From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #120 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Tuesday, April 28 1998 Volume 02 : Number 120 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 98 12:22:49 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: Post-Breakdown Militia/Survival Communication (fwd) On Apr 27, Ed Wolfe wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >From J.J. Johnson: Unlimited re-distribution is hereby granted and encouraged. This article is submitted as guide to develop, build and maintain an effective network of radio and digital communications among like-minded individuals. Much of what will be discussed has been created in other areas of the country. Here in Nevada and southern California, we will seek to use these principles in creating a method of un-interruptible communication. Many of you are aware of these concepts. I am not trying to re-invent the wheel, nor I am trying to dictate what's best for you. Those who have better or different ideas are encouraged to share with others. But before we get started, a word about Knob Creek: Many will be shocked to here this from J.J. Johnson, but it was reported that Dave Rydel was to have Lawrence Meyers address the Knob Creek gathering and give a seminar on HAM communications, encryption, etc. Regardless of past actions, I do not believe Dave Rydel could have selected a more qualified person on the subject than Meyers. There...I said it. Meyers has written at least two soft cover manuals on communications and electronic counter-measures that I would consider a "mandatory purchase" and "must read" to anyone who is serious about this subject. They are titled "SPYCOMM" and "IMPROVISED RADIO JAMMING TECHNIQUES". Another recently published book I would strongly suggest is "Emergency Survival Communications" by Dave Ingram. With that said, the various reports I have read about the Knob Creek meetings was the best example of "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic" that I have ever seen. A national meeting of this type should be one that the press, federal agents, and even ADL members could attend, and it wouldn't make a difference. After all, they were probably there anyway. If there is another meeting, I would suggest those in attendance to stick to the subject of communications and networking. That way, no one has to worry about who the "fed" is, and it's something that everyone can agree on.(There is a message for Rydel and associates at the end of this article) NOTE: I recently wrote an article entitled "Rules of Engagement" that addressed many of these issues. I would suggest that those who left Knob Creek in a somewhat "state-of-disillusionment" read that article again. ...And with that said, let's talk radios. *** Without having any federal budget numbers in front of me, I could make a safe bet that the U.S. Department of Defense has spent more money over the last few decades for communication equipment than they have for weapons systems. There is a reason for this. Any military commander will tell you that as long as his men have and good supply of FUEL and INFORMATION, he can keep moving toward his objective. Communication is the foundation of the latter. Fuel, or "energy" is the subject for a future article. 1) Necessity A National communication network is needed in the event that normal communications fail. This could be caused any man-made or natural disasters that could strike at any time. Issues that we should be concerned about the most are: Y2K, emergency operations, and a military apparatus that has been all but decimated (I'm sure you've read the recent articles on this). Any of these could lead to a situation where telephone ,shortwave, and even satellite communications would be lost. A backup-system must be in place. Since most human being don't work well under severe stress, the time to create this system is NOW, and not AFTER all hell breaks lose. If a stand-off or siege happens (which is almost daily nowadays), even a minimal communication network can save a person's life. 2) Equipment needed After numerous discussions with HAM and other communication experts, we believe the best solution is for as many people as possible to obtain 11 meter (CB), 2 meter, and 10 meter communications gear. The last two require an FCC HAM License. Of course, there will be a huge debate and disagreement on this. I will address those concerns in the next section. First, I will explain the reasons for the use of each. a) 11 meter (CB Radio) is the best for road travel and local neighborhood watch programs. They are in-expensive. But keep in mind that in an emergency, when the phone lines go down, you will find these frequencies jammed with traffic. Where we are, it is all but impossible to communicate locally with CBs due to interference from high powered stations in Mexico during daylight hours. In a social/economic emergency, CBs will be virtually useless during the day outside of a 1-mile range, Base station CBs should be equipped with at least 100 watts of amplification with quality antennas. We stress that everyone invest in at least one CB radio in their vehicles. Remember: Linear amps are illegal so long as the FCC is around to enforce those laws. b) 2-meter rigs are more expensive radios, but less traffic will make communications clearer. 2-meter gear should be powered enough to reach the nearest repeater station. 2-meter can also be used for PACKET radio, which would have to replace the internet if and when the telephone network is interrupted. For the best information on this packet, see: http//www.sedan.org. 2-meter also give us the ability to link up with other networks around the country if necessary - provided all repeaters are in operation. NOTE: Dual band 2-meter/440 Mhz is preferred, but may be cost prohibitive. c) 10 meter systems with the proper antenna and powering equipment is the best for long distance communications. Sure, other frequency ranges are better, but we conclude that 10 meter is best for the money. It has the advantage of using the same type of antenna system as CB- thus saving cost. During the daylight hours, these signals can reach for hundreds of miles with little interference. All hand-held radio should be checked for microphone and speaker input jacks. If someone tries to sell you a hand held portable radio that do not have these functions, don't buy it. This is the start. Our advice: BUY THESE THINGS. Ask around if you don't know what to buy. Hopefully, we can create our frequency allocations tables using these frequency spectrums in the next few months. Right now, we urge people of like mind to obtain this equipment before it becomes unavailable (or before we all stop talking to one another). Also consider microphone and speaker headsets, quality antennas and good scanners. Knowing full well that the subjects outlined have been argued time and time again, I will list the major concerns and try to calm those fears. 1) Too expensive. Go back to the statement I made about the DOD spending more money for comm systems than they do on weapons systems. What am I saying? If you are one of those people who believe that having 20 or so guns in your home is enough to keep America free, you are naive. How many guns can you and your family fire with just two hands? And what good is your gun if you don't know what's coming at you? How will you call for help? No, I am not telling you to dis-arm yourself, but you may consider selling at least one of your firearms. The price of one AK-47 or AR-15 could purchase all the items listed above and more. If you can't spare a rifle, try to squeeze at least some commo gear into your emergency food budget. A base, mobile, or hand held unit alone could save your life in the event of a stand-off or siege, not to mention the rest of your second amendment hardware. You'll notice that when they come for your house, they cut the lines of communication long before they ever go for your guns. Why? For the same reason that the U.S Military destroyed the Iraqi reconnaissance radar installations long before they bombed Baghdad - and their first target in Baghdad was the phone company. Take a lesson from the experts. 2) The adversary can listen to our communications. They do that now. If fact there are numerous federal agencies dedicated to monitoring ALL frequencies - and the internet. By the way, even if Phil Zimmermann (father of PGP) sold out to the feds, it's irrelevant. Without having a copy of the random data you used to create your keys, it takes too long to break the code.(That's from and NSA and bank security expert). Decryption is TIME SENSITIVE. Remember that. Ever heard of encryption? This is also illegal on radio frequencies as long as the FCC is around to enforce these laws. In the event of a national emergency , foreign occupation or governmental collapse, a simple Morse code system of TAC-OP codes embedded in cryptograms can be transmitted over open lines that only the desired recipients can decode. That's right - not even that old CRAY 4 computer or Phil Z can break it. This may sound technical, but it's not. I found this information in a book written by Lawrence Meyers. For short distance(hand held and mobile communications), scramblers can be built, if not purchased. The circuitry is quite simple and it's something we should have been doing for a long time. Remember: decrypting signals is a time-sensitive business. During some emergency operations, one may not even need to encrypt signals. If the adversary cannot figure out what has been transmitted in a certain amount of time and why, his electronic counter-measures are useless. 3) They can jam the signals. Of course they can. And we can located the exact location of such counter-measures and deal with it as necessary. Sure beats sitting around and talking about who's a fed and who's the newest member of the Council on Foreign Relations, doesn't it?. In some cases, your adversary will not want to jam your signal. That way they can listen to what your saying. And If worse case comes, most of the socialist idiots will be so nuts that they'll have to listen to us for instructions on how to stay alive. Using this network, we can discuss how we would use non-electronic communications, in case this event (jamming) would take place. These strategies could also be openly discussed openly at national, state, and local meetings. 4) Obtaining an FCC license is bowing to the Federal Government. That's right, it is. I'll also add that they will have your address in their computer - along with the 700,000 HAMs, and 10 million other people they will have to track down. This is assuming you give the correct address of your base station equipment when obtaining your license. Taking a HAM test forces you to learn a few things about radio communication you'll need to know, anyway. And in the event of an emergency, your equipment can be moved. It's a small price to pay, people. If you and your friends choose to buy HAM gear and use it without obtaining a license, you'll will find yourselves in hostile territory with other licensed HAMs who self-police those frequencies. You might also find HAMS who are on the air for the same reason you are. Don't rock the boat on this one. The more HAMs there are, the more frequencies the FCC will allocate for everyone. 5) National networks are out there, but they are just being "quiet" until the time is right. Don't give me that garbage! The most experienced HAMS in this movement can't find these underground networks (and if they were there, they would find them). And even if they do exist, they won't be of much good to anyone else, not to mention your adversary will have no trouble finding out about this network once it is in operation. For those who have these underground national radio comm nets, would you mind telling the rest us what channel you will use when your little covenant community is surrounded and you need help, or would you rather wait until after it happens? I'm not asking you to give up all your secrecy, but at least have a separate distinct national network we can work together on. Once again, I am not trying to re-invent the wheel. but trying to make sure the wheel is well-lubricated - and round. 6) We'd rather not communicate with you people - we'll just work on our own. That's fine. But you might want to at least know where we'll be for information purposes. Just don't key-up the mike. Meanwhile, if you've got any info that could help out in the long run, we'd be glad to hear it. 7) The adversary can shut off the HAM repeater towers. I covered this subject in my article "Y2K and the Power Grid". This is another area where having a HAM license could be a benefit. Many HAMs have set up there own repeater stations. When ever the cell phone service and pager service goes down, the towers may still work for other communications. And if there is damage to these towers, and there's no one around to maintain them, wouldn't you like to know how to get that tower working again, not to mention the tower locations? Now there's some intel worth hunting for. Remember this: Your adversary needs the power grid and the phone networks to stay up-and-running more than you do. They will have to use the media to control the masses. In some cases, FEMA will also require assistance from HAM operators. Need I say more? 8) If everyone does this, the system will become clogged and the adversary will infiltrate it. My belief is that most people will NOT do this. We will only need one or two long distance stations per survival community. the local population will soon learn that this station will be the outlet for their long distance communications. As for infiltrators, they will show themselves by the amount of dis-information and unwarranted communications they transmit. A policy must be developed to remove such persons from the network, and change any code-key systems thereafter. 9) I don't like his/her beliefs, and I won't work with them. Nobody ever said you had to *like* the other person, but if our common goal is SURVIVAL, what is there to fight over? Besides for those who enjoy yelling and screaming at each other, let's build a stand-by network so we can keep fighting amongst ourselves even after the phones line go down. Shall we? After all folks, it might save a life - ours. *** I'm sure there will be more controversy, but I hoped I've addressed most of it. Once the type of equipment is agreed upon, the next task will be to setup frequency & time allocations, and exchange locations. Network cells for long distance should have there borders determined by geographic location, not just state boundaries. For instance, where we are in southern Nevada, southern California will have to be considered part of our area network. But northern Nevada must consider the input of Idaho, Wyoming, Oregon, and Northern California. areas that work together must be grouped by natural boundaries such as mountains, hill, rivers, lakes, distance, and of course - base station power output. Sounds too technical? Well, then we've got some book work to do. No one person has all the answers. But if we cannot or will not put the brains the God gave us together and come up with something, then we'll get what we deserve. This network has to be dynamic, not static. Complex, but simple enough that a 12 year old can understand it. Different frequencies must be used at different times. There is no way we can all work on one channel. Local network must create themselves. States should create the own nets based on their local equipment. The State networks must integrate themselves into one national network. This has to be a bottom-up project. One important topic the national network must focus on is a universal mapping grid system. Folks who aren't tech-minded can work on this project. HINT: For starters, see http://www.topoguide.com Volunteers who wish to administrate this networking project should create a few web sites (or mail lists)for a central collection of data input. Once a policy is reached (by consensus or committee) that data should be made available to all. But please keep all political & religious viewpoints, covert operational strategies, and other such nonsense OFF of this web site or news group. It should be strictly communication. Strictly business. To get started, just imagine that the entire phone, and power grid has been shut down permanently, then ask you self, "How do we communicate?" Again this article was written as a guide, not a gospel. Many may have better ideas, or more established networks. We are asking for your input without violating your own security protocol. But remember, most of us are not rich, and therefore will not be able to afford purchasing state-of-the-art comm gear. Think practical. Can this be done? Can it work? Only if we want it to. For those willing to participate, Let's get to work. J.J. Johnson -citizen@mindspring.com _______________________________________________________ To Rydel and all other Knob Creek/ VFW Associates (and all others): The last Knob Creek meeting may have not gone as planned, but it gives an opportunity to learn from past mistakes, put all differences aside, and start over. I hope the April gathering won't be the last meeting. If the October meeting could be limited to the subjects listed above (communications and networking) and other related topics, I would fully endorse it, and would even encourage others to do the same. Between now and October, let the internet be used to discuss all options, followed by a vote of those in attendance to officially lay out the policies guidelines and procedures. This would encourage participation from all of the states and give the VFW gathering a sound foundation to work from. I would suggest all military rank, attitudes, and information about the latest accusation is left at the door. If no one leader can be trusted to administrate over this non-partisan gathering, then let someone else do it. I can personally think of several non-501 C3 pastors would could be best suited for this (provided their expenses were covered). That way, we could get away from the finger-pointing issues. That's who led the original Patriots. The time is come to stop pointing swords at each other. A working network of communication can and must be created which is void of accusations, ideologies, and name calling. Since we don't have much of a military left, a Y2K problem coming, and a government being openly handed over to the enemy, our country's future depends on it. Bury the hatchets, people.( J.J. Johnson) ____________________________________________________________________ My lines of communication are now open. citizen@mindspring.com - -- I sit on a man's back, choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by all possible means -- except by getting off his back. -- Leo Tolstoy [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Apr 98 18:24:29 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: INFO: Opening Closed Doors - Statement by ILA Director Metaksa (fwd) On Apr 27, NRA Alerts wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] OPENING CLOSED DOORS Statement by Mrs. Tanya K. Metaksa Executive Director National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action to the Commission on Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice Seventh Session Vienna, Austria April 27, 1998 Agenda Item 5: Criminal Justice Reform and Strengthening of Legal Institutions Measures to Regulate Firearms ________________ Madame Chairperson, first let me congratulate you on the excellent job you have done in presiding over today's plenary session of the Commission. By way of introduction let me note that the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action is the oldest, largest, most active organization in the world concerned with shooting sports and the rights of firearms owners. The NRA has over three million members worldwide and our organization actively lobbies in all fifty of the United States and in the U.S. Congress. The NRA has been an official Economical and Social Counsel non-governmental organization since 1996. In this capacity, we have assumed a leadership role in monitoring all international firearms regulations efforts. We attended all four of the regional workshops on firearms regulations as well as the sixth Session of the Commission on Crime Prevention. Today I should like to address three topics. First, the report of the Secretary General on "Measures to Regulate Firearms." Second, the resolutions regarding firearms which are being considered by this body. And finally, Madame Chairperson, perhaps the most important, the need for democratic reform of the method by which the UN conducts its business when considering issues which, by definition, constitute key elements of the domestic affairs of member states. Report of the Secretary General Having reviewed the report of the Secretary General on "Measures to Regulate firearms" [E/CN. 15/1998/4], we find it an incredible document. It is more aptly described as an un- credible document. I refer to the section sub-titled, "Conclusion of the Workshop." That is found in paragraphs 11 through 23 of the report. This is un-credible for two reasons: the substance of the conclusions and the process by which those conclusions were drawn. Let me list just a few of the so-called, "conclusions" more precisely, affronts to law-abiding possessors of firearms, good people not just of the United States of America but good people of nations around the world. * That hunters should be required to store their firearms in sporting clubs. * That the firearms used in hunting be sharply restricted and permitted for use only to protect wildlife. * That only smooth-bore firearms be permitted for protection of property or life. * That firearm owners establish a need before being allowed to possess firearms. * That firearms collectors be allowed to possess only those firearms which are non-functional. * That there be an upper-age-limit on the possession of firearms. * That firearms owners obtain insurance before being allowed to hunt. * That firearms possession be discouraged and that, if they must, individuals would be permitted to own one firearm at most. Madame Chair, we have in our hands a report issued by a group of people who have bent over backwards to avoid open processes -- processes designed to arrive at measured conclusions. Instead, we have witnessed closed processes which yield no measured conclusions at all, but radical proposals which strike at the core of freedoms we hold dear and a heritage which was passed on to us by our fathers and forefathers. These radical affronts may or may not have been actually discussed at the workshop. Indeed, this is the first time we and our government have heard of many of them. We monitored all four workshops, and we reviewed all published materials, but no verbatim records are kept of workshops. Most sessions were completely closed, even to the very people who have the most to lose. People like us. Citizens with rights. Citizens with something to say. Citizens with no way of verifying how radical proposals found their way into an official U.N. document. Madame, I will return to this point later, but for the record, permit me to make this observation: the U.N.'s tarnished reputation shall never brighten when its agencies cloak themselves in secrecy, when it insists on closing doors rather than opening doors when it masquerades radical proposals as blithe conclusions in officially bound documents. Resolutions under Consideration Let me hasten to add, Madame Chairperson, that we are extremely gratified that no resolution has been introduced for a "declaration of principles on firearm regulation." There has not been sufficient discussion of any such declaration. A resolution at this time would have premature at best. If this body chooses to proceed ahead with further efforts to tighten firearm regulation, we would request that all future meetings be open meetings. Now, action is being considered under the draft resolution. We would sincerely hope that the UN would listen to the pleas not just of the NRA, but of firearms owners worldwide. When we say that we want an opportunity to be heard, we are mindful that the issues we wish to discuss are considered vital by hundreds of millions of hunters, shooters, and lawful possessors of firearms. Democratic reforms of UN procedures Now, let's discuss our final point. Democratic reform of U.N. Procedures. We know and appreciate that the National Rifle Association of America is probably not the U.N.'s most popular Non- governmental Organization. We are fully aware that some have criticized the assertiveness with which we defend our position. I can assure you that our defense of our position will continue to be strong, vibrant and dynamic, so I believe we can predict with some certainty that, in the future, our critics will continue to complain about our effectiveness. That is fine, Madame Chair, for we are not thin-skinned. Indeed, we relish the give and take of a healthy political dialogue. What I want to emphasize today, however, goes far beyond the style with which we defend our freedom and our cultural heritage. It goes far beyond the words of our critics who complain about our assertive defense of our rights. Oh, no, at issue today is neither the style or the substance of this particular non- governmental organization. At issue today and for the foreseeable future is the style and substance of the United Nations itself. In the grand scheme of things, NRA's popularity is of no consequence. At issue is the U.N.'s commitment to an open, democratic process within its own agencies and institutions. Put bluntly, and I can see that our critics are now sitting up, paying closer attention, and taking copious notes put bluntly, how the U.N. treats the NRA is a major test for the U.N. Why? Because, in many ways, the NRA member is the quintessential average citizen. He, or she, is extraordinary, not because of their wealth or station in life, but because of the values they embody. Our members are from every major political party in our nation, men and women, young and old, all colors and creeds. What holds this diverse, dynamic group of people together, as members of a single association, is their shared values. NRA members are ordinary people who come together, because they cherish the values this association stands for: safety, individual responsibility, and freedom. Thus, the manner in which NRA is treated by the U.N. will be seen as emblematic of how the U.N. treats everyday citizens of every member-nation, all around the world, citizens whose lives and culture could be radically transformed by what you decide and how you go about deciding it. With the end of the Cold War, the UN is now engaged in myriad activities, peace-keeping, democracy- building, functions profoundly different from its earlier days. Now, Madame Chairperson, you are probably asking, how does this relate to the need for democratic reform in UN procedures? When the UN was mainly concerned with fulfilling its classic diplomatic role of preventing interstate wars of aggression, there was little necessity for citizens of members countries to have a voice in your deliberation. If and when the UN chooses to involve itself in issues which are domestic by nature, and this most definitely includes the firearms issue, the U.N.'s approach must change. Many criticize the U.N. for even delving into domestic issues; we will leave their valid criticisms for another time. Today, this much can and should be said: the U.N. cannot act in the classic diplomatic manner of governments talking to governments in a closed, restrictive process. The process must be democratic. If there are meetings, they must be opened. If there is information, it must be shared. If decisions are built on evidence and discussions, then all three -- evidence, discussions and resulting decisions -- all three must be made a matter of record. And, if there is a record, that record must be available to the public. Madame Chairperson, we have had a thorny relationship with the UN. The test for the UN is not how it relates to a group with which it feels compatible, but how it relates to groups who often take strong positions, positions some of you may find contrary. This is what democracy is all about. Our experience to date has not been good. One is tempted to say that, if you have found us assertive, I can assure you we have found your locked doors aggressive. Meetings have been closed when they should have been opened. Information was not furnished when it should have been furnished. Deliberations have been private when they should have been public. Madame Chairperson, let me conclude by saying that it is our intention to pursue through the appropriate channels two major reforms of UN procedures. In the USA, such approaches are often called "sunshine laws." Such laws open closed doors, so that all interested parties can observe and participate in the light of day. In U.N. parlance, they are known as "increased transparency." First, the NRA Institute for Legislative Action will seek an "open meeting" provision for the UN. Under such a provision, all official meetings of the UN will, with certain limited exceptions, be open to the public. Second, the NRA Institute for Legislative Action will seek a "public records" provision for the UN. Under this provision, all documents held by the UN will, with certain limited exceptions, be open to public examination. Our extraordinary, ordinary citizens who make up the NRA might put it this way: we want open, honest debate. We want freedom of information. We like town meetings, and we love democracy. And we think, in expressing those values, we have a lot of company. When this Commission meeting started, Pino Alaachi made a prophetic statement. He said, and I quote, Madame Chairperson, "Ultimately, we answer to citizens of the governments of the world." Indeed, Madame Chairperson, so do you. And, from one ordinary citizen who has the honor of speaking for millions of freedom-loving citizens of the United States of America, citizens who are as average as they are extraordinary, thank you for listening. =+=+=+=+ This information is provided as a service of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Fairfax, VA. This and other information on the Second Amendment and the NRA is available at: http://WWW.NRA.Org [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 01:43:14 -0500 From: Joe Sylvester Subject: Re: US backs UN Gun Control (fwd) At 10:28 AM 4/27/98 -0400, pwatson@utdallas.edu wrote: > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 08:28:45 -0700 >Subject: US backs UN Gun Control > > >U.S. aims to shoot down illicit firearms trafficking > >Nation backs U.N. resolution for the first time > >The process alone, even before Friday, has been salutary, advocates of >domestic gun-control laws said. "It has encouraged governments to focus >on gun laws and adopt tougher ones," said Rebecca Peters, an Australian >who represented the International Alliance of Women. She said, for >example, that after the workshop in New Delhi, in January, Mongolia banned >the import of all firearms. > Excepting those brought in by the Chinese Army of Occupation, one would suppose. Sheesh, talk about a bad example for her side, and a "good" one for ours. The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution. ---Doug McKay" Joe Sylvester Don't Tread On Me ! - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 08:47:34 -0700 From: Boyd Kneeland Subject: Re: INFO: Opening Closed Doors - Statement by ILA Director Metaksa (fwd) Ok, having read that I'm ready to hear from the usual suspects about how the NRA does not Kick Ass for the gun owners of the world. Thats right, after hearing Ms. Metaksa "take it to the mountain" I'd like all those critics who want to dump this astounding (albeit flawed) tool to just raise their hand here. Thank you. And a BIG thank you to TM for making my membership an honor. I'll enjoy continuing to work for the FNRA event in Bellevue Wa this friday. I'll be early to the Washington Libertarian convention (Sat. and Sun) where CLAW members will hand out copies of this speech and sign up -more- NRA members. And I'll work late each day at the Washington Arms Collectors show to set up and photograph the NRA auction. Boyd Kneeland, Pres., Council for Legislative Action, Washington. (CLAW) Text of Metaksa speech to UN deleted. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 13:20:44 -0400 (EDT) From: John Curtis Subject: Re: INFO: Opening Closed Doors - Statement by ILA Director Metaksa (fwd) > >Ok, having read that I'm ready to hear from the usual suspects about how >the NRA does not Kick Ass for the gun owners of the world. Thats right, >after hearing Ms. Metaksa "take it to the mountain" I'd like all those >critics who want to dump this astounding (albeit flawed) tool to just raise >their hand here. >Thank you. Ok, I'll confess. I've said some critical things about the NRA in the past. It certainly appears that Ms. Metaksa said the right things to the right people. If she can really pry those people loose from their undemocratic methods, then she ought to run for President. jcurtis - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 10:57:09 -0700 From: Boyd Kneeland Subject: Re: INFO: Opening Closed Doors - Statement by ILA Director Metaksa (fwd) Well, dang John. I didn't think anybody would pay attention to my little hoo-rah. FWIW I too am critical of some of NRAs obvious screwups. Just felt like celebrating that particular good move on Tanyas and did not mean to point any fingers. Actually, looking at what else hit my email box with the latest looksee I see that the Judge in the Fezell face found NRA in contempt. The part of me that likes calling a spade a spade likes it but the part of me that cringes when I can feel the media warming up to show my friends shooting themselves in the foot is, well, cringing. B >> >>Ok, having read that I'm ready to hear from the usual suspects about how >>the NRA does not Kick Ass for the gun owners of the world. Thats right, >>after hearing Ms. Metaksa "take it to the mountain" I'd like all those >>critics who want to dump this astounding (albeit flawed) tool to just raise >>their hand here. >>Thank you. > > Ok, I'll confess. I've said some critical things about the > NRA in the past. It certainly appears that Ms. Metaksa said > the right things to the right people. If she can really pry those > people loose from their undemocratic methods, then she ought to run > for President. > > jcurtis > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 12:38:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Subject: IRS witness urged by Fed Judge not to talk to Congress - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- =============================================== [05] IRS Witness Urged Not To Go Public By ROB WELLS AP Tax Writer NEWSDAY WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Virginia restaurant owner who is suing the IRS for $20 million plans to testify before a Senate panel this week on IRS abuses despite a federal judge's angry complaints about excessive pretrial publicity of the case. U.S. District Judge J. Calvitt Clarke Jr. in Norfolk, Va., last year urged attorneys for John Colaprete, co-owner of the Jewish Mother restaurants in Virginia, to waive taxpayer confidentiality laws to let the Internal Revenue Service tell its side of the story in public. Clarke, upset that Colaprete and his lawyers were discussing details of the case in nationally televised interviews, said the publicity would prejudice potential jurors and threaten the IRS agents' right to a fair trial. Colaprete's tale of a botched raid by IRS and state agents will take center stage at a Senate Finance hearing Wednesday. The retired Marine, who doesn't have a criminal record, refused to grant the IRS a waiver of taxpayer confidentiality laws, saying the IRS wasn't trustworthy. Judge Clarke then took the unusual step of making public pretrial court records so the government's side could be presented. ``And there isn't any question about what ... your people are doing is all one-sided,'' Clarke said in an April 8, 1997 hearing, according to a transcript of the case. ``Why don't you dismiss these cases and go on and get your evens, get even in the press, and we can forget this suit?'' His comments were directed at Colaprete's attorney, Robert Haddad. Colaprete is scheduled to testify Wednesday about 1994 raids by IRS, Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and local police on the businesses and homes of the owners. The raids led to no criminal charges, even though agents carted away a truckload of records and equipment. Colaprete, co-owner Ted Bonk, former manager Scotty Miller and his family filed a federal lawsuit in 1996 against the agents who participated in the raid. The lawsuit alleges violation of their constitutional rights against improper seizure and due process. It accuses the agents of assault, false imprisonment and conducting illegal searches and seizures. In an interview Monday, Haddad recalled ``the hearing where Judge Clark yelled at us'' but defended his client's upcoming appearance before the Senate committee. ``He was invited. He didn't decide to testify,'' Haddad said. ``The bottom line is it was not something that we sought out.'' Haddad said the plaintiffs remain outraged at government allegations in court documents that there was about $20,000 in unreported income from the restaurants and marijuana was discovered at Colaprete's home during the raid. No drug charges were filed against Colaprete, and the business has cleared state and federal tax audits without any money owed, Haddad said. ``That's something else that caught us flat-footed,'' Haddad said of the marijuana allegation. ``It wasn't John's. He said, `I don't have drugs in my house.''' The case involves allegations that 20 agents, including the IRS and Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, accompanied by dogs, came through the front door of the Virginia Beach restaurant and told the manager they were closing the business. Raided at the same time was the Jewish Mother in Norfolk and the homes of two restaurant officials. The suit charges that agents interrupted a slumber party hosted by Miller's teen-age daughter at his house, rousted Miller from the shower at gunpoint and prevented him from calling his lawyer. =============================================== - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #120 *************************