men gave us our Constitution. It's been said that the creation of the United States is the greatest political act in history. I'll sign that. In the next two centuries, though, freedom did not flourish. The next revolution, the French, collapsed in the bloody terror, then Napoleon's tyranny. There's been no shortage of dictators since, in many countries. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin, Castro, Pol Pot. All these monsters began by confiscating private arms, then literally soaking the earth with the blood of tens and tens of millions of their people. Ah, the joys of gun control. Now, I doubt any of you would prefer a rolled up newspaper as a weapon against a dictator or a criminal intruder. Yet in essence that is what you have asked our loved ones to do, through an ill- contrived and totally naive campaign against the Second Amendment. Besides, how can we entrust to you the Second Amendment, when you are so stingy with your own First Amendment? I say this because of the way, in recent days, you have treated your own -- those journalists you consider the least among you. How quick you've been to finger the paparazzi with blame and to eye the tabloids with disdain. How eager you've been to draw a line where there is none, to demand some distinction within the First Amendment that sneers "they are not one of us." How readily you let your lesser brethren take the fall, as if their rights were not as worthy, and their purpose not as pure, and their freedom not as sacred as yours. So now, as politicians consider new laws to shackle and gag paparazzi, who among you will speak up? Who here will stand and defend them? If you won't, I will. Because you do not define the First Amendment. It defines you. And it is bigger than you -- big enough to embrace all of you, plus all those you would exclude. That's how freedom works. It also demands you do your homework. Again and again I hear gun owners say,how can we believe anything the anti-gun media says when they can't even get the facts right? For too long you have swallowed manufactured statistics and fabricated technical support from anti-gun organizations that wouldn't know a semiauto from a sharp stick. And it shows. You fall for it every time. That's why you have very little credibility among 70 million gun owners and 20 million hunters and millions of veterans who learned the hard way which end the bullet comes out. And while you attacked the amendment that defends your homes and protects your spouses and children, you have denied those of us who defend all the Bill of Rights a fair hearing or the courtesy of an honest debate. If the NRA attempts to challenge your assertions, we are ignored. And if we try to buy advertising time or space to answer your charges, more often than not we are denied. How's that for First Amendment freedom? Clearly, too many have used freedom of the press as a weapon not only to strangle our free speech, but to erode and ultimately destroy the right to keep and bear arms as well. In doing so you promoted your profession to that of.constitutional judge and jury, more powerful even than our Supreme Court, more prejudiced than the Inquisition's tribunals. It is a frightening misuse of constitutional privilege, and I pray that you will come to your senses and see that these abuses are curbed. As a veteran of World War II, as a freedom marcher who stood with Dr. Martin Luther King long before it was fashionable, and as a grandfather who wants the coming century to be free and full of promise for my grandchildren, I am ... troubled. The right to keep and bear arms is threatened by political theatrics, piecemeal lawmaking, talk show psychology, extreme bad taste in the entertainment industry, an ever-widening educational chasm in our schools and a conniving media, that all add up to cultural warfare against the idea that guns ever had, or should now have, an honorable and proud place ~~: our society. But all of our rights must be delivered into the 21st century as pure and complete as they came to us at the beginning of this century. Traditionally the passing of that torch is from a gnarled old hand down to an eager young one. So now, at 72, I offer my gnarled old hand. I have accepted a call from the National Rifle Association of America to help protect the Second Amendment. I feel it is my duty -to do that. My mission and vision can be summarized in three simple parts. First, before we enter the next century, I expect to see a pro- Second Amendment president in the White House. Secondly, I expect to build an NRA with the political muscle and clout to keep a pro- Second Amendment congress in place. Third, is a promise to the next generation of free Americans. I hope to help raise a hundred million dollars for NRA programs and education before the year 2000. At least half of that sum will go to teach American kids what the right to keep and bear arms really means to their culture and country. We have raised a generation of young people who think that the Bill of Rights comes with their cable TV. Leave them to their channel surfing and they'll remain oblivious to history and heritage that truly matter. Think about it -- what else must young Americans think when the White House proclaims, as it did, that "a firearm in the hands of youth is a crime or an accident waiting to happen?" No -- it is time they learned that firearm ownership is constitutional, not criminal. In fact, few pursuits can teach a young person more about responsibility, safety, conservation, their history and their heritage, all at once. It is time they found out that the politically correct doctrine of today has misled them. And that when they reach legal age, if they do not break our laws, they have a right to choose to own a gun - a handgun, a long gun, a small gun, a large gun, a black gun, a purple gun, a pretty gun, an ugly gun - and to use that gun to defend themselves and their loved ones or to engage in any lawful purpose they desire without apology or explanation to~anyone, ever. This is their first freedom. If you say it's outdated, then you haven't read your own headlines. If you say guns create only carnage, I would answer that you know better. Declining morals, disintegrating families, vacillating political leadership, an eroding criminal justice system and social mores that blur right and wrong are more to blame -- certainly more than~any legally owned firearm. I want to rescue the Second Amendment from an opportunistic president, and from a press that apparently can't comprehend that attacks on the Second Amendment set the stage for assaults on the First. I want to save the Second Amendment from all these nitpicking little wars of attrition--fights over alleged Saturday night specials, plastic guns, cop killer bullets and so many other made- for-prime-time non-issues invented by some press agent over at gun control headquarters that you guys buy time and again. I simply cannot stand by and watch a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States come under attack from those who either can't understand it, don't like the sound of it, or find themselves too philosophically squeamish to see why it remains the first among equals: Because it is the right we turn to when all else fails. That's why the Second Amendment is America's first freedom. Please, go forth and tell the truth. There can be no free speech, no freedom of the - press, no freedom to protest, no freedom to worship your god; no freedom to speak your mind, no freedom from fear, no freedom for your children and for theirs, for anybody, anywhere, without the Second Amendment freedom to fight for it. If you don't believe me, just turn on the news tonight. Civilization's veneer is wearing thinner all the time. Thank you. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: NC Home Schooling and the Second Amendment (fwd) Date: 26 Sep 1997 12:11:19 PST This one seems to have some fascinating possibilities..... On Sep 25, Eugene W. Gross wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >Return-Path: >From: Slr1918a3@aol.com >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 17:07:00 -0400 (EDT) >To: tagnet@lugnut.rtp.dg.com >Subject: NC Home Schooling and the Second Amendment > >Fellow extremists: > >BATF Director John Magaw in a letter to Congressman Dan Coates has formally >asserted the position that home schools operated under state law are >"schools" as defined by the amended Gun-Free School Zones Act and that >therefore possession of any firearm within 1000 ft of such schools is a >felony (yes, including those of the home schooler). For those of you who >thought United States v. Lopez put a spear through the heart of the act: >Following the Supreme's opinion in Lopez Congressrat Schumer and his pack >promptly enacted after-the-fact "legislative findings" about the terrible >effects on interstate commerce of guns in school zones and re-enacted the >prohibition against guns in school zones (which 43 states have always >prohibited anyway). > >The Home School Legal Defense Ass'n (about which I know nothing) has begun a >declaratory judgment action in the Western District of Texas to declare the >act unconstitutional. I have recommened to NRA and GOA counsel that we >promptly commence counterpart actions everywhere home schools meet the BATF's >interpretation. NC is such a state. They are both enthusiastic. I am >looking for home schoolers who would be willing to be plaintiffs in each of >NC's three federal judicial districts (and also for whatever financial >backing is available to support the suits). The suits will not be dependent >upon receiving any financial support, however. > >The idea here is to get as many suits going in as many districts as possible >so that we ensure a split among federal circuits and subsequent Supreme Court >review, rather than being piecemealed to death as we were in the Section >922(o) (machinegun) cases. These cases are also a beautiful vehicle in which >to present the Second Amendment issue (intertwined with the First Amendment >-- most home schoolers do so for religious or religion related reasons) on >behalf of attractive plaintiffs in a neutral setting (i.e., the "gun" issue >is not being raised by a bank robber). This is the litigation opportunity of >a generation for members of the gun culture. > >Jim Jeffries >3019 Lake Forest Drive >Greensboro, NC 27408 >(910) 282-6024 [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: fwd: Ruby Ridge (fwd) Date: 26 Sep 1997 18:11:17 -0500 (CDT) This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. --BeyondBoundary_2_Fri_Sep_26_09:55:49_1997__4823 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii Content-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Friday, September 26, 1997 Court Blasts FBI Actions at Ruby Ridge By HENRY WEINSTEIN, Times Legal Affairs Writer federal appeals court in San Francisco on Thursday excoriated the FBI for the conduct of its agents during the deadly August 1992 siege at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, saying the "shoot to kill" policy that agents used was "a gross deviation from constitutional principles and a wholly unwarranted return to a lawless and arbitrary Wild West school of law enforcement." In a unanimous decision written by Los Angeles Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said the special rules that led to the death of the wife and 14-year-old son of white separatist Randy Weaver and the severe wounding of their friend Kevin Harris "violated clearly established law, and any reasonable law enforcement officer should have been aware of that fact." A three-judge panel reached these conclusions while rejecting the contentions of 13 FBI agents and U.S. marshals that they were entitled to qualified immunity for their conduct at Ruby Ridge. The decision Thursday in Harris vs. Horiuchi paves the way for a $10-million civil rights case filed by Harris against the agents to go to trial unless the ruling is reversed by a larger panel of 9th Circuit judges or the U.S. Supreme Court. None of the attorneys for the agents returned telephone calls seeking comment. Justice Department and FBI officials declined to comment. Harris' lawyer, David Z. Nevin, of Boise, Idaho, said he was pleased about the 9th Circuit's decision. "We're looking forward to getting this case to trial and airing these issues. This is one step in an extremely long road," Nevin said. Thursday's ruling represents the latest of many black marks against the FBI stemming from the Ruby Ridge incident, an event that became a rallying symbol for many anti-government activists, including convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy J. McVeigh. In October, E. Michael Kahoe, former head of the FBI's violent crime unit, pleaded guilty to obstructing justice by shredding an internal agency report on the incident. Four other agents were suspended, including FBI Deputy Director Larry Potts. But in mid-August, federal prosecutors concluded that they had found insufficient evidence to prosecute them. Nonetheless, an internal Justice Department inquiry of the incident is continuing, department officials confirmed Thursday. Nearly a year earlier, in December 1995, a U.S. Senate panel that investigated the event concluded that there were "substantial failures" by U.S. law enforcement agencies. "The events at Ruby Ridge have helped to weaken the bond of trust that must exist between ordinary Americans and our law enforcement agencies," the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism said in its report on the incident in which a deputy U.S. marshal died along with Weaver's wife and son. The siege began when U.S. marshals seeking to apprehend Randy Weaver on a weapons charge came upon Harris, Weaver, his son Sammy and the family dog Striker at the intersection of two roads near the Weaver property, according to the 9th Circuit. A marshal shot and killed the dog, prompting Sammy to fire at the marshal. Soon thereafter, another marshal shot and killed Sammy and in an ensuing gun battle, U.S. Marshal Michael Degan was shot and killed. Not long afterward, a team of FBI sharpshooters from the agency's Hostage and Rescue Team arrived at the area, and the next day one of them, Lon T. Horiuchi, shot and killed Weaver's wife. * * * There continue to be disputes about what happened at Ruby Ridge, including sharp disagreements among FBI officials about who was responsible for changes in the agency's normal shooting policies that resulted in the death of Vicki Weaver and the couple's son. Normally, the hostage team operates under the FBI's standard rules of engagement, which provide that "an FBI agent may kill a person with whom he or she comes into contact only when the person presents an immediate risk of death or great bodily harm to the agent or another person." However, as Thursday's decision emphasized, a group of FBI and Marshals Service officials created special rules for Ruby Ridge after the Aug. 21, 1992, shootout just a day before Vicki Weaver was shot. The special rules provided that "any armed adult male observed in the vicinity of the Weaver cabin could and should be killed." No FBI official has ever been willing to accept responsibility for the change in policy. On Aug. 22, after being told to follow the special rules by Richard Rogers, the head of the Hostage Team, several members of the team took positions on a hill overlooking the Weaver cabin, according to the decision joined by Judges Sidney Thomas of Montana and John W. Sedwick of Alaska. A few hours later, Weaver, his daughter, Sarah, and Harris walked out of the cabin and headed for a shed to prepare Sammy's body for burial, according to the 9th Circuit. Soon thereafter, Weaver was shot by FBI sniper Horiuchi. Weaver and the others began to run back to the cabin. As his wife held the door open with one hand and held their infant daughter, Elisheba, in her other arm, she was shot in the head and killed instantly. The bullet passed through her and hit Harris in the upper arm and chest. Harris' suit contends that Horiuchi intended to kill him and Vicki Weaver. Horiuchi told a Senate committee in 1995 that he killed Vicki Weaver inadvertently, while aiming at Harris, who, according to Horiuchi, was attempting to shoot at FBI personnel in a helicopter. Harris' suit contends that this is untrue, and he alleges that other law enforcement personnel lied about other matters as well. In August, Justice Department officials said that their two-year criminal probe of the Ruby Ridge incident determined that willfulness on Horiuchi's part in the killing of Vicki Weaver could not be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Willfulness is an essential element to proving a federal criminal civil rights violation. However, on Aug. 21, an Idaho county prosecutor charged Horiuchi with involuntary manslaughter for killing Vicki Weaver. * * * On Thursday, the 9th Circuit panel said that "examining Horiuchi's actions from the perspective of a reasonable law enforcement officer faced with the need to make on-the-spot decisions, it is plain to us that his actions were not objectively reasonable." The judges added: "Horiuchi and his fellow officers were safely ensconced on the hill overlooking the Weaver cabin. No threatening movement was made by Harris with respect to Horiuchi or anyone else, even after Horiuchi shot Randy Weaver." As for the other 12 defendants, the judges said Harris' allegation that they actively encouraged Horiuchi's actions through the formulation of the special rules of engagement was sufficient to state a valid claim under applicable federal court precedents. Harris and Weaver surrendered after spending eight days in the cabin following the shootout. In 1993, a federal court acquitted them of murder, conspiracy and other charges related to Degan's death, while convicting Weaver of unrelated firearms charges. The next year, the two men filed federal civil rights cases against the FBI and U.S. marshals stemming from the siege. In 1995, the government settled Weaver's case for $3.1 million. But government officials asked that Harris' case be dismissed on the grounds that they had qualified immunity because they had acted properly in their official capacity. A federal trial judge in Boise rejected most of their arguments, setting the stage for an appeal that led to Thursday's ruling. Harris' next move, his attorney said, is to ask a state court judge in Idaho to dismiss first-degree murder charges filed against his client by Bounty County prosecutor Denise Woodbury in August for the murder of Degan. The lawyer contends that the charges should be dropped on double jeopardy grounds. Harris is free on $5,000 bail on the Idaho charges and is working as a welder in Republic, Wash. Times staff writers Robert L. Jackson and Ronald J. Ostrow contributed to this story. --BeyondBoundary_2_Fri_Sep_26_09:55:49_1997__4823 Content-Type: APPLICATION/OCTET-STREAM; NAME="ATTRIBS.BND" Content-Transfer-Encoding: X-UUENCODE Content-ID: Content-Description: begin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end --BeyondBoundary_2_Fri_Sep_26_09:55:49_1997__4823-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: Traitor Ted & Hanoi Jane Date: 26 Sep 1997 17:06:39 -0700 From the October Idaho Observer, going to press shortly... Shame On Ted Turner So Ted Turner has donated a $billion dollars to the United Nations, that communist-led, U.S. Constitution-usurping, Godless organization that wants to control every aspect of every human life on the face of the earth. A thousand million dollars. Isn’t that special. It was bad enough when Turner’s current wife, Hanoi Jane Fonda, traveled to North Viet Nam at the height of the Viet Nam war and was photographed in the company of her communist heroes, literally pointing anti-aircraft guns at American military planes as they flew over. Now Ted’s getting serious as well. In fact, he wants to get others to join in the fun of subverting American freedom, as evidenced by his remark that, "If you’re rich, you can expect a call from me." Several years ago you could actually buy Hanoi Jane Urinal Dolls; perhaps it’s time to re-market that idea, with the package to include both members of the happy couple. Traitor Ted and Hanoi Jane Urinal Dolls. Sign me up for a case. - Jefferson Adams - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ I have sworn upon the altar of Almighty God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "E.J. Totty" Subject: Re: Traitor Ted & Hanoi Jane Date: 27 Sep 1997 13:18:46 -0700 Monte, [...] It was bad enough when Turner=EDs current wife, Hanoi Jane Fonda, traveled to North Viet Nam at the height of the Viet Nam war and was photographed in the company of her communist heroes, literally pointing anti-aircraft guns at American military planes as they flew over. [...] I wonder how many times some analyst in the Pentagon kicks himself in the butt for not having ordered a B52 bombing run at that location, on that day? ET ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Skip Leuschner Subject: In the Spirit of DF8: Boxer & Murray Date: 27 Sep 1997 15:42:24 -0700 Dear ROC-ers. Here's a "serious business" adaptation of the DF8 concept to which I'm personally committed and asking for your support. This doesn't "close the books" on UPFRONT's targets of opportunity for '98. It opens them. Boxer and Murray are just the first to meet the "appropriate target" criterion - vulnerability, nationally known and objected to, and most important, there are volunteers available and willing to work the in-state campaign. But it still takes $. Your support, crossposting or $ or both, will be deeply appreciated. More information on UPFRONT available on request to the Cc address. Regards, Skip *********** Forwarded Post *************** Please cross-post widely Dear friends, The following is a press release being widely distributed in CA and WA to announce UPFront's efforts to unseat Senators Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray. The need to replace both is clear. The very real possibility of budget surpluses makes it crucial that those representing us in Congress view those surpluses as debt-paydown opportunities, not as a windfall with which to expand failed social programs. These two senators' voting records speak for themselves. They do not have taxpayers' interests at heart. A lot of money could be saved, in fact, if they stayed home and forwarded a voting proxy to their party leadership. We need your help. For all who are constantly complaining that things never change -- here's your chance to help make a difference. We need your non-tax deductible contributions now. Don't assume that someone else will do it. There is no one else. And don't be shy, whatever you can afford will help. This is heavy lifting -- if we all do our share, it will get done. A special note for those who don't live in WA or CA -- Barbara Boxer sits on the Judiciary, Rules & Administration, and Foreign Relations committees; Patty Murray sits on the Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, Budget, and Appropriations committees. It does concern you, too. ------------- Earlier press release --------------- Grassroots Group Vows to Spend $100,000 to Defeat Boxer and Murray UPFront, a national non-partisan political action committee formed by grassroots activists in 1995, pledged today to raise $100,000 for a media campaign designed to unseat Senators Barbara Boxer of California and Patty Murray of Washington. "We have selected these two targets because they are so contrary to the principles on which this country was founded," said Skip Leuschner, Chairman of UPFront's Policy Committee. "They don't consider what's best for their constituents. They wait for instructions from party bosses. There's too much at stake -- we deserve better." Dan McCandless, the group's Research Director adds, "You know there's a problem when they both receive 100% ratings from both teachers unions and are shown by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation to be among the top 10 biggest spenders in the Senate. Talk about being out of step!" UPFront has begun fund raising activities to raise the required warchest. "Just $20 from each of our 5,000+ supporters and friends will enable us to reach our initial goal," said UPFront founder Margarita Ajamian. "It's not enough to complain about a broken campaign finance system. Each of us must recognize that only we have a personal vested interest in real reform and change. No one is going to do it for us." The first beneficiary of UPFront attention was Tom Campbell, a moderate Republican who took a traditionally Democrat seat in California's Silicon Valley in a December, 1995 special election. "UPFront epitomizes positive and productive involvement by ordinary citizens in our political process," said Campbell. "No special interest in the world could compete if more citizens were motivated to support their chosen candidates and causes with their contributions -- no matter how small." "It's time to get beyond packaging and gender when choosing those who will represent us," added McCandless. "We need to set the debate so that it is relevant to our day-to-day lives." The San Francisco-based group is not presently endorsing any opponents. "In this first phase," said Leuschner, a Washington resident, "our job is to show that these two senators do not measure up. As voters, we must set a high standard for our elected officials, expect them to meet it and replace them when they don't." The campaign will consist entirely of media spots discussing education and tax reform. "These two issues are fundamental to our quality of life," said Ajamian, a homeschool mom of two boys. "We need a serious, substantive discussion of alternatives to the failed status quo. Not only do these two senators vehemently defend it, they fight to send more hard-earned tax dollars into a deadend rathole. That's why they must be replaced." Since its founding, UPFront has been involved exclusively in House races, contributing in various ways to four successful races in '95 and '96. It is patterned after the highly successful 1994 De-Foley-ate campaign in Washington's 5th congressional district that worked with others to unseat then Speaker Tom Foley. _____________________ Prepared and paid for by UPFront Suite 233 633 Post Street San Francisco, CA 94109 (415) 674-9100 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: In the Spirit of DF8: Boxer & Murray Date: 27 Sep 1997 15:54:41 PST FYI, Patty "Stinky Tennis Shoes" Murray may take some direction from the Democrat Party leadership, however she's a Hitlery Klinton clone and sucks it up directly from her. Jim "the ol' blue howler" Bohan had it right on NoBan the other day when he noted that the group formed by Carol Mostly Fraud, Dianne FineSwine, Barkbarka BoxerDog, "Stinky" Murray et al, had just the right acronym: T he W omen I n T he S enate On Sep 27, Skip Leuschner wrote: >Dear ROC-ers. Here's a "serious business" adaptation of the DF8 >concept to which I'm personally committed and asking for your support. >This doesn't "close the books" on UPFRONT's targets of opportunity >for '98. It opens them. Boxer and Murray are just the first to meet >the "appropriate target" criterion - vulnerability, nationally known >and objected to, and most important, there are volunteers available >and willing to work the in-state campaign. But it still takes $. > >Your support, crossposting or $ or both, will be deeply appreciated. >More information on UPFRONT available on request to the Cc address. > >Regards, Skip > >*********** Forwarded Post *************** > >From: UPFRONT857@aol.com > >Please cross-post widely > >Dear friends, > >The following is a press release being widely distributed in CA and WA >to announce UPFront's efforts to unseat Senators Barbara Boxer and >Patty Murray. > >The need to replace both is clear. The very real possibility of budget >surpluses makes it crucial that those representing us in Congress view >those surpluses as debt-paydown opportunities, not as a windfall with >which to expand failed social programs. These two senators' voting >records speak for themselves. They do not have taxpayers' interests >at heart. A lot of money could be saved, in fact, if they stayed home >and forwarded a voting proxy to their party leadership. > >We need your help. For all who are constantly complaining that things >never change -- here's your chance to help make a difference. We need >your non-tax deductible contributions now. Don't assume that someone >else will do it. There is no one else. And don't be shy, whatever you >can afford will help. This is heavy lifting -- if we all do our share, >it will get done. > >A special note for those who don't live in WA or CA -- Barbara Boxer >sits on the Judiciary, Rules & Administration, and Foreign Relations >committees; Patty Murray sits on the Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, >Budget, and Appropriations committees. It does concern you, too. > >------------- Earlier press release --------------- > >Grassroots Group Vows to Spend $100,000 to Defeat Boxer and Murray > > > UPFront, a national non-partisan political action committee >formed by grassroots activists in 1995, pledged today to raise >$100,000 for a media campaign designed to unseat Senators Barbara >Boxer of California and Patty Murray of Washington. > > "We have selected these two targets because they are so >contrary to the principles on which this country was founded," said >Skip Leuschner, Chairman of UPFront's Policy Committee. "They don't >consider what's best for their constituents. They wait for instructions >from party bosses. There's too much at stake -- we deserve better." > > Dan McCandless, the group's Research Director adds, "You know >there's a problem when they both receive 100% ratings from both teachers >unions and are shown by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation to be >among the top 10 biggest spenders in the Senate. Talk about being out >of step!" > > UPFront has begun fund raising activities to raise the required >warchest. > > "Just $20 from each of our 5,000+ supporters and friends will >enable us to reach our initial goal," said UPFront founder Margarita >Ajamian. "It's not enough to complain about a broken campaign finance >system. Each of us must recognize that only we have a personal vested >interest in real reform and change. No one is going to do it for us." > > The first beneficiary of UPFront attention was Tom Campbell, a >moderate Republican who took a traditionally Democrat seat in >California's Silicon Valley in a December, 1995 special election. > > "UPFront epitomizes positive and productive involvement by >ordinary citizens in our political process," said Campbell. "No >special interest in the world could compete if more citizens were >motivated to support their chosen candidates and causes with their >contributions -- no matter how small." > > "It's time to get beyond packaging and gender when choosing >those who will represent us," added McCandless. "We need to set the >debate so that it is relevant to our day-to-day lives." > > The San Francisco-based group is not presently endorsing any >opponents. "In this first phase," said Leuschner, a Washington >resident, "our job is to show that these two senators do not measure >up. As voters, we must set a high standard for our elected officials, >expect them to meet it and replace them when they don't." > > The campaign will consist entirely of media spots discussing >education and tax reform. "These two issues are fundamental to our >quality of life," said Ajamian, a homeschool mom of two boys. "We >need a serious, substantive discussion of alternatives to the failed >status quo. Not only do these two senators vehemently defend it, they >fight to send more hard-earned tax dollars into a deadend rathole. >That's why they must be replaced." > > Since its founding, UPFront has been involved exclusively in >House races, contributing in various ways to four successful races in >'95 and '96. It is patterned after the highly successful 1994 >De-Foley-ate campaign in Washington's 5th congressional district that >worked with others to unseat then Speaker Tom Foley. >_____________________ > >Prepared and paid for by > >UPFront >Suite 233 >633 Post Street >San Francisco, CA 94109 >(415) 674-9100 > -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ____________________________________________________________________________ An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | Keep weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | Your hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | Powder on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: >>> Clinton MTV Quote Date: 27 Sep 1997 21:14:48 -0700 Somebody on one of these lists recently posted a pretty complete version of Herr Clinton's infamous "you gotta be willing to give up a little liberty / radical amount of freedom" MTV spewage. I lost it. Whoever you are, would you please send it to me, via private email, to ghostpwr@dmi.net? Thanks much in advance. - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ I have sworn upon the altar of Almighty God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Upcoming expose series on The Learning Channel Date: 28 Sep 1997 11:57:19 -0400 >Date: Sat, 27 Sep 97 22:58:23 PDT >From: Jon Roland >Subject: Upcoming expose series on The Learning Channel >X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. >Apparently-To: > >Next week The Learning Channel will be running a series they call "Turning >Point". The promos on it look like they will be focusing on high-level >wrongdoing, such as Waco. Spread the word. > >--Jon > >=================================================================== >Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825 >916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM Date: 09/27/97 Time: 22:58:24 >http://www.constitution.org/ mailto:jon.roland@the-spa.com >=================================================================== > > > "Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who don't." Unknown-Thanks to E Pluribus Unum ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Becraft speaks on failed arguments (fwd) Date: 29 Sep 1997 09:03:50 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Newsgroups: misc.taxes II. Wages Are Income: Back in about 1979 or 1980, Bob Golden and Pete Soehnlen published a work entitled "Are You Required," which persuasively advocated the argument that wages are not income. However, desperate people championed this issue and lost in the following cases: 1. United States v. Romero, 640 F.2d 1014 (9th Cir. 1981). 2. Lonsdale v. CIR, 661 F.2d 71 (5th Cir. 1981). 3. United States v. Lawson, 670 F.2d 923 (10th Cir. 1982). 4. Granzow v. CIR, 739 F.2d 265 (7th Cir. 1984). 5. Hansen v. United States, 744 F.2d 658 (8th Cir. 1984). 6. Perkins v. CIR, 746 F.2d 1187 (6th Cir. 1984). 7. Schiff v. CIR, 751 F.2d 116 (2nd Cir. 1984). 8. United States v. Latham, 754 F.2d 747 (7th Cir. 1985). 9. Hyslep v. United States, 765 F.2d 1083 (11th Cir. 1985). 10. Coleman v. CIR, 791 F.2d 68, 70 (7th Cir. 1986). 11. Wilcox v. CIR, 848 F.2d 1007, 1008 (9th Cir. 1988). 12. United States v. Gerards, 999 F.2d 1255, 1256 (8th Cir. 1993). 13. Maisano v. United States, 908 F.2d 408, 409 (9th Cir. 1990), and Maisano v. United States, 940 F.2d 499, 501-02 (9th Cir. 1991). Lovell v. United States, 755 F.2d 517, 519 (7th Cir. 1984). Courts have also consistently rejected claims that wages do not constitute taxable income under the I.R.C. See, e.g., Stubbs v. Commissioner of IRS, 797 F.2d 936, 938 (11th Cir. 1986) (rejecting argument that wages are not taxable income as "patently frivolous"); Ficalora v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 751 F.2d 85, 87-88 (2d Cir. 1984) (holding that income includes compensation for services), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1005 (1985); Lonsdale, 661 F.2d at 72 (rejecting "even exchange" argument). Jeff Dickstein, lawyer "extraordinare" from California, later Alaska, Montana, Tennessee and now Oklahoma, has written a book entitled Judicial Tyranny, which discusses this issue in great detail, including all the adverse decisions on this issue through 1989. When Jeff and I were about to start the conspiracy trial of Vern Holland and Dave Mauldin in Tulsa in August, 1990, Jeff announced that his book was hot off the press. When we got the first copy and looked at his book just days before we were to start that trial in federal court in Tulsa, we noticed that the front cover contained the seal of the local federal court as well as a likeness of one of the local federal judges. At times, Jeff can be harrowing. However, we got a hung jury in that case and afterwards, 6 of the jurors, including the forelady, came and joined Vern's patriot organization. III. The IRS is a Delaware corporation: Back in 1982 or 1983, somebody started circulation of the argument that the IRS was a private corporation which had been created in Delaware in 1933. This is indeed a frivolous argument and has properly been rejected by the courts; see Young v. IRS, 596 F.Supp. 141, 147 (N.D. Ind. 1984). IX. Not a "Person" Under the Tax Code: Some have contended that they were not "persons" under the Internal Revenue Code, an argument which has been lost. United States v. Karlin, 785 F.2d 90, 91 (3d Cir. 1986). United States v. Price, 798 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir. 1986). United States v. Silevan, 985 F.2d 962, 970 (8th Cir. 1993). United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 937 (9th Cir. 1986) (defendant who contended she was not a "taxpayer" because she was an "absolute, freeborn and natural individual" raised frivolous argument); Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1447-48 (10th Cir. 1990)(plaintiff is a person subject to federal income tax, invalidating numerous other frivolous tax protester arguments); Lovell v. United States, 755 F.2d 517, 519 (7th Cir. 1984) (all individuals, natural or unnatural, are subject to federal income tax on their wages); Itz v. United States Tax Court, 1987 WL 15893, at *5, 87-2 USTC P 9497 (W.D.Tex. May 6, 1987) (claim of plaintiff that he is a "de jure" citizen as opposed to a "de facto" citizen of the United States is "patently meritless"). XII. The CFR Cross Reference Index: The Code of Federal Regulations contains a separate volume which list various statutes and the regulations which implement those statutes. This is not an exclusive list nor is it an admission made by the government that there are no regulations for Title 26, U.S.C. Parties making this argument have suffered defeat. United States v. Cochrane, 985 F.2d 1027, 1031 (9th Cir. 1993). Russell v. United States, 95 CCH Tax Cases 50029 (W.D. Mich. 1994). Reese v. CIR, 69 TCM 2814, TC Memo 1995-244 (1995)(this and several other arguments described as "legalistic gibberish"). Morgan v. CIR, 78 AFTR2d 96-6633 (M.D.Fla. 1996); Stafford v. CIR, T.C. Memo 1997-50; 1997 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 46; 73 T.C.M. (CCH) 1848 ("For the same reasons, neither the Code of Federal Regulations nor the parallel table of authorities cited by petitioner supports his BATF transfer argument. n10 We see no reason to belabor that point. n10 The parallel table of authorities is merely an ancillary finding device included in the Code of Federal Regulations"; this case also raised the implementing regs argument). XVI. Wangrudites: Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1448 (10th Cir. 1990)(the following arguments are completely lacking in legal merit and patently frivolous: (1) individuals ("free born, white, preamble, sovereign, natural, individual common law 'de jure' citizens of a state, etc.") are not "persons" subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code; (2) the authority of the United States is confined to the District of Columbia; (3) the income tax is a direct tax which is invalid absent apportionment; (4) the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution is either invalid or applies only to corporations; (5) wages are not income; (6) the income tax is voluntary); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 937 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Buras, 633 F.2d 1356 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235 (9th Cir. 1980). -- Brooks Martin haze11spamela@prodigy.net to reply, remove "spamela" from address ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: [RightNow] Next Revolution: Why The Conservative Movement Died (fwd) Date: 29 Sep 1997 09:10:07 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 18:13:59 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: RightNow@MailList.Net This article is from the "Next Revolution Commentaries" page on the NET Web site at: http://net.fcref.org/comm/nrcomm/1997/nr092297.htm and is copyrighted by NET-Political NewsTalk Network: Why The Conservative Movement Died Commentary by William S. Lind 9-22-97 The "conservative movement" is dead. Oh, there are still plenty of think tanks, committees, PACs, and so forth out there, soliciting money, putting out position papers no one reads and pretending that if we only get the tax system right, America will again become the wonderful country it was in the 1950s. But, with a handful of exceptions, this "conservative movement" has no effect on the course of events. Our national decay and decline continue to accelerate. Why did the conservative movement die? At one time, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, it seemed full of promise. Three things killed it. First, most conservative think tanks failed to understand that the basis of American politics was shifting from economics to culture. That change began in the 1960s, on the Left. An inchoate conservative response began in the late 70s with the Religious Right, and by the mid-1980s, the first books on cultural conservatism were being published =96 by the Free Congress Foundation. But those books were receive= d with hostility by most other conservatives institutions, and, a decade later, few have really adapted to cultural politics. Second, the conservative movement became institutionalized. It moved from the countryside to Washington, and from the grass roots to big institutions, institutions that often cost millions of dollars a year to run. Too often, "success" became defined as success in funding an institution instead of success in saving our country. The movement's focus shifted inward, perhaps inevitably, but also fatally. In the long run, people won't fund institutions that don't make a difference. Third, much of the conservative movement, and many leading "conservative" public figures, were co-opted. Some were co-opted by the Establishment: they traded their beliefs for membership in "the Club" and the wealth, prestige and seeming power it brings. Newt Gingrich is the most prominent example, but he is hardly alone. Others were co-opted by internalizing the enemy's worldview. In many a "conservative" Washington think tank, "racism, sexism and homophobia" are viewed as real sins, and anyone voicing "Politically Incorrect" sentiments is in trouble. While most such places have absorbed cultural Marxism unconsciously, the effect is to make them part of the problem, not part of the solution: pimples on the backside of regress. So what's the answer? The answer is Resistance. All across America, ordinary people are acting =96 not just talking =96 to defy the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness and government's efforts to force it down our throats. Sheriffs are throwing Federal law enforcement officials out of their counties. Families are pulling their children out of government schools. Businessmen are tossing EPA and EEOC meddlers out of their factories. Young men are refusing to volunteer for our Feminized armed forc= es. As the conservative movement lies dead, the Resistance is being born. In it lies hope, hope that we can recover the America we had and have lost. Resistance is deeds, not just words. Resistance is local; it has no interest in meeting with Congressmen or Senators. Resistance is powerful, because the Establishment cannot suppress it without revealing its own true nature as tyranny. That is why effective Resistance is always non-violent: it uses the power of weakness. The "conservative movement" is dead; Long Live the Resistance! =3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-= =3D To unsubscribe from this mailing list, DISREGARD ANY INSTRUCTIONS ABOVE and go to the Web page at http://www.maillist.net/rightnow.html. New subscriptions can also be entered at this page. If you cannot access the World Wide Web, send an e-mail message to RightNow-Request@MailList.Net and on the SUBJECT LINE put the single word: unsubscribe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: Re: >>> Clinton MTV Quote Date: 29 Sep 1997 09:40:52 -0700 >> Somebody on one of these lists recently posted a pretty complete version >> of Herr Clinton's infamous "you gotta be willing to give up a little >> liberty / radical amount of freedom" MTV spewage. >> >> I lost it. > :-( >> >> Whoever you are, would you please send it to me, via private email, >> to ghostpwr@dmi.net? > Lemmme see here,..... > [ Checking document management system for > Clinton, MTV and Liberty ] > >AH HA! :-) > See attached! Thanks, to all who responded; the next edition of The Idaho Observer is going to feature, on the front page, a $3.00 Bill Clinton bill and a $100.00 Ben Franklin bill, with the Clinton quote beneath his bill and Franklin's "They that can give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither libery nor safety" quote below his. Should be rather eye-catching. :) - Monte ------------------------------------------------------------------ I have sworn upon the altar of Almighty God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Idaho Observer http://www.proliberty.com/observer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Zachary, Jon K" Subject: RE: Fratrum: NC Home Schooling and the Second Amendment (fwd) Date: 29 Sep 1997 14:25:51 -0500 Does anyone have access to the list of 12 states that this would apply to? My understanding is that it will apply if the state law defines home schools as 'schools'. Thankyou Jon > ---------- > From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org] > Sent: Friday, September 26, 1997 3:11 PM > To: roc%xmission.com@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Fratrum: NC Home Schooling and the Second Amendment > (fwd) > > This one seems to have some fascinating possibilities..... > > On Sep 25, Eugene W. Gross wrote: > > [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows > --------------------] > > >Return-Path: > >From: Slr1918a3@aol.com > >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 17:07:00 -0400 (EDT) > >To: tagnet@lugnut.rtp.dg.com > >Subject: NC Home Schooling and the Second Amendment > > > >Fellow extremists: > > > >BATF Director John Magaw in a letter to Congressman Dan Coates has > formally > >asserted the position that home schools operated under state law are > >"schools" as defined by the amended Gun-Free School Zones Act and > that > >therefore possession of any firearm within 1000 ft of such schools is > a > >felony (yes, including those of the home schooler). For those of you > who > >thought United States v. Lopez put a spear through the heart of the > act: > >Following the Supreme's opinion in Lopez Congressrat Schumer and his > pack > >promptly enacted after-the-fact "legislative findings" about the > terrible > >effects on interstate commerce of guns in school zones and re-enacted > the > >prohibition against guns in school zones (which 43 states have always > >prohibited anyway). > > > >The Home School Legal Defense Ass'n (about which I know nothing) has > begun a > >declaratory judgment action in the Western District of Texas to > declare the > >act unconstitutional. I have recommened to NRA and GOA counsel that > we > >promptly commence counterpart actions everywhere home schools meet > the BATF's > >interpretation. NC is such a state. They are both enthusiastic. I > am > >looking for home schoolers who would be willing to be plaintiffs in > each of > >NC's three federal judicial districts (and also for whatever > financial > >backing is available to support the suits). The suits will not be > dependent > >upon receiving any financial support, however. > > > >The idea here is to get as many suits going in as many districts as > possible > >so that we ensure a split among federal circuits and subsequent > Supreme Court > >review, rather than being piecemealed to death as we were in the > Section > >922(o) (machinegun) cases. These cases are also a beautiful vehicle > in which > >to present the Second Amendment issue (intertwined with the First > Amendment > >-- most home schoolers do so for religious or religion related > reasons) on > >behalf of attractive plaintiffs in a neutral setting (i.e., the "gun" > issue > >is not being raised by a bank robber). This is the litigation > opportunity of > >a generation for members of the gun culture. > > > >Jim Jeffries > >3019 Lake Forest Drive > >Greensboro, NC 27408 > >(910) 282-6024 > > [------------------------- end of forwarded message > ------------------------] > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______ > An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | If Guns are | Let he who hath no | > Keep > weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only | weapon sell his | > Your > hand = Freedom | DIAL | RIGHT WINGERS | garment and buy a | > Powder > on every side! | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | > Dry. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Dallas KLIF570 Am Just fired David Gold their last pro-gun conservative talk show host (fwd) Date: 29 Sep 1997 16:23:45 -0500 (CDT) David Gold our 12 year local bedrock conservative pro-gun talk radio show host got fired over the weekend. Now the radio station is all Liberals or moderates and all anti-2nd amendment. They are also talking about getting rid of G-Gordon Liddy who is tape delayed at night. They are claiming they want to take all the programming to a more light hearted fun non politics programming. Please let the programming manager Tommy Cramer at fax 214-787-1fax know that you will no longer be listening or spending your money with their sponsors of the now all anti-2nd amendment station. This is now about the 3ed Conservative tell it like it is non fluff Talk Radio host we have lost in the DFW market. With nothing but Socialist on all the major news TV and Print media and in the WhiteHouse and most of DC I am getting real sick and tired of this kind of censorship. I have all the talk radio I want if its hours and hours of sports talk. Frankly I could give a crap less about the Cowboys football games when my government is fixing to consficate all guns and outlaw hunting at the current way we are going. Are most men so hung up on thier own gonads that Sex, Beer, and Sports is all they care about? If this is so than our country as we know it is a goner. Today another nail was driven into the coffin of our once free Republic... Regards, Paul Watson Dallas -- For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net with the word help in the message body. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack@minerva.com Subject: Re: Dallas KLIF570 Am Just fired David Gold their last pro-gun conservative talk show host (fwd) Date: 29 Sep 1997 14:54:10 PDT roc@mail.xmission.com wrote : >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >David Gold our 12 year local bedrock conservative pro-gun talk radio show >host got fired over the weekend. Now the radio station is all Liberals or >moderates and all anti-2nd amendment. They are also talking about getting >rid of G-Gordon Liddy who is tape delayed at night. They are claiming they >want to take all the programming to a more light hearted fun non politics >programming. Please let the programming manager Tommy Cramer at fax >214-787-1fax know that you will no longer be listening or spending your >money with their sponsors of the now all anti-2nd amendment station. >This is now about the 3ed Conservative tell it like it is non fluff Talk >Radio host we have lost in the DFW market. With nothing but Socialist on >all the major news TV and Print media and in the WhiteHouse and most of DC >I am getting real sick and tired of this kind of censorship. I have all >the talk radio I want if its hours and hours of sports talk. Frankly I >could give a crap less about the Cowboys football games when my government >is fixing to consficate all guns and outlaw hunting at the current way we >are going. Are most men so hung up on thier own gonads that Sex, Beer, and >Sports is all they care about? If this is so than our country as we know >it is a goner. Today another nail was driven into the coffin of our once >free Republic... >Regards, >Paul Watson >Dallas Radio Stations at periodic intervals have to get their licenses renewed and one of the criteria is the amount of community service they perform. Various advocacy groups have made life miserable for some radio stations over this point at renewal time. Any large group should be able to show that their part of the community is being dirt by such radio stations and as well as talking to sponsors one might find out when license renewal time is and send letters to the FCC on this subject of a lack of committment to the community .......even if one does not believe it I think those are the proper phrases to interest the FCC Jack > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >-- >For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net >with the word help in the message body. > > > > Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming, Inc | 626-798-6574 | ---------------- | 1175 No. Altadena Drive | fax 398-8620 | jack@minerva.com | Pasadena, CA 91107 US | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com Subject: Enough! Let's Get to Work. Date: 29 Sep 1997 21:54:54 -0500 (CDT) Dear NRA Members, MC Council Activists, and Gunowners: Please consider the following. It explains why we have launched our program to write to Big 5 and discourage it from advertising in the LA Times, SF Chronicle, and other anti-gun rags: Cal. Attorney General Dan Lungren just withdrew his brief which he had submitted in support of the gunowner-defendant, Dingman. Dingman's attorney Don Kates said the attorney general's revised position is a setback to his client's case. "A case that was overwhelmingly [in Dingman's favor] now is less overwhelming," he said. He blamed the Los Angeles Times for Lungren's shift, saying he believes the attorney general was reacting to "a set of hit pieces" that could have hurt his electoral chances. Steve Helsley from the NRA was disappointed saying: "I'm sort of baffled, having spent so much time discussing this case with the Department of Justice," He said that Lungren and his staff had appeared fully committed to their previous position. Did you notice it? Lungren buckled to the pressure of the Time's anti-gun rhetoric. Isn't it time we fought back? Alright, here's what to do: A concerted, state-wide (or even national) campaign directed against one of the Times's major advertisers, with the possibility of reducing their ad revenues, may do the trick. Our target is Big 5 Sporting Goods. Big 5 does a major business in California, as well as in Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas and Washington. It advertises in all major newspapers in California (and, presumably in the other states as well). Ironically, Big 5 caters to hand gunners, target shooters and hunters, at the same time it is giving its advertising dollars to newspapers which are editorializing that the private ownership of most firearms should be banned. The Campaign: A letter-writing and telephone campaign directed to Big 5 to implore it reduce or cease advertising in any newspapers which editorialize against our right to self defense. This is not a boycott. Rather, we are capitalizing on the idea that retailers abhor negative press, are in a fiercely competitive business, and are very sensitive to their customer's whims. The theory is to direct several hundred, and hopefully thousand, well-written letters all to the president of Big 5. Letters should politely make the following points: (1) As a Big 5 customer and gunowner, the writer is very displeased to see Big 5 spending its ad money on The Los Angeles Times [or other anti-gun newspaper] which has repeatedly gone on record as opposing the right of self-defense, and of poor people to purchase firearms to protect their families; (2) Big 5 is thereby opposing the writer's constitutional right to defend himself/herself and his/her family; (3) If Big 5 continues to support anti-self-defense newspapers, the writer will stop patronizing Big 5, and will tell all of his/her friends and family to do the same. (4) Remind Big 5 that as shooting enthusiasts, there are plenty of other retailers out there who would love to do business with gun owners. (5) A [legitimate] return address. Write Big 5 at: Mr. Steve Miller, President United Merchandising Corp. Big 5 Sporting Goods P.O. Box 92088 Los Angeles, CA 90009 Or telephone him at: (310) 536-0611 For this campaign to be effective, we will need every Member's Council, every pro-gun organization and every activist in California and the Western U.S. to participate. Remember: be polite, do not threaten and remind him you spend $$$ on firearms. That's a language Mr. Miller will understand! Let's do it. Steve Silver Vice President The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society, Inc. 18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329 Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066 (The LSAS is a 501(c)(4) Non-Profit Corporation) Visit the LSAS's Web page at: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_menu.html Send an e-mail request, including your snail mail address, to: LSAS3@aol.com for a complimentary copy of the LSAS's newsletter, The Liberty Pole. Remember: Firearms are worth it if they save just one life. *** Self-defense is not a crime. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Sylvester Subject: Clinton :"we should not politicize the it" (IRS) Date: 30 Sep 1997 23:47:37 -0500 Clinton says mend IRS, but don't end it=20 Copyright =A9 1997 Nando.net Copyright =A9 1997 The Associated Press=20 WASHINGTON (September 30, 1997 10:51 p.m. EDT http://www.nando.net) -- Rocked by stories of IRS abuses, the Clinton administration scrambled Tuesday to sooth taxpayer anger and prevent Republicans from building on public sentiment to rein in the agency. President Clinton promised to make improvements to the agency many are saying is out of control, but insisted "we should not politicize" the= effort. . . . "We have done a lot of things to try to make the IRS more accountable, more professional. We can do more but we should not politicize it." ----- Pardon me whilst I make a call on the large white 'phone. Recch! Gag! Hurl! Spew!=20 The Second Amendment is the RESET button=20 of the United States Constitution. =20 ---Doug McKay" =20 Joe Sylvester Don't Tread On Me !