From: Bill Vance Subject: Re: Call Zell (fwd) Date: 03 May 2002 13:55:09 -0700 (PDT) ----------------------- begin forwarded message from C. D. Tavares --------------------- Zell's staff says the calls are running about 50-50 now, after an early heavy lead by the Bradys. Let's swamp the Million Morons. Call NOW. (And ask the person at the other end how the calls are going.) At 9:46 AM -0700 5/3/02, RD wrote: > The Brady Bunch and MMMers have decided to hammer Georgia Senator Zell > Miller for daring to say that NRA is mainstream. They have sent their > members an e-mail telling them to call Senator Miller and give him > grief. > > Said Sarah Brady, "Call Senator Miller at (202) 224-3643." > > So I did. I told the pleasant phone person that I support Zell Miller's > speach to the NRA. > > I asked him if they had been getting many calls. He said that they had > been "inundated." I asked how many calls they had gotten. "About sixty," > was the answer. > > I told him that I would give it a go for reversing that trend. Please > call. It should cost you no more than 10 cents and about 30 seconds of > your time, depending upon your long distance plan. Activism don't get > much cheaper. > > This message is going out to all my lists. Please forward it to yours. > > Rick > Phx, Az -- Tavares@alum.mit.edu | http://alum.mit.edu/www/tavares | RKBA! As a result of my experience, I became interested in the issues... called gun control and decided to investigate the question with an open mind... To my dismay, I reached the conclusion -- without any help from [gun rights groups] -- that good, law-abiding people are being systematically disarmed. --HILLEL GOLDSTEIN, SHOOTING VICTIM OF NEO-NAZI BENJAMIN SMITH ----------------------- end forwarded message from C. D. Tavares --------------------- -- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** 4-19! ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- 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: linzellr@datastar.net (Robert Linzell) Subject: [Fwd: Victory for our side!] Date: 07 May 2002 18:45:01 -0500 -------- Original Message -------- Reply-To: mail@thelibertycommittee.org May 7, 2002 This is a great day for Americans who know the supreme law of our land is the Constitution of the United States and not some United Nations' world court. Yesterday, the U.S. officially announced it was reversing the previous administration's decision to become a signatory to the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty. The ICC treaty is "unsigned!" Our efforts paid off! But as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made chillingly clear in his statement supporting this historic victory for U.S. sovereignty: "Unfortunately, the ICC will not respect the U.S. decision to stay out of the treaty. To the contrary, the ICC provisions claim the authority to detain and try American citizens -- U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, as well as current and future officials -- even though the United States has not given its consent to be bound by the treaty." The threat to U.S. servicemembers and citizens remains very real, because unbelievable thought it may seem, from the beginning, the ICC was set up to claim jurisdiction over every person on the planet even if a person's country might not be a party to the treaty. The battle lines are clearly drawn. It is more urgent than ever that Congress speak to support President Bush's decision. We are working on a sense of Congress resolution to put the full force of the United States Congress on record to affirm President Bush's "unsigning" of the treaty. We are building momentum to pass H.R. 4169 -- The American Servicemember and Citizens Protection Act of 2002. President Bush's decision to renounce America's participation in the ICC was delivered yesterday morning by Marc Grossman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, U.S. Department of State. To read the full text of his remarks, go to http://www.state.gov/p/9949.htm To read the full text of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's statement and warning "There is a risk that the ICC could attempt to assert jurisdiction over U.S. servicemembers, as well as civilians...." go to http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2002/b05062002_bt233-02.html To read the Liberty Committee's press release in response to President Bush's decision, go to http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/first/0506-146.html We will be in contact very soon to announce our next step. You have won a stunning victory -- this is a major setback of the world-government agenda. Thank you! Kent Snyder The Liberty Committee http://www.thelibertycommittee.org To contribute to our campaign, go to https://www.ifr-ors.com/wpr.cfm?wp=149 ==================================================================== Update your profile or unsubscribe here: http://topica.email-publisher.com/survey/?a2iZBH.a3QSIM Delivered by Topica Email Publisher, http://topica.email-publisher.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Vance Subject: Excellent work on doctors and guns, should be in your archives! (fwd) Date: 14 May 2002 09:03:19 -0700 (PDT) ----------------------- begin forwarded message from Charles Riggs --------------------- Reasoning With My Peers by William B. Rogers, MD WRogers@KeepAndBearArms.com Dr. Rogers, Psychiatrist, Member, KeepAndBearArms.com and DSGL.org Boards of Directors, reports on his recent experience presenting a persuasive paper to a meeting of medical professionals in Dallas, TX. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3398 May 5, 2002 I have considerable experience dealing with dysfunctional families and family violence. As such, I wasn't too surprised when my offer was accepted to do a paper for the First Annual Medical Care and Domestic Violence Conference in Dallas, TX last November. Because of the attack on the United States and the chaos in commercial aviation, the conference was delayed until this Spring, and I was glad for the delay (if certainly not for the cause). Why did I need a delay? Because I was quickly finding that I had launched the mother of all projects, that's why. I had decided to write a 15-20 page paper on the "pro" and "con" attitudes about RKBA in the field of American medicine. I wanted the paper to be witty, accurate, easy to read and chock full of good references for the interested reader. I wanted references not only from the field of medical literature, but also from the fields of sociology and criminology. The latter being especially important because most physicians never get to see the data supporting the rational use of firearms from those other scientific disciplines, and the papers being written and published in the mainstream medical literature never reference those other fields. But the problem gets worse. Almost every major anti-gun paper published in the mainstream medical journals uses basic data from two papers published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1986 and 1993 by Kellerman and his associates. Their methods of collecting data and analyzing it to illustrate their bias against the private ownership of firearms has been thoroughly discredited in the sociological and criminological literature. Several very prominent scientists and authors outside of medicine are big enough men to report publicly that they changed their views from anti-RKBA to pro-RKBA after reading the debunking of the early medical literature and then reading the scientifically based literature being offered by the likes of Kleck and Lott (and others). While all this was going on in the 1990's, conclusions drawn from the early medical literature (known outside of medicine to be faulty and flawed) were being used to build a case for representing firearms injuries as a "public health crisis." With those three little words, millions of dollars would get sent to the Centers for Disease Control to begin studying the "depth of the problem" in the hope of finding a preventative solution. When doctors use the "medical model" to describe a social phenomenon, they get onto very shaky ground. For instance, when we consider the plague and how it was ultimately brought under control, we find the key was to recognize the "vector," that is, the animal that carried the infectious agent. It was a nice piece of epidemiological work. The microorganism that causes the infection is carried in fleas. But...the fleas are brought close to people by rats. The solution was actually easy: get rid of the rats and you get rid of the plague. Apply the same logic to firearms injuries and the idea becomes: get rid of the guns and you get rid of the firearms injuries. Well actually even that line of thinking is politically bastardized. The analogy would hold up well if doctors realized that the "guns" are the equivalent of the "fleas." They are too numerous and ubiquitous, and attempts underway even now in England and Australia (and Washington DC and New York City) demonstrate that you simply can't get rid of all the guns. You can get rid of the legal guns, because law-abiding citizens will attempt to follow the law. But criminals couldn't care less if there is a law making the carrying of handguns illegal. In fact, as we all know (first by intuition and now by empirically valid data), when there are less legal firearms in a community, violent crime escalates markedly. Getting rid of the fleas doesn't work, but getting rid of the rats might work. The "rats" in the firearms injuries phenomenon being "people" who don't use firearms properly, either due to lack of training or criminal intent. But why did physicians get duped into settling for a twisted analogy? Well, to begin with, ALL physicians did not get so duped. In fact, MOST physicians that I know personally are firearms owners and competent shooters. And most of the them could care less about politics or politicians. In further fact, MOST physicians do not even belong to the loud, well funded, gun-grabbing, politically powerful groups such as the American Medical Association which are adored by the media. It is an astounding fact that only about 1/3 of all practicing physicians in the United States belong to the AMA. Knowing all this, and wanting to explain this very clearly to about 200 of my colleagues who were scheduled to attend the MCDV meeting in Dallas, gave me considerable pause to fret: I was planning to deliver a pro-gun message to a room full of feminist, politically liberal statists who would probably eat me alive. I asked several colleagues to start a pool to bet on how many minutes it would take for the audience to start booing and then maybe even stop my presentation. This had to be done very carefully. Finally I evolved a "mission statement" that brought focus to the task. My goal was to leave my colleagues with two new ideas: 1. You don't know anything about firearms and society until you have read and agreed with or successfully debated the good science in the fields of sociology and criminology. 2. The people who are telling you what to tell your patients about guns (the "organized medicine" groups) also either don't know anything about firearms, or they have another agenda which is causing them to ignore a very important set of data from sister disciplines. Either way, those of us interested in "good science" must be skeptical about their advice (or admonitions). I didn't want to turn my listeners into pro-RKBA after one controversial paper, but I did want to turn them into questioning, curious skeptics with respect to the "party line." I also hoped that my paper would be accepted into a book being planned to include other papers from the conference. (Unless it is just too damn politically incorrect, it just might make it--ok, a guy can dream, can't he?) The 20 page paper was accompanied by a 20 minute oral presentation and, if I may say so myself, a dynamite Power-Point slide show. Oh...and what happened during my oral presentation? It was attended by about 30 doctors, nurses and psychotherapists (it being one of 4 concurrent "break out" sessions). I was received very politely and with great interest. There was a smattering of applause when I opined that our worthy study of firearms injuries prevention HAD to be disconnected from the politics of "gun control." During the brief Q&A afterwards, a very knowledgeable lady stood to ask if I would elaborate on what I had meant by "the problem with gun control in England." I was only too happy to do so, while holding back my astonishment that she (and I'm sure others in the room) had never heard about the increasing violence in England, Australia and Washington DC in relationship to firearms prohibition and confiscation. A few days ago Angel Shamaya asked me if I wanted to maintain "proprietary control" over the paper and the slides. My answer is not only NO, but H - - L NO! Both the paper and the slides have been edited and placed on the website for Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws (http://www.dsgl.org) -- you can access it from the DSGL home page, and a direct link is found below this note. I invite you to read them both and download them to show your friends and your personal physicians. If you are called upon to make presentations or write articles about RKBA, feel free to use the posted material and any of the references that you find helpful. God bless each one of you, W. Rogers, MD Tyler, TX Charles Riggs Gunsite 1991 - DVC! "Fight Crime - Be armed - Fight back!" GOA-NRA-SAF ********************************* The Kentucky IDPA Studies Group: http://www.kyidpa.org ********************************* A parable for our times: http://www.kc3.org/sheep.htm ********************************* "I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it." -Jack Handy ----------------------- end forwarded message from Charles Riggs --------------------- -- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** 4-19! ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- 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: Bill Vance Subject: Fiedor Report on the News (fwd) Date: 25 May 2002 10:28:50 -0700 (PDT) -------------------- begin forwarded message from Doug Fiedor -------------------- Fiedor Report on the News A Weekly View from the Middle of an Asphalt Jungle May 26, 2002 #274 by: Doug Fiedor dfiedor@comcast.net Previous Editions at: http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/list-hu.htm THE ANATOMY OF PROPAGANDA Who says Hillary's war room was closed? The White House war room was closed, but its counterpart at the Democratic National Committee headquarters sure isn't. Hence, we were bombarded with a week's worth of very stupid propaganda. Actually, certain DNC sycophants working on Capitol Hill should be on their way to prison by now. But, they have yet to be arrested. The Senate Intelligence Committee received a few hundred classified documents from the White House. The aides of Committee Democrats were requested to go over all documents to find whatever might be embarrassing to the Bush Administration. Late one afternoon, they found a certain FBI report and gave it to members of the DNC's war room. Everything thereafter was little more than "spin" by the uninformed. They leaked the classified document to AP. Apparently AP will publish anything the Democrats give them, so they ran the spin from the DNC war room's point of view. That was without, we should add, any input from the White House whatsoever. The Bush Administration didn't even get a courtesy call. The next day, the liberal TV morons in the morning all ran with the story. Again, not one of these DNC sycophants bothered to do the slightest bit of background research. They had information that could be damning to President Bush, the DNC wanted it out, so they all gleefully ran with the story. As soon as Tom Daschle and Dick Gephadrt got to work that morning, they joined right in, as if choreographed puppets of the DNC war room -- "What did he know and when did he know it." Not wanting to be left out, Senator Joe Lieberman, the founder of all the Congressional socialist organizations (New Democrat Network(1), Democratic Leadership Council(2) and other "Third Way" socialist groups) sent out Hillary Clinton to be the official skunk at the Bush garden party. She was stupid enough to do it, too, as Lieberman knew she would. So, what do we have here: A couple Hill Rats working for the Senate Intelligence Committee leak a classified document. The DNC puts their spin on it and hands it off to their operatives in the major media, who spew it to the public as if it were fact. Then the liberal nincompoops in Congress repeat what the liberal media have reported. The problem is, not one of them ever bothered to check their facts. All of them, up and down the line, got it wrong. In their collective glee to start a scandal about President Bush they, in fact, perpetrated a lie. Sure, by the end of the week they were all trying to back off some. Their lie didn't hold water. They were found out. No matter, they want an investigation anyway. Fastest on the correction was Matt Drudge.(3) Drudge pulled out major media stories showing that, as far back as five years ago, terrorist plots to hijack commercial aircraft and crash them into the Pentagon, the CIA headquarters and other buildings, were reported. Fancy that, eh? The major media didn't even look into their own computers to check the accuracy of the DNC's war room nonsense. So, Drudge did it for them. A quick search shows there were over 50 such reports published within the last 5 years. So, does anyone bother to ask Tom Daschle, Dick Gephadrt, Joe Lieberman or Hillary Clinton why they didn't know? It seems like that should be the first question put to them by any good reporter. But, no one is asking. Did major media apologize to the public for perpetrating a lie? Nope! They didn't even retract their stories. Instead, they kept on running with whatever the far-left in Congress wanted to say. There's more, though. What these trouble making morons on Capitol Hill should have known was the 1999 Congressional Library report titled "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism"(4) that was distributed all over Washington back then. Among the other warnings in the report, it states: "Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House." There were also at least two widely distributed military reports indicating the same thing. All of these reports were published while Clinton was president. So, again we see the one thing all these socialists have in common: They lie a lot. That some are also part of the media makes no nevermind. It's still untrue. 1. http://www.newdem.org/ 2. http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=86 3. http://www.drudgereport.com/ 4. http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Sociology-Psychology%20of%20Terrorism.htm THE APPENDIX TO EMERSON There was quite a lot of response about the U.S. v. Emerson Second Amendment case (No. 01-8780) that is under consideration for hearing before the United States Supreme Court. We wrote a little about that two weeks ago(1) and need not rehash all that here. The government's opposition writ of certiorari was filed by Ted Olson, the Solicitor General.(2) Generally speaking, the government's reply was straightforward. They do not want the Supreme Court to hear the case because the Court will probably void a few federal gun laws in the process. Really, that's about all there is to that. Attorney General John Ashcroft, on the other hand, has been making noises indicating that he intends to honor the original intent of the authors of our Constitution and support our Second Amendment rights. The fact is, the above mentioned brief does not necessarily support Ashcroft's contention that he intends to support our right to keep and bear arms. Rather, the brief seems strikingly ordinary in its support of government's position to maintain the status quo. Now comes the Appendix that is receiving all the attention. It appears that the appendix was added on to the brief more or less as an afterthought. That is, rather than text written as part of the brief in Emerson, the text of the appendix seems to be a memo dated November 9, 2001 from the Attorney General to all federal prosecutors. Because there seems to have been quite a bit of misconception as to what that "appendix" actually said, we provide it here in its entirety. In truth, this looks like it could be the beginning of a trend back to the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Even so, there would still be a long, long road to travel to get there. Here's the text of the appendix, as it was added to the Emersion brief. You decide: Washington, D.C. 20530 November 9, 2001 MEMORANDUM TO ALL UNITED STATES' ATTORNEYS FROM: The Attorney General /s/ John Ashcroft RE: United States v. Emerson On October 16, 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in United States v. Emerson. I am pleased that the decision upholds the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) -- which prohibits violent persons who are under domestic restraining orders from possessing firearms. By taking guns out of the hands of persons whose propensity to violence is sufficient to warrant a specific restraining order, this statute helps avoid tragic episodes of domestic violence. As I have stated many times, reducing gun crime is a top priority for the Department. We will vigorously enforce and defend existing firearms laws in order to accomplish that goal. Emerson is also noteworthy because, in upholding this statute, the Fifth Circuit undertook a scholarly and comprehensive review of the pertinent legal materials and specifically affirmed that the Second Amendment "protects the right of individuals, including those not then actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms. . . ." The Court's opinion also makes the important point that the existence of this individual right does not mean that reasonable restrictions cannot be imposed to prevent unfit persons from possessing firearms or to restrict possession of firearms particularly suited to criminal misuse. In my view, the Emerson opinion, and the balance it strikes, generally reflect the correct understanding of the Second Amendment. The Department can and will continue to defend vigorously the constitutionality, under the Second Amendment, of all existing federal firearms laws. The Department has a solemn obligation both to enforce federal law and to respect the constitutional rights guaranteed to Americans. Because it may be expected that Emerson will be raised in any number of firearms case handled by this Department, it is important that the Department carefully assess the implications of the Emerson decision and how it interacts with existing circuit precedent. Accordingly, United States Attorney's Offices should promptly advise the Criminal Division of all cases in which Second Amendment issues are raised, and coordinate all briefing in those cases with the Criminal Division and the Solicitor General's office. As the Supreme Court has long observed, the mission of the Department "in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done." Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935). Justice is best achieved, not by making any available argument that might win a case, but by vigorously enforcing federal law in a manner that heeds the commands of the Constitution. 1. http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/fron272.htm 2. http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2001/0responses/2001-8780.resp.html CONGRESS AND SOCIALIST ORGS. As most readers of this newsletter know, we believe in calling things what they are, in plain English, and in such a way that there is no doubt in what we mean. So we haven't been using words like duplicitous, deceitful and devious when describing the Democrats in Congress. Instead, when they act like socialists (as do some Republicans), socialists is what we call them. There is a very good reason for this socialist tag, too. We are far from being alone in this assessment. Specifically, we find the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) in total agreement. First, though, a little information on the DSA. Here's a few excerpts taken directly from the DSA(1) web page: "The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA's members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics. "At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means and end. We are activists committed not only to extending political democracy but to demanding democratic empowerment in the economy, in gender relations, and in culture. Democracy is not simply one of our political values but our means of restructuring society. Our vision is of a society in which people have a real voice in the choices and relationships that affect the entirety of our lives. We call this vision democratic socialism -- a vision of a more free, democratic and humane society." . . . "We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources, meaningful work, a healthy environment, sustainable growth, gender and racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships." . . . "To advance the cause of socialism, DSA has established the Center for Democratic Values.(2) The Center for Democratic Values is a network of intellectuals committed to bringing progressive ideas on society, the economy, and government into mainstream discussions. CDV produces letters to the editor, op-eds, pamphlets, and books." So there you have it. Social-democrats are "building progressive movements for social change" by "establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics," and through supporting "democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources." How does this fit in with Congress and the Democratic Party? Easy. The only outwardly avowed socialist in Congress is Representative Bernard Sanders of Vermont. However, Sanders was also the chairman of a Congressional group calling itself the Congressional Progressive Caucus.(3) The Progressive Caucus, incidentally, aligns itself with the Democratic Socialists of America. The Congressional Caucus membership list is posted for all to see.(4) Meanwhile, back to the DSA web page: "The Progressive Caucus of the US House of Representatives is made up of 58 members of the House. The Caucus works to advance economic and social justice through sponsoring legislation that reflects its purpose. The Caucus also works with a coalition of organizations, called the Progressive Challenge(5), to bring new life to the progressive voice in US politics." In truth, there are well over 150 Democrats in the House (and a few Republicans who act like it) who subscribe to all of these socialist world economy and world government programs -- those programs designed to allow the chosen elite complete control over the peasant-citizens. What we see today as corruption in government was brought about simply because these people, as a group, feel that any means to their end is acceptable. This includes, of course, taking campaign funds from foreign Communists as well as passing some very obnoxious people- control laws. These groups (and Members of Congress) are, in turn, politically aligned with Socialists International(6), which is based in London. "The Socialist International is the worldwide organization of socialist, social democratic and labour parties. It is the oldest and largest international political association in the world, currently comprising more than 120 parties and organizations from all continents. "The Socialist International, whose origins go back to 1864, has existed in its present form since 1951 when it was re-established at the Frankfurt congress. "The International provides its members with a forum for political action, policy discussion, dialogue and exchange. Its statements and decisions advise member organizations and the international community of consensus views within the global family of socialist, social democratic and labour parties and organizations." Most of these groups may be publicly quiet, but they are very, very active in the political background. And, generally, they all support exactly the same agenda. That socialist agenda, by the way, has made up the bulk of the Democratic Party's official platform for nearly two decades. Last but not least, for more information, on just how neatly the socialist's activities blend in with the U.S. Democratic Party (and the AFL-CIO), check the Social Democrats, USA web page.(7) That is also very enlightening -- albeit, like everything else socialist, their web site often does not work. The leadership organization of these socialist groups is, of course, Socialist International. Readers interested in where the United Nations (and Congress) gets so many of its wacky socialist/communist ideas might want to check out the Socialist International web page.(6) We Constitutionalists would do well to copy some of their organizational framework. 1. http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html 2. http://www.igc.org/cdv/index.html 3. http://bernie.house.gov/pc/ 4. http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp 5. http://www.ips-dc.org/netprogress/ 6. http://www.dsausa.org/si/si.html 7. http://www.socialdemocrats.org ~ End ~ -------------------- end forwarded message from Doug Fiedor -------------------- -- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** 4-19! ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- 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!!!!! -