From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: FCC Public File Auto-FAQ
Date: 01 Oct 2000 00:59:18 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: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: GREAT TEMPTATIONS- Tom Adkins (fwd)
Date: 02 Oct 2000 06:37:42 PST
On Oct 2, Coolhair1@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Great Temptations
the Intellectual Elite and the Great Bourgeois...
Tom Adkins
the Common Conservative 10/1/00
Tom Adkins Link---> commonconservative.com
Great Temptations
The Intellectual Elite and the Great Bourgeois
by Tom Adkins
10/01/00
I have a grudging admiration for the liberal elite. They are pithy. Witty.
They have the perfect byte. They are united, on-message like a Swiss watch.
They seem so scintillating, so brilliant, so intellectual. Their commitment
to ideology never waivers, even as the rotting pillars fall beneath them. So
if they are so smart, why are they liberal? Because liberalism is the Great
Temptation of the intellectual.
Like junior-high boys checking each other out in the locker room, we
perpetually assess each other's intellect, and quickly learn our place in the
pecking order. For the Intellectual Elite, who combine great intellect and
great compassion, the arrogant temptation to tell the Great Bourgeois how to
live is hard to resist. The Great Bourgeois, the vast class of average folk,
have an equal temptation. They expect these smarter people to solve their
problems. To lead them. To take care of them. Today, these two entities drive
the liberal core of the American Democrat party, united in failure, as the
Intellectual Elite leads the Great Bourgeois over the cliff of dependent
self-destruction.
As the theory of individual freedom signaled the end of the Divine King
paradigm, Karl Marx's gunpoint collectivism rose to compete. This battle took
a few hundred years, but across the globe, the messy imperfection of
individual liberty clearly trumped perfect and orderly socialism. Virtually
all American successes over the past 20 years have come by rejecting our own
socialist experiment and reverting back to the individualist concept that
made America great in the first place. Yet the Intellectual Elite continues
to believe their sheer brilliance compels them to save the rest of the world
from themselves.
Unfortunately, the Intellectual Elite placed their entire political
investment in this failed Utopian vision. Now, they cannot possibly
capitulate without rendering themselves obsolete. That's why the American
liberal elite is almost entirely composed of professional liberals. They get
paid to be liberal; college professors, politicians, writers, pundits and
such. Otherwise, who would employ a Marxist professor who spent his life
being professionally wrong? The Intellectual Elite survive by preying upon
the weakness of the Great Bourgeois, who simply cannot avoid this artful
pitch of getting something for nothing. Like the gambler who cannot tear away
from the roulette wheel, the Great Bourgeois always try to beat the house.
And they always lose. They never stop and think that surrendering half of
their income to government bureaucracy guarantees a mathematically negative
result. Karl Marx really had it backwards. The worst exploitation is not the
rich upon the poor, but the Intellectual Elite upon the Great Bourgeois.
Unable to admit defeat, the Intellectual Elite survives by blithely plowing a
field of new lies to cover the failed crop of old lies, at the expense of
humanity. But the worst liberal deception is upon themselves. Do social
engineers really believe enslaving poor people into government dependency is
better? Do they really think perfect Cuban communist starvation is better
than flawed American capitalist success? Do these brilliant thinkers believe
those 150 million people murdered worldwide to preserve socialist power over
the last century are a justified cathartic cleansing, paving the way to a
better world?
What is lacking in this great intellectual class is wisdom? The Modern
Conservative is often accused of having no vision or compassion. But
conservatives of all intellect understand individuals solve their own
problems far better than the grandiose money-burning schemes of
paper-shuffling bureaucrats. When intellectuals gain this wisdom, they become
conservative or Libertarian. Therefore, intelligence doesn't separate the
Intellectual Elite from Modern Conservatives. Wisdom does.
Slowly, the house of socialism is teetering. It props itself up by fooling
enough of the people enough of the time. At the crumbling foundation is a
failure of liberals to be honest, not only with others, but with themselves.
And when the walls are crumbling around you, fooling yourself becomes the
greatest temptation.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: {slick-d} Clinton removed from certificate (fwd)
Date: 03 Oct 2000 09:06:28 PST
On Oct 3, S62140Y@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Eagle Scouts drop
Clinton signature=20
After 'about a zillion complaints,'
president removed from certificate=20
By David M. Bresnahan
=A9 2000 WorldNetDaily.com=20
Following complaints from "thousands of parents" nationwide, Boy Scouts of=
=20
America has quietly removed the signature of President Bill Clinton -- the=
=20
honorary president of BSA -- from the certificate presented to Eagle Scouts=
.=20
"We had about a zillion complaints about Clinton, so I think they just took=
=20
him off. I don't know if they'll put a president back on or not when there'=
s=20
a new one," said Chris who works in the Great Salt Lake Council office in=20
Salt Lake City, Utah. She said the change came from the national office.=20
Not only were there many complaints, but a large number of Eagle Scouts=20
actually returned their certificates and asked for a replacement without=20
Clinton's signature.=20
"I don't really know. I know that there were a lot of people that asked tha=
t=20
the president's signature not be on them. I think they reprinted them witho=
ut=20
it. I don't know," said Sandra at the national BSA office.=20
"When they reprinted the Eagle Scout certificates they left off the=20
president's signature because we're in the process of a change of president=
s.=20
And, we've had so many problems with the president's name on the certificat=
e=20
-- so many people objecting -- that they just decided to put just the board=
=20
president on the certificate from now on. It just created a lot less=20
controversy," she explained.=20
No special announcement was made when the Boy Scouts of America changed the=
=20
award certificate earlier this year. The certificate is presented to boys w=
ho=20
earn the rank of Eagle Scout, the highest rank a Boy Scout can attain. Ther=
e=20
have been no complaints now that Clinton's signature is absent from the=20
certificate.=20
"They're printed documents. It's not like President Clinton actually signed=
=20
them," explained Greg Shields, national spokesman for the BSA. "When we=20
exhausted our supply we gave it a little thought and we decided to just put=
=20
the signature of the actual president of the Boy Scouts. He represents a=20
volunteer who's personally involved in the administration and direction of=
=20
the Boy Scouts of America."=20
Shields confirmed that BSA council offices all over the country received=20
thousands of complaints following the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the=20
impeachment of Clinton. He said those complaints had nothing to do with the=
=20
change. He insisted the change was simply to have focus on the signature of=
=20
the "real" president of Scouting on the certificate instead of the "honorar=
y"=20
president.=20
"That's all it reflected. Nothing more," said Shields.=20
Past certificates included both the BSA president's signature and that of t=
he=20
president of the United States. The new certificates, however, have=20
eliminated Clinton's signature.=20
Congress may take the issue one step further. A bill has been filed to stri=
p=20
BSA of the national charter Congress gave it in 1916. A group of homosexual=
=20
rights activists has been fighting the popular organization -- despite the=
=20
recent Supreme Court ruling in BSA's favor -- to change its policy of=20
excluding homosexuals from youth membership and adult leadership, and they=
=20
want the charter revoked.=20
Scouting for All has organized a national campaign against the BSA and has=
=20
rallied many homosexual organizations to its cause. Democratic Rep. Lynn=20
Woolsey, District 6 Calif., filed H.R. 4892 entitled "The Scouting for All=
=20
Act: To repeal the Federal charter of the Boy Scouts of America."=20
"It's not in response to that either," said Shields of the proposed=20
legislation, noting that the change on the certificates took place many=20
months before the bill was filed by Woolsey.=20
Local Scout leaders in Utah claim Clinton is the first U.S. president not t=
o=20
make a speech at the Boy Scout National Jamboree, and that he is the first =
to=20
have his signature eliminated from the prestigious Eagle Scout award=20
certificate.=20
Shields said he hasn't been around long enough to confirm or deny those=20
reports.=20
Shortly after Clinton took office in 1993, he failed to show up at the=20
National Jamboree, located only 70 miles from the White House. The press at=
=20
the time blamed the snub on Clinton's effort to please the homosexual lobby=
=20
-- a major source of campaign donations.=20
The next jamboree was held in 1997, and this time Clinton attended.=20
"We are grateful. Please recognize that he did come. That's significant,"=20
said Shields.=20
Shields did not know if press reports in 1993 stating that Clinton was the=
=20
first U.S. president to turn down an invitation to speak at the National=20
Jamboree were accurate. He pointed out that jamborees began at the time of=
=20
the Roosevelt administration.=20
Calls to the White House press office for clarification of Clinton's positi=
on=20
regarding the Boy Scouts and the complaints of the homosexual groups were n=
ot=20
returned.=20
"We made the change to reflect the current leadership, personally and deepl=
y=20
involved in the Boy Scouts of America. While President Clinton is involved =
in=20
the Boy Scouts of America -- and we deeply appreciate that he came to our=20
last National Jamboree -- no one would say that he's personally and deeply=
=20
involved," said Shields.=20
Regardless of the real reason the signature was removed from the Eagle Scou=
t=20
certificates, the complaints have stopped and no one complains that Clinton=
's=20
signature is missing.=20
Scouting for All announced it would conduct protests at 36 BSA offices acro=
ss=20
the country on Monday. Six of the locations produced no protesters, many ha=
d=20
only a handful, and just a few had a dozen or more. One of the largest was =
in=20
New York City where about 30 came to demand that the Boy Scouts admit=20
homosexual adults as leaders, according to Shields.=20
"Everybody has a right to their opinion. We simply ask everyone to respect=
=20
our values and our beliefs and our right to hold those, and tolerate -- to=
=20
use their parlance," said Shields. "I really mean that from my heart," he=20
added.=20
He questioned the size and strength of the Scouting for All coalition, and=
=20
said the numbers manifested at the protest locations did not reflect the=20
degree of concern from the general population suggested by the activists.=20
"The thing is, we're not asking everyone to join us. We're just saying that=
=20
we have a place in this world, in this country. Give us a little space. We'=
re=20
not asking for government support. We're not asking for anything other than=
=20
our little space," said Shields.=20
Despite the efforts of Scouting for All and other homosexual activists, the=
=20
Boy Scouts of America is growing as an organization and prospering. Althoug=
h=20
activists have attempted to convince United Way officials to stop providing=
=20
donations to BSA, they have succeeded in only a few locations. Activists ha=
ve=20
also asked boys and adults to resign in protest of the policy on homosexual=
s.=20
"All across the country, Scouting is prospering and growing. Virtually ever=
y=20
council has had healthy growth in both youth members and adult volunteers.=
=20
Every council is enjoying improved financial support, to the extent that ma=
ny=20
are making capital improvements in their camps and council service centers=
=20
for the first time in years. Many councils are now able to begin building=20
endowments or add to existing ones that will enhance programs for years to=
=20
come," explained Robert M. Gates, president of the National Eagle Scout=20
Association.=20
The largest number of boys to achieve Eagle Scout Scouts set a historic=20
record in 1999, according to Gates. There were over 47,000 boys who earned=
=20
the prestigious award, beating the record previously set in 1973.=20
Gates also confirmed that financial support and community support for=20
Scouting is increasing.=20
"These people clearly see Scouting as an important part of the life of thei=
r=20
communities and, even though many of them don't have a child in Scouting,=20
they are prepared to support Scouting with their time and resources. They=20
clearly understand the importance of our commitment to character building i=
n=20
young people -- and the success of our efforts," said Gates in a report to=
=20
current and former Eagle Scouts.=20
To sound off on this issue, you may participate in WND's daily poll.=20
Previous articles:=20
Homosexuals protest 'bigot' Boy Scouts=20
Homosexuals target Boy Scouts=20
First the Boy Scouts, then your church=20
Homosexual group spams Boy Scouts=20
---
--
David M. Bresnahan is an investigative journalist for WorldNetDaily.com=20
E-mail to a friend Printer-friendly version=20=20
=20=20
=20
Not only were there many complaints, but a large number of Eagle Scouts=20
actually returned their certificates and asked for a replacement without=20
Clinton's signature.
=20
=20=20=20
I know that there were a lot of people that asked that the president's=20
signature not be on them. I think they reprinted them without it.
=20=20=20
-- Sandra at the national Boy Scouts of America office=20
=20
=20=20=20
We're not asking everyone to join us. We're just saying that we have a plac=
e=20
in this world, in this country. Give us a little space. We're not asking fo=
r=20
government support. We're not asking for anything other than our little spa=
ce.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: State Farm Begins Dumping South Carolina Gun Owners.
Date: 03 Oct 2000 18:29:57 PST
Time for another Boycott. You'd think these turkeys would talk to each
other once in a while. If you call or write, tell them you've been
considering doing business with them, but when you heard about their
Anti-2nd Amendment activities, you decided on a competitor. This tactic
works better than anything else tried, and on any kind of business. Pass
the word to as many Patriot lists as possible, and State Farm _will_ get
tired of hearing it. Also, pass along any good contact info, CEO phone
numbers, email addrs and so on. Mentioning that you're passing the word on
the internet doesn't hurt any either.
"On Oct 3, Amelia wrote:"
>: I have not had time yet to read this article. Just sending it along for
>your information and consideration.
>Amelia
>
>
>
>State Farm Begins Dumping South Carolina Gun
>> For Immediate Distribution to all ListServs, Bulletin Boards,
>> Newsgroups,
>> Radio Stations, Newpapers, all other media.
>>
>> Hunter? Shooter? Who Is Your Good Neighbor? State Farm Begins Dumping
>> Gun
>> Owners.
>>
>> Gary Atkinson is a good neighbor, even though his nearest neighbor lives
>>
>> hundreds of feet away. He makes his home in rural Chapin, South Carolina
>> on
>> thirteen hilly, mostly wooded acres, along with his wife Lisa, sons Tom
>> and
>> Yates, two horses, three yard dogs, and "too many cats to count" as Gary
>>
>> puts it. "Somebody's got to take in the homeless animals" he explains.
>> "If not, well.." His voice trails off. No need to describe the fate of
>> stray
>> animals in a sparsely populated area.
>>
>> Gary's job in heavy equipment sales brought him from Illinois to South
>> Carolina in 1985. He promptly fell in love with the area, and bought
>> acreage 25 miles and a culture away from the state capitol in Columbia.
>> Gary and Lisa bought a second, adjoining parcel in 1988, and began
>> building their dream house in 1990. "We moved into the house in 1992"
>> Gary says with a laugh, "but we never stopped building. A barn.
>> Outbuildings. A pool. A pond. There's always something going on at our
>> place". When the time came for Gary to change jobs, he stayed in South
>> Carolina.
>>
>> Gary admits his rural homestead isn't as rural as it once was. Fifteen
>> families now live along his dead-end country road, and more are
>> discovering
>> this long-forgotten corner of Richland County every year. But it remains
>> a
>> close-knit community, where everybody knows everybody else. The kids
>> play
>> together, the adults are good friends, and the entire neighborhood gets
>> together several times a year for a massive "block party".
>>
>> But being a good neighbor involves more than holding block parties and
>> swimming in each other's pools. It involves being there when people have
>> a
>> need. For example, Lisa prepares meals for shut-ins, and Gary uses his
>> tractor and chain saw to help around the neighborhood. Sometimes he
>> cuts grass for people who can't do it themselves. When Mike, their
>> neighbor across the street, broke his back in a fall from a deer stand,
>> Gary built special rails on Mike's front steps so that Mike could get in
>>
>> and out of his house. And when there was a loud explosion in the woods
>> behind another neighbor's house, she immediately called Gary and asked
>> him to investigate. Gary found a tree had fallen across a power line in
>> a
>> right-of-way, and started a fire. He fought the fire himself while
>> others
>> summoned help. By the time the trained firefighters arrived, Gary had
>> brought the blaze under control. The firefighters' main job was to put
>> out
>> the still-burning utility pole. That's the kind of "good neighbor" Gary
>> is.
>>
>> For 34 years Gary bought his insurance from State Farm, a company that
>> claims its a good neighbor. His father got him started with car
>> insurance
>> when Gary was 16. Gary later bought homeowners insurance from State
>> Farm,
>> and eventually added an umbrella policy to protect the assets he had
>> accumulated. Gary was happy with State Farm. And State Farm should
>> have been happy with Gary, because he has an excellent claims record.
>> True, his car was broken into several years ago. Hurricane Hugo
>> blew down a tree. And a pipe burst, causing damage in his basement. Not
>> bad, for 34 years of State Farm coverage.
>>
>> Gary's rosy relationship with State Farm came to a screeching halt a few
>>
>> months ago, when he casually mentioned to the local State Farm office
>> that
>> he had been shooting in a ravine back in the woods behind his house. The
>>
>> local agent, who he regarded as a friend, didn't like that, and
>> questioned
>> Gary closely. Shooting? With guns? He answered all of her questions, and
>>
>> even took her through the woods to the ravine so she could see the area
>> for
>> herself. She wasn't happy. Neither was the home office. State Farm
>> promptly
>> cancelled Gary's coverage for what the company called "the operation of
>> the
>> shooting range on your property".
>>
>> Hunting and recreational shooting are a way of life in rural South
>> Carolina, and in much of the rest of America. Gary has enjoyed these
>> activities since he was seven years old, when his father started him
>> with a .22 bolt action rifle. (It's a tradition Gary hopes to pass on to
>> his
>> own sons.) Still, Gary tried to appease State Farm by offering to limit
>> his shooting. Would they ever let him shoot on his own property, or did
>> the
>> company insist on a total ban? "Maybe once in a Blue Moon" the agent
>> told him. "What about hunters going through my woods?" Gary asked.
>> "It's just too dangerous" she replied.
>>
>> Gary next offered to protect State Farm from any liability for his
>> shooting. The ravine was on a parcel of land separate from the house, so
>>
>> what if they just insured the parcel with the house? No deal. Gary went
>> out and bought a million dollar liability policy from an NRA-endorsed
>> underwriter to cover his shooting activities. Would State Farm
>> be willing to exclude all shooting activities from his homeowners
>> policy?
>> Still no deal.
>>
>> So, what did State Farm want from him? Gary asked State Farm's agent to
>> point out the fine print in his policy, or to show him something in
>> writing, so that he could keep the company happy. She conceded there
>> was no fine print, nothing in the policy, and nothing in writing
>> anywhere.
>> But the company regards shooting activities as a "factor of increased
>> risk"
>> she told him, and as reason for terminating his coverage.
>> The company would never be happy.
>>
>> State Farm's agent also tried to stop Gary from shooting by claiming all
>> of
>> the other national insurance companies had similar "no shooting" rules,
>> so Gary
>> shouldn't bother to shop around. But Gary did shop around, and he
>> quickly
>> learned that many companies were more than happy to insure safe
>> shooters.
>>
>> Gary now has all the insurance coverage he wants. From companies that
>> are
>> happy to have his business. At prices lower than he was paying State
>> Farm.
>>
>> Gary still shoots in the ravine behind his house. And he's still a good
>> neighbor. But he's really, really disappointed with State Farm. "This
>> never
>> was about risk" Gary concludes. "Its about guns. State Farm just doesn't
>>
>> want me shooting. Ever."
>>
>> ACTION - GrassRoots South Carolina, http://www.scfirearms.org urges all
>> policy holders with State Farm to contact State Farm and voice
>> complaints
>> regarding their decision to cancel policies based on discrimination of
>> lawful use of firearms when there is no statistics to show increased
>> risk.
>> Voice your protests and concerns directly to them or else find yourself
>> facing increased guidelines in the future - like possible non-coverage
>> of
>> firearms owners. To contact State Farm call (309) 766-2311. Members
>> of the media may call (309) 766-7550.
>>
>> Further contact information is:
>> Mr. Edward Rust, President State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
>> One State Farm Plaza
>> Bloomington IL 61710-0001
>> 309-766-7554
>>
>> Gary's Former State Farm Agent is:
>> Rene'e Wilder
>> 120 Columbia Avenue
>> Chapin, SC 29036-9420
>> Phone: (803) 345-3135
>> Fax: (803) 345-6700
>>
>> Online, you may contact State Farm at:
>> https://sfinsguides.statefarm.com/insur/Forms/Comments.asp
>>
>> Gary may be contacted for further information including the termination
>> letter from State Farm (with reason sited) as well as a detailed events
>> write-up describing how State Farm handled this case start to finish.
>> Contact Gary at: gatkinson@mdccolumbia.com
>>
>> GrassRoots South Carolina has placed the above article with photo's of
>> Gary's range as well as the story as told by Gary at:
>> http://www.scfirearms.org/garya.htm
>>
>> Permission to reprint or forward this is granted as long as the above
>> article is maintained as written with no changes.
>>
>> NEW! SC Firearms Events Calendar Here: http://www.calsnet.com/scfirearms
>>
>> To post to this discussion group simply reply to a message or or e-mail
>> here: mailto:scfirearms@onelist.com
>>
>> Please report SC businesses that post against Concealed Carry here:
>> mailto:jponti@earthlink.net
>> Send Inquiries on being a Coordinator for CWP Issues in your community
>> here: mailto:EJKelleher@aol.com
>> Please send [scfirearms]discussion group problems or concerns to the
>> list manager at mailto:lcoble@netside.com
>> Visit http://www.scfirearms.org
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joe Sylvester
Subject: A Living Document?
Date: 03 Oct 2000 22:36:46 -0500
The starkest contrast in tonight's debate was when the question of
appointment of Supreme Court justices and those of lower courts.
Gore clearly endorsed the "interpret" the Constitution role for judges,
rather than an "enforce" the Constitution role.
Bush, OTH, came down in favor of judges who would be strict construtioinists.
Of course Bush is two faced about this also to some extent. There is no,
nada, zip, authority for the Federal Government to be envolved in
education, or mineral extraction, or for Social Security. Yet Bush would
mandate a *federal* test all students, at every grade level. The test would
actually reflect on the schools, rather than the students directly, but
none the less, it would be a federal intrusion on a state/local area.
Gun control didn't come up at all, but certainly appointment of justices
that can read "right of the people" and not think "power of the states"
would be a big help to restoring our 2nd amendment rights.
In a way, the Constitution is a living document, but not because judges are
free to make it say what they want it to, but rather because it contains
provisions for it's own change/amendment.
The Second Amendment is the RESET button
of the United States Constitution.
--Doug McKay"
Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Subject: interesting AP headline (online news at apple.excite.com)
Date: 04 Oct 2000 00:36:36 -0400
"Gun Violence Rages in Mideast"
Talking about Israel and the Palestinians. First time the media has called
governmental violence "gun violence". I guess all those guns in Israel
just started rioting.
Chad
Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh
chad@pengar.com chad@shire.net
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Curtis
Subject: Forward: UK proposed gun laws
Date: 04 Oct 2000 13:51:13 -0400 (EDT)
======================================================================
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
FYI - They will NOT admitt that their gun controls DIDN'T actually stop
criminals doing crimes - so they are "sweating" the hunters & sporting
shooters.... Theres one insideous line in this report... God knows what
they mean to do - hold school room indoctrination seasons for KIDs on
the big "bad guns"?
National DB of lics? On top of their current lics - will do what for them?
--
Brad/RKBA-Unity!
Britain Beefs Up Controls on Firearms
Updated 6:54 AM ET October 4, 2000
By Edna Fernandes
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain said Wednesday it was beefing up firearms
controls, including tougher restrictions on shotguns and raising the minimum
age for owning a gun to 18. Home Office Minister Charles Clarke announced
plans for a package of measures in response to a parliamentary Home Affairs
Committee report calling for a clampdown.
The move follows a rise in violent crime, with figures for the year to March
showing a 16 percent jump in personal violence. The government said
increasing use of illegal firearms in crime was "a very significant threat to
public safety."
"Our over-riding concern is to ensure public safety and we believe that strong
controls on firearms are absolutely essential to achieve this," Clarke said in a
statement.
"Our firearms controls are already among the strongest in the world, and these
new proposals will increase their effectiveness."
Police swiftly hailed the move, as ministers vowed to help them beat gun-related
crime.
"The (Police Superintendents) Association applauds the government on the
rigorous approach it has taken on the serious issues of firearms controls," it
said.
But the move is likely to anger the countryside lobby, which is a staunch
defender of shooting for sport. "We realize this is an emotive subject, with
strong feelings on either side. We are also aware that many people enjoy
properly conducted shooting sports and we celebrate their competitive
success - most recently at the Olympic Games," said Clarke.
Proposed measures include:
+A ban on the unsupervised use of deadly firearms by people aged under 16.
+Raising the minimum age to own a lethal firearm and certificate to 18, from 17.
+Regulating legitimate shooting sports and curbing activities which
might foster a "gun culture."
+Establishing a national database of firearms certificate holders, with the
possibility that it could include details of the firearms held.
+Consolidating law on firearms.
But the government rejected the idea of licensing air guns despite admitting
they were open to misuse. Instead, it proposed monitoring air gun technology
and measuring their dangers. The decision was taken after ministers listened
to responses from a range of groups including the Association of Chief Police
Officers, the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, the Gun Control
Network and Countryside Alliance.
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Arm all or arm none (fwd)
Date: 04 Oct 2000 12:27:04 PST
On Oct 4, RJK.Sr. wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Arm all or arm none
Charley Reese
Commentary
Published in The Orlando Sentinel on October 03, 2000
Let's play let's pretend. Let's pretend that Suzy, an innocent citizen, and Joe,
a cop, are forced to deal with the same criminal, Zack.
Now Zack one night catches Suzy on the way to her car in a parking lot,
beats the stew out of her, and rapes her. Now the gun-control crowd
absolutely insists that Suzy does not need a handgun in order to deal with
Zack. So an unarmed Suzy becomes a victim of Zack.
Now Joe, the cop, tracks down Zack and puts his worthless carcass into the
can. What's the difference? Joe was armed with a handgun when he had to
deal with Zack.
Now you tell me what warped, sick logic says that the victim of a criminal
should not have a handgun while the policeman who arrests the very same
criminal should have a handgun. If, as the gun-control crowd purports, Suzy
doesn't need a handgun in her encounter with the criminal, why does the
policeman? After all, Joe, the cop, is bigger than Suzy. Why does he need a
weapon? How can people who live in gated communities with armed guards
argue that we common folk must be disarmed?
I say, take down your gates and fire your armed guards. I say to politicians,
get rid of your bodyguards. I say to Congress, tell the Capitol police to go
write traffic tickets; you no longer need their arms to protect you. I say to
the president, get rid of the Secret Service or at least take its guns away.
Disarm every one of the 60,000 federal officials authorized to carry handguns.
It seems to me that either we all disarm or we all arm. It seems to me
unacceptably illogical to argue that crime victims must be unarmed while the
police, dealing with the very same criminals, should be armed. This business
of
the elitists, living behind the protection of pistols, telling the common folk
you must not have firearms smacks of totalitarianism.
It was clearly the intent of the Founding Fathers that every American be
armed.
That's why the ancient Anglo-Saxon right to keep and bear arms was
included in the Bill of Rights. And the amendment states "right of the people"
not right of the states or right of the militias. All honest scholars agree that in
every instance the Bill of Rights uses the word "people," it is referring to
individual rights.
I know that millions of Americans today suffer from urban psychosis, in which
their world view is distorted by dishonest politicians and even more dishonest
news media and their miserable environment of stone, concrete and asphalt.
But the facts are simple. A handgun is a tool, just like a saw or a hammer. It
is an ideal tool for self-defense.
With a handgun, 90-pound Suzy can stop 200-pound Zack. After Samuel Colt
invented his revolver, a common saying in America was, "God created all
men, but Sam Colt made them equal." And so he did.
You don't have to be built like a linebacker or invest five years of sweat in
becoming a martial artist. You can defend yourself quite well with a handgun
with just a little bit of practice and common sense. It is, in fact, an ideal
tool for women and for the elderly.
Gun-control has always been an elitist method of controlling the common
folk. It always has been racist. New York City's first gun-control laws were
aimed at those immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe whom the
hoity-toity types viewed as vermin. In the South, gun-control laws most often
applied only to blacks.
Nevertheless, if the urban insane wish to be prey for predators, that's their
privilege. But no one has the right to tell someone else that he or she cannot
possess the tools necessary to defend his or her life and the lives of loved
ones.
- Joe Eldred
President and Founder: God Bless America - a for-profit educational public
policy organization dedicated to restoring America one family at a time.
http://community.myway.com/pd/Godblessamerica
"Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of
their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because
the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be
intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high
qualities to represent them in the national legislature.... If the next
centennial does not find us a great nation...it will be because those who
represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid
in controlling the political forces." --James Garfield in 1877
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Cloyes
Subject: Re: State Farm Begins Dumping South Carolina Gun Owners.
Date: 04 Oct 2000 18:10:02 -0400
State Farm has had a history of not wanting to pay ANY claim that they are
not first sued for. So their reticence at cancelling the policy of someone
who may possibly might have a claim is right down their alley. It may not
be their hatred of firearms, just their hatred of paying claims. Either
way, I'd NEVER choose to deal with them.
Tom
At 06:29 PM 10/3/00 -0800, Bill Vance wrote:
>Time for another Boycott. You'd think these turkeys would talk to each
>other once in a while. If you call or write, tell them you've been
>considering doing business with them, but when you heard about their
>Anti-2nd Amendment activities, you decided on a competitor. This tactic
>works better than anything else tried, and on any kind of business. Pass
>the word to as many Patriot lists as possible, and State Farm _will_ get
>tired of hearing it. Also, pass along any good contact info, CEO phone
>numbers, email addrs and so on. Mentioning that you're passing the word on
>the internet doesn't hurt any either.
>
>
>"On Oct 3, Amelia wrote:"
>
>>: I have not had time yet to read this article. Just sending it along for
>>your information and consideration.
>>Amelia
>>
>>
>>
>>State Farm Begins Dumping South Carolina Gun
>>> For Immediate Distribution to all ListServs, Bulletin Boards,
>>> Newsgroups,
>>> Radio Stations, Newpapers, all other media.
>>>
>>> Hunter? Shooter? Who Is Your Good Neighbor? State Farm Begins Dumping
>>> Gun
>>> Owners.
>>>
>>> Gary Atkinson is a good neighbor, even though his nearest neighbor lives
>>>
>>> hundreds of feet away. He makes his home in rural Chapin, South Carolina
>>> on
>>> thirteen hilly, mostly wooded acres, along with his wife Lisa, sons Tom
>>> and
>>> Yates, two horses, three yard dogs, and "too many cats to count" as Gary
>>>
>>> puts it. "Somebody's got to take in the homeless animals" he explains.
>>> "If not, well.." His voice trails off. No need to describe the fate of
>>> stray
>>> animals in a sparsely populated area.
>>>
>>> Gary's job in heavy equipment sales brought him from Illinois to South
>>> Carolina in 1985. He promptly fell in love with the area, and bought
>>> acreage 25 miles and a culture away from the state capitol in Columbia.
>>> Gary and Lisa bought a second, adjoining parcel in 1988, and began
>>> building their dream house in 1990. "We moved into the house in 1992"
>>> Gary says with a laugh, "but we never stopped building. A barn.
>>> Outbuildings. A pool. A pond. There's always something going on at our
>>> place". When the time came for Gary to change jobs, he stayed in South
>>> Carolina.
>>>
>>> Gary admits his rural homestead isn't as rural as it once was. Fifteen
>>> families now live along his dead-end country road, and more are
>>> discovering
>>> this long-forgotten corner of Richland County every year. But it remains
>>> a
>>> close-knit community, where everybody knows everybody else. The kids
>>> play
>>> together, the adults are good friends, and the entire neighborhood gets
>>> together several times a year for a massive "block party".
>>>
>>> But being a good neighbor involves more than holding block parties and
>>> swimming in each other's pools. It involves being there when people have
>>> a
>>> need. For example, Lisa prepares meals for shut-ins, and Gary uses his
>>> tractor and chain saw to help around the neighborhood. Sometimes he
>>> cuts grass for people who can't do it themselves. When Mike, their
>>> neighbor across the street, broke his back in a fall from a deer stand,
>>> Gary built special rails on Mike's front steps so that Mike could get in
>>>
>>> and out of his house. And when there was a loud explosion in the woods
>>> behind another neighbor's house, she immediately called Gary and asked
>>> him to investigate. Gary found a tree had fallen across a power line in
>>> a
>>> right-of-way, and started a fire. He fought the fire himself while
>>> others
>>> summoned help. By the time the trained firefighters arrived, Gary had
>>> brought the blaze under control. The firefighters' main job was to put
>>> out
>>> the still-burning utility pole. That's the kind of "good neighbor" Gary
>>> is.
>>>
>>> For 34 years Gary bought his insurance from State Farm, a company that
>>> claims its a good neighbor. His father got him started with car
>>> insurance
>>> when Gary was 16. Gary later bought homeowners insurance from State
>>> Farm,
>>> and eventually added an umbrella policy to protect the assets he had
>>> accumulated. Gary was happy with State Farm. And State Farm should
>>> have been happy with Gary, because he has an excellent claims record.
>>> True, his car was broken into several years ago. Hurricane Hugo
>>> blew down a tree. And a pipe burst, causing damage in his basement. Not
>>> bad, for 34 years of State Farm coverage.
>>>
>>> Gary's rosy relationship with State Farm came to a screeching halt a few
>>>
>>> months ago, when he casually mentioned to the local State Farm office
>>> that
>>> he had been shooting in a ravine back in the woods behind his house. The
>>>
>>> local agent, who he regarded as a friend, didn't like that, and
>>> questioned
>>> Gary closely. Shooting? With guns? He answered all of her questions, and
>>>
>>> even took her through the woods to the ravine so she could see the area
>>> for
>>> herself. She wasn't happy. Neither was the home office. State Farm
>>> promptly
>>> cancelled Gary's coverage for what the company called "the operation of
>>> the
>>> shooting range on your property".
>>>
>>> Hunting and recreational shooting are a way of life in rural South
>>> Carolina, and in much of the rest of America. Gary has enjoyed these
>>> activities since he was seven years old, when his father started him
>>> with a .22 bolt action rifle. (It's a tradition Gary hopes to pass on to
>>> his
>>> own sons.) Still, Gary tried to appease State Farm by offering to limit
>>> his shooting. Would they ever let him shoot on his own property, or did
>>> the
>>> company insist on a total ban? "Maybe once in a Blue Moon" the agent
>>> told him. "What about hunters going through my woods?" Gary asked.
>>> "It's just too dangerous" she replied.
>>>
>>> Gary next offered to protect State Farm from any liability for his
>>> shooting. The ravine was on a parcel of land separate from the house, so
>>>
>>> what if they just insured the parcel with the house? No deal. Gary went
>>> out and bought a million dollar liability policy from an NRA-endorsed
>>> underwriter to cover his shooting activities. Would State Farm
>>> be willing to exclude all shooting activities from his homeowners
>>> policy?
>>> Still no deal.
>>>
>>> So, what did State Farm want from him? Gary asked State Farm's agent to
>>> point out the fine print in his policy, or to show him something in
>>> writing, so that he could keep the company happy. She conceded there
>>> was no fine print, nothing in the policy, and nothing in writing
>>> anywhere.
>>> But the company regards shooting activities as a "factor of increased
>>> risk"
>>> she told him, and as reason for terminating his coverage.
>>> The company would never be happy.
>>>
>>> State Farm's agent also tried to stop Gary from shooting by claiming all
>>> of
>>> the other national insurance companies had similar "no shooting" rules,
>>> so Gary
>>> shouldn't bother to shop around. But Gary did shop around, and he
>>> quickly
>>> learned that many companies were more than happy to insure safe
>>> shooters.
>>>
>>> Gary now has all the insurance coverage he wants. From companies that
>>> are
>>> happy to have his business. At prices lower than he was paying State
>>> Farm.
>>>
>>> Gary still shoots in the ravine behind his house. And he's still a good
>>> neighbor. But he's really, really disappointed with State Farm. "This
>>> never
>>> was about risk" Gary concludes. "Its about guns. State Farm just doesn't
>>>
>>> want me shooting. Ever."
>>>
>>> ACTION - GrassRoots South Carolina, http://www.scfirearms.org urges all
>>> policy holders with State Farm to contact State Farm and voice
>>> complaints
>>> regarding their decision to cancel policies based on discrimination of
>>> lawful use of firearms when there is no statistics to show increased
>>> risk.
>>> Voice your protests and concerns directly to them or else find yourself
>>> facing increased guidelines in the future - like possible non-coverage
>>> of
>>> firearms owners. To contact State Farm call (309) 766-2311. Members
>>> of the media may call (309) 766-7550.
>>>
>>> Further contact information is:
>>> Mr. Edward Rust, President State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
>>> One State Farm Plaza
>>> Bloomington IL 61710-0001
>>> 309-766-7554
>>>
>>> Gary's Former State Farm Agent is:
>>> Rene'e Wilder
>>> 120 Columbia Avenue
>>> Chapin, SC 29036-9420
>>> Phone: (803) 345-3135
>>> Fax: (803) 345-6700
>>>
>>> Online, you may contact State Farm at:
>>> https://sfinsguides.statefarm.com/insur/Forms/Comments.asp
>>>
>>> Gary may be contacted for further information including the termination
>>> letter from State Farm (with reason sited) as well as a detailed events
>>> write-up describing how State Farm handled this case start to finish.
>>> Contact Gary at: gatkinson@mdccolumbia.com
>>>
>>> GrassRoots South Carolina has placed the above article with photo's of
>>> Gary's range as well as the story as told by Gary at:
>>> http://www.scfirearms.org/garya.htm
>>>
>>> Permission to reprint or forward this is granted as long as the above
>>> article is maintained as written with no changes.
>>>
>>> NEW! SC Firearms Events Calendar Here: http://www.calsnet.com/scfirearms
>>>
>>> To post to this discussion group simply reply to a message or or e-mail
>>> here: mailto:scfirearms@onelist.com
>>>
>>> Please report SC businesses that post against Concealed Carry here:
>>> mailto:jponti@earthlink.net
>>> Send Inquiries on being a Coordinator for CWP Issues in your community
>>> here: mailto:EJKelleher@aol.com
>>> Please send [scfirearms]discussion group problems or concerns to the
>>> list manager at mailto:lcoble@netside.com
>>> Visit http://www.scfirearms.org
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
>----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
>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
>----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
>
> Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>-
>
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul Watson
Subject: FW: HUGE VICTORY!!! CARA is almost gone! (fwd)
Date: 05 Oct 2000 08:48:54 -0500 (CDT)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Actually some news that seems pleasant for a change
Jack
Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574
_________________| 1175 N Altadena Dr | ____________
Jack@Minerva.com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-398-8620
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 12:07 AM
American Land Rights Association - Land Rights Network
PO Box 400 - Battle Ground WA 98604
Phone: 360-687-3087 - Fax: 360-687-2973 - Email: -
http://www.landrights.org
Legislative Office: Mike Hardiman - 508 First St SE - Washington DC 20003
Phone: 202-251-3473 - Fax: 202-543-7126 - Email: hardimanmike@aol.com
HUGE VICTORY!!! CARA is almost gone!
Yesterday, the House of Representatives moved CARA, the Condemnation and
Relocation Act, within an inch of elimination.
The crucial vote was whether to allow CARA to be considered as an amendment
to the bill that finances the Department of Interior for Fiscal Year 2001.
It is called a vote on the "rule," meaning approving a rule for debate
which would not allow consideration of CARA.
The House voted 354 to 65 IN FAVOR of the rule for debate, meaning IN
FAVOR of burying CARA for the year!!!
It looks like most of the Congressmen decided they had enough of the
constant demands for pork barrel spending coming from Louisiana Rep. "Slick
Willy" Tauzin and Alaska Rep. Don Young.
Tauzin and Young SOLD OUT your property rights in exchange for millions
in guaranteed trust fund cash for their home states. CARA includes the
money for Louisiana and Alaska, along with over one billion dollars per
year to condemn private property, as part of a deal they made with the big
national environmental groups. The Greens would get cash to condemn land,
while Tauzin and Young stuff their faces with pork barrel spending.
Here is a comparison of CARA versus what was approved in the Interior
Department Appropriations Bill provision called the Conservation,
Preservation and Infrastructure Act (CPIA).
CARA:
*15 years.
*Trust Fund - guaranteed spending.
*$45 billion dollars.
*approximately $16 to $18 billion for land acquisition.
Appropriations bill: (CPIA)
*6 years.
*NOT a trust fund - Congress must appropriate the money each year.
Congress will have oversight, there will be annual reviews.
*12 billion dollars.
*approximately $3 to $4 billion for land acquisition.
What was approved means a substantial increase in land acquisition over
current levels.
However, as you can see, it is a hundred times better than the CARA Pork
Barrel Land Grab.
****** IT'S NOT OVER YET ******
The enemies of private property and access to federal lands are not done
yet. Here is what they had to say yesterday:
"We lost a battle, but the war isn't over," said Senator Mary Landrieu of
Louisiana.
Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi reiterated that CARA "still could be
added to another bill, perhaps an end-of-session spending bill."
"This issue is not going away," said Representative Don Young of Alaska.
Wednesday, Senator Mary Landrieu, D-La., began an informal filibuster in
the Senate. It was intended to delay the Senate's consideration of a
pending Interior Department appropriations bill until the advocates for
CARA can develop a comeback strategy.
YOU MUST DO AN ALL OUT PUSH THURSDAY AND FRIDAY.
No matter what else you do, you must deluge Senator Trent Lott with calls
and faxes as well as your own senators.
-----It is MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER that you call your Senators THURSDAY
AND FRIDAY. There must be no CARA. There must be no dark-of-nite land
grab.
-----The Interior Appropriations Bill will be voted on by the Senate
shortly, perhaps Thursday. You must tell your Senators, No CARA!, No
CARA!, No CARA! No dark-of-night land grab.
-----The Land Grabbers led by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott are looking
for a bill to slip CARA on to. There are several other appropriations
bills coming up and possibly a huge budget reconciliation bill. You must
make sure your Senator understands you will hold him or her accountable if
CARA is slipped into any bill period!
-----YOU MAY CALL ANY SENATOR AT the temporary FREE number (800) 648-3516
or the regular Capitol Switchboard number at (202) 224-3121.
-----YOU MUST CALL TRENT LOTT. THERE MUST BE AN ALL OUT CALL- IN TO HIS
OFFICE. HIS PHONES MUST NOT STOP RINGING. ALSO SEND HIM A FAX. HERE ARE
HIS NUMBERS: Majority Leaders Office: (202) 224-3135 FAX (202) 224-4639.
Personal Office: (202) 224-6253 FAX (202) 224-2262. Some people are
planning to call once every hour.
-----PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO YOUR ENTIRE E-MAIL LIST.
_________________________________________________________________________
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
Regula said the Interior appropriations bill "requires accountability" for
how federal royalties are spent.
"If we're disbursing federal dollars, we have the right to ask for
accountability for that money," he said.
Thank you, Congressman Regula. CARA, as a guaranteed trust fund, has NO
accountability. Regula is a leading opponent of the CARA Land Grab.
Some People Are Still Asking What Happened?
Answer: The Appropriations Committee wrote new conservation legislation
that provided enough money that it became a BACKFIRE that Appears Close To
Heading Off the CARA FIRESTORM
To enhance the chances of stopping CARA, the Appropriations Committee lite
a legislative BACKFIRE to stop the CARA Fire storm by attaching a whole new
Conservation bill to the Interior Appropriations Bill. They called it the
Conservation, Preservation and Infrastructure Act (CPIA).
No one is happy to use a backfire or prescriptive burn to burn their own
ground. But landowners and firefighters have often used backfires to stop
major fire storms. CARA IS A MONSTER FIRE STORM. It appears the
appropriators used a major legislative BACKFIRE to stop CARA. And CARA is
not stopped yet.
The Conservation, Preservation and Infrastructure Act (CPIA) has some bad
news for landowners. It does far less damage than CARA, but it does some
damage. It looks larger than it is because the appropriators included a
bunch of programs already in the budget like Forest Legacy.
The Conservation, Preservation and Infrastructure Act (CPIA) makes more
money available for land acquisition and grant money to the
preservationists than exists today. But far less than CARA would. The
CPIA keeps the money out of the hands of the bureaucrats unless the
appropriations committee gives it to them. It puts the money in a place
where you can have some influence over how it is spent.
Control is better in the hands of elected Members of Congress on the
Appropriations Committee than in an automatic trust fund entitlement that
goes directly into the hands of the Federal bureaucrats and land agents.
CARA would give far more money automatically to the bureaucrats where it
would be very difficult to stop condemnations or fight to save your land.
The CPIA provides much less money for acquisition than CARA. It keeps
conservation funding similar to the existing Land and Water Conservation
Fund (LWCF).
It makes land acquisition compete with other national priorities each year.
So if changing national priorities means that other things become more
important in the eyes of Congress, then there will be less appropriations
for land acquisition. It is up to us to make sure Congress sees it that
way.
Landowners will have to be active getting the appropriators to put more
money into maintenance and other priorities and less into driving unwilling
sellers from their homes and farms. We can do that. With CARA, there was
no place to stop it. There was no Congressional oversight.
REMINDER: BE SURE TO FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.
_________________________________________________________________________
**NOTE: Under Bill S. 1618 TITLE III, passed by the 105th U.S. Congress,
political e-newsletters such as this cannot be considered spam as long as
the sender includes contact information (above) and a method ofremoval. To
be removed from future mailings just reply with REMOVE in the subject line.
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: larry ball
Subject: [Fwd: Fw: FBI might suspect you are an 'extremist' if ...]
Date: 06 Oct 2000 05:16:27 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------2995AFCE3B57800788B1D27B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Please read the following. It is interesting and worthy of a follow-up
complaint to the FBI. We might even ask them to print a retraction.
Larry Ball
lball@inetnebr.com
--------------2995AFCE3B57800788B1D27B
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Received: by pigeon (mbox lball)
(with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.22 1998/04/11) Thu Oct 5 20:58:05 2000)
X-From_: jon.roland@constitution.org Wed Oct 4 17:41:34 2000
Return-Path:
Received: from unlinfo (unlinfo.unl.edu [129.93.1.11])
by pigeon.inebraska.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA11288
for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 17:41:33 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from spinnone.spinn.net (IDENT:root@[209.75.134.6])
by unlinfo (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA16517
for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 17:41:42 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from spinn.net.spinn.net (usr54-dialup229.mix1.Sacramento.cw.net [166.62.137.107])
by spinnone.spinn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA31713;
Wed, 4 Oct 2000 16:29:47 -0600
X-Mailer: Z-Mail Pro 6.2-beta, NetManage Inc. [ZM62_10]
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <4.3.1.2.20001004140532.00ba9910@mail.frii.com>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
------------------------
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Smears "Pro-Gun, Anti-Government"
Americans Who Might Also Flash The Constitution Or Bible
Oct 4, 2000
by Larry Pratt
Comedian Jeff Foxworthy has made a good living with his routines and
book titled "You Might Be A Redneck If...." What he does is to list
a series of things which, if true, mean you might, well, be a
redneck. Much of what he says is hilarious and, for the most part,
good clean fun.
Following in the footsteps of what Foxworthy has done -- though
unwittingly I'm sure -- the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin has given
us its version of what this Southern comic has done. You might call
what the Feds have done in this publication "You Might Be A Member
Of An Extremist Group If...." The difference here, however, is that
Foxworthy's humor is good-natured; the article in this "Bulletin"
is definitely not funny and, arguably, slanders and smears a lot of
decent, law-abiding, God-fearing Americans.
The piece in question is titled "Vehicle Stops Involving Extremist
Group Members." It appeared in the December 1999 issue of the FBI
Law Enforcement Bulletin. Its author is identified as James Kobolt,
director of the Institute For Public Safety at Lake Superior State
University in Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan. The objectionable
portions of this egregious article are as follows:
"Members of extremist groups may reveal their affiliations in a
number of ways.... Specifically, extremists' vehicles may sport
bumper stickers with antigovernment or pro-gun sentiments.... The
occupants of the vehicle may show other signs of extremist group
involvement. Drivers who hold anti-government beliefs may... present
handmade [driver's] licenses, a copy of the Constitution, a Bible,
or political literature...."
Well, now. So, how do you measure up? Do you pass or flunk the FBI
test? Have you ever sported an "anti-government" or "pro-gun" bumper
sticker? Have you ever showed a law enforcement officer a copy of
the Constitution, a Bible, or "political literature" (whatever this
means)? If you say "yes," then you might -- "may" -- be a member of
an "extremist group."
But, this is pernicious nonsense. Evidently, for the publishers of
the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, extremist rhetoric in pursuit of
alleged extremists, is OK. When we interviewed John Ott, editor of
the Bulletin to register a vigorous complaint re: the previously
quoted outrageous assertions, here's the way it went:
For openers, Ott readily agrees that the overwhelming majority of
those with such bumper stickers are law-abiding citizens. He says
the purpose of the Bulletin is "a forum for discussion" and "this is
why when we edit the articles we make very sure that they use the
words 'may' and 'possible' that these are signs of extremist
activity and not literal or clear signs of actual extremist
activity."
Q: But these "extremists" may also be wearing Levis or Mohawk
haircuts or be associated with a hundred other things. So, why
single out pro-gun and/or anti-government sentiments on bumper
stickers, or showing a cop a copy of the Constitution or a Bible?
A: We're discussing officer safety during legitimate traffic
stops in response to actual traffic violations. Any other traffic
stops are clearly illegal.
Q: But, why single out only what is mentioned as ways you 'may'
encounter an 'extremist'?
A: Because they have occurred and there have been incidents where
this has happened. It's just a possibility."
Q: But, as I say, there are, presumably, many other things
associated with such extremists. So, why mention only what you
mention?
A: Those were just two examples.
Q: But, why mention only these two?
A: Because he was talking about right-wing supremacists, militia,
primarily.
Q: And showing a copy of the Constitution and/or Bible also makes
one an extremist?
A: A lot of the extremist groups believe some Millennial ideas.
It's a possibility. That's all. It's a possibility. It's a
suggestion for officers to be aware.
Q: But, if we agree that the overwhelming majority of folks with
pro-gun, anti-government bumper stickers -- and who show a copy of
the Constitution and/or the Bible -- are law-abiding citizens and
not extremists, how does it help a law enforcement officer to say
that these things 'may' indicate an extremist? 'May' also means
'may not.'
Well, says Ott, most officers know their area and groups in it. They
have only a limited number of pages in the Bulletin. This is "a
discussion. And I emphasize... that contributors' opinions and
statements are not considered an endorsement by the FBI whatsoever."
Q: I'm sorry you consider one an extremist who is anti-government.
A: Not at all.
Q: Not at all?!
A: No, that article does not say that. These are all 'maybes' and
'possibles.' Things that officers should be aware of.
Q: Our country was founded by folks who were anti-government, or
at least anti-a-certain-government.
A: Fine. I have no problem with that. I don't agree with all of
what was in the article. But it opens a forum for discussion and
gives some information for officers to look at. We didn't ask for
this article. He simply submitted it. It wasn't written by an FBI
employee.
Q: But, it was approved by an FBI employee.
A: No.
Q: You're not an FBI employee?
A: I am and approved it for publication. And it was approved by
our Behavioral Science Unit.
Q: Oh, my goodness! So, the shrinks said it was OK! So, where's
this forum for discussion you keep mentioning? I see no
letters-to-the-editor section. Also, the article uses the word
'extremist' as pejorative. But is being 'extreme' always bad,
every time, about everything?
A: It's a term that has been used in law enforcement and in other
areas to describe the group of people we are talking about. And we
didn't want to say rightwing conservatives.
Q: But, you did say that in this conversation.
A: I know. But we're more concerned with extremists, people who
are involved in extreme activities. And that's obvious and that's
why we used the term.
Q: Right. Like people with pro-gun, anti-government bumper
stickers.
A: No. That's not what we're talking about. That's not even the
gist of the article.
Q: But the article specifically mentions these kinds of bumper
stickers! And I still don't see how a cop is helped by being told
that such bumper stickers may or may not indicate extremists.
A: These are just clues that such people may have some views that
may effect the process of the arrest. That's all. It's one tiny
clue.
He says we're picking on "some small parts of the article."
Ott notes that he's a conservative and carries a Bible in his car.
Ott says that what we're complaining about is only "a small portion"
of the article "and the editing of it and the wording of it may be
unfortunate..."
Q: May be! There's that weasel-word again.
A: And I can guarantee you that I may be more careful about
editing these types of articles in the future because I am much
more aware of the concerns of people like yourself because we've
received about nine complaints like yours.
Well, let's hope Mr. Ott will be more careful in the future. If
you'd like to contact him, the address is: FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin, c/o Federal Bureau Of Investigation, 935 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW, Washington DC 20535-0001.
--- GOA ---
[Larry Pratt is Executive Director of Gun Owners of America located
at 8001 Forbes Place, Springfield, VA 22151 and at
http://www.gunowners.org on the web.]
---------------End of Original Message-----------------
===================================================================
Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825
916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM Date: 10/04/00 Time: 15:19:22
http://www.constitution.org/ mailto:jon.roland@constitution.org
===================================================================
--------------2995AFCE3B57800788B1D27B--
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Gun debate rallies are full of surprises (fwd)
Date: 06 Oct 2000 08:28:08 PST
On Oct 06, stevechr@ptd.net wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
So the leader of the Million Moms March in Bethlehem on 2 Oct 00 is a=20
convicted drunk driver! Seems to me there's a touch of irony here that=20
should be exploited to its fullest through the use of letters-to-the-editor=
=20
(LTE's for all you newbies). So crank up your favorite word proccesor,=20
e-mail, or crayon and drop the Morning Call a couple of sentences on this=20
revelation.
I guess it's a good thing she walked across the Bridge instead of=20
driving. Plus she had those concrete traffic barriers on the left and=20
right so she wouldn't wander off in the wrong direction. Sort of like a=20
billiard ball on a pool table.
I guess she was just projecting her own inability to control her impulses=20
onto everyone else in the world. Since she knows she can't control=20
herself, she figures nobody else can either and therefore cannot be trusted=
=20
with guns. What a twit.
To e-mail an LTE to the Call use the following address: letters@mcall.com
Or fax your LTE to 610-770-3720
If you want your LTE published, be sure to include a phone number where the=
=20
editor can reach you to confirm that you wrote it and that you want it=20
published.
>Headline: Gun debate rallies are full of surprises
>Date: 10/06/00
>
>
>Not everything turns out the way it is planned.
>
>This week's First Monday 2000 rally in Bethlehem, we were told in advance,=
=20
>was not for gun control. "It's just antiviolence," rally organizer Helen=20
>Ruch told me.
>
>That's not the way it turned out; the rally was largely devoted to antigun=
=20
>rhetoric on signs and in speeches.
>
>Ruch had hoped 1,500 would join her, but 70 showed up to march across=20
>Bethlehem's Fahy Bridge. That dwindled to 40 for her postmarch rally at=20
>Moravian College.
>
>An anti-antigun turnout, on the other hand, surprised even the most ardent=
=20
>National Rifle Association members. More than 1,000 foes of gun control=20
>lined one side of Fahy Bridge as Ruch's 70 demonstrators marched across on=
=20
>the other side, then more than 2,000 showed up at Bethlehem's Rose Garden=
=20
>for a rally to support the Second Amendment.
>
>Another surprise, given the passions on both sides, was that nearly all=20
>these people were very polite.
>
>At Moravian, following some truly dreadful music, Ruch hailed her "rally=20
>to attempt to end gun violence." She said there are conflicting numbers=20
>about how many people are killed by guns, but "one victim a day is too=20
>many.=85Our children do not feel safe and that's not fair."
>
>Then began the awfullest music you can imagine, so I bailed out to go see=
=20
>how the other rally was doing.
>
>The pro-gun rally focused almost entirely on why gun control is bad. It=20
>was argued that crime increased after cities like New York, Washington and=
=20
>Los Angeles imposed severe restrictions on citizens carrying guns, giving=
=20
>criminals free rein. Other arguments were that things like gun locks and=20
>waiting periods similarly leave people defenseless.
>
>All that may be true, but it seems to me that if you have 2,000 zealots in=
=20
>one spot, you should not waste time trying to convince them of what they=20
>already intractably believe.
>
>Instead, tell them how to gain political support, pool resources or=20
>persuade those not yet in your camp, including news media people, many of=
=20
>whom unabashedly support those who seek to dilute the Bill of Rights.
>
>My sentiments have long been aligned against gun control, mainly because=20
>it abrogates part of the Bill of Rights, but also because much of the=20
>impetus comes from hysteria.
>
>Last year, I questioned the hysteria over gun violence in schools while=20
>there was far less outcry over violence caused by drunks. This week,=20
>figures supplied by Mothers Against Drunk Driving said drunken drivers=20
>killed 15,935 in 1998. Handgun Control, a Washington group that pushes gun=
=20
>control, said there were 12,102 homicides by firearms in 1998.
>
>Neither figure is heartening, but the drunks are outdoing the gunslingers=
=20
>when it comes to deadly violence.
>
>And that brings us back to Ruch and a final surprise.
>
>Noting her view that it's not fair for children to feel unsafe because of=
=20
>guns, I asked her Thursday if she thinks it's also unfair that they feel=20
>unsafe because of the far more serious dangers from drunken drivers.
>
>"What does that have to do with anything?" she replied.
>
>I told her it has to do with her drunken driving charge.
>
>"I have no comment," she said.
>
>That's OK, because Lehigh County Court records commented plenty.
>
>They say Ruch was charged with public drunkenness (later dropped), driving=
=20
>under the influence, and improper "emerging onto roadway" in 1996. "Driver=
=20
>was given sobriety tests of balance and walking and failed all tests.=20
>Effects of alcohol were extreme," said an Allentown police report. The=20
>report said her breath test registered 0.162.
>
>The records say that in 1997, Ruch agreed to enter the Accelerated=20
>Rehabilitative Disposition program. Typically, when ARD is successfully=20
>completed, DUI records can be expunged.
>
>In any event, it seems to me that if those marching across Fahy Bridge=20
>genuinely want to curb deadly violence, they can start by demanding=20
>tougher sanctions for drunken drivers.
>
>
> Contact Paul Carpenter
>
>610-820-6176
>
>paul.carpenter@mcall.com
>
>
>For more Lehigh Valley news & information, click here http://www.mcall.com
>For this story, click=20
>http://www.mcall.com/html/columns/cpc/b_pg001_e15surprises.htm
>(c) 2000 The Morning Call - may not be reproduced without written consent
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Urgent alert: Congress on verge of approving warrantless secret searches (fwd)
Date: 07 Oct 2000 19:20:24 PST
On Oct 6, Michael Jones wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 1:27 PM
searches
By Dave Kopel
Independence Institute, http://i2i.org
[Advance draft of article scheduled for publication in National Review
Online,
http://www.nationalreview.com]
Please feel free to forward.
No person s liberty is safe in the last week of Congress traditionally a
time when civil liberties invasions such as wire-tapping, gun prohibitions,
and the like are snuck through in the final frantic hours, with no
opportunity for public opposition. This Congress is no exception. As soon as
Tuesday, the House may vote on a bill, which has already passed the Senate,
to drastically expand government power to conduct secret searches without
judicial approval.
The bill in question comes from Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) and Orrin
Hatch (R-Utah). It is S. 2516, The Fugitive Apprehension Act. The bill
allows the government to obtain any kind of document it wants, without first
getting a search warrant or a subpoena from a court. These documents include
any written or electronic document possessed by an individual or possessed
by a third party (such as bank records, credit card records, telephone
records, school records, or an Internet Service Provider s customer
records). In other words, the bill guts the Fourth Amendment requirement
that private documents should be searched only after a court issues a
warrant based upon probable cause.
Even worse, section 3(g) of the bill allows these document seizures to be
conducted secretly, so that the individual might never be told that his bank
records, Internet records, or other documents have been searched by the
government.
The bill currently applies to apprehension of fugitives, which include
people who have been charged (not convicted) of a crime, at both the federal
or state level. In other words, if your wife s second cousin never showed up
in court for his drunk driving trial, the government could look at your bank
records, telephone records, Internet records, and every other document about
you without a court order, and without ever telling you.
There is no law enforcement need for this provision. Under the All Writs
Act, a United States Attorney can go to court, and present reasons why he
needs access to private records. If the court agrees (it almost always
does), the court issues a subpoena to obtain the records. This system is
working well, and, notably, the United States Attorneys are not asking to
change the law.
Even so, there is a very strong chance that S. 2516 will become law next
week, unless Congress hears of widespread opposition. The American Civil
Liberties Union, which is leading the fight against the bill on Capitol
Hill, is urging to citizens to contact their Representatives and their
Senators over the weekend and on Tuesday morning, in every way possible: at
town hall meetings, by calling DC and local Congressional offices, and by
sending e-mail or faxes. Because House Speaker Dennis Hastert has great
discretion over whether to bring S. 2516 to the House floor, King urges
people all over the U.S. to call his office.
The main Congressman opposing S. 2516 is Representative Bob Barr
(R-Georgia). The very conservative Barr is a former United States Attorney,
and one of the most prominent law and order Republicans in Congress as
shown by his leadership in the effort to impeach President Clinton. While
the ACLU is generally considered liberal, and Barr conservative, both agree
that protecting the Fourth Amendment transcends party or ideology.
Should S. 2516 become law, it would set a precedent for warrantless, secret
searches on other subjects including firearms laws. This is one reason why
Barr, one of the staunchest Second Amendment defenders in Congress, is
opposing the bill.
There is also a possibility that S. 2516 may be snuck through as an
amendment to HR 3048, The Presidential Protection Act of 2000. Of course
S. 2516 has nothing to do with Presidential Protection. Instead, the bill is
about constitutional destruction.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: [The Harbinger] Fw: Release: Supreme Court & Victimless Crimes (fwd)
Date: 07 Oct 2000 19:18:55 PST
On Oct 6, John Fisher wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 3:11 AM
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 12:20 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
===============================
NEWS FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY
2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington DC 20037
World Wide Web: http://www.LP.org
===============================
For release: October 5, 2000
===============================
For additional information:
George Getz, Press Secretary
Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 222
E-Mail: pressreleases@hq.LP.org
===============================
Should police have the power to handcuff and jail people who don't wear
seatbelts?
WASHINGTON, DC -- The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear five
cases this session that involve the power of police to stop, search,
and arrest you for drug and seatbelt violations -- proving that such
"victimless crimes" are now the driving force behind the assault on our
Constitutionally protected liberties, the Libertarian Party said today.
"If police win the right to haul you off in handcuffs for not
wearing a seatbelt, scan your house at whim with a thermal imaging gun,
and set up random roadblocks so dogs can sniff your car for drugs then
victimless crimes will be to blame," said Steve Dasbach, the party's
national director.
"These are the issues the Supreme Court will decide this term -
- - and every one of these frightening expansions of police power is
being justified by so-called crimes that have no victims. The War on
Victimless Crimes has turned into an all-out War on the Bill of
Rights."
Starting this week, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear five major
cases to determine whether law enforcement has the right to stop,
search, test, restrain, and arrest people to enforce drug and seatbelt
laws. The cases include:
* Indianapolis vs. Edmond, which will decide whether police can
set up random roadblocks on public streets to question motorists and
use drug-sniffing dogs to inspect their vehicles.
* Ferguson vs. Charleston, which will decide whether hospitals
can secretly test pregnant women for cocaine, and turn the results over
to police.
* Illinois vs. McArthur, which will decide whether police can
restrain people from entering their homes while police are seeking a
warrant to search the premises for drugs.
* Atwater vs. Lago Vista, which will decide whether people can
be handcuffed and hauled off to jail for not wearing a seatbelt.
* Kyllo vs. United States, which will determine whether police
can scan homes with a thermal imaging gun, searching for heat patterns
that may indicate a marijuana-growing operation.
What do all these cases have in common? They all seek a
dramatic expansion of police power and they all involves "crimes" where
there is no victim, noted Dasbach.
"The criminal justice debate is no longer about what is
permissible when catching violent criminals like murderers, rapists,
and robbers -- it's now about how far law enforcement can go in
violating the Fourth Amendment to catch people who harm no one but
themselves," he said.
The cases being heard by the Supreme Court are not an
unexpected side-effect of victimless crime laws, but a natural
consequence, said Dasbach.
"There's a reason why police aren't setting up random
roadblocks to find people who have been the victims of robbery or a
violent crime," he said."In those kinds of cases, people go to the
police to seek justice. But with drug and seatbelt laws, there is no
victim to complain -- just people engaging in consensual behavior that
harms no one but themselves.
"As a result, law enforcement must engage in police-state
behavior to catch the so-called criminals. To combat victimless crimes,
police use sting operations, paid informers, anonymous tips, no-knock
raids, warrantless searches, and high-tech surveillance. Their impulse
is to always push the boundaries of the Fourth Amendment -- until they
begin to routinely violate everyone's privacy and rights."
It's that last aspect that should be most troubling to
Americans, said Dasbach, even to people who don't use drugs or violate
seatbelt laws.
"When police set up a random roadblock, a hundred innocent
people are inconvenienced and threatened for every one person who is
arrested," he said. "Your Constitutional rights are violated, your
freedom is limited, and your safety is diminished -- just so police can
catch a few individuals who engage in peaceful behavior the government
has criminalized."
These five cases give the Supreme Court an opportunity to draw
a "line in the sand" about how far law enforcement can go to fight
victimless crimes, said Dasbach.
"The Supreme Court has an opportunity to decide what kind of
country we will live in," he said. "Will it be an America where any
violation of the Bill of Rights is justified in the name of a War on
Victimless Crimes? Or will it be an America where ordinary people can
live in freedom, privacy, and safety, and where the Bill of Rights is
respected? That's the real issue on this year's Supreme Court docket."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBOdz9tNCSe1KnQG7RAQEzywP+KXapMGwKt859FCD0lLsGAYNikm2uKQmN
otfQ1ufVqe+zrgZCvhUqhnYugF0nVCZpyAaggmMfCG2htsnDmOg/ijqqfxUtaSxE
WIeRY+A9mtsd2GvEUD8Ef0m8CkzRygDo3MtUSBIG6AFOIkW1XgPcDB9Pz83uf5HN
7MCco3poANA=
=tM8z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The Libertarian Party http://www.lp.org/
2600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100 voice: 202-333-0008
Washington DC 20037 fax: 202-333-0072
For subscription changes, please use the WWW form at:
http://www.lp.org/action/email.html
Alternatively, you may also send a message to
with just the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
YOU can help contribute to the Harbinger just by clicking on my articles listed here:
http://www.themestream.com/authors/72459.html
You can also help by using the Harbinger Book Store for your book purchases. A percentage of each sale goes to us.
http://www.cazekiel.org/bookstore/index.htm
Thank you for your support.
Visit the Harbinger website at http://www.cazekiel.org/harbinger/
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: U.N. Standing Military Now Certain (fwd)
Date: 07 Oct 2000 22:28:36 PST
On Oct 7, Steve Moser wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 22:01:18 EDT
From: KnottyHEK@aol.com
U.N. Standing Military Now Certain
By Allen Quist
On Thursday, September 7, the U.N. Security Council issued a press release
highlighting what it determined to be a highly significant accomplishment of
the U.N. Millennium Conference. This press release stated that the U.N. will
now "obtain trained and properly equipped [military] personnel for
peacekeeping operations." (Security Council Press Release SC/6919)
That is, the U.N. will now create its own standing military. United Press
International (UPI), on 9-9-2000, described the new standing military this
way: "The 'Kofi doctrine' envisages battalion-size units of regular armies
from major nations on permanent stand-by" that can be rushed "at the
shortest
notice into nations" whenever a violation of U.N. objectives "appears to be
imminent."
(http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/9/8/214857)
UPI also said that: "Such units are to be trained by the elite, professional
British army at a center that the British government of Prime Minister Tony
Blair has already agreed to set up." U.N. military operations have come a
long way since the U.N.'s founding in 1945.
No longer will U.N. troops be under the command of their own nation; now the
U.N. military will be structured so the troops will be under U.N. command.
No
longer will U.N. troops be trained exclusively by their home country; now
the
troops will be trained by U.N. commanders. No longer does the U.N and its
troops exist primarily to protect the national security of the nations of
the
world, now it exists largely for the purpose of intervention into the
internal matters of the nations, including intervention to deal with what it
calls "the root causes of conflict."
One-World Government advocates have always said that a U.N. standing
military
was a key ingredient of their utopian dream-world. The One-Worlders know
that
if the U.N has its own military, and if it can intervene into the internal
affairs of nations, then it is the U.N. that is sovereign, not the nations.
Indeed, U.N. Secretary- General, Kofi Annan, has repeatedly said that
national boundaries will no longer be considered a barrier for U.N.
intervention.
The One-Worlders have had their way -- and the unsuspecting American public
has no idea of the enormous erosion of their freedom which has just taken
place. Because One-World Government is now so far advanced, some Americans
now say that we are beyond the point of no return. Our national freedom and
sovereignty are now gone, they say. They may be right; but let us hope they
are wrong.
Clearly, national freedom versus One-World Government is the major battle of
our time. Are there enough patriots left to save our experiment with
freedom?
That we don't know. We do know that the only candidates for high office
worth
supporting are those who are totally committed to national freedom.
We also know that our nation was birthed by those who were willing to put
everything on the line in order to create a nation that was free. Is
anything
less asked of us today?
Allen Quist was a professor at Bethany Lutheran College from 1968 to 1982.
He
currently teaches World Politics at Bethany on a part- time basis. He was a
member of the Minnesota House of Representatives from 1983 to 1989. He was
the Republican-endorsed candidate for Governor of Minnesota in 1994. He is
the author of three books, the most recent being, "The Seamless Web:
Minnesota's New Education System." (1999 copyright).
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Fw: [ALLY] IMPORTANT Online petition against Anti Gun Media Bias! (fwd)
Date: 07 Oct 2000 22:30:34 PST
On Oct 7, Archibald Bard wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
WOOF! WOOF! WOOF!
Sign this Petition NOW!! (Please?)
Archibald Bard
Pro Libertate - For Freedom
ICQ 83834746
YOUR VOTE FOR DEMO/REPUBS WILL ENDORSE
THEIR POLICIES OF DEPRIVATION OF
OUR FREEDOMS!
BUCHANAN-Reform
http://www.buchananreform.com/default.asp
----- Original Message -----
Cc: "Bryan Potratz"
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 7:57 PM
> Hi,
>
> I think you may be interested to take a look at this:
>
>
> Online petition: Report the news on Defensive Gun Uses
> Addressed to: News Divisions CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, et al
> Sponsored by: J. Neil Schulman
> Web site: http://www.i-charity.net/bin/ptn/40/tfref/3436
>
> Not only can you sign this petition online, but also
> you may leave a comment and a link to your web site.
> You can also read the comments of other people who
> signed this petition. So far there are 5221 signatures.
>
> Here is a brief description of this petition:
>
> A petition to the news divisions of the major TV networks,
> demanding that they cover the uses of firearms for defensive
> purposes to reflect the criminological data showing that gun
> defenses far outweigh the tragic uses of firearms.
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> This message was sent to you by your friend:
> Bryan Potratz
> Your email address has NOT been placed on any mailing list.
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Online Petitions is a free service from I-Charity, Inc.
> Copyright (c) 1999 i-Charity, Inc. All rights reserved.
> http://www.i-charity.net
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>
> ==================================================
> DISCLAIMER:
> ==================================================
> ** DISCLAIMER U.C.C.1-207 & COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance
> with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this
> message
> is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who
> have
> expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for
> nonprofit
> research and educational purposes only.
>
>
> ==================================================
> Subscribe: ALLY-subscribe@egroups.com
> Post Message: ALLY@egroups.com
> List Owner: ALLY-owner@egroups.com
> Webpage URL: http://www.egroups.com/group/ALLY
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ALLY-unsubscribe@egroups.com
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: OT: Clinton jokes (fwd)
Date: 08 Oct 2000 12:41:47 PST
On Oct 7, Rich Martin wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
One of the nation's largest soup manufacturers announced
today that they will be stocking America's shelves this week
with their newest Soup creation, Clinton Soup, that will honor
one of the nation's most distinguished men. It consists
primarily of a small weenie in hot water.
********************
Chrysler Corporation is adding a new car to its line to
honor Bill clinton. The Dodge Drafter will begin production
in Canada this year.
***************
When Clinton was asked what he thought about foreign
affairs, he lied: Don't know, I've never had one...
******************
If you came across Bill Clinton struggling in a raging
river and you had a choice between rescuing him or
getting a Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph, what shutter
speed would you use?
*********************
Chelsea asked her dad, "Do all fairy tales begin with
once upon a time?" Bill Clinton replied, "No, some begin
with after I'm elected."
********************
Clinton's mother prayed fervently that Bill would grow
up and be president. So far, half of her prayer has
been answered.
*****************
American Indians have nicknamed Bill Clinton as
"Walking Eagle" because he is so full of crap he can't fly.
******************
Clinton only lacks three things to become one of
America's finest leaders: Integrity, vision, and wisdom.
*******************
Clinton is doing the work of three men: Larry, Curly,
and Moe.
***********************
clinton's revised judicial oath: I solemnly swear to tell the
truth as I know it, the whole truth as I believe it to be,
and nothing but what I think you need to know.
***************************
Politicians and diapers have one thing in common:
They should both be changed regularly, and for the
same reason.
*******************************************************
An airplane was about to crash, and there were five
passengers left, but only 4 parachutes.
The first passenger, Bill Clinton said, "I am President of the
United States, and I have a great responsibility, being the
leader of nearly 300 million people, and a superpower, etc."
So he takes the first parachute, and jumps out of the plane.
The second passenger, said, I`m Antoine Walker,
one of the best NBA Basketball players, and the Boston Celtics
need me, so I can`t afford to die." So he takes the second
parachute, and leaves the plane.
The third passenger, Hillary Clinton, said "I am the wife
of the President of the United States, a soon to be New York
Senator, and I am the smartest woman in the world."
So she takes the third parachute and exits the plane.
The fourth passenger, Pope John Paul the second, says to
the fifth passenger, a 10 year old boy scout, "I am old and
frail and I don`t have many years left, so as Christian gesture
and a good deed, I will sacrifice my life and let you have
the last parachute.
The boy scout said, It`s Ok Sir, there`s a parachute left for you
...the world`s smartest woman took my backpack..."
******************************************************************
In 2031, President Clinton finishes his time on earth and
approaches the Pearly Gates of Heaven...
"And who might you be?" inquires St. Peter. "It's me, Bill
Clinton, formerly the President of the United States and
Leader of the Free World."
"Oh...Mr....... President! What may I do for you?" asks St.
Peter. "I'd like to come in," replies Clinton.
"Sure," says the Saint. "But first, you have to confess your
sins. What bad things have you done in your life?"
Clinton bites his lip and answers, "Well, I tried marijuana,
but you can't call it 'dope-smoking' because I didn't inhale.
There were inappropriate extramarital relationships, but you
can't call it 'adultery' because I didn't have full 'sexual
relations.' And I made some statements that were misleading,
but legally accurate, but you can't call it 'bearing false
witness' because, as far as I know, it didn't meet the legal
standard of perjury."
With that, St. Peter consults the Book of Life briefly, and
declares, "OK, here's the deal. We'll send you somewhere hot,
but we won't call it 'Hell.' You'll be there indefinitely, but
we won't call it 'eternity.' And when you enter, you don't have
to abandon all hope, just hold your breath waiting for it to
freeze over."
******************************
Best anagram of clinton's era:
PRESIDENT CLINTON OF THE USA
It can be rearranged (with no letters left
over, and using each letter once) into:
TO COPULATE HE FINDS INTERNS
**************************************
World's Thinnest Books:
15. My Plan to Find the Real Killers - by O. J. Simpson
14. Things I Would Not Do for Money - by Dennis Rodman
13. The Wild Years - by Al Gore
12. Amelia Earhart's Guide to the Pacific Ocean
11. America's Most Popular Lawyers
10. Detroit - a Travel Guide
9. Dr. Kevorkian's Collection of Motivational Speeches
8. Everything Men Know about Women
7. Everything Women Know about Men
6. George Foreman's Big Book of Baby Names
5. To All the Men I've Loved Before - by Ellen Degeneres
4. Mike Tyson's Guide to Dating Etiquette
3. Spotted Owl Recipes - by the EPA
2. The Amish Phone Directory
And the World's Number One Shortest Book...
1. My Book of Ethics - by Bill Clinton
******************************************************
Al (No Controlling Legal Authority) Gore was brainstorming
his campaign strategy with Bill Clinton at a Georgetown
restaurant when the waitress came to take their order.
Gore ordered a salad and water, and Bill Clinton studied the
menu for a second. Then he looked up, smiled, and said,
"I'll have a quickie."
The waitress was offended. "Mr. President,"
"Considering all that your wife went through last year
with Monica Lewinsky, I think that that's in particularly
poor taste." she said as she stomped away to cry.
Al Gore leaned over to Clinton, looked at his menu, and
whispered, "Uh...Bill, I think that's pronounced quiche...
************************************************************
The center for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, announced today
the President has proven that you CAN get sex from Aides!
***********************************
Jennifer Flowers was asked if her relationship with Bill Clinton was
anything like the Monica Lewinski affair. She supposedly replied,
"Close -- but no cigar."
*******************************************
The FBI has coined a technical term for the stains found on Monica's
dress: "Presidue"
*******************************
President Clinton now recruits interns from only four colleges:
Moorhead, Oral Roberts, Ball State, and Brigham Young.
***************************************
Did you know that Bill Clinton is considering changing the
democratic seal from a donkey to a condom, because it represents
inflation, halts production, and gives you a false sense of security
while
you are being screwed.
*****************************************
Washington has come up with a solution for the Clinton situation.
They added the 11th commandment:
"Thou shall not put thy rod in thy staff."
******************************************
Bill Gates is in New York showing all the computer executives how
well Windows 98 works. But the computer executives say that
Windows 98 goes down so much they are thinking about renaming it
Monica 98.
**********************************
It seems the big new game to play at the White House is
"Swallow the Leader!"
***********************************
Arkansas is very proud of Bill Clinton. All these women coming
forward and not one of them is his sister!
**********************************************
Hillary Clinton goes to a fortune teller who says, "Prepare to be a
widow. Your husband will soon suffer a violent death." Hillary
takes a deep breath and asks, "Will I be acquitted?"
***********************************************
One night, Bill Clinton was awakened by George Washington's ghost
in the White House. Clinton saw him and asked, "George, what is the
best thing I could do to help the country?"
"Set an honest and honorable example," advised George..
The next night, the ghost of Thomas Jefferson moved through the dark
bedrooms "Tom, what is the best thing I could do to help the country?"
Clinton asked.
"Cut taxes and reduce the size of government", advised Tom.
Clinton didn't sleep well the next night, and saw another figure moving
in the shadows. It was Abraham Lincoln's ghost. "Abe, what is the best
thing I could do to help the country?" Clinton asked..
"Go to the theater,"
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: FROM A PISTOL AUSTRALIA MAGAZINE "FOCUS"/ Luke in Oz (fwd)
Date: 09 Oct 2000 07:54:12 PST
On Oct 08, Lukasz Electronics wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
2000 years ago ...
A Current Problem
The Imperial Chancellor, Kung-sun Hung, petitioned the Emperor, saying:
"The people should not be allowed to possess bows or crossbows. When 10
bandits bend their crossbows to the full, a hundred officials dare not
advance.... If the people are not permitted to posses bows or crossbows,
then thieves and robbers will carry only short weapons, and when 2
groups carrying short weapons meet, the larger number will be
victorious.... In your subject's humble opinion, it will be advantageous
to forbid the people to carry bows or crossbows."
When the Emperor sent down this suggestion to his council for discussion
an elder, Shou-wang, replied, saying: "Your subject has heard that when
the ancients made the 5 kinds of weapons, it was not for the purpose of
killing each other, but to prevent tyranny and to punish evil. When
people lived in peace, these weapons were used to control the fierce
animals and to be prepared against emergencies. If there were military
affairs, then these weapons were used to set up defence and to form
battle arrays....
"Your subject has heard that the Sage Rulers brought the people together
and practiced shooting to demonstrate instructions, and he has never
heard any prohibition on bows or arrows."
"Furthermore, the cause for prohibition is that the bandits use them to
attack and rob. The crime of attacking and robbing, is subject to death;
yet that they have not been stopped is because the great law-breakers do
not care, indeed, to avoid severe punishment. Should the suggested
prohibition he enforced, your subject fears that wicked persons will
still carry weapons and the officials will not be able to stop them from
carrying them, and that the good people who keep their weapons for
self-defence will encounter the prohibition of the law. This will make
the power of robbers exclusive and take away the means of defence from
the people ..."
When the petition was presented, the Son of Heaven questioned the
Imperial Chancellor, Hung, who promptly withdrew his suggestion.
- from the History of the Han Dynasty, 124 B.C.
This documented account was sent to the NRA by member John Kirby who
came across it while doing research for the Far East Department of the
University of Washington. It is a striking example of the fact that the
right to preserve the basic right of the people to bear arms changes
little with the passage of the centuries.
Reprinted from the January, 1959 American Rifleman
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: {slick-d} It's Time to Shoot the Bastards (fwd)
Date: 09 Oct 2000 15:47:33 PST
On Oct 9, Steve Moser wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Government Theft
It's Time to Shoot the Bastards
by Vin Suprynowicz
He said, 'If you come on my land, I'll kill you'
For years, Garry Watson, 49, of little Bunker, Mo., (population 390) had
been squabbling with town officials over the sewage line easement which ran
across his property to the adjoining, town-operated sewage lagoon.
Residents say officials grew dissatisfied with their existing easement, and
announced they were going to excavate a new sewer line across the
landowner's property. Capt. Chris Ricks of the Missouri Highway Patrol
reports Watson's wife, Linda, was served with "easement right-of-way papers"
on Sept. 6. She gave the papers to Watson when he got home at 5 a.m. the
next morning from his job at a car battery recycling plant northeast of
Bunker. Watson reportedly went to bed for a short time, but arose about 7
a.m. when the city work crew arrived.
"He told them 'If you come on my land, I'll kill you,' " Bunker resident
Gregg Tivnan told me last week. "Then the three city workers showed up with
a backhoe, plus a police officer. They'd sent along a cop in a cop car to
guard the workers, because they were afraid there might be trouble. Watson
had gone inside for a little while, but then he came out and pulled his SKS
(semi-automatic rifle) out of his truck, steadied it against the truck, and
he shot them."
Killed in the Sept. 7 incident, from a range of about 85 yards, were Rocky
B. Gordon, 34, a city maintenance man, and David Thompson, 44, an alderman
who supervised public works. City maintenance worker Delmar Eugene Dunn, 51,
remained in serious but stable condition the following weekend. Bunker
police Officer Steve Stoops, who drove away from the scene after being shot,
was treated and released from a hospital for a bullet wound to his arm and a
graze to the neck.
Watson thereupon kissed his wife goodbye, took his rifle, and disappeared
into the woods, where his body was found two days later -- dead of an
apparently self-inflicted gunshot wound.
Following such incidents, the local papers are inevitably filled with
well-meaning but mawkish doggerel about the townsfolk "pulling together" and
attempting to "heal" following the "tragedy." There are endless expressions
of frustration, pretending to ask how such an otherwise peaceful member of
the community could "just snap like that."
In fact, the supposedly elusive explanation is right before our eyes.
"He was pushed," Clarence Rosemann -- manager of the local Bunker
convenience store, who'd done some excavation work for Watson -- told the
big-city reporters from St. Louis.
Another area resident, who didn't want to be identified, told the visiting
newsmen, "Most people are understanding why Garry Watson was upset. They are
wishing he didn't do it, but they are understanding why he did it."
You see, to most of the people who work in government and the media these
days -- especially in our urban centers -- "private property" is a concept
out of some dusty, 18th century history book. Oh, sure, "property owners"
are allowed to live on their land, so long as they pay rent to the state in
the form of "property taxes."
But an actual "right" to be let alone on our land to do whatever we
please -- always providing we don't actually endanger the lives or health of
our neighbors?
Heavens! If we allowed that, how would we enforce all our wonderful new
"environmental protection" laws, or the "zoning codes," or the laws against
growing hemp or tobacco or distilling whisky without a license, or any of
the endless parade of other malum prohibitum decrees which have multiplied
like swarms of flying ants in this nation over the past 87 years?
What does it mean to say we have any "rights" or "freedoms" at all, if we
cannot peacefully enjoy that property which we buy with the fruits of our
labors? In his 1985 book Takings, University of Chicago Law Professor
Richard Epstein wrote that, "Private property gives the right to exclude
others without the need for any justification. Indeed, it is the ability to
act at will and without need for justification within some domain which is
the essence of freedom, be it of speech or of property."
"Unfortunately," replies James Bovard, author of the book Freedom in Chains:
The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen, "federal law
enforcement agents and prosecutors are making private property much less
private. ... Park Forest, Ill. in 1994 enacted an ordinance that authorizes
warrantless searches of every single-family rental home by a city inspector
or police officer, who are authorized to invade rental units 'at all
reasonable times.' ... Federal Judge Joan Gottschall struck down the
searches as unconstitutional in 1998, but her decision will have little or
no effect on the numerous other localities that authorize similar invasions
of privacy."
We are now involved in a war in this nation, a last-ditch struggle in which
the other side contends only the king's men are allowed to use force or the
threat of force to push their way in wherever they please, and that any
peasant finally rendered so desperate as to employ the same kind of force
routinely employed by our oppressors must surely be a "lone madman" who
"snapped for no reason."
No, we should not and do not endorse or approve the individual choices of
folks like Garry Watson. But we are still obliged to honor their memories
and the personal courage it takes to fight and die for a principle, even as
we lament both their desperate, misguided actions ... and the systematic
erosion of our liberties which gave them rise.
"Just because one government agent has a piece of paper that's signed by
another government agent, does that mean there's no more right to private
property?" asks my friend Gregg Tivnan.
"If statists fear popular resistance," replies Jim Bovard, "perhaps
government should violate fewer rights."
----
Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal, and editor of Financial Privacy Report (subscribe by calling
Norm at 612-895-8757.) His book, Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the
Freedom Movement, 1993-1998, is available by dialing 1-800-244-2224; or via
web site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.
The Libertarian, October 8, 2000
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: {slick-d} More On Tokyo Rosie. (fwd)
Date: 09 Oct 2000 15:44:04 PST
On Oct 9, Bruce Chesley wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
FY High Tens.
Bruce Chesley
Truth is a terrible cross to bear.
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered.". Thomas Paine
Treason for $$$: ALL "pro 2A" orgs.
--------- Begin forwarded message ----------
MOM says
Read in bold print, you all are making head way but
need more pressure, 2002 is not soon enough. Mike
WWW.ALAMANCEIND.COM
Matt Maggio, Publisher & Editor Email
Rosie O'Donnell is quitting television - something she
herself announced last Wednesday in the New York Daily
News.
Rosie - whose ratings are evidently low enough that
one of Cleveland's three main television stations is dumping
her for a courtroom show and whose ratings evidently have
long been dropping, as evidenced in a 1998 New York Post
article whose title asked if the "bloom was off the Rosie"
after her show's ratings had dropped since its start two
years earlier - wants to go fulltime into work placing adoptive
kids.
In last Wednesday's New York Daily News, Rosie said
that while she enjoys doing the show, she's "sick of all the
crap that comes with it" - probably a reference to the boycotts
that have haunted her ever since she dissed gun owners on-air.
Not only did it take only seven months for a leaderless
"Rosiecott" to force K-Mart to dump her - but similar "Rosiecotts"
have also been organized by gun owners against the national
sponsors of her show ever since K-Mart dumped her.
No merchant or manufacturer will pay television's high ad
rates to incur a boycott by any substantial group - and Rosie's
phrase "all the crap" may well just be a code phrase for an
inability for her show to get advertisers anymore.
She plans on quitting in 2002 - when her present contract
ends.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Confession of a Born-Again 2nd Amendment Supporter (fwd)
Date: 10 Oct 2000 21:32:00 PST
On Oct 10, charmuth@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Forgive me, for I have sinned.
An About Face After Being Saved by a Gun Owner
I am one of those people who you loathe. One of those invisible people who
come into your living room without asking your permission. One of those
people who follow you while you shop, and make it harder for you to make
legal purchases. One of those people who try and tell you how to raise your
children, as if you don't know how. One of those who gives ratings to
stations that promote our demise as a free nation. I am your enemy. Or at
least I was.
I followed it all, all of the propaganda, all of the hoopla. Believed it
too. Believed that leaving my house was more dangerous than being in a war.
At any given moment one of you evil gun owners would open fire on me. I saw
the NRA stickers, the Gun owners of America stickers on the cars that
passed, and I thought you were all fools. I did everything in my power
financially to try and help more laws pass that would prevent you from
owning guns. I wholeheartedly believed that only the Police, and Military
should have guns. Every time I heard of a gang shooting, or other criminal
act committed with a gun, I honestly believed that if we could curtail the
legal sale of guns, we could make a difference.
Boy was I wrong.
I have children, three actually, and to me the only thing more important
than raising them properly, was seeing that they aren't hurt in anyway. I
wanted to ban guns, save my children, save all children. No child should
have to be part of any kind of death, especially the kind that involves
being shot. I gave money to all of the anti gun organizations I could think
of, went to the "Million" Mom March, even looked at Rosie when she spoke,
and actually admire her. Brought the kids as well, and even yelled some not
so nice things to those other marchers. I'm sure some of you know who I
refer to.
I was on my way back from the march, on my way back to Connecticut, when I
stopped off of the highway at a rest stop by one of those McDonalds they
have off I-95. By this time I had dropped off two of my kids with their
father, and only had my little one with me. I went into the restroom with
her, and on my way out noticed two men hanging out by my car. There were
only two other cars in the lot at the time that were anywhere near my
vehicle. I immediately felt threatened by their demeanor, but continued on
to my car.
The smaller of the two approached me with a knife as I was about to open the
door to put my child in her car seat. He yelled at me to get in the back of
the car, they were taking me for a little ride. I obviously told them to
just take my keys, they could have the car, but they insisted I get in the
back. I then heard a man yelling something I don't quite recall, and saw him
running towards me with a gun in his hand. The two men vanished into their
car, and sped away. I stood there frozen in time, and by the time the
gentleman with the gun got to me I just broke down and cried.
To make a long story short, you were all right, and I'm sorry. This man with
a gun saved me, and I just keep thinking if I had gotten my wish and guns
were banned, there is no telling where I'd be, and what would've happened to
my daughter. The only regret I have is not getting the man's phone number
who saved my life. I thanked him over and over again, and told him that he
saved me, but he calmly said to me something I'd never forget. He said
"That's what people like me are here for Ms., and I'm happy to have been
able to help."
"That's what people like me are here for," those words keep on running
through my head everyday. Maybe this gentleman by some chance is part of
your group, and will read my message. If he does I would just like to say
something to him, and to everyone else reading this note.
Thank you for saving my life, and to the rest of you thank you for fighting
for this man's right to protect me and my child. Tell him for me that I will
no longer be part of the group who invades his home, and tries to tell him
how to store his guns. Tell him I will never be part of any group who tries
to make it impossible for him to buy his tool he used to save me. And tell
him I will never again tell him how to raise his children properly, because
obviously I was oblivious to the fact that responsible people such as him
know how to raise their children better than I do.
I did rectify that situation the other day; I bought a shotgun for home
protection, and am in the process of getting my concealed permit. Next time
I will be ready to defend myself, or others for that matter. Some of my
friends think I'm crazy, but they try their best to understand. I just tell
them that as soon as their child's life is put in jeopardy by some criminal
with a weapon that they will understand, but until then don't tell me how to
live my life. I've lost some friends, but surprisingly most of them
understand. If not for this man I could very easily have been killed or
raped, and my child could've been taken from me, so once more I need to say
thanks for saving me, and with all sincerity to the rest of you, forgive me,
for I have sinned.
- Written By: Bryan Clifford (for a dear friend)
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articlei
d=680
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Warrantless Searches...Liberties Lost (fwd)
Date: 11 Oct 2000 12:46:04 PST
On Oct 11, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
AMENDMENT THE FOURTH - CONSTITUTION of the
UNITED STATES of AMERICA
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,
but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized."
Alert: Warrantless secret searches on the verge of being approved!
http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb1075995
The Fugitive Apprehension Act is copied below this piece
from Dave Kopel
~Sharlene~
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39dede1511bd.htm
Urgent Alert:
Congress of verge of approving warrantless secret searches
By Dave Kopel
The Independence Institute http://i2i.org
[Advance draft of article scheduled for publication in National Review
Online, http://www.nationalreview.com] Please feel free to forward
No person's liberty is safe in the last week of Congress-traditionally a time
when civil liberties invasions such as wire-tapping, gun prohibitions, and
the like are snuck through in the final frantic hours, with no opportunity
for public opposition. This Congress is no exception. As soon as Tuesday, the
House may vote on a bill, which has already passed the Senate, to drastically
expand government power to conduct secret searches without judicial approval.
The bill in question comes from Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) and Orrin
Hatch (R-Utah). It is S. 2516, "The Fugitive Apprehension Act." The bill
allows the government to obtain any kind of document it wants, without first
getting a search warrant or a subpoena from a court. These documents include
any written or electronic document possessed by an individual-or possessed by
a third party (such as bank records, credit card records, telephone records,
school records, or an Internet Service Provider?s customer records). In other
words, the bill guts the Fourth Amendment requirement that private documents
should be searched only after a court issues a warrant based upon probable
cause.
Even worse, section 3(g) of the bill allows these document seizures to be
conducted secretly, so that the individual might never be told that his bank
records, Internet records, or other documents have been searched by the
government.
The bill currently applies to apprehension of "fugitives," which include
people who have been charged (not convicted) of a crime, at both the federal
or state level. In other words, if your wife?s second cousin never showed up
in court for his drunk driving trial, the government could look at your bank
records, telephone records, Internet records, and every other document about
you-without a court order, and without ever telling you.
There is no law enforcement need for this provision. Under the All Writs Act,
a United States Attorney can go to court, and present reasons why he needs
access to private records. If the court agrees (it almost always does), the
court issues a subpoena to obtain the records. This system is working well,
and, notably, the United States Attorneys are not asking to change the law.
Even so, there is a very strong chance that S. 2516 will become law next
week, unless Congress hears of widespread opposition. The American Civil
Liberties Union, which is leading the fight against the bill on Capitol Hill,
is urging to citizens to contact their Representatives and their Senators
over the weekend and on Tuesday morning, in every way possible: at town hall
meetings, by calling DC and local Congressional offices, and by sending
e-mail or faxes. Because House Speaker Dennis Hastert has great discretion
over whether to bring S. 2516 to the House floor, King urges people all over
the U.S. to call his office.
The main Congressman opposing S. 2516 is Representative Bob Barr (R-Georgia).
The very conservative Barr is a former United States Attorney, and one of the
most prominent "law and order" Republicans in Congress-as shown by his
leadership in the effort to impeach President Clinton. While the ACLU is
generally considered liberal, and Barr conservative, both agree that
protecting the Fourth Amendment transcends party or ideology.
Should S. 2516 become law, it would set a precedent for warrantless, secret
searches on other subjects-including firearms laws. This is one reason why
Barr, one of the staunchest Second Amendment defenders in Congress, is
opposing the bill.
There is also a possibility that S. 2516 may be snuck through as an amendment
to HR 3048, "The Presidential Protection Act of 2000." Of course S. 2516 has
nothing to do with Presidential Protection. Instead, the bill is about
constitutional destruction.
Take action right now
To Email every member of Congress in both the House and the Senate use the
KeepAndBearArms.Com automailer.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/takeaction/automailers/us_congress.asp
To send one single fax to all congress members for whom we have an email
address, draft your fax and send it to (515) 678-2246. Your fax will be sent
by the KeepAndBearArms.Com Powerfax system to over 1,000 fax machines,
covering faxes at D.C. offices and home state offices of every congress
member for whom we have fax numbers.
You do not have to be a member of KeepAndBearArms.Com to take advantage of
their Powerfax or Automailer services. So there are no excuses, go light 'em
up!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
S 2516 ES
106th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 2516
AN ACT
To fund task forces to locate and apprehend fugitives in Federal, State, and
local felony criminal cases and give administrative subpoena authority to the
United States Marshals Service.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Fugitive Apprehension Act of 2000'.
SEC. 2. FUGITIVE APPREHENSION TASK FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall, upon consultation with
appropriate Department of Justice and Department of the Treasury law
enforcement components, establish permanent Fugitive Apprehension Task Forces
consisting of Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities in
designated regions of the United States, to be directed and coordinated by
the United States Marshals Service, for the purpose of locating and
apprehending fugitives.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated
to the United States Marshal Service to carry out the provisions of this
section $30,000,000 for the fiscal year 2001, $5,000,000 for fiscal year
2002, and $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
(c) OTHER EXISTING APPLICABLE LAW- Nothing in this section shall be construed
to limit any existing authority under any other provision of Federal or State
law for law enforcement agencies to locate or apprehend fugitives through
task forces or any other means.
SEC. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENAS TO APPREHEND FUGITIVES.
(a) IN GENERAL- Chapter 49 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
`Sec. 1075. Administrative subpoenas to apprehend fugitives
`(a) DEFINITIONS- In this section:
`(1) FUGITIVE- The term `fugitive' means a person who--
`(A) having been accused by complaint, information, or indictment under
Federal law or having been convicted of committing a felony under Federal
law, flees or attempts to flee from or evades or attempts to evade the
jurisdiction of the court with jurisdiction over the felony;
`(B) having been accused by complaint, information, or indictment under State
law or having been convicted of committing a felony under State law, flees or
attempts to flee from, or evades or attempts to evade, the jurisdiction of
the court with jurisdiction over the felony;
`(C) escapes from lawful Federal or State custody after having been accused
by complaint, information, or indictment or having been convicted of
committing a felony under Federal or State law; or
`(D) is in violation of subparagraph (2) or (3) of the first undesignated
paragraph of section 1073.
`(2) INVESTIGATION- The term `investigation' means, with respect to a State
fugitive described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), an
investigation in which there is reason to believe that the fugitive fled from
or evaded, or attempted to flee from or evade, the jurisdiction of the court,
or escaped from custody, in or affecting, or using any facility of,
interstate or foreign commerce, or as to whom an appropriate law enforcement
officer or official of a State or political subdivision has requested the
Attorney General to assist in the investigation, and the Attorney General
finds that the particular circumstances of the request give rise to a Federal
interest sufficient for the exercise of Federal jurisdiction pursuant to
section 1075.
`(3) STATE- The term `State' means a State of the United States, the District
of Colombia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United
States.
`(b) SUBPOENAS AND WITNESSES-
`(1) SUBPOENAS- In any investigation with respect to the apprehension of a
fugitive, the Attorney General may subpoena witnesses for the purpose of the
production of any records (including books, papers, documents, electronic
data, and other tangible and intangible items that constitute or contain
evidence) that the Attorney General finds, based on articulable facts, are
relevant to discerning the whereabouts of the fugitive. A subpoena under this
subsection shall describe the records or items required to be produced and
prescribe a return date within a reasonable period of time within which the
records or items can be assembled and made available.
`(2) WITNESSES- The attendance of witnesses and the production of records may
be required from any place in any State or other place subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States at any designated place where the witness
was served with a subpoena, except that a witness shall not be required to
appear more than 500 miles distant from the place where the witness was
served. Witnesses summoned under this section shall be paid the same fees and
mileage that are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States.
`(c) SERVICE-
`(1) AGENT- A subpoena issued under this section may be served by any person
designated in the subpoena as the agent of service.
`(2) NATURAL PERSON- Service upon a natural person may be made by personal
delivery of the subpoena to that person or by certified mail with return
receipt requested.
`(3) CORPORATION- Service may be made upon a domestic or foreign corporation
or upon a partnership or other unincorporated association that is subject to
suit under a common name, by delivering the subpoena to an officer, to a
managing or general agent, or to any other agent authorized by appointment or
by law to receive service of process.
`(4) AFFIDAVIT- The affidavit of the person serving the subpoena entered on a
true copy thereof by the person serving it shall be proof of service.
`(d) CONTUMACY OR REFUSAL-
`(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of the contumacy by or refusal to obey a
subpoena issued to any person, the Attorney General may invoke the aid of any
court of the United States within the jurisdiction of which the investigation
is carried on or of which the subpoenaed person is an inhabitant, or in which
he carries on business or may be found, to compel compliance with the
subpoena. The court may issue an order requiring the subpoenaed person to
appear before the Attorney General to produce records if so ordered.
`(2) CONTEMPT- Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punishable
by the court as contempt thereof.
`(3) PROCESS- All process in any case to enforce an order under this
subsection may be served in any judicial district in which the person may be
found.
`(4) RIGHTS OF SUBPOENA RECIPIENT- Not later than 20 days after the date of
service of an administrative subpoena under this section upon any person, or
at any time before the return date specified in the subpoena, whichever
period is shorter, such person may file, in the district within which such
person resides, is found, or transacts business, a petition to modify or
quash such subpoena on grounds that--
`(A) the terms of the subpoena are unreasonable or unnecessary;
`(B) the subpoena fails to meet the requirements of this section; or
`(C) the subpoena violates the constitutional rights or any other legal
rights or privilege of the subpoenaed party.
`(e) REPORT-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall report in January of each year to
the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the number of administrative subpoenas issued under this
section, whether each matter involved a fugitive from Federal or State
charges, and identification of the agency or component of the Department of
Justice issuing the subpoena and imposing the charges.
`(2) EXPIRATION- The reporting requirement of this subsection shall terminate
in 3 years after the date of enactment of this section.
`(f) GUIDELINES-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall issue guidelines governing the
issuance of administrative subpoenas pursuant to this section.
`(2) REVIEW- The guidelines required by this subsection shall mandate that
administrative subpoenas may be issued only after review and approval of
senior supervisory personnel within the respective investigative agency or
component of the Department of Justice.
`(g) DELAYED NOTICE-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Where an administrative subpoena is issued under this
section to a provider of electronic communication service (as defined in
section 2510 of this title) or remote computing service (as defined in
section 2711 of this title), the Attorney General may--
`(A) in accordance with section 2705(a) of this title, delay notification to
the subscriber or customer to whom the record pertains; and
`(B) apply to a court, in accordance with section 2705(b) of this title, for
an order commanding the provider of electronic communication service or
remote computing service not to notify any other person of the existence of
the subpoena or court order.
`(2) SUBPOENAS FOR FINANCIAL RECORDS- If a subpoena is issued under this
section to a financial institution for financial records of any customer of
such institution, the Attorney General may apply to a court under section
1109 of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3409) for an
order to delay customer notice as otherwise required.
`(3) NONDISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS-
`(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraphs (1) and (2), the Attorney
General may apply to a court for an order requiring the party to whom an
administrative subpoena is directed to refrain from notifying any other party
of the existence of the subpoena or court order for such period as the court
deems appropriate.
`(B) ORDER- The court shall enter such order if it determines that there is
reason to believe that notification of the existence of the administrative
subpoena will result in--
`(i) endangering the life or physical safety of an individual;
`(ii) flight from prosecution;
`(iii) destruction of or tampering with evidence;
`(iv) intimidation of potential witnesses; or
`(v) otherwise seriously jeopardizing an investigation or undue delay of a
trial.
`(h) IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY- Any person, including officers, agents,
and employees, who in good faith produce the records or items requested in a
subpoena shall not be liable in any court of any State or the United States
to any customer or other person for such production or for nondisclosure of
that production to the customer, in compliance with the terms of a court
order for nondisclosure.'.
(b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT- The analysis for chapter 49 of title
18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`1075. Administrative subpoenas to apprehend fugitives.'.
SEC. 4. STUDY AND REPORT OF THE USE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENAS.
Not later than December 31, 2001, the Attorney General, in consultation with
the Secretary of the Treasury, shall complete a study on the use of
administrative subpoena power by executive branch agencies or entities and
shall report the findings to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate
and the House of Representatives. Such report shall include--
(1) a description of the sources of administrative subpoena power and the
scope of such subpoena power within executive branch agencies;
(2) a description of applicable subpoena enforcement mechanisms;
(3) a description of any notification provisions and any other provisions
relating to safeguarding privacy interests;
(4) a description of the standards governing the issuance of administrative
subpoenas; and
(5) recommendations from the Attorney General regarding necessary steps to
ensure that administrative subpoena power is used and enforced consistently
and fairly by executive branch agencies.
Passed the Senate July 26, 2000.
Attest:
Secretary.
106th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 2516
AN ACT
To fund task forces to locate and apprehend fugitives in Federal, State, and
local felony criminal cases and give administrative subpoena authority to the
United States Marshals Service.
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Marshals Service
America's Oldest Federal Law Enforcement Agency
The First Accredited Federal Law Enforcement Agency
http://www.usgov.com/cgi-bin/dblink/jump.cgi?ID=573
==================================================
TO GET ANY CONGRESSIONAL NUMBER: Dial 1-800-648-3516 or (202) 224-3121
======================================================
U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no
Warrants
shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things
to be seized.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/
Looking for what the Bible says about Christians and Civil Government?
Pastor John Weaver covers this and much more. Audio tapes are only $4.00
each. Just click: http://freedompage.home.mindspring.com/johnweaver.html
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: 7 Varieties of Gun Control Advocates (fwd)
Date: 11 Oct 2000 12:40:08 PST
On Oct 11, Steve Moser wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Second Amendment
7 Varieties of Gun Control Advocates
by Gus Cotey, Jr.
The right of decent private citizens to personally possess, transport, and
responsibly use arms without government interference is the ultimate freedom
and the main pillar supporting all other liberties. Few cultures have
allowed their general population access to weapons, the tools of power, to
the same degree as the United States. Instead, most societies have
restricted the keeping and bearing of arms to a select few power brokers and
their agents, often resulting in oppression on a grand scale.
Despite a massive amount of historical evidence to the contrary, there is a
substantial body of Americans, many occupying positions of influence, who
contend that the abrogation of the Second Amendment is the quickest path to
domestic tranquility. Since this is as absurd as advocating blood-letting as
a cure for anemia, it would seem advisable to question the motives and
mentalities of the gun control advocates themselves.
In my observation, weapon prohibitionists can be broken down into seven
major categories. Even though their motives may vary they all pose a
mortalthreat to liberty.
Elitists
Many of those in favor of oppressive firearms legislation are are best
classed as elitists. Elitists frequently identify with a peer group based on
wealth, power, rank, social status, occupation, education, ethnic group,
etc. and perceive themselves and their peers as inherently superior to and
more responsible than the "common people", thus more deserving of certain
rights. Since elitists practically consider those outside their class or
caste as members of another species, that most anti-elitist list of laws,
the Bill of Rights is viewed by them as anathema. Naturally, theSecond
Amendment is their first target as it serves as the supporting structure for
other nine amendments.
Authoritarians
Another type of individual who favors the restriction of private gun
ownership is the authoritarian. Authoritarian personalities are
characterized by their belief in unquestioning obedience to an authority
figure or group and a disdain for individual freedom of action, expression,
and judgement. Those with authoritarian personalities function well in
symbiosis with elitists occupying positions of power. Because authoritarians
repress their desires for autonomy they harbor a deep resentment toward free
and independent thinkers. Of course authoritarians do not want firearms in
the hands of the general population as this constitutes a major obstacle to
fulfilling their pathological and obsessive desire to control people.
Criminals
It goes without saying that career criminals would like to see the public
disarmed for obvious reasons. A well-armed population makes crimes such as
assault, robbery, and burglary hazardous for the perpetrator and this is bad
for "business." Also, it would seem that even non-violentor "white collar"
criminals live in constant fear of retribution from the public that they
financially bleed and would therefore prefer that the public be disarmed.
Evidence supporting this hypothesis can be gathered by studying the Second
Amendment voting records of those legislators who have been convicted of
willful misconduct.
The Fearful
Cowards by definition are easily or excessively frightened by things and
situations that are recognized as dangerous, difficult, or painful. It
therefore stands to reason that the mere thought of guns and the
circumstances in which they are employed causes them abnormal amounts of
stress. Rather than admit their weakness to themselves or others, some
fearful types jump on the anti-gun bandwagon and purport moral superiority
to those "barbaric"enough to employ lethal force against armed assailants by
claiming various humanitarian and pragmatic motives for allowing evil to
remain unchecked. In reality, many of these individuals harbor an envy
induced resentment toward anyone with the means, skill, and will to
successfully stand up to criminal aggression.
The desire to assert oneself exists in nearly everyone, wimps included, so
cowards seek out tame enemies against whom they can ply their pitiful brand
of machismo. Instead of the sociopaths who commit acts of wanton aggression
with guns, guns themselves and responsible gun owners are the main targets
of their attacks. After all, real criminals are dangerous, so cowards prefer
doing battle with inanimate objects that do not have a will of their own and
decent law-abiding people whose high level of integrity and self discipline
prevent them from physically lashing out against mere verbal assailants,
however obnoxious they may be.
Ideological Chamelions
Ideological chameleons follow the simple social strategy of avoiding
controversy and confrontation by espousing the beliefs of the people in
their immediate vicinity or advocating the philosophy of those who scream
the loudest in a debate. Quite a few supposedly pro Second Amendment public
officials have shown themselves to be ideological chameleons when they
supported restrictions on the private possession of military style
semiautomatic rifles following recent atrocities in which such firearms were
employed. Like their reptilian namesake, people who merely blend in with the
ambient philosophical foliage seem to have little insight into the moral and
social ramifications of their actions. Political and/or economic gain along
with avoidance of confrontation are their only goals.
Security Monopolists
Security monopolists are those members and representatives of public and
private security providing concerns who want the means of self protection
out of private hands so that they can command high fees for protecting the
citizenry against the rising tide of crime. These profiteers stand to loose
a great deal of capital if citizens can efficiently defend themselves.To the
security monopolist, each criminal who enters and exits the revolving door
of justice is a renewable source of revenue providing jobs for police,
social workers, victim counsellors, judges, prison employees, security
guards, burglar alarm installers, locksmiths, and others employed by the
security monopolies or their satellite organizations. No wonder it is so
common for an honest citizen to be more ruthlessly hounded by the
authorities when he shoots a criminal in self defense than a criminal who
shoots honest citizens.
The Disfunctional Unworldly
Just as a limb will weaken and atrophy if not used, so will aspects of the
mind fail to develop if nothing in one's environment exists to challenge
them. People who have led excessively sheltered lives tend to have a
difficult time understanding certain cause and effect relationships and an
even harder time appreciating just how cruel the world can be. These
dysfunctionally unworldly types are truly perplexed at the very notion of
firearms ownership with regard to defense. To them, tyranny and crime are
things that happen in other places far removed from their "civilized"
universe. Also, they do not understand the value of private property and why
some people would fight for theirs since they never had to work hard to
acquire what they possess. While those suffering from dysfunctional
unworldliness are most often people who have been born into considerable
wealth, this condition is also common in members of the clergy,
academicians, practioners of the arts, and others who have spent much of
their lives cloistered in a safe and pampering environment. While many of
these people may be quite talented and intelligent in some ways, their
extreme naivety makes them easy prey for the tyrants who use them for the
financial support and favorable advertisement of their regimes. Needless to
say, the anti-gun movement is well represented and financed by the
dysfunctionally unworldly.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and it behooves all vigilant
lovers of liberty to know and be able to recognize the various types of arms
prohibitionists and understand their differing but equally dangerous
motives. Acquiring knowledge of one's foes is the first step toward
defeating them. We must never forget that a threat to private firearms
ownership is a threat to all freedoms.
Jews for the Presevation of Firearms Ownership
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: A maverick takes on public schooling [MUST READ] (fwd)
Date: 11 Oct 2000 12:44:15 PST
On Oct 10, Archibald Bard wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
When Cornwallis surrendered on Oct 17, 1781, did he surrender to THE UNITED
STATES?
No, in fact he surrendered 13 times, to the regiment leaders of each of the
states.
In 1783, Benjamin Franklin went to France.
There, a treaty was signed by King George's representative, which came to be
known as The Treaty of Paris.
In it, King George relinquished his sovereignty and passed it to The 13 FREE
AND INDEPENDENT STATES,
THE PEOPLE AND THEIR POSTERITY, FOREVER!
Independent from England, and Independent from each other.
They were then, and are now, Republics, technically NATIONS.
I recently found a copy of the Treaty of Paris on the United States Congress
web page of international treaties.
It is STILL recognized by International Law!
Treaty of Paris
http://www.foxinternet.net/web/amerika/treaty.htm
Archibald Bard
Pro Libertate - For Freedom
ICQ 83834746
A VOTE FOR DEMO/REPUBS IS TO ENDORSE
THEIR POLICIES OF DEPRIVATION OF
YOUR FREEDOMS!
BUCHANAN-Reform
http://www.buchananreform.com/default.asp
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 10:52 PM
>
> http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/10/10/fp21s2-csm.shtml
>
> A maverick takes on public schooling
>
> Interview / John Taylor Gatto
>
>
> By Amanda Paulson
> Special to The Christian Science Monitor
>
> John Taylor Gatto had just been named New York State Teacher of the Year
> nine years ago when he made a shocking announcement. After teaching 26
> years in New York City public schools, he was quitting, saying he could no
> longer continue to "hurt kids."
>
> Since then, Mr. Gatto has written and lectured extensively on the negative
> effects of compulsory schooling. His newest book, "The Underground History
> of Education" (Oxford Village Press), will be published in January.
> Sections of the book are available online at www.johntaylorgatto.com
>
> The following are excerpts from a recent Monitor interview:
>
> On why he wrote the book:
>
> I had a need after 30 years of fairly successful teaching, with all kinds
> of kids, to understand why the business had evolved the way it had. The
> first thing I learned was that the school world is not independent, but a
> subordinate industry to government and industry and commerce.
>
> On education before school became compulsory:
>
> My own reading from the first 120 years of American national history is
> exactly the same as Alexis de Tocqueville's reading. He says flatly this
is
> the best-educated nation in the Western world, bar none.... It's just
> dazzling what people can do for themselves when the boot of the government
> is off their back.
>
> Everybody understood what the homeschoolers understand today - [compulsory
> school is] nonsense. It becomes a destructive activity to lock people up
> and drill them and confine them with low-level abstractions.
>
> On testing:
>
> There's no teacher worth his or her salt who, inside of a period at the
> start of the year, doesn't know who's going to get the As, who's going to
> get the Bs, who's going to cause trouble.... How do you know when you get
a
> good haircut? You look in the mirror.
>
> What we've allowed to happen is for normal good judgment and wisdom to be
> set aside for some kind of mathematical wizardry.
>
> There's nothing a standardized test measures other than your ability to
> score well on the next standardized test.
>
> Some assumptions he says are made in modern schooling:
>
> *Government school is a central force for social cohesion ... and a
> bureaucratized public order is our only defense against chaos and anarchy.
>
> *The certifiable expertise of schoolteachers is superior to that of lay
> people.
>
> *Compelling children to assemble in mandated groups, for mandated
> intervals, with mandated texts ... does not interfere with academic
> learning.
>
> *Children will inevitably grow apart from parents in beliefs as they grow
> older, and this process must be encouraged.
>
> On the role of the teacher:
>
> The balance of responsibility was [once] divided much differently. The
> assumption was that the kid would do 90 percent of the work and the
teacher
> 10 percent. Sometime around the turn of the 20th century, that assumption
> was deliberately reversed. Each time you intervene in a kid's learning
past
> an allowable minimum, you're actually impeding the process.
>
> On curriculum:
>
> There's no scientific evidence justifying any particular subject
selection,
> any sequence of subjects, any internal arrangements of time. There is no
> body of knowledge inaccessible to a motivated elementary school student.
> The rationing of learning by age - and usually it's by social class and
age
> - is indefensible.
>
> Delinquent behavior is a reaction to the structure of schooling. It's not
> some innate characteristic of large groups of children. School makes
> children angry because it's a consistently dishonest place and a visibly
> unfair place.
>
> On the future of schools:
>
> I see great hope for educational advancement or spiritual advancement.
I've
> traveled 1.4 million miles in 50 states and seven foreign countries, and
> while I've seen a lot less hope overseas, [here] I see effective reform
and
> resistance everywhere.
>
> The most effective of all, bar none, is the homeschool revolution.
> Approximately 2 million people from all social classes and all religious
> and cultural backgrounds have, in effect, set up private labs of
education.
>
> What makes a good school?
>
> That the school part is de-emphasized. Furthermore you have to believe
that
> everybody wants the best. Everybody wants to learn. They'd like to have
> worthwhile meaningful work to do.
>
> On what kids are capable of:
>
> I taught 13-year-olds from [the inner city] using the same text and
> methodology that was used on me at Cornell and Columbia. I pushed them
> harder than I was pushed. I never accepted second-rate work without taking
> the kid aside and showing him why it was second-rate.
>
>
>
> [Forwarded For Information Purposes Only - Not
> Necessarily Endorsed By The Sender - A.K. Pritchard]
>
> ------------------------------
>
> A.K. Pritchard
> http://www.ideasign.com/chiliast/
> http://rosie.acmecity.com/songfest/189/
>
> To subscribe to "The Republican" email list - just ask!
> therepublican@ideasign.com
>
>
> "....teachers who conform to the traditional institutional mode are
> out of place. They might find fulfillment as tap-dance instructers,
> or guards in maximum security prisons or propreiters of reducing
> salons, or agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - - but
> they damage teaching, children, and themselves by staying in
> the classroom."
>
> (NEA book, Schools For the 70's And Beyond)
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: [Lis-LEAF] Fw: THE LIGHTHOUSE: October 10, 2000 (fwd)
Date: 12 Oct 2000 09:33:16 PST
Now here's a decosion everyone can use.....
On Oct 11, Tee wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
>Subject: [Lis-LEAF] Fw: THE LIGHTHOUSE: October 10, 2000
>
>Thought you would find this announcement about this judicial immunity case
>interesting. It is worth further attention.
>
>--Jon
>
>------------------------
> From: "David J. Theroux"
> Subject: THE LIGHTHOUSE: October 10, 2000
> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:04:42 -0500
> To: Lighthouse list members
>
>
>THE LIGHTHOUSE
>"Enlightening Ideas for Public Policy..."
>VOL. 2, ISSUE 39
>October 10, 2000
>
>Welcome to The Lighthouse, the e-mail newsletter of The Independent
>Institute, the non-partisan, public policy research organization
>. We provide you with updates of the
>Institute's current research publications, events and media programs.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>IN THIS WEEK'S ISSUE:
>1. Holding Bureaucrats Personally Accountable: A 1st Amendment Victory
>2. The Independent Review: Fall Issue Now Available
>3. Public Health vs. The Nanny State? -- Next Independent Policy
>Forum (10/26/00)
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>HOLDING BUREAUCRATS PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE: A 1st Amendment Victory
>
>The legal doctrine of "sovereign immunity" -- and its modern cousin,
>"qualified immunity" -- has historically allowed government
>bureaucrats to escape full accountability for misdeeds they have
>perpetrated under the guise of government "policy." Thus, a recent
>decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals -- ruling that a group
>of government bureaucrats may be held personally liable for
>outrageous constitutional violations -- is news worthy of celebration.
>
>The facts of the case attest to the need for strong checks on
>government power. Three Berkeley, Calif., residents had campaigned
>against a proposed homeless shelter in their neighborhood. At the
>behest of local "housing rights" activists, who said the anti-shelter
>campaign was discriminatory and violated the Fair Housing Act, the
>U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) got into the
>act. HUD officials demanded interviews with the three anti-shelter
>neighbors, told their neighbors they had violated the law, and
>ordered them to give HUD all materials -- including the names,
>addresses and phone numbers of other opponents of the shelter -- that
>they had collected for their campaign. To the "Berkeley Three," HUD's
>harassment violated their freedom of speech. To the appeals court,
>"qualified immunity" of government bureaucrats did not apply here;
>the Berkeley Three may proceed with their First Amendment lawsuit
>against the HUD officials and seek monetary damages.
>
>This ruling, although unusual by today's standards, harks back to
>another early legal tradition: the idea that citizens can hold
>government officials personally liable for improper conduct. In 1763,
>John Wilkes, a member of Britain's parliament, was the subject of an
>outrageous search and seizure warrant issued by Secretary of State
>Lord Halifax, after Wilkes published an anonymous attack on the
>government. Wilkes then sued Halifax and other officials and was
>awarded a sum comparable to $20 million today. Americans were so
>enraptured with this refutation of unrestrained government power that
>they made Wilkes a hero and followed in his footsteps, suing
>government officials for unreasonable search and seizures.
>
>Since the 19th century, however, this common-law tradition has nearly
>withered away. The creation of the exclusionary rule has replaced
>Wilkes's remedy with an inferior one. While the exclusionary rule
>brings some satisfaction to criminals who are the subject of
>unreasonable searches and seizures, it does nothing for the innocent.
>Furthermore, the 20th century has seen the rise of the doctrine of
>"qualified immunity," which the U.S. Supreme Court explains "seeks to
>ensure that [government] defendants 'reasonably can anticipate when
>their conduct may give rise to liability,' by attaching liability
>only if '[t]he contours of the right [violated are] sufficiently
>clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is
>doing violates that right.'"
>
>The Ninth Circuit's recent ruling that HUD officials were not acting
>reasonably when they violated the First Amendment rights of the
>Berkeley Three is refreshing because it rekindles the idea that civil
>liability can be a restraint on government power. In an era when
>bureaucratic violations of the rule of law have become routine, it is
>an idea long overdue.
>
>For the Ninth Circuit's opinion, see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-1.html.
>For a press release by supporters of the Berkeley Three, the Center
>for Individual Rights, see "HUD Officials Declared Personally
>Liable..." at
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-2.html.
>
>For more information on bureaucratic accountability, see the
>Independent Institute book CUTTING GREEN TAPE: Toxic Pollutants,
>Environmental Regulation and the Law, edited by Richard Stroup and
>Roger Meiners, at
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-3.html.
>
>For accountability in law enforcement, see the Independent Institute
>book TO SERVE AND PROTECT: Privatization and Community in Criminal
>Justice, by Bruce Benson, at
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-4.html.
>
>For information on lack of bureaucratic accountability and other
>causes of government failure, see the Independent Institute book
>BEYOND POLITICS: Markets, Welfare, and the Failure of Bureaucracy, by
>William C. Mitchell and Randy T. Simmons, at
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-5.html.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW: Fall Issue Now Available
>
>* Why did urban rioters of the 1960s target small businesses -- and
>why have so many commentators rationalized the mob violence?
>* Are some school-choice proposals more promising than others?
>* Have economists been too quiet on Medicare reform?
>* Is taxation morally defensible?
>* How did racism affect employment on the early railroads?
>* Why do government bureaucracies in general, and public education in
>particular, produce such deplorable outcomes?
>* Why did Reaganomics turn out as it did?
>
>These topics and more are discussed in the Fall 2000 issue of THE
>INDEPENDENT REVIEW: A Journal of Political Economy, the Independent
>Institute's 160-page quarterly. Contributors to the fall issue
>include Jonathan Bean, John Merrifield, Robert Helms, Edward Feser,
>David Bernstein, Hans Sherrer, James Payne, Alan Reynolds, Paul Craig
>Roberts, Jennifer Roback Morse, Jeffrey Rogers Hummel, Philip
>Perlmuter, and others.
>
>For a summary and links to selected articles (pdf) and book reviews=20
>(html), see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-6.html.
>
>To recommend THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW to your library, please see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-7.html.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>PUBLIC HEALTH vs. THE NANNY STATE? -- Next Independent Policy Forum (10/26=
/00)
>
>Barely a day goes by without some news of the latest public health
>"threat." Serious health hazards, we are told, lurk around every
>corner -- in water supplies, air, soil, beverages, fast food,
>second-hand smoke, cellular phones, and food irradiation, just to
>name a handful. And yet, Americans today live longer than ever! Are
>markets and private decision-making providing the answers? Or are
>these dangers real, immediate, and a legitimate mandate for
>government control? Can we reduce or eliminate health risks without
>government dictates? How does politics distort perceptions about
>public health? Will Americans succumb to or rebel against the growing
>Nanny State's neo-Puritanism and attack on individual choice and
>responsibility? JACOB SULLUM and THOMAS DiLORENZO will discuss these
>timely and important issues.
>
>SPEAKERS:
>
> - Jacob Sullum (Senior Editor, Reason magazine; Author, FOR YOUR
>OWN GOOD: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of Public Health)
>
> - Thomas DiLorenzo (Professor of Economics, Loyola College of
>Maryland; Co-author, FROM PATHOLOGY TO POLITICS: Public Health in
>America)
>
>WHEN:
> Thursday, October 26, 2000
> Reception and book signing: 6:30 p.m.
> Program: 7:00 - 8:30 p.m.
>
>WHERE:
> The Independent Institute Conference Center
> 100 Swan Way
> Oakland, CA 94621-1428
> For a map and directions, see
> http://www.independent.org/tii/tii_info/about.html#map
>
>TICKETS:
> $30.00 per person: includes one copy of either Jacob Sullum's
>book, FOR YOUR OWN GOOD, or Thomas DiLorenzo's book, FROM PATHOLOGY
>TO POLITICS. Admission without book is $10 per person ($7 for
>Independent Institute Associate Members)
>
>About FOR YOUR OWN GOOD: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of
>Public Health:
>
>"Sullum is meticulously logical, and his conclusions are implicit in
>everything he argues. FOR YOUR OWN GOOD has made us think about
>totalitarianism in this most unlikely context."
> - NEW YORK TIMES
>
>"Intriguing and worthwhile, this book marshals an impressive array of
>facts and arguments. Thoughtful and articulate."
> - NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
>
>About FROM PATHOLOGY TO POLITICS: Public Health in America:
>
>"FROM PATHOLOGY TO POLITICS argues that public health has become a
>bureaucracy that feels the need to perpetuate itself by expanding
>into new areas that are more often than not, just plain 'politically
>correct.'"
> - WALL STREET JOURNAL
>
>For more information about this event, see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-8.html.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>If you enjoy receiving THE LIGHTHOUSE ... please help us support it.
>
>Your supporting Independent Associate Membership enables us to reach
>thousands of other people. So, please make a contribution to The
>Independent Institute. See
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-9.html to
>donate, or contact Ms. Priscilla Busch by phone at 510-632-1366 x105,
>fax to 510-568-6040, email to , or snail mail
>to The Independent Institute, 100 Swan Way, Oakland, CA 94621-1428.
>All contributions are tax-deductible. Thank you!
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>For previous issues of THE LIGHTHOUSE, see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-10.html.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>For information on books and other publications from The Independent
>Institute, see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-11.html.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>For information on The Independent Institute's upcoming Independent
>Policy Forums, see
>http://www.independent.org/tii/lighthouse/LHLink2-39-12.html.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To subscribe (or unsubscribe) to The Lighthouse, please go to
>http://www.independent.org/subscribe.html, choose "subscribe" (or
>"unsubscribe"), enter your e-mail address and select The Lighthouse.
>Or, either send an e-mail message to
>independent-list-request@free-market.net with the words "unsubscribe"
>in the body of the message, or e-mail independent@free-market.net and
>ask to be unsubscribed.
>
>Copyright =A9 2000 The Independent Institute
>100 Swan Way
>Oakland, CA 94621-1428
>(510) 632-1366 phone
>(510) 568-6040 fax
>info@independent.org
>http://www.independent.org
>Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825
>916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM Date: 10/11/00 Time: 13:40:13
>http://www.constitution.org/ mailto:jon.roland@constitution.org
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: For those of you in the Newark, NJ area: ANJRPC sues Montclair - press
Date: 12 Oct 2000 09:28:54 PST
Hmmm, maybe we could use this to get Eddie Eagle programs etc., implemented?
On Oct 11, Terry M. Wintroub wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
If anyone in the Princeton-Lawrenceville-Trenton area is going and wants
a passenger or wants company on the train, let me know. I'm pretty sure
the hotel is just a short walk from Newark's Penn station and I think
the walk is all indoors.
Terry Wintroub
-------- Original Message --------
Reply-To: Nancy Ross
PLEASE PLAN TO COME TO THE PRESS CONFERENCE ON FRIDAY:
ANJRPC SUES MONTCLAIR BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR
VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS
PRESS CONFERENCE
Friday, October 13, at 11:00 am
Robert Treat Hotel, 50 Park Place, Newark
Essex Room
The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC), Moms for
Gun Safety, and residents of Montclair are filing suit against the
Montclair Board of Education and the Superintendent of Public Schools
for violation of their civil rights.
In June, the "Million Moms" organization obtained permission from the
Montclair schools system's Department of Instruction to distribute a
leaflet for a June 8 rally for the Smart Gun bill, S-2045. The leaflets
were given to students to take home to their parents. However, when Moms
for Gun Safety asked the Department of Instruction for permission to
distribute a leaflet announcing a rally against the bill, they were
denied the right to so.
The suit charges the Board of Education with violation of equal
protection of the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and
infringement of the right to freely speak and associate as guaranteed by
the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
According to Harry Kresky, ANJRPC attorney, "When it comes to polarizing
issues such as gun control, the death penalty, sexual orientation, and
abortion, it is critical that the public schools remain neutral and open
to all points of view. Our constitution demands nothing less."
ANJRPC spokeswoman Nancy Ross said, "Public schools are supposed to
present objective and fair arguments on controversial issues, so that
students can make informed decisions. In Montclair, the Board of
Education did the opposite. They took a position in favor of particular
legislation, presenting the students with only one argument and one
opinion. This is not only unconstitutional, it's bad education policy
and harmful."
This lawsuit is groundbreaking in that it seeks to enjoin the Board of
Education from taking political positions and using its influence over
students to push a particular political agenda.
For more information, call Nancy Ross at 201-842-1322.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: THE WAY WE SEE IT - NATIONAL SECTION (fwd)
Date: 15 Oct 2000 08:48:35 PST
On Oct 15, APLsauce@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
GRASSROOTS ALLIANCE
presents
THE WAY WE SEE IT
NATIONAL SECTION shep shepardson, editor
email address aplsauce@AOL.com,
P.O. Box 3251 Holiday Fl 34690 10/16/00
Tel. 727 943 2438
=================================
Political Activists aren t fighting the system, they are fighting those in
office who are corrupting an important inherited system....
====================================
With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff For the story behind the story...
Wednesday October 11, 2000; 1:50 PM EDT
Hillary's Campaign Recruiting Secret Operatives
On Monday Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign spokesman said he had no idea
what her opponent Rick Lazio was talking about when he charged that Clinton
operatives were tailing him and his wife, videotaping their every move in
public.
The next day Mrs. Clinton came clean - sort of, telling reporters, "That's
something that happens in campaigns. I know that it happens in every campaign
that I'm aware of."
Really? Tell it to Jaime Sneider, editorial page editor for Columbia
University's Daily Spectator newspaper.
Last month Mrs. Clinton visited Columbia for what appeared to be a routine
campaign stop. But what transpired between Hillary 2000 and Mr. Sneider was
anything but routine.
Sneider tells NewsMax.com that he got a bizarre series of phone calls shortly
before the first lady's visit from a woman who would identify herself only as
Hillary's "leader of student volunteer efforts." She wanted to speak to any
"pro-Hillary Democrats" who might be on staff.
Sneider initially bristled, telling NewsMax.com that he found the presumption
that anyone on his staff might be biased "objectionable on its face."
However, later that day the Hillary operative called back. His interest
piqued, Sneider asked the woman to identify herself by name. She refused,
complaining, "Do you really need to know that?"
The first lady's mystery operative repeated her earlier request to speak with
a "pro-Hillary Democrat," adding this time that she knew Sneider was "fairly
conservative" politically.
How did this woman know so much about him, Sneider wondered - especially
since she insisted on remaining anonymous herself. He asked what she had in
mind for her Columbia University Hillary 2000 volunteers.
"She told me this too was 'a secret,'" Sneider said, "and that she could
'only tell the person working with [the campaign].'" When he pressed again
for her full identity, the woman shot back, "Is that really relevant?"
Later that same day, Sneider was contacted at his private number, where the
same campaign operative informed him that the "pro-Hillary Democrat" would
have to have press credentials.
Realizing there was only one way to find out what was going on, Sneider
persuaded a member of his staff to go along.
Scheduling conflicts ultimately prevented the Daily Spectator's Hillary 2000
volunteer from joining the team - so Sneider never did learn exactly what
they had in mind for their "pro-Hillary Democrat" with press credentials.
In an initial interview with Hillary's gang, Sneider's recruit was told that
the mission was "a party secret."
In the recent past, Clinton has camouflaged political operatives as average
Janes and Joes for campaign commercials. Sometimes they infiltrate crowds at
Hillary's appearances to boost support.
Mrs. Clinton's Nassau County coordinator never mentioned her connection to
the campaign when she was quoted in the New York Times after last year's
Israeli Day parade. She told the paper that "hate-filled Lazio supporters"
had pushed and shoved her.
During the height of last summer's flap over Hillary's history of behind-t
he-scenes anti-Semitic outbursts, Team Clinton recruited prominent Jews to
contact reporters to say they believed her denials. Those who accepted the
assignment were told to keep the Clinton campaign's role in the project a
secret.
Sneider still wonders about what kind of "secret mission" the folks at
Hillary 2000 had in mind. Whatever it was, undoubtedly it happens, as Mrs.
Clinton would say, in every campaign.
(Editor s note: Hillary s action are indicative of just what is going on in
our various levels of government. Beginning next week we will be talking
about the disease that has infected the people in our governments and how to
recognize the disease and how we, as citizens, can help stamp it out by using
the Constitution.)
=================================
ADVISORY
FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 225-3625
October 12, 2000
No. FC-23
Archer Announces Release of 2000 Edition of "Overview of Entitlement Programs"
Congressman Bill Archer (R-TX), Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means,
today announced the release of the 2000 edition of the Committee print
entitled "Overview of Entitle-ment Programs," informally known as the"Green
Book." This document, prepared by the staff of the Committee on Ways and
Means for the use of its Members and their staffs, has been revised and
updated periodically since 1981. This book is primarily an overview of
entitlement programs within the jurisdiction of the Commit-tee.
The Green Book integrates a description of each program with current data
describing the population served by the program, an analysis of interactions
with other programs, and historical information relating to each program. It
also contains data and discussion on other matters of interest to the
Committee, including trust funds, the budget, and immigration as well as a
thorough study of the socioeconomic conditions of families and children.
Finally, the document presents the most recent and relevant data on family
income and wealth in this country.
The Committee has requested the Superin-tendent of Documents to make the
Committee print available for sale to the general public. The price of the
2000 Green Book is $60 per copy. Orders may be placed with the
Superintendent of Documents by calling (202) 512-1808 between 8 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and referring to the above title. The Green
Book will also be available on the World Wide Web at
"http://waysandmeans.house.gov".
=========================================
THE BIG JOKE - CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS
I have listened to and video-taped many programs since March of this year and
have come to this conclusion.
Most of these so-called interviews or candidate forums have done nothing more
than show how candidates will dance around questions.
I have read newspaper recommendations about which candidates to vote for and
their reasons why.
My biggest complaint is that the people in control of such activities are
completely unqualified.
However, there is one bright spot in all of these and that bright spot s name
is Tom Jackson, a columnist for one of our local newspapers and a sometimes
moderator for some of our candidate forums.
His style? He asks questions of the candidates and then when any candidate
begins the verbal dancing, will stop the nonsense and tell the candidate he
or she is avoiding answering the question.
If the session is opened to audience questioning, he soon jumps on any of the
audience who tries to make a speech rather than asking the question.
We need more Tom Jacksons to show us how to get things done.
Keep up the good work, Tom.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joe Sylvester
Subject: Re: A maverick takes on public schooling [MUST READ] (fwd)
Date: 15 Oct 2000 12:36:08 -0500
At 10:09 AM 10/15/2000 -0600, roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) wrote:
>Date: Wed, 11 Oct 00 12:44:15 PST
>
>On Oct 10, Archibald Bard wrote:
>
>When Cornwallis surrendered on Oct 17, 1781, did he surrender to THE UNITED
>STATES?
>No, in fact he surrendered 13 times, to the regiment leaders of each of the
>states.
>In 1783, Benjamin Franklin went to France.
>There, a treaty was signed by King George's representative, which came to be
>known as The Treaty of Paris.
>In it, King George relinquished his sovereignty and passed it to The 13 FREE
>AND INDEPENDENT STATES,
>THE PEOPLE AND THEIR POSTERITY, FOREVER!
>Independent from England, and Independent from each other.
>They were then, and are now, Republics, technically NATIONS.
>I recently found a copy of the Treaty of Paris on the United States Congress
>web page of international treaties.
>It is STILL recognized by International Law!
>Treaty of Paris
>http://www.foxinternet.net/web/amerika/treaty.htm
All true, but those self-same states relinquished a small and limited
portion of the powers that come with that sovereignty to the newly
established Federal government of the United States. In truth, even under
the Articles of Confederation they had done so.
The areas were then and are now quite limited. They concern mainly external
affairs, national defense, and the monetary system. That the federal
government has grossly oversteped those limits does not mean that they no
longer exist, nor does it mean that the powers have devolved back to the
states. I suppose one could argue that a broken contract, is no longer
binding, but for myself I would prefer that we Restore Our Constitution,
rather than cast it aside, and become 50 independent Nations. We are are
Federation or Confederation, modeled more or less on the Swiss Confederacy,
which predates our own by some centuries. May that once again become true
in fact as well as in law.
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: Finally, A good presidential debate (fwd)
Date: 16 Oct 2000 11:30:38 PST
On Oct 16, Charles F. Nawrocki wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
//////// SENT FYI ////// This is very important./////////
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 06:18:40 -0600
>From: spiker
>Subject: Finally, A good presidential debate
>
>On Friday, October 20, from 8 - 9:30 p.m. ET, 7 - 8:30 p.m. CT, 6 - &:30
>p.m. MT, 5 - 6:30 p.m. PT, Judicial Watch will host a nationally televised
>presidential debate featuring six of the seven qualified presidential
>candidates. John Hagelin, Al Gore, Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanan, Harry
>Browne, and Howard Phillips have all accepted--only George W. Bush has
>declined.
>
>C-SPAN has committed to televising the debate, and Fox TV and American
>Voice Radio are considering coverage. The debate will be moderated by a
>highly respected journalist, and the panel will be composed of other
>journalists from well-known national newspapers--both liberal and conservative.
>
>Seven lecterns will be set up on stage--no matter who attends the debate.
>Each candidate will give an opening and closing statement and will be
>asked questions by the panel in rotating order.
>The questions, while not set in advance, will reflect Judicial Watch
>concerns about ethics in politics--bribery laws, corporate control of
>government, independent counsel issues, etc.
>About 600 people have been invited to the debate and to a reception
>immediately following, including over 30 Ambassadors and their
>seconds-in-command, as well as the entire Washington press corps.
>
>We urge everyone to watch this debate, which certainly promises to be the
>most interesting and representative presidential debate of the season. As
>always, please check your local listings for up-to-the-minute scheduling;
>TV and radio news stations reserve the right to make last-minute changes.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Medical Privacy - National ID (fwd)
Date: 16 Oct 2000 11:37:09 PST
On Oct 15, Swftl@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Subj: ALERT: Medical Privacy-National I.D.
Reply-to: webmaster@ccops.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ALERT FROM CCOPS: CONCERNED CITIZENS OPPOSED TO POLICE STATES
(subscribe and unsubscribe instructions are at end of Alert)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ALERT: Medical Privacy-National I.D.
October 13, 2000
Dear friend of liberty,
Are we going to get what we don't want?
We don't want the federal government to assign every person a
medical identification number (like the Social Security number)
so bureaucrats can track and collect our personal medical
information and create a massive national database on us.
According to a recent Gallup survey, 91% of Americans agree
with us.
If 91% of Americans don't want a national I.D. number, how can
it happen?
This goes back to the infamous 1993 Clinton health care proposal
that was so soundly rejected by the American people. What
believers in big government could not do in that all-encompassing
national health care scheme is instead being done incrementally,
one part at a time. The key to government control of your health
care choices is this national medical identifier.Without that
number, bureaucrats can't track the medications and treatments
you take, what lifestyle choices you make, what genetic factors
you have inherited, and they can't project your likely lifetime
demand on health-care resources.
The national medical I.D. that was pronounced dead-on-arrival in
1993 came back to life in 1996 under the guise of the innocent-
sounding Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
(H.I.P.A.A.)...and Congress fell for it.
That's right, H.I.P.A.A. was passed and signed into law, and
tucked away in that legislation was the all-important language
mandating assignment of a unique, medical identification number
to every American.
The only reason you haven't already been assigned a medical I.D.
number and forced to use it for every health-related activity is
that Congress has withheld funding. In June, Representative Ron
Paul (a physician with over 30 years in private practice)
introduced and had passed an amendment to continue to withhold
funding. Unfortunately, that amendment is now in jeopardy in a
conference committee. The Liberty Committee stopped the national
I.D. card in just such a conference committee in 1999. Now, in
the year 2000, we must hold off the implementation of the
national medical identifier the same way.
Remember, as this Congress winds down, anything is possible.
Please go to http://www.thelibertycommittee.org to contact your
U.S. representative and your two U.S. senators and let them know
you are aware and watching what they do. Urge them to keep the
Paul amendment in the final version of the Labor-H.H.S.-
Education appropriations bill (H.R. 4577). Please do this now
so we don't get what we don't want tomorrow.
Kent Snyder
The Liberty Committee
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/
**********
To send a comment or question, please
Mailto:staff@thelibertycommittee.org
To SUBSCRIBE, please go to
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org and click Join.
* * *
Forwarded by the Liberty Crew
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Copyright 2000 CCOPS, Inc. Permission is granted to reproduce
this alert in full, so long as the following contact information
is included:
CCOPS: Concerned Citizens Opposed to Police States
P.O. Box 270205
Hartford, WI 53027
Phone: (262) 670-9920
Fax: (262) 670-9921
Web: http://www.ccops.org/
e-mail: webmaster@ccops.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CCOPS ALERTS is provided as a free service to the Internet
Community. If you wish to help support this service, consider
joining CCOPS: $25/year. http://www.ccops.org/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To SUBSCRIBE to CCOPS Alerts, send an e-mail message to this
address:
CCOPS-Alerts-subscribe@topica.com
Then reply to the confirmation message you will shortly receive
back from Topica.com.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL (fwd)
Date: 17 Oct 2000 13:29:51 PST
On Oct 16, Archibald Bard wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
BROTHERS AND SISTERS,
Was reviewing my Document Folder and came across this Poem which has always
deeply touched my Heart.
Come November we can begin, once again, to have an America the Beautiful!
Our current nightmare didn't happen overnight, nor will it end with one
election; but we must make a real effort
to look deep in our Hearts and make a personal decision as to the nature of
the America in which we wish
to live and leave to our children.
I recognize my view of America is not necessarily that of many, but there
are certain fundamentals a civil society
abides by, and for which our Founding Fathers laid the framework, and many
gave their last ounce.
The founding principles of our blessed 'representative Republic' have been
torn asunder by forces we have
insidiously allowed to toss upside down and, unfortunately, we must suffer
the
consequences of our lack of vigilance.
But there is Hope that all of you will, someday, see the Light of the error
of your ways, and with determination
and perseverance restore the moral values which had made America the
Beautiful.
I do so hope you enjoy this Poem, as it's one of my favorites.
I might add that the Author is deemed by some to have handed down some
controversial judgments,
but the content of the Poem, I feel, might just have an appeal to your
perception of what we as a Society
have wrought.
May your Creator give you strength to endure the raging battle within you by
the forces of good and evil to enable
your final decision on November 7 to be one for which you will have no
regrets for you personally, your children,
and our Nation. If your one of those who feel bigger government is the
answer to our serious problems,
then you will most likely will vote for one of those candidates left of
center, however, if your one of those with a deep
sense of right and wrong, together with personal responsibility for your
actions, and don't look to big
government to solve your problems, then you will most likely vote for a
candidate who is right of center.
Your decision will affect you and our Nation for decades to come; so I urge
you to be very careful
in your deliberation. Without seeming patronizing left of center means
continuing on the path to Socialism/Communism
and its inherent Slavery, while right of center means taking the path,
forgotten or new to others, to constitutional Freedom;
we are, indeed, at a major Fork on the Path.
The positive response to my past varied Posts not only does my Heart good,
but affords me a personal satisfaction that I have helped you in your
endeavor
to rid your Conscience of the exposed stench of our Society.
I love all of you who strive to live according to God's Will.
You have my Permission to repost.
Archibald Bard
Now to the Poem:
This poem was written by Judge Roy Moore. Judge Moore was
recently sued by the ACLU for displaying the Ten Commandments
in his courtroom. After a lengthy appeal process the case has been
dismissed and the Ten Commandments remain on display.
AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL
by Judge Roy Moore
America the Beautiful, or so you used to be.
Land of the Pilgrims' pride, I'm glad they'll never see
Babies piled in dumpsters, Abortion on demand,
Oh, sweet land of liberty, your house is built on sand.
Our children wander aimlessly, poisoned by cocaine,
Choosing to indulge their lusts, when God has said abstain.
>From sea to shining sea, our Nation turns away
>From the teaching of God's love and a need to always pray.
So many worldly pastors tell lies about our Rock,
Saying God is going broke so they can fleece the flock.
We've kept God in our temples, how callous we have grown,
When earth is but His footstool and Heaven is His throne.
We've voted in a government that's rotting at the core,
Appointing Godless Judges who throw reason out the door,
Too soft to place a killer in a well deserved tomb,
But brave enough to kill a baby before he leaves the womb.
You think that God's not angry that our land's a moral slum?
How much longer will He wait before His judgment comes?
How are we to face our God from Whom we cannot hide?
What then is left for us to do, but stem this evil tide?
If we who are His children will humbly turn and pray,
Seek His holy face and mend our evil way,
Then God will hear from Heaven and forgive us of our sins,
He'll heal our sickly land and those who live within.
But America the Beautiful if you don't, then you will see,
A sad but Holy God withdraw His hand from thee.
AMEN!
"The world is weary of statesmen whom democracy
has degraded into politicians."
Benjamin Disraeli - 1870
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul Watson
Subject: Urgent Letter from Rep. Bob Barr (fwd)
Date: 18 Oct 2000 08:54:23 -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_0005_01C03869.8EC57280
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-ID:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/10/17/162941
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C03869.8EC57280
Content-Type: APPLICATION/OCTET-STREAM; NAME="Urgent Letter from Rep. Bob Barr.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Content-ID:
Content-Description:
Content-Disposition: ATTACHMENT; FILENAME="Urgent Letter from Rep. Bob Barr.url"
[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=3Dhttp://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=3D2000/10/17/162941
[DOC#12]
BASEURL=3Dhttp://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/newsmax.dart/home;sz=3D468x60;til=
e=3D1;ord=3D96.1673357523978
ORIGURL=3Dhttp://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/newsmax.dart/home;sz=3D468x60;til=
e=3D1;ord=3D96.1673357523978
[InternetShortcut]
URL=3Dhttp://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=3D2000/10/17/162941
Modified=3D00E31626A438C001BC
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C03869.8EC57280--
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Statesman Journal Opinion (fwd)
Date: 18 Oct 2000 08:39:50 PST
On Oct 17, Swftl@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Paul wrote:
Please take a few minutes to write the Statesman Journal
about their very anti Libertarian view. This is something we
can do as members of our email lists..
Write to: letters@Statesmanjournal.com
Statesman Journal Opinion:
Forfeiture measure would hurt police A conviction should not be a
requirement for seizing property.
Measure 3=E2=80=99s backers would have us believe that law enforcement offi=
cials
are ruthlessly seizing property from innocent people and using the
proceeds to pad their budgets. Their solution: a constitutional
amendment =E2=80=94 virtually change-proof =E2=80=94 that would rewrite civ=
il forfeiture
laws.
The measure deserves defeat on both fronts. There=E2=80=99s not sufficient
evidence to support their claims that current state laws are being
applied unjustly. Even if abuses exist, rewriting Oregon=E2=80=99s Constit=
ution
is a bad remedy.
Since 1989, law enforcement officials in Oregon have been able to seize
property such as cars and cash if they think they are being used in
illegal drug activity. Local communities can enact their own forfeiture
laws covering other crimes such as drunken driving or prostitution.
To keep the seized goods, authorities must prove their case in civil
court, generally while the defendant proceeds through the criminal court
system. That=E2=80=99s easier than securing a conviction in criminal court=
.
That=E2=80=99s why it=E2=80=99s possible for a defendant to bew acquitted i=
n criminal
court but still have a civil jury rule that his property should be
forfeited.
The proceeds of successful forfeiture suits go to cover court costs,
then to narcotics enforcement and drug treatment and education. Local
officials rely on this support for their drug-fighting efforts.
Measure 3 would require that a person be convicted of a crime before
forfeiting property related to that crime.
The government would have to prove in criminal court that the property
was used in the crime. And proceeds from the forfeiture could be used
for drug treatment but not for fighting illegal drug activity.
That tips the scale in favor of criminals. Not only are they more
likely to make crime pay, they=E2=80=99re less likely to be caught next tim=
e
because local crime-fighting budgets will lose an important source of
money.
Passage of Measure 3 also could complicate cases where animals are
abused or neglected. Authorities couldn=E2=80=99t release them for adoptio=
n
until their owner was convicted =E2=80=94 a process that can drag on for mo=
nths.
To address any problems with the forfeiture law, we first need better
records to demonstrate what=E2=80=99s being seized, where the money is goin=
g and
how often, if ever, property is unjustly taken from people. The
Legislature didn=E2=80=99t get around to budgeting money for this purpose u=
ntil
1997, so we don=E2=80=99t have much to go on. It=E2=80=99s premature to sc=
rap the
forfeiture law on the suspicion that abuses might be taking place.
If changes are needed, the Legislature should tackle them. That makes
more sense than trying to rewrite complex laws through ballot measures.
By the way, this measure was bankrolled by an out-of-state group called
Campaign for New Drug Policies, which believes police focus too much on
drug busts. We=E2=80=99d rather give credence to local law officials than =
to
outfits such as this.
Crime shouldn=E2=80=99t pay, and our current laws are working to make that =
so.
The Statesman Journal=E2=80=99s editorial board recommends a no vote on Mea=
sure
3.
"America's drug war is so stupid that if you pay close attention to just ho=
w
stupid it is -- it'll drive you to use drugs." -- Jim Hightower
***************************************************************************=
*
To Post a message, send it to: cp3@eGroups.com
For Subscription Info and to modify your settings, web postings,etc
Go to the CP site: http://www.egroups.com/group/cp3/info.html
CPOP web site: http://www.teleport.com/~nepal/canpat.htm
Harry Browne for President-Libertarian-End the Drug War!
http://www.HarryBrowne2000.org/
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: McDade - A Thorn In The Feds Side....... (fwd)
Date: 18 Oct 2000 14:18:38 PST
Good news indeed!
On Oct 18, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Govern Without Lies? No Way, says Gov't.
U.S. News
10/16/00
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/001016/mcdade.htm
Federally speaking, a fine kettle of fishA new law is tying prosecutors in
knots
By Chitra Ragavan
Two Octobers ago, Congress passed a funny little law. It was named after
its sponsor, Pennsylvania Republican Joseph McDade, but for the
congressman, there was nothing funny about it. The Justice Department had
spent eight years investigating McDade on racketeering charges. He was
finally acquitted by a jury in 1996, but by then McDade's health and
spirits were broken. The McDade bill was his payback to Justice. It simply
requires federal prosecutors to comply with state ethics laws.
No big deal? Not quite. In August, the Oregon Supreme Court forbade all
lawyers in the state to lie, or encourage others to lie, cheat, or
misrepresent themselves. Under McDade, the ruling now applies to Oregon's
federal prosecutors. "We've handcuffed the agents," says senior FBI
official David Knowlton, "not the criminals." The U.S. attorney for the
Oregon district, Kristine Olson, has informed the FBI and other federal
investigative agencies that she cannot OK agents or informants to assume
false identities, wear body wires, or engage in undercover activities. ....
Federal prosecutors despise the McDade law. David Margolis, a senior
Justice Department official and a veteran organized-crime prosecutor, says
McDade has had a major chilling effect. "Even I wouldn't go out on a
limb," he says. Justice officials are trying to gut the law before
Congress goes out of session this week. The department warned lawmakers in
1998 that prosecutors would be lost in a morass of quirky state ethics
laws–especially during complicated multistate investigations. But
defense lawyers won the day. "Why should prosecutors be exempt from rules
that apply to all other lawyers in that state?" says Mark Holscher, lawyer
for former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee. So far, no court has dismissed
a case or excluded evidence on the basis of McDade. "These are crocodile
tears," says veteran defense lawyer Irv Nathan.
Major headache. The biggest headache for prosecutors is the American Bar
Association's controversial Model Rule 4.2, adopted by many states. It
prohibits prosecutors from contacting people represented by lawyers
without first talking to the attorneys. Remember when Kenneth Starr's
prosecutors ignored Monica Lewinsky's tearful entreaties to call her
lawyer? They got away with it because, since 1989, Justice has defied Rule
4.2.
No more. Prosecutors now say adhering to 4.2 has hurt white-collar probes,
where securing the cooperation of informers is often vital. In an
investigation of Alaska Airlines last year, company lawyers barred federal
agents from questioning employees. Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont says,
"The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction." But House
Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde of Illinois says he's not inclined
to repeal McDade. "That doesn't mean I'm for crooks," Hyde says. "I'm for
ethical behavior both by law enforcement and by defense counsel." Watching
the fight from the sidelines is Joe McDade, now 69. "I didn't read about
it. I lived it," he says, of prosecutorial zealotry. "The effort is not
justice. The effort is to break a citizen."
Sent to J.A.I.L. by Larry Bolin, futuefelon@hotmail.com.
J.A.I.L. is an acronym for (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law)
JAIL's very informative website is found at www.jail4judges.orgJ
AIL proposes a unique new addition to our form of government.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL's is spreading across America like a fast moving wildfire!
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
JAIL may be supported at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
To subscribe or be removed: add-remove-jail@mindspring.com
To send published judicial articles: USA-jail4judges@mindspring.com
To contact the author of JAIL4Judges: jail4judges@mindspring.com
All E-Groups are encouraged to sign on at jail4judges@egroups.com
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel
Adams
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root. -- Henry David Thoreau
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: At What Cost??????? (fwd)
Date: 19 Oct 2000 12:11:51 PST
With deals like this, they want to disarm _us_?
On Oct 19, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
The contempt that many Americans harbor for the man presently occupying the
Oval Office is no secret. Many of us have said for a long time that his
lack of character would come to haunt the United States in a serious way
some day. Well, some of those chickens came home to roost on Thursday. And
in the process, a lot of lives were needlessly lost.
Anyone who doesn't think Bill Clinton's single-minded quest to salvage some
sort of presidential legacy as a peacemaker had anything to do with the
violence that erupted in Israel this week is clinically delusional. And
anyone who doesn't believe the attack on the U.S.S. Cole was, at least in
part, retaliation for all of Clinton's "wag the dog" bombings of Middle East
Arabs to deflect attention from his trouser-dropping escapades with a White
House intern is hopelessly naive.
Bill Clinton's short-sighted, feel-good, busy-body
"can't-we-all-just-get-along" foreign policy has been an abject disaster for
eight years. His rush-rush insistence that Israel and the Palestinians come
to a peace agreement before his time in office is up ... a timetable
designed to benefit Clinton's "legacy," not peace ... was certainly a
contributing factor in this week's violence.
Sticking Uncle Sam's nose into every little schoolyard skirmish everywhere
in the world has built up a lot of resentment towards America and her allies
by a lot of people. At least two of them appear to have been willing to
undertake a suicide mission to sink a U.S. warship. They damn near
succeeded. How embarrassing would THAT have been to America's prestige
around the globe?
In response, our brave commander-in-chief bit his lower lip and meowed, "We
will find out who was responsible and hold them accountable." Yeah, right.
I'm sure all those Middle East terrorists are quaking in their boots and
losing a lot of sleep right now at Bungle-O Bill's words; the political
equivalent of threatening a temper-tantrum throwing kid with a "time out."
Enemies aren't afraid of paper tigers.
On the other hand, a Palestinian mob stormed a Palestinian jail on the same
day, "lynched and mutilated" two Israeli soldiers who had sought sanctuary
there, and dragged their dead bodies through the streets ... all of which
was caught on videotape. But unlike the U.S., the Israelis responded
immediately, launching a rocket attack on the Palestinian jail and reducing
it to rubble.
Eye for an eye ... swift and certain.
Later that day, an Israeli official vowed to hunt down the killers with
words couched in steel, not jello. "We will settle accounts with them,"
said Israel's transport minister Amnon Lipkin-Shahak. "We are going through
the pictures and identifying each one .. the civilians, the policemen ...
each one. We will settle accounts with them. It may take a day, it may
take a week, it may take a year, but we will settle accounts with them."
I'm sure that little bastard shown jumping up and down celebrating the
stomping death of those two Israelis soiled his underpants when he heard
those words. 'Cause the Israelis don't just talk big ... they back their
words up with action, and everybody knows it. That little SOB and his
buddies might want to change their shorts, 'cause there's a good chance
they'll be meeting Allah pretty darn soon.
Those of us who know that Bill Clinton will stoop to any level for political
gain can't help but wonder if the Middle East turmoil isn't the prelude to
some kind of "October Surprise" designed to put Al Gore over the top on
election day. Surely, no one of any intelligence can doubt that this guy is
capable of such underhanded shenanigans. Of course, the biggest question of
all is whether the tinder-box situation in the Middle East will seriously
affect Bill Clinton's fundraising schedule in the coming days and weeks.
Don't bet the kibbutz on it.
- Chuck Muth, Editor
********************
Al Gore's Secret Middle East Arms Deal
"The New York Times reported today that, without reporting to members of the
House or Senate, Vice President Gore concluded a secret agreement in 1995
with then-Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin to circumvent U.S. laws
requiring sanctions on any country that supplies advanced conventional
weapons to Iran.
"Specifically, Gore -- purportedly on behalf of the United States --
secretly authorized Russia to continue the sale of advanced weaponry to Iran
in violation of a U.S. law that Gore himself had co-authored before joining
the Clinton administration.
"... At the very moment Gore was making this secret deal with Chernomyrdin,
bipartisan majorities in Congress were deeply critical of the Clinton
administration's failure to sanction Russian arms sales to Iran. It is now
clear why the administration took no action. Gore actually signed off on
the Russian sales to Iran, in violation of U.S. law.
"The secret Gore-Chernomyrdin agreement reportedly allowed Russia to sell
weapons to Iran for four more years, including an advanced submarine,
torpedoes, anti-ship mines, and hundreds of tanks and armored personnel
carriers. This submarine, as but one example, is exactly the type
identified by Congress, when it passed the law, as posing a risk to U.S.
forces operating in the Middle East. The secret deal cut by Vice President
Gore directly contradicts the 1992 law he authored.
"The report of the Speaker's Advisory Group noted a series of interlocking
flaws in the Clinton-Gore policy towards Russia: unjustified confidence in
unreliable officials like Chernomyrdin; refusal to acknowledge mistakes and
revise policies accordingly; and excessive secrecy, designed to screen
controversial policies from both Congress and the public. This secret
agreement exemplifies every one of these flaws.
"Tragically, as the Times report notes, the decision to flout U.S. law
gained us nothing from the Russians. ... It is now clear the report
understated the magnitude of the Vice President's policy failure. Gore was
not just willfully blind to Russian proliferation -- he acquiesced in it."
- House Policy Chairman Christopher Cox (R-CA), 10/13/00
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: 2 of 2 Executive Order 12919 - Bonfire to the Constitution (fwd)
Date: 24 Oct 2000 11:14:13 PST
On Oct 23, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
PART IV - IMPACT OF OFFSETS
Sec. 401. Offsets. (a) The responsibilities and authority conferred upon
the President by section 309 of the Act with respect to offsets are
delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, who shall function as the
President's Executive Agent for carrying out this authority. (b) The
Secretary of Commerce shall prepare the annual report required by section
309(a) of the Act in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense,
Treasury, Labor, State, the United States Trade Representative, the Arms
Control and Disarmament Agency, the Director of Central Intelligence, and
the heads of other departments and agencies as required. The heads of
Federal departments and agencies shall provide the Secretary of Commerce
with such information as may be necessary for the effective performance of
this function. (c) The offset report shall be subject to the normal
interagency clearance process conducted by the Director, OMB, prior to the
report's submission by the President to Congress.
PART V - VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Sec. 501. Appointments. The authority of the President under sections
708(c) and (d) of the Act is delegated to the heads of each Federal
department or agency, except that, insofar as that authority relates to
section 101 of the Act, it is delegated only to the heads of each Federal
department or agency assigned functions under section 201(a) of this
order. The authority delegated under this section shall be exercised
pursuant to the provisions of section 708 of the Act, and copies and the
status of the use of such delegations shall be furnished to the Director,
FEMA. Sec. 502. Advisory Committees. The authority of the President under
section 708(d) of the Act and delegated in section 501 of this order
(relating to establishment of advisory committees) shall be exercised only
after consultation with, and in accordance with, guidelines and procedures
established by the Administrator of General Services.
PART VI - EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
Sec. 601. National Defense Executive Reserve. (a) In accordance with
section
710(e) of the Act, there is established in the Executive Branch a
National
Defense Executive Reserve ("NDER") composed of persons of recognized
expertise from various segments of the private sector and from government
(except full-time federal employees) for training for employment in
executive positions in the Federal Government in the event of an emergency
that requires such employment. (b) The head of any department or agency
may establish a unit of the NDER in the department or agency and train
members of that unit. (c) The head of each department or agency with an
NDER unit is authorized to exercise the President's authority to employ
civilian personnel in accordance with section 703(a) of the Act when
activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority
shall be subject to the provisions of subsections 601(d) and (e) of this
order and shall not be redelegated. (d) The head of a department or agency
may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written
determination that an emergency affecting the national security or defense
preparedness of the United States exists and that the activation of the
unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the
department or agency. (e) At least 72 hours prior to activating the NDER
unit, the head of the department or agency shall notify, in writing, the
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs of the impending
activation and provide a copy of the determination required under
subsection 601(d) of this order. (f) The Director, FEMA, shall coordinate
the NDER program activities of departments and agencies in establishing
units of the Reserve; provide for appropriate guidance for recruitment,
training, and activation; and issue necessary rules and guidance in
connection with the program. (g) This order suspends any delegated
authority, regulation, or other requirement or condition with respect to
the activation of any NDER unit, in whole or in part, or appointment of
any NDER member that is inconsistent with the authorities delegated
herein, provided that the aforesaid suspension applies only as long as
sections 703(a) and 710(e) of the Act are in effect. Sec. 602.
Consultants. The head of each department or agency assigned functions
under this order is delegated authority under sections 710(b) and (c) of
the Act to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without
compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The
authority delegated by this section shall not be redelegated.
PART VII - LABOR SUPPLY
Sec. 701. Secretary of Labor. The Secretary of Labor, identified in this
section as the Secretary, shall: (a) Collect, analyze, and maintain data
needed to make a continuing appraisal of the nation's labor requirements
and the supply of workers for purposes of national defense. All agencies
of the government shall cooperate with the Secretary in furnishing
information necessary for this purpose, to the extent permitted by law;
(b) In response to requests from the head of a Federal department or
agency engaged in the procurement for national defense, consult with and
advise that department or agency with respect to (1) the effect of
contemplated actions on labor supply and utilization, (2) the relation of
labor supply to materials and facilities requirements, and (3) suchother
matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations
functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;
(c) Formulate plans, programs, and policies for meeting defense and
essential civilian labor requirements; (d) Project skill shortages to
facilitate meeting defense and essential civilian needs and establish
training programs; (e) Determine the occupations and skills critical to
meeting the labor requirements of defense and essential civilian
activities and, with the assistance of the Secretary of Defense, the
Director of Selective Service, and such other persons as the Director,
FEMA, may designate, develop policies regulating the induction and
deferment of personnel for the armed services, except for civilian
personnel in the reserves; and (f) Administer an effective
labor-management relations policy to support the activities and programs
under this order with the cooperation of other Federal agencies, including
the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service.
PART VIII - DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE INFORMATION AND REPORTS
Sec. 801. Foreign Acquisition of Companies. The Secretary of the
Treasury,
in cooperation with the Department of State, the Department of Defense,
the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Department of
Agriculture, the Attorney General, and the Director of Central
Intelligence, shall complete and furnish a report to the President and
then to Congress in accordance with the requirements of section 721(k) of
the Act concerning foreign efforts to acquire United States companies
involved in research, development, or production of critical technologies
and industrial espionage activities directed by foreign governments
against private U.S. companies. Sec. 802. Defense Industrial Base
Information System. (a) The Secretary of Defense and the heads of other
appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the
Secretary of Defense, shall establish an information system on the
domestic defense industrial base in accordance with the requirements of
section 722 of the Act. (b) In establishing the information system
required by subsection (a) of this order, the Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other appropriate Federal
departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in
con
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: 1 of 2 Executive Order 12919 - Bonfire to the Constitution. (fwd)
Date: 24 Oct 2000 11:15:34 PST
On Oct 23, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
EO #12919
by MAGGI BAUER
Maggi@Vigo-Examiner.com
Vigo Examiner
Here is Executive Order #12919 in its entirety. When you get to the
bottom, just see what Slick has done !!! And the worst of it??
Enjoy!
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release June 6, 1994
EXECUTIVE ORDER
NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the
laws of the United States of America, including the Defense Production Act
of 1950, as amended (64 Stat. 798; 50 U.S.C. App. 2061, et seq.), and
section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and as Commander in Chief of
the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
PART I - PURPOSE, POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION
Section 101. Purpose. This order delegates authorities and addresses
national defense industrial resource policies and programs under the
Defense
Production Act of 1950, as amended ("the Act"), except for the amendments
to Title III of the Act in the Energy Security Act of 1980 and
telecommunication authorities under Executive Order No. 12472. Sec. 102.
Policy. The United States must have an industrial and technology base
capable of meeting national defense requirements, and capable of
contributing to the technological superiority of its defense equipment in
peacetime and in times of national emergency. The domestic industrial and
technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness.
The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base
and to ensure it is capable of responding to all threats to the national
security of the United States. Sec. 103. General Functions. Federal
departments and agencies responsible for defense acquisition (or for
industrial resources needed to support defense acquisition) shall: (a)
Identify requirements for the full spectrum of national security
emergencies, including military, industrial, and essential civilian
demand; (b) Assess continually the capability of the domestic industrial
and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of
national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of adequate
industrial resource and production sources, including subcontractors and
suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical
personnel; (c) Be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the
security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the
availability of adequate industrial resources and production capability,
including services and critical technology for national defense
requirements; (d) Improve the efficiency and responsiveness, to defense
requirements, of the domestic industrial base; and (e) Foster cooperation
between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development
and for acquisition of materials, components, and equipment to enhance
industrial base efficiency and responsiveness. Sec. 104. Implementation.
(a) The National Security Council is the principal forum for consideration
and resolution of national security resource preparedness policy. (b) The
Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency ("Director, FEMA") shall:
(1) Serve as an advisor to the National Security Council on issues of
national security resource preparedness and on the use of the authorities
and functions delegated by this order; (2) Provide for the central
coordination of the plans and programs incident to authorities and
functions delegated under this order, and provide guidance and procedures
approved by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
to the Federal departments and agencies under this order; (3) Establish
procedures, in consultation with Federal departments and agencies assigned
functions under this order, to resolve in a timely and effective manner
conflicts and issues that may arise in implementing the authorities and
functions delegated under this order; and (4) Report to the President
periodically concerning all program activities conducted pursuant to this
order. (c) The head of every Federal department and agency assigned
functions under this order shall ensure that the performance of these
functions is consistent with National Security Council policy and
guidelines.
PART II - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS
Sec. 201. Delegations of Priorities and Allocations.
(a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act to
require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other
than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over
performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials,
services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the
national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads: (1) The
Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource
facilities, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial
fertilizer; (2) The Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of
energy; (3) The Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to
health resources; (4) The Secretary of Transportation with respect to all
forms of civil transportation; (5) The Secretary of Defense with respect
to water resources; and (6) The Secretary of Commerce for all other
materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials. (b)
The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the heads of those
departments and agencies specified in subsection 201(a) of this order,
shall administer the Defense Priorities and Allocations System ("DPAS")
regulations that will be used to implement the authority of the President
conferred by section 101 of the Act as delegated to the Secretary of
Commerce in subsection 201(a)(6) of this order. The Secretary of Commerce
will redelegate to the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other
departments and agencies as appropriate, authority for the priority rating
of contracts and orders for all materials, services, and facilities needed
in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order. The
Secretary of Commerce shall act as appropriate upon Special Priorities
Assistance requests in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the
need at hand. (c) The Director, FEMA, shall attempt to resolve issues or
disagreements on priorities or allocations between Federal departments or
agencies in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the issue at hand
and, if not resolved, such issues will be referred to the Assistant to the
President for National Security Affairs for final determination. (d) The
head of each Federal department or agency assigned functions under
subsection 201(a) of this order, when necessary, shall make the finding
required under subsection 101(b) of the Act. This finding shall be
submitted for the President's approval through the Assistant to the
President for National Security Affairs. Upon such approval the head of
the Federal department or agency that made the finding may use the
authority of subsection 101(a) of the Act to control the general
distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the
civilian market. (e) The Assistant to the President for National Security
Affairs is hereby delegated the authority under subsection 101(c)(3) of
the Act, and will be assisted by the Director, FEMA, in ensuring the
coordinated administration of the Act. Sec. 202. Determinations. The
authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to
support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or
appropriate to promote the national defense: (a) By the Secretary of
Defense with respect to military production and construction, military
assistance to foreign nations, stockpiling, outer space, and directly
related activities; (b) By the Secretary of Energy with respect to energy
production and construction, distribution and use, and directly related
activities; and (c) By the Director, FEMA, with respect to essential
civilian needs supporting national defense, including civil defense and
continuity of government and directly related activities. Sec. 203.
Maximizing Domestic Energy Supplies. The authority of the President to
perform the functions provided by subsection 101(c) of the Act is
delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, who shall redelegate to the
Secretary of Energy the authority to make the findings described in
subsection 101(c)(2)(A) that the materials (including equipment),
services, and facilities are critical and essential. The Secretary of
Commerce shall make the finding described in subsection 101(c)(2)(A) of
the Act that the materials (including equipment), services, or facilities
are scarce, and the finding described in subsection 101(c)(2)(B) that it
is necessary to use the authority provided by subsection 101(c)(1). Sec.
204. Chemical and Biological Warfare. The authority of the President
conferred by subsection 104(b) of the Act is delegated to the Secretary of
Defense. This authority may not be further delegated by the Secretary.
PART III - EXPANSION OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY AND SUPPLY
Sec. 301. (a) Financing Institution Guarantees. To expedite or expand
production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the
procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential
to the national defense, the head of each Federal department or agency
engaged in procurement for the national defense (referred to as "agency
head" in this part) and the President and Chairman of the Export-Import
Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion,
technological development, or production in foreign countries) are
authorized to guarantee in whole or in part any public or private
financing institution, subject to provisions of section 301 of the Act.
Guarantees shall be made in consultation with the Department of the
Treasury as to the terms and conditions thereof. The Director of the
Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") shall be informed when such
guarantees are to be made. (b) Direct Loan Guarantees. To expedite or
expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts
for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items
essential to the national defense, each agency head is authorized to make
direct loan guarantees from funds appropriated to their agency for Title
III. (c) Fiscal Agent. Each Federal Reserve Bank is designated and
authorized to act, on behalf of any guaranteeing agency, as fiscal agent
in the making of guarantee contracts and in otherwise carrying out the
purposes of section 301 of the Act. (d) Regulations. The Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System is authorized, after consultation
with heads of guaranteeing departments and agencies, the Secretary of the
Treasury, and the Director, OMB, to prescribe regulations governing
procedures, forms, rates of interest, and fees for such guarantee
contracts. Sec. 302. Loans. (a) To expedite production and deliveries or
services to aid in carrying out government contracts for the procurement
of industrial resources or a critical technology item for the national
defense, an agency head is authorized, subject to the provisions ofsection
302 of the Act, to submit to the Secretary of the Treasury or the
President and Chairman of the Export- Import Bank of the United States (in
cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or
production in foreign countries) applications for loans. (b) To expedite
or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts
for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items
essential to the national defense, each agency head may make direct loans
from funds appropriated to their agency for Title III. (c) After receiving
a loan application and determining that financial assistance is not
otherwise available on reasonable terms, the Secretary of the Treasury or
the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States
(in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or
production in foreign countries) may make loans, subject to provisions of
section 302 of the Act. Sec. 303. Purchase Commitments. (a) In order to
carry out the objectives of the Act, and subject to the provisions of
section 303 thereof, an agency head is authorized to make provision for
purchases of, or commitments to purchase, an industrial resource or a
critical technology item for government use or resale. (b) Materials
acquired under section 303 of the Act that exceed the needs of the
programs under the Act may be transferred to the National Defense
Stockpile, if such transfer is determined by the Secretary of Defense as
the National Defense Stockpile Manager to be in the public interest. Sec.
304. Subsidy Payments. In order to ensure the supply of raw or
non-processed materials from high-cost sources, an agency head is
authorized to make subsidy payments, after consultation with the Secretary
of the Treasury and the Director, OMB, and subject to the provisions of
section 303(c) of the Act. Sec. 305. Determinations and Findings. When
carrying out the authorities in sections 301 through 303 of this order, an
agency head is authorized to make the required determinations, judgments,
statements, certifications, and findings, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Energy or Director, FEMA, as
appropriate. The agency head shall provide a copy of the determination,
judgment, statement, certification, or finding to the Director, OMB, to
the Director, FEMA, and, when appropriate, to the Secretary of the
Treasury. Sec. 306. Strategic and Critical Materials. (a) The Secretary of
the Interior, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense as the
National Defense Stockpile Manager and subject to the provisions of
section 303 of the Act, is authorized to encourage the exploration,
development, and mining of critical and strategic materials and other
materials. (b) An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(g) of
the Act, to make provision for the development of substitutes for
strategic and critical materials, critical components, critical technology
items, and other industrial resources to aid the national defense. (c) An
agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to
make provisions to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of
critical and strategic materials and other materials. Sec. 307.
Government-owned Equipment. An agency head is authorized, pursuant to
section 303(e) of the Act, to install additional equipment, facilities,
processes, or improvements to facilities owned by the government and to
install government-owned equipment in industrial facilities owned by
private persons. Sec. 308. Identification of Shortfalls. Except during
periods of national emergency or after a Presidential determination in
accordance with sections 301(e)(1)(D)(ii), 302(c)(4)(B), or 303(a)(7)(B)
of the Act, no guarantee, loan or other action pursuant to sections 301,
302, and 303 of the Act to correct an industrial shortfall shall be taken
unless the shortfall has been identified in the Budget of the United
States or amendments thereto. Sec. 309. Defense Production Act Fund
Manager. The Secretary of Defense is designated the Defense Production Act
Fund Manager, in accordance with section 304(f) of the Act, and shall
carry out the duties specified in that section, in consultation with the
agency heads having approved Title III projects and appropriated Title III
funds. Sec. 310. Critical Items List. (a) Pursuant to section 107(b)(1)(A)
of the Act, the Secretary of Defense shall identify critical components
and critical technology items for each item on the Critical Items List of
the Commanders-in-Chief of the Unified and Specified Commands and other
items within the inventory of weapon systems and defense equipment. (b)
Each agency head shall take appropriate acsultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall consult with each other
for the purposes of performing the duties listed in section 722(d)(1) of
the Act. (c) The Secretary of Defense shall convene a task force
consisting of the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of each military
department and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and
agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with
the Secretary of Commerce, to carry out the duties under section 722(d)(2)
of the Act. (d) The Secretary of Defense shall report to Congress on a
strategic plan for developing a cost- effective, comprehensive information
system capable of identifying on a timely, ongoing basis vulnerability in
critical components and critical technology items. The plans shall include
an assessment of the performance and cost-effectiveness of procedures
specified in section 722(b) of the Act. (e) The Secretary of Commerce,
acting through the Bureau of the Census, shall consult with the Secretary
of Defense and the Director, FEMA, to improve the usefulness of
information derived from the Census of Manufacturers in carrying out
section 722 of the Act. (f) The Secretary of Defense shall perform an
analysis of the production base for not more than two major weapons
systems of each military department in establishing the information system
under section 722 of the Act. Each analysis shall identify the critical
components of each system. (g) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other Federal departments
and agencies as appropriate, shall issue a biennial report on critical
components and technology in accordance with section 722(e) of the Act.
PART IX - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 901. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 702 of
the Act, the following definitions apply throughout this order: (a) "Civil
transportation" includes movement of persons and property by all modes of
transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the
United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of
Columbia, and, without limitation, related public storage and warehousing,
ports, services, equipment and facilities, such as transportation carrier
shop and repair facilities. However, "civil transportation" shall not
include transportation owned or controlled by the Department of Defense,
use of petroleum and gas pipelines, and coal slurry pipelines used only to
supply energy production facilities directly. As applied herein, "civil
transportation" shall include direction, control, and coordination of
civil transportation capacity regardless of ownership. (b) "Energy" means
all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and
manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal,
coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal gasification), and
atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and
distribution (including pipelines) of all of these forms of energy. (c)
"Farm equipment" means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured
for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for
market use of food resources. (d) "Fertilizer" means any product or
combination of products that contain one or more of the elements --
nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium - - for use as a plant nutrient. (e)
"Food resources" means all commodities and products, simple, mixed, or
compound, or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable
of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other
uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of
processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form
for human or animal consumption. "Food resources" also means all starches,
sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, cotton, tobacco,
wool, mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores, but does not mean any
such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or
agricultural product. (f) "Food resource facilities" means plants,
machinery, vehicles (including on-farm), and other facilities required for
the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold
storage) of food resources, livestock and poultry feed and seed, and for
the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding
transportation thereof). (g) "Functions" include powers, duties,
authority, responsibilities, and discretion. (h) "Head of each Federal
department or agency engaged in procurement for the national defense"
means the heads of the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Commerce, as
well as those departments and agencies listed in Executive Order No.
10789. (i) "Heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies"
as used in part VIII of this order means the heads of such other Federal
agencies and departments that acquire information or need information with
respect to making any determination to exercise any authority under the
Act. (j) "Health resources" means materials, facilities, health supplies,
and equipment (including pharmaceutical, blood collecting and dispensing
supplies, biological, surgical textiles, and emergency surgical
instruments and supplies) required to prevent the impairment of, improve,
or restore the physical and mental health conditions of the population.
(k) "Metals and minerals" means all raw materials of mineral origin
(excluding energy) including their refining, smelting, or processing, but
excluding their fabrication. (l) "Strategic and Critical Materials" means
materials (including energy) that (1) would be needed to supply the
military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States
during a national security emergency, and (2) are not found or produced in
the United States in sufficient quantities to meet such need and are
vulnerable to the termination or reduction of the availability of the
material. (m) "Water resources" means all usable water, from all sources,
within the jurisdiction of the United States, which can be managed,
controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements. Sec. 902.
General. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 902(c) of this
order, the authorities vested in the President by title VII of the Act may
be exercised and performed by the head of each department and agency in
carrying out the delegated authorities under the Act and this order. (b)
The authorities which may be exercised and performed pursuant to
subsection 902(a) of this order shall include (1) the power to redelegate
authorities, and to authorize the successive redelegation of authorities,
to departments and agencies, officers, and employees of the government,
and (2) the power of subpoena with respect to authorities delegated in
parts II, III, and IV of this order, provided that the subpoena power
shall be utilized only after the scope and purpose of the investigation,
inspection, or inquiry to which the subpoena relates have been defined
either by the appropriate officer identified in subsection 902(a) of this
order or by such other person or persons as the officer shall designate.
(c) Excluded from the authorities delegated by subsection 902(a) of this
order are authorities delegated by parts V, VI, and VIII of this order and
the authority with respect to fixing compensation under section 703(a) of
the Act. Sec. 903. Authority. All previously issued orders, regulations,
rulings, certificates, directives, and other actions relating to any
function affected by this order shall remain in effect except as they are
inconsistent with this order or are subsequently amended or revoked under
proper authority. Nothing in this order shall affect the validity or force
of anything done under previous delegations or other assignment of
authority under the Act. Sec. 904. Effect on other Orders. (a) The
following are superseded or revoked: (1) Section 3, Executive Order No.
8248 of September 8, 1939, (4 FR 3864). (2) Executive Order No. 10222 of
March 8, 1951 (16 FR 2247). (3) Executive Order No. 10480 of August 14,
1953 (18 FR 4939). (4) Executive Order No. 10647 of Novembetion to ensure that critical
components or critical technology items are available from reliable
sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime,
graduated mobilization, and national emergency. "Appropriate action" may
include restricting contract solicitations to reliable sources,
restricting contract solicitations to domestic sources (pursuant to
statutory authority), stockpiling critical components, and developing
substitutes for critical components or critical technology items. Sec.
311. Strengthening Domestic Capability. An agency head, in accordance with
section 107(a) of the Act, may utilize the authority of Title III of the
Act or any other provision of law, in consultation with the Secretary of
Defense, to provide appropriate incentives to develop, maintain,
modernize, and expand the productive capacities of domestic sources for
critical components, critical technology items, and industrial resources
essential for the execution of the national security strategy of the
United States.
Sec. 312. Modernization of Equipment. An agency head, in accordance with
section 108(b) of the Act, may utilize the authority of Title III of the
Act to guarantee the purchase or lease of advance manufacturing equipment
and any related services with respect to any such equipment for purposes
of the Act.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
r 28, 1955 (20
FR 8769). (5) Executive Order No. 11179 of September 22, 1964 (29 FR
13239). (6) Executive Order No. 11355 of May 26, 1967 (32 FR 7803). (7)
Sections 7 and 8, Executive Order No. 11912 of April 13, 1976 (41 FR
15825, 15826-27). (8) Section 3, Executive Order No. 12148 of July 20,
1979 (44 FR 43239, 43241). (9) Executive Order No. 12521 of June 24, 1985
(50 FR 26335). (10) Executive Order No. 12649 of August 11, 1988 (53 FR
30639). (11) Executive Order No. 12773 of September 26, 1991 (56 FR
49387), except that part of the order that amends section 604 of Executive
Order 10480. (b) Executive Order No. 10789 of November 14, 1958, is
amended by deleting "and in view of the existing national emergency
declared by Proclamation No. 2914 of December 16, 1950," as it appears in
the first sentence. (c) Executive Order No. 11790, as amended, relating to
the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, is amended by deleting
"Executive Order No. 10480" where it appears in section 4 and substituting
this order's number. (d) Subject to subsection 904(c) of this order, to
the extent that any provision of any prior Executive order is inconsistent
with the provisions of this order, this order shall control and such prior
provision is amended accordingly. Sec. 905. Judicial Review. This order is
not intended to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its agencies, its
officers, or any person.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 3, 1994.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Part 1 of 2 - The Great American Gun Grab ... by Robert Lee (fwd)
Date: 25 Oct 2000 11:28:27 PST
On Oct 25, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Part 1 of 2
The Great American Gun Grab
by Robert W. Lee
During the national debate over an early version of the Brady=20
waiting-period gun control bill in 1992, the liberal Establishment=E2=80=99s=
=20
most revered "conservative" mouthpiece, syndicated columnist and public=20
television emcee William F. Buckley Jr., sarcastically scolded critics=20
of the bill for using arguments "of the slippery-slope type: Give the=20
gun control people an inch and pretty soon you will find a brawny FBI=20
type coming in and confiscating your BB gun." Fear of the slippery=20
slope, Buckley claimed, was being "taken to fanatical lengths," since it=20
was "hard to know how an imposition of that nature seriously deprives us=20
of the right guaranteed under the Second Amendment." He advised that "it=20
is time that conservatives gave up fanatical interpretations of the=20
Second Amendment."
Gradual Process
Actually, "slippery slope" intrigue, predicated on patient gradualism=20
rather than all-out assault, has been the crux of gun control strategy=20
for decades. In 1976, Nelson T. "Pete" Shields, then executive director=20
of the National Council to Control Handguns (NCCH), told The New Yorker,=20
"I=E2=80=99m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on.=
=20
We=E2=80=99re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step i=
s=20
necessarily =E2=80=94 given the political realities =E2=80=94 going to be ve=
ry modest."=20
Then, "we=E2=80=99ll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and=
=20
then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again." The=20
first problem, Shields asserted, "is to slow down the increasing number=20
of handguns being produced and sold in this country." The second "is to=20
get handguns registered." And "the final problem is to make the=20
possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition =E2=80=94 except for t=
he=20
military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs,=20
and licensed gun collectors =E2=80=94 totally illegal."
In 1980, NCCH was renamed Handgun Control Inc. (HCI). Since 1989 its=20
chairperson has been Sarah Brady, for whom the original Brady bill was=20
named. Its agenda has predictably evolved to target rifles and shotguns=20
as well.
The Brady bill was passed by Congress and signed into law by President=20
Clinton in late 1993. Since then, further descent down the slope has=20
included such measures as the 1994 "assault" weapons ban and the 1996 ex=20
post facto gun ban for persons convicted of domestic-abuse misdemeanors.=20
Mr. Clinton has announced that his anti-gun agenda for the 106th=20
Congress will include such additional slippery measures as a permanent
waiting period for handgun purchases; background checks for teens=20
convicted of violent crimes, after they become adults, so they can be=20
banned for life from purchasing firearms; and extending background=20
checks to the few types of presently legal non-dealer transactions at=20
gun shows. His arguments for the latter would, in principle, apply to=20
all private firearms transactions, not simply those at guns shows. That=20
the Administration has such a goal in mind was implied in a recent open=20
letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF), which=20
asserted that "the President expressed his concern about the numbers of=20
firearms sold at gun shows and elsewhere without Brady background checks=20
being conducted...." (Emphasis added.) In early December, Mr. Clinton=20
gave Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and Attorney General Janet Reno=20
until the first week of January to conjure up ways to close the alleged=20
gun show "loophole."
All sales of firearms at gun shows are currently subject to the same=20
federal and state laws that apply in other situations.
The supposed "loophole" cited by the President allows individuals to=20
sell guns on an "occasional" basis for the enhancement of a personal=20
collection or for a hobby, or to sell their collections, without=20
background checks. Beyond that, the law requires that anyone "who=20
devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular=20
course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood=20
and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms" must=20
have a federal firearms license and abide by the Brady law.
The slippery slope strategy, then, is both real and obvious. Those who=20
deny it are implying that there is some point at which gun control=20
fanatics can be satiated short of outright confiscation of civilian=20
firearms. Evidence to the contrary is abundant and convincing,=20
especially when the goal of domestic disarmament is considered in the=20
context of U.S. disarmament policy at the international level. The=20
objective is not to abolish firearms or nuclear weapons, but to give=20
national governments a monopoly over the former and the United Nations=20
control of the latter. National governments would have the wherewithal=20
to control their domestic populations, while the UN would have the means=20
to coerce separate nations to do its bidding. That arrangement is the=20
essence of the collectivist nightmare euphemistically termed the new=20
world order.
Toward Total Control
On September 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy presented a disarmament=20
plan to the UN, subsequently codified in State Department Publication=20
7277, that called for the "disbanding of all national armed forces =E2=80=
=A6=20
other than those required to preserve internal order and for=20
contributions to a United Nations Peace Force." It also called for the=20
"elimination from national arsenals of all armaments =E2=80=A6 other than th=
ose=20
required for a United Nations Peace Force and for managing internal=20
order." Ultimately, "no state would have the military power to challenge=20
the progressively strengthened UN Peace Force."
On April 18, 1962, the Kennedy Administration submitted an outline for a=20
formal treaty reiterating that parties to the treaty "would=20
progressively strengthen the United Nations Peace Force =E2=80=A6 until it h=
ad=20
sufficient armed forces and armaments so that no state could challenge=20
it."
That ominous policy has never been repudiated by our government, and=20
subsequent U.S. policy concerning UN "peacekeeping" authority, and its=20
moves toward domestic disarmament via gun control, indicate that it=20
remains a top priority.
Since 1995, the UN has itself become increasingly involved in the drive=20
to disarm civilian populations. In that year its Commission on Crime=20
Prevention launched an "International Study of Firearms Regulation."=20
Numerous UN confabs have dealt with the issue since. In May of 1997, for=20
instance, the Commission approved a resolution entitled, "Firearms=20
Regulation for the Purpose of Crime Prevention and Public Health and=20
Safety." In August of that year it adopted a Japanese proposal calling=20
for a "Universal Declaration of Principles on Firearms Regulation" that=20
would have all nations establish gun turn-in programs, license all gun=20
owners, and require registration of all firearms. Such "universal=20
declarations" are non-binding, but nevertheless serve as significant=20
propaganda tools which are often followed by legally binding conventions=20
or treaties.
The step-by-step erosion of the Second Amendment, as exemplified by such=20
measures as the Brady law, has been abetted by powerful Republican=20
leaders and gun-rights groups who have opted to compromise rather than=20
stand firm on principle. In 1993, after a filibuster by pro-gun senators=20
turned back two attempts to bring the Brady bill to a vote, the bill=20
appeared to be dead for the year. Even its strongest backers were=20
admitting defeat. But then-Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS),=20
supposedly anxious to preclude the possibility of having the issue arise=20
during the 1994 elections, offered a ludicrous compromise that served as=20
the pretext for terminating the filibuster and enabling the bill to=20
pass. When the final version came to a vote under a unanimous consent=20
agreement with only three senators (including Dole) present, Dole could=20
have blocked it single-handedly, but chose not to do so. He subsequently=20
told reporters that he was "happy to have this issue behind us."
Brady Specifics
The Brady law authorized a temporary five-day waiting period, applicable=20
only to handgun purchases, for five years, to be superseded after=20
November 30, 1998 by an "instant check" system that would cover rifles=20
and shotguns as well. The chief proponent of the "instant check"=20
compromise was the National Rifle Association (NRA), which has=20
vigorously defended it since. During the heat of battle over the Brady=20
bill, NRA lobbyists, rather than standing firm in opposition to the=20
measure, became more concerned about modifications that would "improve"=20
it, just as they are today attempting to make a silk purse out of the=20
"instant check" sow=E2=80=99s ear, rather than seeking its outright repeal.
USA Today for October 26, 1993, quoted James Jay Baker, then executive=20
director of the NRA=E2=80=99s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), as=
=20
saying, "We already support 65 percent of the Brady bill, because it=20
moves to an instant check, which is what we want." As Neal Knox, head of=20
the Virginia-based Firearms Coalition and a former NRA vice president,=20
recently recalled, "Baker, almost as much as [NRA Executive Director=20
Wayne] LaPierre, is perceived as the father of the =E2=80=98Instant Check,=
=E2=80=99=20
which the ATF and FBI are attempting to implement as the heart of a=20
national registration system on all firearms =E2=80=94 as both NRA leaders w=
ere=20
warned when they first proposed it as an alternative to the Brady=20
waiting period on handguns."
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Part 2 of 2 - The Great American Gun Grab ... by Robert Lee (fwd)
Date: 25 Oct 2000 11:24:54 PST
On Oct 25, BOBWORN@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Part 2 of 2
The Great American Gun Grab
by Robert W. Lee
The Brady law specifically precludes the retention or transfer of=20
records about applicants who pass a background check, but with "instant=20
check" looming, Attorney General Janet Reno issued proposed regulations=20
in May 1998 providing that "transactions relating to firearm transfer=20
approvals in the Audit Log will be maintained for eighteen months."=20
Needless to say, the retention of such information is fraught with the=20
potential for abuse, and amounts to a type of federal firearms=20
registration that federal law also precludes.
In August, Reno issued further regulations calling for a tax (user fee)=20
to be imposed on dealers holding federal firearms licenses, ostensibly=20
to cover costs associated with federal processing of instant-check=20
applications for states that did not have their own instant check=20
systems. Understandably, in most instances the fee would have been=20
passed along to customers. By raising the price of guns it would have=20
served to deter a number of gun purchases, to the delight of the=20
President, the Bradys, and other anti-gun zealots.
One apparent purpose of the scheme was to pressure states that have not=20
yet adopted an instant-check system to do so. As Neal Knox noted at the=20
time, "Strangely, if a state legislature has set up its own =E2=80=98instant=
=20
check=E2=80=99 system =E2=80=A6 we=E2=80=99re told the FBI doesn=E2=80=99t p=
lan to charge the state for=20
conducting the check. Why? Obviously to get gun owners in 31 states to=20
back a new state gun law. Why? Because there are federal laws against=20
the Feds using sales information to create a national gun registration=20
system, but the states can create the federally accessible gun=20
registration systems that the Clinton Administration wants."
The tax and record-keeping proposals espoused by the Attorney General=20
and FBI led Senator Robert Smith (R-NH) to propose an amendment (to the=20
fiscal 1999 appropriations bill for the Departments of Commerce,=20
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies) that sought to=20
accomplish three commendable objectives:
=E2=80=A2 Require the immediate destruction of records for applicants=20
"determined not to be prohibited from owning a firearm."
=E2=80=A2 Scuttle the proposed user fee.
=E2=80=A2 Authorize aggrieved persons to sue in federal district court over=20
violations of the amendment=E2=80=99s provisions by government officials and=
, if=20
successful, to "receive damages, punitive damages, and such other=20
remedies as the court may determine to be appropriate, including a=20
reasonable attorney=E2=80=99s fee."
The Smith amendment was overwhelmingly approved by the Senate on July=20
21st by a veto-proof super-majority of 69 to 31. It remained intact=20
during early negotiations over the massive $500 billion omnibus spending=20
bill in October. But it eventually fell victim to GOP betrayal when=20
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) and House Speaker Newt Gingrich=20
(R-GA) threw in the towel during last-minute negotiations with the White=20
House. The crucial qualifier "immediate" was stripped from the=20
record-keeping provision, thereby giving the FBI substantial wiggle room=20
to the time frame for record destruction. Its final decision, expected=20
by February, will likely entail a record retention period of up to six=20
months. The potential for using the data to construct a national gun=20
registration system is obvious.
On December 1st, charging that the FBI=E2=80=99s stance on the record-keepin=
g=20
issue amounts to "an illegal national registration" that violates the=20
privacy of gun owners, the NRA announced that it was filing suit over=20
the matter. The NRA=E2=80=99s Wayne LaPierre told reporters that "Janet Reno=
has=20
turned Congress=E2=80=99 intent to keep records of convicted felons into an=20
Orwellian nightmare of keeping tabs on perfectly law-abiding Americans.=20
The federal government has no business keeping lists of law-abiding=20
Americans in their federal computers."
Which is unquestionably true. We wish the NRA well, but such expensive=20
and time-consuming legal action would likely not be necessary now had=20
the organization stood firm on principle against the Brady bill from the=20
start.
Buyer Beware
Another recent development on the slippery slope front is the spate of=20
lawsuits filed (or contemplated) by cities against firearm=20
manufacturers. The gun control lobby, having failed to win key cases=20
involving private parties, is now striving to fuel its legal attack with=20
local tax dollars. Since the plethora of existing gun control laws has=20
predictably failed to keep guns out of criminal hands, flustered=20
anti-gun politicians are venting their frustrations on law-abiding=20
scapegoats. Most case law favors the manufacturers, but some could be=20
seriously hamstrung or forced into bankruptcy by the mere expense of=20
litigation.
In late October of last year the city of New Orleans filed the first=20
such suit by a city against 15 gun manufacturers and sundry firearms=20
trade groups. The suit claims that firearms are unreasonably dangerous=20
because they lack certain mechanical safety devices, and that the=20
firearms industry should therefore be held financially responsible for=20
the medical bills, police expenditures, and other costs associated with=20
handgun violence. Mayor Marc Morial readily acknowledged that the=20
litigation is intended to entangle gun manufacturers in the same type of=20
litigation that has cost the tobacco industry billions of dollars.=20
Indeed, the suit was prepared by some of the same lawyers who have=20
benefited handsomely from tobacco litigation. Another attorney in the=20
case, Dennis Henigan of the Washington-based Center to Prevent Handgun=20
Violence, bluntly asserted, "Guns must now become the next tobacco."
On November 5th, Cook County and the city of Chicago followed suit with=20
a $433 million action against 22 gun manufacturers, a dozen stores, and=20
four distributors. The suit claims that the defendants are flooding the=20
city with handguns that they know will be used in crime because Chicago=20
has a virtual ban on handgun ownership.
In a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed piece, Dr. John Lott, a law and=20
economics fellow at the University of Chicago School of Law and author=20
of More Guns, Less Crime (1998), cited statistics showing that "30=20
children under 5 and 200 under 15 died from accidental gun deaths in=20
1996," while "950 children under the age of 15 drowned in pools and=20
while boating; 500 children died in bicycle accidents, and more than=20
1,000 children died from residential fires." Nonetheless, he observed,=20
"No one is yet proposing that state or city governments should recoup=20
medical costs or police salaries by suing automobile or bicycle=20
companies, pool builders or makers of home heaters." Indeed, he=20
contended, such suits would "make as little sense as pool builders suing=20
the government to recoup the health benefits from exercise."
Lott readily admitted the obvious, that "bad things happen with guns,"=20
but he noted that suits against manufacturers "ignore that guns also=20
prevent bad things by making it easier for victims to defend themselves.=20
With fewer than one percent of all guns ever used in crimes or causing=20
death or injury, many other products have much higher probabilities of=20
causing harm." Unlike the tobacco suits, "gun makers have powerful=20
arguments about the benefits of gun ownership." For instance, "More than=20
450,000 crimes, including 10,744 murders, are committed with guns each=20
year," but Americans "also use guns defensively about 2.5 million times=20
a year." Indeed, as research presented in Lott=E2=80=99s recent book confirm=
s,=20
"When criminals confront people, resistance with a gun is by far the=20
safest course of action."
Lott also found that "increased gun ownership rates are associated with=20
lower crime rates," and, "Poor people in the highest crime areas benefit=20
the most from owning guns. Lawsuits against gun makers will raise the=20
price of firearms, which will most severely reduce gun ownership among=20
the law-abiding, much-victimized poor." Lott suggested that if "mayors=20
really believe that guns produce no benefits, there is one simple way=20
they can demonstrate this: Disarm their bodyguards." It is, he=20
contended, hypocritical for mayors "to demand that poor people live in=20
high crime areas without being able to own guns, while the mayors would=20
never enter these areas without armed guards."
Global Strategy
The slippery slope strategy for achieving domestic disarmament dovetails=20
with globalist plans to construct a new world order based on the=20
ultimate goal of UN =C3=BCber alles. Sadly, it has often been enhanced by th=
e=20
politics of compromise. The original Brady law, and the "instant check"=20
travesty with which gun owners are now plagued, resulted from compromise=20
of constitutional principle. It (and other supposedly "modest"=20
infringements of the Second Amendment) should not be tweaked to make=20
them more acceptable. They should, instead, be abolished. As Larry=20
Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, recently asserted,=20
"The answer in some sectors of the pro-gun movement has been to work=20
towards making the =E2=80=98trains run on time.=E2=80=99 Make the Instant=20=
=E2=80=98Registration=E2=80=99=20
Check work more efficiently, they say, so there won=E2=80=99t be any delays=20=
and=20
interruptions." In contrast, Pratt recalled, "Gun Owners of America was=20
the only national gun lobby to oppose the Instant Registration Check in=20
1993, when the law first passed. And to this day, we continue to fight=20
against this unconstitutional monstrosity with every ounce of our=20
organizational being."
Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced legislation in the 105th=20
Congress to repeal the entire Brady law, including its "instant check"=20
provisions. He plans to do so again in the 106th.=20
.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: larry ball
Subject: Chinese Money In Canada - Here Too?
Date: 27 Oct 2000 05:56:07 -0500
Remember Big Al and the Buddhist temple? The Indonesian/Chinese
Connection? Look at what appears to be happening in Canada. Could it
be here too? The one big problem of a strong central government is that
it is relatively easy to corrupt. Read below ----
The Sidewinder scandal
A leaked report makes explosive allegations about links between the
Liberals
and Chinese agents
by Kevin Michael Grace
The Report, November 6, 2000
RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli gave an extraordinary
press
conference on September 7. He told startled reporters, "There are
criminal
organizations that target the destabilization of our parliamentary
system." The
commissioner refused to give details but insisted he was not
fear-mongering. He
concluded, "We don't want to wait until we become, unfortunately, like
some
countries around the world, where criminal organizations actually run
part of the
country."
On October 20, the Security Intelligence Review Committee
(SIRC), the
government agency that oversees the Canadian Security Intelligence
Service,
issued its annual report. It devotes six pages to a joint RCMP-CSIS
operation,
Sidewinder, whose secret interim report, Chinese Intelligence Services
and
Triads Financial Links in Canada, was issued in 1997. This report was
suppressed, and all copies were ordered destroyed, as were all
background
materials.
Project Sidewinder was abandoned but then restarted in 1998. A
secret
final report, Echo, was issued in 1999. Sources close to Sidewinder
have alleged
that its 1997 report was first killed and then gutted because it
revealed Chinese
infiltration as a grave threat to Canadian security and sovereignty.
The SIRC report rejects these allegations. It finds no
evidence of political
interference and claims Sidewinder was not terminated; it was delayed
when its
initial product proved to be inadequate. The 1997 report is judged
"deeply
flawed...a loose, disordered compendium of facts connected by
insinuations and
unfounded assertions. Overall, the document is rich with the language
of
scare-mongering and conspiracy theory." SIRC concludes that the
destruction of
transitory documents related to Sidewinder's first draft was standard
practice.
The disappearance of other non-transitory documents is described as
"disconcerting but of no material impact."
The timing of the SIRC report two days before an election call
and its
pre-release leak to the National Post are suspicious. SIRC said in
September
that the report would not be released until the end of the year. Even
more
suspect is the September 25 assertion in the House of Commons by MP
Lynn
Myers, parliamentary secretary to Solicitor-General Lawrence MacAulay:
"I
would like to emphasize that I was not reading from or directly
quoting the
SIRC report, which is a classified report." He was referring to his
September
20 statement to Canadian Alliance MP Jim Abbott dismissing the 1997
Sidewinder report as "deeply flawed and a conspiracy theory", phrases
identical
to those used in the then-supposedly unwritten, unread, classified
SIRC report.
Unfortunately for the Liberals, however, all copies of
Sidewinder were not
destroyed. The Canadian Alliance and various media, including this
magazine,
now possess them. The report, 30 pages long and badly translated from
the
original French, makes a shocking allegation. "Hong Kong tycoons,
triads
(gangs) and Chinese intelligence services have been working for 15
years in
concert with the Chinese government, and some of their financial
ventures in
Canada serve to conceal criminal or intelligence activities."
"These activities include money laundering, heroin trafficking
and the
transfer of economic, high technology and intelligence data to
Beijing.
Sidewinder alleges the corruption of the Canadian business and
political
establishments: The triads, the tycoons and [Chinese intelligence]
have learned
that [the] quick way to gain influence is to provide finance to the
main political
parties...China has obtained access to influential figures who are now
or once
were active at various levels of Canadian society."
Foremost among the Chinese tycoons, according to Sidewinder,
is Li
Ka-Shing, of whom U.S. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher has testified,
"The
U.S. Bureau of Export Affairs, the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and the
Rand
Corporation...have identified Li Ka-Shing and [his company] Hutchison
Whampoa as financing or serving as a conduit for Communist Chinas
military
for them to acquire sensitive technologies and other equipment." Last
year
Forbes estimated Mr. Li's family as the eighth richest in the world,
with assets
totalling US$10.6 billion.
According to Sidewinder, Mr. Li is a director of the
Beijing-controlled
China International Trust Investment Company (CITIC), which had 1997
assets
of US$23 billion. CITIC owns or controls Cathay Pacific Airlines, Hong
Kong
Telecom, Star TV, Poly Technologies and Norinco, suspected of arms
shipments to Mohawk reserves. Mr. Li's company Hutchison owns 49% of
Husky Energy. CITIC has invested $500 million to buy Canadian
companies
Celgar Pulp Mill and Nova Corp Petrochemical. Mr. Li and his son own
at least
one-sixth to one-third of downtown Vancouver and have extensive real
estate
holdings in Toronto."CITIC has developed ... close business links with
Power
Corporation. (Andr=E9 Desmarais, Prime Minister Chretiens son-in-law, i=
s
president and co-chief executive officer of Power Corporation.)"
Mr. Li is the largest (10%) single shareholder of CIBC, and a
shareholder
and director of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank, which in the 1980s
acquired
the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank of Canada, Continental Bank and Lloyds
Bank Canada. CIBC, in turn, bought the securities firms Wood Gundy and
Merrill Lynch. Li Ka-Shing's son Richard bought 50.1% of Gordon
Capital in
1985. (Jean Chretien was a senior adviser there from 1986 to 1990.)
None of the above proves that Canada has been subverted by the
People's
Republic of China, but the linkages and connections revealed between
Mr. Li
and Mr. Chretien and his family (which are not detailed in Sidewinder
but were
reported elsewhere) are, as SIRC might say, disconcerting.
But then, SIRC itself is not entirely in the clear. One SIRC
member,
James Andrews Grant, has a serious unreported conflict of interest.
His
biography on the SIRC Web site identifies him as a director of CIBC
and
chairman of the executive committee of the law firm Stikeman, Elliott,
which
has a long-standing relationship with CIBCs largest shareholder, Li
Ka-Shing.
Canadian Alliance MP Jim Abbott, who raised the Sidewinder
issue in the
Commons, reports that he was immediately denounced by a Liberal MP as
a
racist. He adds, "Unfortunately, many Canadians are prepared to buy
into these
labels, and for that reason they find so much of this [Sidewinder]
unbelievable."
Mr. Abbott takes pains to stress that, while he understands
there is a very
malicious, a very serious criminal side to triad organizations,
there's also the
other side within the Chinese culture, where they are part of
exchanging power
and influence. This is something that we, from our Caucasian,
Judeo-Christian
basis, just don't comprehend.
Elections Canada loopholes make it easy for gangsters and
foreign agents
to contribute to Canadian politicians, money which is sometimes
received
unwittingly. While Mr. Abbott admits his party has not taken any
formal steps
to prevent such occurrences, he explains, "We're very deeply concerned
about it
and are doing our level best with what information we have to make
sure we
arent compromised."
_______
Canada for sale?
A crusading ex-bureaucrat claims that Chinese criminals have subverted
officials
and politicians
by Kevin Michael Grace
The Report, June 19, 2000
Brian McAdam's supporters call him heroic. His enemies call
him
delusional. One thing is certain, however, if he is right, he has
uncovered the
biggest scandal in Canadian history. The retired foreign service
officer charges
that China's endemic corruption has contaminated Canadian bureaucrats
and
politicians to the very highest levels. He makes the sensational claim
that a
former Conservative prime minister, a former Conservative immigration
minister and a former NDP premier were given enormous, illegal
campaign
contributions from shadowy Chinese businessmen.
"Only a judicial inquiry will bring out the full extent of the
evil I have
discovered," Mr. McAdam, 58, declares. In the meantime, he will have
to settle
for testifying later this year before a Commons committee
investigating
organized crime. The evil that he alleges is that Canadian officials
have been
paid not to obstruct -- and even to facilitate - the entry of triad
members to
Canada to expand their criminal activities here, buy legitimate
businesses and
influence Canadian government policy.
The triads were formed as Chinese fraternal societies in 1761.
They soon
branched out into warlordism and crime and followed Chinese migrants
to
Southeast Asia and North America. They are the wealthiest criminal
gangs
anywhere. Their most lucrative activity is the heroin trade, but they
also make
billions from gambling, loan sharking, credit card fraud, kidnapping,
and
smuggling weapons and people. The triads prey on Chinese worldwide,
forcing
them into sexual slavery and indentured servitude to pay back the
crippling
sums they are charged to be smuggled (or fraudulently introduced) into
their
new homelands.
Mr. McAdam became a civil servant in 1965. He was posted in
Hong Kong
in 1968-71 and in 1989-93 and retired for medical reasons in 1995.
Among his
most notable achievements are the breakup of a Taiwanese
cash-for-passports
theft ring -- saving the Canadian government over $50 million -- and
his
influence on 1993 amendments to the Immigration Act that prohibit the
immigration of individuals linked to organized crime. "In the first
four years
after the act was changed, over 1,000 gangsters were kept out of
Canada," he
boasts.
The summit of Mr. McAdam's career was Project Sidewinder, the
most
thorough documentation of Chinese corruption ever attempted. The
product of
years of work by Mr. McAdam and his investigators, it was presented to
the
RCMP and CSIS in 1997. Mr. McAdam says, "Five full-time RCMP and CSIS
analysts and seven part-time analysts checked it out for two years and
confirmed all my allegations." The report was rejected. "CSIS ordered
the
analysts to destroy all the copies. Even the notes. Nothing like this
had ever
happened before." The existence of the report was admitted only this
year.
Project Sidewinder paid special attention to Chinese
billionaires Li
Ka-Shing and Stanley Ho. Last year Forbes estimated Mr. Li's family
fortune at
US$10.6 billion, making it the eighth richest in the world. He has
extensive
holdings in Canada, including the Expo 86 lands and shipping
operations in
Vancouver, and is the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce's single
largest
shareholder. U.S. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher says, "The U.S. Bureau
of
Export Affairs, the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and the Rand
Corporation...have
identified Li Ka-Shing and [his company] Hutchison Whampoa as
financing or
serving as a conduit for Communist China's military [the People's
Liberation
Army] for them to acquire sensitive technologies and other equipment."
Mr. Li
has denied these allegations. Fabian Dawson, the Vancouver Province
reporter
who has written numerous exposes of Chinese criminal influence in
Canada, has
revealed that in 1988 the Royal Hong Kong Police asked the Canadian
Security
Intelligence Service to investigate Mr. Li. The request was denied.
Stanley Ho's fortune is based on his monopoly of casino
gambling on
Macao, a Portuguese colony returned to China earlier this year. These
casinos
have been the subject of a savage gang war, which spilled into Canada
when the
Vancouver home of one of the gangsters was sprayed with machine-gun
fire.
Mr. Ho also has Canadian interests, including Vancouver's luxury
Sutton Place
Hotel; his daughters, Daisy and Pansy, are Canadian citizens.
The RCMP's Asian Crime Roster lists Mr. Ho as a suspected
triad
member/ leader, as does a 1998 U.S. Justice Department report. Asked
in
February by the South China Morning Post about his alleged crime
links, Mr.
Ho retorted, "These reports only say that I know some triad members.
Well,
maybe you have come across some. To be associated with or to know
someone
is completely different.'' Both Mr. Li and Mr. Ho have contributed
heavily to
Britain's Conservative Party. Mr. Li gave 3900,000 pounds to the
party when
John Major led it. Mr. Ho and his business partner Ng Lap Seng have
been
implicated in the 1996 U.S. Democratic Party fundraising scandals.
Mr. McAdam says he was appalled by the corruption he witnessed
in
Hong Kong, but more so by the laissez-faire attitude of Canadian
officials
towards it. He explains that triad members strive ceaselessly to
entrap their
foreign guests. A common ploy is to invite bureaucrats to the
racetrack, where
they are given "lucky" red envelopes containing hundreds of dollars in
cash. Mr.
McAdam refused to accept these gratuities, only to be warned he was
offending
his hosts.
Another ploy is the charity ball. Mr. McAdam explains,
"Canadian mission
staff are constantly invited and many attend these glamorous,
ostentatious,
extravagant affairs, where they can meet the highest circles of
society and also
unknowingly meet triad leaders, paid for by hospitality funds,
compliments of
Canadian taxpayers. Usually there were gifts placed on the tables,
ranging in
value from cheap toys to expensive gifts like watches or jewellery. In
addition,
there would be 'lucky draws.' A Canadian diplomat, for example, won a
computer this way. I cannot think of a more perfect venue for
organized
criminals to meet officials and evaluate their morality."
When some of his colleagues "began to buy houses with $350,000
cash,"
Mr. McAdam made his own evaluation. By that time, he says, he had
lived
through an "eight-year campaign to discredit me as a fantasist, a
nutcase and a
racist." He sank into depression and resigned. "I have been working
since then
to vindicate myself," he declares. "The only thing I can do is to get
as much of
this out to the public as I can."
---------
Check out the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee
http://www.canadafirst.net
Free Speech? http://www.canadianfreespeech.com
C-FAR Online! http://www.populist.org
Paul Fromm's Personal Site: http://www.paulfromm.com
P.O. Box 332 Station 'B', Etobicoke, Ontario M9W 5L3
Tel: (905) 897-7221 -- Fax: (905) 277-3914
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Emerson found not guilty of state charges. Good news for his
Date: 27 Oct 2000 10:43:14 PST
On Oct 27, Directed Fire! wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
>Pardon my legal ignorance, but, can this verdict now be used as a precedent
>in future similar cases? No telling how many people lose their 2nd
>Amendment rights due to "boilerplate" domestic violence restraining orders?
>
>thanks,
>
>Jeff
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Terry M. Wintroub"
>To: "fap"
>Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 12:21 PM
>Subject: Emerson found not guilty of state charges. Good news for his
>federal appeal.
>
>
> > http://www.texaswest.com/archive/00/october/19/1.htm
>
>
The Second Amendment issues are on appeal. The arguments have been
heard - we're just waiting for the verdict.
Odds are that the verdict will be decidedly pro-Second Amendment.
This will place the court in direct opposition with other courts at
the same level in other regions of the country - which virtually
assures Supreme Court review.
That's part of why it's so critical that Al Gore NOT be elected. The
review of Emerson will likely not take place before the next
president appoints 2-4 new justices to the Supreme Court. Imagine
who Algore would appoint!???
So VOTE!
Get your FRIENDS to vote!
And if they aren't interested... tell them they can win a FREE GUN if
they do! http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway
Kurt
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: No hidden agenda for this league-Thanks Charley Reese (fwd)
Date: 27 Oct 2000 12:16:38 PST
On Oct 27, Josephine Bass wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
>No hidden agenda for this league
>Charley Reese
>Commentary
>
>Published in The Orlando Sentinel on October 26, 2000
>
>Well, holy mackerel, I'm part of a vast neo-Confederate conspiracy and didn't
>even know it. At least that's what the smarmy, left-wing Southern Poverty Law
>Center says.
>
>Well, I don't mind being called a neo-Confederate, because that puts me into
>the political camp of Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry. But, alas, our band
>of brothers and sisters is neither vast nor conspiratorial. We haven't even
>tried to replace hash-brown potatoes with grits in restaurants operating in
>Dixie.
>
>Actually the SPLC has done the usual leftist smear job on the League of the
>South, of which I'm a proud member. The SPLC resorts to the usual
>guilt-by-association tactics of the left, lumping the league with
>organizations with which it has no connection and with individuals who are
>not members.
>
>It is a disgraceful tactic, but, then, consider the source. The easiest way
>to refute the smear job is simply to invite anyone who is interested to
>investigate for himself or herself. The League of the South is the most
>transparent organization in America. It has no secrets and no hidden agenda.
>It is made up of people who speak in private the same way they speak in
>public.
>
>Every speech at every one of the league's annual meetings is recorded and
>available for sale unedited. Every policy statement, news release, newsletter
>and position paper is available free of charge from the league's Web site,
>www.dixienet.org.
>
>Thus, for a few hours and a few bucks, anyone interested can read every word
>ever written by the league and hear every word ever spoken at the league's
>annual meetings beginning with the very first one. And I can tell you that,
>in all that, you will not find one word spoken or written that any rational
>person could interpret as racist, white-supremacist or hateful.
>
>The charge, in short, is just a fat lie.
>
>Do buy the tapes, though. The league can use the money, and you will be both
>educated and amused. We are not one of those knitted-brow-zealot outfits. We
>love to laugh. And you don't know joy until you hear the Rev. Steve Wilkins,
>one of the league's directors, laugh. If you're within a block of Steve when
>something hits his funny bone, you will hear a very infectious laugh.
>
>The league is an independent organization that has no connection with any
>other organization or political party. Its aims are precisely what it says:
>to advance the economic, cultural and political interests of the Southern
>people.
>
>I am used to people calling me names, but I was particularly incensed at the
>SPLC's attempt to paint the league's president, Dr. Michael Hill, as a
>racist. I don't know of any racist who has spent the majority of his academic
>career as a tenured professor of history at a black college, as has Dr. Hill.
>He's one of the finest men I've ever met.
>
>In a policy statement calling for an honest discussion and an end to
>demagoguery, Dr. Hill writes, ". . . we will loudly proclaim that we will
>have no truck with those who wish to interject malice and hatred into the
>racial issue and that includes both sides, black and white. Being proud and
>thankful of who we are does not mean that we must denigrate others."
>
>Of course, some people are so incapable of logical thinking that they
>misinterpret the league's celebration of the Anglo-Celtic heritage as a
>putdown of others. Hey, I thought pride in heritage was the "in thing" these
>days. If anyone thinks we Anglo-Celtic folks are going to wear horsehair
>underwear and tell our children as they go off to school, "Be good; feel
>guilty," then your dogs are barking at a tree with no raccoon in it.
>
>It's your choice. Think for yourself or be manipulated.
>
>HREF="http://orlandosentinel.com/automagic/columnists/2000-10-26/OPEDreese2610
>2600.html">
>http://orlandosentinel.com/automagic/columnists/2000-10-26/OPEDreese26102600.h
>
>tml
>
>http://www.cashfiesta.com/php/join.php?ref=demastus
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Multiculturalism and weapons (fwd)
Date: 29 Oct 2000 20:34:09 PST
On Oct 29, ataylor@NMSU.Edu wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
I ran across this in cleaning out files. It's worth
re-reading, close to election day.
FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED OCT. 31, 1999
THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
'Cultures' are not always defined by skin color
As advertised, multiculturalism is a fine thing.
Yes, the average inhabitant of this continent today has a longer life
expectancy and a vastly improved standard of living than if she was still
suffering 50 percent infant mortality and fending off Athabascan raiders
with flint-tipped spears.
But that's not to say the European conquest was an unalloyed triumph of
tolerance and Christian charity. By all means, let's teach our history
warts and all.
Mighty have been the contributions to modern America of the indigenous
Indians, and of the descendants of African peoples brought here against
their will. Let's give them their proper place in the history books, and
teach their descendants to be proud -- not ashamed -- of their heritage.
Next we can start to excavate and restore the cultural pride and proper
historical recognition, as well, of our forefathers who were Irish,
Italian, Polish, Chinese, Serbian, Jewish, Arab ...
Whoa, there. Today's brand of "multiculturalism" takes no such route,
does it? Instead, our children's textbooks are increasingly filled with the
historically bankrupt fantasy that Betsy Ross and Molly Pitcher had as much
to do with winning the American Revolution as Washington and Jefferson;
that the American Indian was some kind of mystically enlightened ecological
steward; and that today's black American is directly descended from an
ancient Negroid race that built the pyramids of Egypt and had already
developed electrical storage batteries and successful hang gliders long
before the birth of Jesus.
What gives?
The answer, of course, is that today's "multiculturalism" is in fact a
sharply limited political agenda sold under false colors. The goal here is
for a small segment of the academe with giant chips on their shoulders to
monomaniacally strip the pictures of dead white males out of our history
books and replace them with pictures of blacks, Indians, and women. (A new
American dollar coin is about the be issued, made of base metal and tarted
up with brass plating. What are the chances it will depict a dead white
male?)
Recognizing how much of the genius attributed to Thomas Edison was
actually bought at minimum wage from folks like Nikola Tesla -- that the
real cartoonist behind the entrepreneur Walt Disney was a guy named Ub
Iwerks -- is not well designed to upset white males and advance this
agenda, since it only shifts credit to other white males. So, it's a
non-starter.
And if you really want to upset a modern "multiculturalist," point out
that he or she seems curiously intolerant of some "cultures" within modern
America -- cultures with documentable thousand-year pedigrees -- where the
cultural divisions are not discernible by skin color, at all.
I was struck, as I recently read the introduction to the 1994 Barnes &
Noble edition of the esteemed archaeologist Ewart Oakeshott's "The
Archaeology of Weapons," by the passage where he describes the attitude of
the ancient Greeks and Romans toward their arms as being totally different
from "that extraordinary romantic veneration for their arms so
characteristic of Teuton, Celt, and Indian -- and on the other side of the
earth, the Japanese."
The Roman attitude toward arms was "actually very modern; the civilian
fears and shuns them, the soldier has them issued to him ... keeps them
clean and in working order because he will get in trouble if he does not,
and has no love for them at all."
How different from the classical Japanese, and from the German tribesmen
who repulsed the Romans in the year 9 A.D. -- from those of our ancestors
who built their warrior societies around the mastery of arms, who gave
their weapons names, endowed them with personalities, and would pass a
single, named blade down through a family for hundreds of years. How
different from the Germans described by Tacitus, among whom "No business,
public or private, is transacted except in arms," where citizenship was
bestowed when "one of the chiefs, or the father or a kinsman equips the
young warrior with a spear and shield in the public council" and where, if
the audience approved of a speech at a public meeting, "they clash their
spears. No form of approval can carry more honor than praise expressed by
arms."
This proud culture is not dead. In peaceful, law-abiding 20th century
Switzerland, where every head of household is still considered a militiaman
and expected to keep a loaded machine gun at home, voters in some villages
still carry their swords as symbol of citizenship to annual town meetings.
Here in America, where many an American male still inducts his son into
manhood by teaching him to safely handle weapons and helping him score his
first kill in the hunt, there is probably no more achingly compelling
description of the long sufferings of America's culture of arms than John
Ross' magnificent 1996 novel "Unintended Consequences" (available from
Loompanics at $28.95; call 360-385-2230 or 800-380-2230.)
Ross' protagonist, Henry Bowman, protests at one point that "They have
treated me and others like me with utter contempt. They have confiscated
our property and put people in maximum-security prisons over ownership of
fender washers, claiming they were unassembled silencer parts. ... They
have shot a man's wife in the head because his gun's buttstock was too
short. ... They burned 90 people alive over a disputed two hundred dollar
tax.
"If you believe you have the right to buy, own and shoot small arms in a
safe manner, as much and as often as you want, and you exercise that right
regularly, our government has branded you as the enemy."
Here, surely, are two cultures. It's unlikely either side of this
cultural divide will ever convince the other it's "right" (in fact, true
multiculturalists would preach only understanding and tolerance) -- though
it must be observed the only thing that sets man apart is his ability to
develop tools and weapons, and the notion that men will be left in peace if
only they will lay down their arms didn't work out so well for the Armenian
minority in Turkey in 1915, the Ukrainians under Stalin in the 1930s, the
Jews under Hitler in the 1940s, or the Cambodian intellectuals under Pol
Pot in the 1970s.
But what (start ital)is(end ital) clear is which of the two cultures
practices tolerance -- I don't believe I've ever met a gun owner who wants
to make it mandatory for everyone else to own and shoot firearms.
Of course, our modern descendants of the Romans -- whose republic fell to
tyranny after they delegated the business of war and armed policing to
hired mercenaries -- those who today "fear and shuns arms, and have no love
for them at all," call those who esteem weapons by the same name the Romans
used: "barbarians."
But before they push their pogrom against these "barbarians" in their
midst to the point where America's gun culture must choose between fighting
back or suffering genocide, these modern Romans might remember what
happened to the governor P. Quintilius Varus, when he led his three
fully-armed Roman legions into the Teutoburger Wald in the year 9 A.D.
The Romans, virtually undefeated since the days of Hannibal, marched into
those woods, and did not emerge. So stunned was the emperor Augustus that
he commanded his successors that the frontiers of the empire would forever
be the Rhine and the Danube, and so they were.
The forest creatures fed for years on the unburied Roman dead ... and the
Romans went to Germany no more.
Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. His new book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the
Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available at $24.95 postpaid from Mountain
Media, P.O. Box 271122, Las Vegas, Nev. 89127; by dialing 1-800-244-2224;
or via web site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.
****************************************************************************
Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com
"The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it." -- John
Hay, 1872
============================================================================
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and
thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series
of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: CONGRESS HAS VIOLATED YOUR SOVEREIGNTY! [WTO] (fwd)
Date: 29 Oct 2000 20:26:47 PST
Looks like it's starting to hit the fan.....
On Oct 29, Archibald Bard wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
For the first time in the history of our country, Congress voted to change
our domestic laws because an international body told us to do so.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has begun to dictate American laws.
----
October 30, 2000
----
U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate
Our National Sovereignty is Violated
An extraordinary event occurred this week in Washington during the final
days of the 106th Congress, an event that did not receive comment in either
the media or the halls of Congress, save for my office. This event had been
termed "unthinkable" only a few months earlier. It occurred despite clear
constitutional prohibitions and at the expense of our precious national
sovereignty. For the first time in the history of our country, Congress
voted to change our domestic laws because an international body told us to
do so. The World Trade Organization (WTO) has begun to dictate American
laws.
More specifically, Congress voted to change our tax laws relating to Foreign
Sales Corporations (FSCs), solely because the WTO appellate panel deemed
that our FSC tax rules constituted a "subsidy" - the EU contingent in the
WTO had brought a complaint to the panel. Our FSC rules simply allow U.S.
corporations to exempt a small portion of income earned abroad from taxes.
No "subsidy" is involved; no tax dollars are given to FSCs. Moreover, most
EU countries do not tax their corporations on any income earned abroad.
Still, the appellate panel agreed with the EU and gave the U.S and October
1st deadline to change our tax laws.
I have opposed our membership in the WTO throughout my tenure in Congress. I
strongly support true free trade, which occurs in the absence of government
tariffs. The WTO, however, represents the worst form of government-managed
trade.
More importantly, however, our involvement in the WTO threatens national
sovereignty. The Constitution clearly vests the power to regulate trade
solely with Congress, and Congress cannot cede with mandates in areas such
as environmental protections, worker rights, and trade policy. Congress
either blindly or willfully chose to ignore this very serious constitutional
conflict when it voted in favor of WTO membership. However, a Congressional
Research Service report was quite clear about the consequences of our
membership: "As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in
accordance with the rules of the multi-lateral body. It is legally obligated
to insure that national laws do not conflict with WTO rules," (emphasis
added).
Earlier this year I sought to address this terrible threat to our
sovereignty by introducing a resolution withdrawing us from the WTO. I
explained my concerns in a brief to the House Ways and Means trade
subcommittee, pointing out the unconstitutionality of our involvement. I
warned that the WTO could begin dictating our environmental, labor and tax
laws. These arguments were met with hostility and condescension.
Subcommittee members stated that we need the WTO to avoid "trade wars," and
that the U.S. Congress would never change our domestic laws to satisfy the
WTO. "Unthinkable" was how one member put it. Judging by this week's vote,
the "unthinkable" has become reality.
We should never change our national laws at the behest of any international
organization. Congress simply has ceded it legislative authority to the WTO,
and it is shameful that this action likely will go unnoticed by the American
people. If we want to help American businesses, we should simply stop taxing
their foreign income. The FSC measure will not appease the Europeans; the EU
already has indicated that the changes are unsatisfactory to them. We stand
on the brink of a retaliatory trade war with the EU, even though we were
told that the WTO was needed to avoid such conflicts. So the WTO has given
us the worst of all worlds.
Rest assured that the WTO assault on American sovereignty will not end here.
What will happen when the Europeans object to another area of our tax laws?
Will we change the way we tax individuals also? Perhaps the Europeans will
object to our relatively liberal immigration laws, because they resent
losing their talented citizens to America. Whatever the issue, the threat
remains the same. Americans who care about sovereignty have every reason to
be outraged.
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2000/tst103000.htm
Archibald Bard
Pro Libertate - For Freedom
ICQ 83834746
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul Watson
Subject: CARA Update (fwd)
Date: 30 Oct 2000 09:44:18 -0600 (CST)
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_006F_01C0422F.904040C0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-ID:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
CARA Update
As you all know CARA has been defeated, for the time being. In spite of
CARA's current status of defeat, it appears there is a continuing attempt by
Senator Trent Lott to add land acquisition money to the Commerce, Justice
and State Department Appropriations Bill. There is a good chance this bill
will pass in the next few days.
This information is from the American Land Rights Association (ALRA). ALRA
sources the Washington DC publication, Roll Call, (Oct. 16th issue) with the
story that Trent Lott has pressured the non-partisan, Senate
Sergeant-at-Arms (James Ziglar) to lobby for a last minute, dark-of-nite
land grab.
According to Roll Call, for the last 18 months Ziglar has helped to maneuver
CARA through the legislative process at the behest of Senator Lott.
Needless to say, little pieces of CARA are still alive, thanks to James
Ziglar and Senator Trent Lott.
Both Senator Lott and Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Ziglar need to be contacted,
with particular emphasis on James Ziglar.
When contacting Ziglar do not let him distract you by saying you need to
contact Senator Lott, as it is Ziglar himself who has been extremely
instrumental in the previous and continuing efforts to push CARA. The
question to Ziglar is why! Why does he and Senator Lott want to condemn my
property? Or, why does he not want me as an average citizen to own and
freely enjoy private property ownership?
When calling Ziglar first try to contact him through the free number.
1-800-648-3516 or 202-224-2341 If possible, please fax him, as well, at
202-224-7690.
It seems there is no end to what some in Congress will do to benefit
themselves at the expense of citizen rights and freedoms.
------=_NextPart_000_006F_01C0422F.904040C0
Content-Type: APPLICATION/MS-TNEF; NAME="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64
Content-ID:
Content-Description:
Content-Disposition: ATTACHMENT; FILENAME="winmail.dat"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==
------=_NextPart_000_006F_01C0422F.904040C0--
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Calif GOP supports Dem Rep! (fwd)
Date: 31 Oct 2000 16:40:44 PST
On Oct 30, Rich Martin wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
This election is being touted as the closest race in
40 years, with a mere 7 seats difference between the
2 major parties to decide next years House chairmen, and
guess what, the GOP has decided to throw away a seat.
What's more important than having a majority in Congress?
Only one thing. The continued growth of the NWO globalists,
RepublicRATs.
Rich Martin
Editor of Slick
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-----Original Message-----
The GOP has come out against Duncan Hunter - R-San Diego -
and instead have thrown their support to the Democrat
challenger this election. Craig Barkacs is a flaming pro-abort
liberal, so why on earth would the Republican Party support
him? What was Hunter's crime? Was he a low-down pro-
abort? A dirty gun-grabber? A tax-and-spend liberal? Hell No!
In the eyes of the GOP, Hunter has committed the most vile of
crimes -- he fought against the treasonous sovereignty-stealing
trade deals including NAFTA, WTO, and MFN.
Note that Duncan Hunter did vote with the globalist
establishment on some key issues including the "war" against
the Serbian people, but it wasn't enough. In the end it does
not matter how you vote on any issue, but you better vote
"yea" on all the New World Order trade deals - or suffer the
consequences.
Brigade, this is exactly what happened to our Pat. Years ago,
these same people that attack him today were his close
friends. They cheered everything he said and did, they called
him their conservative standard bearer. When Pat came out
against NAFTA the friendship turned ugly. Suddenly, the
same people who for years invited him to their dinner parties
began making false accusations against him. They lied about
his character, and ignited a massive smear campaign in the
media.
Pat's crime? He fights for the restoration of American
Sovereignty. See article below, Pat is mentioned.
FTC-Linda
---------
Date sent: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 12:43:40 -0400
Organization: Brandenburg Historica
DIEGO!
Linda,
You have to read this! The GOP is supporting the Democratic
challenger in this election!
-----------
JAMES O. GOLDSBOROUGH / THE SAN DIEGO
UNION-TRIBUNE
Why it is finally time for Duncan Hunter to go
October 26, 2000
Rep. Duncan Hunter, the 10-term, right-wing Republican from
East County who opposes free trade, China, NAFTA, Mexico,
public broadcasting, airports, railroads and practically anything
else that serves the San Diego economy, has a race on his
hands this time in the 52nd District.
Republicans are abandoning Hunter to support Democrat Craig
Barkacs, a business professor at the University of San Diego
who has put together a bipartisan group that objects to
Hunter's anti-business stance. The perception is that Hunter is
hurting San Diego.
"I've been a staunch Republican all my life," says Malin
Burnham, chairman of the Burnham Companies. "After 20
years in office Duncan Hunter is out of touch with the people
he is supposed to represent. As is often the case with career
politicians who become complacent, Duncan loves to talk but
refuses to listen."
Burnham has joined with some 100 prominent business and
community leaders, including Irwin Jacobs, Sol Price, Mel
Katz and Dave Nuffer in bipartisan support for Barkacs. "When
Hunter was first elected two decades ago," says Republican
Katz, co-owner of Manpower, Inc., "San Diego was defense
oriented. Today we are a leader in high tech, biotech and
telecommunications."
"It's time for Duncan to go," says Burnham.
Hunter, whose district stretches from the San Diego suburbs
east into Imperial County, opposes free trade. In 1993, he led a
handful of isolationist Republicans to oppose NAFTA, which
passed thanks to bipartisan leadership and helped spur
California's economy to its best decade in history.
Hunter also opposed U.S. membership in the World Trade
Organization (which includes every nation but a handful of
retrograde ones like Libya, Afghanistan, North Korea and
Syria), opposed aid to Mexico after the peso devaluation of
1994 and opposed China's entry into the WTO.
The Almanac of American Politics, the bible of political
information, says of Hunter: "In many ways he is the House
member who comes closest in substantive views to Patrick
Buchanan." San Diego's business leaders don't think a
Buchanan Republican (xenophobe Buchanan gets 1 percent of
the vote in national polls) is a good fit for California's second
city, and one of the nation's most dynamic.
Barkacs, who has an MBA and law degree from USD and is a
tenured professor of business, is the first serious opponent
Hunter has had lately. With his ties to the defense industry,
Hunter has had no trouble scaring off challengers and depriving
the 52nd District of a choice.
Two years ago, Hunter had no opponent. Four years ago, he
outspent his Democratic challenger by $632,305 to $40,178.
The charge levelled against Hunter by Republicans like
Burnham, Nuffer and Katz is not just that he is out of step with
today's San Diego, but that his ruthless partisanship hurts both
city and state.
"Barkacs," says Katz, "is a perfect example of someone who
wants to break down partisanship. Just think what could
happen if our California delegation started working together.
Just think what we could get done."
This is an allusion to one of Hunter's worst votes, for
Republican leaders in 1992, when the GOP was in the
minority. Bob Michel was the minority leader and Newt
Gingrich the minority whip. The vote for the No. 3 spot was
between conservative Dick Armey of Texas and moderate Jerry
Lewis of Riverside.
Lewis lost 88-84. Two years later, Armey became majority
leader when Republicans won the House and Michel resigned.
Had Hunter and fellow right wingers Bob Dornan (since
defeated) and Dana Rohrabacher of Orange County put this
state's people ahead of their own narrow ideology, California
would have had its first majority leader -- and likely speaker
once Gingrich was thrown out.
Said Lewis after the vote:
"In a time of important decisions relating to the economic and
political future of our states, Texans stick together and
Californians do not. Texas' solid backing for [Armey] and a
divided California delegation was the difference in this race."
Hunter, a Gingrich loyalist in 1992, hoped to be elevated to the
leadership -- at least to a committee chairmanship -- after
1994. Instead, he was pushed out of the leadership as too
extreme even for Gingrich. Despite his 20 years of seniority,
Hunter has never chaired a committee.
Hunter's visceral opposition to Mexico and Mexicans has made
him a leader in the effort to wall Mexico off at the border, and
puts him at loggerheads with San Diego's business leaders.
Says Burnham: "One of the most important challenges and
opportunities we face is working with our friends in Mexico."
Hunter's current energies are spent trying to block the East-
West railroad project, with which San Diego is trying to
revitalize its port by linking it to the east.
It would be an upset for Barkacs to win. He's new to the district
and lacks the fund-raising ties of Hunter. But a Barkacs win
would be good both for the district and the region.
"Twenty years ago no one thought Hunter could win in that
district," says Manpower's Katz. "You never know."
Goldsborough can be reached via e-mail at
jim.goldsborough@uniontrib.com.
http://www.uniontrib.com/news/uniontrib/
thu/opinion/news_1e26golds.html
Cut out the middlemen.
Send donations to:
Boys Scouts of America National HQ
1329 Walnut Hill Ln.
Irving, TX 75162
http://www.SaveOurScouts.com
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Police to issue Warrants (fwd)
Date: 31 Oct 2000 16:37:33 PST
On Oct 31, Swftl@aol.com wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
Subj: Police to issue Warrents
> Senate Bill Passes Allowing Lawmen To Issue
> Warrants Bypassing Courts - Will this be tomorrow's
> headline? Perhaps not if we act today.
>
> Do you FAVOR warrantless apprehensions of American
> citizens? Do you FAVOR asset forfeiture laws, when
> there has been no due process of law? If the answer
> is not in America, then there may still be time to
> act on two profoundly wrong pieces of legislation.
> S. 2516 originally passed the Senate, by unanimous
> consent (unrecorded voice vote), on July 26, 2000;
> HR 3048 originally passed the House, by unrecorded
> voice vote, on June 26, 2000. Both bills have now
> been combined.
>
> Both bills contain provisions that allow for
> expanded applications and issuance authority of
> administrative subpoenas issued NOT through the
> courts, but by the executive branch of the federal
> government. Currently this power has been limited to
> the attorney general. By expanding use of
> administrative subpoenas during its investigations,
> the US Justice Department circumvents the
> judicial-review process of the courts, eliminating a
> vital "check" on the department's exercised power.
> The future of the Fourth Amendment is very much
> endangered by this process.
>
> The Senate amended the original House version of
> H.R. 3048, and sent it back to the House after
> attaching S. 2516, the "Fugitive Apprehension Act,"
> which grants every agency in the Department of
> Justice (including U. S. Marshals) new authority to
> issue administrative subpoenas when investigating
> "fugitive" cases.
> S. 2516, the Fugitive Apprehension Act, would
> extend administrative subpoena-issuance authority to
> the US Marshals Service, for use in pursuing broadly
> defined "fugitives" at the federal, state, and local
> levels. (The definition of "fugitive" is expanded by
> S. 2516 to include not only persons who have been
> convicted of committing violent felonies and
> "serious drug offenses, but also persons who've
> merely been accused, or who are suspected, of
> committing such crimes.) S. 2516 contains a
> "delayed notice" provision, which would allow the
> government to access personal records of "fugitives"
> without the sought persons' knowledge, and without
> first obtaining search warrants through the courts.
> The bill would also authorize federal investigators
> to obtain court orders that would require
> third-party custodians of seized records to refrain
> from speaking to anyone about these investigations.
> In addition, the custodians would be immune from
> civil liability for complying with the demands of
> the government in its investigations.
>
> (Note: It has been claimed that "delayed notice"
> provisions have been removed from the bill, through
> its amendment by the Senate on October 13. This is
> disputed in a letter (to follow) by a Representative
> and organizations lobbying against the bill's
> passage.)
>
>
>
> HR 3048 calls for the establishment of a "National
> Threat Assessment Center" within the Secret Service,
> for the purposes of (1) "training" federal, state,
> and local law enforcement agencies in the areas of
> "threat assessment," "prevention of targeted
> violence," and "facilitation of information
> sharing"; (2) establishing programs for the
> "standardization" of investigative techniques among
> the various levels of law enforcement; and (3) "any
> other activities the [Treasury] Secretary determines
> are necessary to implement a comprehensive threat
> assessment capability."
>
> These bills, if enacted will allow egregious
> destruction of our 4th amendment rights. The
> following are excerpts from letters which speak
> unequivocally to the dangers this legislation will
> pose to a free society:
>
> " Insofar as we already passed HR 3048 out of the
> House, these bills will come to us next in the form
> of a conference report for which we will have to
> cast a vote.
>
> Representative Bill McCollum, Chairman of the
> Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, recently sent out a
> "Dear Colleague" regarding S. 2516, stating that the
> bill was revised so as to significantly address
> privacy concerns. I disagree.
>
> H.R. 3048 is a drastic expansion of government
> power and will seriously erode the privacy rights of
> Americans. Administrative subpoenas are an awesome
> vehicle for government to compel disclosure of
> information. Under this authority, a law enforcement
> officer can sign his name on a piece of paper
> requiring individuals or businesses to turn over
> private information to the government, without
> establishing probable cause or making any other
> showing that a crime has occurred, and without ever
> consulting a judge. What they fail to highlight is
> these subpoenas can be obtained for information
> pertaining to a person who has only "allegedly"
> committed a crime. Additionally, the information
> obtained by the use of these subpoenas is not only
> the "fugitive's" personal records or information.
> These subpoenas can be used to procure information
> and records pertaining to an innocent third party,
> simply because the government believes it may be
> relevant information for an investigation of the
> other person.
>
> I cannot over-emphasize the severity of the
> expansion of these administrative subpoenas. As a
> former United States Attorney, I do not have any
> cases to cite in which a serious or violent felon
> "got away" because the Department of Justice or any
> other federal agency did not have administrative
> subpoena authority. Please help me ensure our civil
> liberties are protected by opposing S. 2516 and HR
> 3048" ....
>
> BOB BARR (Representative)
>
>
>
_____________________________________________________________________
>
> NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION
> AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM
> CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY AND DEMOCRACY
> CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY POLICY
> AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTY UNION
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: UNITE !! (fwd)
Date: 31 Oct 2000 16:55:32 PST
On Oct 30, J.B. Stone wrote:
[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]
UNITE!
"If we make peaceful revolution impossible we make violent revolution
inevitable."
John F. Kennedy
Much has been debated, fretted over, and proposed on the eve of what
will prove to the most significant set of elections this country has
experienced since the Civil War. As always, there is a struggle over
the balance of power. The difference is that usually it means there
will be either there will be a Republican or Democratic majority in
Congress combined with a presidency that favors either the majority or
minority. We re all familiar with the to and fro battles that ensue
given the various combinations. This year will be strikingly different.
What is at stake right now is the continuance of America as we have
known it. Bill Clinton and Al Gore declared that they would recreate
government if they were elected. They have been true to their word.
Ironically, it s just about the only campaign promise that I can recall
that was ever kept in any but the most superficial way.
What they have accomplished is to mesmerize and hoodwink the American
public into a deadly trance and inflicted their will with the combined
power of the Executive Order and the Veto. The executive branch of
government has proven it is free to do as it pleases with the open and
notorious assistance of the Cabinet while the populace sits inertly
watching their TV sets. And so it is, day after day, that
Administrative law is enacted under the guise of policy and procedure
changes that divert the public s attention and influence away from the
control of our nation and hand it over to deeply entrenched bureaucrats
who are immune from scrutiny or oversight.
We made history once upon a time by overthrowing the most powerful
nation on earth to declare our freedom. We are bound to repeat that
feat or cease to exist as a free nation. But how?
The Cultural Revolution we were promised in the 60 s has indeed been
successful in eradicating our historic trust in, and respect for, each
other and isolated us in small, manageable packets easily manipulated
for political gain. Who do you know that cannot be lumped into one
special interest group or another, complete with lobbyists and
tailored legislation? The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is a cruel joke
perpetrated by the Immense Left Wing Coincidence that has brought this
country to its knees militarily and financially. It has been divide and
conquer at its worst. Conservatives assist the Liberals by bickering
amongst themselves rather than presenting a unified front.
There have been rumblings of unrest and promises of resistance from many
quarters. Many have stated that they will move this way or that
depending on the outcome of these crucial elections. But even this
milestone is ultimately insignificant. For whatever you or your
neighbors claim they will do after the votes are tallied, it is not
going to happen. How can I make such a blatantly contradictory
statement?
The changes have already been wrought. If you believe you are a free
person in a free country, just try to express yourself as such. Go
ahead, I m waiting
Did you get arrested or just merely chastised for not acting in a
politically correct fashion? The changes have been so pervasive and
complete that even the language you use has been adjusted to fit the
scheme. The handicapped are disadvantaged , etc.
If that s the case, then who cares about the elections? It s time for
REVOLUTION!
Not so fast, my friend. All this talk of violent overthrow of the
forces condemning us to a life of diminishing returns is just
shortsighted poppycock.
Just exactly who are you going to attack, in what manner will you
accomplish this deed, and when and where are you going to do so? That
brings us back to the elections.
If you are waiting for Al Gore to be elected, it s already too late.
Gore s election will prove that the majority of the public has fallen
for the shell game. You will not be able to defeat or control hundreds
of millions of people by martial law or dispose of that many, especially
if one of the architects of this country s demise is in power with the
still formidable military at his disposal. Oh, and don t forget that
Janet Reno or someone equally reprehensible will still be in control of
the Department of Injustice. In fact, I haven t heard a word about
Gore s intention to replace a single Cabinet member. Wouldn t that be
an interesting turn of events? Given four to eight more years of
uncontrolled subversion, you won t recognize this country.
The sweeping changes already underway will be multiplied tenfold between
now and the inaugural date of our next president. The assaults on our
freedom and the relentless legacy machine will be kicked into overdrive
and pushed forward at a blistering pace calculated to make it all so
overwhelming that the results will stand unchallenged. It s worked so
far. The opportunity for this has been carefully engineered and timed
to hit when we are most complacent and preoccupied with thoughts of
home, the holidays and year-end budget considerations, distracted from
what may seal our fate for decades.
As for who you will be attacking in this revolution that s not going to
happen, have you considered that you will be obligated to mass killings
of children? Unless you have been home schooling them and instilling
them with concrete values and useable logic, they are your biggest
threat. They have been trained, not educated, in violence factories and
taught to value the Nanny State more than their own peers and kin, let
alone freedom . Freedom to these kids is the opportunity to choose
the special interest group of their favor. They adopt and display
their choice by declaring their newly found gayness or by having every
imaginable orifice and appendage studded with garish slave metal
attachments and seek ever more powerful illicit drugs to rot their minds
if they are not already otherwise suited for automatic victimhood.
They hate you establishment types and given the outcome of the last
few high school rampages, they re very creative and effective killers.
At the very least, when you fail in completely eradicating your foes,
they will rebuild the system for them because it s the only one they
know and they won t care for the situation you have created that brings
more accountability to the individual. That would be too much like
growing up. Now know why they are continually doing it for the
children .
And don t forget your neighbors and co-workers. Are you prepared to
confront them in the streets across a haphazard barricade and murder
them? Under what set of criteria will you set your gun sights upon
them? Perhaps lengthy imprisonment and retraining would be more to
your liking? But we just discussed the school system.
While I m thinking about it, what are you planning to do with all these
corpses and their belongings? I guess simple greed will solve half the
problem, but unless you are advocating complete economic chaos, how will
their real estate and investments be divided? Who will care for the
survivors and dependents? The Nanny State will rise again or you will
be forced to eradicate tens of millions of the relatives of your foes.
This will be very, very messy.
Perhaps you are one of the smug adherents to the Militia Ethic . If
so, what s your plan? I see; it s a secret. Fine then. But exactly
how are you going to disseminate this glorious blueprint for freedom and
who gets to play along besides the members of your group? Unless you
have a complete set of skills and talents embodied in your entourage,
you will ultimately be beholding to some other group or groups for your
mere existence. I could be wrong, but I doubt that you have enough
food, water, clothing and transportation stored up for the next several
generations it s going to take to repopulate the country with people who
agree unreservedly with you.
Of course no one that I ve spoken to that advocates this revolutionary
solution to our dilemma has given much critical thought to the future
outcome of their proposed activities in even the most basic terms.
Let s look at the immediate results of a violent overthrow of the
government with no replacement mechanism.
Who would control the military? Even if some Admiral or General or ad
hoc cabal didn t seize the reins of power and our armed forces sat
motionless against the freedom fighters , who would defend the country
from all the petty and not so petty dictators that are aching for our
demise? If you don t think terrorist attacks are a real possibility
now, they would be absolutely guaranteed if we were to go to civil war.
With our defenses down and our focus on internal strife and conflict we
would be prime candidates for an outside force or forces throwing in
with one side or the other with the intention of taking all the marbles
when the dust settles. Couldn t happen? Rent the movie, The Man Who
Would Be King .
By the way, considering those who would be kings and those who plan to
dethrone them, why haven t all the militia groups coalesced and already
mounted the attack? If we are not at the lowest point in our history
right now, what are they waiting for? If things get better without them
are they going to turn away in disgust because they never had their day
of infamy on the battlefield? That s not very conducive to progress and
solidarity, now is it?
Perhaps you re waiting for George Bush to be elected and presume that he
will be able or wanting to root out all the evil that will surround him
when he takes office. I am not assigning any particular bent to him at
this time, but if he intended to do so, it would be unmistakable by
now. Alan Keyes may have fit that mold, but he s not running.
All of the halfway reasonable individuals I have communicated with or
heard publicly espousing their views believe that a return to the
Constitution and the ethics and purpose stated in the Declaration of
Independence are the only answer to our problems. There s even a
Constitution Party with candidates in many states and a presidential
combatant.
The problem with the Constitution Party and the Libertarians is that
they present their ideals and solutions as if they were alien concepts.
Pat Buchanan and the Reform Party have the most name recognition, but
unfortunately it is due for the most part to Perot s sour grapes
performances in the last two elections and the chaotic mess they called
their convention. How do any of these groups ever expect to capture a
majority of the votes for the presidency when they do not have the
support of the mainstream voters?
Why should I care about third parties or elections if things are so
bleak and we are on the brink of disaster? I do believe that there are
many sincere and forthright individuals in these parties and I intend to
vote for some of them.
No matter what you believe, you need to be associated with thousands and
thousands of people of like mind who possess a will to change things for
the better in order to take power. If we take control of the schools
and our local and regional economies and governments and communicate
with others across the nation, we would have most of the battle won
without firing a shot. With better people in office we won t be faced
with such a dire predicament. When we all move in the same direction at
the same time we create momentum.
I ll see you at the polls.
J.B.
[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]
--
RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA!
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
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
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!
-