From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: Re: (fwd) US Marines on patrol in SW Texas (fwd)
Date: 01 Aug 1996 00:28:34 -0500


>Has Congress rescinded provisions of the Posse Commitatus Act?  Why
>are active United States Marines patrolling in Southwest Texas?

Posse Commitatus pertains to the Army.  By extension the Air Force having
been hatched from the Army about 1947.  The Navy is not specified and
thereby exempt. The Marine Corps is a component of the Department of the Navy.  

This well could be the rationale used by "the powers that be" to use Marines
to interdict "drugs" or "illegals" or whatever.  

Cap'n Jacq'



Cap'n Jacq'

"Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish.  Do not overdo it." 
--- Lao-Tzu


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: Heads Up!
Date: 01 Aug 1996 00:31:27 -0500

>Return-Path: bradyco@sky.net
>Comments: Authenticated sender is <bradyco@sky.net>
>From: "bradyco@sky.net" <bradyco>
>To: Those.who.would.be.free!
>Date:          Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:32:20 +0000
>Subject:       Heads Up!
>Reply-to: bradyco@sky.net
>X-Confirm-Reading-To: bradyco@sky.net
>X-pmrqc:       1
>Priority: normal
>
>Much attention has been focused on Monday's meeting between Clinton and
>Congressional leaders to consider "additional" steps to combat
>terrorism, including "roving wiretaps" and tagging explosives.
>
>Some may have noted that the Group of Seven is meeting in Paris to
>discuss "cooperative measures to combat terrorism." A happy coincidence,
>is it not, that our far-sighted leaders chose this week to adopt a
>25-point cooperative plan for "tracking, stopping and convicting
>terrorists?"
>
>People who would preserve the Second Amendment will have
>an interest in learning more about this 25-point agreement. According to
>the Associated Press, "Measures adopted at the one-day summit--attended
>by ministers from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia
>and the United States--include easing extradition and cracking down on
>forged documents AND ACCESS TO FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES 
>[emphasis added].
>
>There it is. The United States government has promised the Group of
>Seven to "crack down" on "access to firearms."
>
>Any questions?
>
>Frank J.  Brady
>
>
>Coalition for an American Future
>http://www.bradyinc.com/change
>e-mail bradyco@sky.net
>FAX 1-816-587-1698
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: FCC Public File Auto-FAQ
Date: 01 Aug 1996 00:58:28 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'll have additional
      evidence if the Station is cheating on their Public File.

5.a.  Watch their commercials for a few days to a week, listing all their
      advertisers.  Go to the Public Library and ask them for help in
      locating those books that have the addresses for the nation's business
      headquarters, 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).

5.b.  The above, (5.a.), is a lot easier and less time consuming if you're
      dealing with a newspaper's or a magazine's ads.

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: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Re: Heads Up!
Date: 01 Aug 1996 07:36:58 -0400 (EDT)



On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Jacques Tucker wrote:

> >People who would preserve the Second Amendment will have
> >an interest in learning more about this 25-point agreement. According to
> >the Associated Press, "Measures adopted at the one-day summit--attended
> >by ministers from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia
> >and the United States--include easing extradition and cracking down on
> >forged documents AND ACCESS TO FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES 
> >[emphasis added].
> >
> >There it is. The United States government has promised the Group of
> >Seven to "crack down" on "access to firearms."
> >
> >Any questions?
> >
> >Frank J.  Brady
> >

Just in case the above was too subtle:


 
 
   Terrorism Conference Adopts Plan 
 
[...]
   Some European diplomats suggested, however, that the United 
   States was committing itself for the first time to 
   politically sensitive security measures that have long been 
   in force in Europe and elsewhere. They specifically 
   mentioned agreement to tighten security involving domestic 
   air cargo and passenger baggage and others apparently aimed 
   at firearms control. 
 
   The Clinton administration, said one diplomat, "may find it 
   useful to invoke the commitments made here to America's 
   allies as a lever" to persuade the American gun lobby and 
   air transport industry that restrictions are now necessary. 

 [...] 

 
 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: 1 dead in Olympic bombing
Date: 01 Aug 1996 08:26:10 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Howlin' Blue wrote:
> A turkish journalist had a heart attack and died enroute to the hospital 
> but one woman was killed by shrap directly from the blast.  I heard the 
> shrap described as a roofing nail, today.

Original reports I heard stated that she died of a "massive head injury"...

;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: FOUR MEN DRESSED IN BLACK (fwd)
Date: 01 Aug 1996 09:31:57 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

Dot ... the problem with this item (if there is a problem) turns out to be 
the source of the media and press accounts I gather here in NY.  Here in 
the metropolitan area, you can watch the Truth Controllers in action, if 
you pay attention.  Raw news gets reported for 6-12 hours, sometimes 
longer.  Then it starts getting "spun" to produce the desired outcome.

All one needs to do is gather up news items at the outset (I'm a news 
junkie), take notes, and wait for the Truth Controllers to go to work.  
Look for the news items -- the "data points" -- that disappear from the 
news.  Observe what happens to the sources of those items.  If time 
allows, make independent inquiries to see what local people are saying vs. 
what's being reported (that's a depressing exercise with the TWA 800 
shootdown.  On Long Island, everyone calls it a "friendly fire" incident 
-- with "friends" like that, who needs tyrants?).

In the case of the Atlanta bombing, for the first 12-18 hours after the 
explosion, news wasn't being effectively filtered.  It was a summer 
weekend, and the Truth Controllers (senior editors, News Directors, etc.) 
were in the Hamptons or the Vineyard, or wherever they go.  (They probably 
had to make a bunch of calls to find the people who tell them what to 
spin, then a bunch more calls to try to get their people in NYC to "spin" 
things right, then finally give up and come back Sunday to really get the 
fix in).  Anyway ...

When the Truth Control kicked in on Sunday, I went back over the reported 
items and found the accounts of:

1)  4 white men in black clothes creating some kind of disturbance at the 
    concert before the backpack was discovered.

2)  A security guard saying he had "25 minutes" of warning before the 
    blast.

3)  French TV showing 2 sketches of different suspects, one with short
    hair in his early 20s, one with long hair in his late 20s.

4)  Police and bomb squads apparently coming & going from the site without
    evacuating the concertgoers or disarming the bomb.

All of these fell off the radar and out of the news on Sunday.  E.g., you 
can infer that they may be important.  They are data points that fall 
"outside the box" that the controlled media are reporting.

Now the problem with all of this is that all these items could have 
originated with one source:  Richard Jewell (including the sketches shown 
on French TV).  So it seems to me there are two alternate scenarios 
possible:

1)  Richard Jewell is a self-aggrandizing rent-a-cop (as the media is 
    saying, if not the FBI) who planted the bomb, made the call, got 
    back to the park with 25 minutes to spare and made himself a "hero" 
    in the murder and mayhem.

2)  Richard Jewell is an observant, zero-tolerance type of guy (as his 
    former employer says ruefully) who spotted the 4 disruptive suspects, 
    then the bomb, identified the threat perhaps with 25 minutes to spare 
    (or was he TOLD of the threat?  By his supervisor?  Are there tapes?), 
    then called over a GBI Agent named Davis of his acquaintance to examine 
    the thing, then tried to move the crowd away as the bomb squad arrived 
    -- just as Jewell (and now his lawyer) says.

The tidbit about Jewell actually bringing over a GBI guy he knew from the 
crowd appeared in today's New York Post, which seems to be filtering and 
manipulating news a lot less than the other local print media here.  Thank 
you, Mr. Murdoch!

Of course, officially the 911 call was made less than 20 minutes before 
the bomb went off.  So if Jewell DID call in the suspicious package (or 
if he actually received a warning from his supervisor or someone else 25 
minutes before the explosion), then Mr. Jewell is a MAJOR problem for 
the "official" version of events.

Isn't he?

Lastly, there's the small problem of Mr. Jewell's manner of speech.  He is 
a good ol' boy.  The 911 caller reportedly had "no discernable accent".

> I am forwarding to you (in case you did not receive it) the message from
> Clark Matthews concerning the "FOUR MEN DRESSED IN BLACK" .

This item re: the four men was on WCBS-AM and WINS-AM radio on Saturday 7/27 
and Sunday 7/28 (early morning).  I've been told it was in the NY Post, too, 
but I haven't found the item there.  The radio reports said the source was 
a guard (Jewell?).

> This is the MOST believable story of all (to me).  It surprises me though
> that the BATF would not have sense enough to at least be in some kind of
> disguise.  Do you know any other jokers who run around in black outfits?

Well, watch it with this.  The sketches, wherever they came from (and it 
appears America isn't allowed to see them, just France), supposedly show 
YOUNG guys.  I have not seen them.  And the news items just said black 
clothing, not Ninja suits.

> I hope that Clark Matthews can furnish all of us with the source of his
> information - and hopefully we can help the FBI catch these guys!!!!!

Well, here they are, for what it's worth.

Best,  Clark

P.S. The problem with working inferentially with reported news items is 
that you can get a bum steer sometimes.  The process is quite similar to a 
self-teaching artificial intelligence software application (an Expert 
System, if you will).  Such software requires that the designer create 
"rules" for the software.  The "rules" I create for reverse-filtering the 
news either work well or go wildly wrong.  Software does the same thing.

Sometimes items that REALLY ARE false or inconsequential get heavily 
reported, and then spiked with no explanation.  The News Directors or 
Truth Controllers or Program Directors clearly count on the same "memory 
hole" phenomenon swallowing up their own goofs.

Because the whole reverse-filtering process is designed to spot them doing 
this, you can end up making mountains out of molehills if you're not 
careful.  Indeed, you can make mountains out of sinkholes.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: iwilsker@ih2000.net
Subject: Re: Heads Up!
Date: 01 Aug 1996 07:38:54 -0600 (MDT)


Gee, how many people were shot on TWA 800 and in the Olympic Park?

Another ruse to lay guilt where there is none?

Ira Wilsker    iwilsker@ih2000.net
http://www.ih2000.net/ira/ira.htm
  OR  http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1814/ira.htm



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ken L. Holder" <kholder@shell.liberty.com>
Subject: a copy of the bill of rights
Date: 01 Aug 1996 13:38:10 -0700

And be sure and thank Adobie for putting this up!

>From: Larry Church <lchurch@immortal.mv.us.adobe.com>
>Subject: a copy of the bill of rights
>Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 11:12:40 PDT
>To: ca-firearms@lists.best.com
>
>
>Tired of arguing about wgere the commas are in the second amendment?
>Chech out http://www.adobe.com/newsfeatures/billofrights/
>
>>From the intro:
>
>   Talk about a paper for the people! Thanks to technology,
>   everyone can own a digital copy of the Bill of Rights - scanned from an
>   original print of the historic U.S. document.
>
>
>It's in pdf format, but you can get a free pdf reader, too.
>
>
>	larry
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey)
Subject: New Terror Bill
Date: 01 Aug 1996 16:49:30 CDT


CNN is reporting that a compromise has been reached on the content of the
new Terror Bill which was inspired by the pipe bomb in the park in Atlanta.
The "roving wiretap" provision will be in it, including an "emergency
wiretap" which apparently allows the Feds to tap a line for 48 hours
without a court order.

The taggant study won't be in it because the Republicans said it is too
controversial.

But the wiretap business apparently isn't.

If the wiretap provision trips your trigger, then you may want to heat
up the lines of communication between you and your elected masters in
Washington DC.

The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other-
wise noted.  No-one else should be held responsible for what I think.

| D. N. Dickey               |  Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and |
| Research Associate         |  timidity, are no match for armed and       |
| Northern Illinois Univ.    |  resolute wickedness.                       |
| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu    |                       - W. S. Churchill     |
| **Finger for public key**  |                                             |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: jacq@sky.net
Subject: I Thessalonians 5:2-6
Date: 01 Aug 1996 17:44:09 -0700

My dear Senator Ashcroft:

Paul's words seem to be so pertinent today in light of the panic extant 
in Congress to pass more oppressive legislature in the guise of stemming 
"terrorism."  Please consider carefully your vote on this issue.

I quote the subject passages for the sake of saving your time:

	"For yourselves know perfectly that of the Lord so cometh as a 
thief in the night.
	"For when they shall say, Peace and safety; the sudden 
destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a women with child; and 
they shall not escape.
	"But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day should 
overtake you as a thief.
	"Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: 
we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
	"Therefore let us not sleep as _do_ others; but let us watch and 
be sober."

Sir, these are critical days we face.  Do what is right.  Do what is 
constitutional.  Do what the Lord wishes us to do.

	En agape,

	Jacques Tucker
	Kansas City, MO

"Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish.  Do not overdo 
it."  Lao Tzu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: CATO's take on Dole
Date: 02 Aug 1996 06:03:36 -0500

This may be off topic, but couldn't resist sharing the words of Ed Crane,
the head of CATO.  Here's the first paragraph of his report to the CATO
Board of Directors, Sponsors and Friends, June 28, 1996:

        "I suppose you think I'm despairing over the Chinese torture of
watching this presidential campaign between the ethically suspect,
fundamentally statist incumbent and the incoherent, philosophically barren
challenger.  Well, you're right, this is downright depressing.  While I've
always maintained that pushing for socialized medicine makes Bill Clinton a
greater threat to our liberties than do his various peccadillos, the
disrespect for the office of the presidency evidenced by the growing
revelations of how the White House has effectively been turned into a
political playpen for Hillary, is simply appalling.  And if there is a
federal program for the ideologically challenged, somebody please enroll 
Bob Dole as soon as possible.  It's become so evident that the former
senator from Kansas has no philosophy, no program, and no concept of why
he's seeking the presidency, that somebody should convice him to do the
right thing and release his delegates."

Mr. Crane does have a good way with words, wouldn't y'all say?

        Cap'n Jacq'


"Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish.  Do not overdo it." 
--- Lao-Tzu


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: H. Con. Res. 206
Date: 02 Aug 1996 12:06:27 -0500

>>CONGRESS:          104
>>BILL NO:           H. Con. Res. 206
>>OFFICIAL TITLE:    expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the threat
>>                   to the security of American citizens and the United States
>>                   Government posed by armed militia and other paramilitary
>>                   groups and ogranizations
>> 

>>SPONSOR:           Jackson-Lee (TX)


>>COSPONSORS:        42 current cosponsors
>>  As introduced    Conyers, Norton, Frazer, Flake, Lowey, Rangel, Hastings
>(FL),
>>                   Millender-McDonald, DeLauro, Clyburn, Hilliard, Wynn,
>>                   Lewis (GA), Payne (NJ), Clayton, Owens, Fields (LA),
>>                   Cummings, Collins (MI), Schumer, Scott, Pastor, Meek,
>>                   Brown (FL), McKinney, Foglietta, Richardson, Coleman,
>>                   Johnson, E. B., Jackson (IL), Collins (IL), Engel,
>>                   Schroeder, Maloney, Velazquez, Gutierrez, Cardin, Serrano,
>>                   Becerra, Gibbons, Nadler, Kennedy (RI)

-----

Now you have a nearly complete list of all the hard-core Marxists in congress.

Bob Knauer

--
       
****************************************************
  A I M N E T           Advanced Internet Marketing
  Corporation            World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>      http://www.aimtec.com/
****************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: wootan@dmi.net
Subject: Re: Sigh...
Date: 02 Aug 1996 10:25:16 -0700

>YOU HAVE JUST TURNED 65. PLEASE REPORT IMMEDIATELY TO THE ST. KEVORKIAN
>REGIONAL OBITORIUM AND RECYCLING CENTER FOR THE FINAL SOLUTION TO YOUR
>RETIREMENT NEEDS.

"Soylent Green is People" 

Charleton Heston in the movie "Soylent Green"


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey)
Subject: Re: Sigh...
Date: 02 Aug 1996 13:58:29 CDT

wootan@dmi.net wrote:

>>YOU HAVE JUST TURNED 65. PLEASE REPORT IMMEDIATELY TO THE ST. KEVORKIAN
>>REGIONAL OBITORIUM AND RECYCLING CENTER FOR THE FINAL SOLUTION TO YOUR
>>RETIREMENT NEEDS.
>
>"Soylent Green is People" 
>
>Charleton Heston in the movie "Soylent Green"

This put me in mind of a solution I discovered to the controversy regarding
physician-assisted suicide, so-called.

It should be made a crime -- murder -- for any person who is a licensed
physician, and has therefore taken the Hippocratic Oath, deliberately to
cause the death of anyone.  Persons who wish to make a career of putting
people out of their misery, or criminals out of our misery, should obtain
a medical degree from an accredited institution, but refrain from taking
the above-mentioned oath.  This would qualify them to be what I would call
"thanatopsians."  These persons would be absolutely prohibited from
practicing any of the healing arts, but would be permitted to assist those
who wish to commit suicide, or in the putting of criminals to death.

At all times when publicly visible or performing their office, persons
qualified as thanatopsians shall wear the designated uniform of their craft,
to wit:  A full-length robe and cowl, all in jet black with no device or
decoration visible.  Care shall be taken in the design of the cowl that
the face be always in shadow.  A bit of black cotton rope will do for a
belt to bind the robe about the waist.  In addition, they shall carry at
all times an hourglass in one hand, and a large scythe over the opposite
shoulder.  A shoulder bag, or haversack, done likewise in heavy black cloth
or leather and decorated with a death's head on the flap, shall serve them
in transporting necessary articles.  When responding to a call for their
services, they shall invariably walk the last two miles to the appointed
place in the open and in full public view, using a measured, funerial,
tread.  If they desire to moan expressively at intervals as they go, they
may do so at their option.  Any assistants they may find it convenient
to employ shall be identically attired, but are not required to carry
the hourglass and scythe.

This is presented in the hope that it may solve a particularly vexing
problem, which currently has a great proportion of our citizenry violently
and needlessly exercised.

The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other-
wise noted.  No-one else should be held responsible for what I think.

| D. N. Dickey               |  Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and |
| Research Associate         |  timidity, are no match for armed and       |
| Northern Illinois Univ.    |  resolute wickedness.                       |
| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu    |                       - W. S. Churchill     |
| **Finger for public key**  |                                             |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Fwd: Serfs, or Modern Share-Croppers?
Date: 02 Aug 1996 15:34:51 -0600

>Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 15:17:37 -0600 (MDT)
>From: ralph@teaminfinity.com
>Received: (from ralph@localhost) by teaminfinity.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id
>QAA17082; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 16:25:24 -0400
>Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 16:25:24 -0400
>Message-Id: <199608022025.QAA17082@teaminfinity.com>
>To: ralph@teaminfinity.com
>Subject:  >>>>>  SERFS
>
>
>Ralph strongly endorses this way of looking at things:
>
>Doug Fiedor wrote, and William Michael Kemp <minutemn@pcl.net> higly
>endorses:
>>
>>                  Serfs, or Modern Share-Croppers?
>>
>>                        by:  Doug Fiedor
>>
>> Share-cropping became common in the United States after the Civil War.  Back
>> then, many Southern plantations had ample land, but little money to pay
>> wages.  At the same time, a large segment of the population was left
>> impoverished, with little prospect of earning an adequate living.  So, it is
>> was little surprise that the landed people -- those with the means of
>> producing a product -- contracted with the poor who had labor to offer, to
>> produce a product from which both might profit.
>>
>> Share croppers normally received a home, the necessary tools, farm animals,
>> and sometimes even some education, for their labor.  They also received a
>> share in the profit -- usually, about half -- from the harvest they produced.
>>
>> This arrangement was somewhat similar to the arrangement of the serfs of
>> England.  Both groups were tied to the land owner.  Both paid a large
>> portion of the product of their labor for the privilege of living and
>> working on the land.  And, with both, the amount of freedom allowed to the
>> workers by the landowners was often quite arbitrary.
>>
>> In this arrangement, true freedom was no more than a fleeting concept.  The
>> land owner told them what they will do, how they are to do it and when they
>> were expected to do it.  For instance, the land owners wished to ensure that
>> everyone in the family would be available to work the fields during the
>> growing season.  To that end, they even suspended education every summer.
>>
>> Today, few of us work the fields.  Yet, are we less of a share-cropper?
>> Clearly, half of all the proceeds of our labor is still paid to the ultimate
>> landowner, the government.  Unlike serfs or share-croppers, we must now
>> purchase the land on which we live.  Yet, the ultimate landowner --the
>> government -- still instructs us on what we may or may not do with that land.
>>
>> There was a time in our common law when it was taught that "Every man's
>> house is his castle; and even though the winds of heaven may blow through
>> it, the King may not enter."  That concept, of course, included the sheriff,
>> the tax collector, and all other police officers too.  However, the Lords
>> and Ladies of Congress did not find this common law maxim expedient to the
>> expressed goals of modern government.  Consequently, they found ways to
>> totally trash the concept.
>>
>> Not to be outdone by the original land-barons of old, today's government has
>> decreed _servient estate_ over our property to itself.  That is, federal,
>> state and local governments have passed laws allowing government agents
>> easement to our private property.  Consequently, not only can today's
>> government place restrictions on the use of private property, government
>> agents may now search and seize private property almost at will.
>>
>> You think not?  Violate some incomprehensible wetland law and the Army
>> (Corps of Engineers) comes after you.  Forget to pay property tax, or what
>> the IRS says you owe, and men with guns come to run you off of your land.
>> And, God forbid some farmer would grow a crop that is not politically
>> correct. . . .
>>
>> A court trial is no longer usually necessary to confiscate private property.
>> But, even if there is cause for trial, first you must relinquish possession
>> of your property to the applicable government agency.  Then, you may go to
>> trial.
>>
>> Adding insult to injury, the Supreme Court recently approved government's
>> taking of private property by saying that forfeiture was different than
>> punishment.  This opinion gave police, and most other government agencies,
>> cart blanche to confiscate private property for a whole host of reasons.
>> And they do.  There is great incentive for government agencies to confiscate
>> private property.  By law, they then use the  proceeds from selling
>> forfeited property to supplement the agency's budget.
>>
>> So too with the concept of privacy.  Like the land owner of old, today's
>> government keeps very good records on its citizens.  Hundreds of citizen
>> databases exist throughout the country, containing everything from
>> education, criminal and medical to financial records.  Worse, all of these
>> databases will soon all be connected, allowing any bureaucrat to instantly
>> compile a complete dossier on any American citizen.
>>
>> Today's government schools no longer teach much about the relationship
>> between the European serf and Master.  Nor do they teach much about the
>> tenuous relationship between the Southern share-croppers and land owners.
>> Perhaps there is good reason for this.
>>
>> ===============================================
>>      This is one of a periodic series collectively titled:
>>      "A View from the Foothills of Appalachia"
>>      by Doug Fiedor     e-mail to:  fiedor19@eos.net
>>
>>      7-31-96
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: ACLU Applauds Rep. Barr
Date: 03 Aug 1996 10:47:15 -0500

>ACLU Applauds Rep. Barr For Calling for Pause: Says Liberties Are Endangered

>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, August 1, 1996

>WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today applauded
>Representative Bob Barr and his colleagues for urging that Congress act
>slowly on so-called counter-terrorism measures.

Another one of these LeftRight coalitions, one which is symbolized in the
NRA-ACLU coalition announced a couple of years ago.

>Representative Barr, a Republican of Georgia, held a news conference this
>morning in which he said that the Administration already has the power it
>needs to combat terrorism. "The bottom line, is the tools are there," he
>said in a July 31 memorandum. Barr called for "a commitment by the
>Administration to stop looking for scapegoats and truly commit itself to
>fighting terrorism."

That part sounds OK.

>Although it noted many substantive disagreements with what Representative
>Barr and his colleagues have called for, the ACLU said it was fully behind
>their efforts to try to slow efforts to increase the government's attempt to
>use tragedy as a justification for grabbing more law enforcement powers.

What are these "many substantive disagreements"? Tyranny is tryanny, pure
and simple - and it is too dangerous to start nitpicking about a bunch of
FarLeft "causes" like gay marriage.

>"When the government acts in haste and fear, it inevitably takes steps that
>lead to the loss of liberty for all Americans," said Laura W. Murphy,
>Director of the ACLU's National Washington Office.

Oh Yeah? What about the unConstitutional Brady Law and the unConstitutional
AW Ban? What about the 20,000 unConstitutional "gun control" laws that
restrict you from being to protect yourself effectively?

I would characterize those as "leading to a loss of liberty."

>"The measures proposed by the Clinton Administration were already rejected
>by Congress as too extreme," Murphy said. "There is no reason to change that
>decision now."

What about other measures which are "too extreme" - like anti-RKBA measures
in America?

>Over the last two years, the ACLU - joined by an unusual coalition of left,
>centrist and conservative organizations - has repeatedly criticized the
>Clinton Administration for its attempts to win unnecessary and invasive
>powers for federal law enforcement.

"Coalition of the left"? C'mon, give me a break.

The ACLU is so FarLeft it's a wonder they are not required to register as a
"foreign power".

>"The American people are largely unified behind our call for caution,"
>Murphy said. "There is absolutely no sane reason for this mad rush to pass
>legislation in the next 24 hours," Murphy concluded. "Congress should hear
>the unease of the American public and slow down."

I suppose it all boils down to whose ox is being gored. Someone once pointed
out that the problem with the ACLU is that when they try to count to ten, it
comes out: 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. Too many people from New Yawk.

If we Conservatives could just get the ACLU to drop that stupid position on
RKBA, they might just double their membership overnight, and we would have
an effective court-based advocate.

For those who might want to keep up with the ACLU online, I include their
sig. below:


Bob Knauer

+++++

ONLINE RESOURCES FROM THE ACLU NATIONAL OFFICE
ACLU Freedom Network Web Page:  http://www.aclu.org.  
America Online users should check out our live chats, auditorium events,
*very* active message boards, and complete news on civil liberties, at
keyword ACLU.

ACLU Newsfeed
American Civil Liberties Union National Office
132 West 43rd Street
New York, New York 10036

To subscribe to the ACLU Newsfeed, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with
"subscribe News" in the body of the message.  To terminate your subscription,
send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "unsubscribe News" in the body of
the message.

For general information about the ACLU, write to info@aclu.org.

+++++

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: ACLU Applauds Rep. Barr
Date: 03 Aug 1996 09:28:30 -0700 (PDT)


OTOH.  Last Monday or Tuesday I heard a debate between the NCal head of
the ACLU and some ex-CIA type back east on KQED, the local public station.

All three parties, the KQED moderator, the ACLU useful idiot and the CIA 
fascist ("The Constitution was not meant to be a suicide pact!") accepted 
the proposition that the BOR and safety were a tradeoff, and merely 
argued about how much safety could be garnered for each unConstitutional 
measure.

I gave up any idea of joining the ACLU.

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: balpert@sky.net
Subject: Re: Counter Measures (fwd)
Date: 03 Aug 1996 16:00:28 CST

Address to: Distribution list (see below)

Forwarding note from: Jeff Rudd <jeffr@netpath.net> Sat, 03 Aug 1996 16:08:42 -0400 
   
   
======================================================================= 
                         North Carolina Citizens Militia              
                             I N T E L L I G E N C E             
                                  S E R V I C E 
             
   
   DATE:       August 03, 1996 
   
   TO:         All Stations - WIDE DISTRIBUTION 
                     N.C. Citizens Militia 
                     N.C. Volunteer Militia 
                     National Militia Liasons 
 
   FROM:       Intelligence Office - N.C.C.M. - Piedmont Div. 
 
   SUBJECT:    Defensive Countermeasures - Research Study           
   ------------------------------------------------------ 
   
   We are seeking information on the observation equipment actively 
   in use in the varied helicopters around the Country.  This would 
   include (but is not limited to) FLIR and ambient light equipment. 
   It is our position that this equipment is being intentionally used 
   in a manner which violates privacy rights and, in many cases does 
   violate the law.   
 
   We are seeking DEFENSIVE COUNTER MEASURES against this equipment. 
   It is important the measures be  PURELY DEFENSIVE  and preferably 
   non-destructive. It would seem logical the measures exist, as 
   the technology is widespread and the military would feel it to be 
   necessary to be able to counter it.  We are seeking proven things 
   which DO work.  We aren't planning a specific use, just want the 
   information as part of a research study. 
 
   We can be reached via FAX at (910) 229-9211 - 24 hours a day. 
   
                                          
   
                                     N.C. Citizens Militia 
                                     Piedmont Division Office 
====================================================================== 
 
For Liberty, 
   
Jeff 
   
+===================================================================+ 
| TERRORIST : one who governs by violent methods which arouse fear. | 
| The Winston Dictionary (1960)				            | 
|								    | 
|                NOW WHO ARE THE *REAL* TERRORISTS???		    | 
+===================================================================+ 
   
The Independence Webpage:  http://www.netpath.net/~jeffr/indep.htm 
   
The internet home of:  
	The Carolina Free Press,  
	The North Carolina Citizen Militia,  
	The Spirit of '76 BBS,  
           and links to other related webpages. 




Distribution list: roc@xmission.com
                   Frank Brady <bradyco@sky.net>
                   Judy Thomas <tthomas101@aol.com>
                   Kay Sheil <vieamie@aol.com>
                   Carolyn D. Hart <cdhart@smartnet.net>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: IC A Twist of Lemon
Date: 03 Aug 1996 21:20:43 -0700

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--------------61EE2E185118
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I found an interesting politically oriented Web site. It seems to be 
pretty well balanced, with a conservative/libertarian tinge; the 
following article comes from there.  It looked like fun. 

http://www.intellectualcapital.com/

-- 
Ken Mitchell      |"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as 
8037 Stone Canyon |laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated
Citrus Heights, CA|to the United States, by the Constitution, nor
95610             |prohibited by it to the states, are reserved
kmitchel@gvn.net  |to the states, or to the people (10th amend.).
916-449-9152 (vm) |To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus
916-729-0966 (fax)|specially drawn around the powers of Congress,
Finger for PGP    |is to take possession of a boundless field of
public  key       |power, no longer susceptible of any definition."
                  |   Thomas Jefferson, Writings of Thomas Jefferson,
                  |    Ed. by H. E. Bergh, Vol III, p. 145 
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------

--------------61EE2E185118
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="iclem.html"

<BASE HREF="http://www.intellectualcapital.com/iclem.html">

<HTML><HEAD>
<!-----PUT TITLE HERE------------------------------------------->
<TITLE>IC A Twist of Lemon</TITLE>
</HEAD>

<BODY BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF TEXT=#000000 LINK=#330099 VLINK=#FF0000 ALINK=#000000>

<FONT FACE="ARIAL">

<TABLE CELLPADDING=0 CELLSPACING=0 WIDTH=600>
<!-----Header graphics------------------------------------------->
<TR>
  <TD WIDTH=170 VALIGN=TOP> <IMG ALIGN=LEFT SRC="/library/images/icthk.gif" ALT="Thinker-ROM" WIDTH=164 HEIGHT=147></IMG> </TD>
  <TD WIDTH=430 VALIGN=TOP ALIGN=LEFT> <IMG SRC="/library/images/iclemhd.gif" ALT="A Twist of Lemon"></IMG><BR><BR><center><FONT SIZE=2><B>August 1, 1996</B></center><BR><BR> </TD>
</TR>

<!-----Sidebar Buttons------------------------------------------->
<TR>
<TD WIDTH=170 VALIGN=TOP ALIGN=LEFT>
<BR>
<A HREF="ictoc.html"><IMG SRC="/library/images/ictocbt.gif" ALT="Table of Contents"></IMG></A>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<A HREF="index.html"><IMG SRC="/library/images/iccovbt.gif" ALT="Front Cover"></IMG></A>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<a href="MAILTO:info@intellectualcapital.com"><IMG SRC="/library/images/icfbt.gif" ALT="Feedback"></A>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</TD>
<!-----End Sidebar----------------------------------------------->

<!-----Main Body---------------------------------------------->
<TD WIDTH=430 VALIGN=TOP ALIGN=LEFT>
<BR>
<FONT FACE="ARIAL">
<B>
<!-----BODY - TITLE------------------------------------------->
<FONT COLOR=RED SIZE=4>
Why Americans Should Lie to Pollsters
</FONT>
<!-----BODY - TEXT-------------------------------------------->
<FONT COLOR=BLACK SIZE=3>
<P>
<I>
by Merrill Matthews, Jr. Ph.D
</I>
<p>
Some Americans blatantly lie when they become the object of a political poll.
<P>
You may think that's a problem.  I don't.  Rather, those Americans are serving their country and making it a better place to live.  Indeed, it is our patriotic duty to lie to a pollster when one calls.
<P>
But you ask, won't that make polls unreliable?  Absolutely, and that's the point.  Just consider some of the social benefits that would arise if polls were completely unreliable:
<P>
<font color=red>
The social benefits:
<font color=black>
<P>
It would save everyone an awful lot of time.  Everyone knows that a poll's results are largely based on what and how the questions are asked.  And pollsters construct their questions in hopes of achieving a desired finding.
<P>
Who is surprised when President Clinton's pollsters find that his policies are popular and that Republican's policies are not?  And who is surprised when Republican pollsters find widespread grassroots support for issues in the Contract With America, much less know whether they agree with it?
<P>
Pollsters craft their questions to get an intended result for both ideological and economic reasons:  If the pollster doesn't produce results pleasing to the person paying for the poll, the poll's sponsor will find someone who can.
<P>
Since the real goal is to verify what the sponsor wants verified anyway -- which will be achieved one way or another -- why go to the trouble of asking people?  By abandoning the sham of going through the polling process just to reach the desired finding, everyone would save a lot of time.  Of course, pollsters would have to raise the margin of error a bit, from say 3 to 5 percent to about 95 percent.  But a poll with a 95 percent margin for error is one I would believe.
<P>
It would spur the economy.  Pollsters don't produce anything but polls, and a fair amount of political turmoil.  If people didn't trust the polls and paid no attention to them, sponsors wouldn't pay for polls.  And pollsters would be forced to find productive jobs where they could benefit society.  Of course, if they refuse to become productive, they might decide to become trial lawyers instead.
<P>
<font color=red>
Other benefits
<font color=black>
<P>
People could make it through dinner without having to answer the telephone, especially during election seasons.
<P>
It would transform our politicians into statesmen.  A statesman reasons:  I will tell the people where we must go and hope that they will follow me.  By contrast:  The politician reasons:  I must find out where the people are going so that I may lead them.
<P>
The statesman needs no polls; the politician would not exist without them.  Is it any wonder, then, that President Clinton's campaign has spent record amounts on polling?  Indeed, according to one news articles, "the president even enjoys designing questions himself."
<P>
Were everyone to boldly lie every time a pollster called, no politician would trust any poll's finding.  Lacking such information, they would have to take a stand for what they believed was right.
<P>
Now, I know what you're thinking.  Could lying to pollsters really turn politicians into statesmen?  That would be a miracle.
<P>
True, it would be a miracle.  But nearly 70 percent of Americans believe miracles can still happen.  I saw it in a poll.
<P>
<I>
<font size=-1>
Dr. Merrill Matthews, Jr. is vice president of domestic policy for the <a href="http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/">National Center for Policy Analysis</a>, a non partisan, nonprofit research institute based in Dallas, TX.
</font>
</I>
</TD>
<!-----END BODY---------------------------------------------->
</TR>
</TABLE>

<!-----FOOTER--------------------------------------------------->
<FONT FACE="ARIAL" COLOR=BLACK SIZE=2>
<P>
<BR>
<CENTER>
<B>
[<A HREF="ictoc.html">Table of Contents</A>]
[<A HREF="index.html">Front Cover</A>]
[<A HREF="MAILTO:info@intellectualcapital.com">Feedback</A>]
<P>
IntellectualCapital.com is a service mark of A2S2 Digital Projects, Inc.
<BR>
<I>
<A HREF="MAILTO:info@intellectualcapital.com">email</a> us at info@intellectualcapital.com</I>
</B>
</CENTER>

</BODY>
</HTML>


--------------61EE2E185118--


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: balpert@sky.net
Subject: July, '96 issue of WMSA's The BULLET
Date: 04 Aug 1996 15:00:34 CST

                            The BULLET 
 
The Official Publication of the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance 
 
  Brought to you electronically by Paul Revere Network/Central 
  Permission to reprint material granted, with full attribution 
 
                                                        July, 1996 
                       (816) 597-3950/Data 
              (816) 333-WMSA/FAX/HOTLINE/VOICEMAIL 
 
        ...to protect and preserve the Second Amendment to the 
            Constitution of the United States of America... 
 
                                WMSA 
                         Board of Directors 
 
Officers 
Terry W. Skinner, President 
Paul Wisner, Vice-President 
Kevin Jamison, Secretary 
Brad Alpert, Press Officer & Editor 
 
Board Members 
Gary Davis, Gunshow Coordinator 
Patrick Wyett, Political Coordinator 
Cynthia Wyett, Line Instructor 
Tim Higdon, Business Liaison 
 
Ex-Officio 
Jacques Tucker, Hotline Administrator 
Jim Stout, Webmaster 
Linda Kimsey, Chief Instructor 
                        Table of Contents 
 
                 DOLE........................1,5 
                 From the President..........3,4 
                 Response to CNN...............5 
                 Liberty Notes...............6-7 
                 From the Hart...............8-9 
                 Metaksa in USA Today.........10 
                 1994 Crime Bill??.........11-12 
                 Quote from Gratia Hupp.......12 
                 NRA-ILA FAX ALERT.........13-14 
                 KC Star BYPASS...............15 
                              DOLE 
 
                         by Brad Alpert 
 
The 1996 presidential election was Bob Dole's to lose and he just  
did.  In an instant replay of George Bush's throwing the 1992  
race by going out of his way to antagonize his natural  
constituency - gunowners (along with everyone who believed his  
"no new taxes" pledge) - Dole first broke his 1995 promise to  
bring the AWB repeal to a vote on the floor of the Senate and  
then - unbelievably - answered Clinton's challenge by saying, two  
weeks ago, that as President he would veto such a repeal. 
 
You recall that after George Bush banned the importation of  
military-lookalikes, then-Chairman of the Republican National  
Committee Lee Atwater said "gunowners have nowhere else to go".   
His candidate then proceeded to lose NRA's endorsement and then  
the election by a paltry 5,000,000 votes. 
 
I will admit that I was one of the last holdouts who was prepared  
to "hold his nose and vote for Dole" but, as I wrote on the  
Republican National Committee website (www.rnc.org/guest), I will  
not vote for an avowed enemy of my Second Amendment rights.  In  
his incomprehensible drive to become functionally identical with  
Bill Clinton, Dole has sealed the coffin on his election effort  
and we will have to endure as much more of a Clinton presidency  
as Kenneth Starr decides we do, pending his painstaking and  
inexorable pursuit of felony charges against Bill and Hillary. 
 
The reasoning behind Dole's turnabout can undoubtedly be traced  
to a desire to appeal to the "middle".  This is a very poorly  
thought-out justification for needlessly alienating a mass of  
highly-motivated voters who would otherwise have cast their vote  
in favor of him.  Consider - how many votes did Dole gain by this  
switch, versus how many it will cost him?  That he and his  
campaign can so blithely ignore the hard lessons of recent  
history - the Bush campaign and the '94 Congressional turnover to  
which Bill Clinton himself attributed the gunowner vote - is  
astonishing. 
 
On a state-by-state (and sometimes, even national) basis since  
1991, gunowners have made tremendous leaps forward.  For this we  
owe incalculable gratitude to a revitalized National Rifle  
Association and equally, to gunowners' newfound commitment to  
work hard in the political arena.  Right-to-carry legislation,  
range protection laws, firearms pre-emption, and now a privately  
held (thus, safe from the ravening anti-gunners in Congress)  
Civilian Marksmanship Program and other such bold initiatives are  
sweeping the land.  And comes now the titular head of the  
Republican Party who sees this pro-freedom activism gelling into  
legislation - and he places himself squarely in the ranks of the  
other gun grabbers. 
I will be voting for Libertarian Harry Browne for President this  
year, and I will work to elect pro-gun Democrats and Republicans  
in other races.  If we can elect a veto-proof Congress, it won't  
much matter who the President is, except for the matter of  
judicial appointments.  Hopefully, however, Clinton will be in  
leg irons before too much longer and we won't even have to worry  
about that.. 
 
I really thought that the Republican Party had gotten the message  
with Bush, and then certainly with the '94 elections.  But  
evidently, the national leaders of the party have no clue about  
how serious we gunowners are about our rights.  If we can get a  
pro-gun, veto-proof Congress elected and let Dole go down to  
defeat, why - maybe the third time's the charm. 
 
Meanwhile, Bob Dole? 
 
Bob Dole can kiss my AR-15! 
          (Following are the remarks of WMSA President 
           Terry Skinner at Gunstock '96 on July 13th) 
 
What does the Second Amendment mean? 
 
The WMSA statement of purpose is "to restore the inalienable  
right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second  
Amendment". 
 
Who knows the actual wording of the Second Amendment?  The exact  
wording is one sentence:  "A well-regulated militia, being  
necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the  
people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."  
 
Unfortunately, both anti-gun and pro-gun groups tend to take  
parts of the statement out of context to prove their view about  
guns and gun control. 
 
I find it irritating that the anti-gunners ONLY look at the first  
part of the Second Amendment and the majority of the pro-gunners  
ONLY look at the second part.   
 
The first part is;  "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to  
the security of a free State..."  
 
The anti-gunners would have you believe that the National Guard  
is the well-regulated militia referred to in the Second  
Amendment.  That is wrong!  
 
If I tried to enlist in the National Guard they would probably  
reject me because of my age and bad sight.  So by the anti- 
gunners perspective, I do not have the right to keep and bear  
arms or help defend my state. 
 
Now the second part;  "the right of the people to keep and bear  
arms, shall not be infringed." 
 
The founding fathers wrote this section so that the people had  
the right and the means to defend themselves. 
 
The pro-gunners understand the intention, but often fail to  
explain it. 
 
The challenge is to look at the Second Amendment as one sentence. 
  
To understand the Second Amendment you have to think back to the  
time it was written.  What was going on at the time, what were  
the founding fathers dealing with, what were their concerns that  
led them to write these words? 
 
The founding fathers wrote the Second Amendment so that the  
people had the right and the means to defend themselves, their  
family, their state, and their country against all enemies,  
foreign and domestic. 
 
The people of the first 13 States had just fought a revolutionary  
war with a tyrannical government that was imposing taxation  
without representation.  A government that was in the process of  
taking their powder, shot, and arms. 
 
The leaders did not believe in standing armies during peacetime. 
 
In the writings of Richard Henry Lee from 1788, "A militia, when  
properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, and render  
regular troops unnecessary..." They believed that the people  
should fight and defend their freedom.  
 
You cannot say the Second Amendment is out of date or that the  
founding fathers never would have foreseen what is happening  
today. We continue to see the problems that occur in countries  
where the common people are unable to defend themselves.  They  
are easily dominated by those with arms.  
 
The Second Amendment clearly states this right "shall not be  
infringed".  According to writings of the founding fathers, the  
right to defend oneself was an inalienably right given by God and  
that the people have a responsibility to be well regulated in the  
use of their guns.  The term well regulated is often interpreted  
in today's meaning of regulation.  Instead, the meaning at the  
time of the writing implied being properly trained and practiced  
in the use of their arms. 
 
The Declaration of Independence was signed 220 years ago.  There  
was no need to protect hunting rights, target shooting, or  
sporting uses at that time.   
 
The Second Amendment has one meaning, the right of the people to  
keep and bear arms shall not be infringed and the people are to  
be well trained and practiced in their use to help defend their  
state, their home, and yourself. 
 
Thank you. 
    Response of WMSA's Webmaster to Cable Network News (CNN) 
 
I am the Webmaster for the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance  
located in Kansas City Missouri.  I was recently made aware of  
the fact that the WMSA home page is listed on one of your web  
pages under related links to the Freemen Standoff and am  
personally infuriated! 
 
The Western Missouri Shooters Alliance is a grass roots  
organization whose purpose is to legally lobby state, county, and  
local legislators in support of the Second Amendment.  We also  
act in the community interest by providing firearms safety  
training and by supporting the efforts of local law enforcement.   
At no point in time does WMSA participate in, nor condone  
involvement in, any unlawful activity!  By including us among  
your "Freemen Links", you have implicitly associated us with a  
group of individuals who are being charged with a host of Federal  
crimes including fraud and threatening an elected official with  
murder! 
 
It is with this that I DEMAND the immediate removal of our URL  
(http://www.sky.net/~jimstout/wmsa) from your "Freemen Links"  
page, I expect CNN to issue a formal apology to myself, to the  
WMSA Board of Directors, and to the members of Western Missouri  
Shooters Alliance.  I would also like to know what research was  
conducted which led you to associate us with the Freemen  
Standoff!  Your prompt attention to this issue is both  
appreciated and expected. 
 
Sincerely, 
Jim Stout, Webmaster 
 
Please do me the favor of a response to this email. 
                          Liberty Notes 
 
                        Kevin L. Jamison 
 
It is a good day for Liberty. 
 
Bill Clinton (a DC area president) has initiated a UN project  
funded by Japan and staffed by Canadians called the Wassenaar  
Arrangement.  Involving 27 nations, it is intended to prohibit  
international trade in all firearms except muskets, rifles and  
carbines manufactured before 1938 and reproductions of long guns  
originally manufactured before 1890.  Odd choice of dates.  You  
will notice that pistols are not mentioned.  I doubt that this  
will lead to a treaty, at this time.  A treaty (by the by) is the  
supreme law of the land, and the route by which the feds get  
jurisdiction over matters they could not otherwise regulate.  If  
the Senate changes even slightly, this could give us major  
trouble.  A vote in the senate is all that is needed for a  
treaty. 
 
Penelope Green of the New York Times admits that when they need a  
story on guns, they call gun ban advocates, but not the NRA,  
claiming it is "biased".  These people do not understand what  
bias is, or understand the concept of balanced reporting. 
 
I spoke to Aaron Zelman of JPFO when he was in town to speak.  He  
contrasted his view of NRA's philosophy that the prohibitionists  
will never go away, with his organization's view that they can be  
defeated, not just beaten, but totally defeated, and their  
ideology discarded.  Well, from his mouth to God's ears.  I am  
not sure that we will win in a single generation, and even if we  
do, the prohibitionists will come back in the next.  I have often  
been told that the NRA does not really want to defeat the  
prohibitionists, because the lack of the evil philosophy will, in  
Taoist fashion, obscure NRA's reason to exist.  I believe this  
attitude exaggerates the situation.  I have seen the NRA  
contributing large amounts of money to long range efforts to  
destroy the prohibitionist philosophy.  NRA failures to act may  
simply be a matter of setting priorities.  I have seen the NRA  
limit itself by a "not invented here" attitude. 
 
Old Town Firearms operates off the Square in Independence (107 E.  
Lexington).  They have a small shop and gunsmithing business. 
 
Bill Clinton (a DC area president) now favors a dusk to dawn  
curfew for juveniles.  He may not have noticed that this will  
interfere with his midnight basketball program. 
 
The White House is behind anti-gun ads being played as "public  
service" announcement in movie theaters.  I have not seen one  
locally.  Has anyone? 
 
Senate bill 1219 and H.R. 2566 will prohibit the NRA (and WMSA)  
from informing members of candidate ratings.  Mention your  
opposition to your congressperson. 
 
Bill Clinton (a DC area president) claims to favor teen curfews.   
However, he appointed Judge Diana Motz to the federal bench 12  
months after she, as a state court judge, found Maryland's curfew  
unconstitutional. 
 
John Ross is running for the US Congress in the 2nd Congressional  
District (St. Louis area).  I deeply want him to win.  Congress  
needs an capitalist economist, a creative thinker, an avid  
machine gun shooter, gun rights advocate, and author of  
*Unintended Consequences*.  To have all these qualities in a  
single candidate is simply too good to be true.  He receives  
rabid devotion at 12158-A Natural Bridge Rd Ste. 10, Bridgeton Mo  
63044 (314) 739-4920. 
 
Had a spare moment and read John Ross's *Unintended  
Consequences*.  It seems that Mitchner is not the only author who  
can write stories covering three continents, sixty years, and  
enough characters for a small country.  John spends 600 pages  
setting the scene, which most authors would dispose of in a few  
pages of exposition.  A supporting, but essential, character has  
been out of the country for thirty years, returning to find the  
norms of liberty no longer exist.  Even minor characters are  
fully developed, showing how they fit into the gun culture.  In a  
perfect scene, a Jewish resistor in the Warsaw Ghetto examines  
his newly acquired revolver, teaching himself how it works, and  
how he can kill.  Some may complain that many characters have a  
tendency to pontificate; people in the gun culture talk like that  
(hell, I talk like that).  Some of his characters go on in great  
technical detail on the complicated ways to make a gun shoot  
further, faster, better; people in the gun culture talk like  
that.  This is a book about the gun culture, and what happens  
when the government forgets that it exists to preserve liberty,  
not control it. 
 
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to consider the  
constitutionality of the Brady Law under the 10th amendment.   
This may serve as an indirect approach towards a decision on the  
Second. 
 
Mrs and Mr Exby are setting up a chapter of SWARM in the metro  
area.  SWARM, a Colorado women's group, has lobbied for concealed  
carry.  The Exby's intend to duplicate that in Missouri and  
Kansas.  This is an ambitious proposal. 
 
Ross Benson did a fine job on the 1996 Gunstock.  However, there  
continues to be a need for a means to cut off speakers who insist  
on telling us everything they think they know. 
 
A year ago, Peggy Tartaro wrote in "Women and Guns" that she met  
a woman who insisted guns should be banned to prevent suicides.   
Ms Tartaro pointed out that suicides would continue through other  
means.  "But not guns, though" was the earnest reply.  They don't  
care about facts, they don't care if it will accomplish the  
claimed result.  They only want to ban our guns. 
                          From the Hart 
 
                         Carolyn D. Hart 
 
The use of "gun control" to manipulate specific classes or races  
of people has been amply documented by respected researchers,  
among them Clayton E. Cramer, whose article "The Racist Roots of  
Gun Control" was published in the Winter 1995 issue of Kansas  
Journal of Law and Public Policy.  Cramer writes "Throughout much  
of American history, gun control was openly stated as a method  
for keeping blacks and Hispanics 'in their place,' and to quiet  
the racial fears of whites." 
 
Aaron Zelman, founder and president of Jews for the Preservation  
of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), is convinced that not only is "gun  
control" dangerous to adults of all races and creeds, it is  
especially dangerous to children.  His view is based on the  
meticulous research carried out by his organization.   
 
This research has found that, among other things, children are  
being seriously misled by statistics used in schools.  As an  
example, many children are being taught that "over a thousand  
kids a year die in gun accidents," when the reality is that  
approximately 40 under age five, and 180 under age fifteen,  
actually die in gun accidents.  That is fewer by far, according  
to JPFO, than the number who die while bicycling or swimming, or  
in car accidents. 
 
In order to more effectively present his message to children,  
Zelman has published the first in a series of comic books  
directed primarily at children, although adults will find the  
small book fascinating as well.  Not only does it poke fun at the  
arguments used by the would-be gun banners, it also contains some  
useful statistics to use against them. 
 
The comic book is entitled "'Gun Control' Kills Kids," with  
Gran'pa Jack.  Throughout the book, Gran'pa Jack carries on a  
conversation with his grandchildren.  The children  relate what  
they have been told about guns and "gun control" by their schools  
and what they have gleaned from television on the subject.   
 
Gran'pa Jack refutes the misleading and sometimes blatantly false  
statistics and statements using facts and logic.  Especially  
interesting is the section where he points out why the "shot  
heard 'round the world" was fired. 
 
Everyone knows the story of Paul Revere's famous ride, and his  
cry, "The British are coming, the British are coming."  But no  
one ever thinks to ask why the British were coming, and the  
answer is rarely taught in schools.  But Gran'pa Jack explains  
that the British were in fact coming to take the powder and shot  
away from the colonists, thereby disarming them and making them  
helpless in the face of King George's tyranny. 
   
Gran'pa Jack also tells about the major 20th century genocides,  
and how each of them was preceded by  gun control" laws.  He  
tells how the "gun control" laws in Germany were enacted before  
the Nazis came to power, and were then used to disarm everyone  
but the Nazis.  As history records, once they were disarmed, the  
dissidents and Jews in Germany could be safely marched off to the  
death camps, because they had no way to resist. 
 
Gran'pa Jack also points out the astonishing similarities between  
the German "gun control laws," and the Gun Control Act of 1968,  
which is now part of United States law. 
 
Aaron Zelman feels that it is vital to convey the truth about  
"gun control" to children, because he believes that the young  
people now in school have been so brainwashed that they will not  
question the weapons laws that are being proposed.  His view is  
amply supported by surveys of young people.  The Kansas City  
Star, in its July 7,1996 issue, lists gun control as one of the  
top ten concerns of high school juniors and seniors.  These, as  
Zelman points out, are people who will be voting in a few short  
years. 
 
The Star, in that same issue, printed an article written by Katie  
Brown of Lee's Summit High School.  Ms. Brown wrote, "It's time  
for stricter gun control legislation.  It's time that we learned  
our lesson and followed the example of the rest of the world."   
 
Zelman, however, responds, "Obviously it's time that Ms. Brown  
learned her history lesson.  'Gun control' has made it possible  
for millions of corpses to be piled up all over the world." 
 
The children of this nation are being betrayed by teachers who  
are unable or unwilling to teach that these United States are  
unique in the world by virtue of the individual rights guaranteed  
and affirmed by our Constitution.  We are not like other  
countries, nor do we want to be.   
 
Our children must be taught, using tools like the "Gran'pa Jack"  
comic book, and any others that we have available, that if we do  
not return to the principles upon which this nation was founded,  
we will be little more than slaves in a globalist world.   
 
JPFO's "Gran'pa Jack" comic book is ideal to use as a giveaway to  
children's groups, or to sell as a fundraiser at various  
functions.  A sample copy is $3.00, or 50 copies are $20.00  
postpaid.  They can be ordered from JPFO at 2872 S. Wentworth  
Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53207, (414) 769-0760. 
Following is an editorial by Tanya Metaksa which was printed in  
USA Today on July 1st in response to Congress' taking up the  
issues of continued funding for the NCIPC and the privatizing of  
the DCM program. 
**************** 
 
Guns save lives.  Gun laws don't.  
 
That's the conclusion of decades of social science.  Astute  
researchers tested gun laws and found they  don't reduce gun use  
in crime.  They also found Americans use guns for self-defense  
some 2.5 million times annually. 
 
Who opposes this scientific research?  CDC.  CDC-funded  
"researchers" hide their data from scrutiny by the real  
scientists whose work they alternately vilify or ignore. 
 
Who says?  Five scholars including Columbia and Harvard Medical  
professors who find CDC's work on guns "so biased [with] so many  
errors of fact, logic, and procedure that we cannot regard them  
as ... scholarly or scientific ..." 
 
A Florida State criminologist judges the most quoted CDC study  
"worthless."  A University of Illinois sociologist evaluates CDC  
gun literature as "unscientific ... unprincipled." 
 
Besides slipshod research, CDC churns out blatant political  
advocacy.  CDC's top gun ban advocate told the Washington Post  
their goal was to "revolutionize" society's view of guns until  
they are considered "dirty, deadly _ and banned."  The Post's  
William Raspberry concluded, "This, of course, isn't medicine."   
Raspberry's right.  It's politics. 
 
Regardless of whether it's your brand of politics, you've paid  
for it _ until an amendment by U.S. Rep. Jay Dickey and the  
leadership of U.S. Rep. Bob Livingston restored responsibility by  
ending the scam.  They got things right. 
 
Critics of the Civilian Marksmanship Program should get things  
right, too. 
 
The CMP program teaches safety and responsibility while grooming  
America's youth to be Olympic champions.  In fact, in the last  
Olympic games, 9 out of 10 of our American shooters, who brought  
home one gold medal and one silver, were CMP participants.  The  
CMP is truly an American program, fully supported by America's  
greatest heroes _ the American Legion.  The program is also  
dedicated to America's youth, teaching firearms safety to  
hundreds of thousands every year. 
 
The privatizing of the CMP was designed to continue its good  
deeds but stop taxpayer subsidy.  Now that the CMP plugs the tax  
drain, gun ban advocates want to spend millions more tax dollars  
to destroy historic firearms and halt a program that teaches  
safety and responsibility. 
                      THE 1994 CRIME BILL?? 
 
Note:  This article represents the personal opinion of Ray Beard, 
President of RJ's Guns and More, Inc. 
 
On April 24, 1996 at approximately 4:13 a.m. a burglary occurred  
at my business.  Twenty-three (23) high quality pistols and  
revolvers were stolen in less than two (2) minutes.  The premises  
are protected by a "state of the art" security system which  
worked flawlessly.  Entry was obtained by one person breaking the  
front glass door and crawling over the security bars through a  
space that was approximately 10 inches wide.  The person then  
opened the back door to let a second person inside.  Two glass  
display cases were broken and 23 handguns went out the back door.   
Four of the guns were recovered where they were dropped by the  
two perpetrators  upon exiting the building and making their way  
to the stashed "get-a-way" vehicle.  The two suspects did not 
bother to get state purchase permits or fill out ATF forms for 
the guns.  SO MUCH FOR WAITING PERIODS AND BACKGROUND CHECKS... 
 
Within 48 hours of the time of the burglary, Raytown Police  
Department apprehended two suspects vandalizing vehicles in their  
city.  The vehicle they were apparently driving did not have any  
license plates.  Upon searching the vehicle one of the pistols  
that had been stolen was recovered from the glove compartment  
along with the registration of the vehicle.  The pistol was  
confiscated and the vehicle released to the registered owner  
without further search for evidence. 
 
Both suspects have been identified and warrants issued for their  
arrest on a class "C" felony state charge.  Both the Riverside  
Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms  
have been investigating the case.   
 
I was told by an A.T.F. agent that the Federal Justice System  
would not prosecute because of the ages of the suspects.  One is  
16 years old and is currently on probation from Clay County for  
auto theft and C.C.W..  Both of those charges were filed as state  
felonies and reduced to misdemeanors and he received two years  
suspended imposition of sentence.  He was, however, certified as  
an adult under the new Missouri State Law.  There is only one  
problem with this situation...it seems that Clay County did not  
get this information entered into the computer system.   
 
The other suspect is 17 years old and has a criminal history  
which is mostly juvenile charges.  These records are sealed and  
not available under state law. 
 
After being told by B.A.T.F. that the Federal Government would  
not file charges because of the suspects ages, I contacted Rick  
Marien with the U.S. Attorney's office, Western District, State  
of Missouri.  He informed me that the Federal Government does not  
have facilities to handle juveniles.  He also stated that the  
process toget a juvenile certified as an adult is very lengthy  
and costly and his agency did not wish to pursue this as a  
Federal Crime. 
 
The bottom line is that with two new Federal Laws passed by Mr.  
Clinton and his anti-gun buddies both in and out of Congress, it  
has been proven again that NO type of Gun Legislation will keep  
illegally obtained guns out of the hands of criminals.  Even when  
the criminals are caught and proven guilty of what was supposed  
to be a Federal Law to help protect Federal Licensed Firearms  
Dealers, the Federal Government does not prosecute due to age,  
time, and the cost involved.   
 
It's time for a WAKE UP CALL to our state and federal  
representatives!  The judicial system is BROKEN and new laws that  
WON'T be enforced WILL NOT fix it! 
          [Quoting Dr. Suzanna Gratia, Killeen massacre 
        survivor who watched as her parents were murdered 
        because she obeyed Texas law and left her handgun 
       locked in her car. Appearing before Representative 
           Charles Schumer's committee hearings on the 
                      assault weapons ban.] 
 
"Just one final statement.  I've been sitting here getting more  
and more fed up with all of this talk about these pieces of  
machinery, having no legitimate sporting purpose, no legitimate  
hunting purpose, people, that is not the point of the Second  
Amendment!  The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting, and I  
know I'm not going to make very many friends saying this, but  
it's about our right, all of our right to be able to protect our  
selves from all of you guys up there. And nobody's talked about  
that.  Senator Moynahan, I think this is today's paper, Monday,  
listen to this, a quote from Senator Moynahan, "I think that the  
Untied States, the United Nations has proven it'self a failed  
instrument in Bosnia.  It won't allow the Bosnians to defend  
themselves and it hasn't defened the Bosnians'.  I think that we  
should arm the Bosnians'.  End quote.  I think that Schindlers  
list should be required viewing for everybody in this room. 
 
Thank you." 
    Suzanna continues to need your help for her run for the 
    Texas Statehouse.  Please, send $20.00 or more to: 
                   Elect Suzanna Gratia Hupp 
                           POB 273 
                     Kempner, TX  76539 
                        NRA-ILA FAX ALERT 
           11250 Waples Mill Road * Fairfax, VA  22030 
   Phone: 1-800-392-8683 * Fax: 703-267-3918 * GROOTS@NRA.org 
 Vol. 3, No. 30						7/19/96 
            NATIONAL "RIGHT-TO-CARRY" BILL INTRODUCED 
 
Your fundamental right to defend yourself and your family against  
criminal attack does not end at the state line.  Yet today, many  
states that allow their residents to carry firearms for self- 
defense deny that same right to qualified, law-abiding  
individuals from other states.  That situation would change if  
legislation introduced this week by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.)  
becomes law.  Under Rep. Stearns' bill, H.R. 3838, citizens  
permitted to carry concealed firearms in their home state would  
be allowed to do so in all other states, including those states  
that currently prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms.   
While the federal government would not be issuing any permits,  
H.R. 3838 would establish federal guidelines governing where  
firearms may be carried concealed for states that do not have a  
right to carry statute.  For states that do have such a statute,  
the state laws would apply.  In cases where a particular state  
law explicitly allows citizens to carry in places not authorized  
by the federal guidelines, the state law would take precedence.  
The bill would also exempt qualified current and former law  
enforcement officers from state laws prohibiting the carrying of  
concealed firearms.  Members: Please call your Representatives at  
(202) 224-3121 and urge them to sign-on as co-sponsors to H.R.  
3838! 
 
STAGE SET FOR SENATE CDC SHOWDOWN 
The battle to end tax-payer funded, anti-gun "research" will move  
to the other side of Capitol Hill next week when the Senate takes  
up the issue of funding for the Centers for Disease Control's  
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC).  As  
you know, gun owners won a big victory last week when the House  
voted to re-direct $2.6 million designated for NCIPC's biased  
anti-gun "research," but you can expect the gun-grabbers to pull  
out all the stops to have that money restored in the Senate.   
Members: Please call your Senators at (202) 224-3121 and urge  
them to oppose any attempt to restore funding for anti-gun  
"research."  Also, please call Labor, Health & Human Services  
Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) at (202) 224- 
4254 and urge him to do the same!  
 
DOLE STATEMENTS ENDANGER NRA ENDORSEMENT 
 With good reason, many NRA members continued to express concern  
this week about recent statements made by presumptive Republican  
Presidential nominee Bob Dole on repealing the Clinton gun ban.   
You'll recall that in 1995, Mr. Dole declared that repeal of the  
Clinton gun ban would be one his top legislative priorities, yet  
his recent remarks indicate that his position has shifted, and he  
no longer supports repeal of the ban he himself has called  
ineffective and "not very sound policy."  The decision of whether  
we make an endorsement in this race will not be made until  
September, when NRA's Board of Directors will meet to take up the  
issue.  Regardless of our involvement in the presidential race,  
NRA's top priority will continue to be electing a Second  
Amendment majority Congress, and we encourage you to actively  
support pro-gun candidates in your area.  For information on how  
you can help elect lawmakers who will support your rights, please  
call 1-800-VOTE-NRA.  To express your concerns about Dole's  
wavering, call his campaign at (202) 414-6400 and the Republican  
National Committee at (202) 863-8500.  
 
PRO-GUN CANDIDATES UNDER ATTACK 
Right now, less than four months away from the November 5th  
election, television and radio advertisements are running in many  
congressional districts attacking pro-gun candidates on a whole  
host of issues.  If you see any of these ads attacking your pro- 
gun candidate, call NRA-ILA at 1-800-392-8683 and let us know  
when and where the ad appeared.  Also, do not hesitate to contact  
the television or radio station and set the record straight!  
 
EDDIE EAGLE EARNS RECOGNITION 
NRA's Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Program was once again singled out  
for recognition when the National Safety Council (NSC) announced  
the program was the winner of an Award of Merit.  The program was  
selected by NSC for its outstanding contribution in promoting  
safety and health, saving lives, lessening injury and reducing  
economic loss.  
 
HIT THE ROAD WITH NRA'S INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION BROCHURE 
With summer upon us, many NRA members are taking to America's  
highways _ but before you travel anywhere with your guns, get the  
facts about the laws governing the interstate transportation of  
firearms.  To receive your FREE copy of our Interstate  
Transportation of Firearms brochure, call NRA-ILA Grassroots at  
1-800-392-8683. 
 
=+=+=+=+ 
 
This information is provided as a service of the National Rifle  
Association Institute for Legislative Action, Fairfax, VA. 
 
This and other information on the Second Amendment and the NRA is  
available at: http://WWW.NRA.Org 
                         KC STAR BYPASS! 
 
Letters 
The  Kansas City Star 
1729 Grand Blvd. 
Kansas City, MO  64108 
 
I am responding to a letter written by a Mr. Hirni that appeared  
in the July 4th issue. 
 
I would say this:  Study the Constitution with an open mind.   
More importantly, study the writings of the "Founding Fathers"  
with an open mind, particularly when they discuss the inclusion  
of the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights.  It becomes clear  
that it was intended to be an individual right of the citizenry,  
not a right that the government gave itself.  The writers  
understood only too well that all governments seek to increase  
their own power at the expense of the citizenry; without the  
Second Amendment the others are only so much writing.  The Second  
Amendment safeguards the others. 
 
It is also true that the Founding Fathers did not foresee such  
things as drive-by shootings, the incredible rise in violence  
among juveniles, and so on.  However, I submit that the  
availability of firearms has little to do with it.  Firearms have  
always been here; what has changed is the breakdown of the family  
and a court system that no longer works.  If availability of guns  
were the cause, then Switzerland, with almost universal gun  
ownership, would have the highest rate of violent crime rather  
than virtually the lowest! 
 
Someone once said that those who would trade their freedoms for  
increased security deserve, and will have, neither. 
 
Very truly yours, 
 
John Harris 
Kansas City, MO 
    Don't forget to mail us a copy of any letters you send to  
         the Star - we'll print it, even if they won't! 
    (and if you can, submit it on diskette in ASCII format or 
         upload it to the Paul Revere Network.  Thanks!) 
 
Address business correspondence to:       WMSA 
                                          POB 11144 
                                          Kansas City, MO  64119 
Direct editorial correspondence to:       Brad Alpert, Editor BULLET 
                                          1553 SW 25 
                                          Kingsville, MO  64061 
                                          Email: balpert@sky.net 
 
Direct Defense Course inquiries to editorial address. 
 
      All material contained herein is copyright WMSA and may be  
    reprinted unless otherwise specified, with attribution to this  
     publication, author, and date of issue.  Unsigned material is  
                  written by the Editor, Brad Alpert 




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: When Photo ID Isn't Enough (fwd)
Date: 05 Aug 1996 06:05:12 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

>From Travel Weekly, August 1, 1996:

                   When Photo ID Isn't Enough

                         by Fran Durbin

     Washington -- Maryland agent Ellen Sisser said American
Airlines "may have overstepped the bounds" when it refused to
board one of her clients, a student who presented a photo ID from
the University of Maryland for a domestic flight.
     But an American spokesman said exceptions to the
identification rule could not be made at a time when security is
of paramount concern.
     The Federal Aviation Administration said an ID card must be
issued by federal, state or local government and that although
the University of Maryland is a state entity, it is not part of
the state government.
     Sisser, manager of Travel Network of Rockville, Md., said
the student is the 24-year-old daughter in a family of four who
were booked by the agency for a one-week vacation in Las Vegas.
     All four family members have the same last name.
     Checking in at American's ticket counter at Baltimore-
Washington airport on July 27, the father, mother and brother
each presented a driver's license, Sisser said.
     The daughter did not have a driver's license but presented
her photo ID from the state university, "so it was, in effect, a
state-issued ID," Sisser said.
     Nevertheless, the American ticket agent refused to accept
the ID or let the daughter board.
     Because the rest of the family did not want to go without
her, they canceled their vacation.
     They were booked at the Luxor hotel in Las Vegas under a 48-
hour cancellation policy, but the hotel "was nice enough not to
charge a penalty" when the circumstances were explained, Sisser
said.
     American would not refund the tickets but agreed to reissue
them at a later date without penalty.
     However, it was not clear if or when the clients could
rebook the trip because they already had a hard time coordinating
their schedules.
     The father of the family "is a real nice, quiet gentleman,"
Sisser said.
     When he called to explain why the trip was canceled, "he was
worried that I might lose my commission," she said.


Posted by Adam Starchild
     Asset Protection & Becoming Judgement Proof at 
          http://www.catalog.com/corner/taxhaven
Subscribe info: email majordomo@pobox.com with the message:
subscribe ignition-point
Ready to DO something?  http://ic.net/~celano/ip/


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Liberty or Death <ghostpwr@europa.com>
Subject: The Latest on OZ
Date: 05 Aug 1996 18:52:29 -0700

Here's the latest about the small Idaho company that has developed an 
environmentally-friendly direct replacement for FREON that the EPA refuses to 
recognize - because they're in bed with Dupont.

If your car needs a refrigerant re-charge, using the new Dupont chemical will 
first cost you approximately $250.00 to re-fit your car for the new chemical, 
while the OZ replacement is a direct drop-in replacement for FREON.


* Injunction Against EPA Filed In Federal Court *

* Judge to hear OZ Technology motion demanding EPA abide by own rules and out 
of court "understanding."

RATHDRUM, ID--Refrigerant manufacturer OZ Technology of Rathdrum, Idaho, filed 
an injunction in Idaho district court July 18, 1996, against the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for ignoring the letter, color and 
intent of their own rules and federal law. OZ claims the EPA has persisted to 
a pattern and practice of disseminating false and misleading information about 
its second generation refrigerant replacement HC 12a.

Clourofluorcarbon (CFC) refrigerants such as the DuPont trademark product 
FREON were banned in the U.S. as of January 1, 1996, as per the Montreal 
Protocol of 1987, to save the ozone layer from CFC bombardment.

According Section 612(d) of the Federal Clean Air Act, the EPA has 
jurisdiction to identify unacceptable and acceptable "first generation" 
replacements to CFC refrigerants. Pursuant to the EPA's own Significantly New 
Alternatives Policy (SNAP), HC 12a qualifies as a "second generation" 
replacement. EPA SNAP rules specify that so long as a "second generation" 
replacement meets established criteria for the prevention of greenhouse gases 
and ozone depletion, which HC 12a definitely does according to both in shop 
and independent analysis, it can  legally and lawfully be used to replace EPA 
"approved" "first generation" refrigeration substitutes.

* EPA openly violates out of court "understanding"

The filed motion for injunction exhibits several transcribed conversations 
between EPA officials and OZ Technology and affidavits from OZ Technology 
distributors which document EPA policy to inform the public that HC 12a is 
banned and illegal. OZ Technology maintains that not only is EPA on going 
policy to spread false and misleading information to the public about the 
legal status of HC 12a a violation of federal law and EPA's own SNAP rules, 
the EPA is in direct violation of a "Memorandum of Understanding" between OZ 
and the EPA.

OZ filed suit against the EPA in U.S. District Court July 13, 1995, and 
supplied documentation to prove that the EPA was giving false and misleading 
information. By February, 1996, the EPA admitted-- in court--that HC 12a was 
in compliance with federal law and EPA SNAP rules.  The motion was dismissed 
and, through a "Memorandum of Understanding," the EPA agreed to, "Take certain 
actions to correct and remedy certain misstatements of law and fact..."  

U.S. Magistrate Larry Boyle dismissed the OZ Technology suit against the EPA 
without prejudice which left OZ Technology with a legal option to reopen the 
suit if the EPA failed to uphold its end of the Memorandum of Understanding. 
Since the EPA has continued to communicate false and misleading information to 
the public and the refrigeration industry and; since the EPA is continuing in 
its unabated and self-disclosed mission to run OZ Technology out of business, 
OZ Technology chose to file an injunction to permanently end EPA persecution 
of the company and its product.

HC-12a is an organic, inexpensive, readily available hydrocarbon compound that 
is 20 percent to 40 percent more energy efficient than FREON and can be 
"dropped in" to replace CFC refrigerants without retrofitting or redesigning 
the refrigeration system. HC-12a has 4 million to 5 million user years in U.S. 
automobiles for air conditioners without one incident and millions of user 
years in commercial refrigeration units with the same perfect track record. 
HC-12a is also marketed in several foreign countries with no reported 
incidents or injuries related to the refrigerant. 

The EPA continues to defend its actions against OZ Technology by insisting 
that HC-12a poses safety risks to the public. Unfortunately for the EPA HC-12a 
user years are accumulating without any evidence that the refrigerant poses 
any health or safety risk whatsoever. 

On the other hand, the DuPont product, HFC-134a, is inorganic, expensive to 
manufacture and 10 percent of its production volume is toxic waste. HFC-134a 
is not compatible with existing compressor oils and seals and therefore 
customers must pay for the unnecessary and expensive redesign and/or retrofit 
of their refrigeration systems to accommodate the DuPont product.

The EPA has all the evidence to prove that hydrocarbon refrigerants such as 
HC-12a are the most efficient, cost-effective and environmentally sound 
alternatives to banned CFC refrigerants. Greenpeace is even in favor of the 
world-wide adoption of hydrocarbon refrigerants to replace CFCs and produces 
its own hydrocarbon refrigerant "Greenfreeze." 

The EPA also has access to evidence which is beginning to surface that 
HFC-134a is a serious health risk to the unsuspecting public.

In a letter to EPA Attorney Jan Tierney, OZ Technology President Gary Lindgren 
closed by telling Teirney that, "It seems ironic that the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency refuses to comply with the law of the land, to 
the continued detriment of the environment."




- Monte

                         >>> Don't Tread On Me! <<<                       
                                * Psalm 33 *                              
  "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
 greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace.
 We seek not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand
 that feeds you.  May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity
 forget that ye were our countrymen.              - Samuel Adams
O-         


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com (Steve Allen Silver)
Subject: 2nd Amendment to Supremes?
Date: 05 Aug 1996 22:26:41 -0700

I previously posted this message. However, I am reposting it because we 
we need to line up amicus briefs (at the Petition for Writ of Cert 
level).  If you know of an organization which would like to submit a 
brief, or sign on to one, please call us at (818) 734-3066.  Briefs are 
due on Monday, August 19!!!


Hickman v. Block: A Second Amendment Case Goes to the Supreme Court (Or 
Does It)
	May You Defend Yourself?
	Although the answer to this question seems obvious, some 
self-proclaimed "experts" claim you do not have this right. They 
suggest the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution only 
guarantees a state's right to maintain a militia.
	What's more, these same "experts" suggest the Second Amendment 
does not prohibit gun control, not even total confiscation. 
	Scholars Agree: A Personal Right -- Of the 45 law review articles 

analyzing the Second Amendment since 1980, 40 concluded it guarantees a 

personal right. Four of the others were written by "researchers" paid 
by anti-gun groups, and one was by a politician!
	Indeed, all evidence from the Constitutional Convention shows the 

Founding Fathers intended the Second Amendment to be a personal right. 
Just ask the British: on April 19, 1775, they marched to Concord to 
confiscate the Americans' firearms, and touched off the Revolutionary 
War.
	The Ninth Circuit Weighs In -- The U.S. Supreme Court has never 
addressed the question of whether the Amendment protects an individual 
right. However, on April 5, 1996, the ultra-liberal Ninth Circuit held 
in Hickman v. Block that the Second Amendment did not guarantee your 
right to own a firearm. Rather, the Ninth Circuit held the Amendment 
only guarantees a "state's right" to maintain a militia.
	That's when The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society (LSAS) went 
into action. On July 5, 1996, the LSAS filed a Petition for Writ of 
Certiorari (a request for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal of 
the Ninth Circuit's decision) on behalf of the plaintiff, Ray Hickman.
	It is anybody's guess what the Court will do. However, if the 
Court agrees to hear Hickman, we intend to win.
	$5 for Freedom -- To be successful, we need your help. We are 
asking every gun owner to contribute at least $5 to the cause. With a 
well-funded war chest, we will hire the best legal minds in the country 
to write the brief and argue the case. Is your freedom worth $5?
	Surplus funds will be used to underwrite other worthwhile 
pro-firearms litigation. Everyone is invited to join the LSAS; dues are 

$35 for lawyers, $25 for all others, and include a subscription to our 
acclaimed newsletter, "The Liberty Pole."

Thank you for your support.

Dan Schultz, President
Steve Silver, Vice President
The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society
18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329, Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066
web site: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_pole.html
(The LSAS is a non-profit 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organization; Donations 
are *not* tax-deductible.)
	





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Liberty or Death <ghostpwr@europa.com>
Subject: (fwd) Davidian Convictions Upheld by Corrupt Court 
Date: 06 Aug 1996 06:34:56 -0700

From Carol Moore - get her book, if you haven't already...
----------------

>DAVIDIAN CONVICTIONS UPHELD BY CORRUPT COURT
>From: Carol Moore, member, Committee for Waco Justice
>
>Well, the evidence is in--the U.S. government
>is free to attack and murder citizens at will
>and if the citizens defend themselves against
>illegal attack, they can be imprisoned for
>life....
>
>August 5, 1996 the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
>in New Orleans ruled that using "more than 70
>well-armed agents" to arrest David Koresh was
>not excessive force and "A citizen may not
>initiate a fire-fight solely on the ground
>that police sent too many well-armed officers
>to arrest him.  We reject this invitation for
>individuals to forcibly resist arrest and
>then put their arresters on trial for the
>reasonableness of their tactical decisions."
>Judge Higgenbotham (Reagan appointee supposedly
>good on the gun issue) rejected their claim
>that they were only defending themselves.
>Judge William Schwartzer (a San Francisco
>liberal) said the six convictions should be
>set aside, saying the force used was excessive.
>
>Well, it is now time to get serious about
>a Branch Davidian defense fund because the
>next round of appeals will be to the
>Supreme Court where all the evidence not
>brought to trial--that BATF lied to get
>militiary helped, shot first, shot from
>helicopters, etc.--can be introduced to
>prove excessive force and the necessity
>for self-defense.
>
>WE CANNOT ALLOW THESE INNOCENT MEN AND
>WOMEN TO SERVE OUT THEIR 240 YEAR SENTENCES!
>
>I will keep you all informed of the attorneys
>and other progress in starting a defense
>fund.
>
>If  you have not yet bought my book
>THE DAVIDIAN MASSACRE, please do so now
>and get the facts.  New price: $9.00
>book rate; $13.00 first class. Autographed.
>Box 65518 Washington DC 20035 202/635-3739
>
>
>Carol Moore in D.C.  
>cmoore@capaccess.org  or cmoore@upx.net


- Monte

                         >>> Don't Tread On Me! <<<                       
                                * Psalm 33 *                              
  "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
 greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace.
 We seek not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand
 that feeds you.  May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity
 forget that ye were our countrymen.              - Samuel Adams
O-         


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: ForeignCorrespondent DON'T PANIC (fwd)
Date: 06 Aug 1996 15:49:47 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

			Foreign Correspondent

		      Inside Track On World News
	    By International Syndicated Columnist & Broadcaster
		 Eric Margolis <emargolis@lglobal.com>

	                  ,,ggddY"""Ybbgg,,
	             ,agd888b,_ "Y8, ___`""Ybga,
	          ,gdP""88888888baa,.""8b    "888g,
	        ,dP"     ]888888888P'  "Y     `888Yb,
	      ,dP"      ,88888888P"  db,       "8P""Yb,
	     ,8"       ,888888888b, d8888a           "8,
	    ,8'        d88888888888,88P"' a,          `8,
	   ,8'         88888888888888PP"  ""           `8,
	   d'          I88888888888P"                   `b
	   8           `8"88P""Y8P'                      8
	   8            Y 8[  _ "                        8
	   8              "Y8d8b  "Y a                   8
	   8                 `""8d,   __                 8
	   Y,                    `"8bd888b,             ,P
	   `8,                     ,d8888888baaa       ,8'
	    `8,                    888888888888'      ,8'
	     `8a                   "8888888888I      a8'
	      `Yba                  `Y8888888P'    adP'
	        "Yba                 `888888P'   adY"
	          `"Yba,             d8888P" ,adP"'
	             `"Y8baa,      ,d888P,ad8P"'
	                  ``""YYba8888P""''


DON'T PANIC 
By
Eric Margolis 1 August 1996

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. - America is overcome this week by an
orgy of self-pity and hysteria over the bombing in Atlanta.

By international standards, the pipe-bombing at Atlanta's
Olympics, the world's biggest TV commercial, was a minor,
albeit, ugly incident.  The media and publicity-seeking
politicians managed to blow it out of all proportion.

The Atlanta incident almost eclipsed the sabotage of TWA
Flight 800, an event of the utmost gravity.  Soon after the
TWA downing, President Clinton hurriedly imposed new
security restrictions on air travel, which I uncomfortably
encountered here in the US this week.

Airports have become Bedlams of confusion and delays. 
Checking photo ID, and asking travellers questions, won't
stop attacks, such as on TWA 800.  All checked-in baggage
must be x-rayed, and even personally identified by
passengers during boarding.  Many airport security
personnel, who earn minimum wage and often find chewing gum
to be mentally challenging, must be replaced by skilled
professionals, who know how to read x-ray scanners, and
search passengers.

Meanwhile, in a political knee-jerk response to the frenzy
over terrorism, the President and Congress are calling for
tougher security laws.  Among them, markers mixed into
explosives, and allowing the FBI to wiretap at random. 
Coming soon after recent anti-terrorism legislation enacted
by Congress that sharply curbs defendants rights in cases of
suspected terrorism, some of these new proposals are more
worrying than the acts of terrorism, or simple madness,
committed against Americans.

Police powers were enormously expanded during the war on
drugs.  The war has been lost, but enhanced police powers
remain, with a consequent diminution of individual rights. 
Now, the amorphous threat of terrorism is being used by the
Federal Government to further encroach on citizen's freedom
- though these are in evidence that such increased police
powers curtail terrorism.

Putting markers in explosives makes good sense.  Wiretaps
and abridgement of citizen's legal rights do not.  We have
just seen a Clinton-appointed yes-man FBI director hand over
1,000 confidential files on US citizens to White House
political hit-men.  This is an intolerable outrage- and
likely a crime.

FBI Director Louis Freeh should resign, or be fired.  The
once superb FBI has become deeply politicized.  J. Edgar
Hoover would never have allowed this.

After Ruby Ridge, Waco and Filegate, I don't want to see the
FBI increasingly sticking its nose into citizen's business. 
The more federal intrusion by the FBI and the ATF (where did
this new army of fed's come from?), the more nut-case
militias will fight back.  Local police work, not ham-handed
intrusion from Washington, is a better way.

It's dangerous to formulate national security policy under
conditions of hysteria and election-year politics.  More
important than protecting the commercial circus in Atlanta,
or even airliners, is the need to protect the Constitution
and citizen's rights from abridgement.

Every time there is a crisis, real or imagined, those
Americans who yearn for more powerful central government, or
those who long to impose their moral views on others -
demand curtailment of rights.  This week, it's FBI wiretaps
without court orders, joining NSA monitoring of all
international calls and fax's;  and demands that 'terrorist'
information be banned from the Internet.

Authoritarians and the self-serving have long sought to deny
what they call 'hate' groups - who are often heretics
challenging the intellectual status quo - the right of free
speech in the press and Internet.  Shielding children from
sex is a favorite excuse for curbing citizen's rights in
print, film and on the Internet.

Anti-smoking fanatics;  the Lesbian Left which demands
special star courts in Canada to prosecute men;  self-
appointed 'anti-racism' loudmouths:  All claim assorted
'crises' to justify limiting the rights of citizens, and
making big government even bigger.

copyright Eric Margolis 1996
	To receive Foreign Correspondent via email send a note
	to Majordomo@lglobal.com with the message in the body:
		subscribe foreignc
	To get off the list, send to the same address but write:
		unsubscribe foreignc
	Back Issues can be obtained from:
		ftp.lglobal.com/pub/foreignc
	For Syndication Information please contact:
	   Email: emargolis@lglobal.com
	   FAX: (416) 960-4803
	   Smail:
		Eric Margolis
		c/o Editorial Department
		The Toronto Sun
		333 King St. East
		Toronto Ontario Canada
		M5A 3X5


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Falter <falter@PACIFIER.COM>
Subject: [Re: [FWIW] "Fool you once"...
Date: 06 Aug 1996 19:20:49 -0700 (PDT)



---
pacifier.com - Vancouver's Public access Internet (206) 693-0325
telnet or dial the above and type "new" at the prompt to register


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: UN should be able to impose taxes (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 05:58:52 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------


  From an article in The WASHINGTON TIMES newspaper:

HEADLINE: "U.N. considers imposing taxes"
SUBHEAD: "Some see attempt to gain sovereignty"

"NEW YORK -- Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali yesterday urged
the United Nations to consider imposing its own taxes to become less
dependent on the United States and other countries.
  "Mr. Boutros-Ghali was quoted in a London interview that the world
organization could, for example, raise billions in revenue by adding a
$1.50 surcharge to airline tickets or charging a small fee for
foreign-currency exchange . . .
  "It is not clear how the United Nations, which currentlyhas no
authority to impose or collect taxes, might acquire the power to do so
 . .
  "'We are of course opposed to any attempt by the United Nations to
impose taxation,' said Barbara Conry, a foreign policy analyst at the
Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington.
 "If it had that power, then it would be a true world government."

  [Regretfully, I don't have the date of the issue of The WASHINGTON
TIMES that the above excerpt appeared in. I received a copy of the
entire TIMES article, as well as copies of other, related articles,
from a mailing by The Christian Action Network, P.O. Box 606, Forest,
VA 24551-0606, which publishes THIS NATION, a publication with which
I'm unfamiliar.]

"A tiny chip implanted inside
the human body to send and
receive radio messages, long a
popular delusion among
paranoids, is likely to be
marketed as a consumer item
early in the next century."

CHICAGO TRIBUNE
May 7, 1996

To subscribe for FREE to Prophe-Zine, write to ray673@best.com

http://www.best.com/~ray673/pzhome.html

God never closes a door, without opening a window.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: WA Illegal Searches? (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 06:20:24 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted: Michael Novick <mnovickttt@igc.apc.org>


Suit Alleges Prince Georges County Police Abuses In Probe of Officer's 
Slaying 

By Todd Shields Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 25 1996; Page B01 The Washington Post


Relatives and acquaintances of Jeffrey C. Gilbert's have filed a
lawsuit alleging that Prince George's County police conducted at
least three searches without warrants and improperly held at least
five people overnight for questioning as they searched for the
killer of a fellow officer last year.

The lawsuit says handgun-brandishing police twice invaded a home
rented by Gilbert's aunt seeking information about the slaying.  In
between raids, the suit says, officers stopped the house's occupants in 
the streets and took them to interrogation rooms, where they were 
handcuffed to walls and held overnight without food, water or a chance to 
use the bathroom.  The suit, alleging that police violated constitutional 
protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, was filed in late 
April in Prince George's County Circuit Court.  At the request of county
attorneys, who said it involved complex federal issues, the case
was moved Monday to U.S. District Court in Greenbelt.

Gilbert, of Lanham, was arrested and charged with murder on April
28, 1995, two days after Cpl. John J. Novabilski was fatally shot
at a Kentland liquor store where he was working off duty.  Gilbert
was released 39 days later, after law enforcement officers discovered 
that another man, who committed suicide after a shootout with law 
enforcement officers, had Novabilski's service revolver and the gun used 
to kill the officer.

Gilbert, who said he was severely beaten during his arrest, has
filed a $10 million lawsuit alleging that his constitutional rights
were violated by police.  Meanwhile, a federal grand jury is looking
into whether the arresting officers beat Gilbert.

The new lawsuit, filed by lawyer Kenneth E. McPherson on behalf of
nine people, accuses police officials and unknown officers of
wrongful arrests and other abuses.  It seeks more than $20 million
in damages.  "These people were ripped from their ordinary lives and
thrust into something they had no part of, and it was a scary two
days for them, " McPherson said.  The lawsuit contends that the
officers' acts could have occurred only in a police force that
tolerated the use of excessive force.

County officials would not comment yesterday on the the suit.  Jay
Creech, an associate county attorney, called the allegations
"vague.  The lawsuit centers on searches conducted at the home of
Gilbert's aunt, Eloise Jones, in the 7200 block of East Forest Road
in Landover.  According to the lawsuit, police appeared at the Jones
residence about 30 minutes after Novabilski was slain several
blocks away.

The suit gives the following account of what happened next:  Two men
who lived in the house were standing outside when "approximately
six" Prince George's police cars pulled up.  The two men were forced
to kneel on the lawn with their hands above their heads.  Police
burst into the house and pointed loaded handguns at the people
there, including one man who was taking a bath.  Police ordered that
man and two other men from within the house to the front lawn,
where they also were forced to kneel with their hands in the air. 

A woman in the house was rousted from her bed at gunpoint and
forced to sit on a couch, wearing only the T-shirt and underwear
in which she had intended to sleep.  Jones, the aunt, was ordered
back inside at gunpoint when she went to the front porch to find
out what was happening.

The next day, April 27, three male residents of the house were
stopped while driving or riding in cars, taken to police
interrogation rooms and told they would be released only if they
provided statements about Novabilski and "Curtis Gilbert," the suit
says.  Gilbert's middle name is Curtis.  The suit says the men were
held until the following morning.

Another woman was held overnight after being taken into custody
while driving in the area, according to the suit.  Another man was
taken into custody April 28 while walking near the house and also
was held overnight, the suit says.  Police entered the Jones
residence again about 4:30 a.m. April 28, little more than two
hours after Gilbert's arrest, the lawsuit says.  It says four people
in the house, including Jones, were taken to a police station and
asked for statements about Gilbert.  They were released later that
morning, the suit said.  Also about 4:30 a.m. April 28, Prince
George's police forced their way into a woman's home on Butler
Street in Southeast Washington and ransacked the residence, the
lawsuit says.

Police who took part in some of the actions had tape over their
name tags, McPherson said. 


Copyright 1996 The Washington Post Company


Posted in pol-abuse@igc.apc.org
To subscribe, send this message: subscribe pol-abuse
To this address: majordomo@igc.apc.org


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: At last Lawyers for gun owners(fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 10:32:11 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

Topic No. 3

Message-ID: <199608060526.WAA12378@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com>

I previously posted this message. However, I am reposting it because we 
we need to line up amicus briefs (at the Petition for Writ of Cert 
level).  If you know of an organization which would like to submit a 
brief, or sign on to one, please call us at (818) 734-3066.  Briefs are 
due on Monday, August 19!!!


Hickman v. Block: A Second Amendment Case Goes to the Supreme Court (Or 
Does It)
	May You Defend Yourself?
	Although the answer to this question seems obvious, some 
self-proclaimed "experts" claim you do not have this right. They 
suggest the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution only 
guarantees a state's right to maintain a militia.
	What's more, these same "experts" suggest the Second Amendment 
does not prohibit gun control, not even total confiscation. 
	Scholars Agree: A Personal Right -- Of the 45 law review articles 

analyzing the Second Amendment since 1980, 40 concluded it guarantees a 

personal right. Four of the others were written by "researchers" paid 
by anti-gun groups, and one was by a politician!
	Indeed, all evidence from the Constitutional Convention shows the 

Founding Fathers intended the Second Amendment to be a personal right. 
Just ask the British: on April 19, 1775, they marched to Concord to 
confiscate the Americans' firearms, and touched off the Revolutionary 
War.
	The Ninth Circuit Weighs In -- The U.S. Supreme Court has never 
addressed the question of whether the Amendment protects an individual 
right. However, on April 5, 1996, the ultra-liberal Ninth Circuit held 
in Hickman v. Block that the Second Amendment did not guarantee your 
right to own a firearm. Rather, the Ninth Circuit held the Amendment 
only guarantees a "state's right" to maintain a militia.
	That's when The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society (LSAS) went 
into action. On July 5, 1996, the LSAS filed a Petition for Writ of 
Certiorari (a request for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal of 
the Ninth Circuit's decision) on behalf of the plaintiff, Ray Hickman.
	It is anybody's guess what the Court will do. However, if the 
Court agrees to hear Hickman, we intend to win.
	$5 for Freedom -- To be successful, we need your help. We are 
asking every gun owner to contribute at least $5 to the cause. With a 
well-funded war chest, we will hire the best legal minds in the country 
to write the brief and argue the case. Is your freedom worth $5?
	Surplus funds will be used to underwrite other worthwhile 
pro-firearms litigation. Everyone is invited to join the LSAS; dues are 

$35 for lawyers, $25 for all others, and include a subscription to our 
acclaimed newsletter, "The Liberty Pole."

Thank you for your support.

Dan Schultz, President
Steve Silver, Vice President
The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society
18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329, Encino, CA 91316 (818) 734-3066
web site: http://www.mcs.net/~lpyleprn/law_pole.html
(The LSAS is a non-profit 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organization; Donations 
are *not* tax-deductible.)
	







-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Donald Silberger <SILBERGD%SNYNEWVM.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject:      Taggents as mentioned in Eric Margolis' article
Date: 07 Aug 1996 12:37:57 EDT


======================================================================== 38

I read with pleasure your article, forwarded to the pro-gun-rights list
<roc@xmission.com>, analyzing the United States government's increasing
assault on individual and constitutional rights as an aftermath of the
bombing of the Atlanta Olympics and the tragedy involving Flight 100.

I disagree with you only in your off-the-cuff claim that putting taggents
into commercially available explosive materials is a good idea.  Those
taggents would be added to black powder, which is an impractically
expensive tool for terrorists when much cheaper and unregulable materials
are available to them in its place, but which is used by black-powder
antique firearms enthusiasts.  Such taggents in black gunpowder might
create real hazards for the law-abiding sportspeople who use those gun
powders for legitimate shooting.  The taggents would, as I understand it,
also be added to "smokeless" powder of the sort employed for reloading
ammunition used in conventional modern firearms.  Smokeless powder is in
fact not a true explosive, but is a precision fast-burning material which
has been calibrated and studied for decades by custom-reloading aficionados
for target shooting and "action" shooting.  The adding of such taggents
to smokeless powder would destroy that long-developed science, and would
produce instead an product exhibiting such unpredictable variety in its
performance as to destroy reloading as a reasonable activity, and indeed
to endanger the shooters themselves who resort to it.

I hope that you will look into the matter of taggents more closely before
you recommend it again, and that you might even consider publishing a
retraction on that small part of your otherwise excellent essay.

Thank you for your attention.

Donald Silberger, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor of Mathematics
The State University of New York
<silbergd@npvm.newpaltz.edu>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: new video (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 12:34:21 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by Fred Stevens <stevens@iglobal.net>
To all:

I don't normally like to post to the list, but I just received an ad by 
snail mail detailing a new video from the people who produced "The 
Clinton Chronicles". It details the investigations into the killing of 
two young men in Saline County, Ark and the cover-ups and further 
killings that were uncovered. They say that all evidence points straight 
to Herr Klinton's direct involvement. The name of the video is 
"Obstruction of Justice" and is available from a group calling itself 
"Citizens for Honest Government" for a "gift" of $22/one, $40/2, $54/3, 
$85/5, etc.

They have other stuff, too (Vince Foster video, info articles, FBI/DEA 
files, etc). They didn't have a phone number on the ad, but the mailing 
address is: Citizens for Honest Government, 611 Pennsylvania Ave. S.E., 
Suite 1996, Washington D.C., 20003.

I am just gullible enough (and was impressed by "The Clinton Chronicles") 
to send them a check today.

Fred

PS - ANYTHING to try to pry that scabrous canker off of our Constitution!
--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) U.S.: #1 Police State (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 12:36:33 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive

##################################################################


Crackdowns on drug crimes, mandatory sentencing laws, and a high rate of
recidivism have more than doubled our prison population since 1980, despite
the fact that the crime rate fell slightly during the 1980s. The results:
an annual cost of incarceration estimated at $16 billion and serious prison
overcrowding. As many as forty states are now under federal court order to
ease their overpopulated prisons, often through furlough and early release
programs that are unpopular with the public.

Rates of incarceration per 100,000 population, 1988-90:

COUNTRY          RATE    COUNTRY      RATE

United States    426     Austria       77
South Africa     333     Spain         76
Soviet Union     268     Finland       73
Hungary          196     Switzerland   73
Malaysia         126     Australia     72
Northern Ireland 120     Denmark       68
Hong Kong        118     Belgium       65
Poland           106     Italy         60
New Zealand      100     Sweden        56
United Kingdom    97     Ireland       55
Turkey            96     Norway        48
Germany           85     Japan         45
France            81     Netherlands   40

Sources (for chart and text): The Sentencing Project; Marc Mauer,
"Americans Behind Bars: A Comparison of International Rates of
Incarceration" (Washington, D.C.: The Sentencing Project, 1991): Council of
Europe, Prison Information Bulletin, no. 15, June 1990, p. 6.

(From Page 138)


##################################################################


|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Corporate Mass-Media Propaganda Works: Our Culture of Punishment
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
      Percentage of population who think the primary aim of
 imprisonment should be to protect citizens from prisoners, and
 percentage who think the aim should be to reeducate prisoners,
                           1981-83:

COUNTRY           PROTECT CITIZENS  REEDUCATE PRISONERS

United States           32.4               27.4
Canada                  28.8               39.8
Australia               28.3               35.1
United Kingdom(53)      28.2               27.7
Ireland                 24.7               41.5
Belgium                 22.0               42.5
Finland                 19.6               48.0
Netherlands             19.1               52.1
Germany                 18.2               49.7
France                  17.2               42.9
Denmark                 16.0               35.7
Spain                   12.4               57.5
Sweden                  11.3               62.7
Norway                   8.7               67.1
Japan                    8.2               32.8
Italy                    7.3               42.7

Source: World Values Survey.

Page 139

##################################################################

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -   
_We're Number One, Where America Stands -- and Falls -- in the New     
World Order_ by Andrew L Shapiro.    
 
New York, May 1992, Vintage Books, a division of Random House.    
$10 paperback. ISBN 0-679-73893-2   
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -    
[Transcribed by jhwoodar@well.sf.ca.us (Joe Woodard)]

--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CTKA Online - Major Upgrade! (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 12:38:10 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

[ Article crossposted from alt.conspiracy.jfk ]
[ Author was Lisa Pease ]
[ Posted on Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:38:49 GMT ]

For any of you who didn't already know, CTKA - Citizens for Truth about 
the Kennedy Assassination - has a web site online, as well as the offline 
magazine called "Probe".

I've been busy giving the site a major overhaul. I think you'll all be 
pleased with the results. The site is optimized for the (free) browser of 
Microsoft Internet Explorer, Ver 3 Beta 2, available at 
http://www.microsoft.com/ie/ for free.

Not only has the site received a major facelift - we've added tons more 
data - at least one article from every recent issue going back over a 
year, and now we have two full issues online - the Connick/Garrison issue 
(as we call it - from 7/95) and the "Nagell" issue from 11/95.

Read, browse, if you have a fast enough connection you may want to wait 
long enough to hear Garrison speak... :) I won't tell you how to find 
that - you'll have fun anyway just poking around.

I tried to code around the functions Netscape does not yet support 
(style features, extended table attributes, 'named' colors, etc.), but 
hey, there's only one of me, and without the IE floating frames feature, 
there's only so much you can do. :) Anyway - for the fullest, best 
possible experience - try Explorer and see what you think.

Several search engines are also hooked in now, including one that allows 
full text searches of the site itself. You can reach NARA's JFK Records 
database from there, and there are links to other sites of interest 
around the net as well.

Enjoy, meander, and if you are not a subscriber - you're REALLY going to 
feel left out when you read the great reader comments (from our great 
readers) about what you're missing.

And don't forget to check out our current action alerts - your help is 
always needed! For inspiration - check out what others have been doing 
with their time in that regard. We've posted several examples of 
independent activism online, for the world to see.

I wish I had two or three of me at least to do all I want to do! But I'm 
only one person - so if I'm slow in getting back to you via mail - please 
don't take it personally. :)


-- 
			Lisa Pease
====================================================================
"It is in the interest of the U.S. people and of the people of the world, 
that this be made known, that they demand to know what is really behind 
the assassination of Kennedy, that the facts be made clear: whether the 
man involved is innocent, sick or an instrument of the reactionaries, an 
agent of a macabre plan to carry forward a policy of war and aggression, 
to place the Government of the United States at the mercy of the most 
aggressive circles of monopoly, of militarism and of the worst agencies 
of the United States. It is in our interest, in the interest of all 
people and of the U.S. people that we demand this." - Fidel Castro, 11/23/63


Check out the Real History Archives:
  http://www.webcom.com/lpease
Citizens for Truth about the Kennedy Assassination: 
  http://www.webcom.com/ctka

-- 
			Lisa Pease
====================================================================
"It is in the interest of the U.S. people and of the people of the world, 
that this be made known, that they demand to know what is really behind 
the assassination of Kennedy, that the facts be made clear: whether the 
man involved is innocent, sick or an instrument of the reactionaries, an 
agent of a macabre plan to carry forward a policy of war and aggression, 
to place the Government of the United States at the mercy of the most 
aggressive circles of monopoly, of militarism and of the worst agencies 
of the United States. It is in our interest, in the interest of all 
people and of the U.S. people that we demand this." - Fidel Castro, 11/23/63


Check out the Real History Archives:
  http://www.webcom.com/lpease
Citizens for Truth about the Kennedy Assassination: 
  http://www.webcom.com/ctka


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) WACO: the crime continues (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 12:39:36 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

               APPEAL FAILS: ATF / FBI VICTIMS

              T O   S T A Y   I N   P R I S O N

By Ian Williams Goddard

       (Associated Press) NEW ORLEANS, Aug. 5 -- Federal agents 
       did NOT use excessive force in trying to arrest Branch 
       Davidian leader David Koresh, a federal appeals court 
       said today, upholding the convictions of six cult members.
 
Oh really, "did not use excessive force."  Gee, let's see if this 
claim can pass the fact test: 

On July 30, 1992 ATF agents interviewed arms dealer Henry McMahon about 
large purchases of guns that David Koresh made for resale through the 
Davidian's gun business The Mag Bag. McMahon phoned Koresh to inform 
him that ATF agents were asking about his recent purchases. David 
replied, "If there's a problem, tell them to come out here. If they 
want to see my guns, they're more than welcome." 

With phone in hand McMahon turned to tell the agents that Koresh invited 
them to visit Mt. Carmel and check out the guns. The ATF agents declined 
this invitation to peacefully gain entry to the Mt. Carmel community. So
the ATF had the opportunity to resolve the matter in a peaceful fashion. 

The road to peace lay before them, instead the ATF chose the road to war. 
To gain entry, the ATF unleashed violent and literally explosive military 
force on a community filled with dozens of women and children; an action 
that the ATF even believed would result in a shoot-out. This can only be 
defined as * EXCESSIVE FORCE * -- that is, force above and beyond that 
which was necessary to gain entry. 

In light of the invitation to the ATF for peaceful entry and subsequent
preference by the ATF for violent forced entry, it is clear that the 
decision of these judges to keep the Davidians in jail because the ATF 
"did not use excessive force" is at odds with both fact and logic, and 
thus the judge's reasoning for keeping the Davidians in jail fails the 
fact test. But that's not all, it also fails the legal test:

Condemning victims of governmental abuse to up to forty more years 
of imprisonment, Judge Patrick Higginbothan claimed:

        A citizen may not initiate a firefight solely 
        on the ground that the police sent too many 
        well-armed officers to arrest him.

I know it's a lot to ask, but perhaps after studying the facts of the case 
before him the judge might try to learn about Texas law. For example, 
Section 9.31 of the Texas Penal Code which states: 

        The use of force to resist an arrest or search is 
        justified: (1) If, before the actor offers any resistance, 
        the peace officer (or persons acting at his direction) uses 
        or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make an 
        arrest or search; and (2) When and to the degree the actor 
        reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to 
        protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) 
        use or attempted use of greater force than necessary."

You kindly invite someone to enter your home, they decline the invitation 
and instead show up with 100 heavily armed men initiating gunfire on and
killing your dogs, hurling explosive devices into your windows, shooting 
down from a helicopter through the roof, and then filling your home with 
thousands of bullets. If this effort to gain entry is not an example 
of excessive force, pray tell what is ?! 

The ATF's act of massive aggression upon the Mt. Carmel community was a 
text book case of excessive use of force, and as such, according to Texas 
law, the Davidans had every right to shoot back in defense of their
families. 

In fact, the jury found survivors guilty not of murder but 'voluntary
manslaughter,' the definition of which is "acting in the heat of passion 
due to adequate PROVOCATION." The excessive force was the "adequate 
provocation," and that's one reason why the jury thought the Davidians 
should walk, and why jury foreman Sara Bain pleaded with the judge on 
the day of sentencing to heed the will of the jury and set the Davidians 
free. Both the will of the jury and justice have been denied.

To this day the crime of aggression against the few surviving Branch 
Davidians continues. Not only were over eighty lives snuffed out, but 
nine lives continue to be slowly snuffed out in prison. For these 
Davidians the vicious aggression of Feb. 28th 1993 has continued 
without a single pause. Free the Branch Davidians.


        " The federal government was absolutely out of control 
        there [Waco]. We spoke in the jury room about the fact 
        that the wrong people were on trial, that it should have 
        been the ones that planned the raid and orchestrated it 
        and insisted on carrying out this plan who should have 
        been on trial." 

        Sara Bain, Jury Foreman at Branch Davidian [ Waco ] trial

Recommended Waco fact reference: " The Davidian Massacre " 
by Carol Moore $9.00 book rate - $11.00 first class and Canada  
Mail to: Carol Moore, Box 65518, Washington, D.C. 20035. 202/635-3739

Law of Identity: A is A, relative to not-A. A = {A, ~A}

Law of Nonidentity: If there is 100% A, there is 0% A. A = ~A

absolute reality: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/reality.html

I Am poetry: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/iam-free.html


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: John Birch Society E-Mail Action Network Alert! (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 18:30:52 -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.

--------------9F937AD3479
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
Content-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960807183028.27561F@infoserv.utdallas.edu>





---------- Forwarded message ----------

!!!

--------------9F937AD3479
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
Content-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960807183028.27561G@infoserv.utdallas.edu>

John Birch Society E-Mail Network Alert!

August 7, 1996

Special Immediate-action Request
August 7, 1996

Key facts: 
On August 2nd, the House of Representatives passed HR 3953, the 
Aviation Security and Anti-terrorism Act of 1996. Anxious to start their 
summer recess, the House caved in and passed this hastily contrived bill as 
a response to media-induced terrorism jitters that followed the TWA Flight 
800 crash and the pipe bomb explosion in Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
The vote was a lopsided 389 to 22.  The Senate will probably act on HR 3953 
soon after Labor Day, followed by another House vote on a final conference 
version.     
 
Action request: 
Arrange a visit with your congressman while he's in your district (Congress 
reconvenes on Sep. 4th).  Using one or more of the talking points listed 
below, express your indignation with his failure to oppose this bill (the 22 
who voted against it are listed below and should be commended; 23 others 
did not vote); urge him to redeem himself by voting against any House-
Senate conference version of HR 3953. If unable to arrange a visit, call, 
write, fax, or e-mail both the local and Washington offices. 

Ask your congressman: Why the rush? Will any part of this bill reduce 
terrorism?

              Major objectionable provisions of HR 3953 as passed by the 
House:

     *  Calls for a feasibility study on including "taggants" in black and 
smokeless powder -- the powder used in bullets. This is a back-door method 
of gun registration by tracking ammo. And gun registration is historically the 
prelude to gun confiscation. 
 
     * Requires airlines to create computer-assisted passenger profiling 
programs in cooperation with the "Federal Aviation Administration, the 
Secretary of Transportation, <<<the intelligence community>>>, and the law 
enforcement community." [Emphasis added] Such big-brother monitoring is 
one step to controlling the mobility of Americans.

     * Creates two new federal bureaucracies, the Civil Aviation Security 
Review Commission and a National Commission on Terrorism, to evaluate 
increasing the investigatory powers of federal law enforcement. Count on 
them to push for more federal power!

     * Expands the dangerous RICO (Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt 
Organizations) Act to cover terrorism offenses. We already have enough 
laws on the books to punish terrorists without further expanding the big 
murky net of the abuse-prone RICO Act.

     * Calls on the President to negotiate a "multilateral sanctions regime" 
via the United Nations and with our "allies" against nations deemed as 
supporters of terrorism. Is a President who hosts IRA and PLO terrorists at 
the White House likely to be serious about fighting international 
terrorism?Fight terrorism via the UN? No chance!  

Also contact your U.S. Senators, urging their rejection of HR 3953.

These 22 members of the House voted against HR 3953: Allard (CO), 
Bonilla (TX), Bono (CA), Coburn (OK), Cooley (OR), Costello (IL), Ehlers 
(MI), Hefley (CO), Hoekstra (MI), Hostettler (IN), Klink (PA), LaHood (IL), 
Mollohan (WV), Murtha (PA), Myers (IN), Radanovich (CA), Sanford (SC), 
Scarborough (FL), Souder (IN), Stockman (TX), Tiahrt (KS), Young (AK)


Copyright 1996 -- The John Birch Society Inc. -- P.O. Box 8040; Appleton, 
WI 54913 [e-mail: jbs@jbs.org ]

Homepage: http://www.jbs.org

Permission to reproduce this legislative alert in toto is hereby granted by 
The John Birch Society Inc. 


--------------9F937AD3479--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 8 Num. 77
Date: 07 Aug 1996 21:11:25 -0400

Something along the lines of discussion going on in the NOBAN list. Lobo, if
it fits the charter of NOBAN, then please forward.
In LIBERTY
Tom

>Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:03:12 -0500 (CDT)
>Reply-To: bigred@duracef.shout.net
>Sender: owner-CN-L@cornell.edu
>From: Brian Redman <bigred@duracef.shout.net>
>To: Conspiracy Nation <CN-L@cornell.edu>
>Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 8 Num. 77
>X-PH: V4.1@cornell.edu (Cornell Modified) 
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2(a) -- ListProcessor by CREN
>
>The following is brought to you thanks, in part, to the kind 
>assistance of CyberNews and the fine folks at Cornell University.
>
>
>              Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 8  Num. 77
>             ======================================
>                    ("Quid coniuratio est?")
> 
> 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>AMERICANISM vs. TERRORISM or TERRORISM vs. AMERICANISM
>======================================================
>By Gene "Chip" Tatum
>--------------------
>
>AMERICANISM VS TERRORISM
>
>OR
>
>TERRORISM VS AMERICANISM
>(July 31, 1996)
>
>DEFINITIONS:
>        
>        Americanism - A custom or trait originating in the United States.
>
>        Terrorism - Violent acts or acts dangerous to human life intended to
>control a civilian population or the policies of a government by use of
>coercion, or assassination.
>
>        At the prompting of the United States, western ministers adopted a
>25-point cooperative plan last Tuesday in an attempt to track, stop, and
>convict terrorists.
>
>        The G-7 plus one (Russia) agreed to share information and resources
>to increase surveillance of bank accounts, front organizations and the
>internet.  Measures adopted during the one-day meeting included easing
>extradition, stiffening penalties for possession of forged travel documents,
>and restricting access to firearms and explosives.
>
>        World leaders, angered by the recent explosion in Atlanta during the
>1996 Olympic Games, called for a united action against terrorism.  "This
>repugnant violation of the spirit of the Olympic Games must be denounced
>around the world", United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali said.
>
>        Israel sent its condolences to Americans, still remembering their
>loss to Palestinian terrorists during the 1972 Munich Olympics.
>
>        Palestine offered condolences to the families of the victims and to
>the American government.
>
>        Condolences to the American government?  Wait a minute.  No U.S.
>officials were hurt from the blast.  Or were there perhaps one or two
>government officials that could suffer at the arm of terrorism.  During an
>election year, an increase in terrorist activities can only hurt a sitting
>policy makers' chances for re-election.  But doesn't it strike a heavy note
>of discord to have the gold medal winner of terrorism, Palestine, coddle up
>to the President, offering him their condolences?  But, perhaps condolences
>are in order.  After all, terrorism is an act of retribution.  Certainly the
>terrorists target was not a forty-four year old woman from Albany, Georgia.
>Nor, I would venture to say, was it any of the 110 wounded concert goers.
>Some journalists have hinted that the target was the American spirit.  But
>I'm going to take a large step forward and tell you what the target of the
>Atlanta Olympic bombing was...the American government.
>
>        And how about the recent downing of TWA Flight 800?  Target?  Not
>the aircraft, airline, or the passengers...but the American government.
>
>        I recently read an article written by Tim Collie of the Tampa
>Tribune entitled "Way of Life Faces Threat".  He begins like this:
>
>        "In Israel, a stray handbag in a park or marketplace
>         will send police and civilians scrambling...In Paris, 
>        soldiers with automatic weapons are a common sight in
>        airports, post offices, and tourist sites."
>
>        Then he asks a panel of "experts" on international terrorism, "Is
>that what life in America is coming to?"  The answer from the pros - NOT
>YET!  Terrorism experts caution against over reaction, pointing out that
>terrorist incidents have actually decreased steadily since the 1980s.  But,
>let's look a little closer at that statistic.
>
>        On cross-examination, the experts admit that the decrease is
>actually a global statistic.  In fact, since 1993, the incidence of
>terrorist threats and actual events in the United States has sharply risen.
>To what do we, the American people who actually suffer the consequences, owe
>this horrific statistic?  I can tell you with one word - retribution.  But
>to be a target of terrorism as retribution we, the American people, had to
>have done something to deserve this.  (In other words, it is an act of
>redistributing something that was distributed.  Webster calls it
>"retribution".  So, for example, if I did something to you and you did it
>back to me, I "distributed" it to you and you "redistributed" back to me.
>Thus "distribute" and "retribute".)
>
>        What has America done to deserve these hideous actions?
>
>        In 1986, I was recruited from military Special Operations into a
>Black Operations unit code-named Pegasus, which was directed by Vice
>President George Bush.  As a pilot it was my duty to deliver into and then
>extract from the target countries a team of "Archers".  It was the mission
>of Pegasus to "neutralize" specific targets.  The neutralization of these
>targets was to be performed by any of the following methods:
>
>        A.      Intimidation - Indirect use of coercion and termination.
>        B.      Coercion - Blackmail, kidnapping, freeze accounts, etc.
>        C.      Termination - A nice way to say assassinate.
>
>        (Remember the definitions at the beginning of this article?)
>
>        This neutralization was targeted toward foreign heads of state,
>world financiers, drug kingpins, military leaders, and United States
>citizens.  And the justification Vice President Bush used for our missions
>was aimed at our patriotism, "in the name of democracy".
>
>        "In the name of democracy" I participated in intimidating Daniel
>Ortega, the President of Nicaragua, to step down from power and allow free
>elections in Nicaragua.
>
>        "In the name of democracy" I blackmailed a top political official of
>the newly elected Nicaraguan government to follow all U.S. policy.
>
>        "In the name of democracy" I assassinated three foreign politicians,
>two military leaders, six foreign civilians, and three spies.
>
>        "In the name of democracy" I was ordered to neutralize Ross Perot.
>I refused in the name of Tatum.
>
>        Contrary to what our government would have us believe, we have, in
>the minds of terrorists, earned whatever they are able to muster.
>
>        There is a constant pressure in global affairs from the American
>government for foreign governments and peoples to follow the dictates of
>America.  A good example is our intrusion into the daily workings of
>sovereign countries.  Colombia, for example, has been decertified by the
>United States due to President Clinton's perception that President Ernst
>Samper of Colombia is a "bad person".  Bad person?  Here is a man that has
>more U.S. DEA agents working in his country than there are combined in the
>rest of the world.  Is he cooperating with Clinton?  Sure.  So, what's the
>beef?  Let the man run his country.  "We the people," in the name of William
>Jefferson Clinton, have chosen to deny the people of Colombia access to
>loans from the World Bank, thus denying badly needed humanitarian medical
>aid to this South American country.  Can this cause trouble for "we the
>people?"  Possibly to the tune of retribution?  Of course.
>
>        The great sense of Americanism which we portray is commendable.  But
>we have no right to push our ideals or laws on foreign countries.  The
>harder we push, the more freedom we will loose.  Every week President
>Clinton announces a new plan by the Justice Department to make America "more
>livable."  But instead of a more comfortable way of life, we seem to be
>loosing all that our forefathers intended for us.
>
>        Historically, big government doesn't work.  So the solution is to
>cut back on U.S. intimidation both in the United States and outside the
>United States.  Give the states more authority.  Deal less in foreign
>affairs, especially dictating how a sovereign country should run its
>affairs.  How would we take an aggressive attack on the United States by
>India because we eat beef?!  Think about that.  All countries do not and
>SHOULD not have the same laws and beliefs as Americans.
>
>        To continue to pressure those countries to conform is terrorism.
>That is a fact.  The U.S. government has adopted a high-tech form of
>terrorism.  Countries around the world continue to ask the same question,
>"Why does such a big, powerful country pick on a little country like us?"
>We terrorize other countries by use of intimidation, coercion, and
>assassination.  That is a fact.  If we continue on our present course,
>thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of Americans will fall to the
>hands of terrorists.  That is a fact.
>
>        Instead, we talk of tightening restrictions, filling prisons with
>those who speak out against American policy, and forming anti-terrorist
>enforcement offices around the U.S.  Big government always sees the answer
>as bigger government when, in fact, the solution is quite simple.  "Let's
>mind our own business, Mr. Clinton."
>
>        It is quite interesting that the rate of terrorism has seen a
>drastic rise since the Clinton/Reno armada steamed into port.
>Unfortunately, this two-man wrecking crew has no morals to base their
>actions on.
>
>        Reno, for instance, "takes the responsibility" for the murder of the
>Waco group (which, may I remind you, included children).  What does that
>mean?  Will she sign a plea agreement?  Or is she awaiting trial?  And what
>about Ruby Ridge as the "top cop."  Negotiating her plea on that also?
>
>        What should worry the American people is the direct line of
>communications between the Department of Justice and the White House.
>Americas' only hope in combating injustice is headed by an immoral, baby
>killing saboteur of the American justice system.  And look who she reports
>to.  Unfortunately for America, the spineless woman is nothing more than a
>mole for the White House.  The Department of Justice is filled with good,
>honest Americans, but their hands are tied by the use of intimidation and
>coercion by Reno and Clinton.  A prime example of this is the statement made
>by Mr. McCurry, White House Spokesperson, last week concerning the possible
>use of a missile in the attack against TWA Flight 800.  The statement was a
>warning to all government employees that revealing a missile attack against
>the aircraft would cost them their jobs.
>
>        I have heard much disinformation concerning both the availability
>and ability of a ground-to-air missile use on a commercial jetliner.  Let me
>dispel any question here and now.  I have first-hand knowledge that in the
>mid-1980s, one hundred SA-7 (Soviet) surface-to-air missiles were purchased
>from China by Ollie North.  The missiles were to be shipped to the
>Nicaraguan Contras to be used against the Soviet gunships Hi-24 (Hind
>helicopters).  They were shipped to Guatemala and CIA personnel acknowledged
>receipt, but they never arrived in the Contra camps.
>
>        In October of 1995, the U.S. was offered 130 Stinger missiles by
>Afghan rebels.  Ther offer was refused (see Rodney Stitch letter dated
>October 20, 1995).
>
>        That's 230 surface-to-air missiles on the free market.  So, the
>question of availability is answered.
>
>        Now, let's talk about ability.  The SA-7 is a shoulder-held rocket
>with a maximum distance of ten kilometers (6.2 miles).  The Stinger is also
>a shoulder-held missile with the maximum distance of eight miles.  A boat in
>the flight path of departing aircraft would be a good platform for a SA-7 or
>Stinger launch.  Over 100 witnesses have told the story of the tell-tale
>glow path arching toward the TWA Flight 800.  So, it is probable that a
>terrorist's missile was used against the aircraft.  Yet the Department of
>Justice and White House deny, to the point of threatening staff, the use of
>a missile.
>
>        Janet Reno took office in 1993.  Terrorist retribution took a sharp
>turn upward by the end of 1993.  William Jefferson Clinton took the sacred
>oath of office as the new President of the United States in January of 1993.
>Since his oath of office, three major scandals involving fraud and murder in
>the White House have surfaced, and a special investigation into Mr.
>Clinton's involvement in drug trafficking is underway in Louisiana.  Surely
>the President of the United States wouldn't be involved in trafficking of
>cocaine.  Especially with his increasingly tough stand on drugs.
>
>        Let's look at the proof being presented to the Special Prosecutor.
>A flight plan has surfaced which reveals a secret meeting in Costa Rica
>involving Governor William Clinton, Vice President George Bush, General
>Manuel Noriega, and future Attorney General William Barr.  The topic of
>discussion was the loss of $100 million in drugs and proceeds.  The loss
>occurred somewhere between Panama and Arkansas.  The original flight plan,
>filed in 1985, is in the hands of government officials.  The pilot made
>notes on the reverse side of the flight plan when he returned to his home
>base in Honduras.  That pilot was me.
>
>        I was tasked with transporting not only top officials to clandestine
>meetings, but transporting intelligence officers disguised as doctors, and
>transporting explosives packed in coolers marked "medical supplies" to
>Contra camps throughout Honduras and Nicaragua.  We found that, disguised as
>a medical, humanitarian flight, we could transport any product world-wide
>unchallenged.  For example, large coolers marked "medical supplies" were
>transported from Honduras to various destinations in the United States.  One
>of these destinations was Little Rock, Arkansas.  The true contents of the
>coolers marked "medical supplies" was cocaine.  Another example of the use
>by our government of coolers marked "medical supplies" involved the death of
>Omar Torrijos, the Panamanian Chief of Staff.  As early as 1978 it had been
>determined that General Torrijos was no longer needed by U.S. intelligence
>agencies.  The United States had groomed a new man to stand watch over the
>precious Canal zone, Manuel Noriega.  In July of 1991 a cooler marked
>"medical supplies" was placed on General Torrijos aircraft.  (Historically
>man does not question any action which carries the tag of humanitarianism.)
>So, the cooler marked "medical supplies" was not checked.  The bomb, which
>was the true contents of the cooler, exploded, sending the passengers of the
>flight to their death.
>
>        During this administration, the government, or more specifically,
>the dynamic duo of Clinton and Reno, seem hell-bent on restricting our
>privacy.  Under the guise of an increase in terrorist activity, thus
>requiring tighter restrictions, Clinton and Reno have pushed Congress for an
>anti-terrorism bill which would lengthen the arm of the government and
>tighten their grasp on America.  However, earlier this year the failure to
>provide such a bill by Congress prompted the Clinton administration to task
>G-7 with tighter reigns on terrorism.  That summit was scheduled to take
>place only weeks after the terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia, a week
>following the mysterious downing of TWA Flight 800, and days following the
>pipe bomb explosion in the Olympic Centennial Park.
>
>        One question which must loom in the minds of the people concerns the
>thought processes of terrorists.  Why would terrorists step-up their
>activities world-wide in the weeks proceeding this summit?  It just doesn't
>make sense.  And let me tell you...the terrorist community is savvy.  They
>are well funded, they have a cause, and they are led by some of the most
>brilliant minds in the world.  So now, I ask again...why the increase in
>terrorism?  Has Americanism and our trek to improve the world prompted these
>attacks on us?  I won't answer that.  I will say, however, it's a good thing
>that a cooler marked "medical supplies" was not on  TWA Flight 800.
>Otherwise, our prime suspects would be the U.S. government, more
>specifically, Clinton and Reno.
>
>        "We the people" are the only group in the world that are being
>snafu-ed by this dynamic duo of Clinton and Reno.  We'd best wake up or we
>won't have any roses to smell...only gladiolas on our loved ones' grave.
>
>D.G. "Chip" Tatum
>Codename: Pegasus
>e-mail:<blackops@sundial.sundial.net>
>P.O. Box 895082
>Leesburg, FL 34789
>Phone (352) 787-9846
> 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>       Views expressed do not necessarily  reflect  those
>       of Conspiracy Nation, nor of its Editor in Chief.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>        I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail 
>address, send a message in the form "subscribe cn-l My Name" to 
>listproc@cornell.edu          (Note: that is "CN-L" *not* "CN-1")
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>    For information on how to receive the improved Conspiracy 
>  Nation Newsletter, send an e-mail message to bigred@shout.net
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Want to know more about Whitewater, Oklahoma City bombing, etc? 
>(1) telnet prairienet.org (2) logon as "visitor" (3) go citcom
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>       See also: http://www.europa.com/~johnlf/cn.html
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>          See also: ftp.shout.net  pub/users/bigred
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
>Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et 
>  pauperem.                    -- Liber Proverbiorum  XXXI: 8-9 
>
>
>
>
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made
in the shape of your conscience to block the pleasures
permitted by mine.  When you people prevail, you commit
a crime against freedom, and that is the greatest
immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
(no date avail). Thanks to:Mark Johnson (onethumb@why.net)

.. To each of my Nephews, William Augustine Washington, George Lewis, George
Steptoe Washington,  Bushrod Washington, and Samuel Washington, I give one of
the Swords or Cutteaux of which I may die possessed; and they are to chuse in
the order they are named. --These Swords are accompanied with an injunction
not to unsheath them for the purpose of shedding blood, except it be for
defense, or in the defense of their Country and its rights; and in the latter
case, to keep them unsheathed, and prefer falling with them in their hands,
to the relinquishment thereof.
(Will, July 9, 1799)

>From "Maxims of George Washington," published by The Mount Vernon Ladies'
Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1989.
Thanks to Bob2A@aol.com

"A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon is truth,
still; and a lie on the throne is on the way to defeat, and truth in a
dungeon is on the way to victory." --Anonymous.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Executive Order 13010 (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 20:48:39 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

>From http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html
search term "executive order 13010" IN QUOTES.

**********************************************************************

[Federal Register: July 17, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 138)]
[Presidential Documents]               
[Page 37345-37350]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]


[[Page 37345]]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





The President





_______________________________________________________________________



Executive Order 13010--Critical Infrastructure Protection


                        Presidential Documents 




___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 37347]]

                Executive Order 13010 of July 15, 1996

 
                Critical Infrastructure Protection

                Certain national infrastructures are so vital that 
                their incapacity or destruction would have a 
                debilitating impact on the defense or economic security 
                of the United States. These critical infrastructures 
                include telecommunications, electrical power systems, 
                gas and oil storage and transportation, banking and 
                finance, transportation, water supply systems, 
                emergency services (including medical, police, fire, 
                and rescue), and continuity of government. Threats to 
                these critical infrastructures fall into two 
                categories: physical threats to tangible property 
                (``physical threats''), and threats of electronic, 
                radio-frequency, or computer-based attacks on the 
                information or communications components that control 
                critical infrastructures (``cyber threats''). Because 
                many of these critical infrastructures are owned and 
                operated by the private sector, it is essential that 
                the government and private sector work together to 
                develop a strategy for protecting them and assuring 
                their continued operation.

                NOW, THEREFORE, by the authority vested in me as 
                President by the Constitution and the laws of the 
                United States of America, it is hereby ordered as 
                follows:

                Section 1. Establishment. There is hereby established 
                the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure 
                Protection (``Commission'').

                    (a) Chair. A qualified individual from outside the 
                Federal Government shall be appointed by the President 
                to serve as Chair of the Commission. The Commission 
                Chair shall be employed on a full-time basis.
                    (b) Members. The head of each of the following 
                executive branch departments and agencies shall 
                nominate not more than two full-time members of the 
                Commission:
                    (i) Department of the Treasury;
                    (ii) Department of Justice;
                    (iii) Department of Defense;
                    (iv) Department of Commerce;
                    (v) Department of Transportation;
                    (vi) Department of Energy;
                    (vii) Central Intelligence Agency;
                    (viii) Federal Emergency Management Agency;
                    (ix) Federal Bureau of Investigation;
                    (x) National Security Agency.

                One of the nominees of each agency may be an individual 
                from outside the Federal Government who shall be 
                employed by the agency on a full-time basis. Each 
                nominee must be approved by the Steering Committee.

                Sec. 2. The Principals Committee. The Commission shall 
                report to the President through a Principals Committee 
                (``Principals Committee''), which shall review any 
                reports or recommendations before submission to the 
                President. The Principals Committee shall comprise the:

                    (i) Secretary of the Treasury;
                    (ii) Secretary of Defense;

[[Page 37348]]

                    (iii) Attorney General;
                    (iv) Secretary of Commerce;
                    (v) Secretary of Transportation;
                    (vi) Secretary of Energy;
                    (vii) Director of Central Intelligence;
                    (viii) Director of the Office of Management and 
                Budget;
                    (ix) Director of the Federal Emergency Management 
                Agency;
                    (x) Assistant to the President for National 
                Security Affairs;
                    (xi) Assistant to the Vice President for National 
                Security Affairs.

                Sec. 3. The Steering Committee of the President's 
                Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection. A 
                Steering Committee (``Steering Committee'') shall 
                oversee the work of the Commission on behalf of the 
                Principals Committee. The Steering Committee shall 
                comprise four members appointed by the President. One 
                of the members shall be the Chair of the Commission and 
                one shall be an employee of the Executive Office of the 
                President. The Steering Committee will receive regular 
                reports on the progress of the Commission's work and 
                approve the submission of reports to the Principals 
                Committee.

                Sec. 4. Mission. The Commission shall: (a) within 30 
                days of this order, produce a statement of its mission 
                objectives, which will elaborate the general objectives 
                set forth in this order, and a detailed schedule for 
                addressing each mission objective, for approval by the 
                Steering Committee;

                    (b) identify and consult with: (i) elements of the 
                public and private sectors that conduct, support, or 
                contribute to infrastructure assurance; (ii) owners and 
                operators of the critical infrastructures; and (iii) 
                other elements of the public and private sectors, 
                including the Congress, that have an interest in 
                critical infrastructure assurance issues and that may 
                have differing perspectives on these issues;
                    (c) assess the scope and nature of the 
                vulnerabilities of, and threats to, critical 
                infrastructures;
                    (d) determine what legal and policy issues are 
                raised by efforts to protect critical infrastructures 
                and assess how these issues should be addressed;
                    (e) recommend a comprehensive national policy and 
                implementation strategy for protecting critical 
                infrastructures from physical and cyber threats and 
                assuring their continued operation;
                    (f) propose any statutory or regulatory changes 
                necessary to effect its recommendations; and
                    (g) produce reports and recommendations to the 
                Steering Committee as they become available; it shall 
                not limit itself to producing one final report.

                Sec. 5. Advisory Committee to the President's 
                Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection. (a) 
                The Commission shall receive advice from an advisory 
                committee (``Advisory Committee'') composed of no more 
                than ten individuals appointed by the President from 
                the private sector who are knowledgeable about critical 
                infrastructures. The Advisory Committee shall advise 
                the Commission on the subjects of the Commission's 
                mission in whatever manner the Advisory Committee, the 
                Commission Chair, and the Steering Committee deem 
                appropriate.

                    (b) A Chair shall be designated by the President 
                from among the members of the Advisory Committee.
                    (c) The Advisory Committee shall be established in 
                compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
                amended (5 U.S.C. App.). The Department of Defense 
                shall perform the functions of the President under the 
                Federal Advisory Committee Act for the Advisory 
                Committee, except that of reporting to the Congress, in 
                accordance with the guidelines and procedures 
                established by the Administrator of General Services.

[[Page 37349]]

                Sec. 6. Administration. (a) All executive departments 
                and agencies shall cooperate with the Commission and 
                provide such assistance, information, and advice to the 
                Commission as it may request, to the extent permitted 
                by law.

                    (b) The Commission and the Advisory Committee may 
                hold open and closed hearings, conduct inquiries, and 
                establish subcommittees, as necessary.
                    (c) Members of the Advisory Committee shall serve 
                without compensation for their work on the Advisory 
                Committee. While engaged in the work of the Advisory 
                Committee, members may be allowed travel expenses, 
                including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as 
                authorized by law for persons serving intermittently in 
                the government service.
                    (d) To the extent permitted by law, and subject to 
                the availability of appropriations, the Department of 
                Defense shall provide the Commission and the Advisory 
                Committee with administrative services, staff, other 
                support services, and such funds as may be necessary 
                for the performance of its functions and shall 
                reimburse the executive branch components that provide 
                representatives to the Commission for the compensation 
                of those representatives.
                    (e) In order to augment the expertise of the 
                Commission, the Department of Defense may, at the 
                Commission's request, contract for the services of 
                nongovernmental consultants who may prepare analyses, 
                reports, background papers, and other materials for 
                consideration by the Commission. In addition, at the 
                Commission's request, executive departments and 
                agencies shall request that existing Federal advisory 
                committees consider and provide advice on issues of 
                critical infrastructure protection, to the extent 
                permitted by law.
                    (f) The Commission, the Principals Committee, the 
                Steering Committee, and the Advisory Committee shall 
                terminate 1 year from the date of this order, unless 
                extended by the President prior to that date.

                Sec. 7. Interim Coordinating Mission. (a) While the 
                Commission is conducting its analysis and until the 
                President has an opportunity to consider and act on its 
                recommendations, there is a need to increase 
                coordination of existing infrastructure protection 
                efforts in order to better address, and prevent, crises 
                that would have a debilitating regional or national 
                impact. There is hereby established an Infrastructure 
                Protection Task Force (``IPTF'') within the Department 
                of Justice, chaired by the Federal Bureau of 
                Investigation, to undertake this interim coordinating 
                mission.

                    (b) The IPTF will not supplant any existing 
                programs or organizations.
                    (c) The Steering Committee shall oversee the work 
                of the IPTF.
                    (d) The IPTF shall include at least one full-time 
                member each from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 
                the Department of Defense, and the National Security 
                Agency. It shall also receive part-time assistance from 
                other executive branch departments and agencies. 
                Members shall be designated by their departments or 
                agencies on the basis of their expertise in the 
                protection of critical infrastructures. IPTF members' 
                compensation shall be paid by their parent agency or 
                department.
                    (e) The IPTF's function is to identify and 
                coordinate existing expertise, inside and outside of 
                the Federal Government, to:
                    (i) provide, or facilitate and coordinate the 
                provision of, expert guidance to critical 
                infrastructures to detect, prevent, halt, or confine an 
                attack and to recover and restore service;
                    (ii) issue threat and warning notices in the event 
                advance information is obtained about a threat;
                    (iii) provide training and education on methods of 
                reducing vulnerabilities and responding to attacks on 
                critical infrastructures;

[[Page 37350]]

                    (iv) conduct after-action analysis to determine 
                possible future threats, targets, or methods of attack; 
                and
                    (v) coordinate with the pertinent law enforcement 
                authorities during or after an attack to facilitate any 
                resulting criminal investigation.
                    (f) All executive departments and agencies shall 
                cooperate with the IPTF and provide such assistance, 
                information, and advice as the IPTF may request, to the 
                extent permitted by law.
                    (g) All executive departments and agencies shall 
                share with the IPTF information about threats and 
                warning of attacks, and about actual attacks on 
                critical infrastructures, to the extent permitted by 
                law.
                    (h) The IPTF shall terminate no later than 180 days 
                after the termination of the Commission, unless 
                extended by the President prior to that date.

                Sec. 8. General. (a) This order is not intended to 
                change any existing statutes or Executive orders.

                    (b) This order is not intended to create any right, 
                benefit, trust, or responsibility, substantive or 
                procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party 
                against the United States, its agencies, its officers, 
                or any person.

                    (Presidential Sig.)<Clinton1><Clinton2>

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                     July 15, 1996.

[FR Doc. 96-18351
Filed 7-16-96; 11:24 am]
Billing code 3195-01-P

--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: America's Plunge into Slavery(fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 21:26:30 -0500 (CDT)


http://www.fortnet.org/~comminc
From the Committee to Restore the Constution Web Site


---------- Forwarded message ----------
   
   Committee to Restore the Constitution &REG</FONT>
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
   
   The Silent Revolution of Federal Regionalism - A Solution
   Part 5
   America's Plunge Into Slavery
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
   
   When the final terror begins, when revolution is unleashed, it will
   then be found that the standing army which society maintains to defend
   itself, i.e., policemen, soldiers, judges, legislators and other
   agencies of order, is neutralized, captured, subverted and
   compromised. It will be found that the power structure of the
   civilization has been covertly transferred from the hands of those who
   created it to an alien control. And, it will be found that subversion
   of the social order and the concealed recruitment of the legions of
   revolt have been accomplished by those who pose as the benefactors and
   protectors of humanity.
   
   The Anatomy of a Revolution (1968) by Archibald E. Roberts, LtCol,
   AUS, ret
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
   
   About 80 years ago a program was begun to condition American
   "peasants" for entry into the planned New World Order. That program is
   now being fulfilled with the installation of the Clinton Co-Presidency
   reign. According to Emmanuel Josephson, author of "Rockefeller
   Internationalist, the Man Who Misrules the World," (Chedney Press,
   1952), it all began when John D. Rockefeller invited to dinner a
   special group of international bankers, multinationalist businessmen,
   university presidents and some ranking religionists, where they talked
   of controlling American education. John D. Sr. offered a million
   dollars over a period of ten years for the "noble" purpose of
   influencing "all education as desired, without regard to sex, race or
   creed." The assembled worthies leaped to the bait and the General
   Education Board was born. They announced its true purpose in
   Occasional Letter No. 1. Josephson wrote:
   
   "The letter is a frank and open statement of the basic totalitarian
   conspiracy that underlies all of the Rockefeller 'philanthropies.'
   Their avowed scheme was to gain the confidence of the people by a show
   of sham 'benevolence' and then, when they 'yield' themselves with
   perfect docility to our molding hands, to work our own good will upon
   them through a Rockefeller dictatorship. In this conspiracy they are
   largely succeeding." The basic statement in this Occasional Letter
   reads: "In our dreams we have limitless resources and the people yield
   themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present
   educational conventions fade from our minds and, unhampered by
   tradition, we work our good will upon a grateful rural folk..."
   
   Now let's notice how "their dreams" are becoming reality eighty years
   later. The Christian conservative newsletter author, Donald McAlvany
   writes and we quote with his permission:
   
     
     
     "There is a black cloud rolling across America. The great majority
     of Americans cannot even see it as they live on in a contented,
     complacent comfort zone that sees no evil, hears no evil, and feels
     no evil. There are powerful forces at work in America today which
     have a well-strategized design to move America into a socialist
     police state and a globalist New World Order. These forces have
     accelerated tremendously over the past five years and especially
     over the past six months. They believe that there is virtually no
     resistance to their plan to control and subjugate the American
     people into their globalist vision of 'a world that will be as one'
     by the year 2000. Certainly there is no resistance from a Congress
     or judiciary which is going along with 98% of the agenda which the
     Establishment has for America. There is no resistance from the
     media, which is a not-so-silent partner and servant to the
     Establishment in keeping the American people asleep, and
     psychologically preparing them for Global 2000 and the dawning of
     the Age of Aquarius. There is no resistance from the churches of
     America which are also in a very complacent comfort zone - the
     mainliners supporting the Establishment's goals; the fundamentalist
     evangelicals are too busy 'loving the brethren' and striving 'to
     feel good about themselves' to notice the evil sweeping across
     America (or lift a finger to oppose it); and most Christians (real,
     nominal or pseudo) in a complacent comfort zone that is presently
     very difficult to disturb. It is as if a spirit of blindness or
     delusion has settled over Americans in general and the Christian
     Church in America in particular, and as the affronts, the insults
     and attacks against our traditional, Constitutional, and Biblical
     values in America grow every day, almost geometrically, the average
     Christian in America goes even more deeply asleep. And there is no
     resistance from the general American population which continues in
     its comfort zone of prosperity and affluence as the government and
     media hypnotize, mesmerize, and pacify them, even as America
     descends into an economic, social, political, moral and spiritual
     free fall. America is much like Nazi Germany in the late 1920s and
     early '30s - in moral, spiritual and political decline, and
     psychologically ripe to accept the New World Order.
     
     "But there is some resistance from a small handful of Americans
     (probably no more than a million or two) who do see the handwriting
     on the wall, who do see the moral, spiritual, social, political free
     fall which America is in today, who do recognize the evil emanating
     from Washington, from our courts, our media and our educational
     system...Whatever the religious or political persuasion of this
     remnant, they have discernment about the dangers America faces, they
     have a love for our traditional way of life, and they have a
     loathing (or hatred) for evil. It is this remnant, this potential
     resistance to the socialization and globalization of America, which
     the Establishment fears and hates at this point. If this remnant
     were to suddenly grow from a few million to 25 to 50 to 75 or even
     100 million Americans, the Establishment's New World Order/New Age
     blueprint for Americans would go up in smoke - and the Establishment
     knows it. This remnant, and the intervening hand of God, are (in the
     opinion of this writer) the only things which can reverse America's
     present free fall and plunge into slavery. So, they must move to
     stamp out the remnant, the dissidents, the potential resistance - as
     swiftly, totally and ruthlessly as Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao did
     as they were rising to power in the '20s, '30s, '40s and '50s. The
     government (Establishment) attacks on the remnant have begun. Groups
     to be targeted include the tax resistors, the gun owners (especially
     the hard core ones), the pro-lifers, believers in financial privacy
     and cash, and 'hard core' fundamental, evangelical Christians -
     especially those who believe strongly in (and defend) traditional
     family values and in Bible prophecy and the so-called 'end times
     security' (and timetable). Government attacks against these groups
     are now accelerating rapidly and can be expected to grow five to
     10-fold over the next few years. Many will have their assets seized;
     many will be jailed; some will be killed. Just as Lenin, Stalin,
     Hitler and Mao knew that they must stamp out the resistance to their
     tyranny if their revolutions were to succeed, so the Liberal Eastern
     Establishment knows they must do the same in America today. These
     potential resistors could ignite a counter-revolution which could
     completely expose and derail the Establishment. They must be
     silenced or neutralized...The seige at Ruby Creek against the Weaver
     family and Operation Waco will be seen in retrospect as watershed
     events in the government's escalating attacks against the remnant."
     (from The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor, July , 1993. P.O. Box
     84904, Phoenix, AZ 85071).
     
   
   
   To prepare the people to become obedient, passive serfs in a Socialist
   America and in the New World Order, and to control, jail or kill those
   who refuse to go along contentedly and happily, police state methods
   must be used. The Waco incident was a forerunner of what may be
   expected in the future. The book, Putting People First, said to have
   been written by Bill Clinton and Al Gore proposes the creation of a
   national police force of 100,000 members, this apparently to be drawn
   from the national guard. General Colin Powell, head of the Joint
   Chiefs of Staff has said that "the government plans to unify all the
   various states' National Guard under one command to deal with national
   emergencies and disasters." In addition to the unified National Guard
   there will also be the various Federal agencies: BATF, FBI, DEA, EPA
   and about a dozen other agencies that will have the power to exercise
   the "forfeiture scam" and similar means that were strictly
   unconstitutional so long as that document was honored as "The Law of
   the Land." In state, county and local police departments, officers are
   said to be in training to cooperate, as some did at Waco. Officers who
   resist this training are allegedly being reported to resign or get
   fired.
   
   It should be understood that this national police force in no way
   interferes with the creation of a UN global police force. The two
   merely complement each other, with the UN in command of both. In this
   connection, the following item is important:
   
     
     
     "In mid-June the Army formally abandoned its fighting doctrine and
     quietly marched into the New World Order. A new guide, dubbed FM-105
     Operations focuses on 'power projection,' the ability to move troops
     quickly around the world to conduct operations other than war; on
     such things as peacekeeping missions (Macedonia), humanitarian
     assistance (Somalia), disaster relief (Hurricane Andrew),
     counter-narcotics actions (South and Central America), relations
     with nations in need of democratic assistance (Persian Gulf), and
     riot control. 'No longer focusing on battling Warsaw pact nations in
     central Europe, the Army will mix and match its forces and will not
     operate alone.' Gen. Federal Franks is the publication's architect.
     Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Sullivan said, 'It guides our
     approach to the future'." (from NewsScam 7/93), P.O. Box 582,
     Canton, TX 75103-0582. Twelve issues, $25.00).
     
   
   
   With the Army no longer designed to defend the United States but
   instead to become a UN peacemaking and peacekeeping force, the
   following notice portends danger for American citizens: "The UN World
   Conference on Human Rights was held in Vienna, with US Undersecretary
   of State Tim Wirth (Council on Foreign Relations member) recommending
   that UN peacekeeping activities include soldiers monitoring human
   rights violations. This would include 'racial discrimination' and
   allow for UN intervention in American domestic affairs." ...With the
   alleged 'collapse' of the Soviet Union, pressure mounted for drastic
   reduction in our military capabilities, thereby forcing us to rely
   more on the UN for global peacekeeping missions. With the fragmented
   USSR now controlling about 13 votes rather than the earlier three
   votes in the UN, one can see the Soviet's 'winning by losing'
   strategy, and remember regarding the Russian 'Bear' the 1898 words of
   Rudyard Kipling: 'When he shows at seeking quarter, with paws like
   hand in prayer, that is the time of peril the time of the Truce of the
   Bear.'
   
     
     
     World socialist government and economy is the goal, and World Trade
     (March 1993) quoted crypto-Marxist Will Swaim opining that the new
     homogenized global economy "may become just the kind of grim,
     unthinkable place that Marx hoped it might: The launching pad for
     the worldwide socialist revolution." And if Americans begin to
     object to the New World Order, foreign troops here might be used to
     handle those situations, as newspapers in early May 1991 reported:
     "German lawmakers and UN officials reacted favorably to the idea of
     a permanent German military presence in the US." (Dennis L. Cuddy,
     Ph.D. in the 5/29/93 issue of the Manchester New Hampshire's Union
     Leader.)
     
   
   
   While our federal government was busy planning ways to complete the
   socialization of and establish totalitarian rule over the people of
   the US, planners at the global level were just as busy. The two
   principal groups promoting the economic and political new world order,
   the Bilderbergers and the Trilateral Commissioners, had their annual
   spring meetings. Little is ever published concerning what actually
   transpires at these secret meetings. But it is known that two new
   policies were adopted and sent to the G-7 governments to be approved.
   So, a G-7 Summit was called, held in Tokyo July 7-9. Supposedly called
   to iron out long-standing difficulties that were holding up the
   Uruguay Round of GATT, unreported by the media were two other very
   important decisions to be agreed upon by the G-7 governments (US,
   Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Canada). First was the
   decision that the UN would have its own army for global peace-keeping,
   peacemaking and other purposes. Some time ago Secretary General
   Boutras Ghali of the UN wrote his "Agenda for Peace," which calls for
   a UN standing army accountable only to the UN Security Council. This
   called for the approval by the nations who have their own standing
   armies and would lose much sovereignty if a superseding military force
   were to be established. So the G-7 governments dutifully approved. The
   text of the G-7's joint communique supports "preventive diplomacy,
   peacemaking, peacekeeping, and post-conflict building in the context
   of the secretary-general's Agenda for Peace." This UN army would
   accept volunteers from various countries and eventually would replace
   all national armies. These UN soldiers would be authorized to operate
   within the borders of countries, arrest any individuals or groups that
   violate any international law (which is the supreme law of the world).
   Of course, there's nothing new about such action. George Bush
   undertook the invasion of the sovereign state of Somalia, and that
   supposedly established a precedent for such action in the future in
   that Bill Clinton left American soldiers there under the command of a
   UN general from Turkey. More recently Clinton sent US troops to
   Macedonia where they are under the command of a Danish general.
   
   The second important decision of G-7 had to do with the now official
   recognition of a third regional world government. So now it is
   official: The world is to be divided into three principal regions: The
   European Community (called EUROPE), the American Community (NAFTA),
   and the Pacific Community, headquartering in Tokyo.
   
   Conclusion. It has been called "a black cloud rolling across the
   land." By our own federal government and with the permission or
   indifference of the great majority of our people were are being moved
   irresistibly toward a socialist police state. Strong pressure is being
   brought against Constitutionalists, Christians, pro-lifers, gun owners
   and other resistors against slavery. We have forgotten that this is a
   land where Christ is our King. And we are paying the price. Ours has
   become a spiritual battle and we must remember that "We wrestle not
   against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers,
   against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual
   wickedness in high places." (Ephesians 6:12).
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
   
   from Don Bell Reports, 2 August 1993 issue, by Don Bell, Council
   member, Committee to Restore the Constitution. Published every other
   Friday: $40/yr, DON BELL REPORTS, P.O. Box 2223, Palm Beach, FL 33480.
   
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
   
   Go On
   Go on
   to the last section of Part 5:
   "The Mattoid Syndrome."
   
   CRC Logo
   Go back
   to the homepage for
   The Committee to Restore the Constitution.
   
   mailbox
   Send a message
   to
   Col. Roberts. [IMAGE]
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   
   
   
   
   [ Feedback | Search | Help | Credits | Home ]
    webmaster@fortnet.org



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: ALERT: 16 country NATO exercise in US on Aug. 12? (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 21:40:02 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

Please read the paragraph that I have highlighted below.  Verify and 
report if possible.

Bob

*********************************************************************

Re: English: Reuter (fwd)

  =*=*=   A l b a N e w s - Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:12:30 GMT-05  =*=*=
  ftp:ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu/albanian      Usenet:bit.listserv.albanian

          01Aug96 ALBANIA: PRESS DIGEST - ALBANIA - AUG 1. 07:54 GMT
          TIRANA, Aug 1 (Reuter) - The following are the main stories
          from Thursday morning's Albanian newspapers. Reuters has not
          verified these stories and does not vouch for their
          accuracy.

          KOHA JONE
          - Interior Minister Halit Shamata said security officials
          had made progress in solving the mystery of a fatal bomb
          attack in the capital five months ago.

          - Albania ratified the European Convention on the Defence of
          Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. Fatos Nano, the jailed
          leader of the opposition Socialist Party, might be the first
          Albanian to ask for his cae to be reviewed.

          - Albania will have four million inhabitants by the year
          2000, five times more than in 1938.

          GAZETA SHQIPTARE
          - Servet Pellumbi, deputy chairman of the Socialist Party,
          said jailed party leader Fatos Nano was sending
          contradictory messages about party reform. Pellumbi said the
          party did not deserve Nano's criticism.
          
************************************************************************

          - Albania will be one of 16 countries to take part in a NATO
          programme of military exercises in the United States on
          August 12.

************************************************************************

          (c) Reuters Limited 1996
          REUTER NEWS SERVICE


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Destruction of Property Rights (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 20:37:58 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Organization: Committee to Restore the Constitution

DESTRUCTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS VIA REGIONALISM  *

Mr Calvin C Steinberger (deceased), President, Oklahoma Committee to
Restore the Constitution, answered a constituents inquiry concerning
'proof' of the destruction of private property rights under federal
regionalism.  Numerous requests to the national headquarters, CRC, prompts
republication of Mr Steinberger's list of documents and personal
observations, first printed in a 1973 CRC release.


Thank you for writing.  Please be advised that in order to 'prove' your
point as to the destruction of our private property rights that you will
need copies of the following documents:

(1)  P. L. 89-136 entitled "Public Works and Economic Development Act of
1965".  This act is the basis for the manner in which the 10 Federal
Regions are to be governed by a "Multi-State Regional Commission".  It also
states that the Secretary of Commerce has the power to 'acquire in any
lawful manner, any property (real or personal) whenever deemed necessary'.

(2)  Nixon's EO of 21 May 1969 established the outline of the 10 Federal
Regions based upon the authority of the above 1965 Act.  His EO #11647
dated February 1972 established that Federal Regional Councils of federal
bureaucrats were to be established within each Region.  His EO #11490 dated
October 1969 consolidated past EO of previous presidents and enabled him to
declare his 'national emergency' on 15 August 1971 and to thereby have the
dictatorial powers so enumerated in EO #11490.  The American people are now
being 'conditioned' to accept the controls of EO #11490.

(3)  In my State of Oklahoma, there was passed in April 1969 SB 290 which
authorized the Oklahoma Industrial Development and Park Commission to
outline the planning 'Districts' which would conform to the larger Federal
Regions.  On 24 May 1971 by Executive Order our Governor (David Hall) froze
all counties into their respective Economic Development Districts.

(4)  Seventeen days later, or on 10 June 1971, there was passed SB 101
which gave our Conservation District Directors the power of eminent domain
over all private property (both real and personal) in the State.  This
applies to not only rural properties but to urban properties as well.  This
was the enforcement legislation needed to enforce No. (1) above.

(5)  P. L. 92-512 known as the Revenue Sharing Act was passed on 20 October
1972.  The primary function of this Act was to provide that:  "after 1
January 1974 if two or more States request it of the US government, and at
the option of the individual States, all State taxes may be collected and
administered by the federal government."  It further provides a 'ceiling
and floor' for State Income Taxes, and states that no State may thereafter
alter its tax structure without first obtaining permission of the federal
government.  It further provides for the manner in which State and local
'boundary changes, and government reorganization' could be handled.

(6)  P. L. 91-596 dated 29 December 1970 known as the "Occupational Safety
and Health Act of 1970" was passed.  This Act was necessary in order to
gain control of private property 'usage'.  The Act specifically limited
itself to private businesses and excluded State, County, Municipal, School
District, and Conservation District governing bodies.  It set forth that
its enabling legislation must provide that the above State government and
its political subdivisions must also abide by the standards set forth in
the federal Act.

(7)  There is presently pending in Oklahoma, SB 168 which is known as the
OSMA of 1973.  This Oklahoma Act is the State enabling legislation of No.
(6) above.  It further expands the federal Act to include all employers of
whatever size (whereas the federal Act as amended limits record keeping
requirements to employers of over 7 employees).

(8)  P. L. 92-500 dated 18 October 1972 which is known as the "Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972" was passed which set forth
that States may assume pollution control enforcement on all businesses,
land owners, and their equipment and land.  As did the OSMA Act of No. (6)
above.  This Act provides an effective 'informer system' for citizens and
employees to squeal on their neighbors and/or employers.  It also creates a
body corporate to be known as the Environmental Financing Authority to have
the power to acquire private property (real or personal) by whatever means
and to also sell or lease said property.  It also set forth that if the
States desired to assume the enforcement duties of the federal government
that it - the State - must enact enabling legislation which must be
approved by the federal government.

(9)  There is presently pending in Oklahoma SB 9 which is known as "The
Environmental Quality Management Act of 1973" which would conform to the
desires of the federal Act of No. (8) above.  This Act further combines the
State Noise Control Agency, Air Pollution Control Agency, Water Pollution
Control Agency, Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Agency, and General
Environmental Protection Agency into one all encompassing "Environmental
Quality Management Board".  Such Board would issue all permits necessary to
be issued to businesses and landowners.  All of this pollution control
legislation is necessary, because you see the bureaucrats have included the
OSMA as an attempt to control the 'environmental containment' known as the
'working environment'.  This is actually written up in our local INCOG
"Regional Pollution Study" book.


(10) There is presently pending in the US House of Representatives S 268
which was passed by the Senate on 9 January 1973.  This Act is known as the
"Land Use Policy and Planning Assistance Act of 1973".  It provides that a
State must conform to the future land-use quidelines of the federal
government, and that it - the State's - enabling legislation must include
the authority of the State to prohibit, under State police powers, the use
of land within areas which have been designated as 'areas of critical
environmental concern'.  It further provides the definition of 'areas of
critical environmental concern' to be, among other things, 'such additional
areas as the State determines to be of critical environmental concern'.

Needless to say, the key points to remember throughout all of your studies
concerning the conspiracy are: (1) The attack is always against property,
(2) There is a centralization of police power, and, (3) Rule is to be by
appointed officials and controlled by the Executive Branch of our
government.

As you can see, there is no one 'Act' that you can use for definite
'proof'.  They are all being enacted to 'fit into place'.
                                                       S/Calvin C.
Steinberger
                                                       Calvin C. Steinberger

NOTE:  Though defeated in the US House of Representatives, pertinent
sections of the "Land Use Policy and Planning Assistance Act of 1973" (No.
(10) above), called "The Udall Bill", were surreptitiously inserted into
THE FEDERAL REGISTER by Mr Russell Train, Director, US Environmental
Protection Agency. "Land Control" thus became the law of the land in
contradiction to the will of Congress and the interest of the people.  It
is upon the spurious 'administrative law' of Mr Train that subsequent 'land
control laws' were mandated by the respective state legislatures in
violation of the prohibitions of the Fifth Amendment, United States
Constitution.

* From EMERGING STRUGGLE FOR STATE SOVEREIGNTY (1979) by Archibald E
Roberts, OUT OF STOCK
============================================================================
Control of land is central to objectives of Federal Regionalism.  Regional
Government seeks to overthrow the Constitution, merge fifty States into ten
Federal Regions, change form of government from elective to appointed
system, seize control of all
property-production-communication-transportation, revoke civil rights and
reduce you to status of 'human resource' subject to dictates of central
authority in Washington.

Remedy to seditious conspiracy of Federal Regionalism is offered in an
eleven part electronic magazine series "The Silent Revolution of Federal
Regionalism - A Solution".  Parts 1, 2, 3, 4  & 5 now posted for your use
in defending your family and property.

See Committee to Restore the Constitution web site:
http://www.fortnet.org/~comminc

Archibald E Roberts, LtCol, AUS, ret, Director
Committee to Restore the Constitution, Inc
P O Box 986   Fort Collins   Colorado   80522

--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-05 Strategy to Fight Terrorism Fact Sheet 
Date: 07 Aug 1996 20:39:42 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Sender: daemon@ai.mit.edu

Keywords: Crime, Economy, Fact-Sheet, Foreign, Infrastructure, International-Cooperation,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/1996/8/6/9.TEXT.1





			   THE WHITE HOUSE
				   
		    Office of the Press Secretary
______________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release	      	   	                August 5, 1996
				   
				   
			      FACT SHEET
				   
				   
			  AMERICAN SECURITY
    PRESIDENT CLINTON'S COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY TO FIGHT TERRORISM

As we enter a new era of remarkable possibility, those of us who 
live in free and open societies have a duty to face up to its 
perils, especially terrorism.  No one is immune from the forces 
of destruction evidenced on the Tokyo subway, the buses of Tel 
Aviv, the streets of London and Moscow, the federal building in 
Oklahoma City, Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia and, most recently, 
in Atlanta.  America, the indispensable leader, has a 
responsibility to act and to lead as a result.  Our 
responsibility is to do everything we can to prevent terrorist 
attacks, to bring to justice those who commit them, and above 
all, to never let terrorism stop us from moving forward with our 
lives.  An open society can never be free from risk.  But we can 
reduce the risks to our freedom by fighting back, step by step, 
with our resources, our will and our strength. That's our 
challenge.  And we will prevail.

PRESIDENT CLINTON HAS AND WILL CONTINUE TO LEAD THE FIGHT AGAINST 
TERRORISM -- AT HOME, ABROAD, AND IN OUR AIRPORTS 

President Clinton has made the fight against terrorism a national 
security priority.  His past and recent efforts have advanced a 
concerted strategy to fight terrorism on three fronts: (1)  
beyond our borders by working more closely than ever with our 
friends and allies; (2) at home, by giving law enforcement the 
most powerful counterterrorism tools available; and, (3) in our 
airport and airplanes by increasing aviation security.  These 
efforts are part of the President's comprehensive strategy to 
ensure that Americans enjoy the safety and security they deserve 
and that America enters the 21st century as the greatest force 
for peace and prosperity on earth. 
     
  FIGHTING TERRORISM ABROAD:  In order to ensure American 
  security at home, we must devote considerable resources to 
  fighting terrorism abroad.  This means working more closely 
  than ever before with our allies and taking other measures when 
  necessary to eliminate activities by states that sponsor 
  terrorism.
     
          Working with Other Countries:  The United States plays 
     the leadership role in the international fight against 
     terrorism.  Our intelligence services are sharing more 
     information than ever before with other nations.  The U.S. 
     has opened a law enforcement academy in Budapest that is 
     training people from 23 countries.  We have opened an FBI 
     office in Moscow, and, with recently approved funds from 
     Congress, will open others in Cairo, Islamabad, Tel Aviv and 
     Beijing. The President Clinton has requested more money for 
     intelligence in 1997 than was appropriated last year and has 
     called for an increase in training and assistance programs 
     to foreign nations.  This assistance is intended to 
     strengthen other nations' law enforcement capabilities -- a 
     major obstacle to our international anti-terrorism efforts. 
     Together, these measures led the Senate Intelligence 
     Committee to commend U.S. intelligence agencies' 
     counterterrorism work, calling it an example of "effective 
     coordination and information sharing."
     
     Last Fall, President Clinton called on all nations to join 
     in the fight against the threat to their citizens' security 
     posed by terrorism.  Since then, the UN Crime Commission 
     passed a U.S. co-sponsored "International Declaration on 
     Crime and Public Safety" which will extend world-wide the 
     goals of regional anti-crime and counterterrorism measures.  
     The President also imposed an embargo against Iran, 
     depriving it of the benefits of trade and investment with 
     the U.S. until it changes its unacceptable behavior.
     
     Working with Other Countries, con't:  Following the 
     assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and 
     terrorist bombings in Israel, President Clinton called for 
     and co-chaired the historic Summit of the Peacemakers at 
     Sharm el-Sheikh.  This summit brought together twenty-nine 
     delegations, including Israel, most Arab countries, and our 
     European and Japanese allies, to pledge their support 
     against terrorism.  President Clinton also sent $50 million 
     in counterterrorism assistance to Israel, and has proposed 
     to Congress that we provide another $50 million in FY 1997.  
     These funds allow for the purchase and shipments of 
     counterterrorism equipment and training
     
     	  Most recently, the President put anti-terrorism 
     proposals at the top of the G-7 agenda in Lyon.  He then 
     sent Attorney General Reno to the Paris Terrorism 
     Ministerial to take the next steps.  The Eight made 
     significant strides in turning the proposals into action. 
     They agreed to 25 specific measures, including to: better 
     protect mass transportation by toughening and standardizing 
     security measures; develop means of lawful government 
     access to coded communications transmitted by terrorists;  
     make it a crime for individuals 
     to possess biological weapons;  and, speed up and share R & 
     D regarding explosive detection methods.  Reno also directed 
     the FBI to study the creation of a terrorism forensic 
     science database and to report their findings in 90 days.
     
     Increasing Pressure on States that Support Terrorism -- Iran 
     and Libya:  President Clinton signed the Iran and Libya 
     Sanctions Act of 1996 today. The bill allows him to impose
     sanctions on foreign companies that engage in specified 
     economic transactions in Iran or Libya.  It will help deny 
     Iran and Libya revenues that can be used to finance 
     international terrorism or obtain weapons of mass 
     destruction, and, pressure Libya to comply with resolutions 
     that, among other things, call for Libya to extradite the 
     accused perpetrators of the Pan Am 103 bombing for trial.
     
     Protecting Troops in Saudi Arabia:  President Clinton has taken
     extensive measures to increase security at our facilities in
     Saudi Arabia.  After the November Riyadh bombing and the attack
     at Khobar Towers, he expanded Americans' protection by extending
     the security perimeter around our bases, added new barriers,
     made it tougher for cars and trucks to get close to our housing
     and relocated some troops within our bases.  He also ordered
     investigations by the FBI and General Downing, due to report his
     findings this month.  Most recently, with the cooperation of the
     Saudi government, we are moving troops to other bases to better
     protect them from terrorists.
     
  FIGHTING TERRORISM AT HOME:  
     
     Pushed Congress to Pass Tough Anti-Terrorism Legislation:  
     In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, President Clinton 
     toughened a terrorism bill he had already sent to Congress. 
     This bill made terrorism a federal offense, expanded the 
     role of the FBI in solving such crimes and imposed the death 
     penalty for terrorism.  The President signed the 
     Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 into 
     law in April.  
     
     Continuing to Push for Additional Tools to Fight Terrorism 
     at Home:  When Congress passed this legislation, they failed 
     to include other important measures to give our law 
     enforcement the tools they need to make Americans as secure 
     as possible.  Following the recent bombing in Atlanta, 
     President Clinton requested new legislation to give our law 
     enforcement the resources he has asked for initially:  
     increased wire tap authority and chemical markers for the 
     most common explosives -- including black and smokeless 
     powder -- so that we can more easily track down bomb makers.  
     President Clinton will continue to fight for the passage of 
     these additional measures to better protect the American 
     people.
          Introducing the International Crime Control Act of 
     1996:  Because terrorism, international organized crime and 
     drug trafficking are increasingly interconnected, the 
     President will submit legislation next month that:  expands 
     our fight against money laundering so criminals and 
     terrorists have a tougher time financing their activities;  
     strengthens our border controls to keep more criminals and 
     terrorists out of America;  and, increases the penalties for 
     violent crimes committed against Americans abroad.
     
     Cutting Chemical Weapon Stockpiles:  President Clinton 
     continues to urge the Senate to ratify the Chemical Weapons 
     Convention so that we can cut chemical weapons stockpiles 
     and control the transfer of lethal materials.  Once the CWC 
     is in force, it will be much more difficult for terrorists 
     to acquire chemical weapons like the Sarin gas that injured 
     thousands in the Tokyo subway.
     
     Expanding the Role of the FBI:  President Clinton has worked 
     to expand the role of the FBI, the leader in 
     counterterrorism efforts around the world.  Since the 
     President expanded the FBI's budget and staff, the FBI now 
     provides counterterrorism training to over forty countries 
     in the international law enforcement community.  
     Furthermore, the FBI has created a Counterterrorism Branch 
     that acts as the center for information collection, analysis 
     and dissemination to better combat terrorism at home and 
     abroad.  Personnel assigned to such programs has increased 
     approximately 50%.
     
  FIGHTING TERRORISM IN OUR AIRPORTS AND AIRPLANES:

     Took Immediate Measures:  Despite the fact that the cause of 
the TWA 800 tragedy is yet to be determined, Americans are 
anxious about aviation safety and security.  President Clinton 
ordered new measures to increase the safety and security of air 
travel on international and domestic flights. Specifically, he 
called for more hand searches and machine screening of luggage 
and pre-flight inspections for every plane flying to or from the 
United States.

     Established Aviation Safety and Security Commission Headed 
by Vice President:  This Commission, which will report its 
findings to President Clinton in 45 days, has a three part 
mandate:       	    
     	  review and identify possible changes to airline and 
airport security operations, with a specific action plan due to 
the President on deploying new technology capable of detecting 
the most sophisticated explosives;  	     	  
review and identify possible changes to aviation safety 
regulations; and, examine and identify possible changes to the 
air traffic control system.

     These Steps Build on Previous Actions:  The President has 
been improving aviation security since the beginning of the 
Administration.  The Administration has field tested new 
explosive detection machines in Atlanta and San Francisco;  
increased security vigilance at our airports; and, the FAA 
formed a private sector/government commission to review aviation 
security.

THESE EFFORTS HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO KEEP AMERICANS SECURE


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: ALERT: 16 country NATO exercise in US on Aug. 12? (fwd)
Date: 07 Aug 1996 21:26:49 -0600

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 09:59:46 -0700
>From: Bob Shearer <bshearer@88net.net>
>Subject: ALERT: 16 country NATO exercise in US on Aug. 12?
>
>Please read the paragraph that I have highlighted below.  Verify and
>report if possible.
>
>Bob
>
>*********************************************************************
>
>Re: English: Reuter (fwd)
>

>************************************************************************
>
>          - Albania will be one of 16 countries to take part in a NATO
>          programme of military exercises in the United States on
>          August 12.
>
>************************************************************************
>
>          (c) Reuters Limited 1996
>          REUTER NEWS SERVICE

Yes, so?

Joint military exercise take place all over the world all the time with our
allies.  Nothing to get all huffy about.

best regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: CONCEALED GUN STUDY (fwd)
Date: 08 Aug 1996 00:37:28 -0400 (EDT)



---------- Forwarded message ----------

	http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/~llou/guncont.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Abstract

Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. counties
from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing citizens to carry
concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to
produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states
which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions
had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177
rapes; and over 60,000 aggravate assaults would have been
avoided yearly. On the other hand, consistent with the
notion of criminals responding to incentives, we find
criminals substituting into property crimes involving
stealth and where the probabilities of contact between the
criminal and the victim are minimal. The largest population
counties where the deterrence effect on violent crimes is
greatest are where the substitution effect into property
crimes is highest. Concealed handguns also have their
greatest deterrent effect in the highest crime counties.
Higher arrest and conviction rates consistently and
dramatically reduce the crime rate. Consistent with other
recent work (Lott, 1992b), the results imply that increasing
the arrest rate, independent of the probability of eventual
conviction, imposes a significant penalty on criminals. The
estimated annual gain from allowing concealed handguns is at
least $6.214 billion.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 08 Aug 1996 06:33:11 -0700

        Donna,

        There are several areas in your post that need attention.
        Sorry for taking this long to answer them, but being busy and all
that (just plain living) . . .

        The following items call my attention.

        >>>>>>>
        A photo of the lower section of the
vertical stabilizer does show, however a crease in the leading edge
and numerous small chips and dings in the surface paint (black & white
photo precludes examination of white undercoat or bare metal in red
surface) that seem to splay backward and upward.  This is similar to the
type of damage seen in photos of aircraft struck by small, shoulder-fired,
IR-guided surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) of the SA-7/14/16/18 GRAIL/GREMLIN/
GIMLET/GROUSE and FIM-92 Stinger types.
        <<<<<<<

        One must be very carefull when assessing damage to aircraft,
especially on that has subsequently fallen into the ocean. Water can be
very *hard* at high speeds, and much of the damage that might be attributed
to a weapon, is the result of surface impact damage.

        >>>>>>>
        The left wingtip, including the area which should have the extended
range fuel tank, shows no evidence of fire as well.  If the engines on the
left side had been hit, the fuel tank would likely have suffered a fire
before the tail separated. There is no evidence this occurred.
        <<<<<<<

        The 747 series aircraft, including the -400's,  have (3) fuel tanks
in each wing. The outer section is used as a reserve/overflow tank, while
the inboard tanks are used by each engine, as numbered.
        The centerwing tank, is used untill it is low enough to be sumped
into the left or right wing tanks.
        There are no "extended range fuel tank(s)" on the 747. The 747-400
has a stab tank (horizontal stabilizer) that is used to give extended
range, but is not referred to as such. To my knowledge, the only Boeing
airliner with such a designation is the 767ER (767 Extended Range). That
particular aircraft has a fuel tank in the forward cargo area aft, for just
such a purpose.

        >>>>>>>
        The APU is not likely to have been operating, as it provides
ground power, but the aircraft was caught on the ground for an extended
period of time, with the APU running virtually the entire time.  It would
have had only something near 30 minutes to cool down before the incident
and is likely to have still been emanating IR energy.
        <<<<<<<

        APU operation (once flight has been achieved) is largely a matter
of operating procedure for each airline. You would be surprised at how
quickly it (the tail pipe) will cool once it is in the upper atmosphere
with air rushing past at high speed.
        If the APU had been secured prior to a 'possible' IR missile shoot,
then it would be quite unlikely to be a target, since the spectrum would be
missing as a possible source. Hot metal does not radiate with the same
brilliance as an exhaust plume. In fact, the heat being given off by
cooling metal would be so diffused by the passing air, that the IR sensor
would very probably not even 'see' it.

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Web Sites Of Interest
Date: 08 Aug 1996 10:50:47 -0500

Today's WSJ had an article about web sites of general interest. Two of them
may be of interest to pro-liberty activists.

http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/charters.html

This is the National Archives site where the Declaration of Independence,
Constitution, Bill of Rights and remaining Amendments are available, in text
and original document form. Also included is the Magna Carta.

http://www.politicsnow.com/

Politics Now has maps showing poll results - for what they are worth. You
can see if your state is American or Marxist-Fascist. Also see the latest
gossip on Dole's VP shortlist.

There is a third site which has nothing directly to do with liberty
activism, but I mention it anyway because it may be useful.

http://www.proximus.com/yahoo/

This site has street maps - you tell it street address(es), ZIP codes, etc.,
and it comes back with a decent looking map, albeit a bit old.

FWIW,

Bob Knauer

--
       
****************************************************
  A I M N E T           Advanced Internet Marketing
  Corporation            World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>      http://www.aimtec.com/
****************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: RE: Ray Southwell Rebuts Congresswoman Jackson-Lee (fwd)
Date: 08 Aug 1996 11:50:42 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------


(Please Repost and distribute widely)

regarding the Armed Militia.

	Recently I was given a copy of your speech before Congress dated 
August 2,1996. I was shocked at the misinformation that you gave your 
colleagues. Congress continues to deny an open forum for discussion on 
the many reasons for the Militia movement. You madam, like the press, 
continue to manufacture public consent for the destruction of freedoms 
and liberties in this nation. History will show how Congress led this 
country into civil war because they would not listen.
	The Militia continues to grow. Last weekend I spoke to a black 
Militia leader in Detroit who told me of new members who just joined his 
unit. He told me of one white man who told a black man how honored he was 
for being sworn in at the same time in the same unit. Madam, you continue 
to support the injustice by passing out misinformation. 
	You said, "The United States Government is comprised of 
democratic institutions  and any change to the Government should occur by 
peaceful means." This is a Constitutional Republic--a limited democracy. 
A democracy is nothing more than mob rule. Blacks as a minority have felt 
the sting of democracy in the past. In a democracy the public's mind can 
be molded through manufactured consent (see the book, Manufacturing 
Consent by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky). I also remind you of The 
Declaration of Independence, that great document,  that established this 
nation. It says "We hold these truths to be self -evident that all man 
are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain 
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of 
Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among 
Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That 
whenever ANY FORM of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is 
the RIGHT of the People to alter or to abolish it... it is their RIGHT, 
it is their DUTY, to throw off such Government!
	You also mentioned Oklahoma City, Pan Am 103, and TWA 800,
insinuating the Militia was involved in those atrocities. There is no
connection, only what has been manufactured by the press and those corrupt
individuals in government.  State Representative Charles Keys, from
Oklahoma, is concerned about a government cover up of the bombing of the
Murrah Federal building in his state. He has asked for an independent
investigation, at the state level, but the idea was rejected.  Once again
corruption and injustice prevail with a Government cover up. I am reminded
of the Government injustice and corruption of past atrocities, John
Kennedy's assassination, Iran Contra, CIA complicity in the drug trade and
the Savings and Loan scandal, to mention a few in a long train of abuses
on the American People. 
	You said "many (Militia) subscribe to the Identity Religion. I 
must again correct you, few belong to the Christian Identity Religion. It 
appears  that your information  is coming from that libelous organization 
The Southern Poverty Law Center (Morris Dees). You need to check your 
sources, some organizations will say anything to increase there wealth. 
	You speak about  "peaceful addressing of their grievances". The 
redress of grievances continues but to no avail. From Daniel Sheehan, of 
the Christic Institute, in his attempt to expose the truth about Iran 
Contra to the Freemen's attempt to expose the corrupt banking system, the 
Government continues to ignore the redress.
	SHAME ON YOU for not examining the whole picture. SHAME ON YOU 
for not stopping the corruption. SHAME ON YOU for compromising with the 
corrupt. SHAME ON YOU for not standing up in Congress demanding  to know 
the whole truth. I can no longer set back and wait for you. When you are 
ready to send your Jack Booted Thugs to destroy the Militia, have them 
come for me first. You see, the corruption  and injustice must stop or I 
must be destroyed.  I am an longer concerned of  what will happen to me, 
only what happens to this republic. I can be reached at

      Ray Southwell,  2833 Sunny Ridge Road, Box 564,  Brutus,  Michigan 
49716,  (616) 529-6646

	Here is a short  list of books for you to examine some of those 
"wild tales of government conspiracies".

		High Treason, by Robert J. Groden and 
                     Harrison Edward Livingstone
		The Mafia, CIA and George Bush, by Pete Brewton
		The Politics of Heroin-CIA Complicity in the Global Drug 
                     Trade, by Alfred W.McCoy
		The Big White Lie, by Michael Levine
		Powderburns-Cocaine, Contras and the Drug War, by 
                     Celerino Castillo III
		Compromised: Clinton, Bush and the CIA, by Terry Reed and 
                     John Cummings
		October Surprise, by Gary Sick




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Clinton & Iran (fwd)
Date: 08 Aug 1996 12:06:12 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

		News Update:  Clinton & Iran

			by J. Orlin Grabbe

	1.  Bob Strauss lead a high-level Democratic 
delegation to talk to President William Jefferson Clinton.  
They asked Clinton to withdraw his name as a contender for 
the 1996 Presidential nomination. They don't want an October 
Surprise, they said.  They said they knew from Kenneth Starr 
that an indictment of Hillary Clinton would be forthcoming 
between the Democratic convention and the November 
election.  Apparently other issues, such as that of Clinton's 
fitness to be President--allegedly including Clinton's excessive 
use of cocaine--were raised.    

	Meanwhile,  leading Republicans like House Speaker 
Newt Gingrich know that a second Fifth Column packet has 
been prepared for Bob Dole.  But to this point it would seem 
they are waiting for someone else to do their job for them.  
Will there be a revolt at the Republican convention and a push 
for a new nominee?  Or will Republicans twiddle their thumbs 
until Dole is forced to withdraw from the race?

	2.  Israeli radio says Israel has been told by the U.S. 
that it will likely attack Iran soon. According to the Isarali 
radio station Arutz7: 

	U.S. LIKELY TO ATTACK 
	IRAN--The United States 
	Army is likely to receive an 
	order in the coming days to 
	attack Iranian targets, 
	including nuclear bases and 
	Iranian ships. This will be in 
	retaliation for Teheran's 
	involvement in the late-June 
	attack against the Marines in 
	Saudi Arabia and the downing 
	of the TWA airliner. The 
	Americans have reported to 
	Israel regarding their plans to 
	attack Iran.

Whether this policy of apparent overkill will have any effect on 
the threatened Syrian terror campaign in the U.S. is not at all 
clear.  

August 6, 1996
Web Page:  http://www.aci.net/kalliste/


--




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 08 Aug 1996 15:09:17 -0500

From the "news":

	Liberties Could Suffer  
	A new poll shows most Americans are willing to give up some  
liberties in order to fight terrorism. The nationwide survey by 
the Los Angeles Times was conducted after the explosion of TWA 
Flight 800 and the bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
Sixty-five percent of those polled expressed concern the fight 
against terrorism could bring restrictions on personal freedoms. 
But 58 percent said they would be willing to give up some 
liberties in exchange for safety. 

--
       
****************************************************
  A I M N E T           Advanced Internet Marketing
  Corporation            World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>      http://www.aimtec.com/
****************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 08 Aug 1996 13:40:47 -0700 (PDT)

It would not surprise me -at-all- to hear that this poll was conducted 
within hours of the centennial park fiasco and that a half hour later 
half that 58% would have changed their tune. Be that as it may, I heard 
on NPR yesterday (afternoon magazine, forgot the name) an "expert" on 
terrorism (or maybe due to frequency of use that should be 
"expertonterrorism") say that there has been a -significant- drop in 
worldwide terrorism against US targets since the late 70's. It seems to 
me that the drums are getting beaten mighty loudly about this and frankly 
more people should have electronic hearing protectors.
Boyd

On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:

> >From the "news":
> 
> 	Liberties Could Suffer  
> 	A new poll shows most Americans are willing to give up some  
> liberties in order to fight terrorism. The nationwide survey by 
> the Los Angeles Times was conducted after the explosion of TWA 
> Flight 800 and the bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
> Sixty-five percent of those polled expressed concern the fight 
> against terrorism could bring restrictions on personal freedoms. 
> But 58 percent said they would be willing to give up some 
> liberties in exchange for safety. 
> 
> --
>        
> ****************************************************
>   A I M N E T           Advanced Internet Marketing
>   Corporation            World Wide Web Publishing 
> 
>  <websales@aimtec.com>      http://www.aimtec.com/
> ****************************************************
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 08 Aug 1996 16:50:56 -0400


>	 Liberties Could Suffer  
>	 A new poll shows most Americans are willing to give up some  
>liberties in order to fight terrorism. The nationwide survey by 
>the Los Angeles Times was conducted after the explosion of TWA 
>Flight 800 and the bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
>Sixty-five percent of those polled expressed concern the fight 
>against terrorism could bring restrictions on personal freedoms. 
>But 58 percent said they would be willing to give up some 
>liberties in exchange for safety. 
>

	One pipe bomb is exploded, likely, but not certainly, by a 
	security guard wishing to be a hero.

	One airliner crashs with large loss of life.   The crash is 
	likely caused by either a bomb or a missile, but no definitive 
	determination has been made for days after, as to what -let alone
	why or who.

	Doesn't sound like very much terrorism to me, in a nation of 
	280 million.

	Who commissioned this poll, and why?   Smells like agit-prop to 
	me.    When the polls are the news, then everyone gets conditioned 
	to accept whatever is coming down the pike, as "the majority of 
	their neighbors prefer to trade liberties for safety".

	Just like the majority favors gun control when violent crime is 
	dropping.   Oh?  You believe violent crime is increasing?

	You must be reading the wrong agit-prop.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 08 Aug 1996 16:32:34 -0500

>You must be reading the wrong agit-prop.

I got the item below off the Reuters News feed on <clari.net>.

Bob Knauer


++++++

>	 Liberties Could Suffer  
>	 A new poll shows most Americans are willing to give up some  
>liberties in order to fight terrorism. The nationwide survey by 
>the Los Angeles Times was conducted after the explosion of TWA 
>Flight 800 and the bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
>Sixty-five percent of those polled expressed concern the fight 
>against terrorism could bring restrictions on personal freedoms. 
>But 58 percent said they would be willing to give up some 
>liberties in exchange for safety. 
>

	One pipe bomb is exploded, likely, but not certainly, by a 
	security guard wishing to be a hero.

	One airliner crashs with large loss of life.   The crash is 
	likely caused by either a bomb or a missile, but no definitive 
	determination has been made for days after, as to what -let alone
	why or who.

	Doesn't sound like very much terrorism to me, in a nation of 
	280 million.

	Who commissioned this poll, and why?   Smells like agit-prop to 
	me.    When the polls are the news, then everyone gets conditioned 
	to accept whatever is coming down the pike, as "the majority of 
	their neighbors prefer to trade liberties for safety".

	Just like the majority favors gun control when violent crime is 
	dropping.   Oh?  You believe violent crime is increasing?

	You must be reading the wrong agit-prop.

+++++
--
       
****************************************************
  A I M N E T           Advanced Internet Marketing
  Corporation            World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>      http://www.aimtec.com/
****************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: muhgi@cyberramp.net (Muhgi)
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 08 Aug 1996 22:43:35 -0500

At 22:15 8/7/96, NRA Alerts wrote:
>               N  R  A    G  R  A  S  S  F  I  R  E
>
>              The Newsletter for NRA-ILA Volunteers
>
>August 1996                                        Vol. 2., No. 8
>                     DOLE DEVIATES ON GUN BAN
>
>With good reason, many NRA members expressed concern throughout
>July about statements made by presumptive Republican presidential
>nominee Bob Dole on repealing the Clinton gun ban.  You'll recall
>that in 1995, Mr. Dole declared that repeal of the Clinton gun
>ban would be one his top legislative priorities, yet his recent
>remarks indicated that his position has shifted, and he no longer
>supports repeal of the ban he himself has called ineffective and
>"not very sound policy."  The decision on whether the NRA will

Who did this spin? Dole said he would veto a bill to repeal the ban--very
different from what is said here. The NRA used to be trusted to tell the
truth. Oh well.

>make an endorsement in this race will not be made until
>September, when NRA's Board of Directors will meet to take up the
>issue.  Regardless of our involvement in the presidential race,
>NRA's top priority will continue to be re-electing a Second
>Amendment majority to Congress, so it is critical that you
>actively support pro-gun candidates in your area.  For more
>information on how you can elect lawmakers who will support your
>rights, please call the NRA Political Victory Fund today at
>1-800-VOTE-NRA (that's 1-800-868-3672.)  Members are also
>encouraged to express their concerns about Dole's wavering by
>calling the Dole Campaign at 202-414-6400 and the Republican
>National Committee at 202-863-8500.


>NATIONAL "RIGHT-TO-CARRY" BILL INTRODUCED
>
>Your fundamental right to defend yourself and your family against
>criminal attack does not end at the state line.  Yet today, many
>states that allow their residents to carry firearms for self-
>defense deny that same right to qualified, law-abiding
>individuals from other states.  That situation would change if

If it is a fundamental right, why do I need government permission to
exercise it?

-Muhgi

========= http://www.cyberramp.net/~muhgi/muhgi.html ==============
"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're
begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals
among men were always automatically 'right'. Guns ended that, and
social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work." -Clarissa in _The Probability Broach_, L.N. Smith
===Collin County Gun Owners===Libertarian Party of Collin County===



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ken L. Holder" <kholder@shell.liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 08 Aug 1996 14:19:01 -0700

Here's the whole thing:
Thursday, August 8, 1996

THE TIMES POLL
Terrorism Fears Fuel Support for Limits
on Liberty

By JAMES GERSTENZANG, Times Staff Writer

     WASHINGTON--In the wake of the
explosion of TWA Flight 800 and the
bombing at Centennial Olympic Park in
Atlanta, a majority of Americans are
willing to give up some civil liberties
in order to fight terrorism, according
to a Los Angeles Times Poll.
      But Americans appear reluctant to
use military force to retaliate against
those found to be responsible for
downing Flight 800--assuming
investigators determine that the crash
was caused by a bomb. Instead, they
prefer the use of economic sanctions and
the U.S. judicial system, the poll
found.
      The responses to a Times Poll
conducted Saturday through Tuesday also
suggest that a growing segment of the
nation believes that even if law
enforcement authorities are given
additional abilities to fight terrorism,
they will not be able to thwart most
attacks.

      "There's this feeling of
resignation," said Susan Pinkus, who
directed the poll. "I don't think they
feel as secure as they once did. Their
naivete has gone away."
      Yet as that sense of security has
eroded, the nation has grudgingly begun
to believe that it will have to
relinquish some freedoms in the name of
safety, the poll found.
      Fifty-eight percent of those
surveyed said they are willing to give
up some civil liberties in order to
fight terrorism, while 23% said they are
not willing to do so. Thirteen percent
said their response would depend on
which liberties would be curtailed.
Respondents were not asked which
specific liberties they would be willing
to relinquish.
      "We're going to have to function
differently with regard to our safety,"
Paul Kurtz of Marietta, Ga., said in an
interview after responding to the poll.
Kurtz offered that opinion even as he
expressed support for free speech and
other civil liberties, and for limited
government intrusion into private lives.

      Overall, the poll found that 65%
of respondents were somewhat or very
concerned that the fight against
terrorism could bring restrictions on
civil liberties. But more than half of
that group, 54%, said they were willing
to give in to those restrictions to
enhance safety.
      "It would be really sad to have
that happen," Terry May of New
Braunfels, Texas, said in a follow-up
interview. "But if things keep going the
way they are, we may have to accept some
loss of privacy."
      The Times Poll interviewed 1,572
adults nationwide by telephone. The
margin of sampling error is plus or
minus 3 percentage points.
      Americans expressed pronounced
willingness to put up with additional
cost and inconvenience in order to gain
greater security aboard airplanes and in
airports. Government officials and
aviation experts have indicated that
security improvements could mean more
thorough and time-consuming inspections
of baggage, the questioning of travelers
and higher fares.
      Of those surveyed, 66% said they
strongly favored making airports more
secure--even at such costs--and another
17% said they "somewhat" favored such a
course. Thirteen percent said they
opposed it, and 4% said they didn't know
what course they preferred.
      And as for punishment of those
responsible if the crash of the Trans
World Airlines jetliner is found to have
been the work of terrorists sponsored by
a foreign power, 40% said the
individuals should be tried in U.S.
courts and the United States should
impose economic sanctions on the nation
involved. Fourteen percent favored
taking military action against the
nation in addition to prosecuting the
individuals in court, while 10% favored
a combination of all those steps.
      Twenty-six percent favored
prosecuting the individuals but taking
no action whatsoever against the nation
that sponsored them.
      But Tom W. Smith, director of
general social surveys at the National
Opinion Research Center of the
University of Chicago, said responses to
the question--which Times pollsters
could only pose hypothetically--almost
certainly would change if investigators
find conclusive evidence that a
terrorist nation is responsible.
      Indeed, May said that while she
did not generally favor a military
response, if Iraqi President Saddam
Hussein was to blame, "you can blow that
country off the map as far as I'm
concerned."
      While terrorism proliferated in
the Middle East and Europe in the 1970s
and 1980s, it is a relatively recent
phenomenon in the United States.
      It was not until a series of
attacks--the 1988 bombing of Pan Am
Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland; the
1993 blast at the World Trade Center in
New York and the 1995 explosion that
destroyed the federal building in
Oklahoma City--that Americans began to
sense their vulnerability.
      The crash of TWA's Boeing 747 with
230 people aboard and the explosion of a
pipe bomb at the Atlanta park, which
killed one person, have refocused the
nation's attention on such concerns.
      Still, the poll suggests that
Americans are becoming somewhat inured
to terrorist attacks, or do not see such
incidents as a threat to them
individually.
      In a Times survey taken
immediately after the Oklahoma City
bombing, 49% of respondents said the
explosion had undermined their sense of
personal security. But the recent poll
found that just 39% of respondents said
they thought the TWA and Atlanta
explosions had made them feel less
secure.
      "The vast majority of people are
not concerned about the personal threat
of terrorism," Smith said.
      Similarly, the percentage of poll
respondents who said they believe that
terrorism is a very serious problem in
the United States has fallen somewhat,
from 49% after the Oklahoma City bombing
to 41% today.
      And 56% of respondents said they
believe that even if law enforcement
officials are given the tools they need
to fight terrorism, they will be able to
prevent only a few of any future
terrorist attacks. Shortly after the
Oklahoma City bombing, a less
pessimistic 48% of those surveyed said
they thought that such support would
prevent only a few attacks.
      * * *
     Terror in U.S.
      A number of Americans say they are
concerned that their civil liberties may
be restricted because of new measures to
fight terrorism, but many are still
willing to give up some of those
liberties to curb such attacks.
      Retaliate or Not?
      If the TWA crash is connected to a
country that supports terrorism, should
we--in addition to trying the person
responsible--retaliate against the
country that sponsored the terrorist by
using economic sanctions, or by using
military force, or should we not
retaliate against that country at all?
      Economic sanctions: 40%
      Military force: 14%
      Should not retaliate: 18%
      Use economic sanctions and
military force (Vol.): 10%
      Just try the person/group that
caused the crash: 8%
      Don't know: 10%
      ****
      Restricting Civil Liberties?
      How concerned are you that new
measures enacted to fight terrorism in
this country may end up restricting some
of our civil liberties?
      Concerned: 65%
      Not concerned: 32%
      Don't know: 3%
      ****
      Willing to Give Up Civil
Liberties?
      Would you be willing to give up
some civil liberties if that were
necessary to curb terrorism in this
country, or not?
      Willing: 58%
      Not willing: 23%
      It Depends (Vol.): 13%
      Don't know: 6%

      * * *
     How the Poll Was Conducted

      The Times Poll contacted 1,572
adults nationwide, by telephone Aug. 3
through Aug. 6. Telephone numbers were
chosen from a list of all exchanges in
the nation. Random-digit dialing
techniques were used so that listed and
non-listed numbers could be contacted.
The sample was weighted slightly to
conform with census figures for sex,
race, age, education, region and party
identification. The margin of sampling
error for all adults is plus or minus 3
percentage points; for certain
sub-groups the error margin may be
somewhat higher. Poll results can also
be affected by other factors such as
question wording and the order in which
questions are presented.


Copyright Los Angeles Times


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 08 Aug 1996 23:29:29 -0500

At 10:43 PM 8/8/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>Who did this spin? Dole said he would veto a bill to repeal the ban--very
>different from what is said here. The NRA used to be trusted to tell the
>truth. Oh well.
>
You have to watch the timing on these things, I think this one came out
between "it's not a priority" and "I would veto a repeal" on LK Live.


>>NATIONAL "RIGHT-TO-CARRY" BILL INTRODUCED
>>
>>Your fundamental right to defend yourself and your family against
>>criminal attack does not end at the state line.  Yet today, many
>>states that allow their residents to carry firearms for self-
>>defense deny that same right to qualified, law-abiding
>>individuals from other states.  That situation would change if
>
>If it is a fundamental right, why do I need government permission to
>exercise it?

Good question, but you do have a CHL, do you not? Wouldn't it be nice if it
were good nationwide?  We'll take this as a "compromise" between the current
situtation and the ability to legally exercise our right to bear arms
without any infringements... for now. Next year we'll be back for another
"compromise". Sound familiar? :) 


>
>

              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: cyrano@ix.netcom.com (Steve Allen Silver)
Subject: LSAS's 'ATF Night'
Date: 08 Aug 1996 23:32:41 -0700

What was I thinking.  I almost forgot to put the word out on the 'Net.  
So here it is....
The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society (LSAS) invites everyone in the 
Southern California area to join it for 'ATF Night' next Thursday 
evening, August 15.  The event will take place at San Gennaro Cafe on 
Culver Boulevard in Culver City (*not* in Brentwood).
The evening will be very informal: speeches will be kept to an absolute 
minimum. The point of ATF Night is to allow pro-firearms activists 
(lawyers and normal people alike) to get together to talk guns and 
network.
Oh yes, the name: ATF night. We will meet in the CigaRoom of the cafe 
so we can enjoy an adult beverages and cigars while we talk guns.
Social hour will commence at 6:30; dinner at 7:30 pm.  We will order 
dinner off the menu; prices range from $5 to $18. 
Please e-mail me a quick note (cyrano@ix.netcom.com) if you plan to 
attend since the room can accommodate up to 60. BTW, if you don't want 
to breathe cigar smoke, you can certainly eat in the regular no-smoking 
dining area.
I hope to see you there.
Steve Silver 
Vice President
The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society
18034 Ventura Blvd., No. 329
Encino, CA  91316
(818) 734-3066

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: RE: WACO UPDATE - 8/8/96 (fwd)
Date: 09 Aug 1996 07:49:47 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
    behold@teleport.com, c-news@world.std.com, campaign@harrybrowne96.org,
    Cato Institute <cato@cato.org>, comminc@fortnet.org,
    cybernews-publish-l@cornell.edu, fsnw-1@tp1.primenet.com,
    hammernet-1@teleport.com, Hippyma <Hippyma@aol.com>, infoaclu@aclu.org,
    liberty-and-justice@pobox.com, misc-activism-militia@uunet.uu.net,
    patriot@aol.com, rkba-dems@netcom.com, snetnews@alterzone.com,
    texas-gun-owners@zilker.net, tm@nra.org, usafeature@gnn.com

FROM: Carol Moore in D.C.  
cmoore@capaccess.org  or cmoore@upx.net
Member, Committee for Waco Justice

               WACO UPDATE - AUGUST 8, 1996
 
**DAVIDIAN APPEALS MORE HOPEFUL THAN REPORTED IN NEWS
     While speaking with one of the Davidian appeals attorneys who had 
read the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals 90 page ruling on the appeals of 
six Branch Davidians, I discovered there were some hopeful rulings and 
options which Associated Press and Reuters reporters failed to report.  
News reports were accurate that the convictions of six Davidians were 
affirmed.  Renos Avraam, Brad Branch, Jaime Castillo and Kevin Whitecliff 
received 40 years each for aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter and 
carrying a weapon in commission of the crime of conspiracy to murder 
federal agents--a crime of which the jury found them innocent.  Found 
guilty on illegal weapons charges, Graeme Craddock received a 20 year 
sentence and Paul Fatta 15 years.
     However, news reports failed to mention that there was some good 
news.  First, the judges ruled that *if* another appeals court currently 
considering whether the federal government has the right to regulate/ban 
automatic weapons rules it cannot, Fatta's conviction can be set aside 
and he can be released.  (Of course, no evidence was presented at trial 
that Fatta knew that the two weapons he had bought allegedly were 
converted to automatics, but the judges did not let that lack of evidence 
sway their decision.)
     Even more promisingly, four Davidians could have 25 years cut off 
their sentences because appeals judges found that the additional 25 year 
sentences Judge Walter J. Smith gave them for allegedly using an 
*illegal* weapon were invalid under the recent Supreme Court decision in 
the Bailey case.  That case held that prosecutors have to prove that the 
individual knew he/she had an illegal weapon.  (The judges *upheld* the 
confused jury's finding that the Davidians used a weapon during the crime 
of conspiracy to kill federal agents--even though they found them 
innocent of conspiracy.)
     Unfortunately, the appeals judges sent this decision on sentencing 
back to the notoriously anti-Davidian Judge Smith.  He will have to 
decide if there is evidence in the trial record that any Davidian had, 
and knew he had, illegal weapons on February 28,1993 during the BATF 
attack on the Branch Davidians during which four federal agents and six 
Davidians died.  If he cannot provide such evidence, he can sentence them 
to only 5 years in prison for carrying a weapon.  (They each received the 
maximum 10 years for aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter.)
     However, before this decision is sent back to Judge Smith, the 
attorneys will be filing a joint brief with all 15 appeals judges asking 
that they *all* review and decide the Davidian appeals.  Attorneys are 
basing this on several factors: the strong dissent by Judge Schwartzer, 
who said the weapons charge should be thrown out because of insufficient 
evidence of conspiracy and that the Davidians should be retried on the 
aiding and abetting manslaughter charge because their was ample evidence 
they acted in self-defense (even though Judge Smith would not allow the 
jury to consider such a defense); the fact that this is such a 
politically and legally significant case; and the fact that other circuit 
courts have found that *only* the jury can decide if defendants had 
illegal weapons while the Fifth Circuit has now ruled the judge can make 
that decision.  When there is a conflict between different circuit court 
rulings, such cases usually go to the Supreme Court.  While circuit 
courts reject most such briefs, there is still an outside chance all the 
appeals judges will hear the case.
     If the appeals judges reject the case, the Davidian attorneys will 
be filing briefs with Judge Smith asserting that there is no credible 
evidence the defendants had or knew they had illegal weapons on February 
28, 1993, when the four BATF agents died.  The only such "evidence" is 
BATF agents allegations they heard automatic gunfire coming from the 
building, the FBI's allegations that 48 weapons found after the fire were 
illegally converted to automatic (there has never been an independent 
verification of this), a jail house snitch's dubious accusation a 
Davidian confessed he used such a weapon on February 28, and Davidian 
Kathryn Schroeder's trial testimony some Davidians had automatic weapons 
after February 28.  If Judge Smith tries to argue there is sufficient 
evidence to justify the additional 25 year sentences, Davidian attorneys 
also can appeal that decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
     Overall, there remains the faint hope that the whole Fifth Circuit 
will hear the case and give some of the Davidians new trials and the 
somewhat better chance that the 25 year sentences will be dropped.   
Unfortunately, the decision is a great boon to Judge Smith, who has been 
busy deciding whether he would recuse (remove) himself from judging the 3 
billion dollar Davidian civil suits against federal officials and agents, 
as the civil suit attorneys demanded he do in briefs filed six weeks 
ago.   Because the appeals judges have upheld his decisions in the 
Davidian trial--only finding a minor error in sentencing--he probably 
feels confidant to take on the civil suits.  Civil suit attorneys assume 
he will do what he did with the first such civil suit--throw the cases 
out entirely.  
 
**LETTER FROM PRISONER LIVINGSTONE FAGAN
     Davidian prisoner Livingstone Fagan, also sentenced to 40 years for 
aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter and weapons charges, refused 
to appeal his conviction and sentence in the belief that God, not "man," 
would set him free.   He also has been non-cooperating with prison 
authorities by refusing to work during the two years he has been in 
federal custody.  He has been in solitary confinement that whole time, 
allowed out of his cell only an hour a day (until his most recent 
incarceration) and allowed only sporadic phone privileges.  Six weeks ago 
he was moved to one of the oldest, most decrepit prison in the federal 
systems, that at Leavenworth, Kansas.  Here is how he describes his 
experience from a recent letter to me:
 
     (First he complains that they have not allowed him his two allotted 
phone calls during his time there and that it took him two weeks to get 
any stamps.)
     "The physical conditions are equally as bad.  The solitary unit is a 
noticeably old building.  My floor holds 300 captives.  At this time of 
the year Kansas is quite hot.  There is no air conditioning.  The windows 
are kept permanently open.  A series of makeshift fans have been 
installed. They are on 24 hours a day.  The combined noise from them is 
deafening.  You have to wear earplugs (not supplied) and raise your voice 
to communicate.  Sleeping is a chore.  Further, I'm held in a 4x10 cell 
designed for one but because of overcrowding houses two.  Imagine being 
locked up 24 hours a day under such conditions.  What is worse, people 
are being locked in solitary at the will of the administration for the 
most trivial of things.  There seems to be the prevailing attitude among 
the staff of reminding captives of who's the Boss!  It is both tedious 
and demoralizing.  So much for rehabilitation! Nevertheless, the captives 
held under these conditions have shown remarkable patience.
        I witnessed one situation where the floor was flooded.  While 
being taking to recreation, both hands handcuffed, a captive slipped and 
fell on his face and broke his tooth.
        I myself did object to having someone placed in my cell in the 
light of the conditions mentioned above.  I stood with my arms on the 
bars.  The guard threatened to break them if I did not remove them.  
Believe me this is no vacation!
        Still, God sits on a Throne! We're approaching the end of our 
prophetic journey.  Please convey my fondest regards to those who have 
shown us compassion in our bonds.  They are the salt of the earth and 
heirs of the Kingdom of God. (Matthew 25:31-46)"
   End Fagan Letter
 
        Needless to say, this is the fate that awaits many who discuss
armed resistance to the ever increasing power of the state.  If the 
Davidians, who were attacked by a huge, unnecessary force of federal 
agents who shot first, and from helicopters, can be locked up for 40 
years for defending themselves, federal agents will continue to feel 
justified in such attacks.  Just because they are currently on a short 
leash, as proved by the Freemen situation, does not mean they will remain 
so--especially in cases where individuals and groups are accused of 
killing federal agents.  As we have seen, several groups of militia 
activists have already been caught up in "conspiracy" charges--i.e., they 
talked about the possibility that they would have to use violent 
resistance in the future, and engaged in legal weapons-related activity, 
while hanging out with government agents (provocateurs?). Now they 
being proseucted for planning it for the near term!
        Even as an advocate of non-violent action, I worry about making 
the wrong joke or speaking a little too indistinctly or ambiguously into 
the wrong government tap.  I'm just wondering how long it will be before 
they start locking up on conspiracy charges those who advocate "war tax 
resistance" (which so far has *not* led to many prosecutions, as opposed 
to constitutionalist tax resistance) or for organizing things like 
non-violently blocking traffic and sitting in at government facilities.   
Even as a pro-choicer, I'm bothered by the RICO laws being used against 
Operation Rescue.  Nevertheless, non-violent action remains the best 
option because even advocacy of violent action after some big government 
crackdown scares the heck out of the general public, making them think 
that such a crackdown is necessary!!  Fear, not reason, remains the 
biggest political motivator.
 
**SHORT HOUSE WACO REPORT NOW AVAILABLE
        The short 110 page House Report on the Waco Investigation (House 
report 749) has just become available free from House Documents, 3rd & D 
Street SW,  Ford Building, Room B-18, Washington, D.C. 20515. You can 
order by phone from 202/225-3456.  (Unfortunately, I don't know if this 
report can be found on any congressional web pages.)  I have not received 
or read the report myself as of yet.  The full report, complete with 
transcripts and documents submitted to the Committee for the record, will 
not be available for several weeks.
 
**DAVID KORESH MUSIC AVAILABLE ON TAPE
        Davidian survivor Clive Doyle and David Koresh's mother Bonnie 
Haldeman have put together a compilation of David Koresh's music called 
"Songs for Grandpa."  It is $10.  Write them also to donate money for the 
memorial, the survivors and the prisoners or to ask for their price list 
of books and audio and video tapes by and about Koresh, the Davidians and 
federal crimes against them.  Mount Carmel Survivors Memorial Fund, Box 
120, Axtell, TX 76624.  (Including videos "Day 51" and of Davidians 
speaking from inside Mount Carmel during the siege.)
 
**DAVIDIANS ON WEB PAGES
        While you can find lots of information search the Web, two sites 
of particular interest are: 
     Mark Swett's THE RESEARCH CENTER which contains writing by David
Koresh and Davidian prisoner Livingstone Fagan.  
     http://www.ime.net/~mswett
     Davidian prisoner Renos Avraam has his own web page in which he provides
his book HIDDEN MANNA written in prison.  The book is controversial among
Davidians, some who find merit in his interpretations and those who dispute
them. 
     http://www.sevenseals.com

**BATF AGENT COMMITS SUICIDE OVER WACO INVOLVEMENT
      ATF Special Agent Nathaniel Medrano committed suicide with a gun 
in the ATF's Los Angeles office. Mr. Merdrano wanted to sue the Treasury
Department (of which the ATF is a subset) for defamation of his character 
due to what he said was unfair blame placed on him regarding his involvement 
in the 1993 Waco assault. He was informed by his lawyer that he could not 
sue the government for defamation of an agent. ( W. Times 7/26/96, A6 )
      Medrano was the agent who posed as a UPS trainee about a month 
before the BATF raid.  Medrano made the UPS agent drive up to Mount
Carmel's front door instead of to the usual drop off point and then
got out of the truck and asked to use the bathroom.  The Treasury
Report critized Medrano because his actions were so obvious that
Koresh called up the Sheriff's office and complained about surveillance.
The Treasury report inferred that this was just one more reason the
Davidians were prepared for the raid.
 
**WACO AND FBI/WHITE HOUSE INCEST
        Congressional leaders like William Clinger and Robert Livingstone 
have been leading inquiries into and expressing outrage over the FBI's 
incestuous relationship with the Clinton White House.  FBI gave White 
House underlings of dubious repute 900 confidential files, mostly of 
Republicans who no longer worked at the White House.  FBI General Counsel 
Howard Shapiro leaked two pieces of sensitive information to the White 
House: an under-FBI-review copy of former FBI agent Gary Aldrich's book 
"Unlimited Access" which contains juicy stories of his days stationed in 
the Clinton White House; and the fact that Representative Clinger was 
about to review FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene's 1993 notes revealing that 
Bernard Nussbaum told him Hillary Clinton wanted the sleazy dirty 
trickster Craig Livingstone hired as head of White House security.  
Shapiro did not even bother to inform the Independent Counsel Kenneth 
Starr about this--but he did send two agents to Sculimbrene's house to 
question him about his notes.  Representative Livingstone has demanded 
Shapiro resign over this serious leak of information in an ongoing 
investigation. (It seems to me he also demanded FBI Director Louis Freeh 
resign, but I can't find that article at the moment.)
        Why are the FBI and the White House so cosy? Is it only because 
of Bill Clinton and Louis Freeh's close friendship?  Or could it be 
because both the FBI and the White House have developed such an emotional 
commitment to covering up each other's participation in the massacre of 
82 civilians outside of Waco, Texas in 1993?  Unfortunately, the U.S. 
Congress is also covering up for BATF and the FBI, as I have frequently 
reported herein.
        Nevertheless, the Committee will be writing a letter to Clinger, 
Livingstone and selected other representatives (and enclosing a copy of 
my book THE DAVIDIAN MASSACRE, as well as other attachments) and 
demanding they recognize and investigate more fully aspects of 
unintentional and intentional homicide at Waco that Congress has ignored 
or denied.  This massacre and its coverup are continuing to undermine 
what  little democracy and liberty we have left in America.
 
**JUSTICE DEPARTMENT EXONERATES DAVIDIAN PROSECUTORS
        In July of 1994 the Committee for Waco Justice filed a complaint 
with the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility, 
followed by several amended complaints, alleging prosecutorial misconduct 
by Davidian prosecutors Ray Jahn, Bill Johnston and John Phinizy.  Our 
complaints included information first revealed during the July, 1995 
House hearings that the Justice Department and Jahn had stopped 
interviews of BATF agents because they were fearful of producing 
"exculpatory material" that might prove Davidians acted in self-defense 
or were otherwise innocent of crimes and lead to acquittals of Davidians 
at trial.  
        The Justice Department "forgot" to send us the results of their 
inquiry, but did so after I called them in May.  On June 14, 1995 Joan L. 
Goldfrank, Assistant counsel, wrote us: "Based on the results of our 
inquiry, we have determined that the allegations are unsubstantiated.  
Accordingly, we consider this matter closed."  We'll be sending that 
letter along with our letters to Clinger, Livingstone and other 
representatives.
 
**ABOUT THE COMMITTEE FOR WACO JUSTICE
Note: New Buttons Available 
 
        The Committee for Waco Justice is a small group of mostly 
libertarians which has been active in the Washington, D.C. area since 
late 1993.  We have been getting word out to the public, press and 
Congress about BATF and the FBI'S crimes against the Branch Davidians.  
Members have demonstrated on the anniversaries of the BATF and FBI 
assaults and of the sentencing of Davidian prisoners at the Washington 
headquarters of the agencies, and at the White House and the Justice 
Department.  In 1994, 1995, and 1996 we erected 82 crosses on the Ellipse 
south of the White House before--Associated Press carried pictures 
nationally all three times!  And on all three anniversaries of the April 
19, 1993 fire that killed most of the group's members we have held press 
conferences and demonstrated at the FBI building.  We are considering 
doing a demonstration on FIJA Day in September to dramatize the fact that 
a fully informed jury would have freed the Branch Davidians!
        Committee members have demonstrated at Congress and provided 
ample documentation to their researchers in order to lobby for 
Congressional hearings.  Members sat through all ten days of House and 
the two days of Senate hearings.  The Committee will keep active because 
those hearings did *not* result in the complete exposure of the crimes of 
federal agents--particularly the facts BATF firing from helicopters 
killed four Davidians, BATF shot first at the front door, the FBI 
purposely sabotaged negotiations, or that FBI wanted to destroy the 
building so they could destroy evidence of illegal BATF gunfire.
        To learn more about the Committee for Waco Justice or get on our 
e-mail list for 2-5 monthly updates e-mail cmoore@capacess.org.   Also, 
we greatly and totally appreciate contributions to help us continue our 
efforts to spread the word, seek justice and free the Davidian 
prisoners.  We owe two members several hundred dollars and prefer not to 
go further into debt to them.  Note our new button selection!

____ $2.00      Information packages
____ $2.00      Each.  2 1/4 inch Buttons.  FREE THE BRANCH DAVIDIANS, 
FBI ATF = GESTAPO, PROSECUTE JANET RENO, WACO NEVER AGAIN ("a"s can be 
replaced with Stars of David if you wish), DAVID KORESH  -- Innocent til 
Proven Guilty, FREEDOM ISN'T FREEH! Abolish FBI.  (Three or more buttons 
$1.50 each.)
   ____$______     CONTRIBUTION TO THE CAUSE

      $_______  TOTAL
 
Since we still are too small and under funded to open a bank account, 
MAKE CHECKS TO:
CAROL MOORE  Box 65518 Washington, D.C. 20035.  202/635-3739  202/797-9877.
 
END




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: GIRLS SEXUALLY ABUSED (fwd)
Date: 09 Aug 1996 08:08:00 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Folks,
        You should be familiar with this case. I have previously forwarded
excellent articles by Michael A. Giarrusso, Mark Howerter, and Eagle Forum
regarding the forcible vaginal exams of 11- and 12-year-old girls in a
government school in East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania. However, most of you
receiving this message are not on my regular mailing list. If you would like
for me to send you the earlier articles, send a message to Harvey Wysong
<hwysong@atl.mindspring.com>
        The legal champion of the little girls in East Stroudsburg is The
Rutherford Institute, a courageous defender of religious liberty. Remember
them in your prayers and financial gifts.

-- Harvey
                        =================================
PENNSYLVANIA PARENTS SUE SCHOOL FOR "SEXUAL ABUSE"

by PAUL LIKOUDIS

 CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. - Attorneys for the Rutherford Institute filed a
lawsuit on May 10th against the East Stroudsburg Area School District after
the school physician gave 59 girls, ages 11 and 12, a genital examination
that included internal probing. They filed suit in Federal District Court
for the middle District of Pennsylvania
        David Melton, one of the Rutherford attorneys, told The Wanderer
that the "body cavity search" on the preadolescent girls was such a gross
violation of their Fourth Amendment right to protection against unreasonable
searches that "it couldn't even be done in a prison.'
        The school doctor, Dr. Ramlah Vhanvaty, has repeatedly said that she
was searching for genital warts and vaginal lesions which would indicate
sexual abuse.
        The lawsuit was filed approximately six weeks after parents publicly
complained that their daughters attending the J.T. Lambert Intermediate
School were traumatized by the 'physicals," and the school and local medical
authorities justified Dr. Vahanvaty's "search." Dr. Vahanvaty performed the
searches on the children on March 19th.
        "The girls were called down to the nurse's office to have their
physicals," Melton told _The Wanderer_," and ordered to strip down to their
underwear while they waited for their exams.
        "Once the first girl came out of the examination room and told the
others what happened to her, the others started panicking. One tried to
escape through a window. One was taken kicking and screaming to the
examination table where she was forcibly held down and examined.
        "What this comes down to is an outrageous violation of the Fourth
Amendment, which protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures
by government officials.
        "These girls have a right to a reasonable expectation of privacy,
and if one does not have the ability to say 'no' under these circumstances,
then the Fourth Amendment means nothing."
        According to various press reports, 16 of the 59 girls started
crying after they were ordered to strip, and asking to be allowed to call
home when the exams began.
        The school nurse called them 'babies," and denied their request.
        "I want to call my mother," cried little Susie Tucker. "She wouldn't
let you do this to me."
        But the doctor proceeded. Her parents, Katie and Paul Tucker, were
outraged, doubly so because they had never even received the required
parental consent form for the physical.
        "My daughter told me that the doctor digitally penetrated her. It's
a nightmare," Mrs. Tucker stated.
        She added: "As parents, we teach our children to say 'no' to being
exposed and touched at school; her voice went unheeded. I know her regular
doctor wouldn't do this. She knows enough about her private parts. When she
says 'no' she means 'no.'"
        Reaction among all the parents was immediate, and the school quickly
called two public meetings to defuse the controversy and dispel "rumors."
        At a stormy March 25th meeting, several girls told how they were
brutally treated before and during the exam, and at least 50 parents
adamantly accused school officials of violating their daughters' privacy;
but school officials defended the physicals on the grounds that they were
required by the state.
        State regulations, responded Melton, do require physicals for school
attendance, "but a physical is not a gynecological exam."
        Furthermore, he said, if a child does not submit evidence of a
physical, the school usually just refuses to allow the child to attend
school until the physical is completed.
        Dr. Vahanvaty told _The Pocono Record_ that parents don't "have the
right to say what's appropriate for a physician to do when they're doing an
exam." A pediatrician colleague, Dr. Yoon-Tack Chun, lamented that the
distraught parents "represent one part of society that is mistrustful of
professionals."
        Melton said the lawsuit will allege, in addition to violations of
Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure, a
violation of the 14th Amendment liberty interest (privacy right on the part
of families and girls). It will charge that the state's behavior violated
both the girls' and their parents' privacy rights, and that there was a
failure to obtain informed consent.
        The lawsuit against the school, the doctor, and the school nurse
also claims malpractice, common law assault and battery, and violation of
tort of privacy.
        The Rutherford Institute is asking the court for injunctive relief
(an order to stop these procedures in the future), declaratory relief, in
which the court clearly states what are the rights of all parties (parents,
schoolchildren, and the school), compensatory damages, and punitive damages.
		===================================
Reprinted from _The Wanderer_, June 6, 1996
The Wanderer Press, 201 Ohio Street, St. Paul, MN 55107
Subscriptions:    One year for $40    Six months for $25
	****************************************************
	Harvey Wysong Independent Consultant HomeQuest Academy
	hwysong@mindspring.com   (404) 266-0930
	701 Longleaf Drive, Atlanta, Georgia 30342, U.S.A.
	****************************************************
     Let me see if I understood you. When the government told you to deliver
your children to the public schools for indoctrination and warehousing, you
did as you were told. But, if they come for your guns, you're gonna' FIGHT
TO THE DEATH!
     Do you really expect me to believe this?
	****************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 09 Aug 1996 09:32:58 -0400

>
>	 Just like the majority favors gun control when violent crime is 
>	 dropping.   Oh?  You believe violent crime is increasing?
>
>	 You must be reading the wrong agit-prop.
>
>
>>>You must be reading the wrong agit-prop.
>
>I got the item below off the Reuters News feed on <clari.net>.
>
>Bob Knauer
>
	Bob,

	I believe you misunderstood me.  I wasn't implying that *you*
	were reading the wrong agit-prop.   I was implying 
	that someone who believed that violent crime was rising,
	when in fact the FBI crime reports indicate that it is 
	falling,  has been reading the wrong agit-prop.

	What's so unusual about Reuters being a channel for propaganda?

	ciao,
	
	jcurtis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 09 Aug 1996 08:50:44 -0700 (PDT)

Very well said. The anti's have been moving back our rights incrementally 
since 1968! It has gotten them where they are today. Everyone who thinks 
that in 1968 none of the "leaders" involved in the GCA wanted an outright 
ban, raise a paw now... That's right, I don't think so either. But they 
understand the political process enough to slowly turn up the heat on the 
pot containing the frog (you and I). Well it's past time, about 3 decades 
past time, that we got at least as good as our opponents at the job of 
politics. YES, I want un infringed individual legal right to keep and bear 
arms and yesterday would be just fine thankyouverymuch. If I suddenly had a 
national pulpit to shout that from, would I be so stupid as to say it? 
No. This son was not born with a silver (pewter or tin) foot in his 
mouth. I understand politics and by golly if the mood of the country 
won't allow for minority protection or for IRKBA then I will slowly re 
orient that "main stream" by incrementally pushing it back to it's 
original right path. Toss yourself into the current if ya want, but when 
you cry out for my lifepreserver be aware I might be busy with other tasks.
Boyd Kneeland

On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, Joe Sylvester wrote:

> At 10:43 PM 8/8/96 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Who did this spin? Dole said he would veto a bill to repeal the ban--very
> >different from what is said here. The NRA used to be trusted to tell the
> >truth. Oh well.
> >
> You have to watch the timing on these things, I think this one came out
> between "it's not a priority" and "I would veto a repeal" on LK Live.
> 
> 
> >>NATIONAL "RIGHT-TO-CARRY" BILL INTRODUCED
> >>
> >>Your fundamental right to defend yourself and your family against
> >>criminal attack does not end at the state line.  Yet today, many
> >>states that allow their residents to carry firearms for self-
> >>defense deny that same right to qualified, law-abiding
> >>individuals from other states.  That situation would change if
> >
> >If it is a fundamental right, why do I need government permission to
> >exercise it?
> 
> Good question, but you do have a CHL, do you not? Wouldn't it be nice if it
> were good nationwide?  We'll take this as a "compromise" between the current
> situtation and the ability to legally exercise our right to bear arms
> without any infringements... for now. Next year we'll be back for another
> "compromise". Sound familiar? :) 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> 
>               The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
>                    of the United States Constitution.  
>       ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 
> 
> 
> Joe Sylvester
> Don't Tread On Me !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "ALFRED A. HAMBIDGE, JR." <HAMBIDGE@BMS.COM>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 09 Aug 1996 11:56:35 -0500 (EST)


>From the "news":

>	Liberties Could Suffer  
>	A new poll shows most Americans are willing to give up some  
>liberties in order to fight terrorism. The nationwide survey by 
>the Los Angeles Times was conducted after the explosion of TWA 
>Flight 800 and the bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
>Sixty-five percent of those polled expressed concern the fight 
>against terrorism could bring restrictions on personal freedoms. 
>But 58 percent said they would be willing to give up some 
>liberties in exchange for safety. 

Just the sort of people Ben Franklin was talking about:
"They that can give up essential liberty for a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."


Al Hambidge, Jr.   hambidge@bms.com     Standard disclaimers apply.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: wootan@dmi.net
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 09 Aug 1996 10:01:55 -0700

>Very well said. The anti's have been moving back our rights incrementally 
>since 1968!

Also well stated Boyd!.  However, I think 1934 is a more realistic year to 
look to the beginning of our loss of rights.  A little thing to do with sawed 
off shotguns and fully automatic weapons?  A few gang members of the thirties 
got together and waisted each other in a little meeting called the St. 
Valentines day massacre, and the rest of us have been paying for it ever 
since.  Now we have gang members of the nineties getting together and waisting 
each other on occasion, and the government wants to make this our problem too. 
 When will we all realize that gang wars are a self solving problem! 

Jerry 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Texas Alert: Stop "Spanker" Gun Ban (fwd)
Date: 09 Aug 1996 12:30:05 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by Joe Horn <6mysmesa@1eagle1.com>

< snipped >
 ----------

>Date: 08 Aug 96 22:49:54 EDT
>From: Erich Pratt <74741.662@CompuServe.COM>
>To: BlindCopyReceiver:;
>Subject: Texas Alert: Stop "Spanker" Gun Ban
>
>   Texas Alert:  Urge Sen. Hutchison to Correct Anti-gun Error
>             -- Ask her to oppose "spanker" gun ban
>
>                    by Gun Owners of America
>      8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA  22151,
>                  (703)321-8585, fax: 321-8408
>
>     (Thursday, August 8) -- Last week, you should have received
>a GOA alert giving you a legislative update on how Congress is
>moving to expand the number of people who are prohibited from
>possessing a firearm.   The bill in question is on the verge of
>becoming law, yet it could very easily take away a father or
>mother's gun rights for spanking their children!
>
>     As a resident of Texas, you have an awesome responsibility.
>You can help get anti-gun language deleted from this bill because
>the primary Senate sponsor for this bill is Sen. Kay Bailey
>Hutchison (R-TX).(1)  As the principle author in the Senate, she can
>exert tremendous influence in the conference committee to get
>this provision removed.  (The House bill, H.R. 2980, has been
>passed by both houses.  The bill could go to a conference
>committee where the differences will be ironed out, or it may be
>attached to a Defense spending bill in the Senate.)
>
>     As reported last week, the anti-gun language was attached to
>the bill as an amendment by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ).  His
>amendment would remove guns from a home where someone has been
>convicted of a misdemeanor involving domestic violence.  But this
>amendment greatly threatens your rights!  Here's how:
>
>     1.  The Lautenberg amendment would mean a lifetime gun ban
>for persons who, in many cases, have committed offenses very
>minor in nature.  In many jurisdictions, for instance, parents
>are being threatened with prosecution for spanking their
>children.
>
>     2. Under many state laws, persons convicted of misdemeanors
>with less than six months imprisonment are not even entitled to
>jury trials.  Therefore, it would be possible for parents to be
>subjected to a life-time gun ban without enjoying the protection
>of a jury.
>
>     3. The Lautenberg amendment is a dangerous expansion of the
>list which deprives persons of their Second Amendment rights, and
>opens the door to depriving firearms to all misdemeanor offenders
>-- including non-violent ones (such as traffic violators, check
>bouncers, etc.).
>
>     The stated purpose of the amendment is to protect women from
>spousal abuse.  But as stated in GOA's earlier alert, the
>Lautenberg amendment actually endangers the battered women it
>purports to help by removing guns from the home.  A woman's best
>defense against an attacker is a firearm.
>
>     Despite all these problems with the Lautenberg amendment,
>here's what Sen. Hutchison had to say about both Sen. Lautenberg
>and his amendment on the floor of the Senate on July 25, 1996:
>
>          Senator Lautenberg is to be commended for working with
>     us to make his amendment a good amendment, and it is a good
>     amendment, and I applaud him for it.  I think it adds to
>     the bill.  He was willing to work with us, and I think we
>     now have a very strong bill. . . . I am very pleased to be
>     supportive of this compromise.
>
>     Perhaps Sen. Hutchison does not realize the full impact of
>the Lautenberg amendment.  The Lautenberg proposal -- when it was
>first introduced as a stand alone bill (S. 1632) -- was
>cosponsored by Senators Dianne Feinstein (CA), Edward Kennedy
>(MA), and other infamous anti-gunners.  Lautenberg himself has an
>"F-" rating from GOA.
>
>     While Sen. Hutchison certainly has good intentions (she
>wants to crack down on abusive spouses), she needs to realize
>that Lautenberg is not a friend on the gun issue.  In fact, any
>gun amendment by him should be considered suspect.
>
>     Lautenberg has opened a very dangerous door -- a door that
>could allow the Charles Schumers in Congress to extend firearms
>prohibition to more and more people.  Furthermore, this proposal,
>which orders guns to be kept out of the home, will only hurt a
>woman's best method of self-defense.
>
>
>     HERE'S WHAT TO DO:
>
>     * Contact Sen. Hutchison and relay your concerns about the
>Lautenberg amendment.  Ask her to do all in her power to kill
>H.R. 2980 as long as it contains the Lautenberg amendment.
>
>                    Washington, D.C. office:
>      1-800-962-3524 or 202-224-5922; fax: 202-224-0776
>
>                       District offices:
>           Austin ph) 512-916-5834; fax) 512-916-5839
>           Dallas ph) 214-361-3500; fax) 214-361-3502
>           Houston ph) 713-653-3456; fax) 713-209-3459
>         San Antonio ph) 210-340-2885; fax) 210-349-6753
>                    Abilene ph) 915-676-2839
>
>     This provision will greatly threaten ALL of our gun rights.
>You can use the arguments made above, pointing out that the
>amendment:  a) threatens any parent who spanks their children; b)
>represents a backdoor way of revoking one's gun rights without a
>jury trial; c) unnecessarily expands the list of people who
>cannot own a firearm; d) endangers women by ordering self-defense
>guns from the home; and finally e) is completely
>unconstitutional, as there is no authority in the Constitution
>for passing such a measure.
>
>     *  Distribute this alert to as many people as you can.
>Also, you can get "more bang for your buck" by faxing a letter to
>all of the fax numbers listed above.
>
>     Note:  Sen. Hutchison's office may give you Sen.
>Lautenberg's reasons for supporting the amendment.  That is,
>because many offenders plea bargain their felonies down to
>misdemeanors, the Lautenberg amendment will catch these people by
>revoking the firearms rights of these misdemeanor offenders.  The
>problem is, Sen. Lautenberg would also punish non-violent
>"offenders" such as any parent who spanks their children in a
>state which frowns on such activity.
>
>     If a person is truly violent and the criminal justice system
>plea bargains his sentence down to a misdemeanor, then there's a
>problem with the criminal justice system, not with gun owners.
>Why punish otherwise law-abiding Americans for a problem inherent
>in the courts?  Urge Sen. Hutchison to kill H.R. 2980 as long as
>the Lautenberg language remains in the bill.
>
>
>1     While Sen. Hutchison's companion bill is S. 1729, the
>Senate chose to vote on the House version, H.R. 2980.
>
>
>

Tim Casey, tcasey@clark.net, http://www.clark.net/pub/tcasey/firearms.html

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear
arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in
government." --Thomas Jefferson





--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CIA probes Mena drug running (fwd)
Date: 09 Aug 1996 13:39:06 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive

Washington Post
August 7, 1996

CIA probes drug, arms claims

Allegations of illegal shipments at Arkansas airstrip to be pursued

    WASHINGTON - The CIA's inspector general is investigating claims 
that U.S. intelligence agencies were involved in illegal arms shipments
and drug smuggling at an isolated airstrip in Mena, Ark., during the 
years Bill Clinton was governor.
    A representative for the CIA said Inspector General Frederick Hitz 
is preparing a report on allegations that the CIA was involved in arms 
shipments from Mena to the Nicaraguan rebels during the 1980s, and that
pilots hired by the agency brought back large shipments of cocaine.
    CIA official Mark Mansfield said the inspector general would report
on possible contracts between the agency and Arkansas state officials 
during the 1980s.  His report also will deal with allegations that the 
CIA attempted to influence or curtail law enforcement investigations of
the airstrip.
    Hitz was asked to investigate the Mena airport by CIA director John
Deutch, who was acting on a request from House Banking Committee 
Chairman Jim Leach, R-Iowa.  Leach's panel is looking into the possible
laundering of drug money generated at Mena.
    Leach's Banking Committee staff has been looking at a variety of 
claims about Mena emanating from a collection of Arkansas law 
enforcement officials and various figures operating in the shadowy 
netherworld on contract with intelligence agencies.  One congressional 
investigator likened sorting through the allegations to being trapped 
in "a hall of mirrors."
    Congressional sources said Leach made the request to the CIA about 
six months ago and expects a report from Hitz in late summer or early 
fall.
    The latest claims are contained in "Boy Clinton," a book by 
American Spectator Editor R. Emmett Tyrrell published this week.  In 
it, Tyrrell asserts that Clinton knew about CIA operations and cocaine 
smuggling at Mena.  He cites as sources Arkansas state troopers, 
including one on the governor's security detail who says he was also a 
contract employee for the CIA during the mid-1980s and informed Clinton
of what was going on at Mena.
    Clinton has said he had nothing to do with any activities at Mena. 
"Mena is the darkest backwater of the right-wing conspiracy industry," 
said White House official Mark Fabiani.  "The allegations are as 
bizarre as they are false."
---


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 09 Aug 1996 21:05:08 -0500

At 06:33 AM 8/8/96 -0700,  eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty) wrote:
>
>        If the APU had been secured prior to a 'possible' IR missile shoot,
>then it would be quite unlikely to be a target, since the spectrum would be
>missing as a possible source. Hot metal does not radiate with the same
>brilliance as an exhaust plume. In fact, the heat being given off by
>cooling metal would be so diffused by the passing air, that the IR sensor
>would very probably not even 'see' it.
>
Actually this is just the sort of thing the more modern, Stinger type, IR
seekers are designed to go after. They find their best use against
heliocopters, military versions of which use exhaust difusers to  cool the
exhaust plume, which on a turboprop engine, like  a helo's is already much
cooler than any jet engines.  

Not that I think a small Stinger type missile is all that great a canidate
for shooting down  a 747 at least not with such a quick knockdown as
apparently occured to flt 800.



              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Liberties Could Suffer
Date: 09 Aug 1996 21:05:11 -0500

At 03:09 PM 8/8/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>From the "news":
>
>	Liberties Could Suffer  
>	A new poll shows most Americans are willing to give up some  
>liberties in order to fight terrorism. The nationwide survey by 
>the Los Angeles Times was conducted after the explosion of TWA 
>Flight 800 and the bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. 
>Sixty-five percent of those polled expressed concern the fight 
>against terrorism could bring restrictions on personal freedoms. 
>But 58 percent said they would be willing to give up some 
>liberties in exchange for safety. 

Did they ask them *which" ones they would be willing to give up? I'll bet
people were thinking more in terms of conveniances rather than true
freedoms, like speech, the press,  etc. But then again you never know. 


              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: CBS/SS held liable for filming search (fwd)
Date: 10 Aug 1996 06:14:57 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------


     @@@@@      IIII II  II  IIII  III   III
   @@@ @ @@@     II  II  II  II   II II II  I
  @@  @ @  @@    II  III II  II   II II  II
 @   @   @   @   II  II III  III  II II  II
 @  @     @  @   II  II  II  II   II II   II
 @ @@@@@@@@@ @   II  II  II  II   II II   II
  @@       @@    II  II  II  II   II II    II
   @@@   @@@     II  II  II  II   II II I  II
     @@@@@      IIII II  II  II    III   III

    -   The alternative newsservice   -
   http://www.lglobal.com/TAO/ainfos.html


Thought this may be of interest to this group.  May help put an end
to police-propaganda-tv in US.


>To: cypherpunks@toad.com
>Organization: Federal Reserve B.O.G.
>Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 13:17:43 -0400
>From: "Thomas C. Allard" <m1tca00@FRB.GOV>
>Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
>
>tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May) said:
>
>> What recourse does he have that camera crews were invited in on the 
>> searches?
>
>From: dante@halcyon.halcyon.com (Dan Tenenbaum)
>Subject: CBS Liable for Filming Search
>Followup-To: alt.prisons
>Date: Fri, 8 Jul 94 15:52:58 EDT
>
>[Paul Wright, the imprisoned editor of Prison Legal News, sent me the
>following and asked me to distribute it widely on the the net because
>there has been no coverage of this in the mainstream media.
>Followups to alt.prisons because I read it. Nyah.
>Typos are mine.
>The article will appear in slightly different form in the next PLN. PLN
>is available from P.O. Box 1684, Lake Worth, FL 33460. $12 for
>subscriptions and $1 for a sample copy.
>Dan Tenenbaum (dante@microsoft.com or dante@halcyon.com)]
>
>CBS Liable for Filming Search
>
>	In a landmark decision a federal court in New York has ruled
>that a CBS film crew and Secret Service agents are liable for filming and
>broadcasting a search of a private citizen's home. It is the first reported
>court decision to hold a television broadcaster liable for accompanying
>police agents on a search and filming it for the broadcast. Anyone who
>has watched "Cops," "Hard Copy," "America's Most Wanted," or any
>of the "real life" cop shows has seen the degrading and propagandistic
>manner in which the victims of police repression are portrayed. The
>broadcasters and the police can be sued and held liable for such
>actions.
>	
>In 1992 Secret Service agents obtained a search warrant
>from a federal court authorizing the search of an apartment shared by
>Babatunde Ayeni, his wife Tawa, and small son Kayode, seeking
>evidence of a credit card fraud operation.  At 6PM on March 5, 1992,
>several Secret Service (SS) agents forced their way into the Ayeni
>residence announcing they had a warrant to conduct a search and
>ask questions.  Only Mrs. Ayeni and her son were home at the time. 

>At about 8:15 four more SS agents arrived with a film crew from the CBS
>news program "Street Stories."  The CBS film crew was never identified
>as CBS employees.  The CBS crew followed the SS agents and taped
>them as they searched the apartment.  They took closeup shots of the
>home's interior, its closets, personal letters, family photos, etc. In the
>apartment's foyer an SS agent was interviewed about the modus
>operandi of people who commit credit card frauds and the tools of
>their trade. During this tape sequence the SS agent implied the
>complicity of the other residents of the Ayeni apartment. No
>evidence implicating the Ayenis in any illegal activity was found
>during the search. One of the agents was filmed expressing his
>disappointment.
>	
>The Ayenis filed suit against the federal agents as well as CBS,
>contending that the search and its filming violated their fourth
>amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. In his
>opinion Judge Weinstein agreed with the Ayenis. The defendants sought
>qualified immunity, which the court denied.
>	
>Under the doctrine of qualified immunity government agents are
>entitled to be free from liability for money damages even if they violate
>constitutional rights as long as the right is not "well established" so that
>a person of reasonable intelligence would know that the right violated
>was recognized. In the case the court held that any reasonable police
>agent would have known that it is unconstitutional to have private
>citizens accompany them on a search to film and broadcast the search.
>The court relied on 18 U.S.C. sec. 3105 which requires that search
>warrants be served by an official authorized to serve the warrant and
>by no other person unless their assistance is required in conducting the
>search, i.e. an accountant, forensic expert, etc., depending on the
>nature of the offense being investigated. Thus, the SS agents should
>have known that having a film crew taping their activities was illegal.
>
>Courts have previously held that taking photos is a "seizure" within
>the meaning of the fourth amendment. CBS also claimed qualified
>immunity from suit. The court notes that private entities are not
>entitled to qualified immunity from suit, it only applies to government
>actors.
>	
>The court used harsh language in condemning the actions by
>the SS and CBS. "The search warrant was issued to agent Mottola and
>other agents of the Unites States Secret Service for precise and limited
>purposes. It authorized their entry into the Ayenis' home only to search
>for items related to credit card fraud. Agent Mottola's act of facilitating
>the CBS camera crew's entry into the apartment and its filming of the
>search exceeded the scope of the warrant. It was allegedly in clear
>violation then well [sic] established fourth amendment principles.
>...it is the equivalent of a rogue policeman using his official position
>to break into a home in order to steal objects for his own profit or
>that of another."
>	
>For immunity purposes it would be "...grossly unreasonable
>for a government agent not to have known that the presence of
>private persons he invited in so that they could titillate and entertain
>others was beyond the scope of what was lawfully authorized by
>the warrant.
>	
>"CBS had no greater right than that of a thief to be in the
>home, to 'capture' the scene of the search on film and to remove
>the photographic record. The images, though created by the camera,
>are a part of the household; they could not be removed without
>permission or official right....The television tape was a seizure of
>private property, information, for non-governmental purposes."
>	
>It is entirely possible that litigation by the victims of this type
>of police and media activity may be able to halt the spread of
>"police TV."  Findings of liability against both police and the broadcaster
>will see to it that police activity is not broadcast to "entertain and
>titillate."  So if you've been filmed against your will during a police
>search you too can sue for an invasion of your privacy and your
>fourth amendment rights. The court decision is reported at:
>Ayeni v. CBS, Inc., 848 F. Supp 362 (ED NY 1994).
>
>
>
>rgds-- TA  (tallard@frb.gov)
>I don't speak for the Federal Reserve Board, it doesn't speak for me.
>pgp fingerprint: 10 49 F5 24 F1 D9 A7 D6  DE 14 25 C8 C0 E2 57 9D

         --/\--          A-Infos   A-Infos
       /  /  \  \            A-Infos   A-Infos
   ---|--/----\--|---            A-Infos   A-Infos
       \/      \/
       /\______/\   http://www.lglobal.com/TAO/ainfos.html

	To Subscribe to a-infos
	 Send a message to majordomo@lglobal.com
	  With the message in the body:
	   subscribe a-infos
	    To Unsubscribe send:
	     unsubscribe a-infos


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 10 Aug 1996 11:24:20 -0500

>Also well stated Boyd!.  However, I think 1934 is a more realistic year to 
>look to the beginning of our loss of rights.  A little thing to do with
>sawed off shotguns and fully automatic weapons?  A few gang members of the
>thirties got together and waisted each other in a little meeting called the
>St. Valentines day massacre, and the rest of us have been paying for it ever 
>since.  Now we have gang members of the nineties getting together and
>waisting each other on occasion, and the government wants to make this our
>problem too.  When will we all realize that gang wars are a self solving
>problem! 

-----

It started when A. Lincoln suspended the Constitution in order the free the
slaves and enslave the free - ever since then we have been slaves to the
federal govt., without Constitutional Rule Of Law.

1934, 1968 & 1993 were just extentions of the same tyranny, compliments of
the Great Emasculator.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 10 Aug 1996 11:14:36 -0700

        Joe,

        >>>>>>>
        Actually this is just the sort of thing the more modern, Stinger
type, IR
seekers are designed to go after. They find their best . . .
        <<<<<<<

        All that aside,

        <>had the explosion been caused by a missile,
        <>and had that missile been a Stinger,
        <>and had that missile hit the APU area,

 then the damage to the vertical and horzontal stabs would have been quite
severe, more so than as has been discovered.
        Additionally, the voice recorder would still have been recording
info, instead of having been abbruptly terminated. The voice recorder is in
the 46 section, left hand side, the aft part of the 'tube'.
        Whatever caused the termination of the voice recording, did so by
severing all three channels (ie., left, right, and center). Those wire
bundles are located sufficiently far apart from each other, that should one
of them become inoperative by whatever means, the remaining channels will
still provide a 'data path'.

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 10 Aug 1996 11:14:40 -0700

        Jerry,

        >>>>>>>
        However, I think 1934 is a more realistic year to
look to the beginning of our loss of rights.  A little thing to do with sawed
off shotguns and fully automatic weapons?  A few gang members of the thirties
got together and waisted each other in a little meeting called the St.
Valentines day massacre, and the rest of us have been paying for it ever
since.  Now we have gang members of the nineties getting together and waisting
each other on occasion, and the government wants to make this our problem too.
 When will we all realize that gang wars are a self solving problem!
        <<<<<<<

        While 1934 is an interesting year, I do believe that 'ride by'
shootings do indeed preceed the 'drive by' shootings, unless one wishes to
consider 'riding' a horse is 'driving' a horse.
        Either way, the act has changed little since the days of highwaymen
on horses wielding flintlock pistols. I cannot recall of ever reading about
_any_ legislation either proposed or enacted prior to 1900, that
presupposed that a violent act had as its genesis a mechanical contrivance.
        I would challenge anyone to produce proof of any law being enacted
in the period prior to 1900, that sought to deprive citizens of their
property and/or Rights as a result of someone else misusing theirs, most
especially as a result of direct action - such as 'drive'  or 'ride bys'.

        I wonder if any of the arguments used by the anit's to introduce
the 1934 act is still available in the records of the Congress? They would
provide some interesting reading.

Ed

In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 10 Aug 1996 21:20:08 -0500

At 11:14 AM 8/10/96 -0700, you wrote:
>        Joe,
>
>        >>>>>>>
>        Actually this is just the sort of thing the more modern, Stinger
>type, IR
>seekers are designed to go after. They find their best . . .
>        <<<<<<<
>
>        All that aside,
>
>        <>had the explosion been caused by a missile,
>        <>and had that missile been a Stinger,
>        <>and had that missile hit the APU area,
>
> then the damage to the vertical and horzontal stabs would have been quite
>severe, more so than as has been discovered.
>        Additionally, the voice recorder would still have been recording
>info, instead of having been abbruptly terminated. The voice recorder is in
>the 46 section, left hand side, the aft part of the 'tube'.
>        Whatever caused the termination of the voice recording, did so by
>severing all three channels (ie., left, right, and center). Those wire
>bundles are located sufficiently far apart from each other, that should one
>of them become inoperative by whatever means, the remaining channels will
>still provide a 'data path'.
>
>Ed
>
>
Ah, real information ! 

I suspected as much, knowing how the airplane busines, civil airliner or
military, goes in for redundancy. Seems fairly unlikely that any but a
really big bomb would do that, even structural failure would take some
seconds or fractions of a second to sever all 3 channels. Even then the
information on the flight data recorder comes from multiple sources about
the aircraft, engines, flight controls and control surface positions.
Thinking, "out loud", is there any redunancy in the power supplied to the
"black" boxes. Or do they all end at the same time because the power was cut
off to both at the same time. My understanding is that the recorders are
analog on that model A/C. Wouldn't an 'open' input look different than no
record, an abrupt change to old data from that last time that part of the
loop went by the record heads (come to think of it a digital recorder would
do the same thing. 

Does the power go through one common physical location, i.e.  several close
together breaker panels? Looks to me that's where to look for the intial
damage, from whatever mechanism. 

How fast was the A/C going? Stingers can home on leading edge/surface
heating, I think.  As a wild ass idea, how about a missle coming in through
the windscreen? Might penetrate aft a ways before exploding. Anything vital,
besides the pilots, in that general area? Seems like that might rip  a
sufficiently large hole in the structure and skin to let aerodynamic forces
do the rest. I read in Av. Wk, that the last words on the tape were the
pilot requesting more power in order to climb, having just be given
clearance to do so. 

A Stinger still doesn't seem very likely to me, just not completely
impossible. The longer it goes with no evidence of a signifigent bomb, one
has to think that, if an explosive  device was the cause, it had to have
been a smallish one, placed at a unfortitous (for those on board) spot.

 

              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: GRASSFIRE: Dole Deviates on Gun Ban
Date: 10 Aug 1996 21:36:13 -0500

At 11:14 AM 8/10/96 -0700, E.J. Totty wrote:
>
>        While 1934 is an interesting year, I do believe that 'ride by'
>shootings do indeed preceed the 'drive by' shootings, unless one wishes to
>consider 'riding' a horse is 'driving' a horse.
>        Either way, the act has changed little since the days of highwaymen
>on horses wielding flintlock pistols. I cannot recall of ever reading about
>_any_ legislation either proposed or enacted prior to 1900, that
>presupposed that a violent act had as its genesis a mechanical contrivance.
>        I would challenge anyone to produce proof of any law being enacted
>in the period prior to 1900, that sought to deprive citizens of their
>property and/or Rights as a result of someone else misusing theirs, most
>especially as a result of direct action - such as 'drive'  or 'ride bys'.
>

Well there were state laws, mostly upheld by state courts, prohibiting
concealed and or concealable weapons. Cane guns, various types of knives,
and so forth. In fact the basic rational for the Miller decision, that only
the right to keep and bear  militarily useful arms is protected,
comes from a Tenn. case involving just such a law, prohibiting the "weapons
of choice" of assassins and other scum likely to be up to no good. 

I could live with that, just tell me where I go to turn in my 10/22 for an
M-16. And my shotgun for an M-60, On second thought, I'll keep the shotgun,
just get a 14 - 16 inch barrel for it.  Although the 10/22, or an M-16 with
the .22 conversion installed, makes a cheap training device.







  
>        I wonder if any of the arguments used by the anit's to introduce
>the 1934 act is still available in the records of the Congress? They would
>provide some interesting reading.

I haven't seen them, but the reason given was that they were the "weapons of
choice" of the Al Capones of the country, as well as of the Bonnie and
Clydes. (Course they were also the "weapons of choice" of the G-men, Texas
Rangers, and others who chased these folks down)


The thing is the 34 law was, AFAIK, federal law, controlling acces to any
firearm by peaceable citizens. Thus setting the precident for what we have
going on today. At least then they knew they  couldn't ouright ban any arms,
so they put what was at the time, a prohibitive tax on them instead. Never
did hear of any gangsters making application to pay the tax. 

Things haven't changed all that much. Except this time they didn't bother to
amend the constitution before taking on powers not granted therein, this
time prohibiting various drugs rather than alcoholic beverages.

 



              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: muhgi@cyberramp.net (Muhgi)
Subject: There _is_ No "Allow"
Date: 10 Aug 1996 23:16:54 -0500

NRA-

Are you listening? Neil Smith says this better than I ever could.

Maybe we'll get lucky, and just like the computer in _Logan's Run_ that
couldn't handle "there is no Sanctuary", the anti-gunners will
short-circuit.

-Muhgi

>
>THERE _IS_ NO "ALLOW"
>
>By L. Neil Smith <lneil@ezlink.com>
>
>Exclusive to _The Libertarian Enterprise_
>
>    Recently we've heard astonishing fallout from an impressive study
>of the achievements, so far, of a growing effort -- almost amounting
>to a movement -- to make it easier for ordinary folks to legally carry
>concealed weapons. In states where this effort has been successful,
>crime rates (in terms of violent confrontation) have fallen so
>dramatically even the media can no longer deny it.
>
>    Advocates of the right to own and carry weapons rendered cynical
>by years of watching media act as a fourth branch of government,
>rather than its adversaries as Jefferson intended, are inclined to
>wonder why the hairsprayheads have decided, unprecedentedly, to tell
>the truth. I suspect an answer lies in a troubling aspect of concealed
>carry I've attempted to warn gunfolk about previously.
>
>    When I entered the argument three and a half decades ago, _the_
>issue where both sides were concerned was registration and licensing.
>Antigunners wanted every firearm in the country listed in government
>directories, every user required to obtain written permission to
>exercise his Second Amendment rights -- rights to be converted into
>privileges, revocable upon the whim of politicians and bureaucrats.
>
>    Antigunners were unsuccessful until 1968, when, grotesquely
>stampeded by the assassinations of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and
>Martin Luther King (I don't recall any similar outrage on the part of
>the media over the shooting of George Wallace), government began
>enforcing the registration of weapons, new and used, at the point of
>retail sale, under Lyndon Johnson's Omnibus Crime Control Act.
>
>    Over the next quarter-century, we managed to "live with" this law,
>which, with the collaboration of a criminal justice system so
>putrescently corrupt it shines in the dark, blatantly violated the
>letter and intent of the Second Amendment. It helped that guns in
>private hands or traded among individuals didn't enter the retail
>stream and remained unregistered. It also helped that, thanks to
>Ronald Reagan, the outlaw BATF (what else do you call an out-of-
>control agency that coldbloodedly murders 81 individuals -- 22 of them
>kids -- and whose very existence is forbidden by the Constitution?)
>was prohibited from computerizing forms generated under the 1968 Gun
>Control Act. And there was still no provision for licensing owners.
>
>    Now, the danger of a _national_ Sullivan Act has raised its
>stealthy head again, brought on by well-intended but misguided efforts
>to issue concealed carry permits. The danger is exacerbated by the
>fact that this extremely circumscribed return of a fundamental liberty
>has produced such remarkably beneficial results. It reminds us of the
>way, in the Soviet Union, that the 5% of farmland privately owned
>produced 80% of the crops. Even from our own side, we hear how crime
>is falling in states that generously _allow_ 1% of the people to carry
>weapons. But there can _be_ no "allow" where an unalienable
>individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right is concerned.
>
>    One more time, just to get it straight:  there _is_ no "allow".
>The word applies only to slaves, collared dogs, maybe children, and
>government. It does _not_ apply to free adults. We've forgotten that,
>in America, unlike any other nation on Earth, "We the People" _allow_
>government to do things (too many, as we're belatedly starting to
>realize), not the other way around. That's the point of the 9th and
>10th Amendments. Second-highest on the list of things we _don't_ allow
>is interference with our right to own and carry weapons.
>
>    It's undeniable that crime has decreased wherever the right to own
>and carry weapons, previously suppressed, has been converted into a
>_privilege_, granted or denied by the state. Overlooked, however, is
>the fact that, in 1994, _Vermont_ was named (_Crime State Rankings
>1994_) the safest state in America. It's the _only_ state without laws
>of any kind forbidding -- or allowing -- concealed weapons. Hence the
>term, "Vermont Carry", which I coined years ago to describe the proper
>way to observe the Second Amendment.
>
>    Where licensing proponents tip their hand is that, in many states,
>in many versions of concealed carry legislation, failure to comply
>with their illegal requirements becomes -- without explanation or
>justification -- a _felony_ rather than the misdemeanor it was before.
>In other instances, the applicant -- make that, "supplicant" -- must
>name the weapon he or she will be _allowed_ to carry, along with its
>serial number. Thus we've come, the long way around, by our own clumsy
>doing, to the registration and licensing we once opposed.
>
>    An _unalienable_ right is one that can't be taken away by anyone
>for any reason. All rights are _individual_ rights; no group has
>rights beyond those possessed individually by its members. My
>dictionary says a _civil_ right is one guaranteed (not "given" or
>"granted") to the individual by law. A _Constitutional_ right is no
>right at all, but a limit on the power of government. A _human_ right
>is one you possess inherently, by virtue of being alive; it's what we
>mean when we say "natural" right.
>
>    The right to own and carry weapons is all of these things, not one
>-- not even civil rights; that's why we busted big fat segregationist
>sheriffs in Smokey Bear hats and mirrored sunglasses in the 1960s --
>subject to government approval.
>
>    Anti-gunners are striking back, suing to expose permits lists,
>violate privacy, endanger lives. The law is with them:  permits are a
>matter of public record and _must_ be disclosed. Elsewhere, we hear of
>discriminatory licensing based on income or race. In terms of
>potential abuses, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
>
>    The Libertarian Second Amendment Caucus, SAFE (Second Amendment is
>For Everyone), and GOLF (Gun Owners' Liberation Front) were the first
>to demand nothing less than Vermont Carry -- _repeal_ of any law
>having anything to do with how people carry weapons. We're gratified
>that SWARM (Safety for Women And Responsible Motherhood) and GOA (Gun
>Owners of America) have followed suit.
>
>    It's time for the National Rifle Association to join us in calling
>for a national _non-system_ of Vermont Carry. No prerequisites, no
>records, no nothing.
>
>    _Then_ watch the crime rate start to fall.
>
>===================================
>
>L. Neil Smith's award-winning first novel, _The Probability Broach_,
>which has long been out of print, will be republished by TOR Books
>this October. A complete list of his novels and collection of his
>essays and other data may be reached on the World Wide Web through
>http://www.liberty.com/home/kholder/. Permission to redistribute this
>article is herewith granted by the author, provided that it is
>reproduced unedited, in its entirety, and appropriate credit given.
>

========= http://www.cyberramp.net/~muhgi/muhgi.html ==============
"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're
begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals
among men were always automatically 'right'. Guns ended that, and
social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work." -Clarissa in _The Probability Broach_, L.N. Smith
===Collin County Gun Owners===Libertarian Party of Collin County===



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 02:48:01 -0700

        Joe,

        >>>>>>>
        Thinking, "out loud", is there any redunancy in the power supplied
to the
"black" boxes. Or do they all end at the same time because the power was cut
off to both at the same time. My understanding is that the recorders are
analog on that model A/C. Wouldn't an 'open' input look different than no
record, an abrupt change to old data from that last time that part of the
loop went by the record heads (come to think of it a digital recorder would
do the same thing.
        <<<<<<<

        The power in a 747 - in the 'air mode', is divided to left and
right side busses.
        Aux power is provided by the APU, and tied in to the left main buss.
        In all models, in the unlikely event of main buss/es shutdown, the
'Hot Battery buss' (ship's main battery) provides about 30 minutes of
standby power (at 28 volts) used also to supply standby DC power, and
through an inverter - AC power, to sustain certain instrumentation (and
certain customers have had the APU battery tied in also via separate
circuit to provide additional time).
        Otherewise, all four engines provide power to the separate busses -
left and right, which are normally tied together to form one connected buss
with the buss tie circuit breaker.
        In the event of load shedding, that is, when a power management
panel is sensing too much of a load, certain portions of the buss load (low
priority items) are programmed to power down in sequence untill the
overload condition is abated.

        As regards power to certain black boxes, the voice recorder has
power fed to it from both busses, along with the Hot Battery buss power.
        The voice recorder in that 747 was probably as was provided -
analog. Your assumption concerning recorded information is correct, if the
line was merely severed.

        >>>>>>>
        Does the power go through one common physical location, i.e.
several close
together breaker panels? Looks to me that's where to look for the intial
damage, from whatever mechanism.
        <<<<<<<

        The major power management panels ('P' panels) are all in the E/E
area, in the aft, lower 41 section, forward of the Main Cargo area. The 41
section is the 'nose' portion of the airplane (in the 747).
        Other 'P' panels of a lesser nature are in various locations on the
airplane.

        >>>>>>>
        How fast was the A/C going? Stingers can home on leading edge/surface
heating, I think.  As a wild ass idea, how about a missle coming in through
the windscreen? Might penetrate aft a ways before exploding. Anything vital,
besides the pilots, in that general area? Seems like that might rip  a
sufficiently large hole in the structure and skin to let aerodynamic forces
do the rest. I read in Av. Wk, that the last words on the tape were the
pilot requesting more power in order to climb, having just be given
clearance to do so.
        <<<<<<<

        Probably close to 400 Kts, and accerlerating.
        To experience leading edge heating you have to be going a faster
than MACH 1. The 747 is capable of a teensy bit below Mach. In fact, it is
Boeing's fastest commercial jetliner. I haven't reviewed the figures for
the 777, but I'd hazard a guess that it is a tie.
        Just in case you don't know, MACH varies with altitude and
barometric pressure. At higher altitudes the air is thinner than at sea
level, and as a result the speed of sound is reached much quicker, since
sound travels faster in a more viscous medium.

         From the American Heritage Dictionary (V4.0):
        The ratio of the speed of an object to the speed of sound in the
surrounding medium. For example, an aircraft moving twice as fast as the
speed of sound is said to be traveling at Mach 2.

        At sea level it is 1116.5 Fps (Feet Per Second) or 761.25 Mph.
        At 13000 ft,  it is 1065.4 Fps or 726.4 Mph.
        However, an interesting tabulation for the speed of sound between
the altitudes of 110,000 Ft and 220,000 Ft is shown in the Handbook Of
Engineering Fundamentals, (Eshbach, Ovid Wallace, Third Edition, Wiley
Handbook Series, ISBN 0-471-24553-4).
        At 100,000 Ft the speed is at 990.9 Fps, then at 110,000 it is
1002.7 Fps, going to 1082 Fps at 160,000 to 170,000 Ft, and dropping to
1000.1 Fps at 210,000 Ft.
        In water, sound travels at an incredible speed, something like 4000
feet per second as I recall.


        The reason the pilot was requesting more power, is that the
airplane was leaving a noise abatement area. Otherwise, the pilot could
have gone to full throttle for whatever length of time was required to
achieve target airspeed.

        >>>>>>>
        The longer it goes with no evidence of a signifigent bomb, one
has to think that, if an explosive  device was the cause, it had to have
been a smallish one, placed at a unfortitous (for those on board) spot.
        <<<<<<<

        The observations of area witnesses should be investigated more
closely, to find out just where that streak of light came from. Most
especially the ANG Major:

        Fred Meyer, a major (sic) in the Air National Guard, who was flying
a C-130 off Long Island on a training mission, said he saw an arc of light
moving toward the plane. He said it followed "the sort of trajectory that
you see when a shooting star enters the atmosphere."
        He added, "Almost immediately thereafter I saw in rapid succession
a small explosion and then a large explosion."

        The above quote was from an AP article I posted recently (7/22/96).

        Untill more substantive findings are learned, I will maintain that
the item that hit the plane was either a piece of space junk, or a
meteoroid.

Ed

PS   I'd give a piece of my anatomy to find that it was just such an item
(space debris). Note all the eggregious legislation that would be found
wanting and totally unnecessary. I wonder what spin they'd put on it to
keep it on the books?



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: VFW
Date: 11 Aug 1996 12:09:55 -0400

I got a solicitation to join the VFW the other day, and thought it might be
a good thing, until I read their oath;
         
         In the presence of Almighty God, I do, of my own free will and
accord, solemnly promise and declare that:
         I will bear true allegiance--to the government of the United States
of America--and I will always be loyal thereto--and will never bear arms-nor
in any way use my influence--against its laws or institutions.
         I do further solemnly promise and declare-that I will comply with
the Congressional Charter--By-Laws and Ritual of this order--and I will
always be loyal thereto--that I will never wrong or defraud this
organization--nor a member thereof--nor permit any wrongdoing to be done
either--if in my power to prevent it.
         I will never propose for membership--any person not
eligible--according to our Congressional Charter--nor one whom I know to be
unworthy.
         I will never make known to anyone--not authorized to receive
it--any of the work of this order.
         Should my affiliation--with the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States--cease in any way--I will consider this pledge--as binding
outside of the order--as though I had remained a member of same.
         All this I promise and pledge--upon the honor of a true
comrade--and a citizen of our great republic.

The part I have trouble with is pledging to "bear true allegiance to the
government of the United States of America". If it had said "the
Constitution of the United States of America", there would be no problem,
but pledging myself to the government, to me is wrong. The United States
government has become corrupted, and perveted, into a form unrecognizable
from what it was instituted as, a Constitutional Republic. As a result, I
could never in good conscience, pledge my allegiance to it as it stands. The
oath I took upon joining the Air Force, to uphold and defend the
Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign AND domestic, is more valid today
than when I took it, which prevents me from taking an oath to "bear true
allegiance to the government of the United States of America". 
Further, the form states, "I certify that I am a citizen of the United
States". I am an American Citizen, not a subject of the US government,
therefore I couldn't take their oath on that grounds alone.
In LIBERTY
Tom
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made
in the shape of your conscience to block the pleasures
permitted by mine.  When you people prevail, you commit
a crime against freedom, and that is the greatest
immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
(no date avail). Thanks to:Mark Johnson (onethumb@why.net)

.. To each of my Nephews, William Augustine Washington, George Lewis, George
Steptoe Washington,  Bushrod Washington, and Samuel Washington, I give one of
the Swords or Cutteaux of which I may die possessed; and they are to chuse in
the order they are named. --These Swords are accompanied with an injunction
not to unsheath them for the purpose of shedding blood, except it be for
defense, or in the defense of their Country and its rights; and in the latter
case, to keep them unsheathed, and prefer falling with them in their hands,
to the relinquishment thereof.
(Will, July 9, 1799)

>From "Maxims of George Washington," published by The Mount Vernon Ladies'
Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1989.
Thanks to Bob2A@aol.com

"A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon is truth,
still; and a lie on the throne is on the way to defeat, and truth in a
dungeon is on the way to victory." --Anonymous.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: UN is on the move? (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 19:25:09 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------


Thanks Paula for this report. Anyone out there see this also? --Ray--

*********


Dear Sister Paula,
This morning at about 8 a.m. my husband observed a west bound train
pulling about 10 flatcars.  They contained tanks, armored cars and troop
transport trucks.  All of them were securely covered with tarps BUT one
of the tarps had blown off and the troop transport truck that my husband
saw had the UN emblem on the doors.  As they were all tarped and all
painted the same color we assume that they surely all had UN markings.
We live in central Indiana and this track runs from New York to
California.

Thought that you might find this interesting!

In Christ's love,
Kathy


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

 - Benjamin Franklin


To subscribe for FREE to Prophe-Zine, write to ray673@best.com

http://www.best.com/~ray673/pzhome.html

God never closes a door, without opening a window.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Your moving to a human settlement camp, soon at a neighborhood near you (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 20:43:00 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
r you

THE NEW AMERICAN / APRIL 29, 1996
for a sample issue call 1-800-727-8783

Battle for Sustainable Freedom
Principled conservationists are teaming up to fight the UN's ecoagenda=20

Quietly but persistently, the Clinton Administration is seeking to redefine
America's environmental and land use policies in conformity with the United
Nations' Agenda 21 blueprint for a global environmental dictatorship. In
doing so, it is carrying out a scheme for the "rewilding" of America which
would result in the conversion of at least half the land area of the
continental U.S. into a vast "ecopark" devoid of industry and private
property.

The UN's environmental vision is one of a human society achieving
"sustainable development" under the direction of a global green elite. This
concept has become a much more immediate danger with the recent publication
of Sustainable America: A New Consensus, the report of the President's
Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). The PCSD report describes itself
as "a new framework for a new century" and declares that "sustainability is
all encompassing." Accordingly, it presents a detailed program for infusing
UN mandated reforms into every aspect of American life, including education=
,
job training, housing, transportation, and health care. It urges an increas=
e
in foreign aid to promote UN environmental policies abroad, and the adoptio=
n
of UN generated population control policies here at home.

Free Market Gathering
The desire to understand the devastating implications of the UN's agenda fo=
r
sustainable development drew more than 100 scholars, activists, and religio=
us
leaders to "Global Environmentalism: Agenda 21's Impact on America," a
national gathering of free market conservationists held in Kansas City from
March 21st23rd. The conference was a project of the Sustainable Freedom
Coalition, a grassroots national network designed to defend America's
constitutional order against the UN aligned ecojuggernaut.

Henry Lamb, founder and chairman of the Environmental Conservation
 organization (ECO) and one of the nationals most diligent students of the
UN's environmental agenda, was the primary organizer of the Kansas City
event, and he is convinced that the best way to confront the threat posed b=
y
the UN and its allies is to create "a wide variety of grassroots contacts w=
ho
will be well informed and prepared to defend property rights and sound
principles." Iamb and his associates assembled a formidable constellation o=
f
scholars to elucidate the UN's environmental agenda and the dangers it
presents to liberty and national independence.

Dr. Patrick Michaels of the University of Virginia and Dr. Robert Balling o=
f
Arizona State University offered authoritative critiques of the dubious
science behind the durable "global warming" scare. Economist Jacqueline Kas=
un
of Humboldt State University presented a detailed examination of the UN's
social agenda, particularly with regard to population control. An account o=
f
the struggle against the UN's Biodiversity treaty was provided by Dr. Micha=
el
Coffman of Environmental Perspectives, Inc., and Tom McDonnell, a resource
analyst for the American Sheep Industry Association. Timely and informative
presentations were also offered by James Sheehan and Fred Smith of the
Competitive Enterprise Institute, agricultural scientist Dennis Avery of th=
e
Hudson Institute, journalist Cliff Kincaid, Jim Miller of Human Life
International, author and researcher Samantha Smith, and financial consulta=
nt
Joan Veon. Congressman Helen Chenoweth (R-ID) addressed the meeting's closi=
ng
banquet.

A Cancer on the Planet
As Dr. Michael Coffman warned, the premise of sustainable development is th=
at
"human society, particularly industrial society, is a cancer on the planet
and must be eradicated." Panelists at the conference documented that the
realization of the UN's designs would require the abolition of national
sovereignty, central planning of the world economy, systematic disruption o=
f
the traditional family, a radical reduction in the human population, and th=
e
adoption of a pre-industrial standard of living for those allowed to inhabi=
t
the earth.

Dennis Avery, an agricultural economist with the Hudson Institute, pointed
out that sustainable development advocates are pursuing mutually incompatib=
le
goals: They seek to "stabilize" the human population at nine billion by the
year 2050 while simultaneously requiring a worldwide conversion to organic
agriculture and preventing largescale deforestation. "If we were to rely on
organic farming to feed a population of nine billion, as Al Gore would
require, we would have to plow down a land area equivalent to all of South
America, North America, continental Europe, and half of Africa," Avery
observed.

Organic farming=97that is, the abandonment of pesticides, fertilizers, hybr=
id
seeds, and methods of high yield agriculture=97could not support the presen=
t
population, Avery maintained. "At best, it could support a population of
about three billion=97roughly half of what we have now. We're not going to
get=97humanely=97to a global population of three billion, as some
environmentalists desire. We're not going to have a vegetarian world. and
there aren't going to be happy Third World peoples living cheerfully in
15thcentury peasant villages." Accordingly, Avery wryly observed, "We are
left with the 'humane' choice between famine, bullets, and poison gas."

Professor Jacqueline Kasun presented a detailed analysis of key UN document=
s,
including the global population plan created at the 1994 International
Conference on Population and Development, the "Plan of Action" created at t=
he
1995 UN women's conference in Beijing, and the UN Convention on the Rights =
of
the Child. She described the UN's vision as that of "a world environmental
zoo park" in which human society would be radically realigned.

As a result of the UN's social initiatives, Kasun predicted, "The family as
we know it will come under even greater pressures than ever before." In
pursuit of UN mandated "gender equity," more women will be driven from thei=
r
homes, making it increasingly difficult for male heads of households to fin=
d
adequate jobs in the labor market, and children will be separated from thei=
r
families at ever earlier ages and indoctrinated in the nostrums of populati=
on
control.

Jim Sheehan, a policy analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute,
described the "greening" of global trade through the NAFTA and GATT trade
accords. "What the Greens mean by free trade is not what market advocates
understand to be free trade, which increases the personal choices for
consumers," Sheehan warned. "What they seek is the abolition of trade
barriers and linking international trade to environmental regulation."

Through the NAFTA pact, according to Sheehan, regulators are "harmonizing"
environmental regulations across North America "using UN environmental
regulations as a baseline." Similar initiatives are underway using GATT's
dispute settlement process=97which is now binding, thanks to the World Trad=
e
Organization. As a result, explained Sheehan, advocates of global central
environmental planning are using international trade "in the same way that
the federal government has used the interstate commerce clause to extend it=
s
jurisdiction into nearly every transaction or social interaction in this
country."

Pagan Worldview
In her address to the conference, Representative Helen Chenoweth pointed ou=
t
that the concept of "sustainable development" is inspired by a religious
worldview=97"a cloudy mixture of earth worship, pagan mysticism, and folklo=
re."
That worldview was endorsed by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt during a
November 21 st address to the National Religious Partnership for the
Environment, in which he condemned traditional Christianity and exalted pag=
an
nature worship as the basis for a new social "covenant." Chenoweth noted th=
at
Babbitt "really believes nature and the natural landscape are literally hol=
y
and that anything we do on the landscape is sacrilegious=97that we're
dis-turbing his temple."

Babbitt is not unique in his devotion to eco-paganism. Vice President Al
Gore's soporific opus Earth in the Bal-ance dismisses Christianity and othe=
r
monotheistic religions as inadequate for the needs of contemporary society
and urges the enshrinement of a "panreligious perspective" as the basis of =
a
world spiritual tradition. Furthermore, the UN Environmental Programme's
Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), a 1,140page document which provides t=
he
theoretical and conceptual basis for the world body's environmental agenda,
maintains that sustainable development will require the abolition of biblic=
al
civilization and the adoption of the values of pre-Christian pagan societie=
s.

In a chapter entitled "The Economic Value of Biodiversity," the GBA
de-scribes the pre-Christian world as a primitive utopia in which people
per-ceived themselves to belong to "a community of beings=97living and
non-living" joined in "relationships with other community members, be they
trees, birds, or mountain peaks...." Inhabitants of such societies often
worshipped "certain spe-cies as sacred, with elaborate myths and folk tales
about how humans originated from such species, or how such species are
incarnations of, or in some way as-sociated with, gods and deities, or how
they have magical powers."

Such paganism, according to the GBA, prevailed in the world "for most of
human existence"=97Christian civilization being merely an unfortunate detou=
r.
The docu-ment contends that the Western worldview "is characterized by the
denial of sacred attributes in nature, a character-istic that has its roots
in Greek philoso-phy, and became firmly established about 2,000 years ago
with the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions."

The triumph of biblical monotheism led to the emergence of "a new worldview=
,
and a new value system":
This perspective, especially as elaborated in the JudaeoChristian tradition=
,
set humans not as part of a wider community of beings, but apart....
Societies dominated by Is lam, and especially by Christianity, have gone th=
e
farthest in setting hu mans apart from nature and in embracing a value syst=
em
that has converted the world into a warehouse of commodities for human
enjoyment.

Some portions of the GBA read as if they had been composed by a coven of
neo-Canaanites. The Old Testament records that the ancient pagan Canaanites
worshipped in "sacred groves," in which they propitiated their deities and
abandoned themselves to ritualized de-pravity. The GBA observes that pagan
cultures which converted to Christianity "began to cut down the sacred
groves, to bring the land under cultivation," and otherwise adopt the value=
s
of the West. However, in India, Myanmar, and else-where in the far east,
"many of these people have ... reestablished the sacred groves, although th=
ey
are now termed safety forests instead." The preservation of sacred groves,
according to the GBA, is a model to be followed by governments and
non-governmental organiza-tions that seek to protect endangered species and
habitat.

Restoring "biodiversity" will also re-quire radical population control,
accord-ing to the GBA. The section of the document dealing with "growth
hu-man population and natural resource consumption" suggests three possible
population models for a "sustainable" global society. An agricultural socie=
ty
"in which most human beings are peasants ... should be able to support 5 to=
 7
billion people...." For "an industrialized world society at the present Nor=
th
American standard of living [the figure] would be 1 billion. At the more
frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 bil-lion would be possible."

The UN's Global Diversity Assess-ment presents the choice of global peon-ag=
e
or mass genocide, and leaves the details of accomplishing either option to
the ingenuity of national governments.
Biodiversity and Wild lands

The GBA was designed as a guide for creating national policies to implement
the UN's Convention on Biodiversity, which was the centerpiece of the 1992
Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. The treaty was designed to be "soft law," a
collection of broad commitments with details to be finalized after
ratification at the national level=97in other words, a blank check for
eco-radicals. Although then President George Bush declined to sign the
treaty, Bill Clinton eagerly affixed his signature to the pact in June 1993
and made preparations for its implementation as domestic policy.

By the time Mr. Clinton signed the Biodiversity treaty, Dr. Michael Coffman
and Tom McDonnell, working in-dependently of each other, had been laboring =
at
the grassroots level to build resistance to ratification of the pact. "Duri=
ng
the year after Bill Clinton signed the treaty, we tried to convince the
Senate that it would essentially abol-ish private property rights, but we h=
ad
no smoking gun," Coffman recalled. "The treaty itself was a skimpy little
18-page document that was little more than an outline. We knew that the UN
Envi-ronmental Program [UNEP] was working on a Global Biodiversity Assessme=
nt
[GBA] that would actually be used as the basis for the 'hard' law=97but
ev-erybody in the UN system denied that the GBA existed."

On September 30, 1994=97the day the Senate was scheduled to vote on ratifyi=
ng
the treaty=97Jon Margolis of the Chicago Tribune quoted a UNEP staff member=
 who
stated that "there is no such document" as the GBA. How-ever, McDonnell had
been able to obtain a copy of the 1,140page document through European
contacts=97"and we had our smoking gun," Coffman said with some satisfactio=
n.
 "When we showed up with material from the GBA, Majority Leader George
Mitchell took the treaty off the Senate floor. It is simply unbelievable wh=
at
the U.S.Senate almost did."

Grand Eco Scheme
Had the Senate rati-fied the Biodiversity treaty, it would have formally
committed the United States to carry out the "Wildlands Project," a scheme =
to
convert at least one-half the land area of the continental United States in=
to
one huge "biodiver-sity preserve." The Wildlands concept is essentially a
creation of UNEP's col-laboration with foundation funded envi-ronmental NGO=
s.
Its two chief architects are Earth First! founder Dave Foreman and deep
ecologist Reed Noss. Despite the fact that the Senate has refused thus far =
to
ratify the Biodiversity treaty, the Wildlands project is being implemented
piecemeal=97with the help of the Clin-ton Administration.

The Wildlands Project is intended to be a network of wilderness reserves,
"buffer zones," and wildlife corridors which would eventually cover the
entire hemisphere. Dave Foreman has written that the scheme "is a bold
attempt to grope our way back to October 1492" =97that is, the arrival of
Columbus to the Americas=97"and find a different trail, a trail overgrown a=
nd
nearly forgotten."

Wildlands activists, states Foreman, intend to "tie the North American
conti-nent into a single Biodiversity Preserve...." According to the
Wildlands Project's mission statement: Healing the land means reconnecting
its parts so that vital flows can be renewed.... To stem the disapearance o=
f
wildlife and wilderness we must allow the recovery of whole ecosystems and
landscapes in every region of North America. Allowing these systems to
recover requires a long term master plan....

Our vision is simple: we live for the day when Grizzlies in Chihuahurr have
an unbroken connection to Grizzlies in Alaska; when Gray Wolf populations a=
re
continuous from New Mexico to Greenland; when vast unbroken forests and
flowing plains again thrive and support pre Colombian popula-tions of plant=
s
and animals; when humans dwell with respect, har-mony, and affection for th=
e
land....

To achieve this end, human civilization must be radically restructured, vas=
t
stretches of land must be reprimitivized, roads must be ripped from the
landscape, and human populations must be forcibly relocated. "The Wildlands
Project is a longterm campaign," ex-plains John Davis, editor of the
Project's journal Wild Earth. "Wilderness recov-ery must start now but
continue indefi-nitely=97expanding wilderness until the matrix, not just th=
e
nexus, is wild.... Does [this] mean that Wild Earth and the Wildlands Proje=
ct
advocate the end of industrial civilization? Most assur-edly. Everything
civilized must go...."

Like the pagan cultures which are lauded in the UN's Global Biodiversity
Assessment, the Wildlands leadership is guided by ecoshamans who can
inter-pret nature's delphic utterances. "Who knows what is precious and how
much time is left?" writes Wildlands board member Michael Soule. "The oracl=
es
are the f shes of the river, the fishers of the forest, and articulate toad=
s.
Our naturalists and conservation biologists can help us translate their
utterances. Our spokespersons, fundraisers, and grassroots organizers will
show us how to implement their sage advice."

While the Wildlands shamans com-mune with "articulate toads" and the
project's foundationfunded and tax-payersubsidized leaders consult with
federal regulators, Wildlands activists on the ground are plotting strategi=
es
to deal with the "enemies of the land"=97 loggers, ranchers, miners, and
property owners. "The role of individuals and grassroots [environmental]
groups," according to Foreman, "is to develop proposals for Wilderness
Recovery Networks on the regional and eco-system level using the [Wildlands=
]
model (or some derivation there-of) so that such plans can dovetail into
simi-lar plans for adjacent regions until the conti-nentwide plan is
as-sembled."

Foreman recommends that local affiliates of the green gestapo "iden-tify
existing protected areas' such as federal and state wilderness areas,
na-tional parks, wildlife refuges, and other areas of "core wilderness." On=
ce
such core areas have been identified, Greens are to begin agitating for the
creation of "buffer zones" around the core areas, and the creation of
"wildlife corridors" to link them together. According to Reed Noss, in both
the core areas and buffer zones, "the collective needs of nonhuman species
must take prece-dence over the needs and desires of humans."

Of course, those humans who happen to own land near the core areas, or whos=
e
property stands athwart wildlife corridors, will have to be evicted from
their property. Foreman urges his allies to "look for gaps between wild lan=
ds
or public lands. Such private lands often will be important areas for
acquisition by public agencies or by private groups like the Nature
Conservancy."

The green network has lost little time implementing this aspect of the
Wild-lands Project: According to Tom Mc-Donnell, W ildl an ds linked
environmental groups=97"at least 35 which we can positively identify"=97hav=
e
initiated ap-peals, litigation, and other legal action to close down
development and human access to lands which have been identi-fied as future
"core areas."

Bioregional Approach
According to McDonnell, "All of the principles and objectives outlined in t=
he
Global Biodiversity Assessment"=97in-cluding the essentials of the Wildland=
s
Project=97"have been embraced by the President's Council on Sustainable
De-velopment, circumventing the fact that we stopped the Senate from
ratifying the treaty." Furthermore, through Vice President Gore's
"reinventing gov-ernment" initiative, the GBA's prin-ciples and objectives
have been integrated into the mandates for the Environmental Protection
Agency and the Department of the Interior.

One immediate result of this de-velopment is the Clinton Admin-istration's
adoption of the UN's "bioregional management" approach to environmental
regulation. The PCSD report asserts: "Many scien-tists and resource manager=
s
now believe that biodiversity ... can only be protected through cooperative
ef-forts across large landscapes that often cross ownership boundaries"; it
recommends that "communities in a region work together to deal with issues
that transcend jurisdictional and other boundaries."

Interior Secretary Babbitt also en | dorsed "bioregional management" in his
address to the National Religious Partnership on the Environment, in which =
he
stated that the Clinton Admin-istration's environmental vision "unites all
state, county, and federal workers under a common moral goal. It erases
artificial borders"=97such as constitu-tional limitations on federal power =
and
ju-risdiction, for example=97"so we can see the full range of natural
habitat.... And it makes us see all the creatures that are collectively
rooted to one habitat, and how, by keeping that habitat intact, we ensure t=
he
survival of the species."

One example of the Clinton Admin-istration's "bioregional" approach is the
Northwest Forest Plan, which Babbitt proudly describes as "a holistic
agree-ment" intended to preserve "critical habitat" across state borders. T=
he
Forest Plan was created in closed sessions by unelected bureaucrats in
connivance with unaccountable ecoactivists=97providing a preview of the fas=
hion
in which "bioregional councils" would operate under the UN's Biodiversity
regime.

The Wildlands radicals are eagerly advancing the UN/Clinton Administra-tion
design, demanding the complete eradication of local and state
jurisdic-tions=97and, eventually, national borders. "Over time, each region=
al
planning group will develop a map based pro-gram for their bioregion,"
explains Michael Soule. "Later, representatives of the bio-regional groups
will meet and integrate their plans into a national, then continental
strategy."

Unaccountable "Consensus"
The "bioregional councils" under development would be governed by
repre-sentatives of the "international civil society"=97UN accredited
non-governmental organizations (NGO), many of them taxpayer funded and
foundation subsidized. From 199395, the U.S. De-partment of the Interior
allocated more than $242 million to some 869 NGOs and activists, including
the Nature Con-servancy, which (as noted above) spear-heads property
acquisition efforts on behalf of the ecoregulatory apparat. Such groups,
Henry Lamb explained, "are considered the authentic voice of public opinion
because they always sup-port the UN defined 'consensus.' Pub-lic opinion th=
at
doesn't support the UN's 'consensus' is called 'populist ac-tion' and is
discounted altogether."

Citing Our Global Neig11borl~ood, the report of the UN aligned Commission o=
n
Global Governance, Lamb suggested that the "bioregional councils" may
eventually be used as administrative units of a UN dominated world
governmeet. He pointed out that Our Global Neighborhood recommends that the
UN's "Trusteeship Council," an obsolete organ which had been used to manage
decolonization efforts, be entrusted with the management of the "global
commons"=97that is, the regulation of the environment.

According to Lamb, "The report calls for the creation of a 'Petitions
Coun-cil' composed of five to seven repre-sentatives of accredited NGOs. Th=
ey
would help direct funding decisions, define administrative duties, and
au-thorize enforcement actions. The world would be divided up into bioregio=
ns
administered by bio-regional councils under direct supervi-sion of the UN a=
nd
with enforcement authority through the petitions coun-cil." In anticipation
of this develop-ment, Lamb observed, "The map of the U.S. is being redrawn
into 21 bigregions, and current federal policy is to eradicate county and
state boundaries by subsuming them into contiguous 'ecosystems."'

Another indication of the Clinton Administration's subservience to the UN's
environmental agenda was the President's decision to grant "the privileges
and immunities that pro-vide or pertain to immunity from suit" to the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) by Ex-ecutive Order o=
n
January 18th. Lamb referred to the IUCN as "the grandaddy of environmental
NGOs." Cocreated by Julian Huxley, the devout eugenicist and social Darwini=
st
who served as the founding director general of the United Nations Education=
,
Scientific, and Cul-tural Organization, (In 1947 Huxley wrote that among
UNESCO's most urgent tasks was "to see that the eugenic problem is examined
with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues =
at
stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable."
Accordingly, it is appro- priate that the IUCN produced the UN's Global
Biodiversity Assessment, which suggests that the human population should be
reduced to one billion.) the IUCN is the major umbrella for the environment=
al
groups which are carrying out the man-dates of the Biodiversity treaty and
the Wildlands Project.  .....

Lost last page, sorry folks



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: UN is on the move? (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 19:59:12 -0600




Yes, so?  Surely you don't all think that UN vehicles get to (Bosnia,
Somalia, Haiti, wherever they have been mixed up in the past) by
themselves, do you?

I worked in Munich Germany for 1.5 years from 91-93.  One evening I saw a
big truck, all in white, driving down the Autobahn (A9 to Nuernberg).  As I
passed it said in blue "UN" on the side.  Did this mean that the UN was
getting ready for some nefarious take over of Germany?  No.

I don't like the UN or its policies any more than the next person.  But UN
vehicles on trains are NO cause for concern.  It happens pretty regularly.
In the last few years there was a trainload of Canadian armored personnel
carriers flatcarred through the US from Montana down to California to be
put on ships headed for the former Yugoslavia.  The below mentioned
vehicles were probably US Army, maybe Canadian Armed Forces that were being
"volunteered" for "UN Duty" somewhere in the world and being shipped to
port to be put on some ships to get there.

If the below is of any concern, that concern should be that your tax
dollars are going to support a stupid UN mission somewhere in the world and
maybe you should be motivated to write to your local newspaper (CCed to
your Congressman and Senators) detailing the sighting and complaining about
the wasted tax money.  The wrong reaction is to get all upset about a UN
take over or such nonesense.

There is a big fight to fight.   Don't get distracted by fantasies.

regards
in liberty
Chad

ps: it is common to put tarps down over military vehicles when they are
being shipped long distances, for many reasons.  Hiding the UN is not one
of those reasons.



>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 07:35:52 -0700
>From: ray673@best.com
>To: Ray's Work <ray@infoweavers.com>
>Subject: UN is on the move?
>
>From: Rdy4Battle@aol.com
>
>Thanks Paula for this report. Anyone out there see this also? --Ray--
>
>*********
>
>From:   kwalter7@ix.netcom.com
>To:     Rdy4Battle@aol.com
>
>Dear Sister Paula,
>This morning at about 8 a.m. my husband observed a west bound train
>pulling about 10 flatcars.  They contained tanks, armored cars and troop
>transport trucks.  All of them were securely covered with tarps BUT one
>of the tarps had blown off and the troop transport truck that my husband
>saw had the UN emblem on the doors.  As they were all tarped and all
>painted the same color we assume that they surely all had UN markings.
>We live in central Indiana and this track runs from New York to
>California.
>
>Thought that you might find this interesting!
>
>In Christ's love,
>Kathy
>
>------------------------------
>
>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>
> - Benjamin Franklin
>
>-------------------------------
>
>To subscribe for FREE to Prophe-Zine, write to ray673@best.com
>
>http://www.best.com/~ray673/pzhome.html
>
>God never closes a door, without opening a window.

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Chattanooga Free Press Prints Article On Forfeiture (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 21:03:28 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Chattanooga Free Press ~ Opinion  ~ Sunday, August 11, 1996

Sunday Focus  Page B7


Militant Forfeiture Apparatus Violates Law     


     Forfeiture is a two-sided coin. On one side it is government taking from
a crook his cash, Mercedes or condo because they are the fruit of his crime
and he has lost his rights to own them.

      On the other side we see the cases of innocent owners losing cars,
homes and businesses to police agencies after raids.

   For them, forfeiture describes the loss of rights as a consequence of some
obligation or condition which somehow has attached itself to the dismayed
property owner.
 
       Civil forfeiture proceedings all across the country are called "in rem
proceedings" (in rem is Latin for "as things"), in which the federal, state
or local government acts against a piece of property ~ an envelope of U.S.
currency in an airline passenger's bag, for example ~ and separates it from
its owner.

    Forfeiture actions which net millions of dollars for police agencies from
thousands of people never charged with a crime are washing over the nation's
property owners like a tidal wave.

      That increasing roar of police action reflects a similar tidal wave in
the legal realm in which federal or "maritime" jurisdiction sloshes over into
common law jurisdiction.

       Common law or natural law jurisdiction, long dominant in the 50
states, is the one presumed by our original Constitution to be the dominant
law realm of the land in which the people live and relate.

        Common law suffered its major defeat in the War Between the States in
the 1860's.

        War was waged against the states under Washington's martial law
power. The District of Columbia was originally set up in maritime
jurisdiction, allowing federal power to operate outside the continental
United States.

     The war helped replace the civilized common law-oriented Constitution
with a militant international law sphere. The pervasive claims of people
working in this sphere of law allows for forfeiture against innocent owners
who have no remedy except costly lawsuits.

      In the old days, forfeiture was legitimate only if the seized property
came from crime.

         Now property may be seized at whim.

        The defenders of federal power that denies common law rights of the
people in the 50 states argue that "necessity" rquires the spread of
forfeiture. The legal doctrine of necessity is one always resorted to by
despots.
            
    Is there any way we can rid ourselves of the plague by eliminating  the
necessity which despots claim?

      First, two unlikely options: The president can issue an executive order
overturning the layers of martial law established under Reagan/Bush/Clinton
and their predecessors. Or a foreign power could work to re-establish "civil"
government.  

       A possible third option would be for the people to establish what are
called "jural societies." Such a society is formed when a group of likeminded
people agree to form a governing body and adhere to its rule. Our national
and state constitutions envision a process in which a sovereign citizenry
forms a governing body or "jural society" starting at the local level.

       I think that the formation of such institutions could allow the people
to have a legal standing to argue against the harsh aspects of the
social-control and police-state apparatus.

       Forfeiture of houses, cars, acreage and currency is sadly a symptom of
a larger forfeiture action which we can blame on the sin of omission by the
American people.

       We have failed to keep the republic and restore it as it slipped away,
and now we are surrounded on all sides by a democracy established under
military-maritime jurisdiction disguised to appear "all normal."

     I am helping to develope the Internet Ecclesiastical Jural Society,
which argues for a return to God's law as a way to bring renewal to America
and eventually elevate common law reality over arbitrary maritime
jurisdiction and the worldview that comes with it (e-mail: Saints@dabney.com).


       Remember Wallace's words in Braveheart: "Every man dies, not every man
really lives."

       Burk Elder Hale III of Chickamauga, Ga., is national director of the
Fully Informed Grand Jurors Alliance.

End of Article

<><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><<><>             


* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: The Coup D'etat That Exposed The True Colors Behind The "Civil War" (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 21:05:05 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

When President Johnson tried to re-establish the federal jural society
under the civil, peace-time provisions of the Constitution, he was met
by the forces that still subvert lawful government today. Below, you
will see the facts that so many subversives use in an attempt to distort 
the truth with the diversion of "minority"-defined racism and white-Christian

guilt. The point here is that we should remember what really happened
to the republic, i.e., it was overthrown in a coup d'etat. ~Elder


MEMORIAL  TO CONGRESS -- FOURTEENTH AND 
FIFTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO U.S. CONSTITUTION
BE DECLARED VOID

NO. 45 (Senate Resolution No. 39)
 
(A Joint Resolution! ~Elder)

A memorial to Congress of the United States of America urging them to enact
such legislation as they may deem fit to declare that the 14th and 15th
amendments to the Constitution of the United States were never validly
adopted and that they are null and void and of no effect.

Whereas, the State of Georgia together with the ten other Southern States
declared to have been lately in rebellion against the United States,
following the termination of hostilities in 1865, met all the conditions laid
down by the President of the United States, in exercise of his Constitutional
powers to recognize the governments of states, domestic as well as foreign,
for the resumption of practical relations with the government of the United
States, as a State and States in proper Constitutional relation to the United
States; and

Whereas, when duly elected Senators and Repre-sentatives appeared in the
Capitol of the United States to take their seats at the time for the opening
of the 39th Congress, and again at the time for the openings of the 40th and
the 41st Congresses, hostile majorities in both Houses refused to admit them
to their seats in manifest violation of Articles I and V of the United States
Constitution; and

Whereas, the said Congresses, not being constituted of Senators and
Representatives from each State as required by the Supreme Law of the Land,
were not, in Constitutional contemplation, anything more than private
assemblages unlawfully attempting to exercise the Legislative Power of the
United States; and

Whereas, the so-called 39th Congress, which proposed to the Legislatures of
several States an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, known
as the 14th Amendment, and the so-called 40th Congress, which proposed an
amendment known as the 15th Amendment, were without lawful power to propose
any amendment whatsoever to the Constitution; and

Whereas, two-thirds of the Members of the House of Representatives and of the
Senate, as they should have been constituted, failed to vote for the
submission of these amendments; and

Whereas, all proceedings subsequently flowing from these invalid proposals,
purporting to establish the so-called 14th and 15th Amendments as valid parts
of the Constitution, were null and void and of no effect from the beginning;
and

Whereas, furthermore, when these invalid proposals were rejected by the
General Assembly of the State of Georgia and twelve other Southern States, as
well as of sundry Northern States, the so-called 39th and 40th Congresses, in
flagrant disregard of the United States Constitution, by the use of military
force, dissolved the duly recognized State Governments in Georgia and nine of
the other Southern States and set up military occupation or puppet State
governments, which compliantly ratified the invalid proposals, thereby making
(at the point of the bayonet) a mockery of Section 4, Article IV of the
Constitution, guaranteeing protection to "each of them against invasion"; and

Whereas, further, the pretended ratification of the so-called 14th and 15th
Amendments by Georgia and other States whose sovereign powers had been
unlawfully seized by force of arms against the peace and dignity of the
people of those States, were necessary to give color to the claim of the
so-called 40th and 41st Congresses that these so-called amendments had been
ratified by three-fourths of the States; and

Whereas, it is a well-established principle of law that the mere lapse of
time does not confirm by common acquiescence an invalidly-enacted provision
of law just as it does not repeal by general desuetude a provision validly
enacted; and

Whereas, the continued recognition of the 14th and 15th Amendments as valid
parts of the Constitution of the United States is incompatible with the
present day position of the United States as the World's champion of
Constitutional governments resting upon the consent of the people given
through their lawful representatives;

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the General Assembly of the State of
Georgia:
The Congress of the United States is hereby memorialized and respectfully
urged to declare that the exclusions of the of the Southern Senators and
Representa-tives from the 39th, 40th and 41st Congresses were malignant acts
of arbitrary power and rendered those Congresses invalidly constituted; that
the forms of law with which those invalid Congresses attempted to clothe the
submission of the 14th and 15th Amendments and to clothe the subsequent acts
to compel unwilling States to ratify these invalidly proposed amendments,
imparted no validity to these acts and amendments; and that the so-called
14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States are null
and void and of no effect.

Be it further resolved that copies of this memorial be transmitted forthwith
by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate of the State of
Georgia to the President of the United States, the Chief Justice of the
United States, the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of
Representatives of Congress of the United States, and the Senators and
Representatives in Congress from the State of Georgia.



Approved March 8, 1957

* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 11 Aug 1996 22:42:45 -0500

At 02:48 AM 8/11/96 -0700, you wrote:
>    
>        The power in a 747 - in the 'air mode', is divided to left and
>right side busses.
>        Aux power is provided by the APU, and tied in to the left main buss.
>        In all models, in the unlikely event of main buss/es shutdown, the
>'Hot Battery buss' (ship's main battery) provides about 30 minutes of
>standby power (at 28 volts) used also to supply standby DC power, and
>through an inverter - AC power, to sustain certain instrumentation (and
>certain customers have had the APU battery tied in also via separate
>circuit to provide additional time).
>        Otherewise, all four engines provide power to the separate busses -
>left and right, which are normally tied together to form one connected buss
>with the buss tie circuit breaker.
>        In the event of load shedding, that is, when a power management
>panel is sensing too much of a load, certain portions of the buss load (low
>priority items) are programmed to power down in sequence untill the
>overload condition is abated.
>
>        As regards power to certain black boxes, the voice recorder has
>power fed to it from both busses, along with the Hot Battery buss power.
>        The voice recorder in that 747 was probably as was provided -
>analog. Your assumption concerning recorded information is correct, if the
>line was merely severed.
>
>        >>>>>>>
>        Does the power go through one common physical location, i.e.
>several close
>together breaker panels? Looks to me that's where to look for the intial
>damage, from whatever mechanism.
>        <<<<<<<
>
>        The major power management panels ('P' panels) are all in the E/E
>area, in the aft, lower 41 section, forward of the Main Cargo area. The 41
>section is the 'nose' portion of the airplane (in the 747).
>        Other 'P' panels of a lesser nature are in various locations on the
>airplane.
>
>        >>>>>>>
>        How fast was the A/C going? Stingers can home on leading edge/surface
>heating, I think.  As a wild ass idea, how about a missle coming in through
>the windscreen? Might penetrate aft a ways before exploding. Anything vital,
>besides the pilots, in that general area? Seems like that might rip  a
>sufficiently large hole in the structure and skin to let aerodynamic forces
>do the rest. I read in Av. Wk, that the last words on the tape were the
>pilot requesting more power in order to climb, having just be given
>clearance to do so.
>        <<<<<<<
>
>        Probably close to 400 Kts, and accerlerating.
>        To experience leading edge heating you have to be going a faster
>than MACH 1. The 747 is capable of a teensy bit below Mach. In fact, it is


I think this isn't quite true, you'll get some heating regardless, how much
is the question. Enough to require special structural/material provisions
does indeed require speeds greater than mach 1, quite a bit greater in fact.


>Boeing's fastest commercial jetliner. I haven't reviewed the figures for
>the 777, but I'd hazard a guess that it is a tie.
>        Just in case you don't know, MACH varies with altitude and
>barometric pressure. At higher altitudes the air is thinner than at sea
>level, and as a result the speed of sound is reached much quicker, since
>sound travels faster in a more viscous medium.

Yea, I know about the variation of speed of sound with altitude. I've done
simulation models of the F-16, F-15, and other aircraft, inconjunction with
designing terrain following flight control algorithms for them. I've even
studied the diagram of the F-16A/B (analog) flight control system.

>
>         From the American Heritage Dictionary (V4.0):
>        The ratio of the speed of an object to the speed of sound in the
>surrounding medium. For example, an aircraft moving twice as fast as the
>speed of sound is said to be traveling at Mach 2.
>
>        At sea level it is 1116.5 Fps (Feet Per Second) or 761.25 Mph.
>        At 13000 ft,  it is 1065.4 Fps or 726.4 Mph.

On a standard day of course :-) 


>
>
>        The reason the pilot was requesting more power, is that the
>airplane was leaving a noise abatement area. Otherwise, the pilot could
>have gone to full throttle for whatever length of time was required to
>achieve target airspeed.
>
>        >>>>>>>
>        The longer it goes with no evidence of a signifigent bomb, one
>has to think that, if an explosive  device was the cause, it had to have
>been a smallish one, placed at a unfortitous (for those on board) spot.
>        <<<<<<<
>
>        The observations of area witnesses should be investigated more
>closely, to find out just where that streak of light came from. Most
>especially the ANG Major:
>
>        Fred Meyer, a major (sic) in the Air National Guard, who was flying
>a C-130 off Long Island on a training mission, said he saw an arc of light
>moving toward the plane. He said it followed "the sort of trajectory that
>you see when a shooting star enters the atmosphere."
>        He added, "Almost immediately thereafter I saw in rapid succession
>a small explosion and then a large explosion."
>
>        The above quote was from an AP article I posted recently (7/22/96).
>
>        Untill more substantive findings are learned, I will maintain that
>the item that hit the plane was either a piece of space junk, or a
>meteoroid.

When you've eliminated all other possible explanations, whatever's left,
however unlikely, is the explantion.  Bad paraphrase of something from some
Heinlien story, 

Todays revelation that the 4 cargo containers that were in the forward cargo
bay have been recoverd and appear "unremarkble", makes the metorite/space
junk explantion ever more believable. 

>
>
>PS   I'd give a piece of my anatomy to find that it was just such an item
>(space debris). Note all the eggregious legislation that would be found
>wanting and totally unnecessary. I wonder what spin they'd put on it to
>keep it on the books?
>
>
Wouldn't need any spin. It's always easier to not act than to act,
especially if that suits your overall agenda.



              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Partners in Power author on C-SPAN2
Date: 12 Aug 1996 01:52:05 -0400 (EDT)

Roger Morris, author of _Partners In Power_, gave a talk about his book
which was televised this morning on C-SPAN2.

Wow!

I thought I knew everything I needed to know about the Clintons in 
particular and our corrupt government in general, but Morris knocked
my socks off with his unrelenting dry dissection of things.

A few quotes:

"We have a cuture of complicity .... [characterized by] economic,
political, social, and intellectual corruption."

"I worked with [national security advisor] Tony Lake.  Needless to 
say, we haven't spoken in months.... I hope he reads this book. 
I don't think he has the slightest idea for whom he is working."

Morris predicted that Clinton will likely be reelected - and that we 
will later have a constitutional crisis as the Clinton's legal problems 
close in on them.  He went on to say, "People [Democrats]  are working 
behind the scenes to try to get to get the president to step down 
before the convention," but then added that he didn't think there was 
a chance that Clinton would do so.

When asked if the Clintons weren't untouchable by the legal system:  
"Nobody is untouchable, if they become expendable."

Morris didn't spare Dole either, pointing out that Dole sent an 
investigator to Mena in the eighties, looking for dirt on political
opponents.  Whatever he discovered may have found use but it never 
saw the light of day.

Discussing some foolishness related to Clinton and one of his major
backers, Jackson Stephens, Morris said:  "We can laugh at them, we can 
ridicule them, but in the end it's their country, not yours."

Morris was also a real optimist about the future of the United States:

"Our political system is at a dead end... About as pre-revolutionary as
you can get without a revolution ... and it's only a matter of time."


I'm going to go buy a copy of _Partners in Power_ tomorrow.

bd



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: UN is on the move? (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 07:39:11 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
> Yes, so?  Surely you don't all think that UN vehicles get to (Bosnia,
> Somalia, Haiti, wherever they have been mixed up in the past) by
> themselves, do you?

But the article stated that they were moving WEST from the NY area thru 
Indiana....if they were heading for Europe or the Caribbean, they'd be 
heading TO the Atlantic for shipment, not FROM it.

> I worked in Munich Germany for 1.5 years from 91-93.  One evening I saw a
> big truck, all in white, driving down the Autobahn (A9 to Nuernberg).  As I
> passed it said in blue "UN" on the side.  Did this mean that the UN was
> getting ready for some nefarious take over of Germany?  No.

A big difference between one truck and a trainload of equipment.

> I don't like the UN or its policies any more than the next person.  But UN
> vehicles on trains are NO cause for concern.  It happens pretty regularly.

Just because it happens "pretty regularly", does not follow that there 
shouldn't be cause for concern....

> In the last few years there was a trainload of Canadian armored personnel
> carriers flatcarred through the US from Montana down to California to be
> put on ships headed for the former Yugoslavia.  The below mentioned
> vehicles were probably US Army, maybe Canadian Armed Forces that were being
> "volunteered" for "UN Duty" somewhere in the world and being shipped to
> port to be put on some ships to get there.

Since they were coming from the NY area, they were already at a port, and 
were being shipped AWAY from it.

> >Dear Sister Paula,
> >This morning at about 8 a.m. my husband observed a west bound train
> >pulling about 10 flatcars.  They contained tanks, armored cars and troop
> >transport trucks.  All of them were securely covered with tarps BUT one
> >of the tarps had blown off and the troop transport truck that my husband
> >saw had the UN emblem on the doors.  As they were all tarped and all
> >painted the same color we assume that they surely all had UN markings.
> >We live in central Indiana and this track runs from New York to
> >California.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: HCI on the run?
Date: 12 Aug 1996 06:42:31 -0600

>From this week's US News and World Report


TIME FOR A CHANGE?

Handgun Control Inc., the lobbying group that helped push through the 
federal ban on semiautomatic weapons and the Brady law on gun purchases, 
is said to be worried that it is losing the public relations war to the 
National Rifle Association and plans to hire a public relations firm to 
"reorient" its message.

It is also considering a name change because, among other reasons, polls 
and focus groups show that many Americans are uncomfortable with the 
word control. The organization plans to spend up to $100,000 for a "new 
message strategy" to better reflect its objectives, according to a 
detailed memo on the proposed makeover. "We are not antigun, we are 
anti-gun violence," HCI officials assert in the memo. Calling for an 
"effective and aggressive response" to the gun lobby, it said the NRA 
had successfully convinced many voters that gun control does not work. 
The group has so far not hired a public relations firm, says Robert 
Walker, Handgun Control's legislative director, and has made no final 
decision on a name change.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: stern@urshan.com
Subject: Your Howard Stern e-Mail has been received
Date: 12 Aug 1996 05:03:07 -0700

Hi roc,

This message has been sent automatically.

Thank you for contacting "stern@urshan.com".  Due to the massive amounts
of e-Mail received daily, your message will probably go unanswered.

We have created the Usenet newsgroup:

alt.binaries.howard-stern

If you do not get this newsgroup, ask your News Administrator to carry
it.

Howard's FAX # at WXRK (where he does his show) is: (212) 759-5329.

We have over 200 megs of Stern Images and Sounds.  They are almost all
back online.

Be sure to pick up a copy of the documentary video "In Howard We Trust"
only available from our Web Site:

http://www.urshan.com/stern

And remember, if you do not get e-Mail from Howard..."It doesn't
matter!"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: stern@urshan.com
Subject: Your Howard Stern e-Mail has been received
Date: 12 Aug 1996 05:06:26 -0700

Hi roc,

This message has been sent automatically.

Thank you for contacting "stern@urshan.com".  Due to the massive amounts
of e-Mail received daily, your message will probably go unanswered.

We have created the Usenet newsgroup:

alt.binaries.howard-stern

If you do not get this newsgroup, ask your News Administrator to carry
it.

Howard's FAX # at WXRK (where he does his show) is: (212) 759-5329.

We have over 200 megs of Stern Images and Sounds.  They are almost all
back online.

Be sure to pick up a copy of the documentary video "In Howard We Trust"
only available from our Web Site:

http://www.urshan.com/stern

And remember, if you do not get e-Mail from Howard..."It doesn't
matter!"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: UN is on the move? (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 07:20:31 -0600

>On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
>> Yes, so?  Surely you don't all think that UN vehicles get to (Bosnia,
>> Somalia, Haiti, wherever they have been mixed up in the past) by
>> themselves, do you?
>
>But the article stated that they were moving WEST from the NY area thru
>Indiana....if they were heading for Europe or the Caribbean, they'd be
>heading TO the Atlantic for shipment, not FROM it.

Several points:  The article did NOT say that they came from NY.  It said,
paraphrased, that the track in question runs from NY to California and that
this was in the midwest somewhere where they were spotted and that they
were head from E to W.  Implying they came from New York when there is no
way to tell that is not sound.

There may be other trouble spots in the world besides Bosnia, like maybe
Burundi, and so they were travelling to embarkation in California.

Another VERY plausible (IMHO) explanation is that these were vehicles IN
Bosnia that, since NATO is there now, were shipped by slow boat back home
and they are on their way to some unit that had been there and is now home
again.

>
>> I worked in Munich Germany for 1.5 years from 91-93.  One evening I saw a
>> big truck, all in white, driving down the Autobahn (A9 to Nuernberg).  As I
>> passed it said in blue "UN" on the side.  Did this mean that the UN was
>> getting ready for some nefarious take over of Germany?  No.
>
>A big difference between one truck and a trainload of equipment.

Little real difference between the two.  10 or so flat cars is not a very
big invasion force.

>
>> I don't like the UN or its policies any more than the next person.  But UN
>> vehicles on trains are NO cause for concern.  It happens pretty regularly.
>
>Just because it happens "pretty regularly", does not follow that there
>shouldn't be cause for concern....
>

It has been happening for years.  The UN is not magical -- it has to ship
stuff the way everyone else does.

regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 09:16:45 -0500

From the "news":

	Buchanan Calls Convention Truce  
	Republican presidential contender Pat Buchanan has called for  
a truce among the Republican party's rival factions, saying the 
party must unite to defeat President Clinton in November. 
Buchanan made his surprise comments last night at an alternative 
rally in Escondido, Calif., not far from the site of the 
Republican National Convention in San Diego. ``Let us, at least 
for the next ten weeks ... suspend our battles with one another 
and join together in common cause to defeat Bill Clinton,'' he 
said. But Buchanan never said if he will endorse The GOP 
nominee-to-be, Bob Dole. 

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: UN is on the move? (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 07:20:36 -0700 (PDT)

On Mon, 12 Aug 1996, Donna J. Logan wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
snip-o-rama
> > I worked in Munich Germany for 1.5 years from 91-93.  One evening I saw a
> > big truck, all in white, driving down the Autobahn (A9 to Nuernberg).  As I
> > passed it said in blue "UN" on the side.  Did this mean that the UN was
> > getting ready for some nefarious take over of Germany?  No.
> 
> A big difference between one truck and a trainload of equipment.

Actually, in the example you noted this "big difference" was 9 vehicles 
(or at least 9 train cars). I submit that 9 train cars does not an 
occupation force make ; )
Not to say I dont think we should hear about movements like this on the 
net, just that not every shipment of odd colored military vehicles would 
indicate immediate trouble. BTW, here in seattle the phones are still 
working and I can see non military traffic moving on I5 ; )
snip
Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey)
Subject: Re: MISSILE MIGHT HAVE DOWNed FLT 800 (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 09:49:53 CDT

Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net> wrote in part:

>When you've eliminated all other possible explanations, whatever's left,
>however unlikely, is the explantion.  Bad paraphrase of something from some
>Heinlien story, 

Perhaps true, but he borrowed it from Sherlock Holmes, who said it first.

:-)


The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other-
wise noted.  No-one else should be held responsible for what I think.

| D. N. Dickey               |  Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and |
| Research Associate         |  timidity, are no match for armed and       |
| Northern Illinois Univ.    |  resolute wickedness.                       |
| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu    |                       - W. S. Churchill     |
| **Finger for public key**  |                                             |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: HCI on the run?
Date: 12 Aug 1996 13:39:31 -0700

        Lobo,

        >>>>>>>
        We are not antigun, we are
anti-gun violence," HCI officials assert in the memo.
        <<<<<<<

        Hee, hee! And pigs can fly, too - only if they are launched from a
catapult!

        Upon further analysis, their statement is rather ambiguous. If they
are anti-gun violence, then they sound to me as being violent about being
anti-gun.

        All the more reason for gun owners to go around armed!
        Methinks thay have muddled the message in an effort to confuse the
issue even more.

Ed

In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 14:46:52 -0700 (PDT)

At 09:16 AM 8/12/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>From the "news":
>
>	Buchanan Calls Convention Truce  
>	Republican presidential contender Pat Buchanan has called for  
>a truce among the Republican party's rival factions, saying the 
>party must unite to defeat President Clinton in November. 
>Buchanan made his surprise comments last night at an alternative 
>rally in Escondido, Calif., not far from the site of the 
>Republican National Convention in San Diego. ``Let us, at least 
>for the next ten weeks ... suspend our battles with one another 
>and join together in common cause to defeat Bill Clinton,'' he 
>said. But Buchanan never said if he will endorse The GOP 
>nominee-to-be, Bob Dole. 
>
>--
>
If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It looks like
I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 17:06:58 -0600

sabutigo wrote:
> 
> If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It looks like
> I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!

Buchanan's other choice was to spend x million dollars of someone else's 
money for the privilege of going down in flames.  When Dole picked Kemp 
he co-opted large parts of Pat's support base.

This republican ticket doesn't have a place for gunowners.  They've 
thrown bones to literally every other interest group and tacitly told us 
to go have anal sex with our issue.

Personally, I'm going to do anything I can to beat them.  Not that I 
like clinton or perot or even browne, but none of the above sounds just 
fine.

The only thing to do is concentrate on congressional elections in 
districts/states where there are dedicated gun-grabbers running against 
someone who is not.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: G7 threat to online privacy and free speech, Aug 7 (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 17:19:19 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by Joe Horn <6mysmesa@1eagle1.com>
The 1st A. being on a par with the 2nd, 3rd etc. this FYI and action.
Please repost.

respects,

JH
======================================================================
   ALERT FROM A COALITION OF ONLINE CIVIL LIBERTIES ORGANISATIONS

            G7 THREAT TO ONLINE FREE SPEECH AND PRIVACY

      IN THE NAME OF COMBATING TERRORISM THE G7 IS PLANNING TO
     CURB THE FREE SPEECH RIGHTS AND PRIVACY OF INTERNET USERS

                           7 AUGUST 1996

   PLEASE REDISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT WIDELY WITH THIS BANNER INTACT
 

______________________________________________________________________
IN THIS ALERT:
  Summary
  Background
  What You Can Do
  Where Can I Learn More?
  Organisations

______________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY

On July 30th the G7 group of nations met in Paris to discuss terrorism.
Among other responses the G7 have endorsed a number of restrictions and
controls on the Internet.  These include the prohibition or censorship
of sources that may contain "dangerous" information, restrictions on
the electronic speech of unpopular political organisations, and the
imposition of "key escrow" or other means of allowing governments to
violate privately encrypted correspondence.

This particularly serious threat, which originates from recent events
such as a bombing at the Atlanta Olympics and the crash of TWA Flight
800, is another case in a long list of attempts to restrict freedom of
speech in electronic networks, of which there are alarming examples in
many countries including Australia, Belgium, China, France, Germany,
Saudi Arabia, Singapore, the USA and Vietnam, under a variety of
pretexts ranging from "pornography" to "terrorism" and incorrect
political opinion.

* The "offensive" material being targeted is no different from similar
material available in libraries and bookshops.  *What is legal offline
must also be legal online*.  If material cannot be censored at the
newsstand or the university library, it must not be censored in the
online newsstands and libraries of our future.

* Legislators and agency officials are pushing for speedy passage of
censorious and privacy-harming laws, capitalising on fear of terrorism
to exclude meaningful public input in the process and substance of
these regulations.

* Because the Internet is global, and every culture has its own rules
about what is and is not permissible, the open nature of the Internet
must be protected.  No local jurisdiction should be allowed to impose
its rules on the rest of the world.

______________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND

This alert is being issued by a coalition of online civil liberties
organisations that support online privacy, freedom of speech and human
rights.  The organisations are listed at the end of this alert along
with contact details.

Since its inception the Internet has more than doubled in size every
year.  If this growth continues, more than one billion people will be
using the Internet by the turn of the century.  Each of these users can
as easily publish material as they can read it.  The Internet has the
potential vastly to improve the workings of democratic government and
to spread liberty across the globe.

In light of recent bombings in the US and elsewhere, there are again
calls to ban from the Internet information on explosives, as well as
any other issues that can be related to "terrorism".  Anti-terrorist
hysteria has become the excuse for governmental attempts to circumvent
online freedom of expression, guaranteed by constitutions, laws, and
the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Information on how to make bombs, as well as other things that would be
"banned", is widely available, often from the very governments pushing
for censorship.  Banning such publications from the Internet won't
make it any less widely available.  However it could become the tool
for the censorship of any debate or opinion which happens to displease
the authorities, or "pressure groups" that do not share those opinions.
This is a pure and simple violation of free speech, no matter how it
is disguised.

Currently, communicating via the Internet is like sending messages on
postcards.  Anyone between the sender and receiver can read the
message.  Encryption (data scrambling) technology can be used to ensure
the privacy of communications.  It's like placing  messages in
envelopes.  Although widely available the technology has not yet become
a part of the Internet because of pressures from the "intelligence" and
law enforcement agencies.

Some countries, such as the United States, treat cryptography as if
were a weapon, like missile or a machine gun, and ban its export.
Other countries, such as France, have an outright ban on cryptography.
Such policies threaten to undermine information infrastructure not only
locally, but globally, leaving computer networks open to industrial
espionage, and as we are seeing in recent news of electronic spying on
the European Parliament, even governmental espionage, as well as
criminal exploitation.

What the G7 have called for is a way to read all messages sent by
terrorists.  The only way they can achieve this is to have some way of
reading messages sent by anyone.  What the G7 are demanding is that the
privacy of all communications be compromised in the name of protection
from terrorism.  However, no real terrorist is going to use such a
compromised system when uncrackable alternatives already exist and are
freely available.  Effectively G7 are demanding that we all compromise
the privacy of our communications - for NO benefit.

______________________________________________________________________
WHAT YOU CAN DO

1. Be alert to what your government is doing or planning.  Contact your
   law-makers and urge them to protect privacy and free speech on the
   Internet.  Write to or call publications in your area and suggest
   that they report on any anti-freedom government action you hear
   about.

2. Join an online civil liberties organisation.  See the end of this
   release for contact information for several such organisations.

3. If there isn't an online civil liberties organisation in your
   country, why not start one?   Some suggestions on how to start an
   online civil liberties organisation are available at:

   http://pobox.com/~mbaker/creating.html

   and

   http://www.well.com/~jonl/bonfire.html

______________________________________________________________________
WHERE CAN I LEARN MORE?

Further details on the G7 meeting and its effect on the Net can be
found in a press release from the Global Internet Liberty Coalition:

  http://www.aclu.org/gilc/index1.html

For a summary of efforts around the world to censor the Internet see
the "10 May 96 Silencing the Net" report on the Human Rights Watch
gopher site:

  gopher://gopher.igc.apc.org:5000/11/int/hrw/general

For background on global efforts to muzzle the Net see these web sites:

  http://www.eff.org/~declan/global/

and

  http://www.io.org/~sherlock/doom/threat.html

For information on global and international online freedom issues see
the Electronic Frontier Foundation web site:

  http://www.eff.org/pub/Global/

Translations of this alert will be available as follows:

  Catalan:  http://www.lander.es/~jlmartin/
  French:   pforsans@in-net.inba.fr
  Italian:  http://www.nexus.it/alcei.html
  Spanish:  http://www.lander.es/~jlmartin/

________________________________________________________________________
ORGANISATIONS

The following organisations have issued this alert:

ALCEI - Electronic Frontiers Italy * http://www.nexus.it/alcei.html
CITADEL - Electronic Frontier France * pforsans@in-net.inba.fr
EFF-Austin (Texas) * http://www.eff-austin.org
Electronic Frontier Foundation (USA) * http://www.eff.org
Electronic Frontier Canada * http://www.efc.ca/
Electronic Frontier Ireland * http://www.efi.ie/
Electronic Frontiers Australia * http://www.efa.org.au
Elektronisk Forpost Norge (Electronic Frontier Norway) *
  http://www.sn.no/~efn
Fronteras Electronicas Espan~a (Electronic Frontiers Spain) *
  http://www.lander.es/~jlmartin/
HotWired * www.hotwired.com
Human Rights Watch * http://www.hrw.org

Press Contacts:

Please choose an organisation above and visit their web site for contact
information.

________________________________________________________________________
                           End Alert
========================================================================

--
Dr Michael Baker, EFA Board Member, PO Box 5, Flaxley SA 5153, Australia
Ph:08 388 8439 Fax:08 262 3633 08=+618 mbaker@pobox.com
http://pobox.com/~mbaker
Internet censorship won't protect Children, but it will destroy their
future
Join the STOP! Campaign <http://www.efa.org.au> or <campaign@efa.org.au>

<----  End Forwarded Message  ---->

         abudak@alumni.ysu.edu

 "Failure is impossible."- Susan B. Anthony



--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: lball@unlinfo.unl.edu (larry ball)
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 17:50:09 -0500 (CDT)

Howard phillips and the American Taxpayer pparty, Blue, that is who to
vote for.  I too am with you about ole doleful and kemp.  Hey ain't 
kemp some sort of a sea weed?

Larry Ball
lball@unlinfo.unl.edu

> 
> sabutigo wrote:
> > 
> > If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It looks like
> > I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!
> 
> Buchanan's other choice was to spend x million dollars of someone else's 
> money for the privilege of going down in flames.  When Dole picked Kemp 
> he co-opted large parts of Pat's support base.
> 
> This republican ticket doesn't have a place for gunowners.  They've 
> thrown bones to literally every other interest group and tacitly told us 
> to go have anal sex with our issue.
> 
> Personally, I'm going to do anything I can to beat them.  Not that I 
> like clinton or perot or even browne, but none of the above sounds just 
> fine.
> 
> The only thing to do is concentrate on congressional elections in 
> districts/states where there are dedicated gun-grabbers running against 
> someone who is not.
> 
> 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 18:17:40 -0600

larry ball wrote:
> 
> Hey ain't
> kemp some sort of a sea weed?

Naw, that's kelp.  Kemp is that shit that blows blue smoke when you 
light it and makes you stoned when you smoke it.  Contemplate your 
navel, play the gong, that kind of thing.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 17:53:58 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Members of this mailing list may remember the item some=20
time ago describing Passive Millimetre Radar, which has
the capacity to locate people through walls and find
hidden weapons, etc.,

This interesting AP item shows the current direction
its development is taking. Our thanks to John-Henry Westen
<jhwesten@mercury.kosone.com> for providing this.

                  John Whitley, Editor
           NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE
________________________________________________________________________

August 12, 1996=20

NEW X-RAY GUN SHOWS SOME AMERICANS WILLING TO TRADE PRIVACY FOR SAFETY



=A0SANTA MONICA, Calif. (AP) -- The latest weapon against terrorism can see
right through you.=20
=A0 The Passive Millimetre Wave Imager can X-ray through clothing to "see" =
a
concealed weapon, plastic explosives or drugs. A police officer can
surreptitiously aim it into a crowd from as far away as 27 metres.
=A0 The new X-ray gun is becoming a symbol for an unlikely alliance of civi=
l
libertarians and gun owners who fear the fight against crime and terrorism
may be waged at the expense of personal freedoms.
=A0 "I'm incredibly concerned," said John Henry Hingson, a past president o=
f
the National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers, meeting here this pas=
t
week. "The entire nation could become a victim of illegal searches and
seizures and the law is powerless to protect them from these police abuses.=
"
=A0 But in these nervous times following the the crash of TWA Fight 800 and
bombings at the Olympics, Oklahoma City and the World Trade Centre, many
Americans are now willing to trade some of their privacy and civil libertie=
s
for greater security.
=A0 A poll last week by the Los Angeles Times found that a majority of peop=
le
-- 58 per cent -- said they would curtail some civil liberties if it would
help thwart terrorism. Thirteen per cent said it would depend on what right=
s
were at stake. The poll didn't ask people to single out any rights.
=A0 Washington has proposed increased wiretapping and other anti-terrorism
steps, and is doling out research grants for cutting edge anti-crime
technology that once may have been intended for only military use.
=A0 Last year, the National Institute of Justice awarded $2.1 million US to
three companies to develop weapon detectors for airports, stores and public
buildings.
=A0 Two models are being developed of the Passive Millimetre Wave Imager, a
creation of Massachusetts-based Millimetrix Corp.
=A0 The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol car
and pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send out X-rays;
instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by human flesh.
=A0 Anything that stands in the way of those waves -- like a gun -- or
anything that emits weaker waves -- like a bag of cocaine or a plastic
explosive -- will show up on a little screen in the patrol car.
=A0 Clothes emit no waves. Neither do walls, allowing the device to be used
from even outside a room.
=A0 A second model is a smaller, battery-operated version that an officer c=
an
operate by hand, like a radar gun.
=A0 Millimetrix hopes to field test the larger model soon at a police agenc=
y.
=A0 Hingson argues the device runs roughshod over bans against illegal
searches and seizures. The law says police can stop and frisk a person only
when an officer has a "reasonable suspicion" the person is armed or involve=
d
in a crime.
=A0 Millimetrix points out that while the imager can see through clothing, =
it
still leaves people some privacy. The device's display screen, the company
says, "does not reveal intimate anatomical details of the person."
=A0 Chip Walker, spokesman for the National Rifle Association, noted that
devices like the imager threaten the legal rights of people in 31 states wh=
o
are allowed to carry concealed weapons with proper licences.
=A0 "We certainly support efforts to disarm criminals, but we need to be
careful that we're not painting with too broad a brush here," he said.
=A0=20
   *******************************************************
   Interested in learning more about communist influence
   in the American media, the resurging Soviet empire,
   the FBI's proposed domestic terrorism centre, the
   TWA800 shootdown, the ATF's "Operation Piedmont" plans
   to plant pipe bombs at the Atlanta Olympics and blame=20
   them on the militias...and much, much more that the
   media will not tell you?

   Visit the NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE Web page
   at:

              http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley

   ********************************************************=20

                 [This item may be re-posted]




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) American spies hack into Euro computers to steal trade secrets (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 19:27:27 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive


London Sunday Times August 4 1996 

American spies hack into Euro computers to steal trade secrets

AMERICAN intelligence agents have hacked into the computers of the
European parliament and European commission as part of an
international espionage campaign aimed at stealing economic and
political secrets, according to investigators.

The European parliament has called in British communications experts
to improve its security and to block further attempts by American
govern ment agents to spy on its workings.

Security officials at the parliament's Luxembourg offices say they
have discovered several recent instances in which its communications
system was compromised by American hacking. They have also found
evidence that the Americans used information obtained from hacking to
help them in negotiations last year on the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

Lord Plumb, leader of the British Tory MEPs in the European
parliament, said he was shocked by the disclosure. "I will be taking
this up directly with the American ambassador [to the European
Union]," he said.

The CIA has already been accused by the Japanese and French
governments of hacking into their communications networks in an
attempt to obtain confidential trade secrets.

The European parliament's computer network links more than 5,000 MEPs,
officials, researchers and other staff to each other, and to the
European commission headquarters in Brussels and the council of
ministers.

Traffic across the network by telephone and computers includes details
of the private medical and financial records of many MEPs and
officials, and discussion documents on confidential issues, including
trade, tariff and quota agreements. The records of closed committees
of inquiry into BSE and fraud are also stored on the system.

European parliament sources say the Americans accessed the network by
compromising the information exchanges that link the parliament's
internal networks with the Internet and external users.

The devices, called "routers", filter entry to the European
parliament's network. It is understood the Americans were able to
obtain access to what is called the simple network management protocol
(SNMP), the language that enables the networks to talk to each other.
They were able to exploit the fact that parts of the system were
manufactured by two American firms.

The breach came to light when officials believed that American
negotiators had been given advance warning of confidential European
Union positions in last year's trade negotiations. "It was established
that the system had been penetrated just days before the talks," an EU
source said. "Our principal concern is not to establish what has
already been copied but to ensure that it does not happen again. This
is an on-going problem."

A spokeswoman for Antonio Cavaco, director of data processing at the
commission, confirmed that allegations of hacking had been
investigated. However, she said she was unable to provide any details.





--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) The Presidential Crisis (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 19:25:50 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Organization: Altopia Corp. - Affordable Usenet Access - http://www.alt.net

The Presidential Crisis

by J. Orlin Grabbe

	The U.S. Presidential election looms in November,  
U.S. troops are poised to strike at Iran, and we have a coke-
head President struggling to hold on to the loyalty of the 
Democratic party.  It is not a pretty picture when it comes to 
national security.

	As previously reported, the troops being amassed in 
Saudia Arabia include the elite units of the 101 Airborne.  
These units constitute our finest military force--one step above 
the Delta force.  If what appears to be the current plan goes 
forward, they will be used to strike at Iranian terrorist camps 
in reaction to the Syrian-inspired bombing of U.S. soldiers in 
Saudia Arabia, the Syrian-inspired western states blackout in 
early July, and the Syrian-inspired downing of  TWA 800.  It 
would not surprise me to see our government bomb Iran for 
something Syria did.  But such an action directed at Iran will 
not prevent further Syrian terrorist actions in the U.S.

	If we are to believe our government, every American 
who possesses an ax is a potential terrorist.  The government 
says a tree fell on a power line and caused the western states 
blackout in early July.  I wonder what explanation will be 
contrived to explain the western states blackout this past 
weekend, on August 10.  Why does the government not admit 
that a western power station was blown up?  And what about 
those two water stations destroyed in the eastern half of the 
United States?  The FBI was notified in advance by the group 
responsible for the July western states blackout and for the 
downing of TWA Flight 800.  Why hasn't the FBI made this 
information public?

	The FBI scenario for the crash of TWA Flight 800 
gets more ever more convoluted with time.  Each new 
"revelation" has to remain consistent with the previous day's 
lie.  It is a sad commentary on public and media perception 
when Gary Aldrich is held to be a consummate liar, while 
Louis Freeh is held to be a virtuous truth-teller.  (Invert those 
perceptions, and you will have something closer to  actual 
fact.)  But Liar Louis's days are numbered.  Someone hacked 
his payroll account and terminated his employment--at least as 
far as the payroll computer in Oklahoma is concerned.  Louis 
won't say very much about it, however.  After all, as the 
computer says:  The FBI is not a chartered organization.  If 
Louis takes the case to court, he will lose his pension.

	Robert Strauss is upset that news of his leading a 
Democratic delegation to ask Bill Clinton to resign or to 
withdraw his name as Presidential nominee has leaked out.  
After all, 1) the Democratics wanted to keep the information 
secret until after the Republican convention; 2) Strauss didn't 
want it publicized he had lost his temper; and 3) when Clinton 
withdraws one way or another, the angry Clinton-lovers will 
hold Strauss responsible.  But none of this has anything to do 
with the fact of the meeting, and with the fact that Strauss was 
acting in the best interests of his country when he lead the 
delegation in the first place.  Strauss is a hero.  He and the 
other Democrats at that meeting are committed to the removal 
of the President.  In addition to their concern about a coke-
head President in charge of military strategy and the nuclear 
button, they also know that if Clinton were to stay on and 
continue as President for another term, some of them would 
become targets of White House recrimination and  candidates 
for Arkacide.

	Meanwhile the Republicans have cheered Dole's 
choice of Jack Kemp for running mate.  Does this mean that, 
with the coming departure of Dole, the Republicans are 
planning to run Kemp for President, and to select someone 
else for Vice-President?
	
August 12, 1996
Web page:  http://www.aci.net/kalliste/





--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Mexico On Road To Disaster (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 19:27:02 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Originator: rich@pencil.math.missouri.edu

/** headlines: 97.0 **/
** Topic: Mexico On Road To Disaster **
** Written  9:25 AM  Aug  1, 1996 by newsdesk in cdp:headlines **

/* Written  9:06 PM  Jul 30, 1996 by twn in igc:twn.features */
/* ---------- "Mexico On Road To Disaster" ---------- */
MEXICO HEADING TOWARDS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DISASTER

     After years of adopting structural adjustment policies with
the encouragement of the World Bank, IMF and US Treasury, Mexico's
productive capacity is disintegrating and the country has become
highly susceptible to sudden outflows of capital.  With a declining
capacity to generate new resources to pay off its huge foreign debt
and no change in economic policy in sight, Mexico is heading
towards an economic and social disaster.

By Steve Hellinger and Mary Purcell

     Since the US Treasury and the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) began their disbursement of some US$37 billion in credits to
the Mexican government in February 1995 to bail out the holders of
Mexican bonds in the midst of the precipitous devaluation of the
peso, Mexico's economy has contracted sharply.  All the official
assurances of an around-the-corner recovery notwithstanding, the
economy remains in a dismal and deteriorating state.

     During 1995, Mexico's gross domestic product (GDP) fell by
almost 7%, and the first quarter of 1996 saw a continued decline. 
Less than a year since it received a total of $1.75 billion from
the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank to help restore
solvency to the tottering banking system, the Zedillo
Administration is now seeking as much as another $1 billion from
the multilateral development banks in financial sector lending. 

     Faced with interest rates that have ranged from 40 to over
100%, close to one half of Mexico's businesses have gone belly up
in the past year.  With two million Mexicans having lost their
jobs, two-thirds of the country's economically active population of
34 million are now without sufficient work and earn incomes that
are below the poverty line.  

     Contributing to this severe depression is a substantial
decline in wages.  Since the current crisis began in December 1994,
the minimum wage has lost 30% of its purchasing power.  It now buys
only a quarter of what it did 20 years ago.  Contractual wages
during the present period have fared even worse.

     The unravelling of the Mexican economy has been devastating
for virtually everyone who does not have financial ties with the
corrupt ruling party or the international community.  Poor urban
neighbourhoods have been particularly hard hit, especially by the
collapse of the construction trade.  In rural areas, thousands of
small farmers are selling their land - often to foreign companies
supplying a foreign market - in order to survive.

     Those farmers who are defaulting on their bank loans have been
joined by large segments of the urban middle class that are unable
to make payments on their homes, cars and businesses to form a
potent, million-strong debtors' movement.  By US accounting
measures, nearly a third of all outstanding loans are overdue, and
this debt is continuing to mount.  Were it not for the $26 billion
already pumped in by the Mexican government - an amount equivalent
to 10% of Mexico's GDP and twice what the government received when
it privatised the banks in 1991 - the country's banking system
would have already collapsed. 

     For 14 years, Mexico, with the encouragement of the World
Bank, IMF and US Treasury under three US presidents, has placed its
fortunes increasingly in the hands of outsiders.  Instead of
building its economy from the bottom up, it adopted structural
adjustment policies - wage suppression, high interest rates,
deregulation, privatisation, export promotion and austerity -
designed to attract the capital and technology of foreign
corporations.  Along with the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA)'s removal of trade barriers, these policies have
facilitated the movemnt of US firms to Mexico and of their
production back into the United States.  Now, more than half of all
trade between the two countries consists of intra-firm transactions
that take place among the branches of US corporations.

     As a result, Mexico's productive capacity is disintegrating
and the country has become highly susceptible to sudden outflows of
capital, as evidenced by the peso's collapse when US interest rates
rose and political trauma hit Mexico in 1994.  To sustain the
economy, the Mexican  government has mortgaged its future with an
extraordinary round of foreign borrowing.  In the past year, it has
taken on $45 billion in international obligations to public and
private lenders, effectively converting short-term debts on which
it had been on the verge of defaulting into a massive medium-term
debt that must be paid over the next five years.

     More specifically, the government has had to sell more bonds
in private markets and offer unusually high returns and guarantees
in order to make payments on the massive loans made by the US
Treasury and the IMF.  Even then, it has been able to meet these
obligations only by rescheduling payment a number of times.

     The result is that the Mexican government is now in the
perilous position of having a foreign debt of some $100 billion
(and the private sector an additional $75 billion), while holding
$16 billion in foreign reserves, 95% of which, according to the
IMF, is borrowed money.  With a declining capacity to generate new
resources to pay off this debt and no change in economic policy in
sight, Mexico is heading inexorably toward another serious run on
the peso and an unmitigated economic and social disaster. - Third
World Network Features/BankCheck Quarterly 

-ends-

About the writers: Steve Hellinger is editor of BankCheck
Quarterly, while Mary Purcell is a contributor to the magazine. 
This article first appeared in the May 1996 issue of the magazine.

When reproducing this feature, please credit Third World Network
Features and (if applicable) the cooperating agency or magazine
involved in the article, and give the byline.  Please send us
cuttings.

For more information, please contact: 

Third World Network 
228, Macalister Road, 10400 Penang, Malaysia. 

Email: twn@igc.apc.org; twnpen@twn.po.my 
Tel: (+604)2293511,2293612 & 2293713; 
Fax: (+604)2298106 & 2264505

1474/96

** End of text from cdp:headlines **

***************************************************************************
This material came from PeaceNet, a non-profit progressive networking
service.  For more information, send a message to peacenet-info@igc.apc.org
***************************************************************************


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Trade News 8-9-96 (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 19:37:47 -0500 (CDT)

And don't worry kids pay no attention to the WTO behind the curtain this 
is not world government in the making.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive

TRADE NEWS
Produced by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade 
Policy
August 9, 1996
Volume 5, Number 14
________________________________________
WTO NEWS SUMMARY
________________________________________

U.S., AUSTRALIA SAY CHINA MUST DO MORE

On July 26, the United States and Australia said that 
China must go further in meeting the criteria of the 
World Trade Organization (WTO) before Beijing can be 
accepted for membership. During bi-lateral security 
talks in Sydney, "both sides agreed that the terms of 
China's offer need to be improved substantially before 
there could be serious progress" on its application for 
membership in the WTO, said a senior Australian 
official. A senior U.S. official reaffirmed that 
Washington "genuinely" wants to see China join the WTO, 
but said that China has not put forward a "commercially 
acceptable offer." He speculated that this suggests 
Chinese leaders were still debating among themselves how 
far they are willing to go to reform their system to 
secure WTO membership. 

China is the world's third largest economy behind the 
United States and Japan, but has been seeking WTO 
membership on easier terms as a "developing" country. 
U.S. officials say Beijing must go further in 
commitments to reduce tariffs, open markets, eliminate 
exclusive trading rights and liberalize investment. 
China says these measures could increase unemployment 
and domestic social instability.

"U.S., Australia Agree China Must Do More On WTO," 
REUTER, July 26, 1996.

U.S. STALLS GREEN TRADE TALKS

On July 25, trade officials at the World Trade 
Organization (WTO) in Geneva announced that the United 
States was refusing to play a constructive role in the 
WTO's trade and environment committee (CTE), threatening 
to prevent any firm results emerging in time for the 
WTO's first ministerial meeting in Singapore in 
December. Trade officials said that two years of 
discussions were going nowhere because the United States 
was unable to take a position on the issues ahead of 
November's presidential election. "The U.S. is proposing 
nothing and systematically trashing everyone else's 
proposals," said one official. "It is a major obstacle 
to getting anything done."

Ironically, Washington was one of the strongest 
proponents of establishing the CTE in 1994, with a 
mandate to report to the Singapore ministerial meeting. 
The committee was charged with looking at the 
relationship between international trade rules and 
environmental measures and whether WTO rules needed 
amending as a consequence. The CTE's agenda includes how 
to handle WTO disputes arising out of trade provisions 
in multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), and how 
to ensure that environmental measures such as 
ecolabelling and packaging requirements are compatible 
with international trade rules.

The CTE was created on an ad-hoc basis and must be re-
established by ministers in Singapore. Though no one has 
yet suggested that it be discontinued, some developing 
countries are known to favor turning the CTE into a 
committee on sustainable development. Developing 
countries say such a move would give them a greater 
voice in the trade and environment debate.

Francis Williams, "U.S. Holding Up Green Trade," 
FINANCIAL TIMES, July 26, 1996.

EU CALLS FOR LABOR STANDARDS

On July 24, the European Union (EU) called for workers' 
rights to be put on the agenda of the World Trade 
Organization (WTO). The European Commission, the EU's 
executive agency, asked for the WTO ministerial meeting 
in Singapore this December to set up a working group on 
the link between trade and labor standards. "If the WTO 
fails to take up the challenge, there is a real danger 
that unilateral protectionist measures could emerge . . . 
(which) could, in turn, serve to destabilize the 
progress already achieved in relation to trade 
liberalization," the commission said in a policy paper. 

In an effort to assuage Asian nations who fear Europe is 
seeking to blunt their competitive edge, the commission 
said the WTO should limit its work to core labor 
standards and not discuss wage levels. Core labor 
standards include the right to collective bargaining, 
freedom of association and the prohibition of slavery, 
forced labor and the employment of children.

The paper immediately drew criticism from the 
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) which 
expressed deep concern over what it called the tendency 
of industrialized nations to impose their domestic 
policies on less developed countries.

Bruce Barnard, "EU Wants WTO to Discuss Wages, Labor 
Standards," JOURNAL OF COMMERCE, July 25, 1996.


U.S. MAY END TUNA IMPORT BAN

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill 
lifting a six-year embargo on tuna fish imports imposed 
to protect dolphins in the eastern Pacific. If the bill 
passes the Senate, as expected, it will remove Mexico's 
threat to bring a potentially embarrassing complaint 
against the U.S. embargo to the World Trade Organization 
(WTO). The bill follows agreement by governments in the 
region -- an area of more than five million square miles 
from Southern California to Chile -- to institute 
reforms to keep dolphin from being killed in the 
circular mile-long nets used to catch tuna. The 
agreement, reached last year in Panama, was signed by 12 
nations: Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, France, 
Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Spain, Vanuatu, Venezuela and 
the United States. The United States lost an earlier 
case against the ban, brought by Mexico in the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) -- the WTO's 
predecessor. 

The agreement negotiated in Panama establishes a 
permanent mortality limit to reduce dolphin deaths to no 
more than 5,000 a year; gives each vessel a limit on 
deaths; works to reduce deaths of sea turtles, small 
fish and other species; and strengthens the enforcement 
and monitoring system. An estimated 130,000 dolphins a 
year were being killed unit the United States ordered 
American fishermen to stop using the huge circular nets 
and ultimately banned tuna imports from countries where 
the practice persisted. 

Nancy Dunne, "U.S. Close to Lifting Ban On Tuna 
Imports," FINANCIAL TIMES, August 2, 1996.

INCREASED TRANSPARENCY IN WTO

On July 22, acting U.S. trade representative Charlene 
Barshefsky announced improvements in transparency and 
public access to information on the actions in the World 
Trade Organization (WTO), including dispute settlement 
proceedings. The WTO General Council approval of these 
improvements on July 18 marked the culmination of two 
years of effort on the part of the United States. 
Barshefsky stated that "today's actions constitute 
important steps towards shedding more light on the day-
to-day operations of the WTO. The U.S. public, including 
our industry, scholars and interest groups, should gain 
a better understanding of how the WTO works and the 
reasons underlying actions that its members take."

The decisions taken by the WTO General Council will 
provide immediate public access to most WTO documents 
and shortened periods for the public release of the 
types of documents that are initially subject to limited 
access. Additionally, guidelines related to providing 
information and access for non-governmental 
organizations, such as environmental groups and trade 
associations, should create new avenues for 
communication between the WTO and public interest 
groups. The WTO maintains an internet home page at 
www.unicc.org/wto.

"U.S. Trade Representative Announces Increased 
Transparency in the WTO," USTR PRESS RELEASE, July 22, 
1996.
__________________________________________
Trade News is produced by the Institute for Agriculture 
and Trade Policy, Mark Ritchie, President. Editor: Orin 
Kirshner. E-mail versions of Trade News are available 
free of charge for Econet/IATP Net subscribers.  For 
more information about fax or mail subscriptions, 
contact: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, 
1313 Fifth Street S.E., Suite 303, Minneapolis, MN, 
55414  Phone 612-379-5980.  To learn more about IATP's 
contract research services, please contact Dale Wiehoff 
at dwiehoff@igc.apc.org














--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 18:41:58 -0700

BULLSHIT ALERT! =20

At 05:53 PM 8/12/96 -0500, pwatson@utdallas.edu forwarded:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 18:06:09 -0400 (EDT)
>From: John K. Whitley <jwhitley@inforamp.net>
>Subject: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner"
>
>Members of this mailing list may remember the item some=20
>time ago describing Passive Millimetre Radar, which has
>the capacity to locate people through walls and find
>hidden weapons, etc.,

(deletia)

>=A0 The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol car
>and pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send out X-rays;
>instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by human flesh.
>=A0 Anything that stands in the way of those waves -- like a gun -- or
>anything that emits weaker waves -- like a bag of cocaine or a plastic
>explosive -- will show up on a little screen in the patrol car.
>=A0 Clothes emit no waves. Neither do walls, allowing the device to be used
>from even outside a room.

Not a chance.  This is pulp comic-book fiction, without basis in physics.
I'd be more likely to believe that the device detects the psychic
emmanations of evil from guns and drugs.=20

Of course, this doesn't stop some people;  there was a company that was
selling a "drug detector" to schools in the Southwest, for about a hundred
bucks each; turns out the gadget was ametal box with a dial and a few LED's
and nothing inside.  Complete hoax.  The school officials who bought it
refused to believe that they'd been conned, and INSISTED that it worked. =20

Amazing how pervasive scientific ignorance can be.=20
Ken Mitchell        |The constitutions of most of our States assert,
8037 Stone Canyon   |that all power is inherent in the people;that=20
Citrus Heights, CA  |they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases=20
95610               |to which they think themselves competent, .....
kmitchel@gvn.net    |or they may act by representatives, freely and=20
916-449-9152 (vm)   |equally chosen; that it is their right and duty
916-729-0966 (fax)  |to be at all times armed; that they are entitled
                    |to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom=20
                    |of property, and freedom of the press."
                    | "The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson,=20
                    |pp.46 - 47, Presented by John Dewey",
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: NMPX21A@prodigy.com ( PAUL D QUESNELL)
Subject: UN:  Now or later -- what's the plan?
Date: 12 Aug 1996 21:49:28, -0500

-- [ From: Paul Quesnell * EMC.Ver #2.5.03 ] --

What will you/we do when the phones don't work and non-military traffic
isn't allowed on Interstate 5?

All this hand wringing about UN tanks, black helicopters, NWO Eco-theme
parks has worn me out and frustrated.  Everyone talks; no one acts;
preparation or planning seem non-existent.  I'm very glad we are aware
and still have the ability to get these messages and concerns over the
internet.  But so what.  We all sit here behind our screens and
keyboards and water keeps getting hotter.

When is the first frog going to jump out?  Who is going to follow?  What
will we/they do when on the stove top or in the fire?


Paul Quesnell
Seattle, Washington
NMPX21A@PRODIGY.COM




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: lball@unlinfo.unl.edu (larry ball)
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 21:51:05 -0500 (CDT)

Solly ol' pal kemp help ya so kelp yo head off.

Larry Ball
lball@unlinfo.unl.edu

> 
> larry ball wrote:
> > 
> > Hey ain't
> > kemp some sort of a sea weed?
> 
> Naw, that's kelp.  Kemp is that shit that blows blue smoke when you 
> light it and makes you stoned when you smoke it.  Contemplate your 
> navel, play the gong, that kind of thing.
> 
> 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: (fwd) The Presidential Crisis (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 21:20:20 -0600

BULL Alert!

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: "J. Orlin Grabbe" <kalliste@aci.net>
>Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
>Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 14:34:48 -0700
>Organization: Altopia Corp. - Affordable Usenet Access - http://www.alt.net
>
>The Presidential Crisis
>
>by J. Orlin Grabbe
>
>        The U.S. Presidential election looms in November,
>U.S. troops are poised to strike at Iran, and we have a coke-
>head President struggling to hold on to the loyalty of the
>Democratic party.  It is not a pretty picture when it comes to
>national security.
>
>        As previously reported, the troops being amassed in
>Saudia Arabia include the elite units of the 101 Airborne.
>These units constitute our finest military force--one step above
>the Delta force.

Wrong answer.  Not to malign the 101, but if Delta Force realy exists :-)
then I am sure they take the cake compared to the 101.  The 101 is a fine
airmobile unit.  The 101 is not a Special Forces unit.  And it is not a
Delta Force.

Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: UN: Now or later -- what's the plan?
Date: 12 Aug 1996 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT)

All excellent questions that I think each of us should give the gravest &
most carefull thought. I have, and part of my answer is that I don't 
discuss tactical decisions about opponents, who may choose to use violence 
against me, in public.
We can, must, and -do- discuss political strategies here and as 
frustrating as that seems right now (and I know right where you're coming 
from Paul) we have made progress with that in the past. Even if our 
holding position seems breached right now we can make a lot of progress 
on that soon. We didnt get rid of -all- the old gaurd in the election of 
92, we have a "target rich" election environment in the congressional 
race of 96 ; ). For me, some former conservative friends (Sen. Slade 
Gorton notably) have free'd up a lot of time this election cycle. Last 
time Slade "CDA my way" Gorton got over 100 hours of time from me. This 
time I'll have those hours to give to Rick White or Jennifer Dunn. 
Because I'm a area chair I'll have to spend some time on Bob "extend 
debate" Dole, and he'll still probably get my vote. But beyond that, I'm not 
going to be at his Washington Headquarters for anything but free food 
(I'll call ya when I get word Paul : ) That's -more- time I can spend on 
solid pro rkba candidates going to congress.
Until that, black helicopters are merely a curiosity that I'd like 
more info about. There's a camera and audiotape recorder in -my- car, 
any UFO's or anything land next to me I promise to get .jpgs on the 
net that day. That's one windy Geeks opinion, that's how I plan to play it.

boydk@wrq.com   PGP key at BAL's. Fingerprint;   D0 6E 1E DC 4E 15 AC 4B
Don't know about Pretty Good Privacy? email me   AC 26 40 19 4B 5E 27 44
     -->  Your Bill of Rights, insist on the genuine articles.  <--

On Mon, 12 Aug 1996, PAUL D QUESNELL wrote:

> -- [ From: Paul Quesnell * EMC.Ver #2.5.03 ] --
> 
> What will you/we do when the phones don't work and non-military traffic
> isn't allowed on Interstate 5?
> 
> All this hand wringing about UN tanks, black helicopters, NWO Eco-theme
> parks has worn me out and frustrated.  Everyone talks; no one acts;
> preparation or planning seem non-existent.  I'm very glad we are aware
> and still have the ability to get these messages and concerns over the
> internet.  But so what.  We all sit here behind our screens and
> keyboards and water keeps getting hotter.
> 
> When is the first frog going to jump out?  Who is going to follow?  What
> will we/they do when on the stove top or in the fire?
> 
> 
> Paul Quesnell
> Seattle, Washington
> NMPX21A@PRODIGY.COM
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Liberty or Death <ghostpwr@europa.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 21:08:04 -0700


>(deletia)
>
>>=A0 The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol=
 car
>>and pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send out=
 X-rays;
>>instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by human flesh.
>>=A0 Anything that stands in the way of those waves -- like a gun -- or
>>anything that emits weaker waves -- like a bag of cocaine or a plastic
>>explosive -- will show up on a little screen in the patrol car.
>>=A0 Clothes emit no waves. Neither do walls, allowing the device to be=
 used
>>from even outside a room.

>Not a chance.  This is pulp comic-book fiction, without basis in physics.
>I'd be more likely to believe that the device detects the psychic
>emmanations of evil from guns and drugs.=20

Sssshhh!!!!!  Don't tellem about the psychic emanations yet!  We're not=
 quite=20
ready to hit the media with it!

- Sarah Brady




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 21:36:18 -0700 (PDT)

On Mon, 12 Aug 1996 pwatson@utdallas.edu wrote:
Okay, I imagine i'm going to piss some people off, but here goes.

> Subject: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner"
snip
>                   John Whitley, Editor
>            NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE
> ________________________________________________________________________
>=20
> August 12, 1996=20
>=20
> NEW X-RAY GUN SHOWS SOME AMERICANS WILLING TO TRADE PRIVACY FOR SAFETY
the existence of an object shows little. The fact that I have a handgun=20
doesnt mean I'm a criminal any more then the existence of high res man=20
portable radar necessarily means we'll all be linged up at neighborhood=20
checkpoints soon.
snip
> =A0 The new X-ray gun is becoming a symbol for an unlikely alliance of ci=
vil
> libertarians and gun owners who fear the fight against crime and terroris=
m
> may be waged at the expense of personal freedoms.
In my possibly naive opinion this is fantastically -good- news. I -love-=20
the very idea that NRA and ACLU are actually working on some things=20
together. There's hope. Maybe not for Ira Glasser, but there are=20
obviously still others with open minds ; )

> =A0 "I'm incredibly concerned," said John Henry Hingson, a past president=
 of
> the National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers, meeting here this p=
ast
> week. "The entire nation could become a victim of illegal searches and
> seizures and the law is powerless to protect them from these police abuse=
s."
certainly cause for concern, but not panic. We should all be concerned,=20
that's about the cheapest freedom going.

> =A0 But in these nervous times following the the crash of TWA Fight 800 a=
nd
> bombings at the Olympics, Oklahoma City and the World Trade Centre, many
> Americans are now willing to trade some of their privacy and civil libert=
ies
> for greater security.
Yes. (and you can quote me on this) IF someone asked me if I would be=20
willing to trade some privacy for security I, knowing that such a=20
hypothetical could never ever happen in the real world, might answer -yes-.
That kiddies, is how the polling biz works. Phrase the question=20
correctly, and you can statistically validate the takeover of the US=20
government in 1958 by aliens that landed in new jersey. We all know that=20
such a trade can't happen. But that was not the question, was it?

> =A0 A poll last week by the Los Angeles Times found that a majority of pe=
ople
> -- 58 per cent -- said they would curtail some civil liberties if it woul=
d
> help thwart terrorism. Thirteen per cent said it would depend on what rig=
hts
> were at stake. The poll didn't ask people to single out any rights.
Again, IF. The trade off is phrased as a given. So, there's no blank line=
=20
to write down that such a hypothetical is impossible in reality, they're=20
not polling about reality here they're polling about the paranoid little=20
delusion inside Mr. Gallups head (or whoever). In that delusion, there's=20
a one to one relationship between having freedom and not having security.=
=20
Such polls are rediculously worthless. They are no more 'true' then they=20
are something to panic over.

> =A0 Washington has proposed increased wiretapping and other anti-terroris=
m
> steps, and is doling out research grants for cutting edge anti-crime
> technology that once may have been intended for only military use.
Yeah, like sticky guns. Your tax dollars at work, the finest (military)=20
scientific minds at work and they can build a "gun" costing tens of=20
thousands of dollars each (production run costs) that works -once-, if=20
the test subject rolls around on the goo preferably on a clean tarp so=20
dirt doesnt get between the loops of adhesive goo rendering it less=20
effective. certainly, this and many other non lethal weapons open serious=
=20
concerns about abuse of power. For me they serve as a motivator for=20
political action too. We get the current round of buttheads outta there=20
and the next may be better or at least less effective at dreaming this=20
stupid shit up (sorry, language tends to go when I'm tired).

> =A0 Last year, the National Institute of Justice awarded $2.1 million US =
to
> three companies to develop weapon detectors for airports, stores and publ=
ic
> buildings.
IF these are used voluntarily this is a -good- thing IMHO. I'll make no=20
excuses for it. I'm a Libertarian by nature and I would happily pay extra=
=20
to travel with people I knew were willing to voluntarily be searched.=20
It's El Al for me, as long as I'm not -forced- to accept it. Given that,=20
I -want- better security equipment. I'll help pay for it and I'll work to=
=20
make sure it's never abused.

> =A0 Two models are being developed of the Passive Millimetre Wave Imager,=
 a
> creation of Massachusetts-based Millimetrix Corp.
> =A0 The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol c=
ar
> and pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send out X-ray=
s;
> instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by human flesh.
That is Grade A nuts. "Human flesh" radiates nothin but very small=20
amounts of heat. -Nervous-systems- radiate electromagnetic energy for an=20
inch or two and I suppose technology might be able to passively scan=20
that. When cops get this stuff (if the system is anything like it is now)=
=20
I'll know about and so will you, cops being citizens and all. If the=20
system changes enough that we won't know about it (and that would be a=20
big change) we'll have more immediate problems then gomers with shoe boxes.

snip (love some verifiable sources on this stuff, I didnt see the prev post=
)

blah
Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 22:50:55 -0700 (PDT)

At 05:06 PM 8/12/96 -0600, you wrote:
>sabutigo wrote:
>> 
>> If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It looks like
>> I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!
>
>Buchanan's other choice was to spend x million dollars of someone else's 
>money for the privilege of going down in flames.

That privilege sometimes is the fate of those who stand on principle instead
of pragmatics.

  When Dole picked Kemp 
>he co-opted large parts of Pat's support base.

He only co-opted those who wouldn't stand on their principles.
>
>This republican ticket doesn't have a place for gunowners.  They've 
>thrown bones to literally every other interest group and tacitly told us 
>to go have anal sex with our issue.

Actually, the Party is making a lot of room for those of the festive
community who enjoy anal sex.
>
>Personally, I'm going to do anything I can to beat them.  Not that I 
>like clinton or perot or even browne, but none of the above sounds just 
>fine.

I may go for Howard Phillips.
>
>The only thing to do is concentrate on congressional elections in 
>districts/states where there are dedicated gun-grabbers running against 
>someone who is not.
>
>
S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 12 Aug 1996 22:52:08 -0700 (PDT)

At 05:50 PM 8/12/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Howard phillips and the American Taxpayer pparty, Blue, that is who to
>vote for.  I too am with you about ole doleful and kemp

Or UN-Kemp-t

.  Hey ain't 
>kemp some sort of a sea weed?
>
>Larry Ball
>lball@unlinfo.unl.edu
>
>> 
>> sabutigo wrote:
>> > 
>> > If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It looks
like
>> > I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!
>> 
>> Buchanan's other choice was to spend x million dollars of someone else's 
>> money for the privilege of going down in flames.  When Dole picked Kemp 
>> he co-opted large parts of Pat's support base.
>> 
>> This republican ticket doesn't have a place for gunowners.  They've 
>> thrown bones to literally every other interest group and tacitly told us 
>> to go have anal sex with our issue.
>> 
>> Personally, I'm going to do anything I can to beat them.  Not that I 
>> like clinton or perot or even browne, but none of the above sounds just 
>> fine.
>> 
>> The only thing to do is concentrate on congressional elections in 
>> districts/states where there are dedicated gun-grabbers running against 
>> someone who is not.
>> 
>> 
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 23:57:46 -0600

Boyd said:
>I'll know about and so will you, cops being citizens and all. If the
>system changes enough that we won't know about it (and that would be a
>big change) we'll have more immediate problems then gomers with shoe boxes.
>
>blah
>Boyd

Well said.

Besides, if a gun will block these "rays" then so will a bunch of metal
plates -- probably doesn't have to be too think...  Just random metal
plates all over your body.  Or better yet, metal cut outs shaped like a gun
for those times you aren't carrying :-)

regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 12 Aug 1996 23:43:33 PST

On Aug 12, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:

>Boyd said:
>>I'll know about and so will you, cops being citizens and all. If the
>>system changes enough that we won't know about it (and that would be a
>>big change) we'll have more immediate problems then gomers with shoe boxes.
>>
>>blah
>>Boyd
>
>Well said.
>
>Besides, if a gun will block these "rays" then so will a bunch of metal
>plates -- probably doesn't have to be too think...  Just random metal
>plates all over your body.  Or better yet, metal cut outs shaped like a gun
>for those times you aren't carrying :-)

I understand a rather nasty trick was once played on someone by making a
lead foil profile cut-out of a 1911-a1 .45, and slipping it into a magazine
someone was carrying onto a plane.....:-)

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 04:22:45 -0700 (PDT)



All we need to do to kill this is show that it reveals sexual arousal.

NetRumor will do.

BTW, it almost certainly does, and almost certainly SS and security
types will use it as a screening device in new and innovative ways.

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 13 Aug 1996 07:25:36 -0600

sabutigo wrote:
> 
> At 05:06 PM 8/12/96 -0600, you wrote:
> >sabutigo wrote:
> >>
> >> If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It looks like
> >> I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!
> >
> >Buchanan's other choice was to spend x million dollars of someone else's
> >money for the privilege of going down in flames.
> 
> That privilege sometimes is the fate of those who stand on principle instead
> of pragmatics.

I disagree on this one.  If Pat's supporters were fat cats that's be one 
thing.  They're not, they're five and ten dollar donors and that ten 
bucks they send him is ten bucks worth of something their family don't 
get.  There are exceptions to that but not many.

For Pat to run, given the current facts, would be nothing but egotism 
and have ethical equavalent of welfare.  I.E., pissing away someone 
else's money for no good use.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: ForeignCorrespondent BOMBING THE USUAL SUSPECTS (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 08:09:45 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

			Foreign Correspondent

		      Inside Track On World News
	    By International Syndicated Columnist & Broadcaster
		 Eric Margolis <emargolis@lglobal.com>

	                  ,,ggddY"""Ybbgg,,
	             ,agd888b,_ "Y8, ___`""Ybga,
	          ,gdP""88888888baa,.""8b    "888g,
	        ,dP"     ]888888888P'  "Y     `888Yb,
	      ,dP"      ,88888888P"  db,       "8P""Yb,
	     ,8"       ,888888888b, d8888a           "8,
	    ,8'        d88888888888,88P"' a,          `8,
	   ,8'         88888888888888PP"  ""           `8,
	   d'          I88888888888P"                   `b
	   8           `8"88P""Y8P'                      8
	   8            Y 8[  _ "                        8
	   8              "Y8d8b  "Y a                   8
	   8                 `""8d,   __                 8
	   Y,                    `"8bd888b,             ,P
	   `8,                     ,d8888888baaa       ,8'
	    `8,                    888888888888'      ,8'
	     `8a                   "8888888888I      a8'
	      `Yba                  `Y8888888P'    adP'
	        "Yba                 `888888P'   adY"
	          `"Yba,             d8888P" ,adP"'
	             `"Y8baa,      ,d888P,ad8P"'
	                  ``""YYba8888P""''



BOMBING THE USUAL SUSPECTS
by
Eric Margolis  12 August 1996



President Bill Clinton accused Iran and Libya last week of
being `two of the most dangerous supporters of terrorism in
the world.'  He signed into law a bill that will impose
heavy sanctions on non-American companies that make 
significant investments in either nation's oil industry. 

While the President was charging `rogue states' Iran and
Libya with terrorism, his ally, Russia, a major recipient of
US aid,  was slaughtering civilians and levelling entire
villages and towns in Chechnya. Russian forces have  
killing 60,000 Chechens in a barbaric campaign of
extermination that Clinton recently justified as being akin
to the American civil war.

The European Union, which gets 25% of its oil from Libya and
Iran, mostly shrugged off Clinton's latest threats of trade
war as election-year grandstanding to  America's  powerful
Israel lobby, which engineered the sanctions. Ironically,
these sanctions duplicate the Arab trade boycott of Israel,
that the same lobby so bitterly opposed. . 

Some Europeans, however, took alarm: they saw Washington's
recent threats against nations doing business with
Cuba,Iran, Sudan, Libya, Syria and Iraq as signs that  US
foreign policy was being exclusively driven by narrow
domestic politics. Turkey, for one, ignored US warnings and
signed a multi-billion gas deal with its neighbor, Iran.

Meanwhile, Washington sources say if the FBI and CIA can
establish any links, no matter how tenuous, between Mideast
terrorists  and the downing of TWA Flight 800, the White
House will authorize  heavy air strikes against Iran or
Libya - or both.  They will also be hit if even remotely
linked to last month's bombing of a US barracks in Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia.

As previously reported in this column. Iran and Libya may
soon be attacked, even if they are not connected to any
terror attacks - particularly if the Whitewater scandals
worsen. Bombing Arab miscreants is always a big voter-winner
for in the US. 

The US and Israel have been mounting a heavy propaganda
campaign in recent months, accusing Iran of secretly
developing nuclear weapons, and Libya of building a
mysterious, underground poison gas plant.  Israel, it should
be noted, has the Mideast's only nuclear arsenal, and  the
largest biological/chemical warfare plants. 

All the rumpus over Iran and Libya is in curious contrast to
the Administration's studied indifference to North Korea,
which has at least two operational nuclear weapons and a
broad array of chemical and biological weapons, all of which
are targeted at US forces in South Korea and Japan.   

Clearly, the Clinton Administration has wholeheartedly
adopted a strategy of replacing the threat of communism with
that of terrorism - and mainly Islamic terrorism at that.  

Muslims Under Our Mattresses  are to be the Reds Under Our
Beds of the 90's.  Political chameleon Clinton has decided
to use terrorism, real or imagined, to sound like Ronald
Reagan, just in time for Fall elections.

Europeans, save Britain's Tories, view all this with deep
scepticism. They do not see Iran or Libya as terrorist
threats, but an important trading partners.  Italy, for
example, imports 45% of its oil from Libya. and gets on well
with its former North African colony.  Muammar Khadaffi
remains wildly eccentric, but he has adopted a low profile
in recent years.  

Still, very strong suspicion points to Libya over the
bombings of a Pan  Am and French UTA airliners, though  
conclusive evidence of Libyan guilt, or even motives, are
elusive. Libya may actually have been framed by its many
enemies, or other terrorist groups.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has stepped up planning air strikes
against Iran and Libya, possibly in conjunction with Israel. 
One hears reports that Saudi Arabia has secretly agreed to
allow Israeli warplanes to overfly its airspace on their way to
hit Iran.  

Likely Iranian targets are two nuclear installations - which
are under UN safeguards - radars along the Gulf, naval
vessels, air bases, and possibly oil terminals. Iran's air
force is miserably weak; its anti-aircraft defenses would be
quickly blinded by US or Israel electronic warfare.

The main target in Libya is the alleged chemical/biological
warfare plant buried deep underground near Tripoli,  Libya
claims the vast site is part of Khadaffi's gigantic `Great
Man-Made River Project,' not a military facility.  Until
recently this was the world's largest construction project:
a series of enormous pumping stations bringing underground
water from the Sahara aquifer 817 km north to the Libyan
coast through 4 meter underground pipes.Wags call it `the
Great Madman's River Project,' 

The White House insists it's a plant, producing gas and
germs aimed at Israel, that must be destroyed.  But the
facility is too deep underground to be reached by US earth-
penetrating conventional weapons.  The Pentagon has been
evaluating British bombs, but without success.  Pro-Israel
hawks in the Clinton Administration have been openly calling
for use of a US tactical nuclear weapon on the mysterious
plant.

Some of this is the product of election fever. But some is
real, and Europeans, who consider the Mideast their
backyard, not Washington's, are getting angry.  

How would the Americans like it, they ask, if Europe ordered
the US to stop investing in Mexico's or Trinidad's  oil
because of those nation's tolerance of drug trading?  Or
declared Israel an outlaw state because of its secret
development of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons?

copyright  Eric Margolis 1996
`Foreign Correspondent' is a copyright of eric margolis


*****************************************************************
***************************************************************** 
 

	To receive Foreign Correspondent via email send a note
	to Majordomo@lglobal.com with the message in the body:
		subscribe foreignc
	To get off the list, send to the same address but write:
		unsubscribe foreignc
	Back Issues can be obtained from:
		ftp.lglobal.com/pub/foreignc
	For Syndication Information please contact:
	   Email: emargolis@lglobal.com
	   FAX: (416) 960-4803
	   Smail:
		Eric Margolis
		c/o Editorial Department
		The Toronto Sun
		333 King St. East
		Toronto Ontario Canada
		M5A 3X5


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Clinton Is Trying to be Big Brother -- Phyllis Schlafly Column 8/8/96 (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 08:18:48 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------


                    Clinton Is Trying to be Big Brother



     August 8, 1996                             by Phyllis Schlafly

     We hope the appropriate government agencies will soon solve the
     recent terrorist crimes and punish the criminals. But all
     Americans who care about civil liberties should vigorously resist
     President Clinton's attempt to use the terrorist attacks as an
     excuse to carry on his all-out war against the personal privacy of
     law-abiding Americans.

     This mind-set was first revealed in the Clinton health care bill,
     which would have given the government computer access to the
     medical records of all Americans. Fortunately, that totalitarian
     takeover of the health care industry was rejected.

     The Clinton Administration's education legislation now pending in
     Congress would put personal information about all schoolchildren
     -- academic, medical, attitudinal, behavioral, and family -- into
     an expanded Labor Market Information database available to the
     government, as well as to prospective employers.

     Now the Clinton Administration is trying to make it illegal for
     individual Americans to have private conversations with one
     another. That's the real meaning of its effort to control
     encryption technology, and it's a direct assault on the First
     Amendment.

     It would be downright ridiculous to assert that the First
     Amendment guarantees our right to speak in public but not in
     private. It would be just as ridiculous to say that we have
     freedom to speak in words that the government can understand, but
     not in words the government can't decipher.

     Americans have the right to speak to one another in private,
     behind closed doors, and we should likewise have the right to
     speak to one another in code and to put our coded messages on
     computer in a process called encryption. Americans would not
     tolerate the government ope0ing and reading the letters we send
     through the mails, and we shou0d not tolerate the government
     opening and reading our encrypted, or coded, messages sent via
     computer.

     Yet, Attorney General Janet Reno, FBI Director Louis Freeh, and
     Vice President Al Gore are all demanding the authority to read our
     encrypted messages. In a speech to the Commonwealth Club of
     California, Reno bluntly stated her demand for "ensuring law
     enforcement access to encrypted data.''

     Reno boasted that there is "a consensus'' that the government
     should create a system known as "Key Escrow'' (i.e., a supposedly
     "neutral third party''), to which all Americans should be forced
     to "entrust'' the keys to their encrypted messages, and to which
     the government would have access. On the contrary, there is no
     such consensus.

     Do you trust Janet Reno with access to your private messages? Do
     you trust the FBI to keep your files confidential?

     The Clinton Administration is already doing 30 to 40 percent more
     federal telephone wiretaps and other electronic surveillance than
     the last year of the Bush Administration. Those figures don't even
     include national security wiretaps or the hundreds of extensions
     granting more time for wiretap orders already issued.

     FBI Director Freeh wrote the New York Times last November that
     "There is no intention to expand the number of wiretaps or the
     extent of wiretapping." Four months later, FBI documents revealed
     that the FBI does, in fact, plan to increase electronic
     surveillance 54 percent by 1998 and 130 percent by 2004.

     On July 12, Al Gore announced that the Administration will
     continue to push for the adoption of a massive public key
     infrastructure to give the government access to all encrypted
     communications. In a blatant bid for a police-state surveillance
     society, Gore warned about "the dangers of unregulated encryption
     technology."

     A neutral panel of the National Research Council was set up to
     make policy recommendations about encryption. The panel called on
     the government to abandon its efforts to restrict encryption.

     The NSC panel concluded that increased use of encryption would
     enhance our national security, not diminish it. Thirteen out of
     its 16 members had security clearances with access to secret
     information, and they saw no national security reason to justify
     the Clinton policy.

     The Clinton Administration bases its campaign to control private
     encryption on the alleged need to fight crime through wiretapping.
     However, the NSC panel concluded that the ability of the private
     sector to transfer confidential financial and other data over the
     information highway without interception is far more important.

     New technologies have given government awesome power to spy on
     individuals. The Filegate investigation accidentally uncovered the
     shocking news that, as soon as Bill Clinton entered the White
     House in 1993, he secretly spent $400,000 on software to create a
     highly sophisticated computer database to track detailed
     political, financial, attitudinal, and personal biographical
     information on 200,000 people, including members of Congress and
     the media. Known as WHODB for White House Office Data Base, the
     system was nicknamed Big Brother.

     Encryption is a First Amendment issue, not a crime issue. If the
     Clinton Administration is allowed to control encryption, it would
     be the biggest expansion of federal power since the passage of the
     Income Tax Amendment in 1913.


EAGLE FORUM -- eagle@eagleforum.org
PO Box 618
Alton, IL  62002
Phone: 618-462-5415
 ----------------------------------------------
Are you on our E-mail list?

Tell a friend about us!

http://www.eagleforum.org

* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: The NEA Is About Politics, Not Education (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 08:24:40 -0500 (CDT)

These are the people re-educating your kids about the evil guns.



---------- Forwarded message ----------


                       The Phyllis Schlafly Report

         -- Vol. 30, No. 1 * Box 618, Alton, Illinois 62002 * August 1996 --


                  The NEA Is About Politics, Not Education

     It's hard to see how the Democratic National Convention in August
     could be any more exciting for Bill Clinton than the annual
     convention of the National Education Association (NEA) held over
     the Fourth of July weekend. The NEA Convention had three times as
     many delegates as the Democratic National Convention, and 91% of
     the NEA delegates voted to endorse Clinton for reelection as
     President. That's a higher approval rating than he enjoys in the
     Democratic Party.

     The NEA convention had all the accouterments of a rip-roaring
     political convention, including Clinton-Gore buttons, signs and
     T-shirts and strobe lights criss-crossing the hall. When Clinton
     entered to make his speech, the crowd cheered and carried on like
     a political rally, the band blared out rock and roll, and the
     Arkansas delegates pretended to play huge make-believe saxophones.

     The NEA announced its thousand-dollar subsidies given to each NEA
     member who is elected a delegate to the Democratic National
     Convention: a grant of $400 in cash, $400 in merchandise, plus air
     travel expense. The NEA will have more delegates at the Democratic
     National Convention than any state.

     The National Education Association maintains one of the five
     largest federal Political Action Committees, called NEA-PAC, and
     it is the third largest donor to Democrats. The NEA gave Democrats
     99% of its PAC money in the 1994 elections and can be expected to
     do likewise in 1996. Cash donations from the federal NEA-PAC are
     supplemented by cash donations from state and local NEA PACs, and
     also by the so-called "volunteers" whom the NEA assigns to work
     for Democratic candidates. The NEA spends $39 million a year on
     1,500 field organizers to promote its goals.

     "Education's most powerful voice in Washington" is the way the NEA
     boasts about its political clout. The NEA brags that it is
     responsible, among other things, for creating the U.S. Department
     of Education, passing Goals 2000, and stopping the Senate from
     approving vouchers.

          The NEA's current lobbying instructions, which were
          passed out to the convention delegates, include the
          following:

             * Oppose any legislation that would allow tuition
               vouchers at private or parochial schools.
             * Oppose Medical Savings Accounts.
             * Oppose any provision that would permit the states
               to withhold taxpayer benefits from illegal aliens.
             * Oppose making English our official language.
             * Oppose the Parental Rights Act sponsored by Senator
               Charles Grassley (R-IA), S. 984 and Rep. Steve
               Largent (R-OK), H.R. 1946.
             * Oppose elimination or consolidation of the
               Department of Education.

     By an accident of history, the NEA enjoys a special property-tax
     exemption for its headquarters building in Washington, D.C. This
     exemption, worth $1.6 million a year, is a financial privilege not
     enjoyed by any other union. Last October, Congress tried to remove
     this quirk in the law, but failed by a vote of 213-210. Of the
     House members who had received political contributions from the
     NEA in the 1994 elections, 173 out of 176 voted to keep the tax
     break.

     Remember, the NEA is a union, and the prime goal of the union is
     not education but more jobs and more schools that require more tax
     funding. The NEA Convention passed its usual series of
     pro-big-spending, anti-parent, pro-feminist, and pro-gay-rights
     resolutions. Of course, the NEA wants federal funding to be
     "substantially increased."

     The NEA is adamantly opposed to home schooling unless the parents
     are licensed and use a curriculum approved by the state department
     of education. The NEA wants a say in how private schools are run
     as well. The NEA position is that individuals should be free to
     choose private education only so long as the school is "accredited
     under uniform standards established by the appropriate agency in
     collaboration with the National Education Association and its
     affiliates."

     Naturally, the NEA is eager to prevent any competition that might
     threaten its public school monopoly. When the NEA resolves against
     abolishing "deleterious programs," that doesn't mean eliminating
     explicit sex education curricula or R-rated videos. It means
     eliminating such "detrimental" programs as "privatization,
     performance contracting, tax credits for tuition to private and
     parochial schools, voucher plans, and evaluations by private
     groups."

     To create more jobs, the NEA not only supports "mandatory
     kindergarten with compulsory attendance," but also "early
     childhood education programs in the public schools for children
     from birth through age eight." This would not be simple
     baby-sitting; it would feature "diversity-based curricula and
     appropriate bias-free screening devices."

     Of course, the NEA doesn't want any accountability. The NEA
     "opposes standardized testing" and "the use of these tests to
     compare one student, staff member, school, or district with
     another." The NEA opposes "competency testing" as a condition of
     employment, evaluation, placement, ranking or promotion.

     Trendy liberal curriculum fads are enthusiastically endorsed by
     the NEA, including multicultural ed, global ed, AIDS ed,
     environmental ed, bilingual ed, self-esteem ed, and suicide ed.
     NEA resolutions do not mention phonics education or teaching
     children to read. In recognition of the fact that semi-literate
     public school graduates must take high school courses all over
     again in college, the NEA went on record against denying taxpayer
     funds to college students enrolled in "remedial" courses.

     The NEA is all for sex education so long as it includes "diversity
     of sexual orientation, incest, and sexual harassment." The NEA
     resolution follows the SIECUS-Planned Parenthood dogma that "it is
     the right of every individual [i.e., every child, without parental
     consent] to live in an environment [i.e., the school] of freely
     available information, knowledge, and wisdom [i.e., as defined by
     the school] about sexuality."

     The NEA wants every child to have "direct and confidential [i.e.,
     without parental knowledge or consent] access to comprehensive
     [i.e., K-12] health, social, and psychological programs and
     services [i.e., contraceptives]." The NEA wants guidance and
     counseling programs to be "integrated into the entire education
     system [i.e., so parents can't opt out their children] beginning
     at the prekindergarten level."

     The NEA's answer to the problem of teen pregnancy is not to teach
     abstinence or self-discipline, but to teach self-esteem, making
     sure that it is "anti-biased, culturally sensitive." The NEA also
     demands that schools set up school-based health clinics (to
     distribute contraceptives) and "on-site child care services."

     The NEA's non-academic resolutions include supporting the Equal
     Rights Amendment (ERA), which was laid to rest in 1982, and
     tax-funded abortion. An attempt to make the organization
     abortion-neutral, was defeated. The NEA supports statehood for the
     District of Columbia, socialized medicine, and tax-funded
     "creative [i.e., obscene] expression" by the National Endowment
     for the Arts. The NEA opposes making English our official U.S.
     language or a moment of silence in schools (i.e., because students
     might pray). The NEA supports continuing to admit illegal aliens
     into tax-supported public schools, and threatens to boycott Shell
     Oil Company for alleged environmental pollution in Nigeria.

     The NEA-GLC (Gay-Lesbian Caucus) has dramatically increased its
     visibility and influence at the annual NEA conventions. Six years
     ago, at the 1990 convention in Kansas City, the gay-lesbian group
     met without publicity and circulated its demands on one
     mimeographed sheet. In 1996, about a third of the delegates
     sported NEA-GLC (Gay Lesbian Caucus) buttons, and an eight-page
     professionally produced newsletter announced eleven caucuses
     during the convention plus an AIDS quilt display and a cocktail
     reception and social.

     The NEA swallowed a lot of bad PR and some loss of membership
     because of last year's resolution endorsing a Lesbian and Gay
     History Month, known as Resolution B-9. This year's convention
     omitted that one line, but continued to endorse all other
     gay-lesbian demands, including rewriting curriculum, textbooks,
     and activities.

     In addition to the passage of more than a dozen resolutions
     embracing the gay-lesbian agenda, an official NEA Human and Civil
     Rights Action Sheet distributed at the 1996 convention listed six
     "Recommendations" for action by the NEA's State Associations:

        + Work with the school district, the parent-teacher
          organization, and community groups to provide information to
          other members, parents, and counselors about the
          developmental and health needs of gay, lesbian, and bisexual
          students.

        + Provide training to enable selected staff to become resources
          to members on gay, lesbian, and bisexual student issues.

        + Recommend to the school district that inservice programs
          address gay, lesbian, and bisexual concerns; and that the
          library include positive learning materials about gays,
          lesbians, and bisexuals.

        + Encourage the establishment and maintenance of peer support
          and community self-help programs for gay, lesbian, and
          bisexual students.

        + Work with the school district to develop or expand school
          policy to ensure respect for diversity, including gays,
          lesbians, and bisexuals.

        + Participate in coalitions to improve support and services for
          gay, lesbian, and bisexual students.

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
 --------


                          Some 1996 NEA Resolutions

     A-18. Undocumented Immigrants. The National Education Association
     believes that, regardless of the immigration status of students or
     their parents, every student has the right to a free public
     education in an environment free from harassment.

     A-28. Federally or State-Mandated Choice/Parental Option Plans.
     The Association opposes federally or state-mandated choice or
     parental option plans.

     A-29. Voucher Plans and Tuition Tax Credits. The National
     Education Association believes that voucher plans and tuition tax
     credits or funding formulas that have the same effect -- under
     which pre-K through 12 nonpublic school education is subsidized by
     tax monies -- undermine public education, reduce the support
     needed to adequately fund public education, and have the potential
     for racial, economic, and social segregation of children. The
     Association opposes all attempts to establish and/or implement
     such plans.

     B-1. Early Childhood Education. The National Education Association
     supports early childhood education programs in the public schools
     for children from birth through age eight. The Association
     supports a high-quality program of transition from home and/or
     preschool to the public kindergarten or first grade. The
     Association further believes that early childhood education
     programs should include a full continuum of services for parents
     and children, including child care, child development,
     developmentally appropriate and diversity-based curricula, special
     education, and appropriate bias-free screening devices. The
     Association believes that federal legislation should be enacted to
     assist in organizing the implementation of fully funded early
     childhood education programs offered through the public schools.
     These programs should be available to all children on an equal
     basis and should include mandatory kindergarten with compulsory
     attendance.

     B-6. Diversity. The National Education Association believes that
     our diverse society enriches all individuals. Similarities and
     differences among races, ethnicity, color, national origin,
     language, geographic location, religion, gender, sexual
     orientation, age, physical ability, size, and marital, parental,
     or economic status form the fabric of our society. The Association
     also believes that education should increase tolerance and foster
     an appreciation of the various qualities that pertain to people as
     individuals or members of a group. The Association further
     believes in the importance of programs and observances that
     accurately portray and recognize the roles, contributions,
     cultures, and history of these diverse groups and individuals.

     B-7. Racism, Sexism, and Sexual Orientation Discrimination. The
     National Education Association believes in the equality of all
     individuals. Discrimination and stereotyping based on such factors
     as race, gender, physical disabilities, ethnicity, and sexual
     orientation must be eliminated. The Association believes that
     plans, activities, and programs for education employees, students,
     parents, and the community should be developed to identify and
     eliminate discrimination and stereotyping in all educational
     settings. Such plans, activities, and programs must --

       a. Increase acceptance of and sensitivity to individuals and
          groups in a diverse society composed of such groups as
          American Indians/Alaska Natives, Asian and Pacific Islanders,
          Blacks, Hispanics, women, gays and lesbians, and people with
          disabilities.

       b. Eliminate discrimination and stereotyping in the curriculum,
          textbooks, resource and instructional materials, activities,
          etc.

       c. Foster the use of nondiscriminatory, nonracist, nonsexist and
          nonstereotypical language, resources, practices, and
          activities.

       d. Eliminate institutional discrimination.

       e. Integrate an accurate portrayal of the roles and
          contributions of all groups throughout history across the
          curriculum.

       f. Identify how prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination have
          limited the roles and contributions of individuals and
          groups.

       g. Eliminate subtle practices that favor the education of one
          student over another on the basis or race, ethnicity, gender,
          physical disabilities, or sexual orientation.

     The Association encourages its affiliates to develop and implement
     training programs on these matters.

     B-23. Adolescent Pregnancy and Parenting. The Association
     recommends that special programs for adolescents be implemented to
     include --

        * Development of positive self-esteem and self concept.

        * Establishment of on-site child care services.

     B-28. Multicultural Education. The Association believes that
     multicultural education is a way of helping students perceive the
     cultural diversity of U.S. citizenry so that they may develop
     pride in their own cultural legacy.

     B-29. Global Education. The National Education Association
     believes that global education increases respect for and awareness
     of the earth and its people. Global education imparts information
     about cultures and an appreciation of our interdependency in
     sharing the world's resources to meet mutual human needs.

     B-36. Family Life Education. The Association believes that
     programs should be established for both students and parents and
     supported at all educational levels to promote --

        * The development of self-esteem.

        * Education in human growth and development.

     The Association believes that education in these areas must be
     presented as part of an anti biased, culturally sensitive program.

     B-37. Sex Education. The Association recognizes that the public
     school must assume an increasingly important role in providing the
     instruction. Teachers and health professionals must be qualified
     to teach in this area and must be legally protected from
     censorship and lawsuits. The Association urges its affiliates and
     members to support appropriately established sex education
     programs, including information on sexual abstinence, birth
     control and family planning, diversity of culture, diversity of
     sexual orientation, parenting skills, prenatal care, sexually
     transmitted diseases, incest, sexual abuse, sexual harassment. To
     facilitate the realization of human potential, it is the right of
     every individual to live in an environment of freely available
     information, knowledge, and wisdom about sexuality.

     B-38. AIDS Education. The National Education Association
     recommends that educational institutions establish comprehensive
     acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) education programs as an
     integral part of the school curriculum.

     B-40. Environmental Education. The Association further urges the
     development and improvement of educational programs that will --

       1. Promote the concept of the interdependence of humanity and
          nature.

       2. Develop an awareness of the effects of past, present, and
          future population growth patterns on world civilization,
          human survival, and the environment.

       3. Promote an understanding of the necessity to protect
          endangered, threatened, and rare species.

       4. Promote an understanding of the necessity to protect the
          earth's finite resources.

     The Association urges its affiliates to support environmental
     programs in school systems.

     B-67. Home Schooling. The National Education Association believes
     that home schooling programs cannot provide the student with a
     comprehensive education experience. The Association believes that
     if parental preference home schooling study occurs, students
     enrolled must meet all state requirements. Instruction should be
     by persons who are licensed by the appropriate state education
     licensure agency, and a curriculum approved by the state
     department of education should be used. The Association further
     believes that such home schooling programs should be limited to
     the children of the immediate family, with all expenses being
     borne by the parents.

     C-7. Child Care. The National Education Association believes that
     all child care centers should be examined and monitored on a
     continuous basis, and additional legislation should be sought as
     necessary to maintain the highest quality child care. The
     Association encourages school districts and educational
     institutions to establish on-site child care for preschoolers,
     students, the children of students, and the children of staff
     members.

     C-23. Comprehensive School Health Programs and Services. The
     National Education Association believes that every child should
     have direct and confidential access to comprehensive health,
     social, and psychological programs and services. The Association
     also believes that programs in the schools should provide --

        * A planned sequential, K-12 health education curriculum that
          integrates various health topics (such a drug abuse,
          violence, universal precautions, and HIV education).

     The Association also believes that services in the schools should
     include --

        * Counseling programs that provide developmental guidance and
          broad-based interventions and referrals,
        * Comprehensive school-based, community-funded student health
          care clinics,
        * If deemed appropriate by local choice, family-planning
          counseling and access to birth control methods with
          instruction in their use.

     C-24. School Counseling Programs. The National Education
     Association believes that guidance and counseling programs should
     be integrated into the entire education system, beginning at the
     prekindergarten level.

     C-29. Student Sexual Orientation. The Association believes that
     every school district and educational institution should provide
     counseling and suicide prevention programs by trained personnel
     for students who are struggling with their sexual/gender
     orientation.

     H-6. National Health Care Policy. The Association supports the
     adoption of a single-payer health care plan for all residents of
     the United States, its territories, and the Commonwealth of Puerto
     Rico.

     I-13. Family Planning. The National Education Association supports
     family planning, including the right to reproductive freedom. The
     Association further urges the implementation of
     community-operated, school-based family planning clinics that will
     provide intensive counseling by trained personnel.

     I-18. Immigration. The Association opposes any immigration policy
     that denies human and/or civil rights or educational opportunities
     to immigrants and their children regardless of their immigration
     status.

     I-22. Freedom of Creative Expression. The National Education
     Association supports freedom of expression in the creative arts
     and therefore deplores any efforts by government to suppress,
     directly or indirectly, such expression. The Association further
     supports the freedom of publicly funded agencies to exercise
     judgment in the awarding of grants to individuals and
     organizations.

     I-27. Freedom of Religion. The Association opposes any federal
     legislation or mandate that would require school districts to
     schedule a moment of silence. The Association particularly opposes
     a moment of silence as a condition for receiving federal funds.

     I-47. English as the Official Language. The Association believes
     that efforts to legislate English as the official language
     disregards cultural pluralism; deprive those in need of education,
     social services, and employment; and must be challenged.

     I-50. Equal Opportunity for Women. The Association supports the
     proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The
     Association urges its affiliates to support ratification of such
     an amendment.


EAGLE FORUM -- eagle@eagleforum.org
PO Box 618
Alton, IL  62002
Phone: 618-462-5415
 ----------------------------------------------
Are you on our E-mail list?

Tell a friend about us!

http://www.eagleforum.org

* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: H. CON. RES. 206 - MODIFIED
Date: 13 Aug 1996 09:55:32 -0500

You never hear anyone expressing any "sense of congress" (oxymoron alert!)
regarding the rights of unborn humans. Maybe this FarLeft militia nonsnese
should be reworded (see below).

Bob Knauer

+++++

*MODIFIED*

HCON 206 IH
104th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. CON. RES. 206
Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the threat to the security
of American unborn citizens and the United States Government posed by armed
medical staff and other paramedical groups and organizations.

                       IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                               August 1, 1996

                           CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the threat to the security
of American unborn citizens of the United States Government posed by armed
medical abortionists and other paramedical groups and organizations.

Whereas the Government of the United States and its agencies are democratic
institutions, created by and for the people of the United States;

Whereas the various agencies of the United States Government derive their
purpose and their character from the expressed will of the American people,
and may be altered from time to time by peaceful means;

Whereas countless millions of unborn American citi\zens of the United States
were killed in numerous abortion clinics throughout the US;

Whereas various spokespersons for self-described medical abortionists and
paramedical organizations and groups have repeatedly denounced the
legitimacy of the rights of the unborn; and

Whereas the actions of some medical abortionists and paramedical groups and
organizations specifically promoting violence constitute a grave danger to
American citizens and the institutions of American democracy, and threaten
the very foundation of freedom and democracy in America:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring),

That it is the Sense of Congress that--

(1) abortion of unborn Americans of the United States should be aggressively
identified, dissolved, and their perpetrators brought to justice by the
federal authorities of law enforcement with the greatest dispatch possible;

(2) the illegal possession of abortion equipment, substances or devices of
fetal destruction by any individual or group should be prosecuted to the
full extent of all applicable laws by the Department of Justice; and

(3) those legally possessing abortion equipment, substances or devices of
fetal destruction, and involved in any conspiracy to harm or destroy any
unborn citizen of the  United States, should be promptly prosecuted to the
full extent of all applicable laws by the Department of Justice, including
those designed to protect unborn citizens from being murdered.

+++++

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: WSJ: The Perils of Polling
Date: 13 Aug 1996 10:17:01 -0500

I recommend reading this commentary from the WSJ. It is the first concise
statement on the fraud of polling I have ever seen.

BTW, you can see the entire article at WSJ Interactive http://wsj,com/,
which is free for now.

Bob Knauer

+++++

The Perils of Polling

               By JOHN H. FUND

               SAN DIEGO--Polls have come to dominate American
               politics as never before. In 1972, media outlets
               commissioned only two polls as part of that year's
               presidential race. In 1992, that number grew to 125. This
               year, there were more than 125 media polls by April.
               While polls are a valuable measuring tool, their
               proliferation has obsessed far too many politicians and
               confused far too many voters. What exactly is going on
               when an Aug. 7 Gallup Poll shows President Clinton with
               a 23-percentage-point lead, then the same poll four days
               later, after Bob Dole selected Jack Kemp as his running
               mate, finds the Clinton lead shrinking to nine points?

               The answer is that while the race may not have tightened
               that quickly, President Clinton's huge leads have been
               partly artificial and were destined to fall as more voters
               focused on the campaign. "Early poll numbers exercise
               some strange form of tyranny over people that they
               shouldn't, given how soft they are," says Everett Carll
               Ladd, director of the Roper Center for Public Opinion
               Research.

               Caveat Emptor

               The fact that so much of this fall's campaign coverage will
               be driven by polls, many of which will show striking
               disparities, makes it important that voters practice the
               hallowed maxim, caveat emptor. Here is a brief
               consumer's guide to help you through the plethora of poll
               numbers we are likely to see before November.

               Polls are volatile. Head-to-head numbers can vary a
               great deal, far more than those on issues such as taxes or
               crime. Seven months ago, Bob Dole led Bill Clinton by a
               few points. Then Mr. Clinton opened a big lead after his
               moves to the center. In 1976, Gerald Ford whittled
               Jimmy Carter's lead from 33 points down to a 50% to
               48% loss. In 1988, Michael Dukakis led George Bush by
               17 points in August yet won only 10 states.

               Polls cannot chart a firmly fixed reality. One reason is
               that fewer and fewer Americans are tied to a political
               party, and thus are willing to change their minds during
               the campaign. Mr. Ladd says the evidence is that voters
               are putting off their decisions later and later into the
               campaign. A University of Michigan study of the 1992
               election found that only 40% of voters firmly decided
               how to cast their ballots before the conventions. About
               17% of voters decided in the last two weeks of the
               campaign and 8% waited until Election Day.

               Today, a surprising
               number of voters still
               haven't arrived at firm
               judgments. A new
               Pew Research Center
               poll found that only
               31% of voters were
               strong supporters of
               either candidate. A
               useful look at the
               possible number of
               undecided voters can
               be gleaned from the
               nearby box, which
               shows two separate
               surveys. The first
               asked voters whether
               they supported Bill Clinton or Bob Dole, and found an
               undecided vote of 12%. The second was an open-ended
               question that asked whether voters had decided how they
               would vote for president. Fully 40% said they were
               undecided, a clear sign this election is still up for grabs.

               Campaigns ultimately drive polls, not the other way
               around. A poll is a snapshot of the electorate at a given
               moment, not a predictor of the final result. In fact, voters
               are often poor predictors of their own future behavior. "I
               view polls as the political equivalent of static revenue
               analysis," says Donald Rumsfeld, a former White House
               chief of staff and now a key Dole adviser. "Head-to-head
               numbers this early don't measure the dynamic effects a
               campaign can have on voters. That's why we bother to
               have campaigns--because they change people's minds."

               Indeed, politics is replete with examples of candidates
               who have come from far behind to score victories. Some
               of the most famous have, like the Dole campaign, put tax
               cuts at the center of their campaign message. In 1994, for
               instance, George Pataki trailed New York Gov. Mario
               Cuomo throughout the campaign, but ended up winning
               49% to 45%.

               In 1993, Christine Todd Whitman trailed New Jersey
               Gov. Jim Florio by 51% to 30% only five weeks before
               the election. She then proposed a dramatic 30% tax cut
               and was able to persuade many voters she intended to
               carry it out if elected. Even so, the final pre-election polls
               showed her trailing by nine percentage points. The key to
               her narrow victory was that Gov. Florio's re-elect
               number--the number of voters who actually wanted him
               to serve a second term--never rose above 50%. That is a
               clear danger signal for any incumbent, no matter how far
               ahead. That's because most undecided voters will either
               stay home or vote for the challenger if the incumbent
               hasn't persuaded them.

               President Clinton's re-elect number hadn't risen above
               50% until early this year, when he won the showdown
               with congressional Republicans on the budget. Now there
               are signs his numbers are dipping again; a new Reuters
               poll puts Mr. Clinton's re-elect number at 45%. Even
               with Ross Perot crashing the election, that indicates a
               competitive race.

               Polling techniques lead to variable polls. The way that
               questions are worded and placed can lead to dramatic
               disparities between polls. Last year, a Los Angeles Times
               poll found that 63% favored cuts in federal spending for
               public TV. A poll commissioned by the Public
               Broadcasting System, meanwhile, contrived a series of
               questions about public TV that ended with a question
               about funding. The result? Fully 49% of respondents
               favored increasing public TV spending, while 35%
               backed current spending levels. Striking disparities also
               are present in head-to-head polls. In election after
               election, the CBS News/New York Times poll has
               shown consistently larger leads for Democratic
               candidates than have other polls, largely because its
               samples include fewer identified Republicans.

               In November 1982, pollster Mervyn Field went on Los
               Angeles television as the polls closed to report that exit
               surveys indicated Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley
               would defeat Republican George Deukmejian for
               governor and Jerry Brown would defeat Pete Wilson for
               U.S. senator. In the election, however, Mr. Deukmejian
               won and Mr. Brown lost. Ironically, Mr. Field's last
               pre-election poll had the Senate race right on the money.
               But the exit polls, which should be more accurate since
               they question actual voters, were wrong because they
               failed to account for the large number of absentee ballots
               Republicans had encouraged their supporters to cast. As
               more and more states allow extensive absentee
               voting--or even mail ballots, as Oregon does--polling will
               become ever more difficult.

               People are getting harder to poll. Pollsters are finding
               that half or more of the people they try to contact can't be
               surveyed--they either hide behind answering machines,
               don't answer the phone or simply refuse to answer.
               Pollsters must decide who they're likely to have
               undersampled and weight their results accordingly. "Polls
               tend to favor incumbents and Democrats at the start of a
               campaign," says Dan Walters, a veteran election watcher
               for the Sacramento Bee. "In the early polls people tend to
               answer by their party affiliation, which includes lots of
               Democrats who often don't vote that way."

               In factoring in Mr. Perot's likely presence in this year's
               race, it's clear he will divide the anti-incumbent vote to
               some extent, but he's unlikely to be the spoiler he was in
               1992. His role will be more akin to that of John
               Anderson in 1980, who fell from 25% in the polls to less
               than 7% on Election Day. The addition of Jack Kemp to
               the GOP ticket will help keep potential Perot voters in
               the Republican fold. Roland Boucher, a former board
               member of Mr. Perot's Reform Party in California, is now
               backing Dole-Kemp. He notes that Howard Ezell, the
               former federal immigration official who co-authored
               California's anti-immigration Prop 187, says Mr. Kemp's
               star qualities outshine his apostasy on that issue.

               Issues, Not Numbers

               Right now polls show a lot of people haven't tuned in. A
               new Pew Research Center poll finds that only 47% of
               voters say they have given the election a lot of thought,
               down from 55% at the same point in 1992. Enthusiasm
               for the campaign is down among all groups, but is sharply
               lower among Democrats and independents who lean
               Democratic, a fact that helped the GOP win control of
               Congress in 1994. President Clinton and his adjustable
               adviser Dick Morris may find that he they've bought
               pumped-up poll numbers with their attempts to coopt
               Republican issues, but at the price of a lower turnout by
               the Democratic base in November.

               Several different polls show voters preferring smaller
               government by the same 2 to 1 margin they did in 1994.
               That Zeitgeist, coupled with Mr. Dole's decisions to
               place taxes in the center of his campaign and select Mr.
               Kemp as his running mate, should guarantee a close,
               competitive race. Indeed, his energized campaign may
               well translate into victory in November if Mr. Clinton
               continues to be obsessed by opinion polls while Mr. Dole
               focuses on the issues that voters care about most.



               Mr. Fund is a member of the Journal's editorial
               board.
--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Can I Carry?
Date: 13 Aug 1996 10:14:40 -0600

Who says there's never anything relevant on AP?



     AP  08-12-96 20:32 EST  41 Lines.  Copyright 1996.  All rights 
reserved.
     AM-CVN--Texas Notebook
     Security, Speeches, Jokes
     By PEGGY FIKAC Associated Press Writer
       SAN DIEGO (AP)  State GOP Chairman Tom Pauken was explaining
     the rules for Texas' delegation to the Republican National
     Convention: No cellular phones on the floor; pagers also might
     be out.
       U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm still had a question.
       ``The senator wants to know if he can carry his sidearm,''
     Pauken said.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: What I am going to do for gun rights. (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 12:06:03 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Well, the choice for me is now clear. 
I will vote for the Libertarian party strait ticket. I am going to ask 
everyone I know to do the same. Our only hope is make the Libertarians 
garner enough of the votes that they will have to be co-opted. This is 
the history of American politics, the Free-Silver movement of the 1890's 
became the Populist movement of the 1900's and was stolen by FDR and 
Democrats in the 1930's along with the Socialist Party of America.
The gun owners and Christians should now steal the Libertarian party out 
from under the Computer nerd debating society types and fight to win.
I am currently reading a book "Why not Freedom" that goes into great 
detail about the screwing of the middle class by the left and right and 
how this started with the Civil war when the Easterners took over the 
Republican party and installed the Carpetbaggers in the South under 
martial law and took over all of their state governments. The civil war 
is more correctly called the war for states rights and we lost. The 
federal government can only be checked by strong states which were after 
all the "principal" that gave power to the "agent" the federal government.
After the civil war this check was destroyed and the federal government 
started acting as the principal running roughshod all over the states. 
The Democrats screw the middle class and use big government to support 
all the protected groups, trial lawyers, greens and so on. The 
Republicans talk about middle class values like Kemp, and Benitt but they 
screw the middle class with big government and support the military 
industrial complex, big contracts with the fortune 500 and let OBE, gun 
control and other freedoms get screwed by the Socialist on the left in 
order to get their economic programs through. The middle class who 
according to this book pays 77% of the taxes has no one who really 
represents their interest, both the left and right steal their money for 
their own big government special interest programs. This folks leaves 
only the Libertarians as our logical choice. It is time we took them over 
and used them to fight the Republicans and Democrats.
Regards,
Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu   Senior Buyer UTD          
The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 214/883-2307,fax# 214/883-2348






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: What I am going to do for gun rights. (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 11:24:09 -0600

Hi All

The following is also my strategy, with one change.  Tactical necessity
says we need to make sure the GOP stays in the Congress as a counterweight
to the Democrats -- keep them bickering.

If your House of Rep vote is close, support the GOP guy, otherwise straight
Libertarian votes for freedom!

regards
Chad


>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 12:00:00 -0500 (CDT)
>From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
>To: No Gun Bans <noban@mainstream.com>
>Subject: What I am going to do for gun rights.
>
>Well, the choice for me is now clear.
>I will vote for the Libertarian party strait ticket. I am going to ask
>everyone I know to do the same. Our only hope is make the Libertarians
>garner enough of the votes that they will have to be co-opted. This is
>the history of American politics, the Free-Silver movement of the 1890's
>became the Populist movement of the 1900's and was stolen by FDR and
>Democrats in the 1930's along with the Socialist Party of America.
>The gun owners and Christians should now steal the Libertarian party out
>from under the Computer nerd debating society types and fight to win.
>I am currently reading a book "Why not Freedom" that goes into great
>detail about the screwing of the middle class by the left and right and
>how this started with the Civil war when the Easterners took over the
>Republican party and installed the Carpetbaggers in the South under
>martial law and took over all of their state governments. The civil war
>is more correctly called the war for states rights and we lost. The
>federal government can only be checked by strong states which were after
>all the "principal" that gave power to the "agent" the federal government.
>After the civil war this check was destroyed and the federal government
>started acting as the principal running roughshod all over the states.
>The Democrats screw the middle class and use big government to support
>all the protected groups, trial lawyers, greens and so on. The
>Republicans talk about middle class values like Kemp, and Benitt but they
>screw the middle class with big government and support the military
>industrial complex, big contracts with the fortune 500 and let OBE, gun
>control and other freedoms get screwed by the Socialist on the left in
>order to get their economic programs through. The middle class who
>according to this book pays 77% of the taxes has no one who really
>represents their interest, both the left and right steal their money for
>their own big government special interest programs. This folks leaves
>only the Libertarians as our logical choice. It is time we took them over
>and used them to fight the Republicans and Democrats.
>Regards,
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu   Senior Buyer UTD
>The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 214/883-2307,fax# 214/883-2348
>--------------------------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) FBI Wants More Power to Abuse (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 12:43:47 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive

Posted:  Ronnie Dadone <dadoner@chesco.com>
http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/terror-bill.html 
August 2, 1996
) 
)           FBI Chief Pleads for Anti-Terror Firepower
) 
)           By JERRY GRAY

[W] ASHINGTON -- FBI Director Louis Freeh warned Thursday that the
United States had become a prime target for terrorists, and appealed to
Congress to approve expanded wiretapping authority and other
counterterrorism measures.

Referring to a series of recent violent episodes that began with the
June bombing of a building that housed U.S. military personnel in Saudi
Arabia, Freeh told a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee:

"I think the incidents of the last 40 days -- whether or not the TWA
flight turns out to be a criminal act, or a terrorist act, even leaving
that aside -- the country and the American people have been
experiencing an increasing war against them by terrorists and
terrorist-supported activities."

Freeh said "we need to act -- and to act fairly quickly -- both in the
immediate, piecemeal things that can be done in the short run, as well
as the long-range, more systematic solutions and evaluations that have
to be done." Freeh's appearance was part of a rush of anti-terrorism
activity on Capitol Hill that began shortly after the July 17 crash of
Trans World Airlines Flight 800, a disaster that many investigators
believe was caused by an act of sabotage, although they caution that
they continue to lack conclusive evidence.

That activity at the Capitol has intensified this week, after the
bombing at Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta last Saturday morning.

While the Intelligence Committee was hearing testimony Thursday, White
House and congressional negotiators were meeting elsewhere on Capitol
Hill to try to reach agreement on at least the basics of a new
counterterrorism bill before Congress begins a monthlong recess
Friday.

The hope is that with the basics in hand, Congress can move quickly
soon after Labor Day to enact a comprehensive anti-terrorism package.
"Our time is growing very short," Sen. Larry E.  Craig, R-Idaho,
chairman of the joint White House-Congress task force on terrorism,
told reporters during a break in the talks, whose administration
contingent is led by Leon Panetta, President Clinton's chief of staff.
But "I do believe we will come up with something," Craig said.

Craig announced Wednesday evening that the two sides were near
agreement on the basics of a package. He said it included provisions
that would increase airport security, allow the authorities to
prosecute suspected terrorists under federal racketeering laws,
expedite the authorities' ability to obtain wiretapping authority from
the courts and allow them to wiretap several telephones with a single
warrant, to better listen in on suspects who move from phone to phone.

Negotiators also said Thursday that they had moved closer to agreement
on another provision:  a White House proposal that would require that
black and smokeless powder, typical components of homemade bombs, be
sold with chemical markers, or "taggants," which would help the
authorities to trace detonated explosives.

On yet a third front Thursday House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate
majority leader Trent Lott, along with other Republican congressional
leaders, summoned Panetta, Freeh and Attorney General Janet Reno to a
private meeting on Capitol Hill to question them about counterterrorism
spending.

Republicans have complained that much of the $359 million that Congress
has appropriated for anti-terrorism activities during the last year has
either not been spent or been put to other uses by the administration.

"We are increasingly concerned that monies and authorities already
granted to the administration are not being used effectively at all,"
Lott, Gingrich and Rep. Dick Armey, the House majority leader, said in
a letter to Clinton this week.

One of the Republicans' specific complaints, which was addressed in a
second letter, sent to Ms. Reno by Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., is that
the FBI is seeking to use $17 million of this money "for such things as
food service at the FBI Academy, beefing up your bodyguards with
raincoats, cars and laptop computers, financial audits, new computers
at FBI headquarters and travel."

"When Congress provides funding to fight terrorism, we expect that
money to be fully used and to be fully used immediately to prevent
terrorist acts," said the letter from Rogers, who heads the House
Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and the
Judiciary.

In response to both letters, Ms. Reno issued one of her own Thursday.
It rebutted the accusations, and said, "I am generally satisfied that
Director Freeh is making progress in obligating the counterterrorism
funding provided to the FBI."



--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) How a 3rd Party Defeats the Duopoly (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 12:48:01 -0500 (CDT)

From someone on the left

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Message-ID: <4uoghc$14gm@news.missouri.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pencil.math.missouri.edu

/** headlines: 145.0 **/
** Topic: How a 3rd Party Defeats the Duopoly **
** Written  8:18 AM  Aug  8, 1996 by newsdesk in cdp:headlines **

/* Written  3:55 PM  Aug  6, 1996 by BIRD516@aol.com in igc:grns.usa.forum */
/* ---------- "Fwd: How A 3rd Party Defeats the Tw" ---------- */

Dear fellow 3rd party folks:

Sorry my last transmission was uncoded.  Here is the memo in its entirety:

Memo To:  ALL THIRD PARTY SUPPORTERS


Re:           HOW A THIRD PARTY CAN DEFEAT THE DEM-REP DUOPOLY


Americans want an alternative to Democrats and Republicans.  Though there are
several third parties, the two party duopoly continues to dominate American
politics.  Why?  Most people do not vote for small third parties because they
perceive they are "throwing away" their votes.  Instead, they choose to vote
for the "lesser of two evils."  In choosing the "lesser evil", people tend to
vote more on personalities than on fundamental issues.

We know this because, when it comes to fundamental issues, the differences
between Democrats and Republicans are becoming less and less.  Consider the
following:

A.  Trade--Both Democrats and Republicans, especially the leadership,
supported the NAFTA/WTO.  These treaties have essentially no protections for
workers' wages nor for our environment.  Yet, the treaties received full
endorsement from Clinton and Dole.

B.  Economics--Both parties, especially Clinton and Dole, believe there's
little we can do to re-shape the global economy and the new corporate world
order to protect our wages, our families and the environment of our
communities.  On taxes, each party offers election year tax cuts, but most
working class folks never see any relief.

C.  The Budget--Clinton made some noises about "corporate welfare", but has
agreed with Republicans that budget cuts start with Grandma, in Medicare and
Medicaid (the big secret is that 2/3rds of Medicaid costs go to elderly long
term care and the disabled, not the "poor").  The parties only differ as to
how much we cut on Grandma, and even that difference is less than 5%.

D.  Campaign Finance Reform--In June, l996, the two parties united to
convince the Supreme Court to allow unlimited contributions to Democrats and
Republicans.  When pushed into reform, Dems and Reeps in Congress have the
same proposals:  Each wants to keep its own money and reform the way the
OTHER  party raises money.  Then, they blame "gridlock" and continue raking
in the cash.

Even on the "Oprah" issus, you know, abortion, gun control, homosexuality,
etc., the parties simply massage the symbolic edges of these "wedge" issues.
 It's not abortion anymore.  It's partial birth abortions, which make up less
than 1% of abortions nationwide.  It's not gun control anymore.  It's the
assault weapons ban, where only 2% of criminals use assault weapons.  It's
not gay rights, it's whether gays can be soldiers or not, and if so, can they
tell anyone they're gay?   Both parties are already against same-sex
marriages--as if that's a pressing issue in America today!  Therefore, voting
for the lesser evil makes less and less sense every election.

Third parties, unfortunately, continue to be very weak.  When voters hear
third parties, if at all, they hear only garbled voices at the perceived end
of the radio dial.  What can third parties do to speak loud and clear to the
American public?  We must first recognize that third parties, for all their
differences, have interests in common.

If we review the platforms of The Reform Party, The Green Party, The Peace
and Freedom Party, The U.S. Taxpayers Party, The New Party, The Labor Party
Advocates, The Patriot Party, and perhaps other parties, we will immediately
see several core issues third parties hold in common:

(1) All third parties are demanding that ordinary American citizens regain
their access to all levels of government, from City Hall to Congress.

(2) Strictly limit the power of money in political campaigns.

(3) Repeal the NAFTA/WTO.  Renegotiate the treaties after withdrawal and/or
institute protection policies for working families, communities and
environment.

(4) Simplify taxes (cut deductions/loopholes given to elites,etc.)

(5) Create a framework to end budget deficits/pay down debt through a program
of shared sacrifice (start with corporate welfare before we go looking for
Grandma, for starters).

The core issues assist third parties in finding other interests in common.
 Consider the environmental issue, so important to the Greens' platform.
 With a re-negoitated NAFTA/WTO, and/or strong national measures to protect
wages and the environment, buisnesses will find little incentive to leave
America when effective environmental policies are implemented.  We will
finally be able to reconcile our love for the environment and our economic
situation.   This allows the unions, the wise use movement and
environmentalists to seek mutually beneficial solutions without the two-party
duopoly shaking them down for more money.

Speaking together on the core issues, third parties will be more clearly
heard without the garbled static.  Then, they must find a way to be seen.
 Right now, third parties are seen as isolated, small rafts floating down the
river yelling for the drawbridge to open.  The drawbridge keepers simply
ignore the rafts.  However, if third parties, together, built an ocean liner
out of their interests in common, the drawbridge --representing the mass
media--would finally open to them.  Third parties will now command respect
for their new ideas and solutions.

Third parties, with their voices and principles in common, will stand for
structural, systemic policy changes designed to improve the condition of our
working families and our communities.  That is the key to winning elections
and making America successful as a Nation in the 21st Century.

Look carefully at YOUR third party platform and then look at other third
party platforms.  Find the common ground and get past the words that are
used.  Focus on the substance, or values, behind the words.  Then, reach out
and talk to people in the other third parties.  That is the first step toward
unity and significance.  If we stay lost in personalities and turf wars,
we'll stay divided and insignificant.

Third parties have a duty to each other, and to our great Nation, to make
common cause.  Third parties, uniting around core issues, must form "the
united third parties of America".  This will signal the re-birth of our civic
society.   It will also inspire people, in America and around the world, to
put the interests of families and communities above the excess profits
pocketed by the elites.

E Pluribus Unum.  Out of diversity, unity; out of third party unity,
restoration of power to the people.

mjf/idi

Mitchell J. Freedman may be reached at his office at (714) 953-9936.  The fax
at work:  (714) 835-3823.  His sister's e-mail is BIRD516@aol.com

August 3, l996

** End of text from cdp:headlines **

***************************************************************************
This material came from PeaceNet, a non-profit progressive networking
service.  For more information, send a message to peacenet-info@igc.apc.org
***************************************************************************


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: GOALS 2000 & OBE: Clinton's National Workforce Plan (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 12:48:49 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


Forwarded message:

C O N S E R V A T I V E   C O N S E N S U S (tm)
*****************************************************************
 Events * Analysis * Forecasts * Commentary * Readers' Opinions
*****************************************************************
E D U C A T I O N   :::                World, National, Regional
                                             Distribution: World
                                                   Editor's Desk

COPYRIGHT 1996 by Conservative Consensus, ISSN 1074-245X.
Excerpted from our Journal; email subscription below.

QUOTATION and redistribution are encouraged, for private,
non-commercial use, provided nothing is changed and
our headers and trailers remain intact. V2XC50

GOALS 2000 AND OBE:
Clinton's National Workforce and Education Plan

by US Rep Henry Hyde

              President Clinton's plan for a national workforce of
skilled laborers is being achieved through the Goals 2000 Educate
America Act (HR 1804), School to Work Opportunities Act (HR 2884),
and Improving America's Schools Act (HR 6), all of which were
passed and signed into law by President Clinton in 1994.

              I'll tell you why it is so important to repeal these
laws. The plan for Goals 2000 was developed by Bill Clinton,
Hillary Clinton, Ira Magaziner, and Marc Tucker, President of the
National Center on Education and the Economy (funded by the
Carnegie Foundation), prior to Clinton's election. It is a concept
for dumbing-down our schools and changing the character of the
nation through behavior modification (a vital part of this plan).
It moves away from an academically intensive curriculum to one
that is integrated with vocational training, producing skilled
manpower for the labor market. The economy will be controlled by
the federal government by controlling our workforce and our
schools. I'm enclosing an 18-page letter to Hillary Clinton from
Marc Tucker, which includes the frame work for Goals 2000. He also
writes about creating "a seamless web of opportunities to develop
one's skills that literally extends from cradle to grave and is
the same system for everyone -- young and old, poor and rich,
worker and full-time student."

              Our children are the guinea pigs who will become the
human resources needed for the global labor market. Working adults
will be included later. Two other bills, still pending, are
designed to advance the School-to-Work phase of Goals 2000. The
Careers Act (HR 1617) and the Workforce Development Act (S.143)
will support a nationwide workforce development system, state by
state. Funding is provided for "one stop career" employment
agencies under the supervision of the federal government. Please,
let's not let these bills become law.

              At an education summit in 1989, then Governor Bill
Clinton chaired a Governors meeting to establish national
performance goals to make America internationally competitive. The
governors adopted six of the National Education Goals, which are
now included in the eight goals in Goals 2000. The other two came
from goals adopted at a World Conference sponsored by the United
Nations and the World Bank in March, 1990.

              S. 143 "requires funds implementing tech-group
programs and career counseling at the earliest possible age."
After passing performance outcome assessments determined by the
National Skills Standards Board (which replaces school diplomas),
students at age 16 (10th grade) will be placed in either
vocational training classes or apprenticeships. (In some magnet
schools, they are placing children in "career" classes at ages 13
and 14.) If students are not prepared to enter vocational classes
by age 16, they are to be placed in "youth centers" for further
development towards that goal.

              After two years of "high school" vocational
training, and one year of community college tech/training,
supported by public funding, students will receive a technical
degree (Certificate of Advanced Mastery: CAM) and will be
permitted to apply for a job at the US Job Service Centers with an
Occupational Skills Certificate (OSC).

              Employers who have "contributed" an amount equaling
1-2% of their payroll to the training of the workers will be
permitted to hire them through the US Job Service Centers. In an
article Hillary Clinton had published in the March, 1992 issue of
Educational Leadership entitled "Will America Choose High Skills
or Low Wages" she wrote, "The movement to high performance work
organizations is more widespread in other nations, and training of
frontline workers is commonplace." She recommended that "public
technical assistance be provided to companies, particularly small
businesses, to assist them in moving to higher performance work
organizations."

              Behavior modification is a significant part of
restructuring our schools. School children will be trained to be
"politically correct," to be unbiased, to understand diversity, to
accept alternative family lifestyles, to contribute to the
community through mandatory community service, to respect and
protect the environment, to become a collaborative contributor and
a quality producer. In Marc Tucker's letter to Mrs. Clinton laying
out the plan for Goals 2000 he states, "Radical changes in
attitudes, values and beliefs are required to move any combination
of these agendas."

              Dumbing-down education is a prime component in
creating a willing workforce. Higher education is not conducive to
accepting skilled labor training for a career that fits into the
federal government's planned labor force. Goals 2000 abandons the
American competitive tracking system. It is replaced by new
national achievement standards which assess students' behavior and
attitude. Students are not allowed to excel independently. They
must achieve higher levels as groups/units. The brighter students
will tutor slower students until the entire unit can move to a
higher level. In order not to harm any student's self esteem, no
one fails and no one excels. Report cards are out. Everyone
receives "Satisfactory" when their assignments are completed (at
their own pace). Brighter students tutor the slower ones. The new
performance-based "assessment" standards are reflected in the
Oregon "Certificate of Initial Mastery" (CIM), enclosed in this
packet.

              A computer tracking system will track teachers'
training and performance, school performance and students from
pre-kindergarten through technical training and into the
workforce. All information will be made available to interested
government officials and prospective employers.

              Pre-school, health clinics, daily meals, and
parental assistance (they have the gall to instruct parents on how
to rear their children, including how students' free time should
be spent), are in this all-inclusive "cradle to grave" plan to
control our children's minds and careers.

              According to Clinton's new Budget For Fiscal Year
1997, 48 states participated in the first year of Goals 2000
funding. Any school district accepting Goals 2000 funding is
mandated to accept the curriculum dictated by the National Board.
When governors or state legislatures do not agree with the school-
to-workforce plan, they can be circumvented because Goals 2000
allows individual contracts between state or local school boards
and the US Department of Education.

              This concept has been around since at least the
1960s and perhaps as far back as the 1930s. It has been tried in
many schools over the last 20-30 years, to the detriment of our
children. In the '70s, it was called "Mastery Learning" under the
supervision of Professor Benjamin Bloom and now is known as
"Outcome-Based Education" (OBE). State school superintendents have
learned to call OBE by other names because of its bad reputation
which precedes it, but the concepts are all the same.

              I ask you to please investigate Goals 2000 yourself.
I think you will come to the same conclusion. Goals 2000 must be
rejected, and the sooner the better -- for our children's sake.
_________________________

Editor's Remarks:  Want to help defeat OBE and Goals 2000 in
Washington State?  Conservative Consensus has endorsed Dr. Ron
Taber for Superintendent of Public Instruction, a statewide
office.  The endorsement appears on our Website:

              http://www.eskimo.com/~ccnrs/news.html

Dr. Taber's campaign has a multitude of anti-OBE/Goals 2000
materials, but no one to help put them up on his website.  If you
can help Dr. Taber with his Website (or with other aspects of his
campaign), please contact him at:

                       taberhq@tcm.nbs.net
                   http://tcm.nbs.net/~taberhq/
========================
SIGN UP FOR FREE RELEASES. This is a low-volume list; you will
receive 8-12 releases monthly and no mail from other subscribers.
Email ccnrs@eskimo.com with SUBSCRIBE CC as the subject.

BRAND NEW! Visit our all-text Website for back issues and frequent
updates. It's free, fast, and accessible with any browser -- plus
you are free to download or repost our material onto other
services.

             http://www.eskimo.com/~ccnrs/news.html

GET THE FULL STORY: Each month our Journal covers over 100 news
events -- with analysis and commentary -- that have been spiked,
suppressed, or ignored by the government-sourced mainline media!
Email ccnrs@eskimo.com with GET CATALOG as the subject. We cover:
                               ***
The US Constitution * US & World Security * Political Corruption
Individual Liberty * World Financial Markets * Religious Freedom
                               ***
__________________________________________________________________

Conservative Consensus * ccnrs@eskimo.com * jinks@u.washington.edu
             http://www.eskimo.com/~ccnrs/news.html
__________________________________________________________________


* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 13 Aug 1996 12:56:18 -0700 (PDT)

At 07:25 AM 8/13/96 -0600, you wrote:
>sabutigo wrote:
>> 
>> At 05:06 PM 8/12/96 -0600, you wrote:
>> >sabutigo wrote:
>> >>
>> >> If this is true, as far as I'm concerned, it's the same thing. It
looks like
>> >> I'll write in Alan Keyes or something. Buchanan is a bust!
>> >
>> >Buchanan's other choice was to spend x million dollars of someone else's
>> >money for the privilege of going down in flames.
>> 
>> That privilege sometimes is the fate of those who stand on principle instead
>> of pragmatics.
>
>I disagree on this one.  If Pat's supporters were fat cats that's be one 
>thing.  They're not, they're five and ten dollar donors and that ten 
>bucks they send him is ten bucks worth of something their family don't 
>get.  There are exceptions to that but not many.
>
>For Pat to run, given the current facts, would be nothing but egotism 
>and have ethical equavalent of welfare.  I.E., pissing away someone 
>else's money for no good use.
>
How about just not running and challenging Dole's pronouncements or even
just keeping his mouth shut? That would have been a more honorable option
than capitulating and pretending that he "got what he wanted."

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: H. CON. RES. 206 - MODIFIED
Date: 13 Aug 1996 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT)

At 09:55 AM 8/13/96 -0500, you wrote:
>You never hear anyone expressing any "sense of congress" (oxymoron alert!)
>regarding the rights of unborn humans. Maybe this FarLeft militia nonsnese
>should be reworded (see below).
>
>Bob Knauer
>
>+++++
>
>*MODIFIED*
>
>HCON 206 IH
>104th CONGRESS
>2d Session
>H. CON. RES. 206
>Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the threat to the security
>of American unborn citizens and the United States Government posed by armed
>medical staff and other paramedical groups and organizations.
>
>                       IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
>                               August 1, 1996
>
>                           CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
>Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the threat to the security
>of American unborn citizens of the United States Government posed by armed
>medical abortionists and other paramedical groups and organizations.
>
>Whereas the Government of the United States and its agencies are democratic
>institutions, created by and for the people of the United States;
>
>Whereas the various agencies of the United States Government derive their
>purpose and their character from the expressed will of the American people,
>and may be altered from time to time by peaceful means;
>
>Whereas countless millions of unborn American citi\zens of the United States
>were killed in numerous abortion clinics throughout the US;
>
>Whereas various spokespersons for self-described medical abortionists and
>paramedical organizations and groups have repeatedly denounced the
>legitimacy of the rights of the unborn; and
>
>Whereas the actions of some medical abortionists and paramedical groups and
>organizations specifically promoting violence constitute a grave danger to
>American citizens and the institutions of American democracy, and threaten
>the very foundation of freedom and democracy in America:
>
>Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
>concurring),
>
>That it is the Sense of Congress that--
>
>(1) abortion of unborn Americans of the United States should be aggressively
>identified, dissolved, and their perpetrators brought to justice by the
>federal authorities of law enforcement with the greatest dispatch possible;
>
>(2) the illegal possession of abortion equipment, substances or devices of
>fetal destruction by any individual or group should be prosecuted to the
>full extent of all applicable laws by the Department of Justice; and
>
>(3) those legally possessing abortion equipment, substances or devices of
>fetal destruction, and involved in any conspiracy to harm or destroy any
>unborn citizen of the  United States, should be promptly prosecuted to the
>full extent of all applicable laws by the Department of Justice, including
>those designed to protect unborn citizens from being murdered.
>
>+++++
>
>--
>       
>**************************************************
>    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
>    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 
>
> <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
>**************************************************
>
Go with the blessings of St. Paul Hill.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 13 Aug 1996 15:08:15 -0600

sabutigo wrote:
> 
> How about just not running and challenging Dole's pronouncements or even
> just keeping his mouth shut? That would have been a more honorable option
> than capitulating and pretending that he "got what he wanted."
> 
> S.

Agreed.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: berg stephen erik <z931086@corn.cso.niu.edu>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 18:42:38 -0500 (CDT)

It does exist.  I know several of the people working on this project.  It 
most likely uses remote sensing techniques, since that is the expertise 
of these folks.

Steve


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 18:41:33 -0700

At 11:43 PM 8/12/96 PST, Bill Vance wrote:
>On Aug 12, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
>
>>
>>Besides, if a gun will block these "rays" then so will a bunch of metal
>>plates -- probably doesn't have to be too think...  Just random metal
>>plates all over your body.  Or better yet, metal cut outs shaped like a gun
>>for those times you aren't carrying :-)
>
>I understand a rather nasty trick was once played on someone by making a
>lead foil profile cut-out of a 1911-a1 .45, and slipping it into a magazine
>someone was carrying onto a plane.....:-)

Should x-ray sweeps actually ever appear, it will become the civic duty of
EVERYONE to wear such a lead-foil silhouette sewn into our clothing, just as
the Danes all wore Stars of David during WWII. 
Ken Mitchell        |The constitutions of most of our States assert,
8037 Stone Canyon   |that all power is inherent in the people;that 
Citrus Heights, CA  |they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases 
95610               |to which they think themselves competent, .....
kmitchel@gvn.net    |or they may act by representatives, freely and 
916-449-9152 (vm)   |equally chosen; that it is their right and duty
916-729-0966 (fax)  |to be at all times armed; that they are entitled
                    |to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom 
                    |of property, and freedom of the press."
                    | "The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson, 
                    |pp.46 - 47, Presented by John Dewey",
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ed Lawson" <edlawson@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Republican Convention Coverage
Date: 13 Aug 1996 21:46:18 -0500

For those of you watching and interested in the convention, you
should be watching it on the Family Channel (GOP-TV) or C-Span. 
The major networks are doing their liberal 'fill' on things they
don't want you to see.  All three (A,N,C) did commentary during
J.C. Watts address. (the Rep. from Oklahoma .... also a Black
Republican).  They don't want 'their Amerikan Public' to see a
successful, articulate and dedicated Republican Black.

This is the second night they have been doing this.

EL



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 13 Aug 1996 23:50:44 -0500

At 06:41 PM 8/12/96 -0700, you wrote:
>BULLSHIT ALERT! =20
>
>At 05:53 PM 8/12/96 -0500, pwatson@utdallas.edu forwarded:
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 18:06:09 -0400 (EDT)
>>From: John K. Whitley <jwhitley@inforamp.net>
>>Subject: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner"
>>
>>Members of this mailing list may remember the item some=20
>>time ago describing Passive Millimetre Radar, which has
>>the capacity to locate people through walls and find
>>hidden weapons, etc.,
>
>(deletia)
>
>>=A0 The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol=
 car
>>and pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send out=
 X-rays;
>>instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by human flesh.
>>=A0 Anything that stands in the way of those waves -- like a gun -- or
>>anything that emits weaker waves -- like a bag of cocaine or a plastic
>>explosive -- will show up on a little screen in the patrol car.
>>=A0 Clothes emit no waves. Neither do walls, allowing the device to be=
 used
>>from even outside a room.
>
>Not a chance.  This is pulp comic-book fiction, without basis in physics.
>I'd be more likely to believe that the device detects the psychic
>emmanations of evil from guns and drugs.=20

A poor explanation to be sure. However MMW radiometers do exist. And they
work because of apparent temperature differences caused by different
emissivities, just like infra-red imagers, but at a lower frequency range.
The trade off is that you need a bigger aperature (antenna) to get the same
angular resolution. Or you can live with the lower resolution, or something
in between,  In practice this limits the useful range. For a picture of such
a unit, and of its imaging capabilities see.=20

Gun News DIgest/ Summer 1996 page 30.=20

The picture on that page shows a MMW imager made by Millitech Corp.=20

The aperature appears to be about 8-10 inches in diameters. The device shown
is handheld with the image being shown on the back side of the device. In
the demonstration shown a concealed pistol can easily be seen, even though
the image is clearly fairly low resolution.

Over 15 years ago, another part of my small group at my company was working
on  a device using similar technology. The point there was to see through
obscurants, such as fog, which give IR imagers fits, since they absorb the
IR radiation, while they do not absord MMW, at least the band that was being
used in that case.=20


I wouldn't expect such a device to be very good at spotting firearms through
house walls from the street or through the roof from overhead. Too low a
resolution, and likely not enough sensitivity also. The walls of the average
home can't be all that good at transmitting MMW frequencies.=20

The article that this picture is a part of also describes another passive
electromagnetic device for detecting concealed arms, likely any metallic
object of suficient mass, without the need for the "portal" type sensor used
at airports, courthouses, schools, etc.




>

>
>Amazing how pervasive scientific ignorance can be.=20


Amazing too, how a poor explanation of a perfectly valid technology can set
off peoples BS alert. My would have been set off by that explanation also,
had I not seen the referanced article, plus a similar one in another
publication, Aviation Week, I think, but I can't be certain.


              The Second Amendment is the RESET button=20
                   of the United States Constitution. =20
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>)=20


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: HR 3313 RE: New age think globally, act locally, touchy-feely stuff (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 07:33:57 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Cc: robert-springfield-missouri <rlbusaall@aol.com>

FILE h3313.ih
          HR 3313 IH
          104th CONGRESS
          2d Session
          To amend the Goals 2000: Educate America Act to allow local
          educational agencies to participate in certain programs if the
          State in which the agency is located does not participate.
                             IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                                     April 24, 1996
          Mr. MORAN (for himself, Mr. PAYNE of Virginia, Mr. SCOTT, Mr.
              BOUCHER, Mr. PICKETT, Mr. WILLIAMS, Mr. MARTINEZ, Ms. PELOSI,
              Mr. BROWDER, Ms. WOOLSEY, and Mr. MILLER of California)
              introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
              Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities.
                                         A BILL
          To amend the Goals 2000: Educate America Act to allow local
          educational agencies to participate in certain programs if the
          State in which the agency is located does not participate.
           [Italic->]   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
          Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
          assembled, [<-Italic]
          SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
            This Act may be cited as the `Goals 2000 Local Autonomy Act'.
          SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
            Congress finds the following:
                (1) In 1989, President Bush and the Nation's Governors
              endorsed the need for National Education Goals defining what
              students need to know in each subject area, standards for
              performance improvement in those subject areas, and assessments
              to measure student performance.
                (2) The idea for Goals 2000 was initiated by a Republican
              President, passed by Congress with bipartisan support, and

              signed by a Democratic President.
                (3) There is a substantial movement to preserve the autonomy
              of each local educational agency's right to decide the
              curriculum for their own school systems.
                (4) Some local educational agencies who would like to
              participate in the Goals 2000 program have been prevented from
              doing so by their State government's decision not to
              participate in this program.
          SEC. 3. LOCAL BYPASS.
            Section 304 of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act is amended by
          adding at the end the following new subsection:
            `(e) LOCAL BYPASS-
                `(1) LOCAL GRANTS AUTHORIZED- Notwithstanding any other
              provision of law, if a State does not participate in the
              program authorized under this title, the Secretary is
              authorized to use the allotment such State would have received
              under this section to award grants, through a competitive
              process, to local educational agencies in such State that have
              applications approved under paragraph (2).
                `(2) APPLICATION REQUIRED- Each local educational agency
              described in paragraph (1) desiring a grant under such
              paragraph shall submit an application to the Secretary at such
              time, in such manner and accompanied by such information, as
              the Secretary may require. Each such application shall contain
              assurances that the local educational agency will develop a
              local improvement plan that meets such requirements applicable
              to a State educational agency under section 306, and will meet
              such other requirements applicable to a State educational
              agency under this title, as the Secretary determines are
              appropriately applied to a local educational agency under this
              subsection.'.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: HR 3194 RE: forfeiture laws are a burden to our citizens (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 07:34:51 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Cc: robert-springfield-missouri <rlbusaall@aol.com>

FILE h3194.ih
          HR 3194 IH
          104th CONGRESS
          2d Session
          To provide that the property of innocent owners is not subject to
          forfeiture under the laws of the United States.
                             IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                                     March 28, 1996
          Mr. PICKETT introduced the following bill; which was referred to
              the Committee on the Judiciary
                                         A BILL
          To provide that the property of innocent owners is not subject to
          forfeiture under the laws of the United States.
           [Italic->]   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
          Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
          assembled, [<-Italic]
          SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
            This Act may be cited as the `Innocent Owners' Forfeiture
          Protection Act of 1996'.
          SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY INTERESTS OF INNOCENT OWNERS IN
                            FORFEITURE PROCEEDINGS.
            Unless the law specifically so provides, and by reference to this
          section overrides the rule of this section, no law of the United
          States shall be interpreted to permit or require the forfeiture of
          the property interest of an innocent owner by reason of the
          criminal conduct of another.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: HR 3652 RE: foreign gun quality-- no, way to stop imports (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 07:38:59 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Cc: robert-springfield-missouri <rlbusaall@aol.com>

FILE h3652.ih
          HR 3652 IH
          104th CONGRESS
          2d Session
          To apply equal standards to certain foreign made and domestically
          produced handguns.
                             IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                                      June 13, 1996
          Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. ROUKEMA, Mr. BERMAN, Mr.
              ENGEL, Mr. NADLER, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. YATES, Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode
              Island, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. HORN, Ms. NORTON, Mr.
              CLAY, Mr. OWENS, Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. MANTON, and Mr. TORRICELLI)
              introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
              Committee on the Judicary
                                         A BILL
          To apply equal standards to certain foreign made and domestically
          produced handguns.
           [Italic->]   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
          Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
          assembled, [<-Italic]
          SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
            This Act may be cited as the `Junk Gun Violence Protection Act'.
          SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
            The Congress finds that--
                (1) the prohibition on the importation of handguns that are
              not generally recognized as particularly suitable for or
              readily adaptable to sporting purposes, often described as junk
              guns or Saturday night specials, has led to the creation of a
              high-volume market for these weapons that are domestically
              manufactured;
                (2) traffic in junk guns constitutes a serious threat to
              public welfare and to law enforcement officers, and the use of
              such firearms is increasing;
                (3) junk guns are used disproportionately in the commission
              of crimes;
                (4) of the firearms traced in 1995, the 3 firearms most
              commonly traced to crimes were junk guns; and
                (5) the domestic manufacture, transfer, and possession of
              junk guns should be restricted.
          SEC. 3. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF
                            CERTAIN HANDGUNS.
            (a) RESTRICTION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is
          amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
            `(y)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture,
          transfer, or possess a junk gun that has been shipped or
          transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
            `(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
                `(A) the possession or transfer of any junk gun otherwise
              lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the
              enactment of the Junk Gun Violence Protection Act;
                `(B) any firearm or replica of a firearm that has been
              rendered permanently inoperative;
                `(C) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the
              United States or a State or a department or agency of the
              United States, or a State or a department, agency, or political
              subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law
              enforcement officer employed by such an entity for law
              enforcement purposes (whether on or off duty); or
                `(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a junk gun
              by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the
              purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the
              Secretary.'.
            (b) DEFINITION OF JUNK GUN- Section 921(a) of title 18, United
          States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
          paragraph:
            `(33) The term `junk gun' means any firearm that is not described
          in section 925(d)(3) or any regulation issued under such section.'.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: HR 3781 RE: gov't watching net for hate speech & haters (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 07:40:19 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Cc: robert-springfield-missouri <rlbusaall@aol.com>

FILE h3781.ih     (My note: this gov't has gone too far, just simply too
far).
          HR 3781 IH
          104th CONGRESS
          2d Session
          To require the National Telecommunications and Information
          Administration to update its report on hate speech, especially as
          it relates to hate speech on the Internet, and for other purposes.
                             IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                                      July 10, 1996
          Mr. ZIMMER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
              Committee on Commerce
                                         A BILL
          To require the National Telecommunications and Information
          Administration to update its report on hate speech, especially as
          it relates to hate speech on the Internet, and for other purposes.
           [Italic->]   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
          Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
          assembled, [<-Italic]
          SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
            The Congress finds the following:
                (1) The World Wide Web, a relatively new Internet technology,
              is attracting a rapidly growing audience. The global nature of
              the Internet permits the Web to reach a worldwide audience. Web
              publishing is fairly inexpensive and simple. Its broad reach,
              low costs and relatively easy-to-master technology have made
              the World Wide Web an ideal propaganda vehicle for hate and
              extremist groups.
                (2) As computers become less expensive, simpler to use, and
              consequently more common in American homes, as the barriers to
              disseminating information through computers falls, bigots of
              all kinds are rushing to use the power of modern technology to
              spread their propaganda.
                (3) Traditional hate groups have established propaganda sites
              on the World Wide Web.
                (4) Holocaust deniers are also using the Web.
                (5) A new type of hater, young and computer literate, has
              become prominent on the Web. The ease of access creates
              opportunities for young, previously unknown haters and hate
              groups, to promote themselves and become active anti-Semitic
              and racist propagandists. These individuals and groups have,
              from time to time, used the facilities of both public and
              private universities.
          SEC. 2. REPORT UPDATE REQUIRED.
            Section 155 of the National Telecommunications and Information
          Administration Organization Act is amended by adding at the end the
          following new subsection:
            `(c) FOLLOW-UP REPORT REQUIRED-
                `(1) CONTENTS OF REPORT- Within 240 days after the date of
              enactment of this subsection, the NTIA, with the assistance of
              the Commission, the Department of Justice, and the United
              States Commission on Civil Rights, shall prepare a report--
                    `(A) analyzing the use of the Internet and other
                  interactive communications media for the dissemination of
                  propaganda advocating hatred on the basis of race, color,
                  religion, national origin, or sex;
                    `(B) evaluating the extent to which such propaganda is
                  accessible to minors, and the extent to which software or
                  other measures are available to protect minors from such
                  propaganda; and
                    `(C) including any recommendations that such agencies
                  deem appropriate.
                `(2) SUBMISSION OF REPORT- The report required by paragraph
              (1) shall be submitted to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
              of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
              Science, and Transportation of the Senate.'.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: HR 3409 RE: wire-tap & military authority -- what next? (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 07:52:53 -0500 (CDT)

Read the part on Domestic terrorism as influence the policy of Government 
and they can ask for Military assistance if they declare an emergency 
with biological weapons.



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Cc: robert-springfield-missouri <rlbusaall@aol.com>

FILE h3409.ih
          HR 3409 IH
          104th CONGRESS
          2d Session
          To combat domestic terrorism.
                             IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                                       May 7, 1996
          Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. CONYERS) introduced the following
              bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
                                         A BILL
          To combat domestic terrorism.
           [Italic->]   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
          Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
          assembled, [<-Italic]
          SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
            This Act may be cited as the `Effective Antiterrorism Tools for
          Law Enforcement Act of 1996'.
          SEC. 2. PEN REGISTERS AND TRAP AND TRACE DEVICES IN FOREIGN
                            COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND COUNTERTERRORISM
                            INVESTIGATIONS.
            (a) IN GENERAL- Chapter 206, title 18, United States Code, is
          amended--
                (1) by redesignating section 3127 as section 3128; and
                (2) by inserting after section 3126 the following:
          `Sec. 3127. Pen register or a trap and trace device in foreign
          counterintelligence and counter- terrorism investigations
            `(a) Notwithstanding any other law, this chapter shall be
          applicable to foreign counterintelligence and international
          terrorism investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of
          Investigation.
            `(b) An application under this section for an order or an
          extension of an order under section 3123 of this title shall
          include--
                `(1) the identity of the attorney for the Government and the
              fact that the investigation is being conducted by the Federal
              Bureau of Investigation; and
                `(2) a certification by the applicant that the information
              likely to be obtained is relevant to an ongoing foreign
              counterintelligence or international terrorism investigation
              being conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

            `(c) All applications and orders under this section shall be
          maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.'.
            (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections at the beginning of
          chapter 206 is amended--
                (1) in the item relating to section 3127 by striking `3127'
              and inserting `3128'; and
                (2) by adding after the item relating to section 3126 the
              following:
          `3127. Pen register or a trap and trace device in foreign
              counterintelligence and counterterrorism investigations.'.
          SEC. 3. ACCESS TO RECORDS OF COMMON CARRIERS, PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION
                            FACILITIES, PHYSICAL STORAGE FACILITIES AND
                            VEHICLE RENTAL FACILITIES IN FOREIGN
                            COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND COUNTERTERRORISM CASES.
            Title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after
          chapter 121 the following:
                         `CHAPTER 122--ACCESS TO CERTAIN RECORDS
          `Sec. 2720. Access to records of common carriers, public
          accommodation facilities, physical storage facilities and vehicle
          rental facilities in counterintelligence and counterterrorism cases
            `(a) Any common carrier, public accommodation facility, physical
          storage facility or vehicle rental facility shall comply with a
          request for records in its possession made pursuant to this section
          by the Federal Bureau of Investigation when the Director or
          designee (whose rank shall be no lower than Assistant Special Agent
          in Charge) certifies in writing to the common carrier, public

          accommodation facility, physical storage facility or vehicle rental
          facility that such records are sought for foreign
          counterintelligence purposes and that there are specific and
          articulable facts giving reason to believe that the person to whom
          the records sought pertain, is a foreign power or an agent of a
          foreign power as defined in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence
          Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. 1801).
            `(b) No common carrier, public accommodation facility, physical
          storage facility or vehicle rental facility or any officer,
          employee or agent of such common carrier, public accommodation
          facility, physical storage facility or vehicle rental facility
          shall disclose to any person, other than those officers, agents or
          employees of the common carrier, public accommodation facility,
          physical storage facility or vehicle rental facility necessary to
          fulfill the requirement to disclose the information to the Federal
          Bureau of Investigation under this section, that the Federal Bureau
          of Investigation has sought or obtained the records requested.
            `(c) As used in this chapter--
                `(1) the term `common carrier' means a locomotive, a rail
              carrier, a bus carrying passengers, a water common carrier, an
              air common carrier, or a private commercial interstate carrier
              for the delivery of packages and other objects;
                `(2) the term `public accommodation facility' means any inn,
              hotel, motel or other establishment which provides lodging to
              transient guests;
                `(3) the term `physical storage facility' means any business
              or  entity which provides space for the storage of goods or
              materials, or services related to the storage of goods or
              materials to the public or any segment thereof; and
                `(4) the term `vehicle rental facility' means any person or


              entity which provides vehicles for rent, lease, loan or other
              similar use, to the public or any segment thereof.'.
          SEC. 4. INTEGRITY OF WIRE INTERCEPTION PROCESS.
            Section 2515 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
          adding at the end the following: `This section shall not apply to
          the disclosure by the United States in a criminal trial or hearing
          or before a grand jury of the contents of a wire or oral
          communication, or evidence derived therefrom, unless the violation
          of this chapter was
          with respect to an interception under section 2518(7) or involved
          bad faith by law enforcement.'.
          SEC. 5. AUTHORITY FOR WIRETAPS.
            Section 2516(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
                (1) by inserting `section 842 (relating to explosives
              violations)' after `section 224 (bribery in sporting
contests)';
                (2) by striking `and' at the end of paragraph (n);
                (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (o) and
              inserting `; and'; and
                (4) by adding at the end the following:
                `(p) any other felony under the laws of the United States if
              the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or the
              Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division (or an
              official acting in any such capacity) certifies to the court
              under seal that there is reason to believe the felony involves
              or may involve domestic terrorism or international terrorism
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
		  (as those terms are defined in 18 U.S.C. 2331).'.
          SEC. 6. TEMPORARY EMERGENCY WIRETAP AUTHORITY INVOLVING TERRORISTIC
                            CRIMES.
            (a) EMERGENCY AUTHORITY- Section 2518(7)(a)(iii) of title 18,
          United States Code, is amended by inserting `or domestic terrorism
          or international terrorism (as those terms are defined in section
          2331 of this title)' after `organized crime'.
            (b) DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM- Section 2331 of title 18,
          United States Code, is amended by inserting the following after
          paragraph (4):
                `(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means any activities that
              involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a
              violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any
              State and which appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a
              civilian population or to influence the policy of a government
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
		by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a
              government by assassination or kidnapping.'
          SEC. 7. EXPANDED AUTHORITY FOR MULTI-POINT WIRETAPS.
            Section 2518(11) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to
          read as follows:
            `(11) The requirements of subsections (1)(b)(ii) and (3)(d) of
          this section relating to the specification of facilities from which
          or the place where the communication is to be intercepted do not
          apply if in the case of an application with respect to the
          interception of wire, oral or electronic communications--
                `(a) the application is by a Federal investigative or law
              enforcement officer, and is approved by the Attorney General,
              the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or
              an Assistant Attorney General (or an official acting in any
              such capacity);
                `(b) the application contains a full and complete statement
              as to why such specification is not practical and identifies
              the person committing the offense and whose communications are
              to be intercepted; and
                `(c) the judge finds that such specification is not
              practical.'.
          SEC. 8. PERMISSION TO REQUEST MILITARY ASSISTANCE AND NEW OFFENSE
                            WITH RESPECT TO OFFENSES INVOLVING CHEMICAL AND
                            BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS.
            (a) BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS- Section 175 of title 18, United States
          Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
            `(c)(1) MILITARY ASSISTANCE- Notwithstanding any other provision
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
          of law, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of
          Defense provide technical assistance in support of Department of
          Justice activities relating to the enforcement of this section in
          situations involving biological weapon emergencies. Department of
          Defense resources, including civilian personnel and members of the
          uniformed services, may be used to provide such technical
          assistance if--
                `(A) the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General
              determine that an emergency situation involving biological
              weapons of mass destruction exists; and
                `(B) the Secretary of Defense determines that the provision
              of such assistance will not adversely affect the military
              preparedness of the United States.
            `(2) As used in this subsection, `emergency situation' means a
          circumstance--
                `(A) that poses a serious threat to the interests of the
              United States; and
                `(B) in which--
                    `(i) enforcement of the law would be seriously impaired
                  if the assistance were not provided;
                    `(ii) military technical assistance and expertise is
                  needed to counter the threat posed by the biological agent
                  involved; and
                    `(iii) civilian law enforcement expertise is not
                  available to provide the required technical assistance.
            `(3) As used in this subsection, `technical assistance' means the
          provision of equipment and technical expertise to law enforcement
          officials in the investigation of violations of this section, such
          as technical assistance in conducting searches that seek evidence
          or instrumentalities of violations of this section, technical
          assistance in taking and collecting evidence related to violations
          of this section, and technical assistance in disarming and
          disabling individuals in possession of contraband under this
          section. It does not include authority to apprehend or arrest.
            `(4) The Secretary of Defense may require reimbursement as a
          condition of assistance under this section.
            `(5) The Attorney General may delegate the Attorney General's
          function under this subsection only to a Deputy, Associate, or
          Assistant Attorney General.'.
            (b) USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS- Title 18, United States Code, is
          amended by inserting after section 2332d the following:
          `Sec. 2332e. Use of chemical weapons
            `(a) OFFENSE- A person who without lawful authority uses, or
          attempts or conspires to use, a chemical weapon--
                `(1) against a national of the United States while such
              national is outside of the United States;
                `(2) against any person within the United States; or
                `(3) against any property that is owned, leased or used by
              the United States or by any department or agency of the United
              States, whether the property is within or outside of the United
              States,
          shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, and if death
          results, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of
          years or for life.
            `(b) DEFINITION- For purposes of this section--
                `(1) the term `national of the United States' has the meaning
              given in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality
              Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)); and
                `(2) the term `chemical weapon' means any weapon that is
              designed to cause death or serious bodily injury through the
              release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous
              chemicals or their precursors.
            `(c)(1) MILITARY ASSISTANCE- Notwithstanding any other provision
          of law, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of
          Defense provide technical assistance in support of Department of
          Justice activities relating to the enforcement of this section in
          situations involving chemical weapon emergencies. Department of
          Defense resources, including civilian personnel and members of the
          uniformed services, may be used to provide such technical
          assistance if--
                `(A) the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General
              determine that an emergency situation involving chemical
              weapons of mass destruction exists; and
                `(B) the Secretary of Defense determines that the provision
              of such assistance will not adversely affect the military
              preparedness of the United States.
            `(2) As used in this section, `emergency situation' means a
          circumstance--
                `(A) that poses a serious threat to the interests of the
              United States; and
                `(B) in which--
                    `(i) enforcement of the law would be seriously impaired
                  if the assistance were not provided;
                    `(ii) military technical assistance and expertise is
                  needed to counter the threat posed by the chemical agent
                  involved; and
                    `(iii) civilian law enforcement expertise is not
                  available to provide the required technical assistance.
            `(3) As used in this section, `technical assistance' means the
          provision of equipment and technical expertise to law enforcement
          officials in the investigation of violations of this section, such
          as technical assistance in conducting searches that seek evidence
          or instrumentalities of violations of this section, technical
          assistance in taking and collecting evidence related to violations
          of this section, and technical assistance in disarming and
          disabling individuals in possession of contraband under this
          section. It does not include authority to apprehend or arrest.
            `(4) The Secretary of Defense may require reimbursement as a
          condition of assistance under this section.
            `(5) The Attorney General may delegate the Attorney General's
          function under this subsection only to a Deputy, Associate, or
          Assistant Attorney General.'.
            (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of chapters at the beginning of
          chapter 113B of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding
          after the item relating to section 2332d the following:
          `Sec. 2332e. Use of chemical weapons.'.
            (d) CLARIFICATION OF LAWFUL AUTHORITY DEFENSE- Section 2332a(a)
          of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking `A person
          who' and inserting `Whoever, without lawful authority,'.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 07:57:07 -0700

        Steve,

        >>>>>>>
        It does exist.  I know several of the people working on this
project.  It
most likely uses remote sensing techniques, since that is the expertise
of these folks.
        <<<<<<<


        Well, it is most likely based on IR (infrared) technology.
        As with any passive technology, it can be defeated, or confused.
        Simply wearing a garment that has metalic constituent would confuse
the sensor.
        Worse yet, would be an active transmitter that is worn by the
'subject' of interest, that emits such a powerful burst of energy at the
sensor's spectrum of detection, that is virtually shuts it down.
        Sort of like jamming a radio/radar receiver.
        If the detector used by the system, is extremely sensitive, then
jamming it might permanently damage it. Even if the detector is not pointed
in the jammer's direction.
        I can think of quite a few pieces of equipment, that when modified,
could render even an input protected sensor usless.
        If enough people start wearing jammers, or clothing that confuses,
then the use of the sensor technology will be abandoned.
        Given the extremes of the garment fashion industry, I do believe
that they could be employed to design fashionable 'cloaks' that render the
use of the sensors null.

Ed




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: thomas@solbrn.dseg.ti.com (Kenneth T Emanuelson ii)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 10:08:24 CDT


> It does exist.  I know several of the people working on this project.  It 
> most likely uses remote sensing techniques, since that is the expertise 
> of these folks.
> 
> Steve

	I'm not an electrical engineer, but I don't buy it.  An
	apparatus like this operating on millimeter-scale wavelength
	would take a huge amount of power to have any appreciable range
	(more than a few feet) and still penetrate even a thin layer of
	clothing.  I can't imagine the FCC and the FAA letting the cops
	wave around a bunch of high-powered emitters in an airport,
	(even though millimeter-wave signals are a ways from
	air-traffic radar on the EM spectrum, a little noise and a lot
	of power equals a problem,) not to mention possible negative side
	effects of aiming such a device at a pacemaker.

	In short, I think the "Passive Millimeter Radar" story is pretty 
	unlikely, (not that someone's not trying to build one, just 
	doubtful it'll work.)  I'm more than willing to listen to any 
	electrical engineers or physicists on the subject to point out
	any errors in my thinking.

-Thomas

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 08:42:57 -0700 (PDT)

Would this be the type of "remote sensing" one can do with magnetic reeds 
bought at radio shack, or is this the "remote sensing" one might here 
about on the Art Bell show, done by the "pscyhically abled"? Boyd

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Kenneth T Emanuelson ii wrote:

> 
> > It does exist.  I know several of the people working on this project.  It 
> > most likely uses remote sensing techniques, since that is the expertise 
> > of these folks.
> > 
> > Steve
> 
> 	I'm not an electrical engineer, but I don't buy it.  An
> 	apparatus like this operating on millimeter-scale wavelength
> 	would take a huge amount of power to have any appreciable range
> 	(more than a few feet) and still penetrate even a thin layer of
> 	clothing.  I can't imagine the FCC and the FAA letting the cops
> 	wave around a bunch of high-powered emitters in an airport,
> 	(even though millimeter-wave signals are a ways from
> 	air-traffic radar on the EM spectrum, a little noise and a lot
> 	of power equals a problem,) not to mention possible negative side
> 	effects of aiming such a device at a pacemaker.
> 
> 	In short, I think the "Passive Millimeter Radar" story is pretty 
> 	unlikely, (not that someone's not trying to build one, just 
> 	doubtful it'll work.)  I'm more than willing to listen to any 
> 	electrical engineers or physicists on the subject to point out
> 	any errors in my thinking.
> 
> -Thomas
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 09:09:04 -0700 (PDT)

Joe, thanks for the explanation. Now, can you tell a non phsisicist how 
inanimate things (walls, guns) -transmit- millimeter radiation?  Also, 
someone please check me on what that even is, I assume radiation with 
millimeter length waves would be at the high end of the radio spectrum.
Thanks in advance for the physics lesson.
Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Terrorism ! (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 12:53:37 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

                        AMERICANISM vs. TERRORISM
                        by Gene "Chip" Tatum

        (Note: It will become obvious that Mr. Tatum is not a National
Socialist, as witness his fatuous comments about the Justice Department
being "full of good Americans" whose hands are tied by the evil Clintons and
Janet Reno. Nonetheless, I believe this article makes several essential
points about the current American situation. - W.S.)

        At the prompting of the United States, western ministers adopted a
25-point cooperative plan last Tuesday in an attempt to track, stop, and
convict terrorists. The G-7 plus one (Russia) agreed to share information
and resources to increase surveillance of bank accounts, front organizations
and the
Internet. Measures adopted during the one-day meeting included easing
extradition, stiffening penalties for possession of forged travel documents,
and restricting access to firearms and explosives.

        World leaders, angered by the recent explosion in Atlanta during the
1996 Olympic Games, called for a united action against terrorism.  "This
repugnant violation of the spirit of the Olympic Games must be denounced
around the world", United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali said.

        Israel sent its condolences to Americans, still remembering their
loss to Palestinian terrorists during the 1972 Munich Olympics.

        Palestine offered condolences to the families of the victims and to
the American government.

        Condolences to the American government?  Wait a minute. No U.S.
officials were hurt from the blast. Or were there perhaps one or two
government officials that could suffer at the arm of terrorism.  During an
election year, an increase in terrorist activities can only hurt a sitting
policy makers' chances for re-election. But doesn't it strike a heavy note
of discord to have the gold medal winner of terrorism, Palestine, coddle up
to the President, offering him their condolences? [NB: Again, bear in mind
that the writer is a conservative who apparently buys the official Zionist
line about the Palestinians fighting to regain their land from the Jews who
stole it being "terrorists". - W.S.] 

        But, perhaps condolences are in order.  After all, terrorism is an
act of retribution.  Certainly the terrorists target was not a forty-four
year old [negress] from Albany, Georgia. Nor, I would venture to say, was it
any of the 110 wounded concert goers. Some journalists have hinted that the
target was the American spirit. But I'm going to take a large step forward
and tell you what the target of the
Atlanta Olympic bombing was...the American government.

        And how about the recent downing of TWA Flight 800?  Target? Not
the aircraft, airline, or the passengers...but the American government.

        I recently read an article written by Tim Collie of the Tampa
Tribune entitled "Way of Life Faces Threat".  He begins like this:

        "In Israel, a stray handbag in a park or marketplace
         will send police and civilians scrambling...In Paris, 
         soldiers with automatic weapons are a common sight in
         airports, post offices, and tourist sites."

        Then he asks a panel of "experts" on international terrorism, "Is
that what life in America is coming to?" The answer from the pros - NOT
YET!  Terrorism experts caution against over reaction, pointing out that
terrorist incidents have actually decreased steadily since the 1980s.  But,
let's look a little closer at that statistic.

        On cross-examination, the experts admit that the decrease is
actually a global statistic.  In fact, since 1993, the incidence of
terrorist threats and actual events in the United States has sharply risen.
To what do we, the American people who actually suffer the consequences, owe
this horrific statistic? I can tell you with one word - retribution.  But
to be a target of terrorism as retribution we, the American people, had to
have done something to deserve this. (In other words, it is an act of
redistributing something that was distributed. Webster calls it
"retribution". So, for example, if I did something to you and you did it
back to me, I "distributed" it to you and you "redistributed" back to me.
Thus "distribute" and "retribute".)

        What has America done to deserve these hideous actions?

        In 1986, I was recruited from military Special Operations into a
Black Operations unit code-named Pegasus, which was directed by Vice
President George Bush. As a pilot it was my duty to deliver into and then
extract from the target countries a team of "Archers". It was the mission
of Pegasus to "neutralize" specific targets. The neutralization of these
targets was to be performed by any of the following methods:

        A.      Intimidation - Indirect use of coercion and termination.
        B.      Coercion - Blackmail, kidnapping, freeze accounts, etc.
        C.      Termination - A nice way to say assassinate.

        This neutralization was targeted toward foreign heads of state,
world financiers, drug kingpins, military leaders, and United States
citizens. And the justification Vice President Bush used for our missions
was aimed at our patriotism, "in the name of democracy".

        "In the name of democracy" I participated in intimidating Daniel
Ortega, the President of Nicaragua, to step down from power and allow free
elections in Nicaragua.

        "In the name of democracy" I blackmailed a top political official of
the newly elected Nicaraguan government to follow all U.S. policy.

        "In the name of democracy" I assassinated three foreign politicians,
two military leaders, six foreign civilians, and three spies.

        "In the name of democracy" I was ordered to neutralize Ross Perot.
I refused in the name of Tatum.

        Contrary to what our government would have us believe, we have, in
the minds of terrorists, earned whatever they are able to muster.

        There is a constant pressure in global affairs from the American
government for foreign governments and peoples to follow the dictates of
America.  A good example is our intrusion into the daily workings of
sovereign countries. Colombia, for example, has been decertified by the
United States due to President Clinton's perception that President Ernst
Samper of Colombia is a "bad person". 

        Bad person? Here is a man that has more U.S. DEA agents working in
his country than there are combined in the rest of the world.  Is he
cooperating with Clinton?  Sure.  So, what's the beef?  Let the man run his
country.  "We the people," in the name of William Jefferson Clinton, have
chosen to deny the people of Colombia access to
loans from the World Bank, thus denying badly needed humanitarian medical
aid to this South American country. Can this cause trouble for "we the
people?" Possibly to the tune of retribution? Of course.

        The great sense of Americanism which we portray is commendable. But
we have no right to push our ideals or laws on foreign countries. The
harder we push, the more freedom we will loose. Every week President
Clinton announces a new plan by the Justice Department to make America "more
livable." But instead of a more comfortable way of life, we seem to be
losing all that our forefathers intended for us.

        Historically, big government doesn't work. So the solution is to
cut back on U.S. intimidation both in the United States and outside the
United States. Give the states more authority.  Deal less in foreign
affairs, especially dictating how a sovereign country should run its
affairs. How would we take an aggressive attack on the United States by
India because we eat beef?! Think about that. All countries do not and
SHOULD not have the same laws and beliefs as Americans.

        To continue to pressure those countries to conform is terrorism.
That is a fact. The U.S. government has adopted a high-tech form of
terrorism. Countries around the world continue to ask the same question,
"Why does such a big, powerful country pick on a little country like us?"
We terrorize other countries by use of intimidation, coercion, and
assassination. That is a fact. If we continue on our present course,
thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of Americans will fall to the
hands of terrorists. That is a fact.

        Instead, we talk of tightening restrictions, filling prisons with
those who speak out against American policy, and forming anti-terrorist
enforcement offices around the U.S. Big government always sees the answer
as bigger government when, in fact, the solution is quite simple.  "Let's
mind our own business, Mr. Clinton."

        It is quite interesting that the rate of terrorism has seen a
drastic rise since the Clinton/Reno armada steamed into port.
Unfortunately, this two-man wrecking crew has no morals to base their
actions on.

        Reno, for instance, "takes the responsibility" for the murder of the
Waco group (which, may I remind you, included children). What does that
mean? Will she sign a plea agreement? Or is she awaiting trial?  And what
about Ruby Ridge as the "top cop?" Negotiating her plea on that also?

        What should worry the American people is the direct line of
communications between the Department of Justice and the White House.
Americas' only hope in combating injustice is headed by an immoral, baby
killing saboteur of the American justice system. And look who she reports
to. Unfortunately for America, the spineless woman is nothing more than a
mole for the White House. The Department of Justice is filled with good,
honest Americans, but their hands are tied by the use of intimidation and
coercion by Reno and Clinton. A prime example of this is the statement made
by Mr. McCurry, White House Spokesperson, last week concerning the possible
use of a missile in the attack against TWA Flight 800. The statement was a
warning to all government employees that revealing a missile attack against
the aircraft would cost them their jobs.

        I have heard much disinformation concerning both the availability
and ability of a ground-to-air missile use on a commercial jetliner. Let me
dispel any question here and now. I have first-hand knowledge that in the
mid-1980s, one hundred SA-7 (Soviet) surface-to-air missiles were purchased
from China by Ollie North. The missiles were to be shipped to the
Nicaraguan Contras to be used against the Soviet gunships Hi-24 (Hind
helicopters). They were shipped to Guatemala and CIA personnel acknowledged
receipt, but they never arrived in the Contra camps.

        In October of 1995, the U.S. was offered 130 Stinger missiles by
Afghan rebels.  Their offer was refused (see Rodney Stitch letter dated
October 20, 1995).

        That's 230 surface-to-air missiles on the free market.  So, the
question of availability is answered.

        Now, let's talk about ability. The SA-7 is a shoulder-held rocket
with a maximum distance of ten kilometers (6.2 miles). The Stinger is also
a shoulder-held missile with the maximum distance of eight miles. A boat in
the flight path of departing aircraft would be a good platform for a SA-7 or
Stinger launch. Over 100 witnesses have told the story of the tell-tale
glow path arching toward the TWA Flight 800. So, it is probable that a
terrorist's missile was used against the aircraft. Yet the Department of
Justice and White House deny, to the point of threatening staff, the use of
a missile.

        Janet Reno took office in 1993. Terrorist retribution took a sharp
turn upward by the end of 1993. William Jefferson Clinton took the sacred
oath of office as the new President of the United States in January of 1993.
Since his oath of office, three major scandals involving fraud and murder in
the White House have surfaced, and a special investigation into Mr.
Clinton's involvement in drug trafficking is underway in Louisiana.  Surely
the President of the United States wouldn't be involved in trafficking of
cocaine.  Especially with his increasingly tough stand on drugs.

        Let's look at the proof being presented to the Special Prosecutor.
A flight plan has surfaced which reveals a secret meeting in Costa Rica
involving Governor William Clinton, Vice President George Bush, General
Manuel Noriega, and future Attorney General William Barr.  The topic of
discussion was the loss of $100 million in drugs and proceeds.  The loss
occurred somewhere between Panama and Arkansas. The original flight plan,
filed in 1985, is in the hands of government officials.  The pilot made
notes on the reverse side of the flight plan when he returned to his home
base in Honduras. That pilot was me.

        I was tasked with transporting not only top officials to clandestine
meetings, but transporting intelligence officers disguised as doctors, and
transporting explosives packed in coolers marked "medical supplies" to
Contra camps throughout Honduras and Nicaragua. We found that, disguised as
a medical, humanitarian flight, we could transport any product world-wide
unchallenged. For example, large coolers marked "medical supplies" were
transported from Honduras to various destinations in the United States. One
of these destinations was Little Rock, Arkansas. The true contents of the
coolers marked "medical supplies" was cocaine. 


        Another example of the use by our government of coolers marked
"medical supplies" involved the death of Omar Torrijos, the Panamanian Chief
of Staff. As early as 1978 it had been determined that General Torrijos was
no longer needed by U.S. intelligence agencies. The United States had
groomed a new man to stand watch over the
precious Canal zone, Manuel Noriega. In July of 1991 a cooler marked
"medical supplies" was placed on General Torrijos aircraft. (Historically
man does not question any action which carries the tag of humanitarianism.)
So, the cooler marked "medical supplies" was not checked.  The bomb, which
was the true contents of the cooler, exploded, sending the passengers of the
flight to their death.

        During this administration, the government, or more specifically,
the dynamic duo of Clinton and Reno, seem hell-bent on restricting our
privacy. Under the guise of an increase in terrorist activity, thus
requiring tighter restrictions, Clinton and Reno have pushed Congress for an
anti-terrorism bill which would lengthen the arm of the government and
tighten their grasp on America. However, earlier this year the failure to
provide such a bill by Congress prompted the Clinton administration to task
G-7 with tighter reigns on terrorism. That summit was scheduled to take
place only weeks after the terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia, a week
following the mysterious downing of TWA Flight 800, and days following the
pipe bomb explosion in the Olympic Centennial Park.

        One question which must loom in the minds of the people concerns the
thought processes of terrorists. Why would terrorists step-up their
activities world-wide in the weeks proceeding this summit? It just doesn't
make sense. And let me tell you...the terrorist community is savvy. They
are well funded, they have a cause, and they are led by some of the most
brilliant minds in the world. So now, I ask again...why the increase in
terrorism?  Has Americanism and our trek to improve the world prompted these
attacks on us? I won't answer that. I will say, however, it's a good thing
that a cooler marked "medical supplies" was not on TWA Flight 800.
Otherwise, our prime suspects would be the U.S. government, more
specifically, Clinton and Reno.

        "We the people" are the only group in the world that are being
snafu-ed by this dynamic duo of Clinton and Reno.  We'd best wake up or we
won't have any roses to smell...only gladiolas on our loved ones' grave.

D.G. "Chip" Tatum
Codename: Pegasus
e-mail:<blackops@sundial.sundial.net>
P.O. Box 895082
Leesburg, FL 34789
Phone (352) 787-9846
 




--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) Smog Check II Threatens Liberty (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 12:55:38 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Environmental socialism is out of control in the Marxist State of
Kalifornia!!!

This amounts to CORPORATE WELFARE by the left-wing environmentalists to the
automobile manufacturers, the financial institutions who provide loans to
purchase new cars, and the whole host of special interests who economically
benefit from more mass transit programs.

This is also further oppression of the lower/middle/working class by the
left-wing in this country.

========================== FORWARD ====================================

Beginning 6/1/96 the first guns of Smog Check II were fired.  Each 
smog station has been required by the Calif. Bureau of Automotive 
Repairs to purchase a "bar code reader" to read the vehicle 
information into the computer and onto MCI for immediate transmission 
to the DMV.  When your car goes in for a smog check, if its emissions 
are high it will be classified as a "gross polluter."  As soon as the 
computer indicates your vehicle hits the gross polluter standards, you 
will be required to take your vehicle to a state central testing 
station (called by the state a "test only referee").  The standards 
for gross polluting vehicles in California are lower than the passing 
standards in many other states.  If your car is adjudged to be either 
a gross polluter or a tampered vehicle, then you must not only go to 
the central testing station, but you will be required to have an 
annual smog check at the central station for the next two years.  The 
state can make this five years, if they choose.

The current repair cost limits range between $50 and $300 depending on 
the age of your vehicle.  If you are unable to bring your car into 
standards within that limit, then you will be allowed one waiver 
during the life of your vehicle (beg. 1/1/95).  One year later, if 
your car doesn't pass, you will be required to spend whatever amount 
it takes to bring your car into compliance with state rules.  You will 
be allowed 30 days in which you have your car repaired and if it fails 
the Smog Check II, it will be taken away from you and crushed under 
the "scrappage law."  The state will pay you what they feel your car 
is worth -- up to $800.  When the dynamometers are installed in your 
area (6 mo. to 2 yr.) the cost limit will automatically be raised to a 
minimum repair cost of $450 for all cars which must be spent before 
any initial waiver can be issued regardless of the age of the vehicle.  

SUMMARY OF CHANGES:

1) The cost of smog check will have to be more because of the new, 
expensive equipment.

2)  About 50% of the stations will not continue in the program because 
they can't afford the new dynamometers or the central testing facility 
will take so much business away they won't be able to survive.

3) Consumers will be waiting in long lines, like the early 80s.

4)  If your vehicle fails, you will be sent to a smog check repair 
garage to have your car fixed, then return to the central testing 
station for retest.

5)  If you car falls into the "gross polluter" category, you will be 
required to have smog checks every year.

6)  If your car cannot be repaired within the repair cost limit, you 
will only be allowed one waiver.  Beyond that you will have to spend 
whatever it takes to meet the new state standards -- or the state will 
take your car for crushing, paying you an amount they feel is fair, up 
to $800 maximum.

7) Once your car is crushed, major polluters will be able to buy a 
pollution credit which is the amount of toxic emissions your car would 
have put in the air in a 3-5 year period.  When they buy this credit, 
they will then be able to pollute that amount for the next 3-5 years 
(the EPA is allowing rich companies to buy the right to pollute the 
air.)

8) In Calif., a 1980 car is a gross polluter if the HC emissions are 
220 ppm at idle.  In Denver, a 1980 car with tailpipe emissions of 400 
ppm will pass as a clean running car.

==========================================================================

There will be a rally against this new policy at the State Capitol in
Sacramento on August 21.  The rally will get started at 6 a.m., but the
crux of activity will be 9-11 a.m.  They are urging people will older cars
to drive right on up.  

The contact is Jim Anderson at (310) 602-1018.

-- 
"Big Oh" <johannp@aimnet.com>

"Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have 
made laws.  On the contrary, it was the fact that life, 
liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to 
make laws in the first place."
      Frederic Bastiat

"Power over a man's subsistence is power over his will."
      Alexander Hamilton

"The state is the great fictitious entity by which everyone 
seeks to live at the expense of everyone else."
      Frederic Bastiat

"Once politics become a tug-of-war for shares in the income 
pie, decent government is impossible."
      Friedrich A. Hayek

--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: thomas@solbrn.dseg.ti.com (Kenneth T Emanuelson ii)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 12:56:15 CDT


> Joe, thanks for the explanation. Now, can you tell a non phsisicist how 
> inanimate things (walls, guns) -transmit- millimeter radiation?  Also, 
> someone please check me on what that even is, I assume radiation with 
> millimeter length waves would be at the high end of the radio spectrum.
> Thanks in advance for the physics lesson.
> Boyd

	Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think millimeter-scale
	radiation would be about 50-100 GHz or so.  For a point of
	reference, cell phones & pagers work in the < 5 GHz range,
	commercial radio's below that.  5-20 GHz (inch-scale
	wavelength) is popular for radars & such.  Infrared is in the
	micron range (I don't have a calculator handy for figuring up
	the frequency, but it's pretty high.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-12 President at Yellowstone Protection Agreement Signing (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 13:01:47 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Sender: daemon@ai.mit.edu
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/1996/8/12/2.TEXT.1



		
				    
				    
			     THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		      Office of the Press Secretary
			 (Jackson Hole, Wyoming)
_________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                     August 12, 1996     

				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
	      IN ANNOUNCING AGREEMENT TO SAVE NATIONAL PARK
			  FROM MINE DEVELOPMENT
				    
				    
			Yellowstone National Park
				 Wyoming	   	 		       



11:25 A.M. MDT
		
(cut)		
		I want to thank Senator and Mrs. Rockefeller who came up
with me.  Jay and Sharon Rockefeller are your neighbors; as you know,
they live near the Grand Tetons and are very concerned about it.  And I
want to thank former Wyoming Governor Mike Sullivan, and his wife, Jane
Sullivan, who came up with me and they've been longtime friends of
Hillary's and mine.
		
(cut)	     
	     I also want to say in closing that the way this was done
should become a model for America's challenges, not only in the
environment but in other areas as well.

	     When we deal with problems of national significance that
have to be resolved by people who understand the particulars and who will
be most affected by it, it will be well to remember how this was done.
Yes, I did say that I wanted to preserve this park.  And, yes, I did put
the Vice President and Katie McGinty and the Cabinet on it.  But the
reason it worked, especially given the way the mining law works, as all
of you know, is that we had a collaborative process that involved people
reflecting all the interests involved who worked in good faith.  That is
the way we have to meet America's challenges as we move into this new
century.


            END                        11:38 A.M. MDT


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Terrorism !
Date: 14 Aug 1996 13:53:05 -0500

>                     AMERICANISM vs. TERRORISM
>                        by Gene "Chip" Tatum
>
>        (Note: It will become obvious that Mr. Tatum is not a National
>Socialist, as witness his fatuous comments about the Justice Department
being "full of good Americans" whose hands are tied by the evil Clintons and
>Janet Reno. Nonetheless, I believe this article makes several essential
>points about the current American situation. - W.S.)

[snip]

>        Reno, for instance, "takes the responsibility" for the murder of the
>Waco group (which, may I remind you, included children). What does that
>mean? Will she sign a plea agreement? Or is she awaiting trial?  And what
>about Ruby Ridge as the "top cop?" Negotiating her plea on that also?

-----

Was Reno even in office when Ruby Ridge occurred?

Bob Knauer

--
       
****************************************************
  A I M N E T           Advanced Internet Marketing
  Corporation            World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>      http://www.aimtec.com/
****************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: Orwellian Education (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 14:47:41 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


The Complete version of the School-to-Work article by JASPER


Vol. 12, No. 15 July 22, 1996

An Orwellian scheme to merge education and labor policy under federal
management has run into a tenacious grassroots roadblock

-

                             Orwellian Education

              The totalitarian design behind "School to Work"

For over half a year, one of the most radical social engineering schemes
this side of the New Deal, a prized showpiece of the Clinton
Administration's "transformation" agenda, has been staving off defeat - wit=
h
indispensable aid from the GOP leadership in Congress. The same Republican
firebrands who ranted and declaimed furiously against Hillary's socialist
health care program have been curiously silent or stubbornly supportive of
an even more audacious "reform" project spawned by the same collectivist
Clintonista cabal.

Last October, the House passed overwhelmingly, by a vote of 345 to 79, the
Careers Act (H.R. 1617), while the text of the Senate companion bill, the
Workforce Development Act (S. 143), sailed through the upper chamber by an
even more lopsided vote of 95 to 2. With such remarkable bipartisan support=
,
a conference report reconciling differences in the two bills was expected t=
o
follow quickly, with final passage of the landmark legislation coming befor=
e
the Thanksgiving Day recess.

Grassroots Rebellion

However, before the exultant legislators could pop the champagne corks and
raise a celebratory toast to their bipartisan "victory," a disturbing
phenomenon arose to upset the jollity. In spite of enjoying near universal
support among the patricians on the Potomac, the proposed legislation was
igniting a firestorm of opposition among the plebeians in the hinterlands.
As one leading House Republican who had voted for the measure later noted,
"A grassroots rebellion is taking place around the nation" in response to
the proposed new law.

Why all the fuss? After all, the new legislation would consolidate over 128
federal educational, training, and assistance programs into three "block
grants" to the states. Who could be against that? The Clinton White House
was for it. Ditto for Congress, the National Governors Association, the
education establishment, and the media.

"Streamline," "simplify," "economize," "consolidate," "accountability,"
"efficiency," "decentralization" - these were the saccharin-sweet buzzwords
used to sell the fraudulent confection. But they were mere bait,
conservative-sounding verbiage intended to lure the unwary to the flypaper.
The seductive icing concealed a socialist, poison cake. Semantic deception,
pure and simple. Potentially deadly deception.

A persistent and growing citizens' chorus was on to the scheme and belted
out an ever-louder refrain: "Look at the ingredients!" Just as important,
they also warned: "Look at the confectioners!" "How in the world could
anyone believe that legislation cooked up by Bill and Hillary Clinton, Tedd=
y
Kennedy, Ira Magaziner, Robert Reich, Mario Cuomo, David Rockefeller, and
the Carnegie Corporation, and based on the Soviet polytechnical system,
would do anything but increase federal interference and add to our
educational woes?" asks Carolyn Steinke, president of Parents Involved in
Education (PIE) and one of the key leaders in the national effort to defeat
the legislation. "These are the premier advocates for the complete
transformation of our republic into a socialistic, government-controlled,
government-managed, national system for 'human resources development.' As
education expert Samuel Blumenfeld has noted, the Careers/Workforce bills
should be called 'The American Forced Labor Bill,' because that's what it
truly is all about."

At first it seemed that the Careers/Workforce locomotive was unstoppable;
its engines were too strong, its momentum too immense. But as the alarm
spread, a grassroots army of concerned parents rose up to block the tracks.
Since November of last year, the ill-conceived package has been stymied in =
a
House-Senate conference, and once-committed advocates in both houses have
been back-pedaling and defecting.

One of the most prominent and active defectors has been Representative Henr=
y
Hyde (R-IL), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. In an April 2nd
"Dear Colleague" letter, Hyde warned, "President Clinton's plan for a
national workforce of skilled laborers is being achieved through the Goals
2000 Educate America Act, (H.R. 1804), School to Work Opportunities Act
(SWO), (H.R. 2884), and Improving America's Schools Act (IASA), (H.R. 6),
all of which were passed and signed into law by President Clinton in 1994."

Dumbing Down the Schools

"I'll tell you why it is so important to repeal these laws," said Hyde. And
the lawmaker did not mince words:

The plan for Goals 2000 was developed by Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ira
Magaziner, and Marc Tucker, president of the National Center on Education
and the Economy (funded by the Carnegie Foundation), prior to Clinton's
election. It is a concept for dumbing-down our schools and changing the
character of the nation through behavior modification (a vital part of this
plan). It moves away from an academically intensive curriculum to one that
is integrated with vocational training, producing skilled manpower for the
labor market. The economy will be controlled by the federal government by
controlling our workforce and our schools.

Joining Hyde is Representative James Talent (R-MO), who asserted: "The
Careers bill has been controversial since it emerged from Committee. At one
time, I thought my concerns had been addressed, but obviously not.... I am
withdrawing my support for H.R. 1617, and it is clear to me that the
sponsors need to rethink the whole concept."

Representative Mel Hancock (R-MO) has been even more forceful in repudiatin=
g
his earlier support for the measure. "After taking a closer look at H.R.
1617 and Goals 2000, and reviewing the letter sent to me by our Missouri
Republican representatives, it is obvious," said Hancock, "that the Nationa=
l
Education Association, in cooperation with the socialistic segments of our
government, are attempting to implement the Marxist theories of reeducating
a society as part of a potential overthrow of our constitutional government
- as advocated by Karl Marx and Joseph Stalin. Even though I originally
voted for the bills, I am withdrawing my support and will do everything
possible to make sure H.R. 1617 is defeated and [will] attempt to rescind
Goals 2000."

On May 9th Representative Hyde fired off another plea to his colleagues,
warning of the deceptive dangers hidden in the seemingly innocuous verbiage
of H.R. 1617 and S. 143. This letter was signed by six of his colleagues.
"School-to-Work sounds good," Hyde noted, "but when carried to its logical
extreme, it chooses careers for every American worker. Children's careers
will be chosen for them by Workforce Development Boards and federal agencie=
s
'at the earliest possible age.' In some cases, such as is currently
happening in Pennsylvania, this is in the third grade. We do want all
Americans to have an opportunity to work, but forcing them to work where an=
d
how the federal agencies deem necessary is not the way to go."

Moreover, Hyde noted that this dictation of career paths by Big Brother
would apply not only to tiny tots, but to adults as well:

Under a national school-to-work system, siblings who have already graduated
will be forced to return for vocational training and behavioral
modification. Adults who want to change jobs or who involuntarily lose thei=
r
jobs will also be required to enter retraining through adult education and
vocational classes in order to qualify for work certificates, also called
Certificates of Initial Mastery (CIM), for future employment. Ultimately,
all Americans will have to go through a one-stop career center in order to
qualify for a job.

Forced Relocation

But the workforce fascists have even grander usurpations in mind - like
assuming the power to decide where the state's "resources" shall live.
"States are now busy complying with Goals 2000 and school-to-work federal
mandates," noted Hyde. "Statewide Workforce Development Boards have formed
to study which labor skills are needed in each state to determine 'human
resources' training requirements. Of course, this will decide also where
these human resources will reside. They will have to live where the 'state'
chooses, according to what skills the 'state' has chosen for them to learn.=
"

And, in true Orwellian fashion, the statists are planning still more
invasive intrusions into our lives, aimed ultimately at stripping away all
privacy. Under the new system, Hyde warned, "national electronic informatio=
n
will be gathered on all students and adults who receive educational and
vocational benefits. The information will be disseminated to one-stop caree=
r
centers and follow them through their working careers ('life-long
learning')."

Is the congressman a raving paranoiac? No, unfortunately the dangers he
cites are real and imminent. Along with his "Dear Colleague" letter, Hyde
enclosed several pages of excerpts from H.R. 1617 and S. 143 which plainly
substantiate his charges. And those barely begin to scratch the surface.

How then did this monstrous scheme advance so far, so fast, and so
completely undetected by the guardians at the gates? One chagrined senior
staffer for a prominent House Republican told THE NEW AMERICAN, "We just
didn't read [the bill] carefully enough. We were so enamored of the benefit=
s
of block grants that we weren't alert to the dangers, as we should have
been." He admitted also that he and many of the other gatekeepers had been
woefully ignorant of the coded meaning of much of the educationese in which
the legislation was written and were unfamiliar with the authors,
organizations, and studies which had figured prominently in the drafting of
the bills. Fortunately, the peasants back in the district had done their
homework.

Elitist Epistle

"One of the most blatant markers that set off alarms with all of us who hav=
e
been involved in the education battle was the obvious influence of Marc
Tucker," Carolyn Steinke told THE NEW AMERICAN. "Much of the language of th=
e
Careers and Workforce bills comes directly out of his letter to Hillary
Clinton and his published studies. That was plain from the start."

The importance of the Marc Tucker epistle to Hillary Rodham Clinton was
explained in these pages last year (see "'Cradle to Grave' OBE," in our Jul=
y
24, 1995 issue). As president of the Carnegie Corporation's National Center
on Education and the Economy (NCEE), a longtime friend of the Clintons, and
a leading mandarin of the education "restructuring" movement, Marc Tucker i=
s
no stranger to the corridors of power. And he has demonstrated a ruthless
delight in exercising that power - to the bitter grief of many communities
that have fallen victim to his "reform" nostrums.

To those familiar with his apparent megalomaniacal bent, appalling track
record, and influential connections, Tucker's 18-page missive to First
Lady-elect Hillary could be read only as a dread omen portending grave ill
for America. The letter was dated November 11, 1992 - just after Bill
Clinton's victory - and there was no mistaking Tucker's delirious ecstacy
over the outcome of the election. The letter began:

Dear Hillary:

I still cannot believe you won. But utter delight that you did pervades all
the circles in which I move. I met last Wednesday in David Rockefeller's
office with him, John Sculley, Dave Barram and David Haselkorn. It was a
great celebration. Both John and David R. were more expansive than I have
ever seen them - literally radiating happiness. My own view and theirs is
this country has seized its last chance....

The subject we were discussing was what you and Bill should do now about
education, training and labor market policy. Following that meeting, I
chaired another in Washington on the same topic. Those present at the secon=
d
meeting included Tim Barnicle, Dave Barram, Mike Cohen, David Hornbeck,
Hilary Pennington, Andy Planner, Lauren Resnick.... Ira Magaziner was also
invited to this meeting.

So what is it that Messrs. Tucker, Rockefeller, Sculley, Hornbeck, and thei=
r
enraptured confreres envision for Bill and Hillary for "education, training
and labor market policy"? Nothing short of a radical, transformational
outcome-based education scheme "to remold the entire American system."
Nothing short of a national system of socialist control over all jobs and
education "that literally extends from cradle to grave" and that is
mandatory "for everyone." Wrote Tucker, "We think the great opportunity you
have is to remold the entire American system for human resource development=
,
almost all of the current components of which were put into place before
World War II."

Tucker knew, of course, that he was addressing a fully sympathetic fellow
revolutionary. Hillary had served on the board of directors of Tucker's NCE=
E
and on the board of governors of his National Standards Project. Bill and
Hillary had brought him to Arkansas during their gubernatorial reign of
terror to "reform" the state's school system. "First, a vision of the kind
of national - not federal - human resources development system the nation
could have," Tucker told his comrade. "This is interwoven with a new
approach to governing that should inform that vision. What is essential is
that we create a seamless web of opportunities to develop one's skills that
literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone =
-
young and old, poor and rich, worker and full-time student."

A "Seamless Web"

The Carnegie visionary next outlined the kind of "seamless web" he and his
fellow spiders were weaving "to implement this vision":

A national "apprenticeship system" to serve as "the keystone of a strategy
for putting a whole new post-secondary training system in place." This
scheme, Tucker wrote, "contains what we think is a powerful idea for rollin=
g
out and scaling up the whole new human resources system nationwide over the
next four years, using the (renamed) apprenticeship idea as the entering
wedge." A national "employment service and a new system of labor market
boards" to control all education, jobs, and job training. A "special progra=
m
to greatly raise the work-related skills of the people trapped in the core
of our great cities." Legislation"to advance the elementary and secondary
reform agenda."

Typical of all would-be despots, Tucker can hardly wait to get his hands on
the children - and the younger the better. His scheme calls for a "seamless
system of unending skill development that begins in the home with the very
young and continues through school, post-secondary education and the
workplace." In this dystopic nightmare, we will be treated to a "national
system of education in which curriculum, pedagogy, examinations and teacher
education and licensure systems are all linked to the national standards."
In other words, what is taught, how it is taught, how it is tested, what
will be taught to those who teach it, and who, ultimately, will be allowed
to teach - all of these vital educational matters will be nationalized.

Among the other many delights envisioned for us by the
Tucker/Rockefeller/Carnegie coterie is a mandatory national "employment
service." Under the new regime, this employment service would rapidly match
job seekers with job providers, since "all available front-line jobs -
whether public or private - must be listed in it by law." And the coercive
utopians have dreamed up even more marvelous programs to help us, such as:
"A system of labor market boards =85 established at the local, state and
federal levels to coordinate the systems for job training, post-secondary
professional and technical education, adult basic education, job matching
and counseling."

The Tucker plan is a conception of breathtaking audacity. And who better to
share it with than Saint Hillary, who obviously has adopted French
Revolutionist Danton's advice - "Audacity, more audacity, always audacity!"
- as her personal credo. But being quite full of himself and positively
giddy at the thought of the opportunities before him, Tucker had to share
his glorious vision with others as well. Thus, in January 1993 his NCEE
released A Human Resources Development Plan for the United States, a 25-pag=
e
report mimicking the "Dear Hillary" dispatch, including whole sections
copied word-for-word from the letter.

The NCEE Plan bears the same sweeping vision as Tucker's epistolary appeal
to the Rodham-Clinton White House. "Nothing less than a wholly restructured
school system can possibly bring all of our students up to a standard only =
a
few have been expected to meet up to now," it states with Tuckeresque zeal.
"The national system of skills standards," the Plan declares, "establishes
the basis for the development of a coherent, unified training system."

And in the argot peculiar to elitist educrats, it makes clear that the
outcome-based education principles that have so alarmed and outraged parent=
s
nationwide will be a prime feature of the new dominion. "We would replace
rules defining inputs with rules defining outcomes and the rewards for
achieving them," it boldly informs.

"No Turning Back"

Nor is there any doubt that these "true believers" are going for the whole
enchilada. Under the subtitle, "An Agenda for the Federal Government," the
Tucker/NCEE Plan openly admits that it is setting forth "strategies for
bringing the new system =85 into being, not as a pilot program, not as a fe=
w
demonstrations to be swept aside in another administration, but everywhere,
as the new way of doing business." (Emphasis added.)

In a memo dated February 13, 1992 to the leadership of the National Allianc=
e
for Restructuring Education (NARE), Marc Tucker provided an even deeper and
more chilling insight into just how thorough is the overturning of society
that he envisions. Under the ominous subtitle, "How We Plan to Do It," the
Carnegie cadre leader wrote:

Our objective is to make schools of the kind we have described the norm, no=
t
the exception, first in the cities and states that are Alliance members, an=
d
later elsewhere. Getting there will require more than new policies and
different practices. It will require a change in the prevailing culture -
the attitudes, values, norms and accepted ways of doing things.... We will
know that we have succeeded when there are enough transformed schools in an=
y
one area =85 that their approach to education sets the norms, frames the
attitudes and defines the accepted way of doing things in that part of the
world. Then there will be no turning back. [Emphasis added.]

Set the norms. Frame the attitudes. Define the accepted way of doing things=

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Terrorism !
Date: 14 Aug 1996 15:06:14 -0600

R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:

> Was Reno even in office when Ruby Ridge occurred?

RR took place in the Bush administration.  Reno was confirmed half way 
thorugh the waco debacle.  On the last day she left the office to go to 
Maryland to make a speech at a lunch gathering.  Sometime after she 
left, the attack began.  Though she's taken responsibility there is more 
than a little doubt she gave the attack order.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Bikers for Bob
Date: 14 Aug 1996 17:19:36 -0600

I didn't see it so I don't know it's true, but I was told by a friend in 
NYC who heard on the Bob Grant Show that Seven Thousand Bikers showed up 
in San Diego in support of Dole/Kemp.  A TV reporter stuck a mike in the 
face of a tattooed and hirsuite gentleman who was perched atop a panhead 
and asked, "Why are you guys here?"

	"It's a freedom thing," replied the scooter tramp.  "You wouldn't 
understand."

They must have closed down the meth-labs in El Cajon for the day.


-- 
"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
because he knows you have the means to do it.
 
"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
everything you've got."

                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: FW: New eyes for Big Brother (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 18:24:44 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------



Apparently-to: LIB_NW.circuit.com!LIB_NW

                    HEAD FOR THE HILLS:

                  BIG BROTHER SOON TO HAVE

                  X - R A Y   V I S I O N

by Ian Williams Goddard

Joyce Price of The Washington Times (A1, 8/13/96) reports that
the government will soon have a new weapon in its war on liberty
 -- a camera that can see through clothes to reveal all the
private goodies concealed therein.

Someday soon there will be no place to run, no place to hide,
no place outside the all-seeing eye of the State. It's going
to be so safe and wonderful then -- NOT !

Ms. Price writes in the Times:

        "A new weapon against terrorism works like
        Superman's eyes: It looks right through you.
        The high-tech camera, know as the passive
        millimeter wave imager, boasts the equivalent
        of X-ray vision, which allows it to penetrate
        clothing to 'see' a concealed weapon, plastic
        explosives, or drugs."

The "Millivison" camera is not an X-ray machine. An X-ray
machine creates an X-ray image by sending X-rays through a
person's body. This device on the other hand is passive, it
merely receives and reads the natural radiations from your
body; radiations that are in "a different part of the
spectrum" than X-rays.

Sufficiently solid items, such as a gun, a bag of crack or
candy, block these radiations revealing the silhouetted shape
of that item to the camera's, and in turn to the govt's, eye.

The 'National Institute of Justice' funded the research and
development of this new tool for tyranny under the pretext
of stopping terrorism. The new wave of terrorism that has
hit the U.S. is doing wonders for the growth of govt power,
just as the Reichstag fire did wonders for the Nazis.

Visit -->  http://www.webcom.com/haight/Oklahoma/Okc.1.html

The ACLU, NRA, and the National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers are not happy about the new device. Jack
King, spokesperson for the NACDL, said Millivision "seems
to be highly intrusive and a violation of the Fourth
Amendment, which guarantees the right to be secure
against unreasonable search and seizure."

While the NRA approves of the device for use at airports and
for tracking down illegal drug activity ( statist air-brains ),
they point out that 31 states have laws that protect the right
to carry concealed weapons. In other words, it's OK to kill the
Fourth Amendment if it stops nonviolent voluntary drug activity
 -- in other words, kiss your freedoms goodbye.

The Times article also states that:

        "A Los Angeles Times poll last week found that
        58 percent of Americans would be willing to lose
        some civil liberties to help thwart terrorism."

As it has been said "Those who are willing to give up freedom
for security will soon have neither." Yet people are trained in
public schools that the government -- i.e., that the 'legal' use
of violent force -- is a cuddly and warm teddy-bear that makes
everything wonderful and should be embraced whenever a problem
appears to arise. It follows therefore that it is safe to
surrender liberty to the govt. And indeed govt is going
to keep us secure, very very secure -- HELP! let me go.

****************************************************************
visit GODDARD'S GALLARIA:  http://www.erols.com/igoddard/art.htm
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
some of the lanscapes, nudes, and visionary art of IAN W GODDARD
________________________________________________________________

Holistic logic --->  http://www.erols.com/igoddard/reality.html
===================================================================
Liberty Northwest Conference
Fidonet 1:346/16 (208) 267-9851
Internet subscriptions: Liberty.Northwest@LIB_NW.circuit.com
Visit Liberty Northwest on the WEB! http://www.saldivar.com/lib_nw/
...Liberty is not an option... only a condition to be lost!
===================================================================


* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: C-NEWS: Congress Action 08/11/96 (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 18:38:19 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------



                         CONGRESS ACTION              August 11, 1996
                         ===============
                         By Kim Weissman
                 Internet BEVDAV@worldnet.att.net

POLICE STATES OF AMERICA: The assault on Freedom of Speech by this
administration has been well documented. It began shortly after the
Clintonites came into power, when the Department of Housing and Urban
Development worked out a plan to force what they defined as
"equality" down the throats of American homeowners. In 1994, HUD was
prepared to begin its attack to destroy family neighborhoods, and
decided to plant a rehabilitation center for recovering alcoholics
and drug addicts in the midst of a family neighborhood in Berkeley,
California. Several residents of that traditional bastion of free
speech decided to exercise their Constitutional rights as Americans
under the First Amendment. They distributed pamphlets. They
testified before the Berkeley City Counsel. They filed a lawsuit
(ultimately unsuccessful) to try to stop HUD's plans. The
politically correct elites at HUD decided that this type of peaceful
activity would not be tolerated in Bill Clinton's America, so HUD
began a campaign of harassment and intimidation, threatening the
group (which came to be called The Berkeley Three) with federal
lawsuits for housing discrimination, fines, and potential jail time.
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, drug abusers are
considered disabled, under the Fair Housing Act, disabled people are
protected from housing discrimination, and opposition to any
protected group is considered discrimination. Thus the residents of
Berkeley had to welcome alcoholics and drug addicts, to wander the
streets on which their children played. Ultimately, the force of
public ridicule over this incident forced the bureaucrats at HUD to
issue guidelines which essentially commanded HUD to obey most (but
not all) of the First Amendment. Conspicuously absent from the
activity which HUD grudgingly acknowledged as protected is the
filing of lawsuits to enjoin HUD actions.

   Then came the case of the Bakersfield Five. Once again HUD
decided to attack a middle class neighborhood, by planting a
residential facility for 6 retarded adults, operated by a private
business enterprise and paid for with Medicaid money, in the midst
of a community of single family homes. This plan was in direct
violation of that community's covenants and conditions which
prohibited the operation of businesses within the community, and
which limited residences to single families. A lawsuit in State
court issued an injunction against the HUD plan, which prompted HUD
bureaucrats to begin discrimination proceedings against the state
court plaintiffs. The Justice Department got involved, demanding
information from the Bakersfield Five which included, among other
things, the identity of "each person who attended any meeting of any
residents of Stockdale Estates" regarding the group home.

   Both of the major political parties are apparently cooperating in
another limitation on free speech. In San Diego the Police
Department designated a parking area three blocks away from the
republican convention as a site for free speech activities. Many
protesters would have preferred to be closer to the convention site,
and the RNC wanted to move the protests further away. To be clear,
it was not the RNC which initially established the limitation on
protests, it was the San Diego Police Department. A federal judge
struck down the more distant protest zone proposed by the RNC, but
did accept the concept of designating a specific free speech zone
proposed by the police department, and it now appears that protests
will be permitted across the street from the RNC site. In Chicago,
the Democratic National Committee is trying the same thing. Protests
at the DNC convention were originally planned to be restricted to a
vacant lot two blocks away from the convention site; now there is
talk about moving the protest site at least eight blocks away. The
ACLU is suing the cities of Chicago and San Diego over these protest
restrictions. Where in the language of the First Amendment is free
speech limited to certain "zones" designated by local bureaucrats?

   All of these activities might be dismissed as warped excesses by
power drunk bureaucrats, were it not for the evidence that the
willingness to use such oppression extends all the way to the top of
the Clinton administration. In an incident which should have had all
the usual defenders of free speech mounting the ramparts, this
administration recently attempted, and in some measure succeeded, in
stiffling the speech of one of its critics. The case involved the
public appearances of former FBI agent Gary Aldrich on various
television programs to discuss his book "Unlimited Access", which
details his experiences with numerous penalties which he witnessed
during his duty in the Clinton White House. Aldrich was scheduled to
appear on ABC's "This Week with David Brinkley", CNN's "Larry King
Live", and NBC's "Dateline".

   There is a long series of Supreme Court precedent which looks very
critically on what is called "previous restraint" of free speech,
that is, the preemptive prohibition of a media outlet from
disseminating words and opinions which may be offensive to those in
power. "The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature
of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints
upon publications..." (Near vs. Minnesota, 1931).

   Prior to Aldrich's appearances, senior White House advisor George
Stephanopoulos put pressure on the TV networks not to allow Aldrich
to appear. CNN and NBC canceled the Aldrich appearances. Recall the
reaction when the Nixon White House put pressure on the New York
Times to prevent it from publishing the Pentagon Papers, which
arguably had national security implications. This is an indication
of how far we have come since then: the issue now has nothing to do
with national security, only with the embarrassment of Bill and
Hillary Clinton. Of course, based on Bill Clinton's invocation of
Executive Priviledge to cover up the Travel Office fiasco, we may
reasonably conclude that the Clintons equate their own embarrassment
with a danger to the national security. Aldrich's story may have had
no credibility at all (although it is difficult to dismiss a 30 year
veteran of the FBI as some fringe wacko), and the media involved may
have decided on their own that they did not want to present his
story. This would have been entirely proper from the perspective of
the proper role of government in a free society, and would have
simply raised the question of media bias in discounting the word of
such an inherently credible eyewitness. The line was crossed,
however, by pressure from an official government source, George
Stephanopoulos, which may have and was certainly intended to
influence the media's decision, indeed, which constituted government
pressure to subvert the independence of the media and censor a
critic.

   Nor will this administration stop at silencing its critics. It
has now begun to jail those who dare criticize Bill Clinton. Clinton
was working the crowd at an appearance in Chicago when a woman,
apparently upset at the terrorist bombing in Saudi Arabia, shouted
to him "You suck, and those boys died." At the request of the Secret
Service, the Chicago police arrested the woman because the remark
was taken as a threat to the president. They also arrested the
woman's husband who was standing nearby. In this country, we condemn
those foreign dictatorships which arrest critics of the government.
We express outrage when those dictatorships go so far as to arrest
the families of those critics. We have now, apparently, arrived at
that same condition here in America. When such outrages occur in an
overseas dictatorship, the usual litany of people in this country
mount boycotts, demonstrate, stage protests. Where are those voices
of protest now, when similar outrages occur right here in America?
Or are such police state tactics acceptable now?

   The assaults on free speech by HUD discussed above occurred early
in the Clinton administration, and it might be natural to assume
that such offensive activity would cease, or at lease lessen, as the
November election approaches. After all, it is one thing for Clinton
to be seen trampling the Second Amendment. Disregard for that
Constitutional right has an honored tradition in radical liberalism.
It is another matter entirely, however, for Clinton to be seen
trampling the First Amendment, particularly the free speech clauses
contained therein, for which liberals have traditionally championed
the widest possible latitude. Yet, judging by the lack of reaction
to the latest outrages from liberals in general, the commitment to
civil liberties by the self-proclaimed defenders of civil liberties
must be re-evaluated. It appears free speech rights are only for
those who agree with the politically correct dogma. The selective
application of the Constitution is nothing new for liberals. The
Equal Protection clause, to cite one example, is marvelously useful
to prohibit discrimination against the mascots of the anointed
(blacks, women, gays, drug addicts, etc), but is not applicable to
prevent discrimination against whites or males. And if these are
examples of the extremism to which Bill Clinton will go when he is
facing re-election, it is chilling to contemplate the lengths to
which he will go if he is elected this November and will not face
the electorate again. This is a factor which should concern not only
republicans, but followers of the Libertarian party and other third
parties as well. Those third party adherents who have announced
their intention to dilute the conservative vote, regardless of the
consequences, should seriously consider those very consequences.
Bill Clinton won election in 1992 with 42% of the electorate because
the anti-Clinton vote was split between George Bush and Ross Perot.
Should Clinton win again with less than a majority, having voted for
a third party out of conscience will be cold comfort to anyone who
disagrees with liberal big-government policies. Anyone who is not in
love with big-government liberalism will be a target for a
re-elected Bill Clinton and his allies in the media.

   Although the lapdog media and the partisan liberal establishment
are smug right now in their belief that they will strengthen their
grip on the levers of power in this country, by retaining the White
House and retaking the majority in Congress, they should consider
the implications of the police state tactics which they now endorse.
The power to arrest critics, the ability to stifle the press, and
the oppression of people who do not toe the correct party line, are
all two-edged swords which cut freedom indiscriminately.
Conservatives are the targets today. Once the precedent is
established, anyone could be the target tomorrow. Those who stand
silent at the abuse of civil liberties today, because in their minds
the end justifies the means, will have no basis to complain when the
assault is directed at them.

   "The tyranny of the legislature is really the danger most to be
feared, and will continue to be so for many years to come. The
tyranny of the executive power will come in its turn, but at a more
distant period." -- Thomas Jefferson

Kim Weissman
BEVDAV@worldnet.att.net

Congress Action is available on its own web page at

http://www.aimnet.com/~jbv/congress_action.html

and on FTP site at

ftp.aimnet.com

/pub/users/jbv/congress_action/

 -------
To unsubscribe from c-news, send the message UNSUBSCRIBE c-news to
majordomo@world.std.com. Contact owner-c-news@world.std.com with questions.
* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Federalist and Antifederalist paper web sites (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 18:41:51 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Federalist Papers: 
     http://www.law.uoknor.edu/hist/federalist.html

Antifederalist Papers:
     http://www.logoplex.com/shops/leaders/afp.txt




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Skip Leuschner <skipl@PACIFIER.COM>
Subject: Re: Bikers for Bob
Date: 14 Aug 1996 16:59:06 -0700 (PDT)


On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Howlin' Blue wrote:

> I didn't see it so I don't know it's true, but I was told by a friend in 
> NYC who heard on the Bob Grant Show that Seven Thousand Bikers showed up 
> in San Diego in support of Dole/Kemp.  

Wouldn't bet the ranch on it either, but heard the same thing on a local
talk show - no mainstream media coverage.   As Ted Koppel said today, 
"- - - no news in San Diego - - - We're leaving."

Skip


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Republican Convention Coverage
Date: 14 Aug 1996 17:38:09 -0700

At 09:46 PM 8/13/96 -0500, Ed Lawson wrote:
>For those of you watching and interested in the convention, you
>should be watching it on the Family Channel (GOP-TV) or C-Span. 
>The major networks are doing their liberal 'fill' on things they
>don't want you to see.  All three (A,N,C) did commentary during
>J.C. Watts address. (the Rep. from Oklahoma .... also a Black
>Republican).  They don't want 'their Amerikan Public' to see a
>successful, articulate and dedicated Republican Black.
>
>This is the second night they have been doing this.

Yeah, but Paul Harvey mentioned it on his news show this morning; how NBC
had gutted Molinari's speech by editing out the Clinton flip-flop video.  
Ken Mitchell        |The constitutions of most of our States assert,
8037 Stone Canyon   |that all power is inherent in the people;that 
Citrus Heights, CA  |they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases 
95610               |to which they think themselves competent, .....
kmitchel@gvn.net    |or they may act by representatives, freely and 
916-449-9152 (vm)   |equally chosen; that it is their right and duty
916-729-0966 (fax)  |to be at all times armed; that they are entitled
                    |to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom 
                    |of property, and freedom of the press."
                    | "The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson, 
                    |pp.46 - 47, Presented by John Dewey",
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: [1776] German invasion in New Mexico (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 20:29:09 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

>From the New York Times this morning.......

August 14, 1996

Germany Opens Luftwaffe Training Base in New Mexico Desert

By JAMES BROOKE


   ALAMOGORDO, N.M. -- If the 300 German prisoners of war interned here half
a century ago could have attended a military ceremony held here last May,
they would have stared as if looking at a desert mirage. 

   "This is a great day for the Luftwaffe, for Alamogordo, and for our two
countries," Germany's defense minister, Volker Ruhe, proclaimed as honor
guards marched German and American flags past a row of Tornado ground attack
jets, each stenciled with the Iron Cross of Germany's Air Force. With that,
the German Air Force Tactical Training Center opened for business at Holloman
Air Force Base. 

   In the ebb and flow of great power relations, a small milestone is quietly
being etched in this dry, baking hot expanse of cactus and sagebrush in
south-central New Mexico: the training center is the first military facility
leased by a foreign government in the United States. 

   To locals, it is simply "the German base." After investing $42 million in
hangars and jet repair shops, Germany has moved here 12 Tornado jets, 300
German Air Force men and 340 family members. Under a three-year expansion
plan, the Germans want to invest another $125 million -- for maintenance
hangars, a flight simulator, a jet engine shop, dormitories and fuel and
munitions warehouses -- so they can increase their Tornado and Phantom F-4E
training wing here to 50 planes and to increase the number of servicemen and
dependents to 2,100.The German government is paying the Pentagon about $22
million a year to use its corner of the base. 

   For the German military, New Mexico offers some of the best training
conditions in the world: relentlessly sunny skies and plenty of desert for
jet pilots to practice 500-mile-an-hour bombing runs at 100 feet off the
ground. At sites where Germans have trained in Germany and Britain, military
pilots are now largely barred from flying below 1,000 feet, a restriction
imposed after the Berlin Wall fell and residents' complaints increased. 

   Without Germany's rain, fog, snow or altitude restrictions, training in
New Mexico allows the Luftwaffe to shave six months off a standard 2-year
basic course for Tornado pilots. Now, another NATO power, which officials
refuse to identify, is considering leasing space to train pilots here. 

   German and American officials note that New Mexico is only slightly
smaller than Germany. But, with only 1.7 million people, it has one-fiftieth
Germany's population. Germany has a 40-year tradition of sending military
pilots to U.S. bases for training. Currently, the nation buys about $200
million worth of American weapons a year. 

   As what is called "supersonic overland airspace" becomes an
internationally marketable commodity, some Americans are feeling queasy. 

   "Until Wednesday, 1 May 1996, there was no foreign military base on our
shores -- not since the British were ejected in 1814!" James (Bo) Gritz, a
retired Green Beret colonel and an informal leader of the far-right
paramilitary movement, wrote recently in his newsletter, Center for Action.
Echoing ultranationalist comments that ricocheted through right-wing talk
shows and shortwave radio programs in May, he wrote: "Hitler would be proud!"


   With Internet headings like 'German troops (Hessians) on our soil," the
far-right furor grew so strong that about 60 members of Congress called the
Air Force in May to ask about the expansion plans. 

   Last week, at a public hearing here on the German expansion plan, Bill
Hornback, a ponytailed U.S. Air Force retiree, grumbled: "We go out and kick
their tails two times -- and now they come here and call us 'hosts.' " 

   Ranchers complained about joy-riding pilots buzzing their sheep and
cattle. But a vigorous defense of the Germans came from Richard Zierlein,
chairman of the Otero county commission. In a time of defense cuts, he said,
the German air force's 10-year lease helps guarantee Holloman's future. It
also pumps an estimated $10 million a year into the economy of a county with
only 58,000 people. 

   "We've got the Stealths here, but they can pick up and fly away anywhere
anytime," Zierlein said of Holloman, which is the home base for the United
States' only unit of radar-evading Stealth bombers and for American training
jets. "You can't do that with a German base." 

   Germany's buildup here coincides with a radical reduction in the number of
American soldiers in Europe. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
United States has cut the number of American military personnel in Europe to
100,000 from 300,000. 

   In Germany, the United States has closed four of its six air bases. By the
end of the decade, if current plans are carried out, the United States will
have roughly the same number of combat planes in Germany as Germany will have
in New Mexico. 

   But Pentagon officials caution that while the numbers may converge, the
missions radically diverge. 

   "We clearly have provided a line of defense to Germany that Germany is not
providing by being in the United States," Kenneth Bacon, the Defense
Department spokesman, said after attending the opening ceremony here with the
secretary of defense, William J. Perry. "In that way, it's not exactly
reciprocal. They're not defending us by being in the United States." In
addition, Germany contributes toward the cost of keeping American troops
there. 

   The German presence here, American military officers say, underscores the
idea that the modern relationship between the Western world's two most
powerful economies is one of allies. 

   "It serves as a symbol to the German people that this is not a one-way
street," said Brig. Gen. Bruce Carlson, base commander at Holloman. "We have
not been over there for 50 years running through their streets and woods as
conquerors. We are allies." 

   Pentagon officials note that the German "tenants" account for fewer than 5
percent of the daily sorties from Holloman. The American base commander said
he was at the top of the chain of command at the base, adding, "Flying
operations are all under my control -- they fly by my rules." 

   Joint operations and other cooperative efforts appear to be the way of the
future, said Lt. Col. Donald L. Hargarten, the American officer who oversees
the German project here. "German pilots are flying in Bosnia," he said. "If
they weren't there, it would be our guys." 

   The German military personnel at Holloman seem happily oblivious to those
who object to their presence. They are enjoying one of their nation's
balmiest overseas posts since Germany lost its African colonies at the end of
World War I. 

   "It's a goody," Col. Eckhard Sowada, the flight-suited German commander,
said from his office in a beige base building marked simply: German Air
Force. 

   German soldiers get a 50 percent pay bonus for service overseas. Here, a
spacious house with a pool and garden can be rented for $1,200 a month, far
less than in Germany. At local supermarkets, the prices of bratwurst,
knackwurst and Black Forest ham are about 25 percent less than at home. 

   Gasoline sells for a third the price of Germany. And, easing the culture
shock for Germans who grew up driving on autobahns without speed limits, most
Western states raised speed limits this summer to 75 miles an hour on rural
interstates. 

   "Around the halls, I hear, 'Last weekend, I was in Vegas,' 'I was in L.A.'
Another got his speeding ticket in Phoenix," said Colonel Sowada, whose
business card shows a Tornado roaring over cactus. The colonel kept up his
tan all winter, skiing at a small resort half an hour from here, in the
Sacramento Mountains. 

   Sgt. Mike Sprengard, a spokesman for the German unit, watched a brace of
Luftwaffe Tornadoes scrape noisily last week across the half-dome desert sky
and said: "New Mexico is great for Germans. I have been everywhere with my
family -- Santa Fe, Taos, Carlsbad Caverns." 

   This is not the first time that German soldiers have fallen in love with
New Mexico. 

   In the final months of World War II, 17 camps in New Mexico, including one
at Alamogordo Army Air Field, held nearly 5,000 German prisoners of war, many
sunburned veterans of the Afrika Korps. Although many of the 370,000 German
prisoners held nationwide wanted to stay at the end of the war, virtually all
were repatriated. 

   The only prisoner to escape without recapture was Georg Gaertner. In
September 1945, he slipped away from a camp at Deming, N.M. In 1985,
Gaertner, who had permanent-resident status here, finally surrendered to
American authorities. 

   Today, Holloman's Family Support Center is easing the crosscultural
adjustments for the 200 German military families here, much as base centers
helped millions of American military families settle into West Germany in
past decades. 

   Guides speaking German help Germans with such mysteries as using the swamp
coolers that air-condition homes, cooking at near-zero humidity and at an
altitude of 4,200 feet and dealing with local creatures like klapperschlangen
(rattlesnakes) and the dreaded desert skorpion. 

   Reflecting this military town's largely warm welcome for the Germans, far
more American families than were needed signed up to mentor new German
families. Video stores are ordering German-language movies, and one store is
stocking California Staats-Zeitung, a German-language weekly newspaper based
in Los Angeles. 

   Next month, a German primary school will open. This fall, the base
commissary is to double the size of its "German section" -- currently 310
European food items displayed below black, red and gold bunting, the colors
of Germany's flag. 

   "People are very friendly here," Staff Sgt. Joerg Heinen, a 23-year-old
ejection-seat technician, said as he paused by a shelf stocked with Bavarian
sponge cake. "I hope I can spend more time here." 

   He is not alone. Five Germans applied for each position available in New
Mexico, Sowada said. After a few months, two-thirds of the Germans here have
requested to extend their tours to four and a half years from three years. 

   "They say they are doing it for the nation," he said, rolling his eyes
skyward in mock disbelief.




Copyright 1996 The New York Times


Received: by ccmail from email.atmel.com
>From 1776-owner@iquest.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: AW Ban Petition (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 19:05:23 PST

<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->


Regarding the assault weapons ban,

Send your comments and vote to the GOP through politicsnow URL.

Located at:  

http://www.politicsnow.com/interact/petition/petition.cgi?which=GOPwea
pons

I browsed it at 1615 today (8/14) (CST).  The tally was 66 repeal, 76 
uphold.

Let them know what you think.  Space for comments provided.

Regards,

Rick

rickv@mail.execpc.com

<----  End Forwarded Message  ---->

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 19:48:58 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, E. J. Totty wrote:

>         If enough people start wearing jammers, or clothing that confuses,
> then the use of the sensor technology will be abandoned.

One of Murphy's Rules of Combat is: When the enemy is in range, so are
you.

When a jammer goes in range, it becomes the focus of EVERYTHING IN THE
VICINITY.  Think about it.  You don't even have to illuminate the
thing, and you have a dead-on bearing to it.  Two bearings that cross,
and 'X' marks the spot.

The technology won't be abandoned (never seen a technological cork put
back in a bottle yet), but speaking of 'abandoned', it will be
interesting to find out how many friends you have when you activate the
jammer...

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ed Lawson" <edlawson@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: AW Ban Petition (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 22:11:17 -0500

At 10PM CDST (8/14) it has reversed course and we are now 130 to
81 in favor of Repealing the AWB.

We need to show strength to Dole and triple or better the
anti-gunners.....  VOTE if you haven't.

EL

On Wed, 14 Aug 96 19:05:23 PST, Bill Vance wrote:

><---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
>From: Rick Voden <rickv@mail.execpc.com>
>Subject: AW ban petition
>Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:45:01 -0500
>To: firearms-alert@lists.best.com
>
>
>Regarding the assault weapons ban,
>
>Send your comments and vote to the GOP through politicsnow URL.
>
>Located at:  
>
>http://www.politicsnow.com/interact/petition/petition.cgi?which=GOPwea
>pons
>
>I browsed it at 1615 today (8/14) (CST).  The tally was 66 repeal, 76 
>uphold.
>
>Let them know what you think.  Space for comments provided.
>
>Regards,
>
>Rick
>
>rickv@mail.execpc.com
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 20:13:53 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, boydk wrote:

> Would this be the type of "remote sensing" one can do with magnetic reeds 
> bought at radio shack, or is this the "remote sensing" one might here 
> about on the Art Bell show, done by the "pscyhically abled"? Boyd

Neither.

It's a type of remote sensing known as "multi-spectral imaging",
analogous to that performed on data acquired by LandSat's, EarthSat's
and the like.  Remote sensing techniques are simply the application of
statistical methodology to data collected simultaneously in several
spectral bands in an organized manner over an organized area.  A video
camera is an example of passive remote sensing.

It takes a tremendous amount of number-crunching power to produce
decent resolution in images in anything approaching real time, as well
as superb sensor technology, but number crunching capability doubles
about once in three years at the pace we are going now, and science and
engineering are improving sensor technology at a like pace.

Such a device requires very little "power" measured in
terms of watts, just as a video camera requires very little power.
That is, after all, what "passive" when used in the context means,  You
just "listen"; you don't go active and "ping" the target.

And the very significant thing about "passive" is the observer does
nothing to reveal his presence.

If you're really interested, contact the Purdue Laboratory for the
Applications of Remote Sensing, which focuses on the unclassified
applications of such techniques.  They may even have a Web Page.  A Web
Search on "Remote Sensing" ought to turn up a whole slough of
references.  Any decent technical library ought to have four or five
books on the subject.

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 20:26:34 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, boydk wrote:

> Joe, thanks for the explanation. Now, can you tell a non phsisicist how 
> inanimate things (walls, guns) -transmit- millimeter radiation?

Any object with a thermal energy above absolute zero emits radiation.

> Also, 
> someone please check me on what that even is,

Check out "Black Box Radiation".  Cross-reference on Thermodynamics and
Astronomy.

> I assume radiation with 
> millimeter length waves would be at the high end of the radio spectrum.

Not so high.  300 MHz is 1 meter wavelength.  300 GHz would be 1mm
radiation.  IR and Visible light is higher.  Typical average peak of
the Sun's emission spectrum is at about 5600 Angstroms (an Angstrom is
10exp(-08) meters) if I remember right.  IR is a shorter wavelength
than so-called "mm wave radar".

> Thanks in advance for the physics lesson.
> Boyd

One of the better single volume encyclopedias, such as Van
Nostrand-Reinhold's Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, can give
you a good thumbnail sketch of the subject of Black Box Radiation.
Check out a bio on a guy named Max Planck, as in "Planck's Constant".

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 23:38:12 -0500

At 10:08 AM 8/14/96 CDT, you wrote:
>
>> It does exist.  I know several of the people working on this project.  It 
>> most likely uses remote sensing techniques, since that is the expertise 
>> of these folks.
>> 
>> Steve
>
>	I'm not an electrical engineer, but I don't buy it.  An
>	apparatus like this operating on millimeter-scale wavelength
>	would take a huge amount of power to have any appreciable range
>	(more than a few feet) and still penetrate even a thin layer of
>	clothing.  I can't imagine the FCC and the FAA letting the cops
>	wave around a bunch of high-powered emitters in an airport,
>	(even though millimeter-wave signals are a ways from
>	air-traffic radar on the EM spectrum, a little noise and a lot
>	of power equals a problem,) not to mention possible negative side
>	effects of aiming such a device at a pacemaker.
>
>	In short, I think the "Passive Millimeter Radar" story is pretty 
>	unlikely, (not that someone's not trying to build one, just 
>	doubtful it'll work.)  I'm more than willing to listen to any 
>	electrical engineers or physicists on the subject to point out
>	any errors in my thinking.
>
>-Thomas

Well, I *am* an electrical engineer and I believe it. mmw (millimeter wave)
acts something like the more familiar microwave (radar) radiation, but also
something like IR. The device is not IR, but works on the same physical
priniciples.  Things that are opaque to IR can be transparent or translucent
to mmw. As an example, the "domes" on IR seekers and other sensors, are or
were, made of a material that is highly reflective to visible light, they
look silver-gray, but quite transparent to IR.  Same thing can be true of
other materials WRT IR and MMW. About 15 years ago, a small team within my
department was working on a passive MMW sensor, that could  see through fog
and other obscurants that give visible light / IR sensors fits. I think it
was on a somewhat longer wavelength than the device in question. It could
easily see buildings, 

See Gun News Digest, Summer 1996 pages 29 and 30. Page thirty has a picture
of such a device in operation.

Screening and or jamming such a device should indeed be possible.  Note that
it is a passive device and thus does not emit any em radiation, any more
than your laser/radar detector does.

It operates on the principle that all bodies emit radiation, with the shape
and position of the spectrum of the emitted radiation being dependent on the
temperature (and emissivity) of the body in question. 
>
>

              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 22:30:15 -0700

At 11:38 PM 8/14/96 -0500, Joe Sylvester wrote:
>
>Well, I *am* an electrical engineer and I believe it. mmw (millimeter wave)
>acts something like the more familiar microwave (radar) radiation, but also
>something like IR. The device is not IR, but works on the same physical
>priniciples.  Things that are opaque to IR can be transparent or translucent
>to mmw. As an example, the "domes" on IR seekers and other sensors, are or
>were, made of a material that is highly reflective to visible light, they
>look silver-gray, but quite transparent to IR.  Same thing can be true of
>other materials WRT IR and MMW. About 15 years ago, a small team within my
>department was working on a passive MMW sensor, that could  see through fog
>and other obscurants that give visible light / IR sensors fits. I think it
>was on a somewhat longer wavelength than the device in question. It could
>easily see buildings, 

But not THROUGH buildings, I'm sure. 

>Screening and or jamming such a device should indeed be possible.  Note that
>it is a passive device and thus does not emit any em radiation, any more
>than your laser/radar detector does.

Perhaps it is ALREADY time for us, in the spirit of the good Danes on WWII
who _all_ wore yellow Stars of David on their clothing, to all begin
carrying "L" shaped bars of inert steel and small baggies of sugar or lawn
clippings in our clothing in order to cause false positive readings.  This
is called "spoofing" the systems, and can cause SERIOUS degradation of
electronic surveillance systems. 

Or perhaps just foil-lined jackets? 
Ken Mitchell        |The constitutions of most of our States assert,
8037 Stone Canyon   |that all power is inherent in the people;that 
Citrus Heights, CA  |they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases 
95610               |to which they think themselves competent, .....
kmitchel@gvn.net    |or they may act by representatives, freely and 
916-449-9152 (vm)   |equally chosen; that it is their right and duty
916-729-0966 (fax)  |to be at all times armed; that they are entitled
                    |to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom 
                    |of property, and freedom of the press."
                    | "The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson, 
                    |pp.46 - 47, Presented by John Dewey",
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 23:20:27 -0700

At 07:48 PM 8/14/96 -0700, Harry Barnett wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, E. J. Totty wrote:
>
>>         If enough people start wearing jammers, or clothing that confuses,
>> then the use of the sensor technology will be abandoned.
>
>One of Murphy's Rules of Combat is: When the enemy is in range, so are
>you.
>
>When a jammer goes in range, it becomes the focus of EVERYTHING IN THE
>VICINITY.  Think about it.  You don't even have to illuminate the
>thing, and you have a dead-on bearing to it.  Two bearings that cross,
>and 'X' marks the spot.
>
>The technology won't be abandoned (never seen a technological cork put
>back in a bottle yet), but speaking of 'abandoned', it will be
>interesting to find out how many friends you have when you activate the
>jammer...

I hereby volunteer to wear the first one and to fire it up in the rotunda of
the State Capitol here in Sacramento, or to BUILD the damn thing if somebody
can tell me exactly how the proposed "sensor" is supposed to work. 

Whatever, if it radiates less than, what, about 100 miliwatts?, it's legal
to radiate it.  Hmmmm..... if the frequency is high enough, it may be in
that "unlimited" high frequency band that's authorized for Amateur Radio
Operator use? Maybe us HAMs ought to build a communicator that'll operate at
that wavelength.....

Ken
WD0ELQ
Ken Mitchell        |The constitutions of most of our States assert,
8037 Stone Canyon   |that all power is inherent in the people;that 
Citrus Heights, CA  |they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases 
95610               |to which they think themselves competent, .....
kmitchel@gvn.net    |or they may act by representatives, freely and 
916-449-9152 (vm)   |equally chosen; that it is their right and duty
916-729-0966 (fax)  |to be at all times armed; that they are entitled
                    |to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom 
                    |of property, and freedom of the press."
                    | "The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson, 
                    |pp.46 - 47, Presented by John Dewey",
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: [1776] German invasion in New Mexico (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 00:19:58 -0600


Ich begruesse unsere deutschen Allierten, als sie neue Heime in New Mexico
machen.  Die Gelegenheit ist gross fuer uns Amerikaner, neue Freunde zu
machen und Neues zu lernen.  Auch die Gelegenheit, unsere USAF Kaserne
weiter zu benuetzen als die USAF sich verkleinert ist, politisch gesehen,
sehr gut.  Die County in NM bekommt das Geld  ($10M Wert)  in die
Wirtschaft und wir helfen einem Allierten mit dem Flug-Training und
-Schulung.

(I welcome our German allies as they make new homes in NM.  The opportunity
for us Americans is very big: new friends to make and new stuff to learn.
Also, the opportunity to make further use of a USAF base as the USAF
shrinks is a good thing, politically.  The NM county gets the money in its
economy and we can help our Ally with its flight training.)

Mit freundlichen Gruessen
Chad
maintainer ROC -- Restore Our Constitution mailing list


>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Wed, 14 Aug 96 14:08:00 PST
>From: dterry <dterry@atmel.com>
>Subject: [1776] German invasion in New Mexico
>
>>From the New York Times this morning.......
>
>August 14, 1996
>
>Germany Opens Luftwaffe Training Base in New Mexico Desert
>
>By JAMES BROOKE
>
>
>   ALAMOGORDO, N.M. -- If the 300 German prisoners of war interned here half
>a century ago could have attended a military ceremony held here last May,
>they would have stared as if looking at a desert mirage.
>
>   "This is a great day for the Luftwaffe, for Alamogordo, and for our two
>countries," Germany's defense minister, Volker Ruhe, proclaimed as honor
>guards marched German and American flags past a row of Tornado ground attack
>jets, each stenciled with the Iron Cross of Germany's Air Force. With that,
>the German Air Force Tactical Training Center opened for business at Holloman
>Air Force Base.
>
>   In the ebb and flow of great power relations, a small milestone is quietly
>being etched in this dry, baking hot expanse of cactus and sagebrush in
>south-central New Mexico: the training center is the first military facility
>leased by a foreign government in the United States.
>
>   To locals, it is simply "the German base." After investing $42 million in
>hangars and jet repair shops, Germany has moved here 12 Tornado jets, 300
>German Air Force men and 340 family members. Under a three-year expansion
>plan, the Germans want to invest another $125 million -- for maintenance
>hangars, a flight simulator, a jet engine shop, dormitories and fuel and
>munitions warehouses -- so they can increase their Tornado and Phantom F-4E
>training wing here to 50 planes and to increase the number of servicemen and
>dependents to 2,100.The German government is paying the Pentagon about $22
>million a year to use its corner of the base.
>
>   For the German military, New Mexico offers some of the best training
>conditions in the world: relentlessly sunny skies and plenty of desert for
>jet pilots to practice 500-mile-an-hour bombing runs at 100 feet off the
>ground. At sites where Germans have trained in Germany and Britain, military
>pilots are now largely barred from flying below 1,000 feet, a restriction
>imposed after the Berlin Wall fell and residents' complaints increased.
>
>   Without Germany's rain, fog, snow or altitude restrictions, training in
>New Mexico allows the Luftwaffe to shave six months off a standard 2-year
>basic course for Tornado pilots. Now, another NATO power, which officials
>refuse to identify, is considering leasing space to train pilots here.
>
>   German and American officials note that New Mexico is only slightly
>smaller than Germany. But, with only 1.7 million people, it has one-fiftieth
>Germany's population. Germany has a 40-year tradition of sending military
>pilots to U.S. bases for training. Currently, the nation buys about $200
>million worth of American weapons a year.
>
>   As what is called "supersonic overland airspace" becomes an
>internationally marketable commodity, some Americans are feeling queasy.
>
>   "Until Wednesday, 1 May 1996, there was no foreign military base on our
>shores -- not since the British were ejected in 1814!" James (Bo) Gritz, a
>retired Green Beret colonel and an informal leader of the far-right
>paramilitary movement, wrote recently in his newsletter, Center for Action.
>Echoing ultranationalist comments that ricocheted through right-wing talk
>shows and shortwave radio programs in May, he wrote: "Hitler would be proud!"
>
>
>   With Internet headings like 'German troops (Hessians) on our soil," the
>far-right furor grew so strong that about 60 members of Congress called the
>Air Force in May to ask about the expansion plans.
>
>   Last week, at a public hearing here on the German expansion plan, Bill
>Hornback, a ponytailed U.S. Air Force retiree, grumbled: "We go out and kick
>their tails two times -- and now they come here and call us 'hosts.' "
>
>   Ranchers complained about joy-riding pilots buzzing their sheep and
>cattle. But a vigorous defense of the Germans came from Richard Zierlein,
>chairman of the Otero county commission. In a time of defense cuts, he said,
>the German air force's 10-year lease helps guarantee Holloman's future. It
>also pumps an estimated $10 million a year into the economy of a county with
>only 58,000 people.
>
>   "We've got the Stealths here, but they can pick up and fly away anywhere
>anytime," Zierlein said of Holloman, which is the home base for the United
>States' only unit of radar-evading Stealth bombers and for American training
>jets. "You can't do that with a German base."
>
>   Germany's buildup here coincides with a radical reduction in the number of
>American soldiers in Europe. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
>United States has cut the number of American military personnel in Europe to
>100,000 from 300,000.
>
>   In Germany, the United States has closed four of its six air bases. By the
>end of the decade, if current plans are carried out, the United States will
>have roughly the same number of combat planes in Germany as Germany will have
>in New Mexico.
>
>   But Pentagon officials caution that while the numbers may converge, the
>missions radically diverge.
>
>   "We clearly have provided a line of defense to Germany that Germany is not
>providing by being in the United States," Kenneth Bacon, the Defense
>Department spokesman, said after attending the opening ceremony here with the
>secretary of defense, William J. Perry. "In that way, it's not exactly
>reciprocal. They're not defending us by being in the United States." In
>addition, Germany contributes toward the cost of keeping American troops
>there.
>
>   The German presence here, American military officers say, underscores the
>idea that the modern relationship between the Western world's two most
>powerful economies is one of allies.
>
>   "It serves as a symbol to the German people that this is not a one-way
>street," said Brig. Gen. Bruce Carlson, base commander at Holloman. "We have
>not been over there for 50 years running through their streets and woods as
>conquerors. We are allies."
>
>   Pentagon officials note that the German "tenants" account for fewer than 5
>percent of the daily sorties from Holloman. The American base commander said
>he was at the top of the chain of command at the base, adding, "Flying
>operations are all under my control -- they fly by my rules."
>
>   Joint operations and other cooperative efforts appear to be the way of the
>future, said Lt. Col. Donald L. Hargarten, the American officer who oversees
>the German project here. "German pilots are flying in Bosnia," he said. "If
>they weren't there, it would be our guys."
>
>   The German military personnel at Holloman seem happily oblivious to those
>who object to their presence. They are enjoying one of their nation's
>balmiest overseas posts since Germany lost its African colonies at the end of
>World War I.
>
>   "It's a goody," Col. Eckhard Sowada, the flight-suited German commander,
>said from his office in a beige base building marked simply: German Air
>Force.
>
>   German soldiers get a 50 percent pay bonus for service overseas. Here, a
>spacious house with a pool and garden can be rented for $1,200 a month, far
>less than in Germany. At local supermarkets, the prices of bratwurst,
>knackwurst and Black Forest ham are about 25 percent less than at home.
>
>   Gasoline sells for a third the price of Germany. And, easing the culture
>shock for Germans who grew up driving on autobahns without speed limits, most
>Western states raised speed limits this summer to 75 miles an hour on rural
>interstates.
>
>   "Around the halls, I hear, 'Last weekend, I was in Vegas,' 'I was in L.A.'
>Another got his speeding ticket in Phoenix," said Colonel Sowada, whose
>business card shows a Tornado roaring over cactus. The colonel kept up his
>tan all winter, skiing at a small resort half an hour from here, in the
>Sacramento Mountains.
>
>   Sgt. Mike Sprengard, a spokesman for the German unit, watched a brace of
>Luftwaffe Tornadoes scrape noisily last week across the half-dome desert sky
>and said: "New Mexico is great for Germans. I have been everywhere with my
>family -- Santa Fe, Taos, Carlsbad Caverns."
>
>   This is not the first time that German soldiers have fallen in love with
>New Mexico.
>
>   In the final months of World War II, 17 camps in New Mexico, including one
>at Alamogordo Army Air Field, held nearly 5,000 German prisoners of war, many
>sunburned veterans of the Afrika Korps. Although many of the 370,000 German
>prisoners held nationwide wanted to stay at the end of the war, virtually all
>were repatriated.
>
>   The only prisoner to escape without recapture was Georg Gaertner. In
>September 1945, he slipped away from a camp at Deming, N.M. In 1985,
>Gaertner, who had permanent-resident status here, finally surrendered to
>American authorities.
>
>   Today, Holloman's Family Support Center is easing the crosscultural
>adjustments for the 200 German military families here, much as base centers
>helped millions of American military families settle into West Germany in
>past decades.
>
>   Guides speaking German help Germans with such mysteries as using the swamp
>coolers that air-condition homes, cooking at near-zero humidity and at an
>altitude of 4,200 feet and dealing with local creatures like klapperschlangen
>(rattlesnakes) and the dreaded desert skorpion.
>
>   Reflecting this military town's largely warm welcome for the Germans, far
>more American families than were needed signed up to mentor new German
>families. Video stores are ordering German-language movies, and one store is
>stocking California Staats-Zeitung, a German-language weekly newspaper based
>in Los Angeles.
>
>   Next month, a German primary school will open. This fall, the base
>commissary is to double the size of its "German section" -- currently 310
>European food items displayed below black, red and gold bunting, the colors
>of Germany's flag.
>
>   "People are very friendly here," Staff Sgt. Joerg Heinen, a 23-year-old
>ejection-seat technician, said as he paused by a shelf stocked with Bavarian
>sponge cake. "I hope I can spend more time here."
>
>   He is not alone. Five Germans applied for each position available in New
>Mexico, Sowada said. After a few months, two-thirds of the Germans here have
>requested to extend their tours to four and a half years from three years.
>
>   "They say they are doing it for the nation," he said, rolling his eyes
>skyward in mock disbelief.
>
>
>
>
>Copyright 1996 The New York Times
>
>
>Received: by ccmail from email.atmel.com
>>From 1776-owner@iquest.com

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 14 Aug 1996 23:42:49 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Joe Sylvester wrote:

> Screening and or jamming such a device should indeed be possible.  Note that
> it is a passive device and thus does not emit any em radiation, any more
> than your laser/radar detector does.
> 
> It operates on the principle that all bodies emit radiation, with the shape
> and position of the spectrum of the emitted radiation being dependent on the
> temperature (and emissivity) of the body in question. 

Joe,

Since your last statement I believe to be entirely correct, may I
presume that you were trying to say with your first statement, "Note
that it is a passive device and thus does not emit any em radiation BY
DESIGN FOR THE PURPOSE OF ILLUMINATING A TARGET, any more than your
laser/radar detector does? (These, in fact, emit a great deal of EM
radiation, which is clearly evident if you have instruments sensitive
enough to detect and display it. And "great deal" is somewhat relative,
of course.)

This whole issue keeps a lot of EMI/EMC specialists gainfully employed.

As to screening, it depends.  A significant piece of surveillance
technology went public during the Waco Hearings.  Remember the part
where the forensic consultant analyzed the videos as the fire started?
I'm not sure what the frequency spectrum of the surveilling equipment
was (FLIR, maybe?), and while the resolution was poor, they were damn
well looking THROUGH buildings.  Same principle.

"There are things on this earth that you have not dreamed of."

Regards,
Harry

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 02:07:26 -0500

At 11:20 PM 8/14/96 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Whatever, if it radiates less than, what, about 100 miliwatts?, it's legal
>to radiate it.  Hmmmm..... if the frequency is high enough, it may be in
>that "unlimited" high frequency band that's authorized for Amateur Radio
>Operator use? Maybe us HAMs ought to build a communicator that'll operate at
>that wavelength.....

It's high all right >20 *Giga* Hz, minimun, more likely around 90 GHz, could
be even higher. I've not seen any referance to which band, or bands the
thing(s) work on. 

100mw would look like the Sun rising in the east, compared to the signal of
interest. Then only problem would be how to keep it from appearing as a spot
on the image, rather than blanking th e image entirely. It would be more
than just 1 pixel, as with all that power you'd likely get blooming or bleed
through, the sidelobes on the sensor can't be all *that* low. 

Think about a jamming "strobe" on a sterotypical circularly scanning radar.
(You sometimes see this on the weather radars, when a nearby set or other
source indadvertantly "jams" the Wx radar)  Enough  power and you jam the
sidelobes as well as the mainlobe, and the "strobe" expands to all azimuths.







              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 00:09:14 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Kenneth Mitchell wrote:

> I hereby volunteer to wear the first one and to fire it up in the rotunda of
> the State Capitol here in Sacramento, or to BUILD the damn thing if somebody
> can tell me exactly how the proposed "sensor" is supposed to work. 

Check with the NTIS (National Technical Information Service).  And with
Web Search Engines, I would be surprised if you couldn't come up with a
source for a pretty good technical description of it within a few
hours.

> 
> Whatever, if it radiates less than, what, about 100 miliwatts?, it's legal
> to radiate it.  Hmmmm..... if the frequency is high enough, it may be in
> that "unlimited" high frequency band that's authorized for Amateur Radio
> Operator use? Maybe us HAMs ought to build a communicator that'll operate at
> that wavelength.....

It's a multi-spectral, or wide-band device.  You ought to be able to
throw together a few commercially available parts, with a random noise
generator for a modulator that will cause emissions all over the
spectrum of interest, hook it up to a sweater woven with metallic
thread, tweak and tune it a little, singe the hair on your chest, and
become a great white ball of light on their scopes, a real shining
standout.  Depends on how sophisticated their equipment is.

They might even be able to read the "Kick Me!" sign stuck to your
back!  :-)

> 
> Ken
> WD0ELQ

Harry
WA7UEF

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 02:22:32 PST

On Aug 15, Harry Barnett wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Kenneth Mitchell wrote:
>
>> I hereby volunteer to wear the first one and to fire it up in the rotunda of
>> the State Capitol here in Sacramento, or to BUILD the damn thing if somebody
>> can tell me exactly how the proposed "sensor" is supposed to work. 
>
>Check with the NTIS (National Technical Information Service).  And with
>Web Search Engines, I would be surprised if you couldn't come up with a
>source for a pretty good technical description of it within a few
>hours.
>
>> 
>> Whatever, if it radiates less than, what, about 100 miliwatts?, it's legal
>> to radiate it.  Hmmmm..... if the frequency is high enough, it may be in
>> that "unlimited" high frequency band that's authorized for Amateur Radio
>> Operator use? Maybe us HAMs ought to build a communicator that'll operate at
>> that wavelength.....

Someone might be able to play some signal polarity games too.  Vertical,
Horizontal, Circular, Rotary etc.

>It's a multi-spectral, or wide-band device.  You ought to be able to
>throw together a few commercially available parts, with a random noise
>generator for a modulator that will cause emissions all over the
>spectrum of interest, hook it up to a sweater woven with metallic
>thread, tweak and tune it a little, singe the hair on your chest, and
>become a great white ball of light on their scopes, a real shining
>standout.  Depends on how sophisticated their equipment is.

Singe is right.  Microwaves can kill;  What the Giga range stuff will do I
wouldn't know.  Those metallic threads sound interesting though.  you could
have them woven into the cloth about a MM apart and both verticaly and
horizontaly for a passive shield, sort of like a wearable faraday cage or
maybe a "Curtain Antenna".

>They might even be able to read the "Kick Me!" sign stuck to your
>back!  :-)

But only if they're looking through your navel, and hold a mirror up next to
the screen.....:-)

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: LaPierre gives quasi-endorsement to gun-grabber Dole
Date: 15 Aug 1996 07:36:41 -0400 (EDT)

Surfing the tube last night trying to get away from the Republican 
infomercial, I flipped into Wayne LaPierre in San Diego, saying something 
like, "NRA hasn't taken a position yet regarding an endorsement but 
Dole/Kemp are much better than Clinton/Gore."

Anything Clinton has done to us, Dole has abetted.  I wish NRA would not 
endorse him, formally or informally.

bd


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: LaPierre gives quasi-endorsement to gun-grabber Dole
Date: 15 Aug 1996 07:37:43 -0600

>Surfing the tube last night trying to get away from the Republican
>infomercial, I flipped into Wayne LaPierre in San Diego, saying something
>like, "NRA hasn't taken a position yet regarding an endorsement but
>Dole/Kemp are much better than Clinton/Gore."
>
>Anything Clinton has done to us, Dole has abetted.  I wish NRA would not
>endorse him, formally or informally.
>
>bd


EVERYONE needs to get on the horn and tell NRA to NOT endorse.  Tell them
that their only realistic choice is to endorse Browne or noone at all.
Encourage them to endorse Browne.

best
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Terrorism !
Date: 15 Aug 1996 09:36:33 -0500

>> Was Reno even in office when Ruby Ridge occurred?

>RR took place in the Bush administration.

Then it would seem out of place to castigate her for the Ruby Ridge affair.

>Reno was confirmed half way through the waco debacle.  On the last day she
>left the office to go to Maryland to make a speech at a lunch gathering.
>Sometime after she left, the attack began.  Though she's taken
>responsibility there is more than a little doubt she gave the attack order.

Waco is her baby alright, so it would seem appropiate to castigate her for
that. But not Ruby Ridge - that's Geo. ("NWO") Bush's baby.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: [1776] German invasion in New Mexico (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 08:56:04 -0700 (PDT)

2100 German citizens buying slurpees and ho ho's at local convenience 
stores. $22MILLION tax dollars we don't have to pay (but note that we 
still own that base and didnt have to convert it into a mid desert weed 
patch). Plus more F4E sales and more tornado sales for our allies 
(Brittain makes that one, no?). Throw in that our allies here (these are 
NOT NAZIs guys) get training that is hard or impossible to get 
elsewhwere, training we would -rely-on- in a European war, and this 
sounds like the deal of the century to me.Why do I get the feeling I'm 
supposed to feel on cynical and nervous about this? We did in fact kick 
Nazi butt in WWII, that's part of why these -Germans- are now our 
allies. Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 08:57:25 -0700

        Harry,

        >>>>>>>
        The technology won't be abandoned (never seen a technological cork put
back in a bottle yet), but speaking of 'abandoned', it will be
interesting to find out how many friends you have when you activate the
jammer...
        <<<<<<<

        A slinking wolf has a better chance than a sitting duck.

        And, big cities have all those nice and big reflective glass panes
. . .

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 09:20:35 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Harry Barnett wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, boydk wrote:
> 
> > Would this be the type of "remote sensing" one can do with magnetic reeds 
> > bought at radio shack, or is this the "remote sensing" one might here 
> > about on the Art Bell show, done by the "pscyhically abled"? Boyd
> 
> Neither.
> 
> It's a type of remote sensing known as "multi-spectral imaging",
> analogous to that performed on data acquired by LandSat's, EarthSat's
> and the like.  Remote sensing techniques are simply the application of
> statistical methodology to data collected simultaneously in several
> spectral bands in an organized manner over an organized area.
I was under the impresssion that land sats -always- had sensors specific 
to the type of radiation they "picture"d and that that was 
multispectral imaging. Is that not true? 

> A video
> camera is an example of passive remote sensing.
A video camera gathers reflected visible light. In contrast, several 
folks have referred to "milimeter wave" radiation as "being transmitted 
by" or "emanating" from guns and other inanimate objects. How can an 
inanimate object like my glock23 transmit Milimeter wave radiation?

> It takes a tremendous amount of number-crunching power to produce
> decent resolution in images in anything approaching real time, as well
> as superb sensor technology, but number crunching capability doubles
> about once in three years at the pace we are going now, and science and
> engineering are improving sensor technology at a like pace.
It's very difficult for me to believe that sensor technology, wich 
requires advances in basic materials sciences is advancing as fast as 
computer technology wich is mostly cerebral and less subject to the 
physical vagaries of chemistry and physics. For instance, video cameras 
operate on the same prismatic effect they were built with in the late 
50's and the sensors have had -one- revolutionary change since then (from 
tube to ccd). My powerbook could easily replace any tube mainframe, most 
home video cameras have obvious color banding and oversaturation 
(especially those low light models everybody pays more for but quite 
frankly simply suck big hairy rocks in comparison to, like, a Kodak 
Brownie).

snip 
> If you're really interested, contact the Purdue Laboratory for the
> Applications of Remote Sensing, which focuses on the unclassified
> applications of such techniques.  They may even have a Web Page.  A Web
> Search on "Remote Sensing" ought to turn up a whole slough of
> references.  Any decent technical library ought to have four or five
> books on the subject.

Will do, and thanks for the interesting information.

> Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 09:23:46 -0700 (PDT)

Excellent again Harry, thanks for so much info, I've got some reading 
ahead of me : ) Sorry for duplicating some questions in my earlier post 
this morning. Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: McDougal Cooperating With Starr?
Date: 15 Aug 1996 11:24:23 -0500

From the "news" (Reuters newsfeed on <clari.net>):

	James McDougal, a former business partner of President  
Clinton's who was convicted of fraud and conspiracy charges, is 
reportedly cooperating with Whitewater prosecutors in a bid for 
lenient sentencing, the Los Angeles Times reports. The paper 
says McDougal started to cooperate with independent counsel 
Kenneth Starr about three weeks ago and has offered to tell the 
special prosecutor everything he knows about the Whitewater 
affair. Sentencing is set for Monday. McDougal's attorney and a 
spokesman for Starr refused to comment on the report. 

-----

The Republican November 1996 Landslide is alive and well.

In fact, Ted Koppel is so sure of it he doesn't even need to stick around
for the Convention to finish.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Update: Politicsnow petition on Klinton Gun Ban
Date: 15 Aug 1996 11:55:51 -0600

ChuckS@bangate.compaq.com wrote:
> 
> The count a few minutes ago (10:34 Texas Time) was 252 to repeal vs. 84 to
> keep the ban.  Most of this since this morning apparently.
> 
> It's at -
> http://www.politicsnow.com/interact/petition/petition.cgi?which=GOPweapons
> 
> Chuck Scanland
> Spring
> 
> No opinions have been expressed.



I just checked the list and the only roc/noban members I saw on the list 
were neil atkins, jeff jennings, howard bloom, tanya metaksa, ed lawson, 
chuck scanlan, boyd kneeland, bill gray, richard hartman, ken emanuelson 
and myself.  That's not even all the regular posters much less all the 
membership.

Folks, you need to sign this puppy in droves, pretend there's a gun law 
up in the house and act accordingly, please.



-- 
"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
because he knows you have the means to do it.
 
"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
everything you've got."

                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Update: Politicsnow petition on Klinton Gun Ban
Date: 15 Aug 1996 12:04:39 -0600

I accidentally omitted bob knauer from the list of signees.  Sorry about 
that.

-- 
"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
because he knows you have the means to do it.
 
"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
everything you've got."

                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ed Lawson" <edlawson@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Update: Politicsnow petition on Klinton Gun Ban
Date: 15 Aug 1996 12:37:45 -0500

I signed the petition last night, but left off my street address. 
My name didn't show up till I went back this morning and filled it
out completely.   Others may be experiencing the same thing.

Ed Lawson
On Thu, 15 Aug 1996 11:55:51 -0600, Howlin' Blue wrote:

>I just checked the list and the only roc/noban members I saw on the list 
>were neil atkins, jeff jennings, howard bloom, tanya metaksa, ed lawson, 
>chuck scanlan, boyd kneeland, bill gray, richard hartman, ken emanuelson 
>and myself.  That's not even all the regular posters much less all the 
>membership.
>
>Folks, you need to sign this puppy in droves, pretend there's a gun law 
>up in the house and act accordingly, please.

>-- 
>"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
>reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
>screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
>because he knows you have the means to do it.
> 
>"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
>everything you've got."
>
>                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou
>
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: Update: Politicsnow petition on Klinton Gun Ban
Date: 15 Aug 1996 14:50:56 -0600

Hi All

If you are leery of putting your address in the survey then either: Make
one up or use your company's address.  They don't know the difference and
they won't stick up your name without an address it  seems.

regards
Chad

>ChuckS@bangate.compaq.com wrote:
>>
>> The count a few minutes ago (10:34 Texas Time) was 252 to repeal vs. 84 to
>> keep the ban.  Most of this since this morning apparently.
>>
>> It's at -
>> http://www.politicsnow.com/interact/petition/petition.cgi?which=GOPweapons
>>
>> Chuck Scanland
>> Spring
>>
>> No opinions have been expressed.
>
>
>
>I just checked the list and the only roc/noban members I saw on the list
>were neil atkins, jeff jennings, howard bloom, tanya metaksa, ed lawson,
>chuck scanlan, boyd kneeland, bill gray, richard hartman, ken emanuelson
>and myself.  That's not even all the regular posters much less all the
>membership.
>
>Folks, you need to sign this puppy in droves, pretend there's a gun law
>up in the house and act accordingly, please.
>
>
>
>--
>"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
>reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on
>screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
>because he knows you have the means to do it.
>
>"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
>everything you've got."
>
>                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Disney Boycotted _Again_
Date: 15 Aug 1996 14:00:40 PST

First it was the Southern Baptists who started Boycotting Disney, and now
the Assembly of God has joined in.  I'm not sure about the former, but the
latter has been known to offer _lots_ of Disney Vacation Deals/Products/etc,
to their membership, so that's a fairly large bite for the Disney
corporations.

Financially speaking, Disney is still taking a bath in that families are
staying away from their movies and animated features in droves.  The last
two were real bombs for them, and it's my bet they're go to go that way a
little longer yet before they wake up and smell the coffee.  Like large
ships, large corporations and/or groups of them take a while to turn around.

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: FW: New eyes for Big Brother (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 18:09:01 -0700 (PDT)


This technology MUST reveal SEXUAL AROUSAL.  I believe that thermography
is used in the lab to do so for men and women.

The Gestapo is going to select women/men based upon their state of arousal
for further "investigation", conversation, ...  Guaranteed.

This is an exceptionally easy experiment to perform, and may be fun 8)
Somebody should do so and get out the press release immediately.  It is
guaranteed to get attention, air play, etc.  Press can't help themselves
on topics like this, no matter how it will PO big brother.

We need to enlist American prudery in the cause of Civil Rights, for once.

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David LeVine" <Dave_L@Mainstream.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 23:04:56 +0000

> Perhaps it is ALREADY time for us, in the spirit of the good Danes
> on WWII who _all_ wore yellow Stars of David on their clothing, to
> all begin carrying "L" shaped bars of inert steel and small baggies
> of sugar or lawn clippings in our clothing in order to cause false
> positive readings.  This is called "spoofing" the systems, and can
> cause SERIOUS degradation of electronic surveillance systems. 

With all due respect, what would a wad of 10 one dollar bills look 
like?  A dark rectangale, I would guess.  And a bag of Cocaine?  A 
dark rectangale, I would guess.

What does this do to probable cause?

Dave  8{)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 21:26:43 -0700 (PDT)

On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, E. J. Totty wrote:

>         If enough people start wearing jammers, or clothing that confuses,
> then the use of the sensor technology will be abandoned.
>         Given the extremes of the garment fashion industry, I do believe
> that they could be employed to design fashionable 'cloaks' that render the
> use of the sensors null.
> 
> Ed

By George, I think you've got it!  All we need is a "personal cloaking
device", a la Schwarzenegger's alien nemesis in "Predator".  :-)

More seriously, passive surveillance devices are, by their very nature,
more difficult to defeat than active devices.  For one thing, it is
difficult to detect that the surveillance devices are even there with
means available to the average citizen.  Furthermore, you have to
consider what you mean by "defeat".  What is your goal, your
objective?  If it is to conceal, active jamming ain't the way to go
about it, nor is "extraordinary" clothing.  What you need is shielding
that just renders you, or the object you are trying to conceal, "not
there".  While you're at it, invent something that covers the visible
spectrum, too, will ya?

For every measure, there is a countermeasure.

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 21:54:06 -0700 (PDT)

On Thu, 15 Aug 1996, David LeVine wrote:

> With all due respect, what would a wad of 10 one dollar bills look 
> like?  A dark rectangale, I would guess.  And a bag of Cocaine?  A 
> dark rectangale, I would guess.

It depends on a number of things.  The physical priniciples upon which
the sensor operates, the physical filtering the emissions are subjected
to before it reaches the sensor, the attribute of the radiation
detected by the sensor, the frequency response (time constant) of the
sensor just for starters.  And then, after you have converted the
attribute of the radiation detected (e.g., power spectral density) to
its electrical analog, easily converted to digital samples, you can
then apply MORE filtering (either analog or digital), and then apply
any of several dozen common (and some not so common) imaging algorithms
to the acquired data, including the use of statistical methodology, and
then apply further filtering and conversion to render it in a form
suitable for graphic display at the desired resolution and refresh
rate, say at 30 to 60 frames per second.

It's no great stretch to conceive, given current commercially available
technology, that a bag of cocaine could indeed be easily ("easily" is
all relative, of course) distinguished from several dollar bills.  In
fact, it isn't far fetched to consider they might be able to tell a
Jackson from a Lincoln or a Franklin.  How it is finally rendered on an
imaging device depends on how the device is engineered, i.e., what its
as-built specifications are.  If the customer wants to see paper money
in green, and cocaine in red, all they need to do is ask for that
rendition.  And all the engineers have to do is put together the
devices and the circuitry and the data processing to give them what
they want.  (Sometimes easier said than done.  :-)

> 
> What does this do to probable cause?
> 
> Dave  8{)
> 

Prabable cawz?  Ah doan need no steenkeen Prabable Cawz!  :-)

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: LFB Book News: KNOWLEDGE AND DECISIONS (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 08:28:39 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

[Note: This title has not arrived in stock yet, but we are accepting 
orders for it.  The books are reportedly on their way to us; I 
expect we'll receive them sometime in the next week.  --Russell]

Now back in print with a new preface!

Why governments make so many bad decisions which inflict people with 
endless agony

KNOWLEDGE AND DECISIONS
by Thomas Sowell
(reviewed by Jim Powell)

For decades, governments have expanded their power to make vital 
decisions affecting our lives.  Yet as Hoover Institution scholar 
Thomas Sowell shows in KNOWLEDGE AND DECISIONS, governments are 
largely incapable of making good decisions.

This isn't a matter of bad luck, like the former Soviet Union's annual 
crop failures.  Nor is it because of the difficulty in finding smart 
bureaucrats.  As Sowell explains, good political decisions are almost 
impossible because of the nature of knowledge and the way governments 
function.  The more decision-making authority governments seize from 
private individuals, the more bad decisions are made--and the more 
miserable people will be.  Sowell applies to innumerable policy issues 
the insights Hayek developed on the role of knowledge in society.  

Sowell explains why private individuals in free markets are much 
better at making decisions... why less knowledge is required for good 
decisions in free markets... why ordinary people succeed where smart 
politicians fail... why private individuals are better than 
bureaucrats at applying knowledge and in a better position to 
understand trade-offs... and much more.

Sowell dispels the delusion that government can be made better and 
provides a compelling case for why we must regain the right to make 
decisions over our own lives.  Many people consider this his most 
important book, and we at Laissez Faire Books are proud to have had a 
hand in bringing KNOWLEDGE AND DECISIONS back into print.

TS7131 (paperback) 422p.  List price: $15.00
             LAISSEZ FAIRE PRICE ONLY $12.50

Please send this review to anyone who you think might be interested

KNOWLEDGE AND DECISIONS is available from Laissez Faire Books.
To order . . .

BY EMAIL: Address email orders to Sarah at orders@LFB.org.  If you 
have ordered from us before, include your name and zip code (or 
postal code), and we will process your order using the information we 
have on file.  If you have not ordered from us before, we will need 
your name, address, and credit card number (including expiration 
date).  If you prefer not to send this information over the Internet, 
please write, telephone, or fax us with this information before 
emailing your order.  PGP encrypted mail is accepted; email me at 
Russell@LFB.org or finger lfb@lfb.org for our public key.

BY MAIL: Write to Laissez Faire Books, Dept L50, 938 Howard St., 
Ste. 202, San Francisco, CA 94103-4114, USA.

BY PHONE: Call toll free 1-800-326-0996 (US and Canada) or dial 
(415) 541-9780.  Customer service representatives are available 
between 9am and 6pm PACIFIC TIME.

BY FAX: Fax us at (415) 541-0597.

PAYMENT: Make a check or money order payable to Laissez Faire Books, 
or pay by credit card.  (We accept Visa, Mastercard, and Discover.)

California residents must include sales tax.  (To learn the sales tax
rate for your county, contact Laissez Faire Books or point your web 
browser to http://www.boe.ca.gov/boe/tsutr.htm.)

SHIPPING & HANDLING: Standard US mail is $3.25.  (International 
customers: Surface mail is $3.75.)  Contact us for other shipping 
options.

If you'd like to receive our free monthly printed booklist, or if 
you'd like to receive Book News announcements via email, or if you 
have any other questions or comments, please let me know.

Visit our web pages at http://www.lfb.org/

Russell Hanneken
Laissez Faire Books
Russell@LFB.org



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: Balancing the Federal Budget (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 08:30:41 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------



BALANCING THE FEDERAL BUDGET REQUIRES ENFORCEMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION

Statement, T. David Horton, Legal Counsel, Committee to Restore the
Constitution, before the Finance Committee, Nevada State Senate,
considering Arizona Joint Resolution #25, rescinding Nevada's call for a
Constitutional Convention (1987).
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------  
 ---
The present un-balance of the Federal Budget is directly traceable to
violations of the U.S. Constitution in two areas:  Congressional
expenditures for purposes that are not permitted by the Constitution and
Congressional borrowings in violation of it.

Many federal expenditures are made in violation of the limits imposed upon
the Congress by the States when they agreed to the Constitution of the
United States.

The second area of Constitutional violation consists of Federal borrowings
to finance expenditures in excess of receipts.

Both of these Constitutional violations are induced by the departure by the
Congress from the requirements of Article 1 Section 8 clause 5 of the U.S.
Constitution whereby  Congress received from the States, their power to
issue money.  The Congress has unlawfully delegated the power it received
from the States to the Federal Reserve Corporation, a private institution
in which the United States owns not one share of stock.

The Federal Reserve Corporation has supplied the American economy with a
Debt Money System that is ill-suited to the requirements of the
free-enterprise economy.  It is this Debt Money System that creates the
imperious necessity of the Congress violating the Constitution in order to
keep the economy going.  A Debt Money System requires the continued
expansion of debt.  Unless there is debt created to provide for the
issuance of Debt Money, money will disappear and the economy will be
ruined.

In order to avert this cataclysm, unconstitutional, and frequently
socialist programs are supported to create the deficit necessary to provide
the Debt Money for the economy to run on.

So long as our Debt Money System remains unchanged, inherent economic
pressures will force the Congress to continue deficit financing in
violation of the Constitutional Prohibitions against deficit financing, the
Constitutional Prohibitions against Socialist programs, and any additional
Constitutional Amendment requiring a balanced budget.

THE POWER, AND THE DUTY, TO CORRECT CONSTITUTIONAL INFRACTIONS BY THE
CONGRESS LIES WITH THE STATES.

The States created Congress as one of three special or limited agencies to
which the States agreed they would delegate limited and enumerated power.
The Congress unlawfully violated the Constitution by abandoning its
responsibility to issue debt-free currency and by making un-Constitutional
expenditures financed by unconstitutional deficits.  It belongs to the
State to correct these excesses of its agent.

It is not constitutional amendment that is required when the Congress
violates the Constitution, it is constitutional enforcement that is
required.

The State may use its legislative power to correct constitutional
infractions within its borders.  Nevada has already started such
legislative correction in the Public Lands Ownership Act.  Nevada could
also start the correction of our un-constitutional Debt Money System by
adopting a State statute absolving Nevada of her obligation not to issue
money, and providing for the issuance of silver coins as legal tender.
This measure would stimulate the Nevada economy.  Other States could copy
Nevada's example, as they did in the Public Lands Ownership Movemant, and
end the depression in their States, at the same time, they could join
Nevada in calling for the constitutional issuance of money by the Congress.

AMENDING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION BY MEANS OF A CALL FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL
CONVENTION IS FRAUGHT WITH HAZARD AND UNCERTAINTIES.

Those who glibly assure us that a Congress that habitually violates the
limits of its own authority would steadfastly circumscribe someone else's
authority (that of the Constitutional Convention) excite the risible
faculty.  The express language of Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution
provides that a Constitutional Convention shall consider 'amendments'
(plural).  There is no precedent for the Congress successfully limiting the
powers of a Constitutional Convention.

I might trust a suave amd well-spoken Congressman with my life, but never
with my Constitution.

****************************************************************************  
***
*
Don't stand idle while others, for lack of knowledge, watch in helpless
despair, destruction of their money and property by Federal Reserve
decision makers.

Send self-addressed, stamped, #10 envelope.  Ask for tactical operation
"How to defend your money and property against confiscatory stratagems of
the Federal Reserve".
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------  
 ---
 -
Archibald E. Roberts, LtCol, AUS, ret, Director
Committee to Restore the Constitution, Inc
Post Office Box 986    Fort Collins, Colorado   80522
Web Site:   http://www.fortnet.org/~comminc


* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 09:52:45 -0400 (EDT)

On Thu, 15 Aug 1996, Harry Barnett wrote:
> >         If enough people start wearing jammers, or clothing that confuses,
> > then the use of the sensor technology will be abandoned.
> >         Given the extremes of the garment fashion industry, I do believe
> > that they could be employed to design fashionable 'cloaks' that render the
> > use of the sensors null.
> 
> By George, I think you've got it!  All we need is a "personal cloaking
> device", a la Schwarzenegger's alien nemesis in "Predator".  :-)

What would the sensors show if one were wearing say, something covered 
with metal studs, like a lot of jeckets are?  What if a woman was wearing 
a leather metal-studded bustierre, a la Madonna?  Would they force a 
strip search on her?

I can see where those who are into body-piercing will give those doing 
the scanning a real thrill....

;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Donald Silberger <SILBERGD%SNYNEWVM.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject:      Hurry up please it's time
Date: 16 Aug 1996 09:57:43 EDT


STOP THE BROWNE OUT!  Let's have substantive Presidential/VicePresidential
debates for a change this fall.  Invite the Libertarian Party's candidates
Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen to participate.  Let the debaters speak
freely and without interruption.  Field *ALL* phoned in questions.  Keep
the discussion going until some debater quits.  STOP THE BROWNE OUT!

=========================================================================
Return-Path: <announce-request@HARRYBROWNE96.ORG>
Received: from UICVM (NJE origin SMTP@UICVM) by UICVM.CC.UIC.EDU (LMail
 V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0269; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:02:11 -0500
Received: from hustle.rahul.net by UICVM.UIC.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP;
   Thu, 01 Aug 96 17:02:07 CDT
Received: by hustle.rahul.net with UUCP id AA01790
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for SILBERGD@SNYNEWVM.bitnet); Thu, 1 Aug 1996 14:57:58 -0700
Received: by dehnbase.fidonet.org (mailout1.26); Thu, 1 Aug 96 14:11:13 PDT
Message-Id: <47716.32011D70.ann@HarryBrowne96.org>
Sender: announce-request@HarryBrowne96.org
Reply-To: campaign@HarryBrowne96.org
X-Mailer: mailout v1.26 released with lsendfix 1.6a


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HARRY BROWNE, LIBERTARIAN FOR PRESIDENT
2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington DC 20037
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For additional information:
Bill Winter, Director of Communications
Phone: (202) 333-0008
Internet: 73163.3063@CompuServe.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CAMPAIGN NEWS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 1, 1996


Anti-terrorist proposals are "attack on the rights
of innocent Americans," charges Harry Browne


        WASHINGTON, DC -- President Bill Clinton and
Congressional Republicans are using the recent attacks
on TWA Flight 800 and the Olympic games to try to pass
a "wish list" of unconstitutional legislation under the
guise of fighting terrorism, Libertarian Party
presidential candidate Harry Browne charged today.

        "If we're not careful, half of the Bill of Rights
will fall victim to the frantic desire of Republican and
Democratic politicians to appear tough on terrorists,"
he warned.

        Browne spoke out against a wide range of so-called
"anti-terrorist" proposals from the White House and
Congressional Republicans -- including roving wiretaps,
no-warrant wiretaps, extending RICO laws to terrorists,
Internet censorship, government-mandated taggants, and
efforts to weaken computer privacy.

        "Each of these proposals is an attack on the
rights of innocent Americans masquerading as an attack
on guilty terrorists," said Browne. "Add them all together,
and you have a Republican and Democratic wish list to
increase the power of government at the expense of the
Bill of Rights.

        "But the Bill of Rights is a literal and absolute
document. The First Amendment doesn't say you have a right
to speak out unless the government has a 'compelling interest'
in censoring the Internet. The Second Amendment doesn't say
you have the right to keep and bear arms until some madman
plants a bomb. The Fourth Amendment doesn't say you have a
right to be secure from search and seizure unless some FBI
agent thinks you fit the profile of a terrorist. The government
has no right to interfere with any of these freedoms under any
circumstances," said Browne.

        The Libertarian candidate said the "anti-terrorist"
proposals -- and the bipartisan haste to pass them into
law -- dramatically illustrate the importance of having
another choice in the 1996 presidential race.

        "Clinton has gotten into a bidding war with Newt
Gingrich, Bob Dole, and other Republicans to see who can
repeal your rights fastest. Neither of the two older
parties will defend the Bill of Rights. Only a Libertarian
will speak out against this headlong rush towards a police
state," he said.

        Responding to the specific "anti-terrorist" proposals,
Browne said he opposes:

        * So-called "roving'' wiretaps, which would allow
police to tap multiple phones of suspected criminals. "This
does nothing but make it easier for the government to spy
on people not convicted of any crime," said Browne. "There
is no evidence that this kind of wire-tapping power would
have prevented any past terrorist action -- or will prevent
any future terrorist act."

        * No-warrant wiretaps, which grant "emergency"
wiretap authority to government agents for 48 hours without
a judge's order. "This would repeal basic Fourth Amendment
protections and put us all at the mercy of uncontrolled
government spying," said Browne.

        * Extending anti-racketeering statutes to terrorists,
making them subject to property forfeiture laws. "Asset
forfeiture laws are a license for legal looting by law
enforcement," said Browne. "These laws must be abolished
-- not expanded."

        * A provision which would ban the publication of
bomb-making information on the Internet -- while keeping
it legal in printed form. "Politicians claim the First
Amendment doesn't apply to the Internet, while blithely
ignoring the fact that such information remains widely
available in public libraries, army manuals, and even
in the Encyclopedia Britannica," said Browne.

        * A long-standing White House push to allow
government officials to spy on computer communications by
mandating weakened encryption technology. "Free speech
includes the right not to be spied on by government officials,"
countered Browne.

        * Government mandated taggants -- microscopic plastic
color-coded identifiers -- in black or smokeless powder and
explosives. "Such taggants pose a safety threat to innocent
users, would create a de facto system of ammunition registration,
and would impose a hidden tax of up to $700 million on the mining
and quarrying industries, which are the principal users of
such products," said Browne.

        Unlike Republicans and Democrats, Browne said he
wouldn't be goaded into permanently gutting the Bill of
Rights to temporarily grandstand as "tough on terrorists."

        "The Bill of Rights wasn't written to protect terrorists.
It was designed to protect you," said Browne. "Of course, these
safeguards would protect the guilty as well as the innocent. But
brushing them aside gives government employees the power to do
as they wish -- to harass whomever they think is guilty. If that
happens, then terrorists have already won their greatest victory."

--
Harry Browne for President                         Campaign@HarryBrowne96.org
http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/                               fax: 202-333-0072
2600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100, Washington DC 20037     voice: 202-333-0008

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: [1776] German invasion in New Mexico (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 10:04:44 -0500

At 08:56 AM 8/15/96 -0700, you wrote:
>2100 German citizens buying slurpees and ho ho's at local convenience 
>stores. $22MILLION tax dollars we don't have to pay (but note that we 
>still own that base and didnt have to convert it into a mid desert weed 
>patch). Plus more F4E sales and more tornado sales for our allies 
>(Brittain makes that one, no?). Throw in that our allies here (these are

Primarily Messerschmit(sic?), but actually a consortium of British, German
and Italian companies. The radar was designed by Texas Instruments, and
early production was in Dallas, but currently i is produced in Europe.

The British do make an interceptor version, which only they, and I think the
Saudis, use.

 I don't know that they are producing anymore, although they might be. The
technology is 20-25 years old after all, being more or less contemporaneous
with the early model F-15s, and having undergone no major upgrades, like the
F-15,F-16, F-18 transition from A/B models to C/D models (and E and E/F for
the -15 and -18 respectively)

 
 
>NOT NAZIs guys) get training that is hard or impossible to get 
>elsewhwere, training we would -rely-on- in a European war, and this 
>sounds like the deal of the century to me.Why do I get the feeling I'm 
>supposed to feel on cynical and nervous about this? We did in fact kick 
>Nazi butt in WWII, that's part of why these -Germans- are now our 
>allies. Boyd
>

It *is* a lot nicer having the Luftwaffe on our side for a change. :-) .


              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 08:14:07 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, Donna J. Logan wrote:

> What would the sensors show if one were wearing say, something covered 
> with metal studs, like a lot of jeckets are?

It depends.  On the design, quality, and condition of the equipment,
and on the training of the operator.

> What if a woman was wearing 
> a leather metal-studded bustierre, a la Madonna?  Would they force a 
> strip search on her?

The answer to this is that Police Agents of the State (and 14YO boys)
will do what they have always done, in all times, and in all places:
They will do whatever they think they can get away with.

> I can see where those who are into body-piercing will give those doing 
> the scanning a real thrill....
> 
> ;-)

This would be more true of an ACTIVE device, that illuminated the
target with energy at traditional "radar" frequencies and depended on
the illumination energy REFLECTED to create an image.  That kind of
device depends upon the opacity and non-absorptive qualities of the
various, er, "appliances" involved in such decoration.

Remember that this is a PASSIVE device: it utilizes only the natural
radiation EMITTED by the target.

A useful illustration of the difference is, again, a video camera.  A
video camera utilizes the energy reflected from a target to produce an
image.  This reflected energy comes from either natural illumination
(Sun), or artificial illumination (e.g., electric lights).  If this
illumination goes away, the capability of the camera to produce an
image degrades; it depends on the camera's sensitivity.  Modern
commercially available ones have a "1 lux rating", for example, which
is a pretty low "light level".

The video camera is, of itself, a passive device: it does not generate
the illumination upon which it depends for it to function.  However, if
the target activates a flashlight and points it at the camera, a
"smear" appears, because as little as it is, the energy EMITTED by the
flashlight is far more intense than the energy reflected, under normal
conditions, by a conventional target.  And the image the camera creates
is of the point source of light the target is holding, NOT of the
target itself.  How well the camera copes with such extremes, and
produces a usable image anyway, is a measure of its "dynamic range".

Similarly, a passive millimeter wave imager depends on the natural
energy radiated by the target: it does not illuminate the target
itself.  All materials have different transmissivities.  For example, a
good pair of "true color" sunglasses will "filter out" UV, and transmit
the visible spectrum with the same spectral curve in the visible range
as that produced by natural sunlight.  A belt buckle, a boustierre
stud, a nipple ring, depending on the material it is made of, will be
opaque to some frequencies, absorptive of some, reflective of some,
translucent of some, and transparent to some.  "Seeing through" them,
or "seeing ONLY" them, or somewhere in between, is merely having the
technical capability to sort out and detect the frequencies of interest
(those to which they are transparent and translucent, for "seeing
through" them) from the noise and signal around them.  (Easier said
than done, but doable nevertheless.)

So, getting back to the charter of ROC, all the indignation and
excitement is over nothing more exotic, really, than a video camera.
Which was pretty exotic 50-60 years ago.  Times change, people change,
things change.  Someone getting up in arms about being "searched" by a
millimeter wave imager is like their getting outraged because they walk
down the middle of Main Street naked, and people look at them.

The solution is simple, really.  If you don't want to be observed, keep
your millimeter waves out of their apertures.  If you want to shake
your boody in their face, a la "Braveheart", then you can actively jam
them, or use "chaff" in the form of apparel and appurtenances.

Right now, cost of the things is prohibitive, but dollars to doughnuts,
as soon as the cost drops, and it gets out of the prototype phase into
mass production, there will soon be a movement afoot to keep these
things "out of the hands of private citizens, who have no legitimate
need for them."  And all the "outraged indignation" will simply play
into the hands of that movement.

You can either be an archer, and cry "The Sky is Falling!" about the
use of gunpowder, or you can get one of them bang-sticks for yourself,
and figure out how to turn it to your advantage.  But no matter what,
you are NOT going to be able to un-invent gunpowder.

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: 1776: Inslaw, the Continuing Caper (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 12:13:40 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


The following is a forward from the 1776 list posted to PIML as an item of
interest. Original sender is Friends of Wisdom <biophilos@flinet.com>
Please address any comments or questions regarding the item's contents to
the original sender.

=20
"Inslaw, the Continuing Caper"
UNCLASSIFIED
No. 37, Summer 1996

INSLAW UPDATE

Inslaw trial delayed while court panel inspects intelligence agency softwar=
e.

If you haven't heard too much recently about the Inslaw case, probably the
most significant national security and intelligence scandal of the past
several decades, that's not surprising.  No articles have appeared for a
long time in either mainstream or alternative American media about Inslaw's
contention that the Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, NSA and other major
U.S. intelligence agencies stole Inslaw Inc.'s PROMIS database management
software.  Originally developed in the early 1980's to provide federal
prosecutors with computerization to handle paper-intensive case-management
tracking, Inslaw says the government took PROMIS and has used it, illegally
and without license, continually since 1985 on numerous sites in federal
agencies throughout the government -- including in the offices of the
Attorney General of the United States, the Honorable Ms. Janet Reno.

Further, sources speculate that stolen PROMIS is the official, secret
database management system which coordinates the entire U.S. intelligence
infrastructure, a "plate of spaghetti which connects anything to anything"
as one person familiar with the software describes it, and perhaps the
single most important computer program in day-to-day use by the national
security establishment.=20

Driven into bankruptcy after the Department of Justice refused to pay its
contract with Inslaw in 1985 (with indications that DOJ insiders, including
Earl Brian, an Ed Meese crony, intended to buy Inslaw at a bargain-basement
price after forcing its demise), the company won a tough legal battle in a
1987 bankruptcy court decision; in it federal bankruptcy Judge George Bason
agreed with Inslaw owners Bill and Nancy Hamilton that the DOJ had
appropriated PROMIS by "fraud, trickery and deceit."  Despite Judge Bason's
award of seven million dollars, the Hamiltons saw their victory quickly
evaporate when a three-judge appellate panel of Reagan appointees overturne=
d
Bason's ruling on a technicality. Judge Bason's decision also apparently
cost him his job: passed over for routine re-appointment in his highly
technical bankruptcy specialty, Bason was replaced by a lawyer who had
argued against Inslaw in the trial.

The suspicion of many is that Bason only made one mistake: ruling against
the Department of Justice. Now, after years of legal battles, congressional
hearings and highly-criticized self-exonerating DOJ reports, Inslaw is back
in court, having won a Congressional Reference resolution in a vote of
congress last year, to sue the United States, in the case of "Inslaw Inc.
and William and Nancy Hamilton vs. the United States and the United States
Department of Justice," scheduled to begin September 4th for a three-week
trial in Washington's U.S. Federal Court of Claims.=20

Representing Inslaw owners Bill and Nancy Hamilton in their long-awaited
federal suit, the Atlanta law firm of Pope, McGlammery, Kilpatrick, and
Morrison has advised them not to give interviews about the litigation, a
request they've honored.

Despite this, UNCLASSIFIED is pleased to offer this exclusive update, a
roundup of information from knowledgeable sources which may be the only
print record in the U.S. on the current status of Inslaw vs. the Department
of Justice.=20

MODIFIED PROMIS - A COVERT OPERATION?

 Some observers see the alleged PROMIS theft as having implications far
beyond the bare claims being made in court.   Over the years sources have
alleged that a technically brilliant covert operation transformed the stole=
n
PROMIS program -- originally a 500,000 line program written for mainframe
computers in the COBOL language  -- into a high-tech spying tool of
unprecedented power.  In the early 1980's the story goes, brilliant CIA
programmer Michael Riconoscuito and a development team at the
Wackenhut/Cabazon Joint Venture in Indio, California added a secret
'trapdoor' access, modifying PROMIS and creating a bugged version which was
allegedly sold to foreign government, intelligence, and police agencies,
friend and foe, around the world.

(For the first time in this country, UNCLASSIFIED presents an exclusive
report on the first public discussion of technical details on the PROMIS
trapdoor modification.  See below).

The availability of a PROMIS-like espionage tool would be a temptation for
any spy agency, launching American spycraft into the 21st century and
consigning to the past forever the old coldwar clich=E9 of a spy in a gray
hat, breaking into an office and photographing pieces of paper with a Minox
miniature camera.  The new paradigm: computerized power and efficiency with
the silent and undetectable downloading of electronic data from any site
where the software is installed, anywhere in the world.

PROMIS AND BANKING

As an example of a surprising PROMIS application, allegedly the program
allows the NSA to monitor worldwide financial transactions in 'real time' -=
-
i.e., to watch money-laundering on the screen while it actually happens, an=
d
so to determine all its sources, nuances, destinations, and ultimately, its
purposes. Even more astonishing, the software may itself be used for
money-laundering, an application with enormous potential for any covert
operations agency.

Understandably, hard evidence of these exotic uses of PROMIS has yet to be
established, but 'sources' and some reports over the years -- such as
Anthony Kimery's 1994 articles for the Thomson Banking Regulator, which cos=
t
him his job -- have provided consistent indications that the wildest dreams
you might have about the PROMIS software, could all turn out to be true.=20

Kimery's articles reported evidence of (unlicensed) PROMIS installation in
international banking and financial institutions, including banks in
Switzerland, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.  If that'=
s
the case, it would be naive to assume that PROMIS is not used in many
American banking institutions as well, and indeed Inslaw received
information that Systematics Inc., based in Little Rock Arkansas and the
largest banking software purveyor in the U.S., has sold banking software
based on PROMIS.

PROMIS AND THE CLINTONS

The political implications of a Systematics/Promis connection are somewhat
staggering, since the company's then-owner, Jackson Stephens, was the first
major financial backer of Bill Clinton's campaign for the presidency.  The
Rose Law Firm represented Systematics, and during that era its partner
Hillary Clinton became something of an expert in the esoteric legal field o=
f
intellectual property rights and patent protection, while personally
representing the Systematics firm.  Though no court cases arose against
Systematics on those grounds, Mrs. Clinton, we can assume, was fully
prepared if they did.

Even if coincidental, this makes for a very odd coincidence indeed, since
the Inslaw theft and modification have long been associated with the
Reagan/Bush/Meese/Casey regimes at CIA, DOJ and related federal
bureaucracies.  But early in their tenures, Janet Reno and former high
ranking Clinton DOJ appointee Webster Hubbell (since convicted and now
serving a prison term in a case involving false billing at the Rose Law
firm) astonished Inslaw followers by signing off on, and ratifying, the
Bush-sponsored, controversial and problematic 'Report of Judge Bua on
Inslaw' -- a whitewash, exponents of the case argue, which falsely
exonerates the DOJ of any impropriety in the Inslaw "contract dispute."=20

Inslaw's response, the excoriating "Rebuttal to the Report of Judge Bua" an=
d
its "Addendum" are required reading for anyone interested in the Inslaw
matter: far from being dry legal arguments, these extensive documents shred
the Bua report point by point and provide dramatic evidence of DOJ lying,
conspiracy and coverup in the Inslaw case.

They also detail some of the more exotic aspects of the case, including
background information, two reports of death threats against the Hamiltons,
reports of unsuspected applications of PROMIS (which is installed,
apparently, on all U.S. and British nuclear submarines) and other
information which has come to Inslaw over the years, from sources they deem
reliable and whose information, over a long time span, has been proven vali=
d.

INSLAW AND THE MEDIA

While the basic Inslaw allegations may sound like quite a story, the
response of the mainstream media over the years has been to completely
ignore Inslaw, relegating it to the damning category of  "it's not news" (a=
s
Don Hewitt, producer of 60 Minutes, told this writer), or lately, the
post-Clinton election spin, that "it's an 80's story," a catchall aimed at
dismissing any government malfeasance earlier than the Whitewater
investigation as irrelevant to the concerns of our progressive and
forward-looking democracy.

Even among those few journalists who are aware of Inslaw, it's often heard
that the topic is just too complex, and by implication, tedious (whether fo=
r
the writer or the readership isn't explained), a matter far too esoteric an=
d
abstract to merit the attention of a wide public -- which might otherwise b=
e
reasonably interested to learn whether or not its top law enforcement
agency, the Department of Justice, as well as its major intelligence
agencies, have been guilty of massive felony theft, fraud and coverup for
well over a decade.

DANNY CASOLARO

Well, how boring is the Inslaw case? Very, if you read The New York Times,
which in a few tiny,  buried articles, invariably refers to Inslaw as a
"government contract dispute," playing it down to stultifying blandness,
while consistently leaving Inslaw's more exotic details unmentioned.  The
most important of these is the still-mysterious death of investigative
writer/investigator Danny Casolaro, who announced to friends in August 1991
just days before he was found dead in a West Virginia hotel room, that afte=
r
a year of intensive investigation he had "cracked" the Inslaw matter, and
was about to meet a key "source" to obtain a final piece of evidence.  That
meeting either never occurred, or it resulted in Casolaro's murder.
Although the death was officially ruled a suicide -- and so legally, a 'cas=
e
closed' -- local police records of the investigation of Casolaro's death
remain unreleased by local police or the DOJ five years later.

The single Department of Justice report which discusses Casolaro (a followu=
p
to the Bua report) lays out the scenario that the ebullient writer and
indefatigable investigator was in fact a heavy drinker, depressed, in
financial straits, possibly afflicted with a terminal disease, and so,
suicidal. People who knew Casolaro give a different picture, describing him
as a "great guy" whom "everybody liked", with a close family, lots of
friends, and who, in solving Inslaw and uncovering the 'octopus' as he
called the conspiracy, likely had reached a breakthrough in his career.

To date, there has never been an official, objective investigation into the
many remaining questions and contradictions surrounding Casolaro's death,
despite indications, for example, that his autopsy examination or results
may have been altered or falsified.  Nevertheless the Department of Justice
has taken considerable pains to reinforce the notion that Casolaro -- at
what should have been one of the most exhilarating moments in his life --
slashed both his wrists an impossible dozen times, and somehow disposed of
the sheaves of documents and evidence that he was known to carry with him
everywhere he went.

INSLAW IN COURT - 1996

The Inslaw trial had been scheduled to begin on May 28th, but was postponed
until the September 4th date to give a panel of three software experts time
to inspect software now in use in five federal agencies, to determine
whether or not it has the "DNA" of PROMIS.   That work, which hasn't begun
yet, has been authorized by the court, but is expected to take several
months. Selection of the panel was divided among the three parties: Inslaw
chose Tom Bragg, adjunct professor at George Washington University and a
professional expert on computer software who owns his own software business=

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: politics now
Date: 16 Aug 1996 14:53:16 -0600

This is interesting.  There are 4 topics on the PN petition list.  
Immigration, term limits, abortion and guns.  The votes are as follows.

immigration  167/65

term limits   96/54

abortion     240/347

guns         578/97


Gee, I wonder what the hot issue on the net is?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: thomas@solbrn.dseg.ti.com (Kenneth T Emanuelson ii)
Subject: Hasta la vista
Date: 16 Aug 1996 15:37:32 CDT





	August 16, 1996

	To:	My friends on ROC, NOBAN, and TGO

	From:	Ken Emanuelson (thomas@solbrn.dseg.ti.com)

	Re:	Hasta la vista!


	As many of you are already aware, I'm leaving my cushy
	engineering career to begin law school at the University of
	Texas.  In order to fully devote myself to my studies, I'm
	biting the bullet and swearing off my internet and political
	addictions for awhile.  I want y'all to know I've enjoyed all
	the discussion immensely.  Although the debates have been
	pretty heated on occasion, I consider all of you my allies and
	friends, and I hope this sentiment's shared.

	I look forward to the time when I can actively take up the
	banner of liberty alongside you.  Consider me in "covert ops"
	training :)

	This email address will cease to be valid after the end of next
	week.  If anyone has any reason to get in touch with me,
	Lobo'll always know where to find me.

	In liberty,

	Kenneth Thomas Emanuelson II
	

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack@minerva.com
Subject: Re: politics now  /Suggestion
Date: 16 Aug 1996 13:10:48 PDT

roc@xmission.com wrote :

>This is interesting.  There are 4 topics on the PN petition list.  
>Immigration, term limits, abortion and guns.  The votes are as follows.
>
>immigration  167/65
>
>term limits   96/54
>
>abortion     240/347
>
>guns         578/97
>
>
>Gee, I wonder what the hot issue on the net is?
>
>
>

Maybe you could get some editorial space in one of the NRA magazines that
would say:

Find a friend with a computer

Impress the politicians

Sign your name to each and every political poll showing the strong popular
support behind the 2nd Amendment.....give web site

Maybe even attach such a message to all those alerts that go to so many
FAX addresses

Jack



    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 16 Aug 1996 15:53:34 -0600

Call me and give me a vox when you get to austin.  I'm in there quite a 
bit and you may want to come down here and hang out from time to time.  
I got a guest room you can use on occassion when you want to chill out.  
Bernie Stolzman (digitwiz) married a lt col in the AF and she's just 
been transferred to SA so between rod and lawson and paul and a few 
others we practically got a noban chapter here.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 16 Aug 1996 16:06:54 -0600

that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry 
about that.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 14:23:50 -0700

        Harry,

        >>>>>>>
        What you need is shielding
that just renders you, or the object you are trying to conceal, "not
there".  While you're at it, invent something that covers the visible
spectrum, too, will ya?
        <<<<<<<

        There are several ways to play this game.
        Usually though, as David LeVine" <Dave_L@Mainstream.net> pointed
out in an earlier post,
"spoofing" is about the best way I can think of, except I would not use
intentionally distracting or other object shapes that would draw attention
to me. I will explain why in a moment.
        Rather, as I pointed out earlier, clothing that has either metalic
materials, or materials known to diffuse/distort the radiation in the band
of interest, woven into or appliqued to the surface in a decorative
pattern.
        The impact of wearing a garment that completely 'shades' everything
excepting your exposed extremities, would be cause to probably stop you.
        Active spoofing, would entail wearing a garment that actually
radiates in the spectrum at a level that deceives the receiver, with
puposeful little 'shades' built-in, to look like various personal
paraphernalia. This of course presumes, that you will wearing a full set of
street clothes. Such an outfit I suppose, could be tailored to work at a
specified power level when wearing summer clothing such a shorts and the
like, so as to present a 'believeable' image.

       Spoofing the system with _intentional fakes_, could lead to some
negative consequences, in that the FASCIST's could argue that you were
intentionally misleading the police, and may well land you someplace you'd
rather not be.

        Some basic science.

        Back around 1972 or so, I remember reading an article in either
Science News or Scientific Amercan, about some engineers who had taken a
piece of niobium and placed it into a tray of liquid nitrogen. After a
period of time allowing the atomic structure to stabilize at that
temperature, they suspended the test piece above the tray. The area around
the tray was rigged with several extremely sensitive recievers tuned to
various frequencies, and connected to recorders.
        The results of that test showed that the niobium test piece began
to radiate at a band of frequencies that rapidly swept upwards as the piece
gradually warmed to room temperature.
        Granted, the amount of energy the metal radiated was exceedingly
small, and was just within the detection range and sensitivities of the
instruments being used at the time. But it proved that the atomic structure
of a material could be used to determine a temperature merely by measuring
the the frequencies radiated - not unlike passive infrared.
        In a subsequent experiment, the niobium test piece was used in an
RF circuit, as a filter.

        I don't know if you are familiar with YIG's (yttrium-iron-garnet),
but they are used extensively in microwave instrumentation as filters.
Basically, it is an alloy ball that is suspended on a ceramic rod in an
isolation sphere. The isolation sphere has a permanant magnet attached -
externally, which surrounds the sphere in a donut shape, and one must be
very carefull not to abuse the assembly when working with or around it, so
as not to change the gauss value. Attached to the ball at opposing sides,
are electrode conections that are attached to external connectors.

        At 90 degrees to the electrodes, and placed so that the YIG alloy
ball is centered in it, is a coil of wire that is used to create a magnetic
field (which is called the 'sweep' field) that is in opposition - by 90
degrees to the external permanent magnet's field. The intensity of the
'sweep' field aligns the magnetic domains of the YIG structure, such that
it operates as a  'window' to a specific narrow band of frequiencies.
        In the same way, that the YIG operates as a filter, it can also be
used as a feedback path to an amplifier thereby causing it to oscillate,
assuming positive feedback of course.
        The current supplied to the sweep field can be a DC value, but is
most often a linearized sawtooth, generated by an a sychronizing sweep for
a crt display, such as in spectrum analyzers.

        Well, as you might have expected, the niobium did pretty much the
same thing, except only a low temperature was required to produce the same
results.

        If you are wondering how all this science is relevant to the
discussion, consider using a heating pad as one method of a spoof. It could
be warm on a hot day, but hey, fun is fun. And besides, if it is rolled-up
and stuffed down your pant leg, not only will you get _looks_ but you'll
REALLY get 'looks'!

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: Re: Update: Politicsnow petition on Klinton Gun Ban
Date: 16 Aug 1996 18:39:19 -0400

I just signed it, and at 17:57 8-16 there were 601 for repeal, 97 against.
In LIBERTY
Tom

At 11:55 AM 8/15/96 -0600, you wrote:
>ChuckS@bangate.compaq.com wrote:
>> 
>> The count a few minutes ago (10:34 Texas Time) was 252 to repeal vs. 84 to
>> keep the ban.  Most of this since this morning apparently.
>> 
>> It's at -
>> http://www.politicsnow.com/interact/petition/petition.cgi?which=GOPweapons
>> 
>> Chuck Scanland
>> Spring
>> 
>> No opinions have been expressed.
>
>
>
>I just checked the list and the only roc/noban members I saw on the list 
>were neil atkins, jeff jennings, howard bloom, tanya metaksa, ed lawson, 
>chuck scanlan, boyd kneeland, bill gray, richard hartman, ken emanuelson 
>and myself.  That's not even all the regular posters much less all the 
>membership.
>
>Folks, you need to sign this puppy in droves, pretend there's a gun law 
>up in the house and act accordingly, please.
>
>
>
>-- 
>"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
>reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
>screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
>because he knows you have the means to do it.
> 
>"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
>everything you've got."
>
>                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou
>
>
>
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made
in the shape of your conscience to block the pleasures
permitted by mine.  When you people prevail, you commit
a crime against freedom, and that is the greatest
immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
(no date avail). Thanks to:Mark Johnson (onethumb@why.net)

.. To each of my Nephews, William Augustine Washington, George Lewis, George
Steptoe Washington,  Bushrod Washington, and Samuel Washington, I give one of
the Swords or Cutteaux of which I may die possessed; and they are to chuse in
the order they are named. --These Swords are accompanied with an injunction
not to unsheath them for the purpose of shedding blood, except it be for
defense, or in the defense of their Country and its rights; and in the latter
case, to keep them unsheathed, and prefer falling with them in their hands,
to the relinquishment thereof.
(Will, July 9, 1799)

>From "Maxims of George Washington," published by The Mount Vernon Ladies'
Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1989.
Thanks to Bob2A@aol.com

"A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon is truth,
still; and a lie on the throne is on the way to defeat, and truth in a
dungeon is on the way to victory." --Anonymous.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 17:09:43 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, E. J. Totty wrote:

>         The impact of wearing a garment that completely 'shades' everything
> excepting your exposed extremities, would be cause to probably stop you.

It wouldn't fit the legal definition of probable cause to stop and
frisk, as it is currently accepted, but it very well could make you a
"person of interest".

>        Spoofing the system with _intentional fakes_, could lead to some
> negative consequences, in that the FASCIST's could argue that you were
> intentionally misleading the police, and may well land you someplace you'd
> rather not be.

As a seer from my youth told me, "If you play with the bull, you're
liable to get the horns up your ass."

>         If you are wondering how all this science is relevant to the
> discussion, consider using a heating pad as one method of a spoof. It could
> be warm on a hot day, but hey, fun is fun. And besides, if it is rolled-up
> and stuffed down your pant leg, not only will you get _looks_ but you'll
> REALLY get 'looks'!
> 
> Ed

Battery heated long johns and socks (maybe other things) are available
through several hunter's supply outlets.  Powering them with, say, 200
MHz square waves instead of DC (low power, of course, don't want to
singe the wrong things) MIGHT produce sufficient spectral power density
in the region of interest.  Flexible flat lead can be readily cut to
any desired shape, and appropriately terminated, to use as radiators.

Now all we need are a bunch of people with the mentality of Graffiti
Artists to carry the concept to its logical extreme, and like the
Energizer Bunny, keep going, and going, and going...  :-)

Hey, whadda we wanna be when we grow up?  :-)

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: AW ban on Politicsnow
Date: 16 Aug 1996 22:32:56 -0400

Just checked at 22:30 8-16, and the tally is 641for repeal, 98 against. Keep
it up.
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made
in the shape of your conscience to block the pleasures
permitted by mine.  When you people prevail, you commit
a crime against freedom, and that is the greatest
immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
(no date avail). Thanks to:Mark Johnson (onethumb@why.net)

.. To each of my Nephews, William Augustine Washington, George Lewis, George
Steptoe Washington,  Bushrod Washington, and Samuel Washington, I give one of
the Swords or Cutteaux of which I may die possessed; and they are to chuse in
the order they are named. --These Swords are accompanied with an injunction
not to unsheath them for the purpose of shedding blood, except it be for
defense, or in the defense of their Country and its rights; and in the latter
case, to keep them unsheathed, and prefer falling with them in their hands,
to the relinquishment thereof.
(Will, July 9, 1799)

>From "Maxims of George Washington," published by The Mount Vernon Ladies'
Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1989.
Thanks to Bob2A@aol.com

"A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon is truth,
still; and a lie on the throne is on the way to defeat, and truth in a
dungeon is on the way to victory." --Anonymous.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: The Republican campaign
Date: 16 Aug 1996 19:57:13 PST

Well, having listened to the Republican Convention Highlights on KVI, and
watched on PBS, (better at least than commercial broadcast TV), what little
of the Convention they _allowed_ to get between their bouts of the talking
DeadHeads with their Moron level "inciteful questions", Sophomoric
"Commentary", and time wasted assigning "School Grades" to speeches, I was
about ready to scream at the TV, "SITDOWN, SHUTUP, AND LET 'EM TALK!!!!!"

While they did let the Speeches of Senator and Mrs. Dole air, other just as
important speeches like that of J.C. Watts was totally ignored by them.  As
far as those who were only watching on commercial or PBS TV are concerned,
they never happened.  I geuss they just can't stand to let anyone see a good
inciteful, successul, role model grade, conservative, Negro doing well.

I hope the RNC or someone else had the good sense to tape the whole affair
as a lot of people need to see/hear some of this stuff.  while some of the
lesser hoopla won't be missed, the important stuff would probably sell
fairly well if they put it out at a reasonable price.

Bob Dole came off looking like he's Presidential timbre for a change;  Like
he might even win.  The entire affair was pretty upbeat, leading some of
the talking DeadHeads to comment, "There's no news here".  None _they_
wanted to hear at any rate, or let _us_ hear.  The Convention seems to have
been a success in some ways, but inspite of, rather than because of the
media.

The kicker though, as I see it, is that the Dole campaign is being run by
those moderates who have no successes to their credit whatsoever.

The very same ones who ran the campaigns for Gerald Ford, George Bush, and
Phil Gramm.....

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 16 Aug 1996 21:32:15 -0700

>        Usually though, as David LeVine" <Dave_L@Mainstream.net> pointed
>out in an earlier post,
>"spoofing" is about the best way I can think of, except I would not use
>intentionally distracting or other object shapes that would draw attention
>to me. I will explain why in a moment.

The point is that this technology is only POLITICALLY viable if it can be
kept quiet and only used against the bad guys.  When fine upstanding
law-abiding citizens get caught by this, there'll be hell to pay. 

>        The impact of wearing a garment that completely 'shades' everything
>excepting your exposed extremities, would be cause to probably stop you.

You're suggesting that the JBGT's are goig to ADVERTISE the fact that
they're performing illegal warrantless electronic searches of law-abising
citizens? 

>        Active spoofing, would entail wearing a garment that actually
>radiates in the spectrum at a level that deceives the receiver, with
>puposeful little 'shades' built-in, to look like various personal
>paraphernalia. This of course presumes, that you will wearing a full set of
>street clothes. Such an outfit I suppose, could be tailored to work at a
>specified power level when wearing summer clothing such a shorts and the
>like, so as to present a 'believeable' image.

The technology, as discussed here, is postulated to be "passive" in nature.
(I personally do not accept that it can even theoretically work as
discussed. Nothing I learned getting my degree in physics can explain this.)
The only active radiating element here is  going to be a jammer. 

>       Spoofing the system with _intentional fakes_, could lead to some
>negative consequences, in that the FASCIST's could argue that you were
>intentionally misleading the police, and may well land you someplace you'd
>rather not be.

Again, the goons are going to ADVERTISE this?  They stop somebody who's
REALLY clean, and that person will own the Mayor's and the Chief of Police's
houses by the time the lawsuits are done. 



Ken Mitchell        |The constitutions of most of our States assert,
8037 Stone Canyon   |that all power is inherent in the people;that 
Citrus Heights, CA  |they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases 
95610               |to which they think themselves competent, .....
kmitchel@gvn.net    |or they may act by representatives, freely and 
916-449-9152 (vm)   |equally chosen; that it is their right and duty
916-729-0966 (fax)  |to be at all times armed; that they are entitled
                    |to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom 
                    |of property, and freedom of the press."
                    | "The Living Thoughts of Thomas Jefferson, 
                    |pp.46 - 47, Presented by John Dewey",
-------------------http://www.vpm.com/kmitchel/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 17 Aug 1996 01:27:40 -0500

At 09:32 PM 8/16/96 -0700, you wrote:

>The technology, as discussed here, is postulated to be "passive" in nature.
>(I personally do not accept that it can even theoretically work as
>discussed. Nothing I learned getting my degree in physics can explain this.)
>The only active radiating element here is  going to be a jammer. 

The radiating is being done by the object under surveilance itself. (Go to
your Halliday & Resnick and look up black body radiation. The devices work
like FLIRs, except at MMW frequencies) See New Gun Week, Summer 1996 pp
29-30, for a very brief description and a picture of the device and the
image it produces. Hard to tell from the picture, but the resolution looks
to be a fraction of an inch (1/3-1/4 perhaps) at distance of a few feet.
Good enough to make out the trigger guard on the concealed pistol. 

Any "jammer" would need to be spacially distributed, else it would appear as
a point, or smudge on the display. 


              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Passive Millimetre Radar - NWO "people scanner" (fwd)
Date: 17 Aug 1996 00:04:38 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, Kenneth Mitchell wrote:

> The point is that this technology is only POLITICALLY viable if it can be
> kept quiet and only used against the bad guys.  When fine upstanding
> law-abiding citizens get caught by this, there'll be hell to pay. 

While the technology is subject to abuse, by private agencies as well
as public authorities, I suspect it will be used to focus on "persons
of interest", and conventional probable cause will develop from
continued focussed observation of the individual, not from crowd
surveillance.

> 
> >        The impact of wearing a garment that completely 'shades' everything
> >excepting your exposed extremities, would be cause to probably stop you.
> 
> You're suggesting that the JBGT's are goig to ADVERTISE the fact that
> they're performing illegal warrantless electronic searches of law-abising
> citizens? 

Why not?  They do it in every Federal Courthouse, and most Federal
buildings and major airports right now!  Only difference is, it's not
"new" (in a public sense), "magic" technology.

> Again, the goons are going to ADVERTISE this?  They stop somebody who's
> REALLY clean, and that person will own the Mayor's and the Chief of Police's
> houses by the time the lawsuits are done. 


A fellow near LA, who owned a ranch some sheriff wanted to seize on a
trumped-up drug bust pretext, is dead from a raid which came about from
probable cause developed, in part, from satellite surveillance photos.

He was REALLY clean.

AFAIK, the county still is in possession of this highly desirable ("to
kill for") piece of real estate, although the physical search where
they killed the fellow turned up nada.

If he had no heirs who will pursue the jerks involved, the county will
probably keep it, too.

This happened a couple of years ago, you never see a whisper about it
in the Prissy Media, and I have no idea what "due process" has
determined in this matter.


-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 17 Aug 1996 06:43:49 -0700

At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>about that.


        Just don't let it happen again, okay?

        >>thrash<< !!

        >>thrash<< !!

        ;-)

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: NEW "RIGHT TO CARRY" STUDY HAS ANTI-GUNNERS RUNNING SCARED
Date: 17 Aug 1996 10:18:54 -0500

The more I read this report (see below), the more amazing I find it.

The comment about "so many lives would have been saved but for CCW in all
the states." shows who the real criminals are:  the hoplophobes and their
Fascist political allies.

I wonder if Schumer and his constituency are proud of what they have done to
increase the murder rate?

Everyone in New Yawk City who supported Schumer's Fascist gun control laws
should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for having contributed to the
death and injury of so many fellow Americans.

And all of us need to let them know it too!

Bob Knauer

-----

From the NRA:

>                        NRA-ILA FAX ALERT
>            11250 Waples Mill Road * Fairfax, VA 22030
>    Phone: 1-800-392-8683 * Fax: 703-267-3918 * GROOTS@NRA.org
>                                 
>Vol. 3, No. 34                                            8/16/96

[snip]

>NEW "RIGHT TO CARRY" STUDY HAS ANTI-GUNNERS RUNNING SCARED: The
>results of a landmark study released last week of "right to carry"
>laws have the anti-gunners running for political cover.  In recent
>days, the author of the study, University of Chicago School of Law
>Professor John Lott, has become the target of a vicious smear campaign
>by members of the anti-gun establishment aimed at discrediting his
>research.  At the heart of their criticism is the fact that Lott is
>currently the John M. Olin Fellow at the University of Chicago Law
>School, a fellowship funded by the John M. Olin Foundation, which got
>its money from the Olin Corporation.  The Olin Corp. happens to own
>Winchester Ammunition, and that alone is enough "to call into question
>the study's legitimacy," according to the Illinois Council Against
>Handgun Violence.  However, writer Stephen Chapman points out in his
>commentary in the Chicago Tribune, there are many serious flaws in
>that reasoning.  For instance, the Olin Foundation was created with
>money from John Olin's personal wealth, not by the Olin Corp., and has
>no corporate parent.  Furthermore, the foundation played no role in
>choosing Lott for the fellowship, did not give Lott any money, and did
>not approve his topic.
>
>NEW POLL SHOWS STRONG SUPPORT FOR "RIGHT TO CARRY": The findings of
>the Lott study are backed up by the results of a poll released this
>week by the Tarrance Group.  The study showed that by a wide margin,
>Americans believe that law-abiding citizens should be able to carry a
>firearm for self-defense should they choose to do so.  The poll showed
>that 59% of voters support the right of the law-abiding to obtain
>permits to carry concealed firearms, compared to only 36% who don't.
>The survey also revealed that 84% of American voters believe that
>individual criminals alone should be held responsible for their
>actions, while only 5% believe that firearms manufacturers and dealers
>should be held accountable.
>
>GROUNDBREAKING STUDY AVAILABLE ON INTERNET: Professor Lott's study of
>"right to carry" laws and their effect on crime -- Crime, Deterrence,
>and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns (see Fax Alert No. 33) -- can
>now be downloaded via the Internet at
>http://law.lib.uchicago.edu/faculty/lott/guns.html.  Lott's research
>goes a long way towards explaining why so many Americans support
>"right to carry," and why many lawmakers previously opposed to these
>laws are now reconsidering their positions.

-----

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: NEW "RIGHT TO CARRY" STUDY HAS ANTI-GUNNERS RUNNING SCARED
Date: 17 Aug 1996 09:11:09 -0700 (PDT)


Maybe we could get Parker Brothers to modify their "Clue" game slightly.

As in "Who killed the Hoplophobe?"

I confess.  It was "Colonel Mustard in the Library with a Pen."

(Sorry.  Couldn't resist. :-)

-----
Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 17 Aug 1996 12:24:51 PST

On Aug 17, E. J. Totty wrote:

>At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>>about that.
>
>
>        Just don't let it happen again, okay?
>
>        >>thrash<< !!
>
>        >>thrash<< !!
>
>        ;-)
>
>Ed

It would help a lot if the "Reply-To: roc@..." line were removed from
everything that roc sends out.  Point to point email _used_ to be easy.....

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 17 Aug 1996 14:11:24 -0600

>On Aug 17, E. J. Totty wrote:
>
>>At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>>>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>>>about that.
>>
>>
>>        Just don't let it happen again, okay?
>>
>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>
>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>
>>        ;-)
>>
>>Ed
>
>It would help a lot if the "Reply-To: roc@..." line were removed from
>everything that roc sends out.  Point to point email _used_ to be easy.....
>

it still is easy.  You type in the TO: line the receiver's email address...

regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 17 Aug 1996 14:13:37 PST

On Aug 17, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:

>>On Aug 17, E. J. Totty wrote:
>>
>>>At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>>>>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>>>>about that.
>>>
>>>        Just don't let it happen again, okay?
>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>        ;-)
>>>Ed
>>
>>It would help a lot if the "Reply-To: roc@..." line were removed from
>>everything that roc sends out.  Point to point email _used_ to be easy.....
>
>it still is easy.  You type in the TO: line the receiver's email address...

Allready supplied by Elm, and then ignored and replaced when you use the
Send command, requireing hand editing of both the mail file and one of the
control files, sometimes racing the hourly dial up to do it.  Fun stuff.

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 17 Aug 1996 16:00:19 -0600

>On Aug 17, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
>
>>>On Aug 17, E. J. Totty wrote:
>>>
>>>>At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>>>>>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>>>>>about that.
>>>>
>>>>        Just don't let it happen again, okay?
>>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>>        ;-)
>>>>Ed
>>>
>>>It would help a lot if the "Reply-To: roc@..." line were removed from
>>>everything that roc sends out.  Point to point email _used_ to be easy.....
>>
>>it still is easy.  You type in the TO: line the receiver's email address...
>
>Allready supplied by Elm, and then ignored and replaced when you use the
>Send command, requireing hand editing of both the mail file and one of the
>control files, sometimes racing the hourly dial up to do it.  Fun stuff.
>


That is a problem with "elm" .  Maybe you should use a different email program.

regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Chad Leigh <chad@xmission.com>
Subject: Welcome to roc (fwd)
Date: 17 Aug 1996 16:10:57 -0600 (MDT)

Hi All
This is just a copy of the Roc "charter" as mailed to all new 
s*bscribers.  I thought I'd forward it to the list again as a refresher...

Please substitute a 'u' for the '*' character as appropriate in the 
section on how to subscribe or unsubscribe.  I need to do this 
substitution to fool majordomo in sending this mail out instead of 
try into to interpret it as a subscribe message.

Chad
ROC maintainer
chad@pengar.com

Forwarded message:
> From owner-roc@xmission.com Sat Aug 17 16:05 MDT 1996
> Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 16:05:22 -0600 (MDT)
> Message-Id: <199608172205.QAA22910@xmission.xmission.com>
> To: chad@xmission.com
> From: majordomo@xmission.com
> Subject: Welcome to roc
> Reply-To: majordomo@xmission.com
> Content-Type: text
> Content-Length: 3204
> 
> --
> 
> Welcome to the roc mailing list!
> 
> If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list,
> you can send mail to "majordomo" with the following command
> in the body of your email message:
> 
>     uns*bscribe roc your@email.address
> 
> Here's the general information for the list you've
> s*bscribed to, in case you don't already have it:
> 
> 
> Welcome to the Restore Our Constitution (ROC) mailing list!
> 
> This list is a non-partisan mailing list for those interested
> in helping to restore our Constitution of the United States.  It
> is mainly an activism list, where we trade ideas, organize efforts,
> etc.  Discussion of pertinent information not directly activist related
> is also ok.  Theoretical discussion of grandiose conspiracy theories
> should take place on forums better suited for such activities.
> 
> If you have interest in firearms rights at all please also s*bscribe
> to firearms-alert or rkba-alert for timely alert information.  Cross
> posting alert information from these two sources onto ROC is discouraged.
> 
> There are periodic posts to the roc readers outlining other lists that may
> be of interest.
> 
> The initial idea for this list was for an rkba-activism
> list to complement the rkba alert and discussion lists --
> a forum to discuss how to better use and react to the alert
> material coming down the pipes.  Discussion with
> interested party/ies lead to this list where rkba is an
> important but not the only focus, as all Constitutional issues and rights
> are interrelated.
> 
> ("rkba" stands for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms -- 2nd Amendment etc.)
> 
> This list is unmoderated (mostly -- really inappropriate material will
> be pointed out by the sponsor and a request to avoid such stuff for the
> future will be made), and comes in two forms -- the normal list and a
> digest form.
> The normal list brings you each message as it comes, the digest form gives you
> one message with all of that days messages dumped into one long mail.
> 
> The two lists are called:
> 
> roc
> roc-digest
> 
> Use the appropriate one in any s*bscription requests.
> 
> To s*bscribe send a mail to majordomo@xmission.com with the message 
text body > containing:
> 
> s*bscribe roc <address>
> or
> s*bscribe roc-digest <address>
> 
> <address> (optional)  is an email address other than the one from which 
you are sending > the mail
> if you wish to have the mailing list messages sent to a different email address
> other than the one from which you sending the request.  It is optional.
> 
> To remove yourself from the list send a mail to majordomo@xmission.com with the
> text body containing:
> 
> uns*bscribe roc <address>
> or
> uns*bscribe roc-digest <address>
> 
> <address> is as for subscribe.
> 
> 
> You can also send the text body "help" to the majordomo mailing list server
> to see what other commands it understands.
> 
> To post a message to "roc" send your message to  roc@xmission.com.  Do this
> whether you are subscribed to the normal list or the digested list.
> 
> Two last things:
> 
> Try to have meaningful titles/subjects for your messages -- it is a help to
> the readers of your message.
> 
> This is a family list -- try to avoid language that others may find
> offensive.  Use your best judgement.
> 
> Thanks for joining us!
> 
> Chad Leigh
> chad@xmission.com
> ROC sponsor
> 
> Don't Tread On Me!
> 
> 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: test only
Date: 17 Aug 1996 16:13:48 -0600

This is a test
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Discrediting Dissidents by Inducing Madness (fwd)
Date: 17 Aug 1996 16:37:35 PST

Ominous forward from fap, (Firearms And Politics list).

On Aug 16, Jon Roland wrote:

[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]

Discrediting Dissidents by Inducing Madness
by Jon Roland

One of the recurring themes in modern political reform or investigatory
activities is the development of aberrant behavior by key personalities,
often after a long, unbroken history of competence and rationality. This
seems especially prevalent among witnesses to high-level criminal or
secret projects, or persons otherwise critical to exposure of something
powerful people may want to keep covered up. The subject will exhibit
such symptoms as the loss of focus, shortening of attention span, loss
of coherence in sentence structure and logic, and the development of
paranoid suspicions of others, including his own family, friends, and
allied, often accusing them of betrayal or plotting against him, and
turning more attention on them than on his real enemies. The subject may
begin to say weird things that cause his supporters to lose confidence
in him and in the other things he has had to say, thereby discrediting
him and his evidence. At the same time, the subject may exhibit some or
all of the following physical symptoms: fever, headache, delirium,
aching joints, high blood pressure, numbness of extremities, and skin
rash.

Subjects exhibiting these symptoms have had reported the presence in the
area of mysterious vans parked nearby, often with license plate numbers
that don't seem to be registered to anyone, or frequent overflights by
black helicopters with no tail numbers.

We have a number of reports of methods used by intelligence agencies and
criminal organizations to affect the minds of persons, ranging from
contact poisons to infrasonic transmitters to psychotronic devices
operating on microwave frequencies. Research programs in the MK-ULTRA
series have been documented in hearings before the U.S. Congress, and a
few researchers, like Jose Delgado, have openly published papers on
mind-control research they have conducted under government sponsorship.
Several investigators, notably Martin Cannon and Julianne McKinney, have
documented much of this research, including material that can be found
in public records.

Therefore, we must take seriously the possibility of a real threat to
the mental soundness of key personalities involved in the exposure of
high-level corruption or abuse, and to reformers generally. Parties who
might be threatened by such reform activities and who may have access to
and use of such mind-altering technologies could be expected to yield to
the temptation to use those technologies, and such use may have become
well-established.

There is a natural tendency on the part of ordinary people to discredit
such concerns, and to dismiss them as paranoid, the evidence of
delusional thinking rather than a matter of rational discussion and
preparation. However, the public record cannot be ignored, nor can we
ignore the susceptibility of powerful persons to use any methods they
have available to them to protect their interests. We can hardly rely on
the powerful to be decent, honorable people. History proves otherwise.

So how can activists and witnesses protect themselves from such threats
without becoming paranoid by doing so? It is certainly not feasible to
live in a Faraday cage (to protect from electromagnetic transmissions),
or to subject everything we eat, drink, or touch to sophisticated
chemical analyses.

The first thing to do is to recognize the symptoms. If our previously
rational fellows begin to go weird on us, they may have become targets
for mental disruption. At this point it may not be too late to take
defensive actions. The subject might be removed to another environment
where he will be less easily targeted. Faraday screens might be set up
(wire mesh or screen wire). Precautions against poisoning might be
taken, especially against contact poisons. Parked vans and overflying
helicopters might be discouraged (by methods left to your imagination).

But there are two main things that can and should be done. The first is
for supporters to recognize the possible threat and not to discredit the
evidence that the subject presented during his rational period, even if
he is no longer a credible witness. The second is for the subject
himself to fight the symptoms. That is not easy, but there is good
reason to think that such assaults can be resisted if the person learns
to recognize them in himself, and to develop the kinds of mental
training that can overcome them. He will need to learn to see his
behavior as others see it, to take an external view of himself, and to
counter any aberrant thoughts, feelings, or behaviors as they arise. By
drawing from inner reserves of reason and objectivity, he can
effectively resist almost any onslaughts of this kind.

The war for the future will be fought on many fronts, and on many
battlefields. In the end, the most important of these are our own minds.

=======================================================================
Visit our Web site at http://www.constitution.org/     | Sacramento, CA
If you need help setting up your own Web site, call us at 916/927-4935.
=======================================================================

[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: >>>> SERFS (fwd)
Date: 19 Aug 1996 10:16:19 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

>From: ralph@teaminfinity.com
>Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 16:25:24 -0400
>
>
>Ralph strongly endorses this way of looking at things:
>
>Doug Fiedor wrote, and William Michael Kemp <minutemn@pcl.net> higly 
>endorses:
>> 
>>                  Serfs, or Modern Share-Croppers?
>> 
>>                        by:  Doug Fiedor
>> 
>> Share-cropping became common in the United States after the Civil War.  Back
>> then, many Southern plantations had ample land, but little money to pay
>> wages.  At the same time, a large segment of the population was left
>> impoverished, with little prospect of earning an adequate living.  So, it is
>> was little surprise that the landed people -- those with the means of
>> producing a product -- contracted with the poor who had labor to offer, to
>> produce a product from which both might profit.
>> 
>> Share croppers normally received a home, the necessary tools, farm animals,
>> and sometimes even some education, for their labor.  They also received a
>> share in the profit -- usually, about half -- from the harvest they produced.
>> 
>> This arrangement was somewhat similar to the arrangement of the serfs of
>> England.  Both groups were tied to the land owner.  Both paid a large
>> portion of the product of their labor for the privilege of living and
>> working on the land.  And, with both, the amount of freedom allowed to the
>> workers by the landowners was often quite arbitrary.
>> 
>> In this arrangement, true freedom was no more than a fleeting concept.  The
>> land owner told them what they will do, how they are to do it and when they
>> were expected to do it.  For instance, the land owners wished to ensure that
>> everyone in the family would be available to work the fields during the
>> growing season.  To that end, they even suspended education every summer.
>> 
>> Today, few of us work the fields.  Yet, are we less of a share-cropper?
>> Clearly, half of all the proceeds of our labor is still paid to the ultimate
>> landowner, the government.  Unlike serfs or share-croppers, we must now
>> purchase the land on which we live.  Yet, the ultimate landowner --the
>> government -- still instructs us on what we may or may not do with that land.
>> 
>> There was a time in our common law when it was taught that "Every man's
>> house is his castle; and even though the winds of heaven may blow through
>> it, the King may not enter."  That concept, of course, included the sheriff,
>> the tax collector, and all other police officers too.  However, the Lords
>> and Ladies of Congress did not find this common law maxim expedient to the
>> expressed goals of modern government.  Consequently, they found ways to
>> totally trash the concept.
>> 
>> Not to be outdone by the original land-barons of old, today's government has
>> decreed _servient estate_ over our property to itself.  That is, federal,
>> state and local governments have passed laws allowing government agents
>> easement to our private property.  Consequently, not only can today's
>> government place restrictions on the use of private property, government
>> agents may now search and seize private property almost at will.
>> 
>> You think not?  Violate some incomprehensible wetland law and the Army
>> (Corps of Engineers) comes after you.  Forget to pay property tax, or what
>> the IRS says you owe, and men with guns come to run you off of your land.
>> And, God forbid some farmer would grow a crop that is not politically
>> correct. . . .
>> 
>> A court trial is no longer usually necessary to confiscate private property.
>> But, even if there is cause for trial, first you must relinquish possession
>> of your property to the applicable government agency.  Then, you may go to
>> trial.
>> 
>> Adding insult to injury, the Supreme Court recently approved government's
>> taking of private property by saying that forfeiture was different than
>> punishment.  This opinion gave police, and most other government agencies,
>> cart blanche to confiscate private property for a whole host of reasons.
>> And they do.  There is great incentive for government agencies to confiscate
>> private property.  By law, they then use the  proceeds from selling
>> forfeited property to supplement the agency's budget.
>> 
>> So too with the concept of privacy.  Like the land owner of old, today's
>> government keeps very good records on its citizens.  Hundreds of citizen
>> databases exist throughout the country, containing everything from
>> education, criminal and medical to financial records.  Worse, all of these
>> databases will soon all be connected, allowing any bureaucrat to instantly
>> compile a complete dossier on any American citizen.
>> 
>> Today's government schools no longer teach much about the relationship
>> between the European serf and Master.  Nor do they teach much about the
>> tenuous relationship between the Southern share-croppers and land owners.
>> Perhaps there is good reason for this.
>> 
>> ===============================================
>>      This is one of a periodic series collectively titled:
>>      "A View from the Foothills of Appalachia"
>>      by Doug Fiedor     e-mail to:  fiedor19@eos.net
>> 
>>      7-31-96
>
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: McDougal Sentencing Postponed
Date: 19 Aug 1996 11:35:16 -0500

From the "news" (Reuters newsfeed on clari.news.briefs):

	McDougal Sentencing Postponed  
	A federal judge has ordered the sentencing of Arkansas  
businessman James McDougal postponed in the clearest sign yet 
that McDougal is cooperating with Whitewater investigators. 
McDougal had been scheduled to be sentenced today for his 
conviction on fraud and conspiracy charges in a 
Whitewater-related trial. But in an order dated Aug. 9 and 
unsealed today, the judge postponed the sentencing until Nov. 
18. Sources close to McDougal say he's been negotiating with the 
team of independent counsel Kenneth Starr, who is leading the 
Whitewater probe into President Clinton's finances. 

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 19 Aug 1996 12:46:46 -0500

No wonder they want to disarm Australia. These guys play rough.

Bob Knauer

-----

From the "news" (Reuters newsfeed on clari.news.briefs):

	Protesters Rage in Australia  
	Demonstrators stormed Australia's parliament building today  
as a protest against labor reforms and government spending cuts. 
Hundreds of people wielding sledge-hammers and a makeshift 
battering ram smashed through glass doors at the front of the 
building in Canberra and battled police in a foyer for about two 
hours. They got to within about 100 yards of Prime Minister John 
Howard's office deep inside the building. Police used riot 
shields to push the protesters out. 

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-18 President Remarks at 50th Birthday Celebration (fwd)
Date: 19 Aug 1996 13:07:01 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Keywords: Election-Campaign, Government, Personnel, President, Remarks, Social,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/1996/8/19/3.TEXT.1
				    
				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary
			  (New York, New York)
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                     August 18, 1996     

				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
		AT GALA CELEBRATION OF HIS 50TH BIRTHDAY
				    
				    
			 Radio City Music Hall
			   New York, New York    			       
      	    



9:25 P.M. EDT
		
		
	     
	     And I thank my friends.  Some of them have been subject to
ridicule, you know.  FOBs has become, I don't know, an epithet in some
quarters.  But I wouldn't be here today without them -- and all of you
who were there with me in each step along life's way, I thank you.  I
thank all of those who worked with me in every job I ever had, and all
of you who helped me to come to this point.  I just feel a great sense
of gratitude.
	     
	     And I thank God for everybody I've ever been able to work
with -- those of you who are here.  A lot of them are gone, too, now.  I
miss my friend and brother, Ron Brown.  He would have liked this
tonight, and what a wonderful job he would have done.  (Applause.)
	     
	     I started out my presidency with one of the greatest men I
ever met in my life, the late Prime Minister of Israel, Itzhak Rabin.  I
miss him so much. (Applause.)  There are a lot of people I miss, and I'm
sorry they had to leave this Earth before I did.  But, you know,
all of us left ahead, because we got to live out our dreams.  And most
of us here, truth were known, we'd have to say we've done better than we
deserved.  And I would like for every child in this country and every
child in this world to be able to say that more than they can say it now
when our time here is done.
	     
	     We have to get this country ready for the next century.  It
will be the time of greatest possibility in all of human history.  More
of our kids, without regard to their race, their gender, their station,
will have a chance to live their dreams if we do our job.  That is
really what we're here about.
	     
	     I've been luckier than most people because I had family who
loved me, friends who took care of me, folks who worked with me and made
me look better than I deserved, and a chance to do work I loved.  But in
the end, all that matters is whether, when we finish, we have made it
possible for more people to be what God meant them to be.  And you have
helped to give me that chance, and that is the best birthday present of
all.
	     
	     Thank you and God bless you.  (Applause.)
            END                        9:38 P.M. EDT


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-18 President Remarks at Pre-Celebration Reception (fwd)
Date: 19 Aug 1996 13:13:17 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.reform
Keywords: Arkansas, Business, Economy, Education, Election-Campaign, Fiscal-Policy,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/1996/8/19/2.TEXT.1
				    
				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary
			  (New York, New York)
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                    August 18, 1996     

				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
		      AT PRE-CELEBRATION RECEPTION
				    
				    
			Sheraton New York Hotel
			   New York, New York		       	  
				    


	     Let me begin by thanking Chairman Don Fowler.  I know he
said before I came out a word, but I'd like to say another word of
respect and condolence to the families of those who were on that
government airplane, the Air Force plane that was carrying those who
work with me on my security detail out there in Wyoming.  It's a very
sad thing.  One of the safest planes we ever had.  We don't yet know
what happened, but tonight I just ask you to be thinking about their
families.
	     
	     On the other hand, since they neglected to talk about their
record for the last two years, I think we ought to remind people about
that every chance we get; and remind everyone that this is really a
great contest between two different visions of the future.  There is no
status quo option.  Neither of us believe that we can stay with what we
did for 40 or 50 years.  But, on the other hand, there are very
different consequences to where we will go in the future.
	     
 We've had four years in a row where the crime rate went down.
There are 60,000 felons, fugitives and stalkers that could not get hand
guns because of the Brady Bill.  (Applause.)   

	     And the most important thing to know is that the leaders of
the other party, their nominee for president, their Speaker of the House
-- they fought us on the economic program; they fought us on the Crime
Bill; they fought us on the Brady Bill; they fought us on the Family and
Medical Leave law; they fought us on the things that we tried to do that
it made a difference for America.  The results are in:  we're better off
than we were.  We need to keep going where we're going, not take a great
U-turn and go back in the other direction.  (Applause.)
	     
	     If you look at what happened -- if you look at the results
that we've gotten with the Brady Bill, the assault weapons ban and the
plan to put 100,000 police on the street, I'd like to see that expanded
so that we can ban those cop killer bullets that have no purpose, other
than to knock our police officers and other innocent citizens out of
their lives.  (Applause.)
	     
	     So there's a lot more to do here.  But our country is
stronger, we are more respected in the world, we are a larger force for
peace and freedom and decency than we were.
	     
	     
	     So those folks holding those signs up and everybody else
ought to be thinking about this:  Who do you trust to give jobs to those
people?  Who do you trust to take care of their children?  Who do you
trust to implement this instead of turning around and walking away from
it?
	     
	     Remember, the bills I vetoed -- do you know what they did
to the bills I vetoed?  No child care	; take away the guarantees of
the school lunch program; take away the guarantees of the food stamp
program; take away the guarantees of health care for children with
disabilities.  That's what they tried to do.  I vetoed all that.
	     
	     So my gift to you is to remember that this is a choice.
And I'm delighted that you're here to celebrate my birthday.  And I'm
going to have a wonderful time tonight.  But I want to remind you that
we have 79 more days before we can really celebrate the assurance that
America will march into the 21st century with the vision I articulated
in 1991 that I reaffirm to you today.  I want us to go into the 21st
century with three things unquestionably true.  I want every child in
this country, without regard to race or gender or station in life, to be
able to live out his or her dreams if they're responsible enough to work
for it.  I want to know that our country is the world's strongest force
for peace and freedom and democracy.  And I want to know that with all
of our incredible diversity -- unlike all these other countries that are
coming apart at the seams because of their racial, their religious,
their ethnic, their tribal hatred -- I want America to be the one
country in the world that says, we believe in our common humanity and we
are growing stronger through our diversity, not weaker.  That is my
dream, and that's the present I want for you.  (Applause.)
	     
	     Thank you and God bless you.  (Applause.)

            END                        5:22 P.M. EDT


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-15 President Names Lader to Red Cross Board of Governors (fwd)
Date: 19 Aug 1996 13:14:49 -0500 (CDT)



Keywords: Appointment, Executive-Act, Government, Personnel, Social, South-Carolina,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/1996/8/15/2.TEXT.1



                                          

                            THE WHITE HOUSE

                     Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                    August 15, 1996


    PRESIDENT CLINTON NAMES PHILIP LADER TO BE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD 
	    OF GOVERNORS OF THE AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS

     The President announced today his intent to appoint Philip Lader
to the Board of Governors of the American National Red Cross.

     Philip Lader of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, has served as
the Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration since
October of 1994.  During the first two years of the Clinton
Administration, Mr. Lader served as White House Deputy Chief of Staff
and Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and
Budget.  In 1981, Mr. Lader founded Renaissance Weekends, family
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
retreats for innovative leaders now organized by the Renaissance
Institute.  Additionally, he was president of Australia's first private
university, Bond University, from 1991 to 1993.  Mr. Lader received his
B.A. from Duke University, his M.A. in history from the University of
Michigan, and his J.D. from Harvard Law School.

     The Board of Governors of the American National Red Cross is the
governing body of the Red Cross.  The American National Red Cross is a
humanitarian organization, led by volunteers, that provides relief to
victims of disaster and helps people prevent, prepare for, and respond
to emergencies.


                           -30-30-30-











--




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: berg stephen erik <z931086@corn.cso.niu.edu>
Subject: Re: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 19 Aug 1996 19:51:32 -0500 (CDT)

Perhaps the govrnment will ban sledgehammers Down Under, after this 
display of anarchy.  

Steve

z931086@corn.cso.niu.edu


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Skip Leuschner <skipl@PACIFIER.COM>
Subject: Re: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 19 Aug 1996 18:09:00 -0700 (PDT)


On Mon, 19 Aug 1996, berg stephen erik wrote:

> Perhaps the govrnment will ban sledgehammers Down Under, after this 
> display of anarchy.  
> 
> Steve
> 
> z931086@corn.cso.niu.edu
> 
> 
Do I understand the circumstances correctly - that this is how government
handout addicts behave when the taxpayers say "enough?"

If so, standby America. 

Skip. 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 19 Aug 1996 20:30:18 -0600

Skip Leuschner wrote:
> 
> Do I understand the circumstances correctly - that this is how government
> handout addicts behave when the taxpayers say "enough?"

You understand the circumstances correctly.

> If so, standby America.

Don't think the same thing won't happen here.  And there are going to be 
some surprises about who's doing the rioting.  There is an area of LA 
called Plummer's Park, La Brea and Santa Monica area.  It's filled up in 
the last couple years with Russian emigrants.  Got just enough money to 
catch the aeroflot and buy a passport.  Get to LA and the first stop is 
the welfare office.  They haven't been here long enough to qualify for 
citizenship.  Don't speak any more english than the average river 
swimmer.

Standby America, you say?  If you live in a major city or anywhere along 
the southern border you better do more than that.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 19 Aug 1996 21:27:04 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 19 Aug 1996, berg stephen erik wrote:
> Perhaps the govrnment will ban sledgehammers Down Under, after this 
> display of anarchy.  

Only assault sledgehammers will be banned (as will battering rams).  One 
will be able to purchase other sledgehammers if one takes a course in their 
proper use, and obtains the proper license permitting one to wield a 
sledgehammer solely for hunting purposes.  Carrying a concealed 
sledgehammer will not be allowed anywhere.

Peter Gabriel, tho, will be banned from MTV....

;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: QUERY (fwd)
Date: 19 Aug 1996 20:40:15 -0500 (CDT)

From a California radio host:
please reply to me.
Thanks,
Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu   Senior Buyer UTD          
The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 214/883-2307,fax# 214/883-2348
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, 
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,
and to provide new Guards for their future security.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

I r eceived a report over the weekend that some U.S. Army General 
upon hearing he would have to deploy troops to Sri Lanka REFUSED.  
Reportedly he noted there is nso strategic significance to such a 
deployment, and he would not comply.  He was subsequently summarily 
RELIEVED of command.
  CAn anyone confirm or deny this rumor?  IF it is true (this is no 
Spec 4, but a GENERAL), please let me know his name, rank, and 
posting.  I would very much like to get him on the air.
  Meanwhile, I am contacting Col Ron Ray.  If I get any more info I 
will post ASAP.

Thanx,
   --Geoff


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack@minerva.com
Subject: Re: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 19 Aug 1996 18:30:46 PDT

roc@xmission.com wrote :

>Perhaps the govrnment will ban sledgehammers Down Under, after this 
>display of anarchy.  
>
>Steve
>
>z931086@corn.cso.niu.edu
>
>
>

And TREES!  Can't leave a source of battering rams available  .....

Jack



    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: zucchini recipe for disaster... (fwd)
Date: 19 Aug 1996 22:23:33 -0400 (EDT)

What isn't stated in the following article is that the feds have a new EO 
in the works making the possession of assault zucchinis illegal, and 
requiring one to attend classes to learn how to properly use a zucchini 
(for hunting purposes only) before being able to obtain a license to keep 
a non-assault zucchini (which must be carried in the open and must not be 
concealed upon one's person....)...fertilizers and garden tools will 
become controlled substances, the possession of which will make one 
liable to forfeiture laws....   ;-)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

...or "vegetables go bad". The scary vegetable story saga continues.....       
-- Pat
=============================================
 _Wall Street Journal_, 19 August 1996, p. B1

"Would the Juries Have Convicted a Man Who Wielded an Eggplant?"
by Lee Brown
     
It was an eight-inch zucchini, and Carlos Diaz may have used it to 
commit a robbery.
     
But Mr Diaz, a 28 year-old with a record of armed robberies, says he 
did no such thing.  And late last Friday, the third New York jury to hear 
the case announced it was hopelessly deadlocked over whether Mr Diaz used the 
squash to hold up bartender Oscar Leal in April 1995
     
Why so many trials?
     
"The zucchini throws off the juries," says A. Kirke Bartley, an 
assistant district attorney in Queens County.  The prosecution is charging 
that Mr Diaz put the vegetable in a paper bag, wrapped it in his jacket and 
stuck it in Mr Leal's face in a holdup, taking $20 and a watch.
     
Mr Bartley notes that a criminal statute says that pretending to have a 
gun or using any object to commit a holdup constitutes second-degree 
robbery.  Because of previous convictions -- one for using a rock in a 
holdup -- Mr Diaz would be subject to a sentence of 25 years to life if 
convicted, Mr bartley adds.
     
Umberto Guido, the assistant district attorney who handled the trial, 
says the idea of using the zucchini as a weapon appeasr to crack up some 
jury members.  "They smile, they snicker," he says,  "It's not the serious 
crime it should be."
     
The first jury last February was dismissed by a state court judge after 
the jurors became unsettled, court officials say. last May, the second jury 
convicted Mr diaz of possessing stolen property -- the $20 and the watch -- 
but couldn't decide if he used the vegetable as a weapon.
     
"I can't read the mind of the jury, but the zucchini seemed to confuse 
them," says the court clerk in the second trial.  "If it had been a 
finger or something else, they might have agreed on a verdict."
     
The judge declared a mistrial after the third jury deadlocked, and the 
state hasn't decided whether to seek a fourth trial. the defendant remains 
in jail, unable to make $10 000 bail on the holdup charge.
     
Police say they caught Mr Diaz trying to escape with the loot after the 
holdup and they call him a dangerous criminal.
     
Responded Steven Silverblatt, a Legal Aid Society lawyer representing Mr 
Diaz:  "My client says he was just shopping and had oranges and other 
fruits and vegetables in the bag.  If he is really the heavy criminal the DA 
portrays, do you really think he would be holding up people with a zucchini?"
===================================================


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: More On the New X-ray Gun that Detects Concealed Weapons (fwd)
Date: 20 Aug 1996 07:57:21 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text

August 14, 1996                                                      [News ]


New X-ray gun detects concealed weapons: Device, which can see guns from 90
feet away, seen as tool against terrorism.

By Michael Fleeman / Associated Press
SANTA MONICA, Calif. -- The latest weapon against terrorism can see right
through you.

The Passive Millimeter Wave Imager can X-ray through clothing to "see" a
concealed weapon, plastic explosives or drugs. A police officer can
surreptitiously aim it into a crowd from as far away as 90 feet.

The new X-ray gun is becoming a danger symbol for an unlikely alliance of
civil libertarians and gun owners who fear the fight against crime and
terrorism may be waged at the expense of personal freedoms.

"I'm incredibly concerned," said John Henry Hingson, a past president of the
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, meeting here this past
week. "The entire nation could become a victim of illegal searches and
seizures and the law is powerless to protect them from these police abuses."

But in these nervous times following the the crash of TWA Fight 800 and
bombings at the Olympics, Oklahoma City and the World Trade Center, many
Americans now say they are willing to trade some of their privacy and civil
liberties for greater security.

A poll last week by the Los Angeles Times found that a majority of people --
58 percent -- said they would give up some civil liberties if it would help
to thwart terrorism.

Thirteen percent said it would depend on what rights were at stake. The poll
didn't ask people to single out any rights.

The Clinton administration has proposed increased wiretapping and other
anti-terrorism steps, and is doling out research grants for cutting-edge
anti-crime technology that once may have been intended for purely military
use.

Last year, the National Institute of Justice awarded $2.1 million to three
companies to develop weapon detectors for airports, stores and public
buildings.

Two models are being developed of the Passive Millimeter Wave Imager, a
creation of Massachusetts-based Millimetrix Corp.

The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol car and
pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send out X-rays;
instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by human flesh.

Anything that stands in the way of those waves -- like a gun -- or anything
that emits weaker waves -- like a bag of cocaine or a plastic explosive --
will show up on a little screen in the patrol car.

Clothes emit no waves. Neither do walls, allowing the device to be used even
from outside a room.

A second model is a smaller, battery-operated version that an officer can
operate by hand, like a radar gun.

Millimetrix hopes to field test the larger model soon at a police agency.

Hingson argues the device runs roughshod over bans against illegal searches
and seizures.

The law says police can stop and frisk a person only when an officer has a
"reasonable suspicion" the person is armed or involved in a crime.

Millimetrix points out that while the imager can see through clothing, it
still leaves people some privacy. The device's display screen, the company
says, "does not reveal intimate anatomical details of the person."

Chip Walker, spokesman for the National Rifle Association, noted that
devices like the imager threaten the legal rights of people in 31 states who
are allowed to carry concealed weapons with proper licenses.

"We certainly support efforts to disarm criminals, but we need to be careful
that we're not painting with too broad a brush here," he said.

Walker said that as troubling as terrorism is, people would be playing into
terrorists' hands by giving up their privacy.

"One of the broader issues is that if we start giving up certain civil
liberties, that essentially means that the terrorists are starting to
accomplish one of their goals," he said.

Copyright 1996, The Detroit News

                Comments? Criticism? Story ideas? Talk to us.
                  Check Net Mail for comments and replies.


****************************************************************************
Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues
Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA
on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week)
Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH  43229
****************************************************************************




* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Jewell Passes Polygraph Test
Date: 20 Aug 1996 08:41:24 -0500

It should be interesting to see if Jewell takes any legal action against the
FBI and news media (see below).

But what about all the other people framed by the Gestapo and their allies,
the Marxist Media?

Bob Knauer

+++++

From the "news":

	Jewell Passes Polygraph Test  
	Lawyers for Richard Jewell say the security guard who's been  
identified as a suspect in the Olympic bombing has passed a 
lie-detector test. Reports say a former FBI agent hired by 
Jewell's lawyers administered the polygraph test, and the 
results show Jewell is telling the truth. He hasn't been charged 
with anything and insists he didn't plant the bomb in Centennial 
Olympic Park, leaving two people dead and more than 100 injured. 
His lawyers say he's the victim of a rush to judgment, and 
they're considering legal action against the FBI and the news 
media for portraying him as the prime suspect. 

+++++

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: An Ultimatum For the U.N.: Reform or Die
Date: 20 Aug 1996 08:53:30 -0500

From WSJ Interactive - subscriptions are free at this time.

As usual, Ole Jesse tells it like it is!

Bob Knauer

+++++

               An Ultimatum For the U.N.:  Reform or Die

               BY JESSE HELMS

               In his acceptance speech last week, Bob Dole strongly
               criticized the United Nations. He was right to do so. As it
               currently operates, the U.N. does not deserve continued
               American support. Its bureaucracy is proliferating, its
               costs are spiraling, and its mission is constantly expanding
               beyond its mandate--and beyond its capabilities. Worse,
               with the steady growth in the size and scope of its
               activities, the U.N. is being transformed from an
               institution of sovereign nations into a quasi-sovereign
               entity. This transformation is being funded principally by
               American taxpayers, who contribute more than $3.5
               billion every year.

               The U.N. needs to be radically overhauled. Yet
               Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali has pursued a
               well-publicized campaign of U.N. "empowerment." He
               has protected the bloated bureaucracy, and the number
               and nature of peacekeeping operations have vastly
               expanded under his tenure. He has pressed for the
               establishment of a standing U.N. army and the power to
               collect direct U.N. taxes.

               What the U.N. needs is a stark reassessment of its
               mission and its mandate. The next secretary-general must
               help develop and carry out a bold plan to cut back the
               overgrown bureaucracy and limit its activities. If such a
               plan is not put forward and implemented, the next
               secretary-general could--and should--be the last.

               Successful reform would arrest U.N. encroachment on
               the sovereignty of nation-states while harnessing a
               dramatically downsized U.N. to help sovereign nations
               cope with some cross-border problems. It would entail at
               least a 50% cut in the U.N. bureaucracy and the
               termination of unnecessary committees and conferences.
               The U.N. has hundreds of agencies, commissions,
               committees and subcommittees--even including a
               Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, which
               counts among its crowning achievements the passage of a
               resolution calling upon nations to report all contacts with
               extraterrestrial beings to the secretary-general.

               The U.N. budgeting process must be fundamentally
               reorganized. The secretary-general currently has a budget
               of roughly $1 billion, which is voted on by the General
               Assembly, where the U.S. has no veto, and where every
               nation--democratic or dictatorial, no matter how much or
               how little it contributes to the U.N.--has an equal vote. In
               contrast, budgets for U.N. voluntary organizations are
               amassed through a bidding process, in which nations must
               make capital investments prior to involvement in specific
               U.N. projects. This should be the model for the entire
               U.N. budgeting system.

               The secretary-general should be limited to a bare-bones
               budget for basic expenses of some $250 million, and
               other U.N. activities should be funded on a voluntary
               basis. This would essentially subject all U.N. programs to
               a market test. Those programs that are championed only
               by the bureaucracy would die of malnutrition.

               And peacekeeping, the U.N.'s fastest-growing industry,
               must also be overhauled. In 1988, the total cost of U.N.
               peacekeeping operations world-wide was just $230
               million; in 1994, $3.6 billion--of which the U.S. was
               directly assessed nearly $1.2 billion, plus additional
               contributions of personnel, equipment and other support
               totaling roughly $1.7 billion (all of which was skimmed off
               the U.S. defense budget). "Peacekeeping" has evolved
               into a term without meaning. It is used to justify all sorts
               of U.N. activities--from holding elections to feeding
               hungry people to conducting a host of activities under the
               banner of nation building.

               As the system now works, the U.S. has two choices: go
               along with a proposed peacekeeping operation and pay
               31.7% of the cost, or veto the mission, which we do not
               like to do. The system should permit a third option: allow
               the U.S. to let missions go forward without American
               funding or participation. If others in the world want to
               undertake nation-building operations, there is no reason
               the U.S. should discourage them--so long as American
               taxpayers do not have to pay for a third of it.

               The time has come for the U.S. to deliver an ultimatum:
               Either the U.N. reforms, quickly and dramatically, or the
               U.S. will end its participation. For too long the Clinton
               administration has paid lip service to the idea of U.N.
               reform without imposing any real costs for its absence.
               Without the threat of American withdrawal, nothing will
               change. Rep. Joe Scarborough (R., Fla.) has introduced
               legislation under which the U.S. would withdraw from the
               U.N., which would be replaced by a league of
               democracies. This idea has merit, and if the U.N. is not
               clearly on the path of real reform well before 2000, the
               U.S. should withdraw.

               The United Nations will certainly resist any reform. Many
               of the smaller and less-developed member
               nations--which benefit from the current system and gain
               influence by selling their sovereignty to the
               organization--will be particularly resistant. That is why the
               next secretary-general has an enormous job: His mandate
               will be nothing less than to save the U.N. from itself,
               prove that it is not impervious to reform, and show that it
               can be downsized, brought under control, and harnessed
               to contribute to the security needs of the 21st century. If
               these things are not done, then the U.N. is not worth
               saving--and I will be leading the charge for U.S.
               withdrawal.



               Sen. Helms (R., N.C.) is chairman of the Senate
               Foreign Relations Committee. This article is adapted
               from the September/October issue of Foreign Affairs.

+++++
--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  CONSTITUTIONISTS HOLDING RALY (fwd)
Date: 20 Aug 1996 10:01:36 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
----- Begin Included Message -----

>Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 16:05:30

>Subject: CONSTITUTIONISTS HOLDING RALY
>

>Pat
>
>
>        TO:  Assignment Editor
>
>        SUBJECT:  Media Release
>
>        CONTACT:  Charlena Alden        
>                  ph: 609/797-9520
>                  fax 609/797-9518
>
>
>                                CONSTITUTIONISTS HOLDING RALLY
>
>Del Mar, CA ... A national grassroots RALLY FOR THE BILL OF RIGHTS will be
held on the Mall in Washington DC on August 31 and September 1, 1996.
Sponsors of the Rally are Citizens Against Legal Loopholes (C.A.L.L.) and
the Committee of 1776.
>
>"The Spirit of America has ignited!  The energy being generated by this
united spirit will be used to see our government again operating within the
limits prescribed by the Constitution," said Charlene Alden, founder of
C.A.L.L.  The foremost purpose of the Rally is to use this political power
base to get Congress to hold hearings and investigations into what led 30 of
our seated Governors to declare in the Williamsburg Resolve (November 22,
1994) that federal action has exceeded the clear bound of its jurisdiction
under the Constitution and thus violated the Rights of the People.
>
>Saturday's schedule features entertainment, fun and fellowship.
Entertainment will include an all-star jam session featuring members of
Lynyrd Skynyrd and Soul Asylum, solo artists Carl Klang, Steve Vaus,
international performers Arizeder and Dianne Urreizeta, winner of the
Pavalotti international vocal award, and Barry Weinstein will also perform.
>
>"Sunday its down to business," said Alden.  Morning worship service will
begin at 8:30 AM.  It will be followed by speeches on topics of major
concern to Americans and what is being done to solve them.   Among the 50
prominent guest speakers will be Presidential candidates Harry Browne,
Charles Collins and Howard Phillips.  State Senators Don Rogers (R-CA),
Charles Duke (R-CO), and John Waterman (R-IN), Mr. Larry Pratt, Director -
Gun Owners of America, Dr. Gene Schroder, author of Constitution: Fact or
Fiction and General Benton Partin, USAF (ret).
>
>                C.A.L.L., Citizens Against Legal Loopholes
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Protesters Rage in Australia
Date: 20 Aug 1996 09:09:08 -0700 (PDT)

Funny thing is, I -just- bought a fiberglass handled four pound mallet 
the day before this happened. Hmm, maybe I should stock up : )
Boyd (this is a joke) Kneeland
(Will be using my assault mallet on political speech... making signs for 
a pro rkba gubernatorial candidate here in Wa.)

On Mon, 19 Aug 1996, Donna J. Logan wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 1996, berg stephen erik wrote:
> > Perhaps the govrnment will ban sledgehammers Down Under, after this 
> > display of anarchy.  
> 
> Only assault sledgehammers will be banned (as will battering rams).  One 
> will be able to purchase other sledgehammers if one takes a course in their 
> proper use, and obtains the proper license permitting one to wield a 
> sledgehammer solely for hunting purposes.  Carrying a concealed 
> sledgehammer will not be allowed anywhere.
> 
> Peter Gabriel, tho, will be banned from MTV....
> 
> ;-)
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  RNC struck an UN nerve! (fwd)
Date: 20 Aug 1996 13:34:25 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

Wednesday August 14 6:58 PM EDT


UNITED NATIONS (Reuter) - The United Nations sharply
criticized the Republican Party platform Wednesday, saying it
was filled with disinformation about the world body.

Breaking a taboo against commenting on a member's
internal political affairs, U.N. spokeswoman Sylvana Foa
cited a section of the platform opposing the commitment of
U.S. troops to U.N. peacekeeping operations under foreign
commanders and pledging not to compel American
servicemen to wear foreign uniforms or insignia.

``I think it is worrying that a party that would seek to lead
America would be so ill-informed about how the United
Nations actually functions and how soldiers are committed to
peace-keeping operations,'' the spokeswoman said.

``Everybody in this room is aware that no country commits
soldiers to a peacekeeping operation if they don't want to
and that the United States can veto any peacekeeping
operation. And even if it votes for it, it doesn't have to send
soldiers to fight in that peacekeeping operation.''

Foa, a U.S. citizen, also took exception to Republicans
regarding the United Nations as a ``foreign power,'' saying:
``The U.N. belongs to all of us. It's ours.''

Alluding to a paragraph in the platform saying ``American
citizens must retain ownership of their private property, and
must maintain full control of our national and state parks,
without international interference,'' she continued:

``The U.N. is not trying to take over America's parks. We
simply give plaques and awards for what great parks you
have. That doesn't mean that we are now expressing our
sovereignty over your parks.''

Nor was the world body trying to take over the Internal
Revenue Service, she said. Suggestions for imposing taxes
on air flight tickets or international currency transactions
were merely ideas for financing U.N. operations that the
United States could veto, if it wished.

``There is just so much disinformation here,'' she said. ``Are
we addressing these statements to people who are
paranoid about the U.N. or are we addressing these
statmements to a well-informed American public? Sometimes
it is quite frightening to me.''




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  McDougal Talks to Prosecutors (fwd)
Date: 20 Aug 1996 13:36:42 -0500 (CDT)


----- Begin Included Message -----

Clinton Ex-Partner Is Cooperating With Whitewater
Counsel, Sources Say

By Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 15 1996; Page A06
=A9 The Washington Post

James B. McDougal, the Clintons' Whitewater business
partner convicted three months ago on bank fraud and
conspiracy charges, is now cooperating with Whitewater
independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr's investigation
of President Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton,
according to sources close to the case.

McDougal, who faces imprisonment for up to 84 years
for fraud and conspiracy, has agreed to tell what he
knows about the Clintons' involvement in matters Starr
is investigating, including their dealings with his
failed Arkansas thrift, Madison Guaranty Savings &
Loan.

McDougal agreed to cooperate with the investigation to
reduce his prison term, according to sources. He is
scheduled to be sentenced Monday in Little Rock.

McDougal and his ex-wife Susan invited the Clintons to
be their partners in the Whitewater real estate
venture, and he hired Hillary Clinton to do legal work
for his S&L in the mid-1980s -- both areas the
independent counsel's office has been investigating
for more than two years. McDougal's cooperation was
first reported last night by the Los Angeles Times.

[...]

On Friday, a document was filed under seal in the
case, stirring speculation about a possible
cooperation agreement, a postponement of McDougal's
sentencing date or perhaps an agreement that both
sides would not reveal that discussions are ongoing.

[...]

White House spokesman Mark Fabiani said yesterday that
lawyers for the president and the first lady had heard
nothing about cooperation by McDougal.

Tucker is to be sentenced as well on Monday, and Susan
McDougal is scheduled to be sentenced Tuesday.

###

Additional note: McDougal has so far refused to deny cooperating with the
I.C., telling the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "It's fair to say that to
respond to that question would be to put me in violation of the court
order," referring to the order filed under seal.

Mark White 
C-News Editor
icrn@world.std.com

-------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Voting Records - AW Ban Repeal
Date: 20 Aug 1996 15:51:06 -0500

Can someone point me to the voting record for the most recent AW Ban Repeal
in the House, member for member.

It would be fun to predict who will return to the House and who will be
thrown out - a kind of advance scorecard for the election.

I'll bet it will be more accurate than any of the Marxist Media polls.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Down with Clinton-Dole
Date: 20 Aug 1996 22:31:17 -0400 (EDT)

Prepared this for another list, but thought it might be enjoyed here. -bd




[Extraneous comments inserted to be sure
of meeting "fair use" requirements -bd]

RRR Rothbard-Rockwell Report, August 1996

THE DEATH OF THE TWO-PARTY CARTEL
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

The elites thought they had us.  Dole v. Clinton.  That's your
choice:  live with it.  Ain't democracy grand?  [Sounds just like
the Lapham essay about "Democracyland." -bd]  But such a fate
would not only be evil, since both candidates are stalking horses
for rival factions of the welfare/warfare power elite, it would
also be terribly boring.  Who could posssible care whether this
or that social democratic creep gets to be president?

But, glory be, all that has begun to change.  Of course, the
power elite will probably get its man at the end.  But in the
meantime, we are going to have loads of fun.  If all goes well,
this will be the beginning of the end for the two-party system. 
The horse race is on, and, if the pack runs hard and fast, the
two out front could get trampled.  That will leave the next
president, probably Slick Willie, the weakest chief executive in
this century.

FUNNELING FOR POWER

Democracy's a racket, to be sure.  But the one thing the elites
can't entirely control (yet) is what people actually do in the
voting booth (vote fraud being a fairly risky game) [New
computerized voting machines ought to fix that -bd].  For that
reason, the management of elections has required the power elite
to carefully manipulate public opinion in the establishment's
favor.  The goal is to funnel people's voting preferences into
candidates who have the government's seal of approval.

When the Cold War was on, this was tricky but doable. [...]

But [using the Cold War] was not the only method of funneling
used by the power elite.  Since at least the mid-1980s,
conservatives have been told that they must never vote third
party because the Supreme Court was at stake.  [...]

If the Democrat wins, we were told, he'll appoint horrible
justices who will then engage in evil deeds, like refusing to
overturn Roe v. Wade.  This method of vote funneling usually
worked ....

These days, funneling is more difficult.  Try as it might, the
power elite has not been able to manufacture a foreign policy
crisis with sufficient power to funnel people's political
preferences into conventional modes.  Lord knows they've tried:
the Iraqi threat, the North Korean threat, the Japanese threat,
the Chinese threat, the terrorist threat ...

The power elite tried to keep the left in line by using the
warfare state for humanitarian ends:  guns as a means of
delivering butter to the world.  Thus the poor suffering souls in
Somalia had to be saved.  Haiti needed democracy in the form of a
drug-crazed voodoo socialist. [...]

One additonal factor helped funnel presidential votes into
approved channels in 1992:  the fear of Clinton.  Despite the
lack of enthusiasm for Bush among Republican voters, they backed
him anyway in order to keep the Draft Dodger out of office... 
[If you're left-leaning and this is getting too partisan, bear
with Rockwell.  He gets better.  -bd]  

The real reason Bush lost ... was Ross Perot, whom the elites
hate and fear the most.  It was his candidacy, his ability to
garner support from one in five voters - even after his temporary
pull-out - that began the demolition of the two-party system.

THE SYSTEM BREAKS DOWN

[YESSSSS! -bd]

It was a remarkable moment in post-war political history,
although it is virtually never described that way.  The spin has
been that the Perot phenomenon was a fluke, a function of his
money and temporary voter stupidity.  The media have engaged in a
four-year long effort to discredit him and his movement, with the
_Weekly Standard_ leading the effort with hysterical anti-Perot
cover stories.  The hope is that if they can take him out of the
game, everything will get back to "normal," meaning two nominees
and no real choice.

Fat chance [...]

[T]he two conventional candidates have barely managed to
distinguish themselves on issues.  It's possible that Clinton
could manage to run to Dole's right this year on immigration,
race, welfare, and even crime.  Clinton's ads have already hit
Dole for being Mr. Tax Increase.  [...]

In 1996, there will be more credible choices on the ballot than
in the last 50 years.  The power elite was barely able to handle
the Ross Perot problem, and it has poured enormous resources into
damaging him personally. [...]  But how can the media handle two,
three, or even five or six credible alternatives to Clinton-Dole? 
At some point, the tactic doesn't work.  [...]

Unless something dramatic happens to the Dole camp, Clinton is
going to be president again. [...]

Dole may be even worse [than Clinton]:  he is more a creature of
Washington, is more of a militarist, has more to answer for, and
knows the way the legislative gears work.  A united government -
with Congress and the executive run by today's Republicans -
could prove to be worse than four more years of divided
government.

After all, Clinton would enter office as seriously damaged goods. 
And scorn heaped on him will extend beyond the man to the office,
and from the office to the system at large.  Another Clinton term
offers the prospect of discrediting the power elite itself
[...Four more years! Four more years!  ...  -bd].  The Congress,
when it's not up to no good itself, is capable of holding him at
bay.  Better to have a weak president than one who believes he
has a voter mandate to do evil.

After four years of Clinton, we hate him so much, we've almost
begun to enjoy it [Rolling on the floor laughing - bd].  He's
been subjected to a steady stream of damning books and
revelations, linking him and Hillary to every manner of
depravity, including cocaine use and trafficking, harlotry,
bribery, theft, and murder.

The magnificient _Partners In Power_ by Roger Morris may be the
most damaging book ever written about a sitting president.  If
even one third of this book is true - and I have no doubt that
virtually all of it is - the Clintons should not only be toppled,
but exiled to live in Cuba with the former president of Mexico.
[Wonderful book - *Do* read it.  -bd]  [...]

The reason the book is not receiving any public attention ... 
[is that] it indicts not only Clinton, but brings modern
democracy itself into question.  In short, any country headed by
this man has the wrong system of government.  [This line alone
justifies typing this in. -bd]

The president is also tormented by the major sector of the
electorate, independent of Morris's allegations, who hate him
utterly and don't believe a word he says.  We ... sometimes
forget that anti-Clintonism also exists on the left.

Leftists see Clinton as a betrayer. [...]

Many on the left feel strong enough about this to back Ralph
Nader, who plans to run a left-populist campaign for president.
[...]

DOLE'S TROUBLE

Despite winning the nomination, Dole's stature in the Republican
Party has been on the decline. [...]  

[I]n retrospect, it was a terrible mistake for Dole to leave the
Senate ...  Without the power of the majority leadership, he now
appears as he is in fact:  a bitter old man with no ideals, no
passion, and a deeply dishonest look in his eye.

Activist Christians have been among the most loyal of all
Republicans... In the past, Dole could have depended on their
support.  Reagan and Bush assured their backing by making
perfunctory appeals for the pro-life vote, while never actually
doing anything to advance the agenda.  The pro-lifers have long
been the lap-dogs of the Republican Party.  But this year, their
owner is treating them with much less respect. [...]

Not even the Supreme Court is at stake in this election:  after
all, Dole backed Ruth Bader Ginsburg ...

THE CHRISTIAN PARTY

Staying home is one way the Christian right can protest the
"choice" of Dole or Clinton, but it is not the most effective
one.  What this country needs is another party that accepts their
values. [...]

If James Dobson accepted [U.S. Taxpayer's Party founder] Howard
Phillips's invitation and became a third-party  contender for
president, American politics would be transformed overnight.  The
Republican Party would split down the middle and fly into its
death throes.  [What a show!  -bd]  Of course Dobson couldn't
win, but think about it:  he could garner at least 10 percent and
as much as 20 percent of the electorate, all else being equal.
[...]

RETHINKING THE LIBERTARIANS

[...] Every four years, the Libertarian Party claims their moment
has finally arrived ...

In years' past, [the] Libertarian vote has been successfully
funneled along with everyone else's.  That meant a candidate who
was able to make a credible promise to cut taxes.  Sure Dole (and
probably Clinton) will come out for lower taxes, but who can
believe it.  All the conditions are right for a wave of
defections from the Republican Party to the Libertarian Party.
[...]

THE PEROT/LAMM FACTOR

That still leaves the other major class of alienated voters,
politically independent working class whites.  For the new Reform
Party, that vote is ripe for the picking.  [...]  If [Ross Perot]
is the nominee, he will definitely be in the debates once again.

FIRED UP

Harry Browne is devoting a major part of his resources to getting
into the debates, and he may succeed.  But if that happens, the
debates won't be able to exclude Nader or Dobson either.  Imagine
it:  Dole and Clinton with four other people up there exposing
them for the frauds they are.  That could make for the most
exciting political season in a half century, and nothing like
what the power elite intended when the rigged up the "choice" of
Clinton and Dole.

Let's consider one possible scenario.  Clinton wins the electoral
college hands down.  But in the popular vote, he wins only a
quarter of the voting public.  Dole gets 20 percent, Dobson and
the Reform Party each get 15 percent, Browne gets 10 percent,
Nader gets 8 percent, and the remaining 7 percent is split among
various independents and smaller parties.

The corrupt, rigged American system of party politics will have
been smashed to smithereens, opening the way for an even wilder
and more profitable election in 2000.  Meanwhile, we get four
more years to beat up on Clinton, mobilize a truely revolutionary
mass movement against government in general, and pave the way for
a new era dedicated to repudiating this vicious, bloody century.

Impossible?  That's what people said about the fall of socialism
in 1989.  In today's volatile political climate, revolution may
indeed be at hand.  One of the biggest barriers to liberty is the
sordid two-party system, and it could soon go the way of the
Berlin Wall.  

[Rockwell just - almost - rekindles a spark of optimism in me. 
-bd]

RRR is $49 for 12 monthly issues, 875 Mahler Rd., Suite 150,
Burlingame CA 94010



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ken L. Holder" <kholder@shell.liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Buchanan Calls Convention Truce
Date: 21 Aug 1996 00:55:34 -0700

At 05:50 PM 8/12/96 -0500, Larry Ball wrote:
>Howard phillips and the American Taxpayer pparty, Blue, that is who to
>vote for.  I too am with you about ole doleful and kemp.  Hey ain't 
>kemp some sort of a sea weed?
>
>Larry Ball
>lball@unlinfo.unl.edu

And a D'hole is some kind of hideous monster in an H.P. Lovecraft story.

--
Ken L. Holder     kholder@liberty.com     www.liberty.com/home/kholder/


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: ACLU Wins Challenge To Chicago Demonstration Restrictions (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 07:24:46 -0400 (EDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

ACLU Wins Challenge To Chicago Demonstration Restrictions

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, August 16, 1996

CHICAGO -- In a victory for the First Amendment, U.S. District Judge James
Moran today ordered the City of Chicago to open an area near the United
Center to limited First Amendment activity during this month's Democratic
Convention.

The City had tried to exclude all but holders of credentials issued by the
Democratic National Convention Committee (DNCC) from a twelve-block area
surrounding the convention site.

In today's ruling, Judge Moran said that the City must allow at least 20
people at a time the opportunity to deliver their messages at a fixed spot
near the United Center entrance.  The American Civil Liberties Union of
Illinois represented one of the five plaintiffs challenging the City's
planned restrictions.

"Streets and sidewalks are traditional places for people to gather -- they
belong to everyone," said ACLU staff attorney Jane Whicher.  "When the
DNCC chose Chicagofor its convention site, it chose a big city with diverse
people, ideas, and opinions.  The judge correctly ruled that the City cannot
shield the delegates from those who want to use our streets and sidewalks
for counter-speech."

The ACLU represents Dr. Quentin Young, the national coordinator of
Physicians for a National Health Plan.  Dr. Young is planning a march from
Cook County Hospital to the United Center on the morning of August 26, the
first day of the convention, and a round-the-clock vigil near the United
Center entrance through the duration of the convention.  The march and vigil
are intended to protest the Clinton Administration's abandonment of its
support for national health care reform.

The city had planned a virtually complete closure of the streets and
sidewalks in the twelve-block area surrounding the United Center during the
convention.  Only persons bearing credentials issued by the Democratic
National Convention Committee, security personnel, and residents would be
permitted to enter into this "buffer zone."

The ACLU and the other plaintiffs' attorneys argued that by closing the
public streets and sidewalks around the United Center, the City would take
away from the public a traditional forum for First Amendment activity.
These restrictions would limit the free speech rights of all speakers except
the Democratic National Convention Committee.  The ACLU argued that a small
portion of the buffer zone could be designated for speech activities without
compromising security or hindering traffic flow.

In his ruling, Judge Moran noted that streets and sidewalks held a privileged
position in First Amendment law as a forum for speech activity.  He
acknowledged that security concerns justify certain restrictions to limit
the risk of harm.  Still, Judge Moran observed that the City's security
plans could be altered to be more accommodating to First Amendment activity.

"We are thrilled with Judge Moran's thoughtful decision," said ACLU
volunteer cooperating attorney Edward Feldman.  "The judge engaged in the
difficult task of balancing security and free speech.  He correctly decided
that twenty people can safely exercise their right to leaflet and speak to
delegates right across the street from the entrance to the United Center."

Whicher noted that Judge Moran's decision provides for access similar to
that arranged at the 1992 Democratic Convention in New York, where sidewalk
space was set aside for leafletters.  "Also, at the Republican Convention in
San Diego, demonstrators and delegates were able to mingle on the public
streets and sidewalks," Whicher said.

"The judge made the right decision in recognizing that security can never be
a mask for destroying constitutional liberty," Dr. Young said.  "It is clear
that discourse took a holiday at the Republican Convention.  We want to make
sure that does not happen here in Chicago at the Democratic Convention."

The ACLU's volunteer cooperating attorneys at trial were Edward Feldman and
Diane Klotnia of Miller Shakman, and Michael Fridkin, Kerry Miller, and Bina
Sanghavi of Sachnoff & Weaver.


****************************************************************************
Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues
Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA
on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week)
Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH  43229
****************************************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Use the Liberals to call Congress for free
Date: 21 Aug 1996 07:26:15 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Call Congress for FREE by dialing 800-962-3524. For information on 
how to send your representatives email, as well as more information 
on Burma, visit our link located at
http://www.cnotes.com/telecom/action.html

Peace,

Mike Corso
CNI Telecom

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: Macon Update 08/21/96 (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 07:38:22 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Citizen Defense News  WED 21 AUG 96 0100 HRS 

MACON (CDN) - Constituitional investigators have learned that similarities
may exsist between the type of pipe bomb used at the Olympics and others
around the country. More details later in this report. 

... But first, our Top Story: 

Atlanta Journal & Constitution
e-mail: constitution@ajc.com

Tuesday, August 20, 1996

Local News- Page 1B
by David Kindred, At Large (Columnist for the Atlanta Journal & Consitution)

Title: "Taking a 2nd look at Georgia Militia"

It makes no sense.
But the questions ought to be asked.

What if the Georgia Republic militia is even a little bit right?

What if the boys playing soldier in the Crawford County woods were not
arming themselves, building bombs and otherwise preparing to go to war
against the federal government? What if they were just good ol' boys playing
soldier in the woods and cussin' out Uncle Sam between beers?

We know that agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms arrested
leaders of the militia in April on evidence produced by two informants who
had infiltrated the organization. But what if the informants were rogues who
took their act further than they should have?  What if the informants
planted the evidence that was then used to have the militiamen arrested?
Informants are not sworn police officers.  They're mercenaries used by the
police to do dirty work. So they're hired hands looking to please the boss,
in this case the ATF.  Not only is there no guarantee these mercenaries will
be honest upright, law-abiding citizens, chances are they like the thrill of
the chase as much as the honor of the law.

So the question ought to be asked:  What if the Georgia Republic Militia is
even a little bit right when it claims the informants didn't just report
what they saw, but invented something to report? That question comes up
because a federal agent has testified in open court, under oath, that the
founder of the Georgia Republic Militia was not present when pipe bomb
components were buried on his property by an informant.

________________________________________________________________

What if the informants were rogues who took their act further than they
should have?
________________________________________________________________

The agent also testified that a second militia member had said, "I don't
want to know anything about it," and walked away when the government's
informant talked about building bombs.  Yet both men were. arrested.  Robert
Edward Starr III and William James McCranie now await a Sept. 3 trial date
on charges of conspiring to possess unregistered explosive devices.

Their lawyer, Nancy Lord, said at a preliminary hearing, This is beyond
entrapment.  It is manufactured evidence."  She called the informants "agent
provocateurs." No one wants to believe that We don't want to believe our
government  works that way. Whether or not it does, we may find out soon.

And we certainly don't want to believe the militiamen when they take their
argument another step forward.  They move from citing sworn testimony to
speculating a theory of the Centennial Olympic Park bombing that could pass
for a first draft of an Oliver Stone exercise in paranoia. They suggest that
the government informants in the Macon case may have moved on to Atlanta
during the Olympics and become the park bombers.

The first week of May, the militiamen say, they answered an FBI request for
information about the ATF informants, including photographs.

Two days after the park bombing on July 27, militia spokesman, J.J. Johnson
issued a written statement saying the organization had called the FBI,
Atlanta police and Olympic federal security agency" and told them of
suspects who know about and have made pipe bombs." He also wrote, "Based on
news reports concerning a pipe bomb made of galvanized steel with nails
attached and a white male with a soft Southern accent, we became concerned
that the tragedy mightbe linked to individuals who we learned of through our
investigation on the Macon case ..."

Meanwhile, an Alabama militia group, the Gadsden Minutemen, has named the
two ATF informants and distributed photographs of them.  Neither man, it
might be noted, bears a resemblance to Richard Jewell.
________________________________________________________________

In other news...

ATLANTA - Sources say they cannot confrim a  match between the pipe bombs
found  on Georgia militiaman Robert Starr III's property and the one that
detonated in Olympic Centennial Park on July 27, killing two and injuring
111. However, Lloyd Erwin, a chemist for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms with be in Washington, D.C. to conduct more tests, hopefuly not on
civilians.

Richard Jewell, the soon-to-be wealthy secruity guard of Centennial Park,
passed a polygraph test yesterday. Jack Martin, attorney for Jewell appeared
on CNN's "Talk Back Live" prasing the results of the polygraph tests, that
were administered by Dick Rackleff, a former FBI agent. Although Martin
still believes polygraph tests are conterversial, especailly went being
administered by the FBI, he allowed the CNN audience to hold the news media
in utter contempt, and discuss how and where Jewell should spend his early
retirement. 

The 15 hour polygraph tests led Rakleff to say "He didn't do it".  The 27
year FBI veteran went on to state , " There's not any doubt in my mind. He
had no knowledge about the bomb... The tests show he absolutley was not
involved."

One unnamed FBI official, says that based on the evidence that has been
gathered from bombings around the nation, the only connection seems to be
that of the ATF, a treasury depatment radical extremist group based in
Washington, D.C. who's members have been linked to racist behavior, perjury,
the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City, and the terrorist assualt on
the Branch Davidian ranch that killed 86 people in April, 1993.

"Pipe bombs are considered job security," say one retired ATF official who
would not disclose in name. "It's just like the window salesman. When
business is slow, we go out and break some windows".

More news later. Stay tuned ....




___________________________________________________________________________

There will be nightly, unbaised INTERNET reports on the proceedings in the
U.S. vs. Starr/McCranie/Spain case. To be placed on the recieving list,
e-mail with the words "MACON COURT LIST" in the SUBJECT field of your
message. All attachment files will be in DOS (.txt) format. Postings start
Sep 3rd.								      
J.J. Johnson		Off: (912) 788-6272	
Citizen's Defense League	Fax (912) 785-1809
P.O. Box 7223		citizen@mindspring.com
Macon, Georgia 31209
___________________________________________________________________________



* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: The Brady Law (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 08:08:51 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

Message-ID: <960821032812_184104221@emout18.mail.aol.com>

The following examples provided by attorney and public policy analyst David
Kopel33 are instructive:
Bonnie Elmasri
On March 5, 1991 Bonnie Elmasri called a firearms instructor, worried that
her husband-who was subject to a restraining order to stay away from her-had
been threatening her and her children.  When she asked the instructor about
getting a handgun, the instructor explained that Wisconsin has a 48-hour
waiting period.  Ms. Elmasri and her two children were murdered by her
husband twenty-four hours later.
Rayna Ross
On June 29, 1993, at three o'clock in the morning, a 21-year-old woman named
Rayna Ross was awakened by the sound of a burglar who had broken into her
apartment and entered her bedroom. The burglar was her ax-boyfriend, a man
who had previously assaulted her. This time, having smashed his way into her
apartment, he was armed with a bayonet. Miss Ross took aim with a .380
semiautomatic pistol and shot him twice. The burglar's death was classified
as a "justifiable homicide" by the Prince William County commonwealth's
attorney, which determined that Miss Ross had acted lawfully in shooting the
attacker.
Miss Ross had bought her handgun one full business day before the attack,
thanks to Virginia's "instant background check." Virginia's 1993 Democratic
candidate for governor, Mary Sue Terry (endorsed by Handgun Control, Inc.),
proposed that-although the Virginia instant check already checks all handgun
buyers-Virginia handgun purchasers should undergo a "cooling-off period" of
five business days. Had the proposal been law in Virginia in 1993, Rayna Ross
would now be undergoing a permanent "cooling-off period.''34
Sonya Miller
Armed with a knife, Charles A. Grant, Jr., sexually assaulted a 33-year-old
woman on a Virginia beach one Tuesday in 1991. The assault was videotaped by
a tourist who (not having a permit to carry a concealed handgun for
protection) apparently could do nothing to help except record the crime.
The following day, Wednesday, Charles Grant raped a 12-year-old girl. News
broadcasts of the videotape of Grant's Tuesday assault frightened many people
in the nearby Nags Head community.
A young woman named Sonya Miller had been wanting a handgun for a while, and
on that Wednesday, her father bought her a .38 Special revolver. He gave her
the revolver that evening.
At about 9 P.M., Miss Miller went to the post office to pick up her mail. As
she stepped into the dimly lit parking lot near the post office, Charles
Grant saw her, and she saw Charles Grant. They both screamed. Grant told the
young woman he would not hurt her, but when she attempted to get into her
car, Grant lunged at the door. He stuck a .25 caliber pistol in her face,
began climbing into the car's back seat, and said, "I'm going to kill you."
"No," she replied, "I'm going to kill you." Sonya Miller picked up the
revolver she had acquired less than fifteen minutes before. When she pulled
the hammer back (a step preparatory to firing), he dropped his gun and fled.
Miss
Miller drove home; her father called the sheriff's offices, and Charles Grant
was apprehended.
Regarding the handgun Miss Miller had just acquired, "It's the only thing
that saved her life," her father observed.35x
Virgen Blanca
At the age of seventeen, Virgen Blanca emigrated to the United States from
Spain. By the time she was twenty-three, she had three children and was
divorced. To make ends meet for her family, she had to work two or three
jobs, as long as eighteen hours a day. In 1993, Ms. Blanca and her three
teenage children moved from Mesquite, Texas, to Dallas, in order to be closer
to her job as a house painter. The family moved into a seven-unit apartment
building, where they were the sole tenants.
During the night of Saturday, July 24, 1993, a prowler twice attempted to
break into the apartment. The second time, Ms. Blanca's 15-year-old son Reel
jumped out a second-story window to call the police. By the time they
arrived, the prowler was gone, having left behind a message scrawled on a
light switch next to the Blanca apartment, "I'll be back."
On Sunday, Mrs. Blanca purchased a Bryco semi-automatic pistol [an
inexpensive pistol]. On Monday night, Mrs. Blanca left the apartment to buy
food. Moments later, 15year-old Reel, 14-year-old Alexandra, and 10-year-old
John Paul heard a door creaking outside the apartment house. Recognizing the
man to be the same man who had twice attempted to break in Saturday night,
Reel took the Bryco pistol from his mother's room, and aimed it out the
window at the man in the courtyard below. Reel yelled "Freeze!" but the man
began to open the door to the apartment building. Reel shot the gun three
times, wounding the man in the groin.
The man limped two blocks, asked someone to call an ambulance, and claimed
that he had merely been looking for a place to urinate. Because Mrs. Blanca
could not make a positive identification of the man, police dropped burglary
charges.36
What a Difference a Day Makes
In 1985 in San Leandro, California, a woman and her daughter were threatened
by a neighbor. Instead of being able immediately to obtain a handgun for
self-defense, the woman had to wait fifteen days. The day after she finally
was allowed to pick up her gun, the neighbor attacked them, and she shot him
in self-defense. Had the man attacked fourteen rather than sixteen days after
his initial threat, the woman and her daughter might have been raped.
Catherine Latta
In September 1990, a mail carrier named Catherine Latta of Charlotte, North
Carolina, went to the police to obtain permission to buy a handgun. Her
ex-boyfriend had previously robbed her, assaulted her several times, and
raped her The clerk at the sheriff's office informed her the gun permit would
take two to four weeks. "I told her I'd be dead by then," Ms. Latta later
recalled. That afternoon' she went to a bad part of town, and bought an
illegal $20 semiautomatic pistol on the street. Five hours later, her
ex-boyfriend attacked her outside her house, and she shot him dead. The
county prosecutor decided not to prosecute Ms. Latta for either the
self-defense homicide, or the illegal gun.37
These anecdotes illustrate our contention that innocents suffer and die when
denied timely access to the safest and most effective means of protection -
guns.  The Brady Law waiting period and the extraordinary number of Brady
background check errors - almost the rule rather than the exception - deny
timely access to dozens of thousands of good and needful people.  In so
doing, it is our contention that the Brady Law costs many more lives than it
saves.
Recommendations
In balance, the Brady Law is a constitutionally offensive political fraud, a
public policy failure, and should be dismantled in its entirety.
We strenuously object to the concept of proving qualification to exercise an
inherent and irrevocable right to self defense.  We strenuously object to
even the suggestion of proving qualification to exercise a pre-existent and
constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.
If despite our most strenuous objections there is to be an infringement of
these rights to self-defense and right to keep and bear arms, let it be the
least intrusive infringement available; let it be the Instant Check system as
freely adopted by states (rather than imposed by the Brady Law's usurpation
of Tenth Amendment state powers).  State Instant Check systems are less
intrusive and less destructive of individual rights and state powers than the
Brady Law.  On a purely pragmatic level devoid of constitutional concerns (an
unprincipled position we neither adopt nor recommend), there are no benefits
whatsoever from the Brady Law except those that are better served by Instant
Check systems.
1 Lott JR and Mustard DB. "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed
Handguns."  Journal of Legal Studies. January 1997 forthcoming.
2 Suter EA  Waters WC 4th  Murray GB  Hopkins CB  Asiaf J  Moore JB  Fackler
M  Cowan DN  Eckenhoff RG  Singer TR  et al. "Violence in America - Effective
solutions." J Med Assoc Ga June 1995; 84(6):253-263.
3 Sugarmann J and Rand K. Cease Fire - A comprehensive strategy to reduce
violence. Washington DC: Violence Policy Center. 1993.
4 this voluminous literature is best summarized in Kleck G. Point Blank: Guns
and Violence in America.  New York: Aldine de Gruyter. 1991.
5 McGonigal MD, Cole J, Schwab W, Kauder DR, Rotondo MF, and Angood PB. Urban
firearms deaths: a five-year perspective. J Trauma. 1993; 35(4): 532-36.
6 Hutson HR, Anglin D, and Pratts MJ. Adolescents and children injured or
killed in drive-by shootings in Los Angeles. N Engl J Med. 1994; 330: 324-27.
7 Suter EA  Waters WC 4th  Murray GB  Hopkins CB  Asiaf J  Moore JB  Fackler
M  Cowan DN  Eckenhoff RG  Singer TR  et al. "Violence in America - Effective
solutions." J Med Assoc Ga June 1995; 84(6):253-263.
8 Kleck G and Gertz M. "Armed Resistance to Crime: the Prevalence and Nature
of Self-Defense with a Gun." Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology. Summer
1995:;  86:143-186.
9 Suter EA  Waters WC 4th  Murray GB  Hopkins CB  Asiaf J  Moore JB  Fackler
M  Cowan DN  Eckenhoff RG  Singer TR  et al. "Violence in America - Effective
solutions." J Med Assoc Ga June 1995; 84(6):253-263.
10 Kellermann AL. and Reay DT. "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of
Firearms-Related Deaths in the Home." N Engl J. Med 1986. 314: 1557-60.
11 Kates D, Schaffer HE, Lattimer JK, Murray GB, and Cassem EW. "Guns and
Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda?" Tennessee Law
Review. Spring 1995; 62(3): 513-596.
12 Suter EA. "Guns in the Medical Literature - A Failure of Peer Review."
Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia. March 1994: 133-48.
13  Suter EA, National Chair, Doctors for Integrity in Research & Public
Policy. testimony before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the
Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate. March 23, 1994
14 Waters, WC 4th, Eastern Director, Doctors for Integrity in Policy
Research, Inc.; Wheeler TW, President, Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership;
Faria M, Professor of Neurosurgery and Adjunct Professor of Medical History,
Mercer University, former editor of the Journal of the Medical Association of
Georgia; and Kates DB, civil rights attorney and criminologist. testimony
before the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations,
 Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and Education.  March 6,
1996.
15 Bennett A and Sharpe A. "Health Hazard: AIDS Fight Is Skewed By Federal
Campaign Exaggerating Risks." Wall Street Journal. May 1, 1996, pp 1 & 6.
16 Clinton WJ, President of the United States of America. Remarks at the
Democratic National Committee Gala. Washington Convention Center. Washington
DC. May 8, 1966 10:32PM EDT.
17 Clinton WJ, President of the United States of America. Remarks to the
people of DesMoines. Knapp Center, Drake University, Des Moines IA.  February
11, 1996 2:05PM CST.
18 United States General Accounting Office. "Report to the Committee on the
Judiciary - House of Representatives - Gun Control: Implementation of the
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act." GAO/GGD-96-22 Washington DC: USGAO.
January 1996. hereinafter "GAO survey."
19 GAO survey Chapter 2.
20 Wright JD and Rossi PH. Armed and considered dangerous: a survey of felons
and their firearms. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. 1986.
21 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. "Protecting America: The
Effectiveness of the Federal Armed Career Criminal Statute."  Washington DC:
US DOJ BATF. undated. page 28.
22 Federal Bureau of Investigation, US Department of Justice. Uniform Crime
Reports: Crime in the United States 1993. Washington DC: US Government
Printing Office. 1994.  Table 5. and Federal Bureau of Investigation, US
Department of Justice. Uniform Crime Reports: Crime in the United States
1994. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office. 1995.  Table 5.
23 GAO survey at page 5.
24 Wright JD and Rossi PH. Armed and considered dangerous: a survey of felons
and their firearms. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. 1986.
25 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. "Protecting America: The
Effectiveness of the Federal Armed Career Criminal Statute."  Washington DC:
US DOJ BATF. undated. page 28.
26 Aborn R, President of Handgun Control Inc. Letter to the editor.
Washington Post. September 30, 1994.
27 Howlett D. Jury still out on success of the Brady Law. USA Today. December
28, 1994.  p A-2.
28 Clinton WJ, President of the United States of America. Remarks on MTV's
"Enough is Enough" forum on crime. Kalorama Studio. Washington DC. April 19,
1994 11:30AM EDT.
29 Jacobs JB and Potter KA. "Keeping Guns Out of the 'Wrong' Hands: The Brady
Law and the Limits of Regulation." Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology.
Summer 1995:;  86:93-120.
30 Federal Bureau of Investigation, US Department of Justice. Uniform Crime
Reports: Crime in the United States 1992. Washington DC: US Government
Printing Office. 1993.  Table 5.
31 Federal Bureau of Investigation, US Department of Justice. Uniform Crime
Reports: Crime in the United States 1994. Washington DC: US Government
Printing Office. 1995.  Table 5.
32 Suter EA  Waters WC 4th  Murray GB  Hopkins CB  Asiaf J  Moore JB  Fackler
M  Cowan DN  Eckenhoff RG  Singer TR  et al. "Violence in America - Effective
solutions." J Med Assoc Ga June 1995; 84(6):253-263.
33 Kopel DB. "Guns: Who Should Have Them?"  Amherst NY: Prometheus Books.
1995. pp 61-65.
34 "No Duty to Protect." Washington Times. July 13, 1993. page missing.
35 Thiel E. "Gift of a Gun Warded Off Attack, Father Says." Virginia-Pilot.
April 12, 1991. p. D-1.
36 Gilman TJ and Talley O. "Violent Reactions: Citizens' Growing Use of Force
Stirs Societal Questions." Dallas Morning News. August 1, 1993. page 1-A.
37 Wright GL. "Woman Won't Be Charged: Boyfriend's Slaying Ruled
Self-Defense." Charlotte Observer. October 3, 1990. page missing.




Message-ID: <960821033704_184107204@emout15.mail.aol.com>

Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research, Doctors for Responsible Gun
Ownership, and the Lawyers Second Amendment Society have filed an amicus
brief supporting the dismantling of the Brady  Law.  In the tradition of the
"Brandeis Brief," we do not address the focused constitutional concerns, but
address instead the public policy concerns.  We cannot allow the Supreme
Court to mistakenly imagine that the sky will fall if they dismantle the
Brady Law (which, incidentally, was originally named for _Sarah_, _not_
Jim_Brady).  We cannot allow the Supreme Court to imagine that a "compelling
government interest" exists that overshadows our rights.

Though _not_ the text of our brief, we offer the background research for your
consideration and dissemination.

DIPR, DRGO, & LSAS
*********************************

Dismantling the Brady Law - No Public Policy Disaster
Dispelling Common Misperceptions
Guns in the hands of Americans  are overwhelmingly a net benefit to society.
 To understand why dismantling the Brady Law is desirable - not a public
disaster - it is crucial to first understand the enormous protective benefits
of guns - the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs averted
(because guns save lives and prevent injuries), and the property protected
using guns.  Evidence continues to accumulate showing that, rather than
causing an "epidemic of violence," guns in the hands of good citizens reduce
violence.
Below we will point to the evidence that the Brady Law background check and
waiting period do nothing significant to reduce violence or to ensure that
guns are only in "good hands," but do impede the timely access of good
citizens to needed protection.  In hopes of weakening the Tenth Amendment
challenge to the Brady Law "reasonable" background check requirement of Chief
Law Enforcement Officers (CLEO), supporters of the Brady Law, with a wink and
a nod, have suggested that in some cases a "reasonable" background check is
no background check.  We argue that such farcical perfidy cannot be suborned
by the Court, particularly in view of the superior available option,
computerized Instant Check of gun purchasers' backgrounds as currently exist
in 28 states.  Unlike the Brady Law's ridiculous requirement that CLEOs
review available records (such records often constituting little better than
outdated paper files in a shoebox), the Instant Check system relies upon
current, computerized records.  We point to the dramatic difference between
the Brady Law's laughable prosecution and conviction record (during the first
year of the Brady Law, 7 convictions in the entire nation) and the efficient
sweep of computerized state Instant Checks of gun purchasers' backgrounds
(between November 1989 and June 1996, 2,479 individuals were arrested - of
which 304 were wanted persons - in one state alone, Virginia).  We will
demonstrate the duplicity of repeated claims that the Brady Law has prevented
"Sixty thousand" - or even any thousands - of criminals from obtaining
firearms.  We provide this documentation with one purpose in mind - to show
unequivocally that there is no compelling government interest in
resuscitating the Brady Law.  Far from a public policy disaster, dismantling
the Brady Law is a public benefit.  To place the specifics of Brady Law gun
control in perspective, one must understand the larger perspective of gun
control.  
As the newest piece of evidence supportive of that contention that guns in
the hands of Americans  are overwhelmingly a net benefit to society, a
forthcoming study of 15 years' data by University of Chicago researchers
shows that "1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults
would have been avoided yearly" if currently restrictive states would reform
their laws to allow more mentally-competent, law-abiding adults to carry
concealed handguns for protection outside the home.1  Though surprising to
those who obtain their impressions of gun violence research from the print
and broadcast lay press, the scholarly literature increasingly vindicates
guns as "pathogens" of violence and exposes gun control as a "placebo" or
"suicide pill" rather than a "cure" for gun violence.2
In fact, the strategy of gun control proponents to repackage gun control as a
"public health" measure3 resulted because of the near unanimous recognition
of the criminological scholarly literature that gun control was a failure as
a crime or violence reductive measure.4   Stringent gun control does not and
cannot be expected to keep guns out of the hands of the willful predators who
ignore laws against drug trafficking, rape, and murder.  By whatever
increment any gun control measure inconveniences criminals, those criminals
are not (the wishful and repeated claims of gun control advocates
notwithstanding) "prevented from obtaining guns," they are merely displaced
into the fast and uncontrolled illegal gun market.  Predators who sell crack
by the gram or heroin by the kilogram, can quickly and certainly find a black
market gun and can certainly afford outrageous prices for such guns without
any inconvenience of a background check or a waiting period any longer than a
"cash and carry" transaction.  Accordingly, gun control only impedes gun
purchases by willingly compliant law-abiding citizens, the victims.  In so
doing, gun control is a counter-productive, even deadly, failure.  Victim
disarmament is not  a policy that saves lives.  To the extent that the Brady
Law impedes the access of good citizens to the protection of guns, the Brady
Law becomes only a comfort to criminals, an assurance of criminals'
continuing job safety.
The much ballyhooed "public health approach to gun violence" merely spins
"new clothes [a lab coat] for the emperor" offering an insidiously amoral,
value-neutral perspective on gun deaths.  Because of Hippocratic Oath values,
 the medical and public health literature tallies the death of the crippled
grandmother shot in the back by a gang-banging predator the same as it
tallies the death of a predatory 24 year old, drug-trafficking "innocent
child" (in the parlance of the American Academy of Pediatrics). Such
predatory teens and young adults carry illegal guns obtained on the black
market that are not subject to the Brady Law background checks or waiting
periods.  The medical/gun control advocacy literature5,6 shows that fully
two-thirds of gun homicide "victims" are, in fact, drug dealers and their
customers who wreak tremendous human and economic havoc upon society.
 Failing to account for this, the medical literature cannot and does not
honestly assess these deaths.  Whether measured in human or economic terms,
our peer-reviewed cost-benefit analysis finds an overwhelming net benefit of
guns in our society - overwhelmingly more lives and money saved using guns
than are lost using guns.7
Without exception, review of all 14 studies of defensive gun use suggest that
protective uses of guns by Americans number 1 to 2.5 million annually.8  The
largest-scale, most comprehensive study of protective gun use, Kleck &
Gertz's National Self-Defense Survey, suggests about 2.5 million protective
uses by adult Americans against human attackers annually - lives saved,
injuries prevented, medical costs averted, and property protected.
 Protective uses against animals  and protective uses by teenagers or
children were not included in this study.  About 400,000 of these gun
defenders believe that they would almost certainly have lost their lives if
they did not have a gun for protection.  Even if 90% of these gun defenders
were mistaken, the number of lives saved using guns still outnumbers the
lives taken using guns by thousands.
In about 98% of these protective uses the gun is not even fired.  In only
about 0.1% (one-in-a-thousand) of the protective uses is the attacker
killer.9  This exposes the fundamental flaw in the Centers for Disease
Control (CDC)-sponsored research claiming that "a gun owner is 43 times more
likely to kill a family member than an intruder"10 - gun defenders apprehend
or repel attackers a thousand times as often as they kill them.
The flawed and politicized nature of the CDC's much publicized research has
been repeatedly exposed in the peer-reviewed and peer-acclaimed scientific
literature11,12 and before Congress.13,14  In a front page investigation the
Wall Street Journal of May 1, 199615 exposed the CDC's campaign of strategic
lying regarding AIDS research.  The CDC has waged a similar campaign of
strategic lies regarding guns and violence.
We present this data as background to generate healthy scientific - and legal
- skepticism of the flawed and politicized "science" that has polluted the
public debate, media, and common wisdom regarding guns in our society.   Such
rigorous objectivity is essential in examining the key point of this brief,
our contention that the Brady Law is useless, perhaps even dangerously
counter-productive.
Piercing the False Claims of Brady Law Benefits
Arguably the most prominent Brady Law supporter, President Clinton, stated
"xSixty thousand people with criminal records have not been able to buy
handguns because of the passage of the Brady Billx."16 and "It has made us a
safer country."17  The President's remarks encapsulate all that is wrong with
his and countless similar claims of Brady Law benefits because:
* the GAO survey,18 the source of President Clinton's projected figure,
stated that it's Brady Law sample data could not be projected to the nation
at large as President Clinton has done to arrive at the "Sixty thousand"
figure
* the GAO survey shows that approximately half of the individuals fingered by
Brady Law background checks are not individuals disqualified from gun
ownership19
* data from the National Institute of Justice20 and from the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms21 suggest that, of those actual criminals
fingered by the Brady Law background checks, gun purchase was not prevented -
criminals are merely displaced from the legal retail market into the illegal
black market unaffected by the Brady Law
* FBI Uniform Crime Report data from 1993 and 199422 actually show that the
22 states exempt from Brady Law provisions are safer than the 28 states
subject to Brady Law provisions.
We elaborate on each of these points.  "GAO did not conduct a national survey
of law enforcement officials.x Instead, GAO judgementally selected and
surveyed 20 law enforcement jurisdictions (7 statewide and 13 local).  The
results of GAO's study, therefore, are not projectable to the universe of
denials nationwide."[emphasis added]23  Unfortunately, the President and
other Brady Law advocates ignore this important caveat from their own data
source.  Additionally, such claims of "Sixty thousand" depend upon denials in
the entire nation, including the Brady-exempt states.  How can Brady Law
advocates honestly lay claim to the benefits obtained in states exempt from
Brady Law provisions?  
The GAO survey found that approximately half of Brady Law background check
denials, the so-called "criminals," are errors.  Half of these Brady Law
"criminals" are flagged due to administrative errors (such as forms prepared
or mailed incorrectly, innocents whose names are similar to felons,
non-disqualifying misdemeanor traffic convictions, or other trivial "crimes"
such as fishing without a license and failure to license dogs).  Even when
considering the convicted felons accurately fingered by background checks,
one must wonder what threat to society is the handgun of a former tax evader
who paid her debt to society? or the handgun of the middle-aged, working
father who forgot about his collegiate plea on "disturbing the peace"
charges?  Such crimes do disqualify gun ownership, but can Brady Law
advocates honestly lay claim that such denials kept handguns out of the hands
of criminals? or that such denials prevented crimes?
Neither waiting periods nor background checks prevent criminals from
acquiring guns.  Data from the National Institute of Justice24 and from the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms25 agree that approximately 7% of
criminals' handguns are obtained from retail sources, so controls on retail
gun sales cannot be expected to reduce criminals' access to guns much, if at
all.  Despite exaggerated claims by the administration and gun prohibition
lobbyists26 of the success of the Brady Law,  the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms (BATF) has acknowledged that the little existent evidence is
only anecdotal.27
Of the actual felons identified by Brady Law background checks during the
first 1 1/2 years of the Brady Law, only seven had been successfully
prosecuted (4 received probation and 3 received prison sentences of between 1
to 2 years).   Even if we ignore noting that incarcerated criminals still
obtain or improvise firearms, we are forced to note that the actual Brady Law
criminals who are not incarcerated are merely displaced into the "black
market."  In such circumstance, the minimal expected benefit of the Brady Law
diminishes to no benefit at all.  President Clinton, himself a staunch
defender of the Brady Law, admitted the Brady Law failure: "It is true that
you can still buy an illegal gun with cash in the streets."28  The real
purveyors of violence, the vicious predators with lifelong histories of
violence to those around them (family, acquaintance, or otherwise), are the
criminals untouched by the Brady Law or other gun laws except for penalty
enhancements (when the gun charges are not plea bargained away by the
prosecutor).
A meticulous scholarly analysis published in The Journal of Criminal Law &
Criminology29 reviewed these and other problems that expose the Brady Law as
a political boon, but a public policy sham.
There is no persuasive evidence that the Brady Law has made us safer.  Prior
to implementation of the Brady Law in 1993, FBI Uniform Crime Report data
showed that, in the 24 states and the District of Columbia where laws existed
to delay handgun purchases, violent crime was 34.6% higher, Robbery was 76.9%
higher, Aggravated assault was 21.6% higher, and Homicide was 3.7% higher.30
 Following the implementation of the Brady Law, FBI Uniform Crime Report data
from 1993 and 1994 show that:
homicide dropped about twice as much in the 22 states exempt from the
provisions of the Brady Law (a 7.3% drop from 1993 to 1994) in comparison
with the 28 states subject to the provisions of the Brady Law (a 3.8% drop
from 1993 to 1994).
total violent crime dropped exactly twice as much in the 22 states exempt
from the provisions of the Brady Law (a 4.8% drop from 1993 to 1994) in
comparison with the 28 states subject to the provisions of the Brady Law (a
2.4% drop from 1993 to 1994).
robbery dropped over three times as much in the 22 states exempt from the
provisions of the Brady Law (an 8.8% drop from 1993 to 1994) in comparison
with the 28 states subject to the provisions of the Brady Law (a 2.7% drop
from 1993 to 1994).
Since most high-crime states and the District of Columbia were exempt from
Brady Law provisions, the Brady Law would not have been expected to have had
an effect on these jurisdictions. Instead, the Brady Law imposed background
check and waiting period requirements upon traditionally low-crime states - a
priori reason to have low expectations for Brady Law results.  Today the
District of Columbia and most high-crime cities are exempt from the Brady Law
waiting period. Ten such Brady Law-exempt/high-crime cities (New York City,
Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, District of Columbia, Baltimore, St. Louis,
Phoenix, Atlanta, Richmond) accounted for 23% of 1994 US homicides.31
"If it saves one life," but costs many  lives, what then?
The Brady Law is a failure and predictably so.  Contrary to the pandemic of
propaganda by the advocates of the Brady Law, dismantling the Brady Law will
not result in an epidemic of violence or a public policy disaster.  In
formulating sound public policy, one cannot succumb to the seductive "if it
saves only one life" lament as though it suggested some compelling government
need, because the dozens of thousands of Brady Law background check errors
and the waiting period have certainly denied timely access to the safest and
most effective means of protection32 - a gun - to at least many innocent
victims.
[cont'd]



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  1996-08-14 Letter on Extending Emergency Economic Powers (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 09:25:00 -0500 (CDT)



                           THE WHITE HOUSE
  
                    Office of the Press Secretary
  
  _______________________________________________________________
  
  For Immediate Release	   	     	          August 14, 1996
  
  
  
                 TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
                        TO THE SPEAKER OF THE
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                   AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE
  
  
  
  
                           August 14, 1996
  
  
  
  Dear Mr. Speaker:   (Dear Mr. President:)
  
  On August 19, 1994, in light of the expiration of the Export 
  Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 
  et seq.), I issued Executive Order No. 12924 declaring a 
  national emergency and continuing the system of export 
  regulation under the International Emergency Economic Powers 
  Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).  Under section 202(d) of the 
  National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), the national 
  emergency terminates on the anniversary date of its declaration 
  unless the President publishes in the Federal Register and 
  transmits to the Congress a notice of its continuation.
  
  I am hereby advising the Congress that I have extended the 
  national emergency declared in Executive Order No. 12924.  
  Attached is a copy of the notice of extension.
  
       	    	      	   	Sincerely,
  
  
  
  
       	    	      	   	WILLIAM J. CLINTON
  
  
  
  
  
  
                                # # #
  


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Don't Sleep by Windows . . . (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 12:00:02 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

>From eplurib@megalinx.net Wed Aug 21 11:31:11 1996

* Police device burns man and woman during raid

MCALESTER, Okla. AP 8/21/96  -- Police raiding a home early Tuesday threw a
"flash bang" device through a bedroom window, burning a sleeping couple when 
the device landed on the bed.

Narcotics Task Force Commander Richard Sexton said police used the 
device while serving a search warrant for drugs and guns at the home of 
Nina and Eugene Kirk in Krebs, about 10 miles east of McAlester.

"This was a distraction device, and it's not meant to hurt anyone," 
Sexton said. It landed on the bed accidentally, he said.

Nina Kirk was taken to Hillcrest Burn Center in Tulsa, where she was in 
stable condition with second-degree burns over 25 percent of her body.

Eugene Kirk was treated at McAlester Regional Health Center. Then, 
wearing ankle-to-thigh bandages on both legs, he went to court to 
request a mistrial on an unrelated firearms charge. The mistrial was 
granted.

Kirk is charged with illegally possessing a handgun found by the same 
group of police in his home in March 1995.
Helen Reed-Johnson - Fridays - 8:00 pm EST - WWCR 5.065 Mhz
E Pluribus Unum & The Ohio Unorganized Militia
PO Box 477; Stockport, Ohio  43787; Office: 614-559-3468 Fax: 614-559-3469
Web Site - http://home.megalinx.net/~eplurib/home.html
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" Hosea 4:6



----- End Included Message -----



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: ACLU Wins Challenge To Chicago Demonstration Restrictions (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 10:33:11 -0700

        Donna,

        >>>>>>>
        "The judge made the right decision in recognizing that security can
never be
a mask for destroying constitutional liberty,"
        <<<<<<<


        How very interesting, coming from an ACLU mouth.

        " . . . security can never be a mask for destroying constitutional
liberty, . . ."

        Does that mean, that they no longer subscribe to 'gun control'?
        If the ACLU still purports the necessity of a secure society as
being a necessity for gun control, then they are as always - being
duplicitous.

        Let's see them back out of that one.

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey)
Subject: We think we have troubles . . . .
Date: 21 Aug 1996 12:56:14 CDT


I saw this today on the London Daily Telegraph.  Apparently it's not a
joke.

And we think we have problems.

The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other-
wise noted.  No-one else should be held responsible for what I think.

| D. N. Dickey               |  Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and |
| Research Associate         |  timidity, are no match for armed and       |
| Northern Illinois Univ.    |  resolute wickedness.                       |
| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu    |                       - W. S. Churchill     |
| **Finger for public key**  |                                             |

--------------------------- Begin Included Document -----------------------

[Image]                                          Electronic Telegraph
           International News
           Wednesday 21 August 1996                          Issue 456
           [Image]

[See text menu at bottom of page]

 [Image]    Finnish police tackle speeders with harpoon

            POLICE in Finland are hunting speeding motorists in a patrol
            car equipped with a harpoon.

            The device was developed by officers in Oulu, 380 miles north
            of Helsinki, who are seeking government approval for regular
            use. The harpoon is rammed into the boot of a fleeing car,
            locking into place with hydraulically operated barbs, and the
            runaway comes to a halt as the police car brakes.

            If the runaway driver refuses to get out of the vehicle, tear
            gas can be released through the harpoon's hollow shaft. The
            3ft harpoon swivels so that it can be aimed for a precise hit
            and it comes with infra-red sights for night use. A single
            officer can operate the harpoon while driving without
            endangering road safety, according to Sgt Markku Limingoja,
            who designed the device.

            "There is a danger that the runaway car could jam on the
            brakes," Sgt Limingoja admitted. "Officers using the car will
            have to be well-trained so that they get a feel for it."

            He spent two years working on the project before he built a
            prototype, which was tested earlier this summer.

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [Image] Next Story: News in brief
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------ End Included Document ----------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: ACLU Wins Challenge To Chicago Demonstration Restrictions
Date: 21 Aug 1996 14:04:48 -0500

>        How very interesting, coming from an ACLU mouth.
>
>        " . . . security can never be a mask for destroying constitutional
>liberty, . . ."
>
>        Does that mean, that they no longer subscribe to 'gun control'?
>        If the ACLU still purports the necessity of a secure society as
>being a necessity for gun control, then they are as always - being
>duplicitous.
>
>        Let's see them back out of that one.
>


-----

They can't. They will have to change their stance - and soon.

The glaring inconsistency of the ACLU anti-RKBA position is a costing them
too much in the way of broad-based support for other issues with which they
need all the help they can get. Anyway, liberty vs. tyranny cuts across
cultural/ideological lines - why let stupid cultural differences and petty
mental disturbances stand in the way of mounting a successful coalition to
preserve liberty?

The ACLU, like most organizations, is made up of cronies who don't want to
admit they made a serious error in judgment. Maybe if we point out to them
the impact of continuing to hold to these errors, they will join us in our
pursuit of liberty.

RKBA is essential to preserving liberty, including much of the liberty the
ACLU espouses. I think they are beginning to see that - the CDA and the
roving wiretap legislation must have scared the living crap out of them, and
now they just may recognize that RKBA is essential to their pet causes. Even
Laura Murphy made a big deal about the "new coalition" being formed - a
thinly disguised allusion to people on the Right.

She should have come clean and told everyone watching CNN that the "new
coalition" includes the NRA - but the Fascist demagogues have done a pretty
good job of putting the NRA into a politically incorrect corner. That will
change soon, too.

I believe the now-famous Univ. of Chicago Report is going to be the pivotal
element to effect this change in attitude at the ACLU. How many people do
they want to be responsible for being murdered and raped from this point
forward, just because they have adopted this ridiculous anti-RKBA stance?
Not many, I would suspect. Why not remind your ACLU friends of this?

Hoplophobia is curable - just look at the many conversions that have come
about among the members of FarLeft Academia - especially after Gary Kleck
gained prominence?  There were several ACLU-type academics on the House
Panel just before the OKC bombing.

The RKBA pendulum is finally swinging to the Right - and just in the nick of
time, too.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Jewell Passes Polygraph Test
Date: 21 Aug 1996 12:09:16 -0700

        Bob,

        >>>>>>>
        His lawyers say he's the victim of a rush to judgment, and
they're considering legal action against the FBI and the news
media for portraying him as the prime suspect.
        <<<<<<<

        Now, you know that 'we' just _had to have_ someone's face and a
name with which to focus our 'collective anger and rage' upon.
        Come on, Bob, get with the (liberal) program.
        You know how it is, especially when there was no one else around to
'look like' a prospective suspect. And besides, he even looked like he
could be the archtypical yonder there, redneck yokel who is capable of
doing any bad thing.
        He is also patriotic and a white male, and a cop wannabe ta boot!
How much more evidence do ya want?
        Damn, Bob, he has all the traits of being a mad bomber!
        So just what is your problem here, anyway?
        I say, let's plant that 'evidence', and get on with the show!

        {;-^)

        Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: ACLU Wins Challenge To Chicago Demonstration Restrictions
Date: 21 Aug 1996 15:38:44 -0400


[ much of Bob's excellent post deleted for brevity]

> The ACLU, like most organizations, is made up of cronies who don't want to
>admit they made a serious error in judgment. Maybe if we point out to them
>the impact of continuing to hold to these errors, they will join us in our
>pursuit of liberty.
>
>RKBA is essential to preserving liberty, including much of the liberty the
>ACLU espouses. I think they are beginning to see that - the CDA and the
>roving wiretap legislation must have scared the living crap out of them, and
>now they just may recognize that RKBA is essential to their pet causes. Even
>Laura Murphy made a big deal about the "new coalition" being formed - a
>thinly disguised allusion to people on the Right.
>

	This reminds me of a civics lesson from long ago.  A teacher illustrated 
	political differences with a horseshoe shaped diagram:

                          
                            centrist
                           ---------- 
           center left   /           \center right
                        |             |  
		left	 \           /  right
			  \         /
		communist  \       / fascist
			====       ====


	The point of the diagram is that the when Communists and Fascists start 
	to oppress people wholesale, then it doesn't matter which oppressive 
	totalitarianism you live under, the ends of the horseshoe come together 
	and there isn't enough difference to matter to the subjects of the 
	oppression.

	I think that a modern diagram should drop the Communist and Fascist 
	label and turn the whole thing on its head, to say:

	"When the centrist position is turning towards a highly managed,
	highly secure, low rights society with managed information and 
	only lip service to Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, then the 
	extreme left and extreme right start to realize that *they* are the 
	oppressed people and they have many interests in common (specifically,
	to stop the oncoming march of the welfare/warfare/infotainment state)."

	jcurtis









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Michael Stiler <stiler@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: We think we have troubles . . . .
Date: 21 Aug 1996 14:25:09 -0700 (PDT)




On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Neil Dickey wrote:
> 
> I saw this today on the London Daily Telegraph.  Apparently it's not a
> joke.
> 
> --------------------------- Begin Included Document -----------------------
> 
>  [Image]    Finnish police tackle speeders with harpoon
> 
>             POLICE in Finland are hunting speeding motorists in a patrol
>             car equipped with a harpoon.
> 
>             The device was developed by officers in Oulu, 380 miles north
>             of Helsinki, who are seeking government approval for regular
>             use. The harpoon is rammed into the boot of a fleeing car,
>             locking into place with hydraulically operated barbs, and the
>             runaway comes to a halt as the police car brakes.
> 
> ------------------------ End Included Document ----------------------------


I can hardly wait to see the look of surprise on the face of the
hostage/kidnap victim in the 'boot' (trunk)! 


Mike


Michael D. Stiler || stiler@netcom.com || SysDate Consulting Services
Master Mason  Knight Templar  Scottish Rite  Shriner  Sailor  Diver
AMA LifeMember   NRA LifeMember   AOPA   HOG   Bagpiper   TeamOS/2
|- I'll give up sex before I'll give up motorcycling -|
Bagpipe Spoken Here!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Report: CIA Profited from Crack Plague (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 17:07:47 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


Found at USA Today website
http://www.usatoday.com
today, Aug. 21, 1996


   [Washington News]
08/20/96 - 08:57 PM ET - Click reload often for latest version

  Report: CIA profited from crack plague
  
   SAN JOSE, Calif. - Throughout the 1980s, a San Francisco Bay area drug
   ring sold tons of cocaine to Los Angeles street gangs and funneled the
   profits to some of the CIA-run Contras in Nicaragua, a newspaper
   reported.
   
   Repeated attempts to prosecute the ring's kingpin were thwarted by the
   CIA, possibly to cover up ties between the traffickers and Contra
   leaders, the San Jose Mercury News reported in a series of articles
   after a yearlong investigation.
   
   The newspaper's report, based on recently declassified federal
   reports, court testimony and interviews, also alleges that the drug
   network was partially responsible for the ongoing "crack" problem in
   Los Angeles.
   
   The money pipeline was created after the CIA combined several armies
   to create 5,000-member anti-communist FDN Fuerza Democratica
   Nicaraguense (Nicaraguan Democratic Force) in mid-1981, the newspaper
   reported.
   
   The same year, the drug ring sold almost a ton of cocaine to the Crips
   and Bloods, notorious Los Angeles gangs, for $54 million, former FDN
   leader and government informant Oscar Danilo Blandon Reyes said.
   
   "There is a saying that the ends justify the means," Blandon testified
   in 1994. "So we started raising money for the Contra revolution."
   
   The Mercury News identified the primary buyer as Ricky Donnell Ross,
   or "Freeway Rick," a notorious South-Central Los Angeles dealer who
   bought powder cocaine, turned it into crack and sold it wholesale
   throughout the city and the nation.
   
   Blandon spent 28 months in U.S. prison for dealing drugs, the Mercury
   News said. He was released from prison in 1994 to become a full-time
   informant for the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, a job which
   has since paid him more than $166,000.
   
   How much of the drug ring's profits went to the FDN before it
   disbanded in 1988 still is unclear. But in his testimony, Blandon
   said, "whatever we were running in L.A., the profit was going to the
   Contra revolution."
   
   Blandon's boss, Juan Norwin Meneses Cantarero, was a major drug dealer
   and smuggler who ran the FDN operation out of his homes in Burlingame
   and Pacifica in Northern California, the paper reported.
   
   Although records show that the U.S. government was aware of Meneses'
   dealings since 1974, the Mercury News reported that he has never been
   in a U.S. prison. Meneses currently is serving time in Nicaragua after
   being arrested in connection with a 750-kilo shipment of cocaine.
   
   Federal prosecutors blame the CIA and other federal departments for
   Meneses' relatively sweet treatment in the U.S., the Mercury News
   said.
   
   "The Justice Department flipped out to prevent us from getting access
   to people, records - anything that would help us find out about it,"
   said Jack Blum, former chief counsel to the Senate subcommittee that
   investigated alleged cocaine trafficking to the Contras. "It was one
   of the most frustrating exercises that I can ever recall."
   
   Agents from four other agencies, including the DEA, U.S. Customs, the
   Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and the California Bureau of
   Narcotic Enforcement, also have complained that the CIA hampered
   investigations, the Mercury News reported.
   
   The reason might well be Meneses' own connections to the CIA, the
   Mercury News said. One piece of evidence - a picture taken in June
   1984 - shows Meneses with Adolfo Calero, a longtime CIA operative and
   FDN political boss.
   
   But efforts to trace the government's knowledge of the drug ring have
   similarly been thwarted, the newspaper reported.
   
   Freedom of Information Act requests that reporters filed with the CIA
   and DEA have been denied on national security and privacy grounds. A
   FOIA request filed with the FBI has so far been ignored, the Mercury
   News reported.
   
   While Blandon has never said he was selling cocaine for the CIA, his
   lawyer, Los Angeles defense attorney Bradley Brunon, said he has drawn
   his own conclusions from the CIA's clandestine behavior.
   
   "Was (Blandon) involved with the CIA? Probably. Was he involved with
   drugs? Most definitely," Brunon said. "Were those two things involved
   with each other? They've never said that, obviously. They've never
   admitted that. But I don't know where these guys get these big
   aircraft."
   
   By The Associated Press
     _________________________________________________________________
                                      
     * Go to Washington news
     * Go to News front page
       
     _________________________________________________________________
                                      
   [ISMAP]


Brian Redman       | bigred@shout.net | ftp.shout.net  pub/users/bigred
Editor-in-Chief    | ---------------Phone: 217-356-4418----------------
Conspiracy Nation  |       "The perfect slave thinks he's free."




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: Helms says U.S. should consider withdrawing from U.N. (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 17:11:13 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


Helms says U.S. should consider withdrawing from U.N.


Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Jesse Helms, the conservative chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, says the United States should withdraw from the
United Nations if the world body isn't overhauled.

"We must not enter the new millennium with the current structure in place,"
Helms, R-N.C., writes in Foreign Affairs magazine.

The State Department disagrees, though Glyn Davies, a spokesman, said
Tuesday, "There is a lot of fat to cut out."

The Clinton administration is withholding an estimated $1.5 billion from the
United Nations as a pressure tactic.

U.N. spokesman Ahmad Fawzi dismissed Helm's article as "totally inaccurate."

"I am sorry to say once again he has not done his homework," Fawzi said.

Helms over the years has chafed at the growing size of the U.N. budget and
operations. For instance, he writes in the September-October issue, the
total cost of U.N. peacekeeping has skyrocketed from $230 million in 1988 to
$3.6 billion in 1994, for which the United States contributed $1.7 billion.

>From monitoring truces, policing cease-fires and serving as a buffer between
parties, U.N. peacekeeping has evolved to everything from holding elections
to feeding hungry people and nation-building, Helms says. And the United
States pays 31.7 percent of the cost.

According to some accounts, however, peacekeeping costs have dropped
considerably since 1993 as U.N. troops were withdrawn from Rwanda and from
Bosnia, where they were replaced by a 60,000-member NATO-led force.

Peacekeeping is expected to cost some $1.4 billion this year, less than half
1993 expenses.

The United States has said it will pay only a quarter of those costs.

Overall, the United States contributed $3.5 billion a year to the United
Nations, which has a bloated bureaucracy of 53,744 and is encroaching on the
sovereignty of nation-states, Helms wrote.

Calling for a 50 percent cut in its personnel and limiting the U.N.
secretary-general, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, to a bare-bones $250 million,
Helms said U.N. activities should be funded on a voluntary basis.

Helms writes: "The time has come for the United States to deliver an
ultimatum: Either the United Nations reforms, quickly and dramatically, or
the United States will end its participation."

Last Friday, Boutros-Ghali announced a budget proposal that would cut 500
jobs and trim expenses 6.9 percent.

"There needs to be a new way of operating in the U.N.," Davies said Tuesday.
"That's the message that we've sent consistently."

However, Davies also said, "We stand by the U.N. as an important institution
that does an awful lot for the United States as a nation, does an awful lot
to help preserve the peace in various parts of the world. We certainly have
no plans to withdraw from the U.N. and can't envision any circumstances
currently that would lead us even to speculate."

The Clinton administration has called on the United Nations to freeze its
growth and has declared its opposition to an extension of Boutros-Ghali's
five-year term. Helms argued the budget should be slashed, and he denounced
the Egyptian diplomat as a protector of a bloated bureaucracy and an
advocate of a standing U.N. army and the power to collect direct U.N. taxes.

"The international elites running the United Nations look at the idea of the
nation-state with disdain," Helms wrote. "They consider it a discredited
notion of the past that has been superseded by the idea of the United
Nations."

The senator appeared to rate chances of reform as slim. The United Nations
-- certainly the smaller nations -- is certain to resist all changes, Helms
said, because "they benefit from the current system and gain influence by
selling their sovereignty to the organization."

           ------------------------------------------------------

You can select another article in the national news section and click  or go
back to the GT OnLine front page.

                                |Front page|
     |World news| |National news| |Business news| |Editorials/Opinions|
      |Sports news| |Local/state news| |Lifestyle news| |Go! magazine
A Service by the Gazette Telegraph, Hosted by U S A . N E T. Copyright )
1995-1996 The Gazette Telegraph



* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Fwd: Marines Training in New Orleans (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 17:30:50 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------



---------- Forwarded message ----------
    rbiondi@u.washington.edu, freematt@coil.com, cenmonet@socketis.net,
    ray673@best.com, maboud@aol.com, RMart@Web-Net.com,
    lcressy@cybersim.com, judyt@norfolk.infi.net, c_harrisco@aol.com


MARINES COME TO TOWN

New Orleans, LA - Soon, some 400 Marines will be deployed in the
Mediterranean Sea for six months.  But before they head out, they've stopped
in New Orleans, Louisiana to polish their urban war skills - including
foreign evacuations and hostage rescues.

For the next 10 days, these little war games will be going on right in New
Orleans' own backyard - complete with the hovering and landing of loud
choppers, and possibly the firing of blank ammunition.   Why New Orleans?
According to commanding officer, Col. Emerson Gardner, "We've trained and
trained at Camp Lejeune, but, to us, New Orleans and Mobile (Alabama) are
foreign environments."

Much of the training will take place at night in undisclosed locations.
Colonel Gardner said this is to both keep people from gathering to watch the
exercises, and to practice the secrecy aspects of rescue and combat
operations.  Helicopter pilots will gain experience using night goggles to
navigate in unfamiliar territory; ground troops will practice entering dark
buildings.  The troops will not be informed of their mission nor where they
are to be deployed in the city until just hours prior to the exercises.

A maximum of 100 troops will be training in the city simultaneously and
fourteen choppers will be involved, although not all of them at the same
time.

According to Lt. John Selby, a Super Cobra pilot out of Los Angeles, it will
be noisy - but residents should have nothing to fear.

source: "Relax!  Marines are only training; Loud choppers to arrive in N.O."
Times-Picayune, Aug. 20, 1996




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey)
Subject: Re: We think we have troubles . . . .
Date: 21 Aug 1996 17:41:28 CDT

Michael Stiler <stiler@NETCOM.COM> wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Neil Dickey wrote:
>> 
>> I saw this today on the London Daily Telegraph.  Apparently it's not a
>> joke.
>> 
>> --------------------------- Begin Included Document -----------------------
>> 
>>  [Image]    Finnish police tackle speeders with harpoon
>
> [ ... Snip ... ]
>
>I can hardly wait to see the look of surprise on the face of the
>hostage/kidnap victim in the 'boot' (trunk)! 

The mind boggles, really!  And then they turn on the gas.

>Michael D. Stiler || stiler@netcom.com || SysDate Consulting Services
>Master Mason  Knight Templar  Scottish Rite  Shriner  Sailor  Diver
>AMA LifeMember   NRA LifeMember   AOPA   HOG   Bagpiper   TeamOS/2
>|- I'll give up sex before I'll give up motorcycling -|
>Bagpipe Spoken Here!
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Really?  I play the fife, but love to listen to bagpipes as well.

The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other-
wise noted.  No-one else should be held responsible for what I think.

| D. N. Dickey               |  Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and |
| Research Associate         |  timidity, are no match for armed and       |
| Northern Illinois Univ.    |  resolute wickedness.                       |
| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu    |                       - W. S. Churchill     |
| **Finger for public key**  |                                             |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Conference of Interest to Your Readers (fwd)
Date: 21 Aug 1996 19:24:30 -0400 (EDT)

Sometimes the most interesting items come across the HUD maillist.....

---------- Forwarded message ----------

OPEN SOURCE INTELLIGENCE (Decision-Support/Real-Time Research) is the focus
on the internationally acclaimed OSS '96, now going into its fifth year.

Titled "Global Security & Global Competitiveness:  Open Source Solutions",
the conference -- now its its fifth year, started as a means of teaching 
spies how to use publicly available information.  It has evolved into the 
world's only open forum and meeting ground which brings together spies, 
librarians, hackers, scholars, business intelligence and law enforcement 
intelligence analysts, and military intelligence analysts as well as 
information brokers and private investigators.  

Professional tracks focus on economic and financial intelligence; 
transnational and domestic law enforcement intelligence; and military and
coalition intelligence.  Technical tracks focus on sources of information
including commercial imagery; advanced tools and techniques for information
discovery, discrimination, distillation, and dissemination; and
opportunities for private sector sales to international government, and
government privatization of selected intelligence functions. 

For a complete schedule, send email to <OSS96@oss.net>, visit Web site
<http://www.oss.net/oss>, fax (703) 242-1711, or call (703) 242-1700 with a
complete mailing address. The conference will be held just outside
Washington, DC in Tysons Corner, Virginia.


Zhi Hamby-Nye, President
Real Trends, Inc.

Have you registered for OSS '96?  16-18 September 1996 at the Sheraton
Premiere, Tysons Corner.

Visit the Web site at <http://www.oss.net/oss>, or send email to
<oss96@oss.net>.  See you there!

Have you registered for the NMIA InfoWar Conference to be held on 17
September 1996 at the Sheraton Premiere and hosted by OSS?  Visit the Web
site at <http://www.oss.net/NMIA/HomePage.html> or send email to
<zhi@cais.com>.

The OPS Group will also be holding a Conference on 16 September 1996 at the
Sheraton Premiere and hosted by OSS.  For information send email to 
<zhi@cais.com>.

Managing information for:
NMIA - http://www.oss.net/NMIA
OSS - http://www.oss.net/oss
OPS - http://www.oss.net/zhi
NIP - http://www.oss.net/oss/nip
GRIP and the 749th TBA


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: FBI IN TRANSCAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA (fwd)
Date: 22 Aug 1996 08:15:40 -0500 (CDT)



----- Begin Included Message -----
    The following was part of an OMRI News brief which the Hungarian American
List posts daily with news regarding Hungary and it's region.  In light of
recent posts to this list, I found this particularly of interest. You may
consider this a second witness (II Corinthians 13:1).


FBI IN TRANSCAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA. The U.S. Federal Bureau of
Investigation plans to double it overseas offices from 23 to 46
over a four-year period, AFP reported on 20 August. Among other
countries, the agency plans to establish a presence in Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan, and Georgia in 1998. This is part of the FBI's effort
to create a "first line of defense" or early warning system to cope
with what it considers to be the growing internationalization of
crime and crime threats to the U.S. The report detailing these
plans stressed that the agency, whose mission has been confined to
domestic law enforcement and counter-intelligence, would not be
engaged in espionage but would liaise with its foreign
counterparts. -- Lowell Bezanis

 Compiled by Steve Kettle
Compiled by Tim Rostan

       This material was reprinted with permission of the 
Open Media Research Institute, a nonprofit organization with research
   offices in Prague, Czech Republic. (http://www.omri.cz/)
       For more information on OMRI publications, 
             please write to:  info@omri.cz

     Copyright (C) 1996 Open Media Research Institute, Inc.
             All rights reserved. ISSN 1211-1570


  E-mail from: Louis A. Yurcsak, Jr., 21-Aug-1996

************************************************

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  FEDS TELL ALL !!! (fwd)
Date: 22 Aug 1996 08:19:39 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

             Council on Domestic Relations
             August 21, 1996

Have you seen the "Working Paper 9405" from the Federal Reserve?
It's about 70 pages.  A presentation made by Walker Todd, 
assistant general counsel and research officer at the Federal
Reserve Bank in Cleveland, to the Western Economic Association
International Conference at Lake Tahoe, Nevada, June 23, 1993.

He tells how the Federal Reserve did it to us.  Outrageous but
true!

Call 216 579-3079.  That's the Fed Bank in Cleveland.  You'll get
a voice mail message.  Leave your name, address and phone number
and request WORKING PAPER 9405.  They'll send it free.  I received
mine within a week.

Here's just a sampling from page 23-24 ...

>Another telling indictment of the legal, as distinct from the 
>political, basis for the emergency proclamation that the Board's
>[Federal Reserve Board] general counsel prepared was the following
>exchange between Roosevelt and Senator Glass in Roosevelt's hotel
>room at 11:30 on the night before the inauguration:

>[Roosevelt]:  [Hoover says that the Board has asked him twice 
>within the last three days to issue an emergency proclamation,
>but I told him that the governors of the states can take care of
>bank closings.

>[Glass]:  "Yes, I know.

>[Roosevelt]:  "The previous time [that the Board asked Hoover
>for the proclamation] I sent [incoming Treasury Secretary William]
>Woodin to [outgoing Treasury Secretary Ogdon] Mills to tell him
>I would not give my approval to such a proclamation."

>"I see, What are you planning to do?" asked Glass.

>"Planning to close them, of course." answered Roosevelt.

>"You will have no authority to do that, no authority to issue 
>any such proclamation." protested Glass.  "It is highly 
>questionable in my mind if you will even have the authority to
>close national banks -- and there is no question, at all, that
>you, even as President, will lack the authority to close banks
>chartered by the states."

> "I will have that authority," argued Roosevelt.  "Under the 
> enemy Trading Act, passed during the World War and never 
> rescinded by Congress.  I, as President, will have the authority
> to issue such an emergency proclamation 'for the purpose.' as 
> the Act says, 'of limiting the use of coin and currency to 
> necessary purposes.' "

> "It is my understanding that President Hoover explored that
> avenue a year or two ago -- and again during recent days," said
> Glass.  "Likewise, it is my understanding that the Attorney
> General informed him that it was highly questionable if, even
> under this act, though it has never been rescinded by Congress,
> the President has any such authority.  Highly questionable 
> because the likelihood is the act was dead with the signing of 
> the Peace Treaty, if not before."

> "My advice is precisely the opposite." 

>  "Then you've got some expedient advice," returned Glass....
>  [Glass then argued that the courts would find the proclamation
> unconstitutional because it would require the unwarrented 
> closing of solvent banks and because, even if all the banks
> were known to be insolvent,] "I am sure such a proclamation
> could not legally include banks chartered by the states."
> [Wyatt's written opinion of December 5, 1932, argued just the
> contrary, that the federal government could close state-
> chartered banks.]

> "Nevertheless", declared Roosevelt, "I am going to issue such
> a proclamation."

> Convinced though he [Glass] was there had been no need for 
> closing the banks [Glass believed that only insolvent banks
> could not withstand the runs of February-March 1933] and
> certain, too, the President was without constitutional authority
> for his act, those convictions were lost causes. (Smith and
> Beasley [1972], pp. 341-343).

>  Hoover writes in his memoirs that if Roosevelt really believed 
> what he told Senator Glass late on March 3, then he should have
> joined Hoover in issuing a proclamation limiting withdrawals and
> issuing the 80 percent guarantee of deposits to avoid *closing*
> the banks:  "But closing the banks would be a sign the country
> was in the ditch.  It was the American equivalent of the burning
> of the Reichstag to create 'an emergency'" (Hoover [1952], p.214).
> However, as noted in the earlier discussion of the measures
> taken from the fall of 1931 onward, it was Governor Meyer and
> the Board's staff who led the way in finding reasons for
> proclaiming emergencies and for pushing forward the boldest
> emergency relief schemes, against the recalcitrance of Hoover,
> who went along with much that should not have but retained to
> the end the capacity to discern excess where the Board apparently
> did not.

Was it Congressman McFadden who said, "The Federal Reserve
Act was the greatest act of treason ever perpetrated on the American
people". ?  Read their own documents.

MAY GOD BLESS US, EVERYONE 

Jackie


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  NSSC Doc: Dole's New World Orders (fwd)
Date: 22 Aug 1996 09:31:15 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 07:15:07 -0500 (CDT)
>From: Nick Ivanovich <nssc@inlink.com>
>X-Sender: nssc@shell1
>To: uwsa <uwsa@shell.portal.com>
>cc: 1776@iquest.com
>Subject: NSSC Doc: Dole's New World Orders
>
>Please forward the following to your networks. 
>Thank you,
>
>Nick Ivanovich, NSSC National Coordinator
>
>
>          NATIONAL STATE SOVEREIGNTY COALITION
>   "Information / Action....Of, By and For the People" 
>               Doc. 113, 8/21/96, 2 Pages
>
>             DOLE GETS HIS NEW WORLD ORDERS
>                            
>George Shultz appeared on the McNeil-Lehrer News Hour on PBS and
>disclosed that he is an advisor to the Dole campaign. Shultz said nothing about
>"The rest of the story."
>
>     GEORGE SHULTZ, a Republican, was U.S. Secretary of State from
>1982-1989. Like other recent Secretaries of State, he is a member of the
>Council on Foreign Relations, CFR.  Unlike them however, he is also
>Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the GORBACHEV FOUNDATION. 
>
>     THE GORBACHEV FOUNDATION was featured in the L.A. Times
>4/17/93 under the headline, "THE FORMER HEAD OF THE RUSSIAN KGB
>TAKES OVER A U.S.MILITARY POST IN S.F.  Mikhail Gorbachev was
>given the key to an office on the Presideo in San Francisco.... The Foundation
>raises money and provides technical support."... Gorbachev calls it "the
>symbol of our irreversible transition from an era of confrontation and
>militaristic insanity to a New World Order, one that promises dividends for
>all."
>     The San Jose Mercury News 4/21/93 reported, "...Gorbachev
>announced that the Foundation is creating a national task force on U.S.
>military base closings." The article concludes, "In his news conference,
>Gorbachev was asked whether he would re-enter politics. 'I never left
politics,'
>he said." 
>     A Gorbachev Foundation Press Release, 10/19/94, reads - "In a major
>policy speech delivered today at the Council on Foreign Relations of New
>York, Mikhail Gorbachev unveiled the final report of the Global Security
>Project, an eighteen month collaborative effort undertaken by the Gorbachev
>Foundation/USA and the Gorbachev Foundation/Moscow... David Rockefeller,
>Sr., founder of the Council, introduced Mr. Gorbachev." 
>
>     THE BOARD OF ADVISORS for the Gorbachev Foundation are:
>**Dwayne Andreas**, Sen. Dick Clark, Sidney Drell, Sen. Gary Hart,
>Theodore Hesburgh, Rep. Mel Levine, Sen. Charles Mathias, Rep. David
>Nagle, John Naisbitt and Walter Shorenstein. 
>
>     DWAYNE ANDREAS is the CEO of Archer Daniels Midland
>company, ADM, the world's largest producer of grain and the self proclaimed
>"Supermarket to the World."  ADM sponsors many TV network news and
>news analysis programs, including the McNeil-Lehrer News Hour.
>     Bob Dole is ADM's idea of the ultimate presidential candidate. ADM
>produces ethanol. Dole is one of ethanol's biggest champions. He introduced
>more than 50 bills to promote it's use. He promoted the 54-cents ethanol
>subsidy and helped keep it from applying to methanol. For this subsidy, the
>federal government pays $3.5 billion over five years, and ADM garners 60%
>of that."  
>     "NEW YORK" in its 7/10/95 issue reported, "It is the Dole/Dwayne
>Andreas/ADM relationship more than any other that stands as a case study in
>the legal corruption of politics and as an explanation of why, in the midst of
>a budget-cutting frenzy, some of the juiciest handouts aren't even in jeopardy.
>     Mrs. Nelson A. Rockefeller sits on Archer-Daniels' board of
>directors.... Bob Dole's second wife (Elizabeth Dole) is a career bureaucrat. 
>Since 1991, she has been the President of the Red Cross.  While she has been
>serving as president, Archer-Daniels has contributed over one million dollars
>to the Red Cross." (Media Chooses the President', chap. 5)
>     Dwayne Andreas, a Trilateralist and CFR member, is a major player
>among the controlling elite and supports the centralization of power of the New
>Word Order. Andreas/ADM donated $250,000 to Mikhail Gorbachev who is
>organizing other internationalists to establish WORLD GOVERNMENT and
>WORLD TAX. 
>     MIKHAIL GORBACHEV is the former Premier of the Soviet Union
>and head of the KGB, the Russian equivalent of the CIA.. In his book,
>Perestroika, Gorbachev's words are crystal clear: (quotes) "In effect,
according
>to Lenin, socialism and democracy are indivisible." page 32 (revised edition
>pg. numbers in Parentheses - 18)... "Those who hope we shall move away
>from the socialist path will be greatly disappointed.  Every part of our
program
>of perestroika - and the program as a whole, for that matter -is fully based on
>the principle of more socialism and more democracy." page 36 (23)....."We
>will proceed toward more socialism rather than away from it.  We are saying
>this honestly, without trying to fool our own people, or the world.  Any hopes
>that we will begin to build a different, non-socialist society and go over
to the
>other camp are unrealistic and futile." page 37 (23)....."What we need is not
>"pure," doctrinaire, invented socialism, but real, Leninist socialism." page 96
>(82). To him the terms "democracy and socialism" mean the same.
>
>     ADVICE - Just what advice will Shultz, Gorbachev, Andreas, etal,
>give to Candidate Dole? Surely, it won't be to withdraw from the sovereignty-
>stealing United Nations and its campaign for World Government, "of, by and
>for the Elite." And how will the instructions given to Dole differ from those
>which they'll give to Candidate Clinton? Bill Clinton, too, is a member of the
>Trilateral commission elites, and both he and his Secretary of State, Warren
>Christopher, are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Since mid-
>1994, Dwayne Andreas has also been shipping money to Clinton, which now
>totals $270,000, making ADM one of Clinton's largest benefactors (according
>to Common Cause). 
>     
>     WHAT TO DO ? The campaign between "Bob Clinton vs. Bill Dole"
>is a sham, there is NO difference. Both bow to the same controlling
>international elite. They have no allegiance to the United States or its
working
>citizens.  They will continue to sell out American Sovereignty as they did when
>they followed orders of the global elite and perpetrated the fraud called
>NAFTA; and when they turned America's independent decision making power
>on trade over to un-elected bureaucrats at the World Trade Organization in
>Geneva who are NOT ACCOUNTABLE TO U.S. CITIZENS. Clinton and
>Dole haven't changed. They'll say whatever it takes to get your vote.  Then,
>after the election, they'll be back to serving the NWO.
>
>YOUR CHOICES: 
>     1.) Delude yourself and Vote for the lesser evil of two evils
>and continue to empower the International Elites calling for a New
>World Socialist Order with all power centralized at the top.
>     
>     2.) Stay home and just not vote and let the New World
>Order win.
>
>     3.) Or, Get Mad as Hell, and Really Stop Throwing Away
>Your Vote. PROMOTE and VOTE for a THIRD PARTY
>CANDIDATE who has personally, and without equivocation,
>committed to stand for the INDEPENDENCE of the U.S.A. as
>required by the Constitution. You will send the Republicrats and
>the NWO crowd a powerful message... And you will know in your
>heart that this time you voted AGAINST the tyranny of World
>Socialist Government...and FOR America's Freedom!
>                            
>                       *  *  *  *
>
>Contact:  The Gorbachev Foundation/USA, Box 29134 - The Presideo, San
>Francisco, CA 94129, Tel 415-771-4567, Fax, 415-771-4443). "Media Chooses
>the President"  author of internet postings in Oct.95 is Carl Loeber
>408-298-8733. lion@netcom.com.... or NSSC for more information.
>     
>*** The U.S. Taxpayers Party supports the U.S. Constitution. Hear
>Howard Phillips' inspiring Aug 18th San Diego Presidential nominee
>acceptance speech, now available on audio cassette. Send $5 to NSSC, PO
>Box 29106, St. Louis, MO 63126,..Ph.314-843-3457, Fx 314-843-3771, E-
>mail nssc@inlink.com 
>
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: TWA 800 Bomb Fraud Fizzles; Safety Is Issue (fwd)
Date: 22 Aug 1996 11:12:07 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
The relevancy of this article to list issues is that this crash is being
used as a reason to further erode or eliminate more liberties in the name of
"anti-terrorism" in the way OKC was blamed on gun owners, the NRA and talk
radio. Read what TWA employees say.....
JH 

                   August 21, 1996

BY NANCY ROSENSTOCK
   NEW YORK - Nearly a month after the crash of TWA Flight 800
off the coast of Long Island, with half the plane and most of
its contents recovered from the ocean floor, the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the FBI have not produced
a single shred of evidence that points to a bombing of the
plane. At the same time, investigators "have also begun to more
strongly consider mechanical failure as a possible cause of the
mid-air explosion of the Boeing 747-100 on July 17," reported a
front-page article in the August 9 Seattle Times.
   The article, by the paper's aerospace reporter, Byron
Acohido, was headlined "Mechanical failure eyed in probe of TWA
crash" with the teaser "Possible structural problems, fuel leak
get a closer look." The Seattle Times, published in Boeing's
home turf, had run another front-page story July 27 on the
Boeing 747 explosion near Madrid in the mid-1970s that led to
discovery of fuel-system defects in the plane. That account
included the otherwise virtually unreported notification by TWA
800 pilots of "an erratic fuel-flow gauge" just two minutes
before the crash.
   The July 27 story received scant attention in the media. The
August 9 article has begun to get wider notice. It was reprinted
in its entirety in the August 10 Star-Ledger, the main daily in
Newark, New Jersey. Meanwhile, most big-business papers like the
New York Times have moved their daily articles on the TWA
investigation - which peddle the government/company "terrorist"
scare campaign - from the front pages to inside sections.
   Acohido reports that the TWA 800 crash may have been caused
by "massive structural failure of the engines or fuselage,
perhaps linked to an initial fire fed by leaking fuel." When
investigators raised the right wing from the ocean floor, they
found that the engines were missing and that the engine
attachment pins or fuse pins, all eight of them, were in place.
   Weak fuse pins were the cause of an El Al 747 freighter crash
in Amsterdam in 1992. The faulty pins caused the El Al jet's
inboard right engine to break loose of the wing on take-off. The
engine shot forward and to the right, knocking the right
outboard engine off the wing as well. The jet smashed into a
crowded 10-story apartment building.
   "A nearly identical fatal crash of a China Airlines 747
freighter had occurred near Taipei, Taiwan, 10 months earlier,"
Acohido reported. Boeing subsequently developed corrosion-
resistant fuse pins and designed a special bracket to more
securely hold the engine to the wings. The company assigned
special crews to travel around the world to begin strengthening
747 mounts. But older jets weren't top priority. According to
NTSB vice-chairman Robert Francis, the 25-year-old TWA 800 plane
hadn't yet had its mounts fully upgraded.
   These are not the only problems with older 747 jets.
According to Acohido, part of the structural frame, known as
Section 41, has been a safety concern since the mid-1980s. The
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ordered major
strengthening of Section 41 frames when these planes reach
20,000 flights. In the crash of Pan Am Flight 103 over
Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, the plane broke into several
pieces after its Section 41 frames buckled. Acohido reported
that "the TWA jet, with 16,870 flights, last had its Section 41
frames inspected after its 14,687th flight, with a typical
number of cracks found and repaired."
   Acohido said a loose engine could smash into the plane's
fuselage and buckle its weak Section 41 frame.
   Another safety question relates to the 747's leaky fuel
tanks, which can develop over time on aging jets. "A standing
FAA directive requires operators of 190 747-100s to upgrade
fasteners in a main structural member of the wing, called the
front spar, which also forms one side of the jet's fuel tanks,"
Acohido wrote. "Fatigue cracks can develop in the fastener holes
on the front spar, creating fuel leaks near the inboard
engines."
   Back in 1991 Boeing warned that such "fuel leakage can cause
a fire."
   Acohido added that "airline and federal aviation officials
have said the TWA jet complied with all FAA directives, but
decline to say whether that meant the jet was on an inspection
schedule or had undergone the fastener-hole upgrade."
   The only other time a 747 jet exploded in mid-air was in
1976. The 747 was owned by the Iranian military and exploded
near Madrid. No cause was ever determined for this crash but it
was reported that lightening could have triggered an electrical
spark from a fuel system pump.
   Last year, another incident just now coming to light,
occurred in Singapore. The 747 jet, owned by Japan Air Lines,
was being refueled when it caught fire. The electrical
insulation for one of its 14 fuel pumps shorted out and ignited
fuel, according to the New York Times.
   The August 8 New York Times reported the FAA will issue a new
ruling soon that would "require regular testing and possible
replacement of fuel pumps on the huge jets. The pumps - there
are 14 on each 747 - have been shown to be prone to leakage."
   Claiming this has no connection to the crash of Flight 800,
the Times continued, "The agency [FAA] has been working on the
new rule for months, and the timing of its release is not
related to the TWA crash. But tests have shown many pumps to be
susceptible to the problem."
   In 1976, following the Madrid crash, the FAA ordered 747
wings checked for fuel leaks. Most found leaks and the FAA
ordered upgrades. But the jet that crashed July 17 was owned by
Iran's military at the time and was exempt from civil aviation
rules. Boeing spokesman Doug Webb would not say whether the fuel
system upgrades were made once the plane was repurchased by TWA
in December 1976. Acohido revealed that the pilots of TWA 800
reported "an erratic fuel gauge" just before the crash.
   As part of its cost-cutting drive to shore up declining
profit rates and outbid competition, TWA has not invested in new
aircraft. The average age of the company's fleet has grown to
nearly 20 years and for its Boeing 747 fleet it is 25 years.
   Airline workers are quite familiar with the detrimental
effect of this profit drive on aircraft maintenance and safety,
as crews get smaller and the bosses impose dangerous speed up.
   We have also felt the brunt of the employers' assault on our
living standard. TWA has been in and out of bankruptcy twice in
the past eight years. In November 1994, after TWA emerged from
bankruptcy, workers made concessions to the tune of $660 million
in exchange for 45 percent "ownership" of the company. New hires
on the ramp, most of whom start part-time, make less than 50
percent of top pay. Vacations have been cut and pensions are
frozen.
   The latest example of how the companies' profit drive
undermines safety is the recent announcement by Delta Air Lines.
The August 9 New York Times reported that the company plans to
start a "budget, no frills airline" called Delta Express. "To
make money," the article said, "Delta Express must chop labor
costs and cut the time it takes to load and fuel a plane to 20
minutes from almost an hour."

   Nancy Rosenstock is a member of the International Association
of Machinists and works at TWA in Newark, New Jersey.

--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE: Re: Jewell Passes Polygraph Test
Date: 22 Aug 1996 11:45:23 -0500

        Bob,

        >>>>>>>
        His lawyers say he's the victim of a rush to judgment, and
they're considering legal action against the FBI and the news
media for portraying him as the prime suspect.
        <<<<<<<

        Now, you know that 'we' just _had to have_ someone's face and a
name with which to focus our 'collective anger and rage' upon.
        Come on, Bob, get with the (liberal) program.
        You know how it is, especially when there was no one else around to
'look like' a prospective suspect. And besides, he even looked like he
could be the archtypical yonder there, redneck yokel who is capable of
doing any bad thing.
        He is also patriotic and a white male, and a cop wannabe ta boot!
How much more evidence do ya want?
        Damn, Bob, he has all the traits of being a mad bomber!
        So just what is your problem here, anyway?
        I say, let's plant that 'evidence', and get on with the show!

        {;-^)

        Ed



--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 22 Aug 1996 11:46:46 -0600

A couple days ago I got a book in the mail from a publisher.  It's 
written by Richard Pombo, Congressman from Stocton, CA and is called 
"This Land Is Our Land."  I'm not totally sure how or why I got this 
little gift but since the "Fortune" article some people seem to feel the 
need to send me all sorts of stuff.

Before I waste time reading a book by a congress-critter I want to know 
how he is on guns so I called Joe Phillips at NRA Fed Affairs and got a 
five minute positive rave about him.  Pombo's voted 100% right on guns 
since he's been in congress.  So I read the book.

Pombo's big thing is private property rights.  Most of yawl know I have 
a little piece of currently scorched South Texas and if you get me 
talking about endangered species, etc., you're stuck for the afternoon.

I feel a little better after reading Pombo's book because now I know at 
least one SOB in Washington understands how I feel on the subject.  As 
far as he's concerned all that malarkey amounts to is a bunch of 
socialists trying steal land from private property owners and he goes 
into some detail about how it's being done.  If you have any curiosity 
about why a lot of folks here there and elsewhere are ready to shoot 
somebody over this issue, Pombo will explain it to you without the 
attendant frothing at the mouth and four letter words that usually 
accompany my diatribes on the subject.

They also included some reviews.  Rush thinks it's wonderful, Newt 
thinks it's wonderful, Kirkus Reviews (whoever the hell they are) thinks 
it's poetry, etc, and frankly I don't give a damn what any of them 
think.  But there is one by a guy I respect who seemed to actually have 
read the book rather than just wrote what a publisher wanted to see.

This is from Dr. Walter E. Williams,  professor of economics, George 
Mason University: <This is a book about old wine in new bottles. Since 
communism has lost respectability, its ideas of control and coercion 
must be relabeled into more respectable titles, such as environmentalism 
and care for endangered species. Americans had better wise up while we 
still have the freedom to act.>

According to me, Dr. Williams understands the deal.  So does Pombo.

My guess is they (the publisher) sent me this hoping I'd love and put 
something up on the net about it and they'd sell a gazillion books to 
various and sundry grass roots folks.  They get half their wish.  The 
book is worth reading and if you want a copy you can order one at 
1-800-288-2131.

Just for the sake of form, no financial or any other consideration was 
paid or promised other than the book, which I've already sent to someone 
else.  If this yanks your chain, blame me, not Pombo.

Jim Bohan

	
-- 
"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
because he knows you have the means to do it.
 
"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
everything you've got."

                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Date: 22 Aug 1996 21:03:21 -0500

If any of you critters are in the Kansas City area or even 8 hours away,
John Ross of St. Louis, the author of "Unintended Consequences" will make a
presentation to the Zenith Boosters Club meeting next Wednesday evening, 28
Aug 1996.

You're invited to attend.  Cocktails at 5:30, presentation about 7:00.  The
University Club, 918 Baltimore, Kansas City, MO.  We'll need $10
contribution towards hors d'oerves and John's expenses.

Ross' novel covers the history of gun control throughout the world in a most
entertaining way with a remarkedly exciting denoument.

Jacq'

Uh, don't forget to "feed the hawgs." 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: For the DOUBTERS of NEWT's COMMENTS on WTOP re:24hr Chance (fwd)
Date: 22 Aug 1996 21:22:10 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------


For anyone who doubted the 08/20/96 WTOP piece on Newt's comments re:
Terrorism etc, here is the transcript of communication with Newt's
congressional office manager Hunter Hamilton.  BTW, Newt has a point here... 
Of course two edge sword comes to mind.  We must contend till the end.

	Ralph	http://TeamInfinity.com/bible/
		http://TeamInfinity.com/~ralph/code/t26.html




>From hunter@gingrich.house.gov Thu Aug 22 09:54:05 1996
Return-Path: hunter@gingrich.house.gov
Received: from oxygen.house.gov (oxygen.house.gov [137.18.128.6]) by teaminfinity.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA31028 for <ralph@teaminfinity.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 09:54:00 -0400
Received: from [143.231.122.2] by oxygen.house.gov (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA21282; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:18:42 -0400
Received: by gingrich.house.gov (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA23967; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:20:31 -0400
Message-Id: <9608221420.AA23967@gingrich.house.gov>
Status: RO


> 
> *** ORIGINATED BY RALPH@TEAMINFINITY.COM ON 02:47PM 08/21/1996 ***
> Dear Hunter, 
> 
> As per our conversation moments ago here is the info I desire.
> 
> Yesterday (8/20/96, about 1:00pm) on WTOP we heard a very interesting 
story
> in which it quoted Newt on Terrorism.  We were impressed with the common
> sense and no nonsense approach with using the military and giving 24 
hours
> to prove innocense etc. He also mentioned placing missle batteries in 
major
> US Cities and expanded FBI involvment to insure American s safety.  Could 
> we
> please get the exact text of what was said yesterday ?
> 
> Was there a press conference ? Is there a document expressing these views 
? 
> What was the context ? Where was it held.  We need the exact words so as 
to
> not misprepresent in conversation.  People I know were very interested in
> this, I want to make sure I get it right.  Very exciting indeed.
> 
>         Thanks, 
> 
> 
>                 ralph@TeamInfinity.com
> 
> *** ANNOTATED BY HUNTER ON 05:12PM 08/21/1996 ***
> Ralph,
> 
> I have sent an inquiry to the District Office regarding the alleged 
> terrorism comments by Mr. Gingrich.  When I hear back from them, I will 
let 
> you know.
> 

*** ANNOTATED BY HUNTER ON 10:20AM 08/22/1996 ***
Ralph,

The following story is from the White House Bulletin of Tuesday, August 
20:

    "House Speaker Newt Gingrich said in a speech to businessmen in Georgia 
today that the US should adopt a 'doctrine of pre-emption' in which 
'terrorists' would have 24 hours to prove they are innocent of planning 
attacks against US targets or face retaliation.  He said such retaliatory 
attacks could be carried out openly or covertly by the CIA.  Said Gingrich: 
'We don't wait around until after they take out the World Trade towers, 
with nuclear weapons next time.  We go ahead and say: We have a reason to 
believe you're not behaving correctly.  You should convince us in the next 
24 hours that we're wrong or we will tke you out.  If we would be very 
aggressive in saying to Libya, Syria, Iran and Sudan that we will not 
tolerate your supporting terrorists, we could have a big effect on the 
resources available to terrorists around the world.'"
 
That's the best I can do for you, Ralph.  Anything further will have to 
come either from the radio station or our press office.  Hope this is 
helpful.  By the way, I agree that this attitude is very exciting, 
refreshing, and well overdue. 




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: Colorado Judge Threatens Juror (fwd)
Date: 22 Aug 1996 21:23:52 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------



     Net Activism Alert:
     This is not a test.
     Please distribute this announcement
     and post to Usenet groups freely.

     **** Colorado Judge Threatens Juror ****

Distributed by the Libertarian Party of Boulder County

Judd Ptak                               Paul Grant
Libertarian Party of Boulder County     Defense Counsel
Box 663                                 P.O. Box 1272
Nederland, CO 80466                     Parker, CO 80134
(303) 258-3457                          (303) 841-9649
judd.ptak@kr-bbs.com                    pkgrant@ix.netcom.com

Gilpin County, Colo. ---  In a case that threatens to destroy
trial by jury, a Gilpin County judge has charged a juror with
contempt of court for deliberating "improperly" in a jury room. 
The prosecution of this juror threatens the very foundations of
American justice by inquiring into confidential jury
deliberations and forcing jurors to testify against each other.
     The juror is Laura Kriho, a Gilpin County resident, who was
summoned for jury duty on May 13.  Ms. Kriho was seated on the
jury in the case of a 19 year old female defendant charged with
felony possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine). 
Ms. Kriho and the other jurors listened to 2 days of testimony on
the case and were sent to the jury room to deliver a verdict.
      The jury was hung on the possession charge.  Eleven jurors
wanted to convict the defendant, but Ms. Kriho said she had
reasonable doubts that the defendant was guilty.  The
deliberations in the jury room reportedly became very heated. 
Ms. Kriho claims several of the jurors began verbally attacking
her and ridiculing her reasonable doubt.  One juror sent a note
to the presiding judge, Kenneth Barnhill, alleging that Ms. Kriho
had told the other jurors what sentences the defendant would face
if convicted.  Based on this note, and with no other
investigation, Judge Barnhill declared the jury had been tainted
and declared a mistrial.
     On July 19, Ms. Kriho received a citation for contempt of
court.  The citation alleges that Ms. Kriho should be held in
contempt of court for 1) disobedience to an order of the court,
2) obstructing the administration of justice, and 3) committing
perjury by lying under oath to the Judge and the attorneys.
     The citation alleges that Ms. Kriho disobeyed a court order
by discussing sentences in her deliberations.  The Judge had
instructed the jury to deliberate only on the facts of the case
and not to consider sentences.  However, Ms. Kriho insists that
she ultimately voted to acquit because she had reasonable
doubts as to the defendant's guilt based on the facts of the case
as presented by the prosecution.
     The prosecutor in the case, James Stanley, apparently was so
angered at Ms. Kriho's alleged behavior in the jury room that he
had an investigator look into her background.  The investigator
uncovered the fact that Ms. Kriho had received a felony drug
conviction in 1984.  Ms. Kriho had received a deferred sentence
on that charge and says it was her understanding that when she
successfully completed two years of probation, the conviction
would be wiped from her record as if it had never happened.
     Ms. Kriho claims she was never asked during voir dire about 
her arrest record.  However, the prosecutor feels she should have
volunteered that information without being specifically asked,
and now feels that she committed perjury.
     The investigator also interviewed several of Ms. Kriho's
fellow jurors after the mistrial was declared.  These jurors
alleged that, during deliberations, Ms. Kriho discussed some
ideas about jury nullification and the rights of jurors to vote
according to their conscience.  The jurors also alleged that Ms.
Kriho stated an opinion that drug cases should be handled by the
family and community, and not the courts.
     Ms. Kriho believes that she was a fair and impartial juror
to the defendant and that she weighed the facts of the case as
instructed by the judge.  She says she is in shock about the
contempt charges.  "I tried to do my job as juror well.  I had
never been on a jury before, and the whole experience was unique
and very stressful.  Now I feel I am being unfairly singled-out
and punished for coming up with the wrong verdict."
     Paul Grant, who is representing Ms. Kriho in this case,
warns that the prosecution of his client threatens to destroy the
jury system.  "Jurors must be able to deliberate independently of
the judge, without the threat of criminal prosecution hanging
over their heads," said Grant.
     This prosecution has the potential to poison the attitudes
of citizens toward jury duty even further.  Citizens will not
only be reluctant to serve on a jury, but fearful of criminal
charges as well.  Once on the jury, they will be afraid to
discuss their true thoughts with the other jurors for fear of
prosecution.
     The right to trial by jury, protected under the Sixth
Amendment, was deemed important by our Founding Fathers
specifically because it prevents abuses of power by overzealous
judges and prosecutors.  If jurors are prosecuted for their
deliberations, no defendant can ever expect a fair and impartial
trial by jury.
     Ms. Kriho's four day jury trial has been set to begin on
September 30.  She faces an open-ended prison sentence which
could exceed 6 months and an unlimited fine.
     A legal defense fund has been set up to help pay the legal
expenses of this trial.  Checks can be made to the: Laura Kriho
Legal Defense Fund, c/o Paul Grant, P.O. Box 1272, Parker, CO
80134

What you can do:

1) Donate to the legal defense fund.
     Legal expenses for this trial are estimated at $10,000. 
This is a is an important case to all those who value their
constitutional rights.  It is important to fight it well.
     Laura Kriho Legal Defense Fund
     c/o Paul Grant
     P.O. Box 1272
     Parker, CO 80134
     (303) 841-9649
Contributions are not tax deductible.
All unused contributions will be returned.

2) Solicit donations from others.  You could:
     a) mention the case and defense fund in your next newsletter
     b) do a mailing to interested people
     c) organize a fund-raising event in your area

3) If you are an attorney, you can donate time to work on legal
motions and research.

4) Help gain local media attention on the case, through letters
to the editor, press releases, or local talk shows.
Send copies of any letters written or publicity generated
to jrights@welcomehome.org for compilation and distribution.

5) Distribute this announcement over the Internet or make printed
copies to distribute.

6) Sign on to the statement of support written below. It would be
especially beneficial to have organizations who have an interest
in this case sign on to the statement of support.  If you belong
to a group, please bring it up at your next meeting.
*****************************************************************
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
The People of the State of Colorado vs. Laura Kriho
Case# 96CR91

     I/We believe it is wrong to intimidate jurors by filing
criminal charges against them for their deliberations in the jury
room.  I/We believe the right to trial by jury is a fundamental
right under the U.S. Constitution and should not be diminished in
any way.  I/We believe the contempt charge against Ms. Kriho
should be dismissed immediately and that no other punitive
actions should be taken against her.

Date Statement was Endorsed:

Name:
Organization:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Phone:
Fax:
Email:

Can we use this endorsement publicly?   Yes    No
*****************************************************************

Thank you for your support!!!

Either we all hang together or we'll all hang seperately.



   ----------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Tavel's Self Help Legal Clinic and Sovereign Library is the Homepage of
R. J. Tavel, J.D Libertarian Mediator  Check out the free online legal help
with Pro Se manuals, actual pleadings, reference tools, international media
contact tools, and more: 	
          			http://www.iquest.net/~rjtavel
"If the Nuremberg laws were applied today, then every Post-War American
president would have to be hanged." Noam Chomskey

     "There are no magic answers, no miraculous methods to overcome the
problems we face, just the familiar ones: honest search for understanding,
education, organization, action that raises the cost of state violence for
its perpetrators or that lays the basis for institutional change--and the
kind of commitment that will persist despite the temptations of
disillusionment, despite many failures and only limited successes, inspired
by the hope of a brighter future." Noam Chomskey
		For Liberty in Our Lifetime, R.J. Tavel, J.D.
  



* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: John Ross getogether
Date: 22 Aug 1996 21:30:26 -0500

Shoot! <g> I forgot a subject:
>
>If any of you critters are in the Kansas City area or even 8 hours away,
>John Ross of St. Louis, the author of "Unintended Consequences" will make a
>presentation to the Zenith Boosters Club meeting next Wednesday evening, 28
>Aug 1996.
>
>You're invited to attend.  Cocktails at 5:30, presentation about 7:00.  The
>University Club, 918 Baltimore, Kansas City, MO.  We'll need $10
>contribution towards hors d'oerves and John's expenses.
>
>Ross' novel covers the history of gun control throughout the world in a most
>entertaining way with a remarkedly exciting denoument.
>
>Jacq'
>
>Uh, don't forget to "feed the hawgs." 
>
>
"The question is not whether we will be extremists,
 but what kind of extremists we will be."
  - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

 "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises,
 I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it 
 gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played
 with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body
 and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the 
 constant companion of your walks."
  - Thomas Jefferson

 "The government seems to consider citizens who are responsible for
 themselves and their families to be its enemies.  Because if we don't 
 need them, they have no power over us."
 - Pamela Pescosolido, Chair, Valley Libertarians

 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 22 Aug 1996 19:30:44 -0700

At 11:46 AM 8/22/96 -0600, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>A couple days ago I got a book in the mail from a publisher.  It's 
>written by Richard Pombo, Congressman from Stocton, CA and is called 
>"This Land Is Our Land."  
>
>Before I waste time reading a book by a congress-critter I want to know 
>how he is on guns so I called Joe Phillips at NRA Fed Affairs and got a 
>five minute positive rave about him.  Pombo's voted 100% right on guns 
>since he's been in congress.  So I read the book.
>
>Pombo's big thing is private property rights.  Most of yawl know I have 
>a little piece of currently scorched South Texas and if you get me 
>talking about endangered species, etc., you're stuck for the afternoon.
>
>I feel a little better after reading Pombo's book because now I know at 
>least one SOB in Washington understands how I feel on the subject.  

Actually, Lobo, we have several California congresscritters who are on the
up-and-up.  My own Representative, John Doolittle, is an outstanding example
of a man that I'm proud and happy to vote for, each and every time. Now, if
we could just get rid of Vic Fazio and replace him with Tim LeFever.....
Ken Mitchell      |"Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. 
8037 Stone Canyon |counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing
Citrus Heights, CA|citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent
95610             |crimes and it appears to produce no increase in
kmitchel@gvn.net  |accidental deaths. If those states which did not 
916-449-9152 (vm) |have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had
916-729-0966 (fax)|adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders;
                  |4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults
                  |would have been avoided yearly."  Crime, 
                  |Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
                  |John R. Lott, Jr., School of Law Univ. of Chicago
-------------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 22 Aug 1996 23:48:59 -0500

At 11:46 AM 8/22/96 -0600, you wrote:

>
>Pombo's big thing is private property rights.  Most of yawl know I have 
>a little piece of currently scorched South Texas and if you get me 
>talking about endangered species, etc., you're stuck for the afternoon.

So has that parched Bumduck on the Bayou gotten any rain from the fringes of
Dolly? Just took a look at Wx radar for San Antonio
(http://www.intellicast.com/weather/sat/radsum/) and
Brownsville(http://www.intellicast.com/weather/bro/radsum/), looks like you
might have gotten at least a little earlier in the day, but the 11:00 image
from Brownsville shows none over your area at the present. (11:50PM)


My daughter was in either Campeche or Cancun Mexico, likely Cancun,
visiting her Mexican "sister" when Dolly blew through. Haven't heard from
them yet. (Mi hija mexicana has net access through the University of
Campeche, where she is a fifth year student in accounting)


>
>I feel a little better after reading Pombo's book because now I know at 
>least one SOB in Washington understands how I feel on the subject.  As 
>far as he's concerned all that malarkey amounts to is a bunch of 
>socialists trying steal land from private property owners and he goes 
>into some detail about how it's being done.  If you have any curiosity 
>about why a lot of folks here there and elsewhere are ready to shoot 
>somebody over this issue, Pombo will explain it to you without the 
>attendant frothing at the mouth and four letter words that usually 
>accompany my diatribes on the subject.

I'm sure my in-laws, the men anyway would do more than froth at the mouth,
etc, should anyone try to take their land away. Come to think of it, I'd run
up and help with this not-frothing business.


>
>They also included some reviews.  Rush thinks it's wonderful, Newt 
>thinks it's wonderful, Kirkus Reviews (whoever the hell they are) thinks 
>it's poetry, etc, and frankly I don't give a damn what any of them 
>think.  But there is one by a guy I respect who seemed to actually have 
>read the book rather than just wrote what a publisher wanted to see.
>
>This is from Dr. Walter E. Williams,  professor of economics, George 
>Mason University: <This is a book about old wine in new bottles. Since 
>communism has lost respectability, its ideas of control and coercion 
>must be relabeled into more respectable titles, such as environmentalism 
>and care for endangered species. Americans had better wise up while we 
>still have the freedom to act.>
>
>According to me, Dr. Williams understands the deal.  So does Pombo.
>
>My guess is they (the publisher) sent me this hoping I'd love and put 
>something up on the net about it and they'd sell a gazillion books to 
>various and sundry grass roots folks.  They get half their wish.  The 
>book is worth reading and if you want a copy you can order one at 
>1-800-288-2131.
>
>Just for the sake of form, no financial or any other consideration was 
>paid or promised other than the book, which I've already sent to someone 
>else.  If this yanks your chain, blame me, not Pombo.
>
>Jim Bohan
>
>	
>-- 
>"I use RKBA as a litmus test for politicians for a very simple
>reason. A politician who isn't afraid of RKBA isn't figuring on 
>screwing you over so bad you feel the need to start a revolution
>because he knows you have the means to do it.
> 
>"A politician who wants to take your guns is figuring on taking
>everything you've got."
>
>                        The Blue Howling Bard of Bumduck on the Bayou
>
>
>

              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 22 Aug 1996 23:30:34 -0600

Once upon a time Loboazul said:
>>This is from Dr. Walter E. Williams,  professor of economics, George
>>Mason University: <This is a book about old wine in new bottles. Since
>>communism has lost respectability, its ideas of control and coercion
>>must be relabeled into more respectable titles, such as environmentalism
>>and care for endangered species. Americans had better wise up while we
>>still have the freedom to act.>
>>
>>According to me, Dr. Williams understands the deal.  So does Pombo.
>>

Dr. Walter Williams is a great and dedicated libertarian (notice small "l"
== don't know his party persuasion).  He really can articulate well the
libertarian message.  Whether it is property rights, or drug legalization,
or taxation, or guns, he can do it.  He is my favorite sub for that fat oaf
(but very politically astute -- much more than his loyal dittoheads could
ever imagine -- I get the feeling that most of them don't comprehend the
depth and insight that he has into things) Rush Limbaugh.  He also has a
regular nationally syndicated newspaper column.  He is great to read or
hear!

regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 22 Aug 1996 23:34:27 -0600

>On Aug 17, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
>
>>>On Aug 17, E. J. Totty wrote:
>>>
>>>>At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>>>>>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>>>>>about that.
>>>>
>>>>        Just don't let it happen again, okay?
>>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>>        ;-)
>>>>Ed
>>>
>>>It would help a lot if the "Reply-To: roc@..." line were removed from
>>>everything that roc sends out.  Point to point email _used_ to be easy.....
>>
>>it still is easy.  You type in the TO: line the receiver's email address...
>
>Allready supplied by Elm, and then ignored and replaced when you use the
>Send command, requireing hand editing of both the mail file and one of the
>control files, sometimes racing the hourly dial up to do it.  Fun stuff.
>


The elm on my providers machine, after typing reply and composing the
message, lets me choose to either (s)end or to edit (h)eaders and some
other stuff.  I can just edit (h)eaders and replace the to: line with the
private email address.   Very simple and easy.  And what if you WANT to
reply to the whole list...

You have to do it either for private  or for list mail.  My assumption is
that most people, when reading roc mail, would rather reply to the list
then send private emails to the authors so it is less of a bother to have
reply-to point to the list.

best
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 23 Aug 1996 00:47:42 -0600

Joe Sylvester wrote:
> 
> So has that parched Bumduck on the Bayou gotten any rain from the fringes of
> Dolly? Just took a look at Wx radar for San Antonio
> (http://www.intellicast.com/weather/sat/radsum/) and
> Brownsville(http://www.intellicast.com/weather/bro/radsum/), looks like you
> might have gotten at least a little earlier in the day, but the 11:00 image
> from Brownsville shows none over your area at the present. (11:50PM)

We had a hellova rain, today.  Got a quarter of an inch.  That rounds 
off the total for july and august at an even...quarter of an inch.  
That's a small exaggeration, but it's under an inch.  Had 9 inches in 2 
days the end of June.  Last time before that was the end of october or 
beginning of november.  Nut city. Made 17 round bales on one 35 acre 
coastal patch.  Enough for about 2 weeks feeding this winter.  If I can 
find someone with a rig I'm going to bring some in out of southwestern 
louisiana.  They're under water there and making bumper crops of hay.  
Cost too damn much to feed store bought stuff in this market

Hope your kid's ok.  What's she majoring in down there?  Suntans?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"-OOPS
Date: 23 Aug 1996 00:59:44 -0500

At 11:48 PM 8/22/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>So has that parched Bumduck on the Bayou gotten any rain from the fringes of
>Dolly? Just took a look at Wx radar for San Antonio
OOPS, sorry, between noban and roc, I can never remember which one has
replies set to the poster and which to the group. This was supposed to be
direct to El Lobo. 

Joe S.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 23 Aug 1996 01:24:23 -0500

At 11:34 PM 8/22/96 -0600, Chad Leigh wrote:
>
>
>You have to do it either for private  or for list mail.  My assumption is
>that most people, when reading roc mail, would rather reply to the list
>then send private emails to the authors so it is less of a bother to have
>reply-to point to the list.

Either way is fine with me, well, I really prefer the reply going to the
group to be the "default". I just wish the various groups were consistent.
"Noban", the other group I read the most, does it the other way. That's why
I just posted a private reply to roc by mistake. If I'd been replying to the
Noban version I would have been OK. 


              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 22 Aug 1996 23:48:04 PST

On Aug 22, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:

>>On Aug 17, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
>>
>>>>On Aug 17, E. J. Totty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>At 16:06 8/16/96, Howlin' Blue wrote:
>>>>>>that last message was obviously intended to be private email.  sorry
>>>>>>about that.
>>>>>
>>>>>        Just don't let it happen again, okay?
>>>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>>>        >>thrash<< !!
>>>>>        ;-)
>>>>>Ed
>>>>
>>>>It would help a lot if the "Reply-To: roc@..." line were removed from
>>>>everything that roc sends out.  Point to point email _used_ to be easy.....
>>>
>>>it still is easy.  You type in the TO: line the receiver's email address...
>>
>>Allready supplied by Elm, and then ignored and replaced when you use the
>>Send command, requireing hand editing of both the mail file and one of the
>>control files, sometimes racing the hourly dial up to do it.  Fun stuff.
>
>The elm on my providers machine, after typing reply and composing the
>message, lets me choose to either (s)end or to edit (h)eaders and some
>other stuff.  I can just edit (h)eaders and replace the to: line with the
>private email address.   Very simple and easy.  And what if you WANT to
>reply to the whole list...

The only other version of elm I have still doesn't do that, but has the
added disadvantage of requiring me to _constantly_ switch back and forth
betwen mouse and keyboard, at each and every step.  Can't imagine why
someone wrote code like that, but if you do a lot of email, it'll drive you
nuts.  This version allows editing, but doesn't give you the entire header
section to edit, thus requiring additional external editing of the files for
point to point.  Geuss I'll just have to do up a script to rip out all the
"Reply-To:" lines before reading.

>You have to do it either for private  or for list mail.  My assumption is
>that most people, when reading roc mail, would rather reply to the list
>then send private emails to the authors so it is less of a bother to have
>reply-to point to the list.

If you want to mail the list, just send it there.  A simple alias like
"2roc" does just fine.  If you want Reply-To: to point to the list, then it
sould be put into your _personal_ "elmheaders" or equivelent file, _not_ the
lists.  That way _everyone_ gets their choice.  If one isn't available for
personal editing, you should talk to your sysop about geting it added to
your mailers header/config/whatever file.

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Macon Update 08/22/96 (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 08:22:52 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

----- Begin Included Message -----

>From jon.roland@the-spa.com Thu Aug 22 22:48:03 1996
X-Sender: jon.roland@the-spa.com

The following message is forwarded from J.J. Johnson, with some corrections
and reformatting. For more reports on this subject, see the Georgia
Constitutional Militia WWW page at
http://www.constitution.org/mil/ga/mil_usga.htm

========================================================================

CDN THU 22 AUG 96 2300 HRS  
Citizen Defense News

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT: 

THE PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE HAVE BEEN GRANTED A REQUEST BY THE JUDGE TO
MOVE THE MACON TRIAL DATE TO MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1996. WE ARE ASKING
THOSE WHO WERE PLANNING TO ATTEND ON SEP. 3 PLEASE MAKE ADJUSTMENTS IN
YOUR SCHEDULE. THE RALLY DATE HAS BEEN MOVED TO SEPTEMBER 16, 1996. CALL
THE CITIZEN'S DEFENSE LEAGUE FOR MORE DETAILS.

...And now, the news:

MACON (CDN) - Federal district Judge Duross Fitzpatrick rules that it's
okay for the government to place items on your property, and later
arrest you just to prove a point. More on this later... 
 
...But first our Top Story: 
 
The Macon Telegraph 
Thursday, August 22, 1996 
Local/State 
Page 1B 
 
Title: Pipe Bomb case lawyer faces drug charges 

>From staff and wire reports 
 
A defense attorney in the Georgia Militia pipe-bomb conspiracy case in
Macon said Wednesday that the arrest of her co-counsel on drug charges
near Athens probably will have no impact on their client, Bob Starr. 
 
Scott McLarty who entered the Macon case as Starr co-counsel in July,
was arrested by Athens-Clarke County Police after an early morning raid
on his home in the Clarke County town of Winterville.

Police seized more the one ounce of cocaine, less the one ounce of
marijuana and several guns, according to police. He was released on bond
Tuesday.
 
Starr is one of three defendants charged earlier this year with
conspiring to possess pipe bombs, and actually possessing them. The
government contends the men, members of the Georgia Militia, were
preparing for war with the government. 
 
The defense, however, contends the men were part of a peaceful political
group that was involved in paramilitary training for defensive purposes.
The group considered an attack from government law agencies to be as
inevitable as interventions to the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas, and
the Weaver family at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. 
 
Starr's main counsel, Nancy Lord, said she was unsure what effect, if
any, McLarty's arrest would have on Starr's case, which is scheduled for
trial Sept. 3.
 
"It's too early to tell," said Lord during a break in pretrial hearing
for Starr an co-defendants Jimmy McCranie Jr. and Troy Spain. "It may
have no effect because the trial's coming up soon. (McLarty) may not
even be arraigned" by then. 
 
U.S. District Judge Duross Fitzpatrick continued to hear motions
Wednesday in the pipe-bomb conspiracy case. 
 
Government and defense attorneys are reviewing transcripts from hours of
secretly recorded tapes of the defendants made by two confidential
informants. Lord also unsuccessfully sought to have excluded from the
trial pipe-bomb material and other evidence seized from
 
...(continued on page 2B) 

Subtitle: Judge announces that he will sequester jury during trial

Starr's property in Crawford County.

Fitzpatrick announced Wednesday he would sequester the jury during the
trial, which is expected to take at least two weeks.
 
McLarty, whose practice is based in Athens, has not been at any of the
recent hearings in Macon on the pipe-bomb case.
 
The search warrant for McLarty's home was issued Friday by a Superior
Court judge in Clarke County. Athens-Clarke drug and vice detectives
said they had received information from several sources accusing McLarty
of cocaine trafficking, said Det. Mike Hunsinger, who led the raid. "His
name has come up several times" in the past year, Hunsinger said. 
 
*****

Staff writer Eric Velasco and the Associated Press contributed to this
report. 
 
See: A STATEMENT FROM NANCY LORD later is the report. 
================================================ 
In other news... 
 
MACON - As motion hearings continued in federal court yesterday, U.S.
Assistant attorney Sharon Ratley pleaded for the inclusion of an
incident known as the "DFACS incident", in which several of the Georgia
Militiamen are accused of attempting to "take down" the children's
services agency. 
 
Although, the militiamen, noticing that state sponsored terrorists were
waiting to "take them down in the parking lot", wisely chose not to
approach the government property back in April, Ratley stated that this
incident showed that the accused has "no respect for authority."
 
One unnamed member of the press said, "Although the defense teams are
showing restraint in the face of government arrogance, most of the
(defense) arguments seem to be ignored. "It seems more like an exercise
in futility," he said. A U.S. Marshall, who was helping protect the
defendants, said "I'm surprised no one tried to take the easier route
and just bust them out!"
 
Michelle Moore, brother of Robert Starr, was fired from her job
Wednesday, for supporting her family during this situation.

***
 
GADSDEN, AL (CDN) - The Clinton campaign is gaining strength among
militia members. In an INTERNET discussion called "Political Warfare"
last weekend, constitutionalists from several states conferenced in to
discuss the benefits of the Clinton administration. Jeff Randall,
co-founder of the Gadsden Minutemen, a law abiding Alabama Militia group
who became famous by exposing the normal behavior of the BATF at the
Good Ol' Boys Roundup, says that Bill Clinton is the "best recruiter the
militia movement has ever had". 

Randall, along with William Michael Kemp, a national Militia philosopher
and Constitutional dialogue expert, lobbied for militia support of the
Clinton/Gore democratic ticket.

Although the Clinton administration has not commented on this upsurge,
political experts believe that the president's lead in the polls is due
to militia support from pivotal states such as Ohio, Missouri, Florida,
Georgia and other Galaxies. 

Randall says that Clinton's recent executive order to regulate
cigarettes is "guaranteed to swell the ranks of the Militia". "It's a
great political move," says Kemp. "4 more for Clinton/Gore," he said.

SENECA, NY (CDN) - A spokesman for the Native American Reservation
Landowners Association praised President Clinton for signing an
executive order regulating cigarettes.

"We're just tickled red," said Chief Robert Running Wolf of NARLA,
saying that his phones haven't stop ringing since Clinton's executive
order. "We've received calls from all over the nation from tobacco
farmers and companies wanting to buy land," Running Wolf said. The
reservation chief says that large corporations such Philip Morris and
RJR Nabisco have called making offers that dwarf the profits from the
natives' bingo fortunes.

Running Wolf tribe says that the value in reservation land will double
over the two weeks since the U.S. Constitution forbids taxation or
certain regulations on "Indian lands".

The Indian Nation agreed to talk to this office when calling about
militia contacts in the western New York area. Due to the heightened
interests in regulation-free land, tribal leaders are seeking the aid of
militia security personnel.

"Bill Clinton will get my vote," says Running Wolf, who plans to open a
"lend-lease" land office next week. "We estimate our Indian brothers and
tribesmen will reap enough profits to buy back our country, just like
the Japanese bought Pearl Harbor," he said.

**** 

A STATEMENT FROM NANCY LORD

We are very pleased to announce that Mr. Scott McLarty will continue as
co-counsel for Robert Starr, III. Mr. McLarty is now counted amongst a
troubling list of lawyers who have won criminal cases against the
federal government -- then became a defendant.
 
Mr. McLarty was set up by government operatives with planted evidence --
just like his own client, Robert Starr, III.

Last year, another skilled lawyer suffered through a year long trial, in
Reno, Nevada, after his own clients were offered juicy snitch deals to
testify falsely against him. He was acquitted.

Neither Mr. Starr, Mr. McLarty, nor I will cower under the boot of this
continuing tyranny. It appears that our last remaining right is that of
trial by jury, and its purpose is to prevent the oppression by the
government. That purpose will soon be accomplished.

Nancy Lord 08/22/96
___________________________________________________________________________

There will be nightly, unbiased INTERNET reports on the proceedings in
the U.S. vs. Starr/McCranie/Spain case. To be placed on the receiving
list, e-mail with the words "MACON COURT LIST" in the SUBJECT field of
your message. All attachment files will be in DOS (.txt) format.
Postings start Sep. 16th.

J.J. Johnson		        Off: (912) 788-6272	
Citizen's Defense League	Fax: (912) 785-1809
P.O. Box 7223		        citizen@mindspring.com
Macon, Georgia 31209
___________________________________________________________________________

=======================================================================
Visit our Web site at http://www.constitution.org/       Sacramento, CA
If you need help setting up your own Web site, call us at 916/927-4935.
=======================================================================



----- End Included Message -----



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: New CHL Stats (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 08:30:56 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by Jeff Halapin <greeby@onramp.net>
By JUAN B. ELIZONDO Jr.=
Associated Press Writer=

AUSTIN (AP) _ More than 90,000 Texans are licensed to carry
concealed handguns, according to the Department of Public Safety.

The DPS says it had issued 91,501 concealed-carry licenses as of
Wednesday. Another 617 people had been denied licenses.

The department on Thursday released its monthly report covering
85,818 licenses issued as of Aug. 1.

The report showed:

_ 80,807, or just more than 94 percent of those permits went to
white men and women. That could include Hispanics, who are not
counted separately.

_ White men, including some Hispanics, held 65,607, or 76.5
percent, of the permits.

_ Black men and women had 2,566, or nearly 3 percent.

_ Black men held 2,239, or 2.6 percent.

Texas lawmakers approved the concealed-carry law last year.
Permits began going out last fall and permitholders were allowed to
carry their concealed weapons starting Jan. 1.

State officials had estimated 75,000 permits would be issued in
the first fiscal year, which ends Aug. 31. That estimate was passed
last month.

The department said 273,539 people had requested applications
and 99,652 had returned completed forms so far.

``We're glad that people are taking advantage of the
opportunity,'' said Mark Seale, a spokesman for Sen. Jerry
Patterson, R-Pasadena. Patterson sponsored the law.

``We think that the numbers will continue once people realize
they can achieve their safety legally. The blood in the street that
opponents predicted hasn't happened and it won't happen.''

The DPS report also shows age descriptions of the 85,818
permitholders and the ZIP codes in which they live. Information
about the other permitholders will be released next month.

By age:

_ Two 92-year-old Texans were the oldest licensed to carry
concealed weapons. The law does not allow the DPS to report
individuals' names or addresses.

_ The youngest people allowed to carry concealed handguns are
21. There were 142 of them.

_ The median age of permitholders was 50. There were 2,387
50-year-olds licensed.

By postal ZIP code, nine areas were home to more than 300
permitholders each, including seven in the Dallas-Fort Worth areas.
Those were:

_ 75149 (370) and 75150 (325), which cover parts of Mesquite in
Dallas County.

_ 75043 (357), which covers part of Garland, in Dallas County.

_ 77536 (326), Deer Park in Harris County.

_ 76017 (324), Arlington in Tarrant County.

_ 76028 (319), Burleson in Johnson-Tarrant counties.

_ 76180 (315), Fort Worth in Tarrant County.

_ 77566 (306), Lake Jackson, in Brazoria County.

_ 75067 (303), Lewisville, in Denton County.

(Copyright 1996 by The Associated Press.  All Rights Reserved.)
===================================
Jeff Halapin
greeby@onramp.net
===================================

--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: RE: FEMA underground parallel government at MOUNT WEATHER <fwd> (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 08:39:59 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

More on our old friends at FEMA, those brooding
Executive Orders, and the coming "National
Emergency."

Aren't you glad that the power to declare 
"National Emergencies" or to declare that
individuals or groups are "terrorists" is in
the Prewsident's wise and selfless hands?

Many thanks to Clido@aol.com for forwarding this.

            John Whitley, Editor
      NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE

---------------------
Forwarded message:
Sender:	snetnews-approval@alterzone.com
Reply-to:	snetnews@alterzone.com


->  SearchNet's   snetnews   Mailing List


Hi there, thought this was worth passing on.  Very little out 
on the web about this, I am interested if anyone else has 
heard/read about "Mt. Weather".  Feel free to mock me if this 
is old news.

Jim

          LOUISE/SH SASSY

Few Americans--indeed, few Congressional reps--are aware
of the existence of Mount Weather, a mysterious underground
military base carved deep inside a mountain near the sleepy
rural town of Bluemont, Virginia, just 46 miles from Washington
DC. Mount Weather--also known as the Western Virginia
Office of Controlled Conflict Operations--is buried not just in
hard granite, but in secrecy as well.

In March, 1976, The Progressive Magazine published an
astonishing article entitled "The Mysterious Mountain." The 
author, Richard Pollock, based his investigative report on Senate 
subcommittee hearings and upon "several off-the-record interviews 
with officials formerly associated with Mount Weather." His report, 
and a 1991 article in Time Magazine entitled "Doomsday Hideaway", 
supply a few compelling hints about what is going on underground.

Ted Gup, writing for Time, describes the base as follows: "Mount
Weather is a virtually self-contained facility. Aboveground, 
scattered across manicured lawns, are about a dozen buildings 
bristling with antennas and microwave relay systems. An on-site 
sewage-treatment plant, with a 90,000 gal.-a-day capacity, and 
two tanks holding 250,000 gal. of water could last some 200 people 
more than a month; underground ponds hold additional water supplies. 
Not far from the installation's entry gate are a control tower and 
a helicopter pad. The mountain's real secrets are not visible at 
ground level."

The mountain's "real secrets" are protected by warning signs, 10 
foot-high chain link fences, razor wire, and armed guards. Curious 
motorists and hikers on the Appalachian trail are relieved of their 
sketching pads and cameras and sent on their way. Security is tight.

The government has owned the site since 1903; it has seen service as 
an artillery range, a hobo farm during the Depression, and a National
Weather Bureau Facility. In 1936, the U.S. Bureau of Mines took 
control and started digging.

Mount Weather is virtually an underground city, according to former
personnel interviewed by Pollock. Buried deep inside the earth, Mount
Weather was equipped with such amenities as:

--private apartments and dormitories
--streets and sidewalks
--cafeterias and hospitals
--a water purification system, power plant and general office
  buildings
--a small lake fed by fresh water from underground springs
--its own mass transit system
--a TV communication system

Mount Weather is the self-sustaining underground command center 
for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The facility 
is the operational center--the hub--of approximately 100 other Federal
Relocation Centers, most of which are concentrated in Pennsylvania,
West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina. Together this
network of underground facilities constitutes the backbone of America's
"Continuity of Government" program. In the event of nuclear war,
declaration of martial law, or other national emergency, the President,
his cabinet and the rest of the Executive Branch would be "relocated" 
to Mount Weather.

What Does Congress Know about Mount Weather?

According to the Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights
hearings in 1975, Congress has almost no knowledge and no oversight
--budgetary or otherwise--on Mount Weather. Retired Air Force General 
Leslie W. Bray, in his testimony to the subcommittee, said "I am not 
at liberty to describe precisely what is the role and the mission and 
the capability that we have at Mount Weather, or at any other precise 
location."

Apparently, this underground capital of the United States is a secret
only to Congress and the US taxpayers who paid for it. The Russians 
know about it, as reported in Time: "Few in the U.S. government will 
speak of it,

though it is assumed that all along the Soviets have known both its
precise location and its mission (unlike the Congress, since Bray
wouldn't tell); defense experts take it as a given that the site is on
the Kremlin's targeting maps." The Russians attempted to buy real estate
right next door, as a "country estate" for their embassy folks, but that
deal was dead- ended by the State Department.

Mount Weather's "Government-in-Waiting"

Pollock's report, based on his interviews with former officials at Mount
Weather, contains astounding information on the base's personnel. The
underground city contains a parallel government-in-waiting: "High- level
Governmental sources, speaking in the promise of strictest anonymity,
told me [Pollock] that each of the Federal departments represented at
Mount Weather is headed by a single person on whom is conferred the rank
of a Cabinet-level official. Protocol even demands that subordinates
address them as 'Mr. Secretary.' Each of the Mount Weather 'Cabinet
members' is apparently appointed by the White House and serves an
indefinite term ... many through several Administrations.... The
facility attempts to duplicate the vital functions of the Executive
branch of the Administration."

Nine Federal departments are replicated within Mount Weather
(Agriculture; Commerce; Health, Education & Welfare; Housing & Urban 
Development; Interior; Labor; State; Transportation; and Treasurey) 
as well as at least five Federal agencies (Federal Communications 
Commission, Selective Service, Federal Power Commission, Civil Service 
Commission, and the Veterans Administration). The Federal Reserve and 
the U.S. Post Office, both private corporations, also have offices in 
Mount Weather.

Pollock writes that the "cabinet members" are "apparently" appointed by
the White House and serve an indefinite term, but that information
cannot be confirmed, raising the further question of who holds the reins
on this "back-up government." Furthermore, appointed Mount Weather
officials hold their positions through several elected administrations,
transcending the time their appointers spend in office. Unlike other
presidential nominees, these apppointments are made without the public
advice or consent of the Senate.

Is there an alternative President and Vice President as well? If so, who
appoints them? Pollock says only this: "As might be expected, there is
also an Office of the Presidency at Mount Weather. The Federal
Preparedness Agency (precursor to FEMA) apparently appoints a special
staff to the Presidential section, which regularly receives top secret
national security estimates and raw data from each of the Federal
departments and agencies. What Do They Do At Mount Weather?

1) Collect Data on American Citizens

The Senate Subcommittee in 1975 learned that the "facility held
dossiers on at least 100,000 Americans. [Senator] John Tunney later 
alleged that the Mount Weather computers can obtain millions of 
pieces of additional information on the personal lives of American 
citizens simply by tapping the data stored at any of the other 
ninety-six Federal Relocation Centers."

The subcommittee concluded that Mount Weather's databases "operate with
few, if any, safeguards or guidelines."

2) Store Necessary Information

The Progressive article detailed that "General Bray gave Tunney's
subcommittee a list of the categories of files maintained at Mount
Weather: military installations, government facilities, communications,
transportation, energy and power, agriculture, manufacturing, wholesale
and retail services, manpower, financial, medical and educational
institutions, sanitary facilities, population, housing shelter, and
stockpiles." This massive database fits cleanly into Mount Weather's
ultimate purpose as the command center in the event of a national
emergency.

3) Play War Games

This is the main daily activity of the approximately 240 people who work
at Mount Weather. The games are intended to train the Mount Weather
bureaucracy to managing a wide range of problems associated with both
war and domestic political crises.

Decisions are made in the "Situation Room," the base's nerve center,
located in the core of Mount Weather. The Situation Room is the
archetypal war room, with "charts, maps and whatever visuals may be
needed" and "batteries of communications equipment connecting Mount
Weather with the White House and 'Raven Rock'--the underground Pentagon
sixty miles north of Washington--as well as with almost every US
military unit stationed around the globe," according to the Progressive
article. "All internal communications are conducted by closed-circuit
color television ... senior officers and 'Cabinet members' have two
consoles recessed in the walls of their office."

Descriptions of the war games read a bit like a Ian Fleming novel. Every
year there is a system-wide alert that "includes all military and
civilian-run underground installations." The real, aboveground President
and his Cabinet members are "relocated" to Mount Weather to observe the
simulation. Post-mortems are conducted and the margins for error are
calculated after the games. All the data is studied and documented.

4) Civil Crisis Management

Mount Weather personnel study more than war scenarios. Domestic
"crises" are also tracked and watched, and there have been times when 
Mount Weather almost swung into action, as Pollock reported: "Officials 
who were at Mount Weather during the 1960s say the complex was actually
prepared to assume certain governmental powers at the time of the 1961
Cuban missile crisis and the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963.
The installation used the tools of its 'Civil Crisis Management' program
on a standby basis during the 1967 and 1968 urban riots and during a
number of national antiwar demonstrations, the sources said."

In its 1974 Annual Report, the Federal Preparedness Agency stated
that "Studies conducted at Mount Weather involve the control and
management of domestic political unrest where there are material 
shortages (such as food riots) or in strike situations where the FPA 
determines that there are industrial disruptions and other domestic 
resource crises."

The Mount Weather facility uses a vast array of resources to
continually monitor the American people. According to Daniel J. Cronin, 
former assistant director for the FPA, Reconnaissance satellites, local 
and state police intelligence reports, and Federal law enforcement 
agencies are just a few of the resources available to the FPA [now 
FEMA] for information gathering. "We try to monitor situations and get 
to them before they become emergencies," Cronin said. "No expense is 
spared in the monitoring program."

5) Maintain and Update the "Survivors List"

Using all the data generated by the war games and domestic crisis
scenarios, the facility continually maintains and updates a list of
names and addresses of people deemed to be "vital" to the survival of
the nation, or who can "assist essential and non-interruptible
services." In the 1976 article, the "survivors list" contained 6,500
names, but even that was deemed to be low. Who Pays for All This, and
How Much?

At the same time tens of millions of dollars were being spent on
maintaining and upgrading the complex to protect several hundred
designated officials in the event of nuclear attack, the US 
government drastically reduced its emphasis on war preparedness for 
US citizens. A 1989 FEMA brochure entitled "Are You Prepared?" 
suggests that citizens construct makeshift fallout shelters using used 
furniture, books, and other common household items.

Officially, Mount Weather (and its budget) does not exist. FEMA
refuses to answer inquiries about the facility; as FEMA spokesman 
Bob Blair told Time magazine, "I'll be glad to tell you all about it, 
but I'd have to kill you afterward."

We don't know how much Mount Weather has cost over the years, but of
course, American taxpayers bear this burden as well. A Christian Science
Monitor article entitled "Study Reveals US Has Spent $4 Trillion on
Nukes Since '45" reports that "The government devoted at least $12
billion to civil defense projects to protect the population from nuclear
attack. But billions of dollars more were secretly spent on vast
underground complexes from which civilian and military officials would
run the government during a nuclear war." What is Mount Weather's
Ultimate Purpose?

We have seen that Mount Weather contains an unelected, parallel
"government-in-waiting" ready to take control of the United States upon
word from the President or his successor. The facility contains a
massive database of information on U.S. citizens which is operated with
no safeguards or accountability. Ostensibly, this expensive hub of
America's network of sub-terran bases was designed to preserve our form
of government during a nuclear holocaust.

But Mount Weather is not simply a Cold War holdover. Information on
command and control strategies during national emergencies have largely
been withheld from the American public. Executive Order 11051, signed by
President Kennedy on October 2, 1962, states that "national preparedness
must be achieved... as may be required to deal with increases in
international tension with limited war, or with general war including
attack upon the United States."

However, Executive Order 11490, drafted by Gen. George A Lincoln
(former director for the Office of Emergency Preparedness, the FPA's
predecessor) and signed by President Nixon in October 1969, tells a 
different story. EO 11490, which superceded Kennedy's EO 11051, begins, 
"Whereas our national security is dependent upon our ability to assure 
continuity of government, at every level, in any national emergency type 
situation that might conceivably confront the nation..."

As researcher William Cooper points out, Nixon's order makes no
reference to "war," "imminent attack," or "general war." These 
quantifiers are replaced by an extremely vague "national emergency type 
situation" that "might conceivably" interfere with the workings of the 
national power structure. Furthermore, there is no publicly known 
Executive Order outlining the restoration of the Constitution after a 
national emergency has ended. Unless the parallel government at Mount 
Weather does not decide out of the goodness of its heart to return 
power to Constitutional authority, the United States could experience 
an honest-to-God coup d'etat posing as a national emergency.

Like the enigmatic Area 51 in Nevada, the Federal government wants to
keep the Mount Weather facility buried in secrecy. Public awareness of
this place and its purpose would raise serious questions about who holds
the reins of power in this country. The Constitution states that those
reins lie in the hands of the people, but the very existence of Mount
Weather indicates an entirely different reality. As long as Mount
Weather exists, these questions will remain. Mount Weather's Russian
Twin


                                            By Patricia Neill
                                            Matrix Editor
                                            (PSCP Wanda@aol.com)

On April 16, 1996, the New York Times reported on a mysterious
military base being constructed in Russia: "In a secret project
reminiscent of the chilliest days of the Cold War, Russia is
building a mammoth underground military complex in the Ural
Mountains, Western officials and Russian witnesses say.

Hidden inside Yamantau mountain in the Beloretsk area of the 
southern Urals, the project involved the creation of a
huge complex, served by a railroad,a highway, and thousands of
workers."

The New York Times article quotes Russian officials describing the
underground compound variously as a mining site, a repository for
Russian treasures, a food storage area, and a bunker for Russia's 
leaders in case of nuclear war.

It would seem that the Russian Parliament knows as little about
Russian underground bases as the Congress knows about Mount Weather 
in the United States. "The (Russian) Defense Ministry declined to 
say whether Parliament has been informed about the details of the 
project, like its purpose and cost, saying only that it receives 
necessary military information," according to the New York Times.

"We can't say with confidence what the purpose is, and the Russians are
not very interested in having us go in there," a senior American
official said in Washington. "It is being built on a huge scale and
involves a major investment of resources. The investments are being made
at a time when the Russians are complaining they do not have the
resources to do things pertaining to arms control."

Where's the Money Coming From?

The construction of the vast underground complex in Russia may very well
become a cause of concern to the Clinton Administration. The issue of
ultimate purpose for the complex, whether defensive (as with Mount
Weather) or offensive (such as an underground weapons factory) is not
the only issue Mr. Clinton has to worry about.

The real cause for concern is that the US is currently sending
hundreds of millions of dollars to Russia, supposedly to help that 
country dismantle old nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, the Russian 
parliament has been complaining to Yeltsin that it cannot pay $250 
million in back wages owed to its workers at the same time that it is 
spending money to comply with new strategic arms reduction treaties.

Aviation Week and Space Technology reported that "It seems the nearly
$30 billion a year spent on intelligence hasn't answered the question of
what the Russians are up to at Yamantau Mountain in the Urals. The huge
underground complex being built there has been the object of U.S.
interest since 1992. 'We don't know exactly what it is,' says Ashton
Carter, the Pentagon's international security mogul. The facility is not
operational, and the Russians have offered 'nonspecific reassurances'
that it poses no threat to the U.S."

U.S. law states that the Administration must certify to Congress that
any money sent to Russia is used to disarm its nuclear weapons. However,
is that the case? If the Russian parliament is complaining of a shortage
of funds for nuclear disarmament, then how can Russia afford to build
the Yamantau complex?

Are the Russians building an underground city akin to Mount Weather with
American taxpayer's money? Could American funds be subsidizing a Russian
weapons factory? Hopefully Congress will get a firm answer to these
questions before authorizing further funding to Russian military
projects.

-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@alterzone.com
->  Posted by: bblack@idcnet.com (j. hrubesky)

        _______________end forwarded message___________________

        
   *******************************************************
   Interested in learning more about communist influence
   in the American media, the resurging Soviet empire,
   the FBI's proposed domestic terrorism centre, the
   TWA800 shootdown, the ATF's "Operation Piedmont" plans
   to plant pipe bombs at the Atlanta Olympics and blame 
   them on the militias, the 33rd degree Masonic affilition
   of US Vice Presidential nominee Jack Kemp, Ross Perot's
   Establishment links, etc....and much, much more that the
   media will not tell you?

   Visit the NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE Web page
   at:

              http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley

   ******************************************************** 
    



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: For the DOUBTERS of NEWT's COMMENTS on WTOP re:24hr Chance (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 08:24:33 -0700 (PDT)

Paul, do I understand correctly that you agree withe the idea that 
terrorists should have 24 hours to prove their innocence and that if they 
fail that we should kill them? 
confusedly yours, Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: RE: Re: For the DOUBTERS of NEWT's COMMENTS on WTOP re:24hr Chance (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 12:18:58 -0500 (CDT)

Heck no I do not agree, it was Newt that made that statement, I just 
forwarded it. We owe other countries and their citizens some kind of due 
process just like Americans get. To go around shooting back at a nation 
or neighbor because we think they might have done it is acting like a 
lynch mob and not a civilized society. That kind of behavior is reserved 
for the likes of the KKK in the 1920's.
Paul Watson




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: NY POST: Don't disarm the good guys. (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 12:24:40 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by Joe Horn <6mysmesa@1eagle1.com>
New York Post, August 22, 1996
"DON'T DISARM THE GOOD GUYS"
by Irwin M. Stelzer

     Crime in New York City is down.  You can read about it in the newspaper,
and you can feel it in the city's streets.  People feel safer - for very good
reason that they <I>are</I> safer.
     Serious crimes - murder, burglary, robbery, sex crimes, grand larceny and
auto theft - fell by almost 12 per cent in the first six months of the first
half of 1995.
     Although we are headed towards the lowest homicide rate since 1968, the
city still remains a shooting gallery when the sun goes down and even in the
broad light of day.
     Almost three murders are committed every day.  And with robberies and
burglaries running at a combined annual rate of over 170,000 (not including car
thefts), or almost 500 every day, we can hardly say that the war on crime has
been won.  Indeed, with a bulge in the crime-prone young male population about
to hit us, now is the time to reexamine our strategies.
     The generally accepted view seems to be that more and more stringent
gun-control laws must be part of any continuing effort to keep the crime rate
headed down.  But experience and new academic studies call that view into
serious question.
     The first thing that experience teaches is that even the strictest gun
control laws do not keep handguns out of the hands of the bad guys.  Or of the
demented.  Two of the jurisdictions with the tightest controls are Washington,
D.C. and New York City: both are rife with illegal weapons, especially cheap
handguns known as "Saturday night specials."
     The second lesson we have learned - thanks to Rudy Giuliani and Bill
Bratton - is that one way to disarm violent crooks is to enforce every law on
the books.  One of the first things then-Police Commissioner Bratton did was to
order his patrolmen to arrest those committing so-called minor offenses such as
defacing buildings with graffiti and urinating in the streets.
     Lo and behold, many of these minor offenders proved to be carrying weapons,
a practice less common among these sorts since it became clear that the police
might stop and search them, given plausible cause.  Result: safer streets.
     Interestingly, the crackdown on what proved to be not-so-minor crimes was
based on the academic studies by scholars such as California Prof. John Q.
Wilson.  He found that broken windows and graffiti signal to honest citizens
that the police have lost control of the streets - as a consequence of which the
good citizens stay home, ceding the streets to the thugs.
     So we can't ignore the latest product of university research into ways to
lower the crime rate - a study recently completed by law professor John Lott,
Jr. and economist David Mustard, both of the University of Chicago.  They
studied crime data for all 3,054 counties in the United States from 1977 to
1992.
     Crooks, of course, do not turn into honest citizens for fear of being blown
away by a potential victim.  Some turn instead to co-called "stealth" crimes, in
which they are highly unlikely to come into contact with the victim, such as
auto theft and burglaries of unoccupied residences.
     Earlier studies by both Lott and other scholars show that almost half the
burglaries in Britain and Canada, countries with strict gun control laws, are
so-called "hot burglaries" - they occur when residents are at home when the
criminal strikes.
     In the U.S., by contrast, crooks worry if their prey has a gun: 56 percent
of the felony prisoners in ten state jails said that they would not attack a
potential victim who was known to be armed.
     And they worry, too, if the victim is likely but not certain to be armed:
crooks operating in the states with the highest incidence of civilian gun
ownership say they worry most about running into an armed potential victim, and
so avoid late-night burglaries.  Result: the "hot burglary" rate in the US is
only 13 percent.
     Remember: When citizens are allowed to carry handguns, muggers and rapists
never can be sure who has and who has not availed himself of that right.  So
those who do carry guns end up providing protection for those who choose not to
go about armed.
     That's one reason some feminist groups favor right-to-carry laws.  Women,
they argue, should not be easy targets for muggers and rapists.  By carrying
guns in their purses and cars they give themselves the means with which to
resist.  And make rapists think carefully before approaching any woman, lest she
be one of those who, armed, can put paid to his career.
     Of course, anyone licensed to carry a gun must be trained in its use.  And
this appears to be the case, as shown by the infrequency of gun-related
accidents in America.
     In 1993, a year for which good data are available, police accidentally
killed 330 innocent individuals, compared to the 30 accidentally killed by
private citizens who mistook the victim for an intruder.
     All in all, say Lott and Mustard, allowing law-abiding, sane citizens to
carry handguns "deters violent crime and appears to produce and extremely small
and statistically insignificant change in accidental deaths."
     None of this is to suggest that New York should rush to follow the lead of
the 31 states with right-to carry laws (a dozen have enacted such statutes in
the past four years alone).  But it does seem that the subject should not be
considered taboo.
     The new academic studies cannot be ignored: Crooks prefer unarmed victims -
witness their greater willingness to break into occupied homes in Britain and
Canada than in America.
     Worth pondering before blindly sticking to a policy that disarms only the
good guys.
Irwin Stelzer is director of regulatory policy studies at the American
Enterprise Institute


--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: NY POST: Don't disarm the good guys. (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 14:12:55 EDT

With a permit to carry though aren't you waving a red flag at a
government that might want to take that handgun away from you?
On Fri, 23 Aug 1996 12:24:40 -0500 (CDT) pwatson@utdallas.edu writes:
>
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 08:46:22 -0700
>From: Joe Horn <6mysmesa@1eagle1.com>
>To: Sixth Mesa <6mysmesa@1eagle1.com>
>Subject: NY POST: Don't disarm the good guys.
>
>Posted to texas-gun-owners by Joe Horn <6mysmesa@1eagle1.com>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>New York Post, August 22, 1996
>"DON'T DISARM THE GOOD GUYS"
>by Irwin M. Stelzer
>
>     Crime in New York City is down.  You can read about it in the 
>newspaper,
>and you can feel it in the city's streets.  People feel safer - for 
>very good
>reason that they <I>are</I> safer.
>     Serious crimes - murder, burglary, robbery, sex crimes, grand 
>larceny and
>auto theft - fell by almost 12 per cent in the first six months of the 
>first
>half of 1995.
>     Although we are headed towards the lowest homicide rate since 
>1968, the
>city still remains a shooting gallery when the sun goes down and even 
>in the
>broad light of day.
>     Almost three murders are committed every day.  And with robberies 
>and
>burglaries running at a combined annual rate of over 170,000 (not 
>including car
>thefts), or almost 500 every day, we can hardly say that the war on 
>crime has
>been won.  Indeed, with a bulge in the crime-prone young male 
>population about
>to hit us, now is the time to reexamine our strategies.
>     The generally accepted view seems to be that more and more 
>stringent
>gun-control laws must be part of any continuing effort to keep the 
>crime rate
>headed down.  But experience and new academic studies call that view 
>into
>serious question.
>     The first thing that experience teaches is that even the 
>strictest gun
>control laws do not keep handguns out of the hands of the bad guys.  
>Or of the
>demented.  Two of the jurisdictions with the tightest controls are 
>Washington,
>D.C. and New York City: both are rife with illegal weapons, especially 
>cheap
>handguns known as "Saturday night specials."
>     The second lesson we have learned - thanks to Rudy Giuliani and 
>Bill
>Bratton - is that one way to disarm violent crooks is to enforce every 
>law on
>the books.  One of the first things then-Police Commissioner Bratton 
>did was to
>order his patrolmen to arrest those committing so-called minor 
>offenses such as
>defacing buildings with graffiti and urinating in the streets.
>     Lo and behold, many of these minor offenders proved to be 
>carrying weapons,
>a practice less common among these sorts since it became clear that 
>the police
>might stop and search them, given plausible cause.  Result: safer 
>streets.
>     Interestingly, the crackdown on what proved to be not-so-minor 
>crimes was
>based on the academic studies by scholars such as California Prof. 
>John Q.
>Wilson.  He found that broken windows and graffiti signal to honest 
>citizens
>that the police have lost control of the streets - as a consequence of 
>which the
>good citizens stay home, ceding the streets to the thugs.
>     So we can't ignore the latest product of university research into 
>ways to
>lower the crime rate - a study recently completed by law professor 
>John Lott,
>Jr. and economist David Mustard, both of the University of Chicago.  
>They
>studied crime data for all 3,054 counties in the United States from 
>1977 to
>1992.
>     Crooks, of course, do not turn into honest citizens for fear of 
>being blown
>away by a potential victim.  Some turn instead to co-called "stealth" 
>crimes, in
>which they are highly unlikely to come into contact with the victim, 
>such as
>auto theft and burglaries of unoccupied residences.
>     Earlier studies by both Lott and other scholars show that almost 
>half the
>burglaries in Britain and Canada, countries with strict gun control 
>laws, are
>so-called "hot burglaries" - they occur when residents are at home 
>when the
>criminal strikes.
>     In the U.S., by contrast, crooks worry if their prey has a gun: 
>56 percent
>of the felony prisoners in ten state jails said that they would not 
>attack a
>potential victim who was known to be armed.
>     And they worry, too, if the victim is likely but not certain to 
>be armed:
>crooks operating in the states with the highest incidence of civilian 
>gun
>ownership say they worry most about running into an armed potential 
>victim, and
>so avoid late-night burglaries.  Result: the "hot burglary" rate in 
>the US is
>only 13 percent.
>     Remember: When citizens are allowed to carry handguns, muggers 
>and rapists
>never can be sure who has and who has not availed himself of that 
>right.  So
>those who do carry guns end up providing protection for those who 
>choose not to
>go about armed.
>     That's one reason some feminist groups favor right-to-carry laws. 
> Women,
>they argue, should not be easy targets for muggers and rapists.  By 
>carrying
>guns in their purses and cars they give themselves the means with 
>which to
>resist.  And make rapists think carefully before approaching any 
>woman, lest she
>be one of those who, armed, can put paid to his career.
>     Of course, anyone licensed to carry a gun must be trained in its 
>use.  And
>this appears to be the case, as shown by the infrequency of 
>gun-related
>accidents in America.
>     In 1993, a year for which good data are available, police 
>accidentally
>killed 330 innocent individuals, compared to the 30 accidentally 
>killed by
>private citizens who mistook the victim for an intruder.
>     All in all, say Lott and Mustard, allowing law-abiding, sane 
>citizens to
>carry handguns "deters violent crime and appears to produce and 
>extremely small
>and statistically insignificant change in accidental deaths."
>     None of this is to suggest that New York should rush to follow 
>the lead of
>the 31 states with right-to carry laws (a dozen have enacted such 
>statutes in
>the past four years alone).  But it does seem that the subject should 
>not be
>considered taboo.
>     The new academic studies cannot be ignored: Crooks prefer unarmed 
>victims -
>witness their greater willingness to break into occupied homes in 
>Britain and
>Canada than in America.
>     Worth pondering before blindly sticking to a policy that disarms 
>only the
>good guys.
>-----------------------------------
>Irwin Stelzer is director of regulatory policy studies at the American
>Enterprise Institute
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to 
>majordomo@zilker.net
>with the word help in the message body.
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-19 President to Salem Baptist Church Community TN (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 12:48:32 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/
				    
				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary
			 (Humboldt, Tennessee)
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release					August 19, 1996     

				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
	    TO THE SALEM MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH COMMUNITY
				    
				    
		    Salem Missionary Baptist Church
			  Fruitland, Tennessee 
                                 	     			     
	     	  			     

2:10 P.M. CDT
	     
	     
	     THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you very

	     I want to begin my remarks by presenting to Reverend
Donaldson and Reverend Vaughan a plaque with a statement I made about
this whole issue not very long ago that says, "We must come together as
one America to rebuild our churches, restore hope, and show the forces
of hatred they cannot win."  And I wanted you both to have these plaques
(CUT)
	     And as your President, I want you to think about this -- as
your President, an enormous percentage of my time in dealing with
America's relationship to the rest of the world is required of people
who refuse to get along with each other because of their religious,
their racial, their ethnic, or their tribal differences.  That is what
has convulsed the Holy Land for decades now.  That is what brought the
people in Bosnia, after decades and decades of peace, to slaughtering
each other as if they were animals for four years.
	     
	     In Northern Ireland, the part of Ireland which ought to be
the most prosperous and successful, it's what keeps Protestants and
Catholics apart.  They're still refighting 600-year-old battles when the
kids want them to join hands and march into the future together.  In
Rwanda and Burundi, tribal differences have kept two small countries
convulsed with mass slaughter when they ought to be trying to figure out
how to feed their children.

	     I see this everywhere.  And I thank God for the wisdom of
our founding fathers, who said, first, that all people were are created
equal, and, second, that the right to the freedom of religion is the
First Amendment, the first and most important right we have.  And so I
ask you to think about that.  (Applause.)
(cut)
	     I want to encourage everybody to participate in our process
just as we encourage everyone to practice their faith.  The genius of
America is we have found a way to manage our differences and to keep
coming closer the ideals of our Constitution.

	     We've had our troubles, too.  We've had our troubles in
trying to come to grips with the fact that our Constitution was
inconsistent with our practice when it said all people are created
equal.  We had a civil war in this country.  We had a long civil rights
struggle.  We had a lot of challenges.  But we're still here after 220
years, stronger than ever, because we found a way to work together --
not just blacks and whites anymore.
(CUT)	     
	     We say, if you come here, we'll give you the freedom to
speak, we'll give you the freedom to assemble, we'll give you the
freedom to move around, we'll give you the freedom of religion -- but
you can't look down on somebody else because they're of a different
religion, a different race, a different ethnic group, a different tribe.
You got to treat people as if they're equal in the eyes of God and the
law.  (Applause.)

	     And so, I tell you that I have spent a lot of time on this
church burning issue because I think it is a test of our character as a
people and because we must never even begin to go down that road that
has ended in the dark alleys of slaughter in Bosnia, the continuing
agony in the Middle East, and all the other places in the world where
people cannot get along because they insist on living their lives by
being able to look down on people because they're different from them
instead of trying to lift everybody up because they're all children of
God.  And we must not start down that road.  We have to stamp out there
feelings whenever we see them manifest.                 ^^^^^^^^^
YEP SOUNDS LIKE BIG BROTHER AND MIND CONTROL, STAMP OUT THOSE 
UNAPPROVED THOUGHTS.	     
	     Let's face it, everyone of us at sometime in our lives --
not a single soul here can say that you're not guilty at sometime in
your life of defining yourself because you could look down on somebody
else -- say, well, I may not be perfect, but at least I'm not that
person.  (Laughter.)  At least I'm not this, that or the other thing.
Everyone one of us is guilty of that.  And we know there's something in
human nature that makes people do that.  But when it's uncontrolled, you
have all this slaughter and heartache.                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
(CUT)	     
	     So Hillary and Tipper and Al and I, we've worked hard to
try to rally the American people to deal with this problem of church
                                                   ^^^^^^^
burning because we don't even want to see it start in America.  
(CUT)
	     Let me say, too, that we are standing on the brink of a new
century.  The kids in this audience today, some of these kids will be
doing jobs 20 years from now that have not been invented yet.  Some of
these children will be doing jobs that have not been imagined yet.
People that live in little rural places, within a matter of a few years,
thanks in no small measure to the work that Al Gore has done to bring
the benefits of the Internet and computer technology to every classroom,
every hospital and every library in America by the year 2000, they will
have access to things that no child in rural America has ever known
before.  (Applause.)
(cut)
 YEP LIKE THE BORG IN STAR TREK WIRED INTO BIG BROTHER
	     
               END                      2:27 P.M. CDT





--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: 24hr Chance (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 14:18:09 EDT

Ihate coming in on the tail end of conversations!  I didn't get Newty's
statement in the first place.
On Fri, 23 Aug 1996 12:18:58 -0500 (CDT) pwatson@utdallas.edu writes:
>Heck no I do not agree, it was Newt that made that statement, I just 
>forwarded it. We owe other countries and their citizens some kind of 
>due 
>process just like Americans get. To go around shooting back at a 
>nation 
>or neighbor because we think they might have done it is acting like a 
>lynch mob and not a civilized society. That kind of behavior is 
>reserved 
>for the likes of the KKK in the 1920's.
>Paul Watson
>
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-21 President Statement on Signing War Crimes Act of 1996 (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 12:49:21 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.reform
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/






                          THE WHITE HOUSE
  
                   Office of the Press Secretary
  
  _______________________________________________________________
  
  For Immediate Release	   	     	          August 21, 1996
  
  
                     STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
  
  
       Today I am pleased to sign into law H.R. 3680, the "War 
  Crimes Act of 1996."  This bill, in furtherance of the Geneva 
  Conventions of 1949, extends U.S. criminal jurisdiction over 
  certain war crimes and provides the United States with clearer 
  authority to prosecute violations of the laws of war.
  
       Most grave breaches of the Conventions are already subject 
  to U.S. prosecution if committed in the United States and 
  many -- such as hostage taking, terrorism or genocide -- could 
  be prosecuted even if committed abroad.  However, many other 
  crimes which would be considered grave breaches of the 
  Conventions could not be prosecuted in United States courts.  
  This legislation is designed to help fill that gap.  It 
  authorizes the prosecution of war criminals if they are found 
  in or extradited to the United States.  It applies to U.S. 
  nationals or members of the Armed Forces who are perpetrators or 
  victims of war crimes.  It would apply, for example, in the case 
  of American civilians subjected to war crimes in an overseas 
  conflict.
  
       This legislation represents an important reaffirmation 
  of American leadership in the development of the law for the 
  protection of victims of war.
  
       In keeping with this leadership role, however, we can and 
  should do even more to strengthen the law in this area.  To that 
  end, my Administration is committed to working with the Congress 
  to expand the scope of this legislation.  This expansion should 
  address:  (1) war crimes committed by any person who comes 
  within the jurisdiction of the United States courts, including 
  crimes committed by non-U.S. persons against non-U.S. victims; 
  (2) cases involving other serious war crimes not covered by 
  H.R. 3680, such as those prohibited by The Hague Conventions of 
  1907; and (3) cases involving acts to be made criminal under the 
  recently improved landmines protocol of the Convention on 
  Conventional Weapons.  This broadening of the law would 
  not require the United States to exercise jurisdiction in 
  any particular case, but would provide the authority to do 
  so in the national interest.
  
       This bill and the expansions we seek have been endorsed 
  by the American Red Cross, which has had an important role 
  to play in this area ever since its founder Clara Barton 
  took the lead in securing U.S. ratification of the first Geneva 
  Convention.  The International Committee of the Red Cross has 
  also voiced its support for our efforts to broaden the scope of 
  this legislation.
  
       In sum, this bill serves important goals and is a 
  significant step forward.  Now we should build on this progress   
  and seek further improvements in promoting respect for the laws 
  of war and in reinforcing protections for the victims of war.
  
  
  
       	    	      	   	     WILLIAM J. CLINTON
  
  
  THE WHITE HOUSE,
      August 21, 1996.
  
  
                               # # #
  


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: NY POST: Don't disarm the good guys. (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 14:27:44 -0700

        To gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE), et. at,

        It is not necessary to retransmit an entire article when commenting
on it, and thus us take up even more time to download the mail and read it,
ie., bandwidth.

        Please thoughtfully consider the rest of us when replying to a
post, by simply quoting the salient parts, and snipping the rest.

        Thanks a bunch, in advance.

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 18:16:38 EDT

Does anyon have the email address for RKBA-ALERT or FIREARMS-ALERT.

Thanks

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: NY POST: Don't disarm the good guys. (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 18:20:52 EDT

oops, sorry, I gues as I get more experience on this thing the better it
will be.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-21 President Statement on Signing 
Date: 23 Aug 1996 19:28:06 EDT

Ok  Now wil someone explain to me in simple redneck language what in the
heck he is talking about!!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-21 President Statement on Signing 
Date: 23 Aug 1996 19:24:25 -0600

GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:
> 
> Ok  Now wil someone explain to me in simple redneck language what in the
> heck he is talking about!!


He said he's pissed off and he wants to hurt somebody.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: (fwd) Olympic Investigation
Date: 23 Aug 1996 20:20:48 -0500

Isn't this whole episode just a bunch of horseshit? A Georgia Cracker calls
911 with a "neutral accent", and becomes a prime suspect. I mean, this guy
couldn't fix a broken toaster much less rig a pipe bomb.

I wonder how much they are paying him to play along with the game? That's
the only possible explanation for such a silly charade.

Jeez!

Bob Knauer

-----
		 
>   Jewell Fights Back In Pipe Bomb Case  
>   ATLANTA -- Lawyers for Richard Jewell, the main suspect in the  
>Atlanta Olympic park bombing, are waging a public relations campaign 
>in an effort to prove he is innocent. 
>   This week his defense team said it is exploring the possibility of  
>civil suits against the FBI and media for their handling of the case. 
>Another attorney held a news conference to release the results of a 
>lie-detector test that Mr. Jewell had passed. The same lawyer recently 
>walked the path from the phone booth where the 911 call was placed to 
>the site where Jewell pointed out the bomb in order to illustrate that 
>his client couldn't have made the call during the time period in 
>question. 
>   One month after the pipe bombing that jarred Atlanta, the case  
>continues to raise fundamental questions about FBI investigation 
>tactics and media responsibility in dealing with high-profile crimes. 
>   Jewell, a security guard at Centennial Olympic Park, was the man  
>who directed police to the green knapsack that carried the fatal pipe 
>bomb. He was first hailed as a hero and then quickly became the main 
>suspect of the investigation. Since then, FBI agents have searched his 
>apartment and a cabin he rented in north Georgia. He has not been 
>charged, and the FBI has declined to disclose whether it has found any 
>evidence against him or to comment on the investigation. 
>   Jewell's lawyers point to lack of physical evidence as proof that  
>he is innocent. They claim the intense investigation and relentless 
>media scrutiny have damaged their client's name and are pressuring the 
>FBI to clear him. ``It's high time he got an apology,'' Jack Martin, 
>Jewell's attorney, said at a press conference. 
>   But while some legal experts question the FBI's tactics in  
>ferreting out a suspect in the blast, others are reserving judgment. 
>   ``The FBI had to have some fairly strong probable cause ... some  
>evidence of wrongdoing'' to target Jewell, says Dave Camp, an 
>associate professor of criminal justice at Georgia State University. 
>Mr. Camp maintains it is typical for the bureau to spend a lot of time 
>investigating a suspect in a high-profile case. 
>   Camp says the FBI may have zeroed in on Jewell as a prime suspect  
>and decided the best way to keep the evidence preserved was to draw 
>attention to him, hoping he'd crack and confess. 
>   But ``if they went on less-than-secure evidence when they turned  
>their attention to him ... if they are continuing this knowing he's 
>been excluded as a suspect but too embarrassed to do anything about 
>it, then shame on them, and I suspect they'll get a black eye,'' Camp 
>says. 
>   Jewell is unlikely to receive an apology, experts say.  
>   ``Even if they wanted to, their attorneys would be telling them not  
>to,'' says Robert Sigler, a professor of criminal justice at the 
>University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. ``The most you can expect from 
>the FBI is a statement saying he's no longer a suspect.'' 
>   Dr. Sigler says the information acknowledging that Jewell was a  
>suspect was released too soon. ``There was a real pressure to identify 
>someone ... but it would have been almost impossible for the FBI to 
>conceal the fact this guy was a suspect'' because of the media 
>attention, he says. ``There was a bit too much detail available too 
>early, but I'm not sure the FBI released it.'' 
>   Jewell's attorneys are investigating the leaks and whether there  
>was a violation of his civil or constitutional rights. 
>   Sigler says it's likely Jewell will file several lawsuits. ``His  
>life is ruined; he's got a clear basis for recovery'' if he is 
>innocent. ``The question will be from whom will he recover?'' Sigler 
>says. ``If he can prove that FBI officers or whoever it was were 
>reckless in releasing information, he's got cause.'' 
>   But Camp says it is difficult to sue a federal agency. ``They can  
>talk lawsuit but ... you have to have something more substantial than 
>'Oops they got the wrong guy,' because if you sift through the 
>evidence, and a reasonable person would say at the time Jewell was 
>possibly involved ... then there's not much of a chance,'' he says. 
>  	   	
>
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@alterzone.com
>->  Posted by: rlawler@dfw.net (Rick Lawler)
>
>
--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-21 President Statement on Signing 
Date: 23 Aug 1996 23:29:54 EDT

Thank you.  I think.

JAIL TO THE CHIEF

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: (fwd) Olympic Investigation
Date: 23 Aug 1996 23:49:24 EDT

I don't know, but tell me this.  How can an  "Arkansas Cracker" who
supposedly loaned his mama $200,000 on a bad realestate, whose wife just
happend to a pretty nice chunck of change on cattle futures (gambling). 
Who has a lot of associates that have this fication with "Arcacide". 
(being FOB will get you very much dead it seems)
etc...etc...etc ever end up to be a prez that just might get reelected?

God help us, Because nobody else can!!!


Capt. G.H. Burkepile
Communications Officer
First Alabama Regiment
VII Ranger Corps
 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack@minerva.com
Subject: CLINTON: 1996-08-21 President Statement on Signing War Crimes Act of 1996 (fwd)
Date: 23 Aug 1996 21:01:37 PDT

Forwarded message

>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Publications-Admin@Whitehouse.Gov (The White House)
>Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.reform
>Subject: CLINTON: 1996-08-21 President Statement on Signing War Crimes Act of 1996
>Date: 21 Aug 1996 18:22:13 -0400
>Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
>Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                          THE WHITE HOUSE
>  
>                   Office of the Press Secretary
>  
>  _______________________________________________________________
>  
>  For Immediate Release	   	     	          August 21, 1996
>  
>  
>                     STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
>  
>  
>       Today I am pleased to sign into law H.R. 3680, the "War 
>  Crimes Act of 1996."  This bill, in furtherance of the Geneva 
>  Conventions of 1949, extends U.S. criminal jurisdiction over 
>  certain war crimes and provides the United States with clearer 
>  authority to prosecute violations of the laws of war.
> 

This is most interesting.

According to KNX a very angry Black American group whose name escapes me
(Black Poliical Action xxxxxxxx  ....I think) incensed on reading the series
in the San Jose Mercury on Drugs was going to hold a press conference in
Los Angeles City Hall Plaza and demand an investigation of the CIA and the
GENOCIDE they conducted against blacks in LA by deliberately bringing in 
CRACK.  And now it seems that only two days earlier WJS signed one of his
imperial edicts to make it easier to prosecute war crimes: GENOCIDE.

One wonders if this is one of those times WJC should have looked to see if
the pool had any water before jumping in

Jack



    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 01:27:37 -0500

At 06:16 PM 8/23/96 EDT, you wrote:
>Does anyon have the email address for RKBA-ALERT or FIREARMS-ALERT.
>
>Thanks
>
RKBA-ALERT is at  listproc@saf.org, likely subscribe RKBA-ALERT in body.  If
that doesn't work try help in body of message

Can't help you with FIREARMS-alert, I unsubscribed because I kept responding
to posts there, a definate no-no, and I seem to have lost the address. Try
Jeff Chans page at;

http://www.portal.com/~chan/firearms.faq.html

Well I lied, I can help you with FA (now )
----
firearms-alert 

national and state legislative, media, action alerts (low volume, no
discussion allowed) 

firearms-alert is a central Internet mailing list for alerts and action
items. It currently gets offical alerts from NRA, GOA, Neal Knox, and
CCRKBA, in addition to our own grassroots alerts. If you want alerts,
subscribe to firearms-alert regardless of your location. Since mail volume
averages around 12 alerts per day, this is the list to be on to keep up with
the latest firearms rights information, even at work. To subscribe send a
message: 


  To: firearms-alert-request@lists.best.com
  Subject: (Bestserv ignores subject)
  
  subscribe 







              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ken L. Holder" <kholder@shell.liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 24 Aug 1996 00:17:15 -0700

At 01:24 AM 8/23/96 -0500, Joe Sylvester wrote:
>At 11:34 PM 8/22/96 -0600, Chad Leigh wrote:
>>
>>
>>You have to do it either for private  or for list mail.  My assumption is
>>that most people, when reading roc mail, would rather reply to the list
>>then send private emails to the authors so it is less of a bother to have
>>reply-to point to the list.
>
>Either way is fine with me, well, I really prefer the reply going to the
>group to be the "default". I just wish the various groups were consistent.
>"Noban", the other group I read the most, does it the other way. That's why
>I just posted a private reply to roc by mistake. If I'd been replying to the
>Noban version I would have been OK. 

Having the "Reply-to:" set to the list _should_ be the standard, but
it's not always. What ya gotta do is get in the habit of looking to
see where your mail reader is pointing the "To:" header at. It's hard
for us old dogs to learn them new tricks, I'll admit ....

--Ken
kholder@liberty.com
http://www.liberty.com/home/kholder/


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 24 Aug 1996 05:58:27 -0700

        Ken,

        >>>>>>>
        It's hard for us old dogs to learn them new tricks, I'll admit ....
        <<<<<<<

        You too, eh?
        Now I was wondering, do you also get the urge when passing a tree
or a hydrant?
        :-^)

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 05:58:23 -0700

At 18:16 8/23/96, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:
>Does anyon have the email address for RKBA-ALERT or FIREARMS-ALERT.
>
>Thanks


        Gary,

        The following is enclosed for your use. Please read the
instructions carefully.

Ed
Reply-To: listproc@gatekeeper.saf.org
Sender: listproc@gatekeeper.saf.org
X-Comment: The Firearms ListProcessor
Status:

To subscribe to rkba-alert send:

subscribe rkba-alert Your Full Name

(replacing Your Full Name with your name) as the body of a message
to listproc@saf.org

To receive the SAF's press releases send:

subscribe press-release Your Full Name

as the body of a message to listproc@saf.org



                          ListProcessor 6.0

Here is a brief description of the set of requests recognized by ListProcessor.
Everything appearing in [] below is optional; everything
appearing in <> is mandatory; all arguments are case insensitive. The vertical
bar ("|") is used as a logical OR operator between the arguments. Requests may
be abbreviated, but you must specify at least the first three characters.

Keep in mind that when referring to a <list>, that list may be of two kinds:
local or remote, unless otherwise noted. When referring to a local list, your
request will be immediately processed; when referring to a remote list (a list
served by another ListProcessor which this system knows about), your request
will be appropriately forwarded. Issue a 'lists' request to get a listing of all
local and known remote lists to this ListProcessor.

Recognized requests are:


help [topic]
------------
Without arguments, this file. Otherwise get specific information on the
selected topic. Topics may also refer to requests. To learn more about this
system issue a 'help listproc' request. To get a listing of all available
topics, generate an error message by sending a bogus request like 'help me'.


set <list> [<option> <arg[s]>]
Without the optional arguments, get a list of all current settings for
the specified list. Otherwise change the option to a new value for that
list. Issue a 'help set' request for more information.


subscribe <list> <your name>
----------------------------
The only way to subscribe to a list.


unsubscribe <list>
signoff <list>
------------------
Two ways of removing yourself from the specified list.


recipients <list>
review <list>
-----------------
Get a listing of all non-concealed people subscribed to the specified list.


information <list>
------------------
Get information about the specified list.


statistics <list> {[subscriber email address(es)] | [-all]}
Get a listing of non-concealed subscribers along with the number of messages
each one of them has sent to the specified list. If the optional email addresses
are given, then statistics will be collected for these users only. For example:
                stat foo user1@domain user2@domain
will generate statistics about these two subscribers. "-all" lists statistics
for all users that have posted on the list (whether currently subscribed ot
not).

run <list> [<password> <cmd [args]>]
Run the specified command with the optional arguments and receive the output
from stdout and/or stderr. To get a listing of all available commands to run,
omit the arguments, i.e. issue a 'run <list>' request. You have to belong to
the specified list, and must have obtained the password from the list's owner;
the owner's address may be found in the Errors-To: header line of each
delivered message. <list> may be local only.


lists
-----
Get a list of all local mailing lists that are served by this server, as well
as of all known remote lists.


index [archive | path-to-archive] [/password] [-all]
Get a list of files in the selected archive, or the master archive if no
archive was specified. If an archive is private, you have to provide its
password as well.


get <archive | path-to-archive> <file> [/password] [parts]
Get the requested file from the specified archive. Files are usually split in
parts locally, and in such a case you will receive the file in multiple email
messages -- an 'index' request tells you how many parts the file has been split
into, and their sizes; if you need to obtain certain parts, specify them as
optional arguments. If an archive is private, you have to provide its password
as well.

view <archive | path-to-archive>] [/password] [parts]
Same as "get" but in interactive mode justs catenates the file on the
screen.

search <archive | path-to-archive>] [/password] [-all] <pattern>
Search all files of the specified archive (and all of its subarchives if -all
is specified) for lines that match the pattern. The pattern can be an
egrep(1)-style regular expression with support for the following additional
operators: '~' (negation), '|' and '&' (logical OR and AND), '<' '>' (group
regular expressions). The pattern may be enclosed in single or double quotes.
Note: . matches any character including new line.

fax <fax-number> <archive | path-to-archive> <file> [/password] [parts]
Same as 'get', but it faxes you the files instead to the specified number.

release
-------
Get information about the current release of this ListProcessor system.


which
-----
Get a listing of local mailing lists to which you have subscribed.

===============================================================================

The requests below are list owner specific. List owners should contact the
system's manager for extensive usage information:


reports <list> <password>
-------------------------
Obtain all reports about the specified local list.


edit <list> <password> <file>
Obtain the specified file for editing.


put <list> <password> <keyword> [args]
Manipulate addresses and change system files.


approve <list> <password> <tag>
Approve the message identified by the tag number for posting to the
specified moderated list.


discard <list> <password> <tag>
Discard the message identified by the tag number sent to the specified
moderated list.
===============================================================================

In addition, help is available on the following topic(s):

live
----
Learn how to connect to this ListProcessor over the Internet for live
processing of your requests.

listproc
--------
Learn more about this system and list management software in general.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 10:53:05 EDT

Thankss Joe.  I'm not a rdical 'want to fight guy'.  All I want to do is
stay alert and not be lied to by the Feds.  You might wonder why I put my
title and offiliation after my name?  As the Glen Campbel song went, I
take a lot of pride in who I am.

Regards,


Capt. G.H. Burkepile
Communications Officer
First Alabama Regiment
VII Ranger Corps

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 13:22:06 -0500

At 10:53 AM 8/24/96 EDT, you wrote:
>Thankss Joe.  I'm not a rdical 'want to fight guy'.  All I want to do is
>stay alert and not be lied to by the Feds.  You might wonder why I put my
>title and offiliation after my name?  As the Glen Campbel song went, I
>take a lot of pride in who I am.
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Capt. G.H. Burkepile
>Communications Officer
>First Alabama Regiment
>VII Ranger Corps
>
You're welcome. I don't think anybody with half a brain wants to fight. Oh
they convince the young grunts and jarheads that they do, but that doesn't
last long. It soon changes to "ready and willing", but not "wanting" .  I'll
put my "title" on too.

Dennis J. Sylvester
Captain, USAFR (Ret)


              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 16:11:02 EDT

I was ing the regular AF.  Albeit in the military I only reached E-4.
Stationed at Maxwell in Montgomery.  Dates 1970-74 and thenagain 1977-80.


Gary

On Sat, 24 Aug 1996 13:22:06 -0500 Joe Sylvester
<joesylvester@texoma.net> writes:
>At 10:53 AM 8/24/96 EDT, you wrote:
>>Thankss Joe.  I'm not a rdical 'want to fight guy'.  All I want to do 
>is
>>stay alert and not be lied to by the Feds.  You might wonder why I 
>put my
>>title and offiliation after my name?  As the Glen Campbel song went, 
>I
>>take a lot of pride in who I am.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>
>>Capt. G.H. Burkepile
>>Communications Officer
>>First Alabama Regiment
>>VII Ranger Corps
>>
>You're welcome. I don't think anybody with half a brain wants to 
>fight. Oh
>they convince the young grunts and jarheads that they do, but that 
>doesn't
>last long. It soon changes to "ready and willing", but not "wanting" . 
> I'll
>put my "title" on too.
>
>Dennis J. Sylvester
>Captain, USAFR (Ret)
>
>
>              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
>                   of the United States Constitution.  
>      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 
>
>
>Joe Sylvester
>Don't Tread On Me !
>
>
>
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re:
Date: 24 Aug 1996 14:28:17 PST

 Spc/4  Wm. A. Vance
 U.S.A.S.A.
 '66-'70

Seems to be a lot of Vets on the net.....

On Aug 24, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

>I was ing the regular AF.  Albeit in the military I only reached E-4.
>Stationed at Maxwell in Montgomery.  Dates 1970-74 and thenagain 1977-80.
>
>Gary
>
>On Sat, 24 Aug 1996 13:22:06 -0500 Joe Sylvester
><joesylvester@texoma.net> writes:
>>At 10:53 AM 8/24/96 EDT, you wrote:
>>>Thankss Joe.  I'm not a rdical 'want to fight guy'.  All I want to do 
>>is
>>>stay alert and not be lied to by the Feds.  You might wonder why I 
>>put my
>>>title and offiliation after my name?  As the Glen Campbel song went, 
>>I
>>>take a lot of pride in who I am.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Capt. G.H. Burkepile
>>>Communications Officer
>>>First Alabama Regiment
>>>VII Ranger Corps
>>>
>>You're welcome. I don't think anybody with half a brain wants to 
>>fight. Oh
>>they convince the young grunts and jarheads that they do, but that 
>>doesn't
>>last long. It soon changes to "ready and willing", but not "wanting" . 
>> I'll
>>put my "title" on too.
>>
>>Dennis J. Sylvester
>>Captain, USAFR (Ret)
>>
>>              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
>>                   of the United States Constitution.  
>>      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 
>>
>>Joe Sylvester
>>Don't Tread On Me !

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 17:42:44 -0500

At 04:11 PM 8/24/96 EDT, you wrote:
>I was ing the regular AF.  Albeit in the military I only reached E-4.
>Stationed at Maxwell in Montgomery.  Dates 1970-74 and thenagain 1977-80.
>
>
Which gives you about 4 years more active duty time than I had. I was active
duty, but with a reserve commision, from '73 - '76 and then reserve and
Guard off and on until the late early nineties, when it became impossible to
get 20 "good" years in the time I had left until I would have been in 30
years, at which point reservists, at least those below General, must retire.
Thus my retirement comes without benefits, but is none the less "real".
Basically means I can legally use the title, and if I could get into it, the
uniform on appropriate occasions. 
My 30 years started in the fall of 1971 when I joined AF-ROTC and would have
ended in 2001, if I hadn't had so much "off" time. 

Stationed at Tinker, OK City. Guard duty in OKC, Reserves at Offut (Omaha),
Carswell (Now Navy Ft. Worth) and Wright Patterson , Dayton OH. WP was where
I did my two weeks active duty and Carswell was where I did weekends for my
last assignment as a Mobilization Augmentee in Foreign Technology
Assessement, i.e. a Techno-Spook. 


Oh yeah, as the G-man says, thank you for your service to our country.   

              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Vets on Net
Date: 24 Aug 1996 18:46:37 EDT

Well I wouldn't know about that, I've only been on it for a day or two.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 19:18:44 EDT

And thank you also.  

I was a supply services specialist (61150) and OJT admin (75132).  Not
very exciting  unless you consider tell a Squadron Commander that his
boss said he had better listen to shat I say.  Them ol'boys would get
boiling mad when I told them that they had to do things as the reg said
and not the way they wanted it done.  Anyhow, I guess I stepped on
somebody's toes a little bit wrong.  You know you can dig up dirt on
anyone to smear them and thats what happened to me.  I wasn't politically
correct.  Oh well, I still get my little 40% disability check every month
for ever how long that will last.

I would think as a Spook you would know some fairly secret stuff.  I
know, I know.  You could tell me some of the stuff you know but you would
have to kill me.  Don't bother, I don't want to know!!  

Regards,

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Clinton Backs Tracking Offenders
Date: 24 Aug 1996 18:21:18 -0500

>From the so-called "news":

	Clinton Backs Tracking Offenders  
	President Clinton today announced a national database to  
track sex offenders. Clinton said a temporary system to track 
sex offenders around the United States will be in place in six 
months. In his weekly radio address, Clinton said authorities 
will follow every move of every child molester. He says the 
database will be compiled from information supplied by each 
state, while a computer network will let police learn whether a 
person is a registered sex offender anywhere in the country. 

-----

Why not expand the national database to track gun owners, militia
terrorists, Internet seditionists, members of other (non-Dem.) political
parties, NRA members, Constitutionalists, Conservatives, and so on.

I mean, after all, if you are going to do it to one class of "criminals",
why not do it to every class?

Better be careful with that criminal stuff, BillyBoy, your day is about to come.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************



--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: 
Date: 24 Aug 1996 16:47:00 -0700

At 07:18 PM 8/24/96 EDT, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:
>
>I would think as a Spook you would know some fairly secret stuff.  I
>know, I know.  You could tell me some of the stuff you know but you would
>have to kill me.  Don't bother, I don't want to know!!  

As long as all us "vets" are telling our stories;  I spent 20 years in Navy
anti-submarine warfare.  Yeah, I've got a bunch of stories I could tell....
but Tom Clancy already did.  I about dropped a brick when I read "Hunt for
Red October" and "Red Storm Rising".  

BTW, his newest, "Executive Orders", is every bit as good as his last one,
"Debt of Honor".  
Ken Mitchell      |"Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. 
8037 Stone Canyon |counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing
Citrus Heights, CA|citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent
95610             |crimes and it appears to produce no increase in
kmitchel@gvn.net  |accidental deaths. If those states which did not 
916-449-9152 (vm) |have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had
916-729-0966 (fax)|adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders;
                  |4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults
                  |would have been avoided yearly."  Crime, 
                  |Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
                  |John R. Lott, Jr., School of Law Univ. of Chicago
-------------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Clinton Backs Tracking Offenders
Date: 24 Aug 1996 19:49:53 EDT

As Col. Bo Gritz says, JAIL TO THE CHIEF!!!

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: Re: RR bars wanna fight?
Date: 24 Aug 1996 19:33:41 -0500

At 01:22 PM 8/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>At 10:53 AM 8/24/96 EDT, you wrote:
>>Thankss Joe.  I'm not a rdical 'want to fight guy'.  All I want to do is
>>stay alert and not be lied to by the Feds.  You might wonder why I put my
>>title and offiliation after my name?  As the Glen Campbel song went, I
>>take a lot of pride in who I am.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>
>>Capt. G.H. Burkepile
>>Communications Officer
>>First Alabama Regiment
>>VII Ranger Corps
>>
>You're welcome. I don't think anybody with half a brain wants to fight. Oh
>they convince the young grunts and jarheads that they do, but that doesn't
>last long. It soon changes to "ready and willing", but not "wanting" .  I'll
>put my "title" on too.
>
>Dennis J. Sylvester
>Captain, USAFR (Ret)
>
>
Ready to fight?  Just don't shoot 'til you see the whites of their eyes, folks.

Semper Fi, gang!

Jacques E. Tucker
Captain, USMC (Ret)

"Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish.  Do not overdo it." 
--- Lao-Tzu


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re:
Date: 24 Aug 1996 19:02:23 -0600

Ken Mitchell said:
>BTW, his newest, "Executive Orders", is every bit as good as his last one,
>"Debt of Honor".

Which kind of sucked...  It was a good book but a lousy "ending" -- I mean
after the real ending came the last chapter...  Too hokie

Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: RR bars wanna fight?
Date: 24 Aug 1996 21:09:30 EDT

>From the Red Neck dictionary:

Gun Control - v.  Hitting what is aimed at.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ken L. Holder" <kholder@shell.liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 25 Aug 1996 00:57:09 -0700

At 05:58 AM 8/24/96 -0700, you wrote:

>        >>>>>>>
>        It's hard for us old dogs to learn them new tricks, I'll admit ....
>        <<<<<<<
>
>        You too, eh?
>        Now I was wondering, do you also get the urge when passing a tree
>or a hydrant?
>        :-^)

Heh. And I keep trying to scratch behind my ear with my foot ....


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 25 Aug 1996 01:46:49 PST

On Aug 25, Ken L. Holder wrote:

>At 05:58 AM 8/24/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>        >>>>>>>
>>        It's hard for us old dogs to learn them new tricks, I'll admit ....
>>        <<<<<<<
>>
>>        You too, eh?
>>        Now I was wondering, do you also get the urge when passing a tree
>>or a hydrant?
>>        :-^)
>
>Heh. And I keep trying to scratch behind my ear with my foot ....

Just don't be jumping my ankle, I draw the line there.....:-)

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: Re:
Date: 25 Aug 1996 08:38:42 -0400

Another Vet here
USAF '70-74 Sgt e-4
Tom

At 02:28 PM 8/24/96 PST, you wrote:
> Spc/4  Wm. A. Vance
> U.S.A.S.A.
> '66-'70
>
>Seems to be a lot of Vets on the net.....
>
>On Aug 24, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:
>
>>I was ing the regular AF. 
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made
in the shape of your conscience to block the pleasures
permitted by mine.  When you people prevail, you commit
a crime against freedom, and that is the greatest
immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
(no date avail). Thanks to:Mark Johnson (onethumb@why.net)

.. To each of my Nephews, William Augustine Washington, George Lewis, George
Steptoe Washington,  Bushrod Washington, and Samuel Washington, I give one of
the Swords or Cutteaux of which I may die possessed; and they are to chuse in
the order they are named. --These Swords are accompanied with an injunction
not to unsheath them for the purpose of shedding blood, except it be for
defense, or in the defense of their Country and its rights; and in the latter
case, to keep them unsheathed, and prefer falling with them in their hands,
to the relinquishment thereof.
(Will, July 9, 1799)

>From "Maxims of George Washington," published by The Mount Vernon Ladies'
Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1989.
Thanks to Bob2A@aol.com

"A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon is truth,
still; and a lie on the throne is on the way to defeat, and truth in a
dungeon is on the way to victory." --Anonymous.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: 
Date: 25 Aug 1996 10:39:07 EDT

DO WHAT???

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Howlin' Blue" <loboazul@ICSI.Net>
Subject: Re: Hasta la vista
Date: 25 Aug 1996 11:16:24 -0600

Ken L. Holder wrote:
> 
> At 05:58 AM 8/24/96 -0700, you wrote:
> 
> >        >>>>>>>
> >        It's hard for us old dogs to learn them new tricks, I'll admit ....
> >        <<<<<<<
> >
> >        You too, eh?
> >        Now I was wondering, do you also get the urge when passing a tree
> >or a hydrant?
> >        :-^)
> 
> Heh. And I keep trying to scratch behind my ear with my foot ....


Hummmmmmm.  Remind me not be be around you guys when your butts starts
to itch.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 25 Aug 1996 18:01:50 -0500

At 11:30 PM 8/22/96 -0600, Chad wrote:
>Once upon a time Loboazul said:

I recall once when Dr. Williams was subbing for Rush (when I was still
listening to Rush <g>), he was discussing a march on Washington.  He closed
his comments with, "don't forget your sporting goods."  He does tell it
"like it is."

>>>This is from Dr. Walter E. Williams,  professor of economics, George
>>>Mason University: <This is a book about old wine in new bottles. Since
>>>communism has lost respectability, its ideas of control and coercion
>>>must be relabeled into more respectable titles, such as environmentalism
>>>and care for endangered species. Americans had better wise up while we
>>>still have the freedom to act.>
>>>
>>>According to me, Dr. Williams understands the deal.  So does Pombo.
>>>
>
>Dr. Walter Williams is a great and dedicated libertarian (notice small "l"
>== don't know his party persuasion).  He really can articulate well the
>libertarian message.  Whether it is property rights, or drug legalization,
>or taxation, or guns, he can do it.  He is my favorite sub for that fat oaf
>(but very politically astute -- much more than his loyal dittoheads could
>ever imagine -- I get the feeling that most of them don't comprehend the
>depth and insight that he has into things) Rush Limbaugh.  He also has a
>regular nationally syndicated newspaper column.  He is great to read or
>hear!
>
>regards
>Chad
>
>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>Activism Info
>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------
>
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 25 Aug 1996 21:42:41 EDT

The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!


Capt. G.H. Burkepile
Communications Officer
First Alabama Regiment
VII Ranger Corps

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jacques Tucker <jacq@sky.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 25 Aug 1996 21:17:15 -0500

Gary:

...and put all the smokers in Raleigh and let 'em choke to death?  It's
really none of the gov'ment's business.  And the abortion "issue" is another
that is not a gov'ment area of concern.  Nothing in the contract, uh,
constititution about that.  

What's happening now that the prez is ruling by imperial edict, ah, er,
executive order?  What's the congress doing, anyway.  This is bizarre!

Cap'n Jacq'
Jacques Tucker
Libertarian candidate for Missouri treasurer.


At 09:42 PM 8/25/96 EDT, you wrote:
>The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
>the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
>the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
>want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
>
>
>Capt. G.H. Burkepile
>Communications Officer
>First Alabama Regiment
>VII Ranger Corps
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 25 Aug 1996 20:33:19 -0600

>The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
>the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
>the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
>want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
>

Hi Gary

On the drug issue you may not actually disagree.  Let me explain the
libertarian position in two different ways and we'll see if you might not
agree.

Way #1

True freedom is allowing each to be his own master, for good or for evil,
as long as what he does does not directly harm others (and this is the case
with drugs).  Even if it is stupid (which in the case if drugs, IT IS),
true freedom (and real property rights) says that I am in complete control
of my own body and noone has the right to deny me freedom to my own body.

Way #2

Government is the wrong way to take care of society's problems.  Government
is a monopoly of force.  Coercion is not the way to solve any problem -- it
only causes hate, resentment, and black markets (which bring with them
crime to control them).  Society needs to work out its problems without
force and coercion but through dialog, debate, convincing, education, etc.
Drugs ARE STUPID.  Taking drugs is stupid.  But what right does my neighbor
have to coerce me to stop?  What right does the government have to butt
into society's problems?  Let society solve its own problems.


Libertarians are not drug fanatics.  They are not drug pushers.  Most
l/Libertarians probaby do not even encourage/support drug use, though some
do.  But they all recognize that it is none of government's business or
society's business to use force to coerce people to live how you THINK they
should live.  (The same way God gives us commandments to help us make good
decisions but he does not coerce us into following them.)  They would much
rather let people have real freedom including freedom to screw yourself up.
(Of course, no libertarian supports the use of force to coerce society
into taking care of people who have screwed themselves up -- ie, government
doles).  That is the philosophical viewpoint.  The practical viewpoint is
that the War on Drugs has been a disaster.  Very expensive, has caused drug
prices to stay high which encourages crime to control the trade in drugs,
and has made it difficult for people who need help or want to get off drugs
to get help.  Name ONE problem in society caused by drugs.  It is difficult
to name one.  Now, name ONE problem caused by the illegality of drugs.
Almost all problems that people associate with drugs are actually caused by
the War on Drugs / illegality of drugs and the attempt at controlling the
lucrative market.

Why do you think that people are out trying to hook school kids on drugs?
Because they are market-building.  They are building up a market for their
expensive wares. (The same way the Democrats and some Republicans hook
people into the welfare trap and raise generations of entrapped voters).

RE: Abortion.  I have to disagree with the Libertarian Party platform with
regards to abortion.  There is a strong, though minority part of the party
who is pro-life.  To me, if you choose to have sex, you risk getting
pregnant.  You should take the responsibility to follow through with that
decision.  I believe that abortion is wrong and immoral.  I base my this on
my religious beliefs and on common sense that an unborn baby is still a
human being.  Luckily, the libertarian viewpoint on abortion has little
real impact because even if the libertarians were in power and kept
abortion legal, they would not spend one red cent of government money
paying for them through welfare/any other government program

Libertarianism is about REAL FREEDOM.  The freedom to think, do, and say
what you want to (as long as you do not directly affect others negatively).
It is the freedom to make the best of your life, or to screw it up.  It is
not about being a serf or slave to any person's notion on how you should
live.  You are free to follow whatever lifestyle you like and taking the
responsibility for that lifestyle's choices.  To be your own master.

Sadly, Republicans and Democrats do not share that vision.  Their only
vision (as parties) is to 1. get elected.  2.  to force society to live
according to their viewpoint.  To use force and coercion to "fix" the
problems of society.

best regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 03:59:30 -0700 (PDT)


Don't believe in the Constitution in actual practice, do you?

Where in the Constitution does it grant the government the power to
notice my use of beer, wine, ... ?

How can you allow yourself, as an individual, powers over another individual
which you don't want the government to have?

IMHO, we have to hold ourselves to Constitutional standards, otherwise
we give the gov opportunities to correct injustices.  Thus, the "civil
rights" laws, ...

The current anti-drug hysteria has a lot in common with the anti-gun
hysteria.  Both are driven by government propaganda.  Both ignore
reality (human weakness, economics, medical facts) in favor of demonizing
the "enemy".  These demons are human beings, our neighbors and ourselves,
in both cases.  (unless you are a teetotler, don't use tobacco, ...)

Dole's "drugs are the moral equivalent of terrorism/ use the military"
proposals are pathetic, unConstitional, and amazingly stupid.  We have
corrupted major segments of our society (CIA, DEA, FBI, Justice, state
and local equivalents) in the WOSD.  Now he wants to add the military
to the list.

And people like you, on a list like this, miss the Constitutional and
personal ethical issues, meaning you have swollowed the last 40 years
of propaganda re: drugs just like HCI's supporters have swollowed
the gov's anti-gun propaganda.

It's about FREEDOM, remember?

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.

On Sun, 25 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
> the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
> the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
> want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
> 
> 
> Capt. G.H. Burkepile
> Communications Officer
> First Alabama Regiment
> VII Ranger Corps
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 07:12:39 -0400 (EDT)

I can't tell that 30 years of the "war on drugs" has stopped the 
importation and sale of drugs but it has permitted the creation of a 
large, well-financed, well-armed criminal class.

I'm tired of being searched without warrants at "drug checkpoints."

Legalize, I say.   It works for the Dutch.

bd

On Sun, 25 Aug 1996, Jacques Tucker wrote:

> Gary:
> 
> ...and put all the smokers in Raleigh and let 'em choke to death?  It's
> really none of the gov'ment's business.  And the abortion "issue" is another
> that is not a gov'ment area of concern.  Nothing in the contract, uh,
> constititution about that.  
> 
> What's happening now that the prez is ruling by imperial edict, ah, er,
> executive order?  What's the congress doing, anyway.  This is bizarre!
> 
> Cap'n Jacq'
> Jacques Tucker
> Libertarian candidate for Missouri treasurer.
> 
> 
> At 09:42 PM 8/25/96 EDT, you wrote:
> >The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
> >the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
> >the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
> >want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
> >
> >
> >Capt. G.H. Burkepile
> >Communications Officer
> >First Alabama Regiment
> >VII Ranger Corps
> >
> >
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Dark Alliance series (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 07:09:58 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
----- Begin Included Message -----

>From jon.roland@the-spa.com Sat Aug 24 04:09:38 1996
X-Sender: jon.roland@the-spa.com

This is to commend the San Jose Mercury-News for its excellent series, Dark
Alliance, and to encourage everyone to write more on the subject. The focus
of this series was on the events of the previous decade, but we need to
bring the series up to date. The problem of the complicity of federal agents
in the smuggling of narcotics not only continues, but has gotten worse. We
have whistleblowers who estimate that between 40 and 80 percent of all drugs
are smuggled into the U.S. with the direct involvement of federal, state,
and local officials.

The subject needs to be put into perspective. The estimated annual
volume of the world market for illegal drugs is $500 billion, with about
$80 billion of that in the U.S. That is about the amount of cash in
circulation, and within a few weeks of a new bill being circulated, it
is tainted with cocaine from handling by drug traffickers. All that cash
is put back into circulation, and we need to ask how. The answer is that
the government and financial institutions are involved, and their take
of about 30 percent makes them the true drug lords. This money is not
being used to buy consumer products. It is being used to buy assets and
governments. Ask how much of what kinds of assets $50-80 billion a year
for 30-40 years can buy. Then ask yourself who is now really running
this country and most other countries.

These drug lords don't like the U.S. Constitution. It is an
inconvenience for them. They are trying to undermine it, and some of us
are trying to stop them. Keep that thought in mind when you read the
news, and many things will become more clear.

--Jon Roland
Sacramento, CA, 916/927-4935

-- 
======================================================================
DARK ALLIANCE: The Story Behind the Crack Explosion

A THREE PART series, August 19-21.  Go the the Web Page
http://cgi.sjmercury.com/drugs/stories.htm


BY GARY WEBB
Mercury News Staff Writer

FOR THE BETTER PART of a decade, a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring sold
tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles and
funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerrilla army run
by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, a Mercury News investigation
has found.

This drug network opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine
cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles, a city now known as
the "crack'' capital of the world. The cocaine that flooded in helped
spark a crack explosion in urban America and provided the cash and
connections needed for L.A.'s gangs to buy automatic weapons.

It is one of the most bizarre alliances in modern history: the union of
a U.S.-backed army attempting to overthrow a revolutionary socialist
government and the Uzi-toting "gangstas" of Compton and South-Central
Los Angeles. 

Testimony links
U.S. to
drugs-guns
trade
Dealers got their
'own little arsenal'

The army's financiers -- who met with CIA agents both before and during
the time they were selling the drugs in L.A. -- delivered cut-rate
cocaine to the gangs through a young South-Central crack dealer named
Ricky Donnell Ross.

Unaware of his suppliers' military and political connections, "Freeway
Rick" -- a dope dealer of mythic proportions in the L.A. drug world --
turned the cocaine powder into crack and wholesaled it to gangs across
the country. 

The cash Ross paid for the cocaine, court records show, was then used to
buy weapons and equipment for a guerrilla army named the Fuerza
Democratica Nicaraguense (Nicaraguan Democratic Force) or FDN, the
largest of several anti-communist commonly called the Contras. 

Biographical
information on Rick
Ross

More photos of
Rick Ross

While the FDN's war is barely a memory today, black America is still
dealing with its poisonous side effects. Urban neighborhoods are
grappling with legions of homeless crack addicts. Thousands of young
black men are serving long prison sentences for selling cocaine -- a
drug that was virtually unobtainable in black neighborhoods before
members of the CIA's army started bringing it into South-Central in the
1980s at bargain-basement prices. 

And the L.A. gangs, which used their enormous cocaine profits to arm
themselves and spread crack across the country, are still thriving,
turning entire blocks of major cities into occasional war zones. "There
is a saying that the ends justify the means," former FDN leader and drug
dealer Oscar Danilo Blandon Reyes testified during a recent cocaine
trafficking trial in San Diego. "And that's what Mr. Bermudez (the CIA
agent who commanded the FDN) told us in Honduras, OK? So we started
raising money for the Contra revolution."

Recently declassified reports, federal court testimony, undercover
tapes, court records here and abroad and hundreds of hours of interviews
over the past 12 months leave no doubt that Blandon was no ordinary drug
dealer. 

Biographical
information on
Danilo Blandon

Blandon's
testimony
100K AIFF
301K WAV

Shortly before Blandon -- who had been the drug ring's Southern
California distributor -- took the stand in San Diego as a witness for
the U.S. Department of Justice, federal prosecutors obtained a court
order preventing defense lawyers from delving into his ties to the CIA.

Blandon, one of the FDN's founders in California, "will admit that he
was a large-scale dealer in cocaine, and there is no additional benefit
to any defendant to inquire as to the Central Intelligence Agency,"
Assistant U.S. Attorney L.J. O'Neale argued in his motion shortly before
Ross' trial on cocaine trafficking charges in March.

Motion to preclude
reference to CIA
involvement

The most Blandon would say in court about who called the shots when he
sold cocaine for the FDN was that "we received orders from the -- from
other people." 

The 5,000-man FDN, records show, was created in mid-1981 when the CIA
combined several existing groups of anti-communist exiles into a unified
force it hoped would topple the new socialist government of Nicaragua. 

>From 1982 to 1988, the FDN -- run by both American and Nicaraguan CIA
agents -- waged a losing war against Nicaragua's Sandinista government,
the Cuban-supported socialists who'd overthrown U.S.-backed dictator
Anastasio Somoza in 1979. Blandon, who began working for the FDN's drug
operation in late 1981, testified that the drug ring sold almost a ton
of cocaine in the United States that year -- $54 million worth at
prevailing wholesale prices. It was not clear how much of the money
found its way back to the CIA's army, but Blandon testified that
"whatever we were running in L.A., the profit was going to the Contra
revolution." 
                                                                            
                                        
Blandon's
testimony
137K AIFF
412K WAV 

At the time of that testimony, Blandon was a full-time informant for the
Drug Enforcement Administration, a job the U.S. Department of Justice
got him after releasing him from prison in 1994. 

Though Blandon admitted to crimes that have sent others away for life,
the Justice Department turned him loose on unsupervised probation after
only 28 months behind bars and has paid him more than $166,000 since,
court records show. 

Motion for
reduction of Oscar
Danilo Blandon's
sentence 

"He has been extraordinarily helpful," federal prosecutor O'Neale told
Blandon's judge in a plea for the trafficker's release in 1994. Though
O'Neale once described Blandon to a grand jury as "the biggest
Nicaraguan cocaine dealer in the United States," the prosecutor would
not discuss him with the Mercury News. 

A known dealer since '74 has stayed out of U.S. jails

Blandon's boss in the FDN's cocaine operation, Juan Norwin Meneses
Cantarero, has never spent a day in a U.S. prison, even though the
federal government has been aware of his cocaine dealings since at least
1974, records show. 

Meneses -- who ran the drug ring from his homes in the San Francisco Bay
Area -- is listed in the DEA's computers as a major international drug
smuggler and was implicated in 45 separate federal investigations. Yet
he and his ocaine-dealing relatives lived quite openly in the Bay Area
for years, buying homes in Pacifica and Burlingame, along with bars,
restaurants, car lots and factories in San Francisco, Hayward and
Oakland. 


Biographical
information on
Norwin Meneses

More photos of
Norwin Meneses 

"I even drove my own cars, registered in my name," Meneses said during a
recent interview in Nicaragua. 

Meneses' organization was "the target of unsuccessful investigative
attempts for many years," prosecutor O'Neale acknowledged in a 1994
affidavit. But records and interviews revealed that a number of those
probes were stymied not by the elusive Meneses but by agencies of the
U.S. government. 

Agents from four organizations -- the DEA, U.S. Customs, the Los Angeles
County Sheriff's Department and the California Bureau of Narcotic
Enforcement -- have complained that investigations were hampered by the
CIA or unnamed "national security" interests. 

1988 investigation hit a wall of secrecy

One 1988 investigation by a U.S. Senate subcommittee ran into a wall of
official secrecy at the Justice Department. 

In that case, congressional records show, Senate investigators were
trying to determine why the U.S. attorney in San Francisco, Joseph
Russoniello, had given $36,000 back to a Nicaraguan cocaine dealer
arrested by the FBI. 

The money was returned, court records show, after two Contra leaders
sent letters to the court swearing that the drug dealer had been given
the cash to buy weapons for guerrillas. Russoniello said it was cheaper
to give the money back than to disprove that claim. 

"The Justice Department flipped out to prevent us from getting access to
people, records -- finding anything out about it," recalled Jack Blum,
former chief counsel to the Senate subcommittee that investigated
allegations of Contra cocaine trafficking. "It was one of the most
frustrating exercises that I can ever recall."

It wasn't until 1989, a few months after the Contra-Sandinista war ended
and five years after Meneses moved from the Peninsula to a ranch in
Costa Rica, that the U.S. government took action against him -- sort of.

Federal prosecutors in San Francisco charged Meneses with conspiracy to
distribute one kilo of cocaine in 1984, a year in which he was working
publicly with the FDN. In San Francisco photo, Meneses seen with CIA
operative

Meneses' work was so public, in fact, that he posed for a picture in
June 1984 in a kitchen of a San Francisco home with the FDN's political
boss, Adolfo Calero, a longtime CIA operative who became the public face
of the Contras in the United States. 

According to the indictment, Meneses was in the midst of his alleged
cocaine conspiracy at the time the picture was taken. 

But the indictment was quickly locked away in the vaults of the San
Francisco federal courthouse, where it remains today inexplicably secret
for more than seven years. Meneses was never arrested. 


1984 meeting of
anti-communist
group in San
Francisco

Biographical
information on
Adolfo Calero 

Reporters found a copy of the secret indictment in Nicaragua, along with
a federal arrest warrant issued Feb. 8, 1989. Records show the no-bail
warrant was never entered into the national law enforcement database
called NCIC, which police use to track down fugitives. The former
federal prosecutor who indicted him, Eric Swenson, declined to be
interviewed. 

After Nicaraguan police arrested Meneses on cocaine charges in Managua
in 1991, his judge expressed astonishment that the infamous smuggler
went unmolested by American drug agents during his years in the United
States.


Indictment of
Norwin Meneses

Photo of the arrest
warrant (58K) 

"How do you explain the fact that Norwin Meneses, implicated since 1974
in the trafficking of drugs ... has not been detained in the United
States, a country in which he has lived, entered and departed many times
since 1974?" Judge Martha Quezada asked during a pretrial hearing. 

"Well, that question needs to be asked to the authorities of the United
States," replied Roger Mayorga, then chief of Nicaragua's anti-drug
agency. 

U.S. officials amazed Meneses remained free

His seeming invulnerability amazed American authorities as well. 

A Customs agent who investigated Meneses in 1980 before transferring
elsewhere said he was reassigned to San Francisco seven years later "and
I was sitting in some meetings and here's Meneses' name again. And I can
remember thinking, "Holy cow, is this guy still around?'." 

Blandon led an equally charmed life. For at least five years he brokered
massive amounts of cocaine to the black gangs of Los Angeles without
being arrested. But his luck changed overnight. 

On Oct. 27, 1986, agents from the FBI, the IRS, local police and the Los
Angeles County sheriff fanned out across Southern California and raided
more than a dozen locations connected to Blandon's cocaine operation.
Blandon and his wife, along with numerous Nicaraguan associates, were
arrested on drug and weapons charges. 

The search warrant affidavit reveals that local drug agents knew plenty
about Blandon's involvement with cocaine and the CIA's army nearly 10
years ago. 

"Danilo Blandon is in charge of a sophisticated cocaine smuggling and
distribution organization operating in Southern California," L.A. County
sheriff's Sgt. Tom Gordon said in the 1986 affidavit. "The monies gained
from the sales of cocaine are transported to Florida and laundered
through Orlando Murillo, who is a high-ranking officer of a chain of
banks in Florida named Government Securities Corporation. From this bank
the monies are filtered to the Contra rebels to buy arms in the war in
Nicaragua." 

Corporate records show that Murillo -- a Nicaraguan banker and relative
of Blandon's wife -- was a vice-president of Government Securities
Corporation in Coral Gables, a large brokerage firm that collapsed in
1987 amid allegations of fraud. Murillo did not respond to an interview
request.

Despite their intimate knowledge of Blandon's operations, the police
raids were a spectacular failure. Every location had been cleaned of
anything remotely incriminating. No one was ever prosecuted. 

Ron Spear, a spokesman for Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block,
said Blandon somehow knew that he was under police surveillance. Others
thought so, too. 

"The cops always believed that investigation had been compromised by the
CIA," Los Angeles federal public defender Barbara O'Connor said in a
recent interview. O'Connor knew of the raids because she later defended
the raids' leader, Sgt. Gordon, against federal charges of police
corruption. Gordon, convicted of tax evasion, declined to be
interviewed. 

Lawyer suggests aid was at root of problem

FBI records show that soon after the raids, Blandon's defense attorney,
Bradley Brunon, called the sheriff's department to suggest that his
client's troubles stemmed from a most unlikely source: a recent
congressional vote authorizing $100 million in military aid to the CIA's
Contra army. According to a December 1986 FBI Teletype, Brunon told the
officers that the "CIA winked at this sort of thing. ... (Brunon)
indicated that now that U.S. Congress had voted funds for the Nicaraguan
Contra movement, U.S. government now appears to be turning against
organizations like this." 

That FBI report, part of the files of former Iran-Contra Special
Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh, was made public only last year, when it was
released by the National Archives at the Mercury News' request. 


FBI Teletype
regarding
conversation with
attorney Bradley
Brunon 

Blandon has also implied that his cocaine sales were, for a time,
CIA-approved. He told a San Francisco federal grand jury in 1994 that
once the FDN began receiving American taxpayer dollars, the CIA no
longer needed his kind of help. 

"When Mr. Reagan get in the power, we start receiving a lot of money,"
Blandon testified. "And the people that was in charge, it was the CIA,
so they didn't want to raise any (drug) money because they have, they
had the money that they wanted." 

"From the government?" asked Assistant U.S. Attorney David Hall.

"Yes," for the Contra revolution," Blandon said. "So we started -- you
know, the ambitious person -- we started doing business by ourselves."

Asked about that, prosecutor Hall said, "I don't know what to tell you.
The CIA won't tell me anything."

None of the government agencies known to have been involved with Meneses
and Blandon over the years would provide the Mercury News with any
information about them. 

A Freedom of Information Act request filed with the CIA was denied on
national security grounds. FOIA requests filed with the DEA were denied
on privacy grounds. Requests filed months ago with the FBI, the State
Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Service have produced
nothing so far. 

None of the DEA officials known to have worked with the two men would
talk to a reporter. Questions submitted to the DEA's public affairs
office in Washington were never answered, despite repeated requests. 

Blandon's lawyer, Brunon, said in an interview that his client never
told him directly that he was selling cocaine for the CIA, but the
prominent Los Angeles defense attorney drew his own conclusions from the
"atmosphere of CIA and clandestine activities" that surrounded Blandon
and his Nicaraguan friends. 

"Was he involved with the CIA? Probably. Was he involved with drugs?
Most definitely,'' Brunon said. "Were those two things involved with
each other? They've never said that, obviously. They've never admitted
that. But I don't know where these guys get these big aircraft ..."

That very topic arose during the sensational 1992 cocaine trafficking
trial of Meneses after Meneses was arrested in Nicaragua in connection
with a staggering 750-kilo shipment of cocaine. His chief accuser was
his friend Enrique Miranda, a relative and former Nicaraguan military
intelligence officer who had been Meneses' emissary to the cocaine
cartel of Bogota, Colombia. Miranda pleaded guilty to drug charges and
agreed to cooperate in exchange for a seven-year sentence. 

In a long, handwritten statement he read to Meneses' jury, Miranda
revealed the deepest secrets of the Meneses drug ring, earning his old
boss a 30-year prison sentence in the process. 

"He (Norwin) and his brother Luis Enrique had financed the Contra
revolution with the benefits of the cocaine they sold," Miranda wrote.
"This operation, as Norwin told me, was executed with the collaboration
of high-ranking Salvadoran military personnel. They met with officials
of the Salvadoran air force, who flew (planes) to Colombia and then left
for the U.S., bound for an Air Force base in Texas, as he told me." 

Meneses -- who has close personal and business ties to a Salvadoran air
force commander and former CIA agent named Marcos Aguado -- declined to
discuss Miranda's statements during an interview at a prison outside
Managua in January. He is scheduled to be paroled this summer, after
nearly five years in custody. 

U.S. General Accounting Office records confirm that El Salvador's air
force was supplying the CIA's Nicaraguan guerrillas with aircraft and
flight support services throughout the mid-1980s. 

Miranda did not name the Air Force base in Texas where the FDN's cocaine
was purportedly flown. The same day the Mercury News requested official
permission to interview Miranda, he disappeared. 

While out on a routine weekend furlough, Miranda failed to return to the
Nicaraguan jail where he'd been living since 1992. Though his jailers,
who described him as a model prisoner, claimed Miranda had escaped, they
didn't call the police until a Mercury News correspondent showed up and
discovered he was gone. 

He has not been seen in nearly a year. 


MONDAY: How the drug ring worked, and how crack was "born" in the San
Francisco Bay Area. Plus, the story of how the U.S. government gave back
$36,000 seized from a drug dealer after he claimed the money belonged to
the Contras.

Additional reporting for this series in Nicaragua and Costa Rica was
done by Managua journalist Georg Hodel. Research assistance at the
Nicaraguan Supreme Court in Managua was done by journalist Leonore
Delgado.

=======================================================================
Visit our Web site at http://www.constitution.org/       Sacramento, CA
If you need help setting up your own Web site, call us at 916/927-4935.
=======================================================================



----- End Included Message -----



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Bill Clinton's Choo-Choo (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 07:18:24 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


		Bill Clinton's Choo-Choo

		   by J. Orlin Grabbe

	Jimmy Carter is so disgusted with the Clinton 
administration that, he says, he will not attend the 
Democratic Convention.  This didn't make the headlines 
in my town.

	The ground-swell of non-support for Clinton is 
evidenced in his "whistle-stop" tour.  His choo-choo train 
is scheduled to pause for a political speech in Ashland, 
Kentucky.  But the advance men discovered they couldn't 
assemble a crowd.  So all state employees in the area were 
ordered to attend the Clinton rally during the weekend.  It 
kind of reminds you of all those organizations that were 
ordered to buy copies of Hillary's book *It Takes a Village*.  
	

	The train will arrive in Ashland from Huntington, 
Virginia, then head on to Chillicothe, Ohio, for the next 
stop.  Today's *Washington Post* quotes Clinton as saying, 
"Deadly criminals don't stay within state lines, so neither 
should law enforcement's tools to stop them."  But 
fortunately for Mr. Clinton,  the national registry for sex 
offenders will not be operational for another six months.

	This registry will be set up at the FBI.   The FBI 
will thus be able to enhance the quality of the information 
they sell to lobbying organizations, or feed into the White 
House Big Brother data base (WHODB).  

	Why did Clinton choose to travel by train?  
Presumably it wasn't fear of a missile attack on his plane.  
But the FBI cover-up of  the cause of the downing of 
TWA Flight 800 is unraveling anyway.  One news report 
this week ran an interview with Michael Demas, among 
others, who describes what can only be a missile traveling 
upward and intersecting with TWA 800.  Another news 
report showed a photograph of the missile's flight path.

	Why did the missile glow as it ascended toward 
the plane?  Because the ordinary warhead of the Stinger 
had been replaced with a phosphorous warhead.  (This 
replacement is not difficult.)  Phosphorous incandesces as 
it travels through the atmosphere at high speed. Analysis 
of the photos shows that it was the *head*, not the tail, of 
the missile that was glowing.  A spectral analysis shows 
the head was phosphorous.  

	Why did the missile hit the belly fuel tank and not 
an engine?  Because the phosphorous head is not heat-
seeking.  The Syrian-trained terrorists *wanted* to hit the 
fuel tank in the belly of the plane.  So they changed the 
missile head.  The missile's microprocessors, once locked 
on target, keep the missile on course until it reaches its 
destination.

	One rather suspects that the real "terrorists" that 
Mr. Clinton has to fear will show up in Chicago. Poor 
Chicago.  They so wanted to change their image as a place 
where Democratic conventions turn into disaster, as 
happened in 1968.  Oh, well.  (Aside to Chicago: *Don't 
sweat it.  Keep up the good work*.)

	As I reported in "Clinton and Iran",  Robert 
Strauss lead a delegation of high-level Democrats asking 
Bill Clinton either to resign, or to withdraw his name as a 
candidate for the Democratic nomination.  Otherwise, the 
delegation said, they would attack him from the floor of 
the convention.  We shall see if Mr. Strauss has the 
cojones to carry out his threat. 

	But whether Mr. Bill survives the Democratic 
convention or not, the track ahead is secured by rotten 
cross-ties and missing spikes.  Apparently Clinton made a 
deal with the Israelis:  They are supposed to whip up war 
fever in the media against Iran, and then he will 
bomb the suckers come October.  Isn't every red-blooded 
American ready to die to make the re-election safe for Mr. 
Bill?

	The problem is no one can come up with any 
evidence that Iran was involved either in the Dhahran 
bombing or the downing of TWA Flight 800.  Some of 
the individuals involved in the Dhahran bombing have 
been captured.  They are Saudi nationals without ties to 
Iran.  Thus if Bill Clinton insists on bombing Iran, he will 
escalate the very problem he is claiming to solve.  We 
already have enough problem with Syrian-inspired 
terrorist actions on U.S. soil without adding Iranians to 
the list.  But Mr. Bill doesn't care.  He's so wants to bomb 
those Iranians.

	Hopefully Mr. Clinton will find sufficient energy 
to get through the trials and tribulations ahead.  (Hint to 
Bill:  take L-phenylalanine.  It helps rebuild the brain's 
noradrenaline, which is depleted by excessive use of 
certain stimulants.) 

	A railroad track cut through one corner of the 
ranch I grew up on in West Texas.  When I was very 
young, the Southern Pacific still operated a steam 
locomotive on that line.  The engine fireman would keep 
the boiler pressure up by stoking the furnace with coke.  
When Mr. Bill decided to take the train to Chicago,  I 
think he was confused about the operational fuel involved. 
	 

August 24, 1996
Web Page:  http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ 





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 8 Num. 96 (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 07:22:30 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

The following is brought to you thanks, in part, to the kind 
assistance of CyberNews and the fine folks at Cornell University.


              Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 8  Num. 96
             ======================================
                    ("Quid coniuratio est?")
 
 
 
MORE PLOTS TO REMOVE CLINTON
============================
By Sherman H. Skolnick
----------------------
 
Some of the  generals  were  unhappy.   Their previous efforts to
send a message to their Commander-in-Chief had all failed.  Their
schemes to confront him and  yes,  to  arrest  him,  under  their
version  of  the  Military  Code,  had  produced no results, only
numerous fatalities, falsely described  in  the press as military
airplane accidents and such.
 
The crash killing all onboard near Alexander City,  Alabama,  two
days  before  the  Oklahoma  bombings  (there  was  more than one
device.)  The disappearance of former CIA Director William Colby,
just as he was about to  go public fingering the Pentagon and the
White House for covering up the Prisoner of War  [P.O.W.]  issue.
The  murder  (disguised as suicide) of Chief of Naval Operations,
Admiral Boorda, who was  the  Commander-in-Chief's man opposed to
the confrontation.
 
The failures and casualties meant possibly that their plans  were
not well thought out.
 
So  the  general told the commentator, on the eve of the Democrat
Convention in Chicago, "Suppose there  is this factory where they
make furniture, tables, chairs, and such.  And  the  workers  are
making  fiberboards  and putting together various materials.  And
they are given some other substance to mix into the woodchips and
such.  Sort of like the  same  as  glue or epoxy or whatever some
may call it, binding the  material  together.   The  workers  are
low-paid to begin with.  So they give them a few dollars more per
hour, to ask no questions. No one offers any explanation."
 
"So  now,  the  end results are simply furniture, tables, chairs,
upholstery, material  under  laminated  material,  seat cushions.
Any of it.  Maybe even items for a  speakers'  podium.   Some  of
them made out of binary explosives A and B. Nothing happens until
an  agent  primer  somehow  puts  them  together  chemically  and
otherwise, causing a chemical reaction and release."
 
"What  are  you  saying,  general?"  the  commentator asks.  "The
furniture  are  all  bombs.   The  nail,  the  rivet,  the  metal
decoration -- antennas, ready to receive a signal, detonating the
explosives," the general explains.
 
"Where is the signal going to come from?" probes the commentator.
"From any electronic  device.   A  cellular  phone, video camera,
wireless microphone, all kinds of such  items,"  comes  back  the
response.   "You  mean  the  Convention  Center?" the commentator
continues.  "Where do you think?"  answers the general, to try to
blur the issue a bit.
 
The commentator thinks over what others had said in the past.  If
the generals are apprehended and court-martialed for mutiny, they
will  try  to  defend   themselves  with  charges  against  their
Commander-in-Chief of treason and sedition.
 
(And what if the  binary  bomb  furniture  is  not  sent  to  the
convention  itself, but to some other location, either in Chicago
or elsewhere?)
 
The First Lady and Vincent  W.  Foster, Jr., even before they got
to the Clinton White House (as known to the  Commander-in-Chief),
had  arranged to supply to a foreign power nuclear missile launch
and tracking codes, so a foreign  power could control some of the
U.S.'s  most  secret  weaponry.   The  First  Lady  was  apparent
beneficiary  to  overseas   secret   accounts,   Grand   Caymans,
Switzerland,  elsewhere.  Foster had supposedly gone from time to
time to check on  the  money  for  himself  and Hillary.  Was the
reason he was murdered and covered up at the  highest  level,  by
the  Commander-in-Chief,  because of "national security"?  Or was
it the bank software  computer  services spying project, in which
Foster,   the   First   Lady,   and   Webster    Hubbell    (once
third-in-command of the Clinton Justice Department and later sent
to prison) had all participated?
 
And  Foster  was  the  equivalent  of  a  general in the National
Security Agency.  When they knocked  him off and planted his body
in a park, they knocked off a general.
 
"You are one of the few that understands.  So we were ordered  to
contact  you,"  the  general  resumes.   The commentator asks the
silent question into the great  void,  Asked by whom?  Ordered by
whom?
 
And the commentator reminds himself that others had informed  him
at  some  other time and place.  Two of the top binary explosives
experts in the country  are  Michael  Riconosciuto (of late, in a
federal jail in South  Carolina,  on  what  he  and  some  others
contend  is  a  dope frame-up, because Michael would not give out
the codes,  kept  in  his  head,  for  the  parked  billions that
disappeared from the CIA's bank, Nugan-Hand Bank  --  now  called
Household  Bank  and  Household  International  --  and the CIA's
interest in the supposedly  defunct  Bank  of Credit and Commerce
International -- risen from the ashes  as  Pinnacle  Banc  Group,
their flagship First National Bank of Cicero, Illinois.)
 
And the other binary explosives expert, the new head of CIA, John
M. Deutch.
 
Some  claim Michael knows a lot of the what, when, and how of the
World Trade Center bombing (the  bomb  blew  up right next to the
President's limousine, in the parking garage) and a lot about the
bombings in Oklahoma City.  Michael reportedly claims  that  used
there  were  the  blue  death bombs developed by him.  And Deutch
knows a lot.  But  are  either  of  them  available any more to a
reporter or outsider's query?
 
"Is the Convention furniture scenario, or wherever  or  whatever,
just  going  to be a diversionary attack, so something else could
happen?" the commentator asks,  but  not  even a No Comment comes
back.  A diversion would sort of be  standard  military  tactics,
assuming  it  was  a  military  coup.  Only a whisper comes back,
"PETN.  That is part  of  the  stuff."  Finally the general adds,
"It may be the beginning of weeks of Hell."
 
Later, the commentator finds out that one  of  the  generals  has
already been shot, or shot at, another threatened with death.  So
what is it that some are claiming is happening?
 
The  supposed  Democrat  Convention  security chief, according to
some published accounts, has  no security background.  The matter
of Convention protection is  really  all  in  the  hands  of  the
Chicago  Police  Department.   Their  Bomb  and  Arson  Squad  is
currently  headed  by  a  woman,  a  Sgt.  A  discussion with her
reveals, quickly, that  perhaps  she  was  assigned by some equal
rights considerations rather than great know-how.  She  does  not
seem to know who the Commander-in-Chief is. 
 
Maybe  the  furniture  scenario would not actually be used.  When
informed of the  explosive  furniture  possibility,  a Bomb Squad
officer was startled and blurted out that  40  trailer  loads  of
furniture  for  the Convention Center had just arrived.  The Bomb
Squad chief says there is no  way  she knows of to check into the
matter.  To demonstrate that some in the Bomb Squad really do not
understand the latest technology in explosives at all, they  were
preparing  to  go  with  bomb-sniffing  dogs  to  check  out  the
furniture. Yet, the binary explosives have no track nor odor.
 
Maybe  some favor a military coup but worry the end results would
be bad anyway.
 
 +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +
 
Mr.   Skolnick,  since  1963,  has  been  founder/chairman  of  a
public-interest  group,  CITIZENS'  COMMITTEE  TO  CLEAN  UP  THE
COURTS, researching and disclosing  certain instances of judicial
corruption and political  murders.   Since  1971,  as  editor  of
updates  of  the  group's  work,  called HOTLINE NEWS, a 5-minute
recorded phone  message,  changed  several  times  per  week -- a
regular phone call -- (312)  731-1100.   Since  1991,  a  regular
participant,  now moderator, of a popular, public access cable TV
program, called "Broadsides", in  Chicago  and suburbs -- on most
every Monday evening in Chicago, on Channel  21  cable,  9  p.m.,
available  to  some  400,000  households.  His comments appear on
Internet on several  websites;  archives  of  his  stories can be
pulled up and printed out.  Also, on Internet, his stories appear
on    some    five   categories   of   news   groups,   such   as
alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater  and  alt.activism.  Office
(8 a.m. to midnight, 7 days):  (312) 375-5741.  9800 So.  Oglesby
Avenue, Chicago, IL 60617-4870.  Call before sending FAX.  (After
October 12, 1996, AREA CODE changes to 773.)
 
A few highlights of the group's work:  Caused the biggest bribery
scandal in U.S. history, the collapse  of  the  Illinois  Supreme
Court,  1969.   Investigation  of  the  sabotaged Watergate plane
crash, 1972-73.  12 Watergate  figures perished including Mrs. E.
Howard Hunt, wife of the Watergate burglar.  One of the first  to
comment on the Vice President Spiro Agnew bribery mess, resulting
in  his downfall, 1973.  Investigation and disclosure causing the
jailing for bribery of the highest level sitting federal judge in
American history, Chicago Federal Appeals Judge Otto Kerner, Jr.,
1973.  Touching  off  "Operation  Greylord,"  in  which  20 local
judges and 40 lawyers jailed for bribery, 1983-1993.
 
       Views expressed do not necessarily  reflect  those
       of Conspiracy Nation, nor of its Editor in Chief.
        I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail 
address, send a message in the form "subscribe cn-l My Name" to 
listproc@cornell.edu          (Note: that is "CN-L" *not* "CN-1")
    For information on how to receive the improved Conspiracy 
  Nation Newsletter, send an e-mail message to bigred@shout.net
Want to know more about Whitewater, Oklahoma City bombing, etc? 
(1) telnet prairienet.org (2) logon as "visitor" (3) go citcom
       See also: http://www.europa.com/~johnlf/cn.html
          See also: ftp.shout.net  pub/users/bigred
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et 
  pauperem.                    -- Liber Proverbiorum  XXXI: 8-9 




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: DOMESTIC "UNREST" FORESEEN
Date: 26 Aug 1996 08:50:12 -0500

From NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE:

82nd AND 101st AIRBORNE DIVISIONS TO BE EMPLOYED AGAINST U.S.
CITIZENS? DOMESTIC "UNREST" FORESEEN

According to an upcoming report in March's SOLDIER OF FORTUNE
magazine, pre-released on the Internet, the elite "All
Americans" and "Screaming Eagles" Airborne Divisions may soon
be policing U.S. towns and cities and manning checkpoints on
U.S. highways, in direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act,
which forbids the deployment of U.S. troops against U.S.
citizens. That Act was also notably breached at Waco, where
machine-gun firing Texas National Guard helicopters were employed
to open the pre-planned ATF assault and where Special Forces/Delta Force
troops were utilized in a number of ways.

At the present time, public affairs officers at XVIII Airborne
Corps, Fort Bragg, Georgia, are refusing to comment. What is
known, however, is that about 40 Army and Air Force legal and
other personnel attended a secret "research symposium" at
XVIII Airborne Corps, between December 6th and 8th, 1994, to
strategize and study for the deployment of U.S. Army and Air
Force personnel and resources to aid civilian authorities in
"the suppression of domestic civil unrest". Something big
appears to be in the wind!

According to the editor of the Special Forces underground
paper, THE RESISTER, interviewed for the SOLDIER OF FORTUNE
article, the conference concentrated on the "legality" of
using U.S. forces against U.S. citizens and on drafting
suitable military rules of engagement.

Army lawyers reportedly brushed aside dismissively Airborne
officers' concerns that such deployment would violate the Posse
Comitatus Act, one lawyer responding cryptically, "Not anymore,
it doesn't." During the symposium at the U.S. John F. Kennedy
Special Warfare Centre and School, Fort Bragg, SOLDIER OF
FORTUNE states, attendees analysed previous Special Forces
operations in Panama, Iraq, Somalia and Haiti, concentrating
on experiences gained there in the disarming of local
populations via "wholesale gun confiscation, warrantless
search-and-seizure sweeps and weapons buy-back programs."

A key unit in such internal "suppression" would undoubtedly
be the secretive and shadowy Delta Force, which is reported
to have also played the leading role in the countries mentioned
above. Delta Force draftees, who are largely drawn from the
10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum {see our Web page article} and
from the 3rd of the 75th Rangers, are primarily routed to the
160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment at Fort Campbell,
Kentucky, and to another division of the 160th based at Hurlbut
field, Florida. This latter 160th group are reported to be
flying a ninja-suited, ski-masked, heavily-armed unit named
CJTF 6 around the U.S. in black helicopters.
They are alleged to be able to do this with no accountablity
through the simple device of having Special Forces
members leave active duty then sign up as reservists and
volunteer for "special assignment".  Another shadowy black ops
group which would doubtless also be employed is 12th Special Forces,
originally based in Arlington Heights, Illinois, but recently divided
and relocated in two other states.

The 10th Mountain Division, a 10,000 man-strong Light
Assault Division, is based at Fort Drum in upstate New
York, just south of the Canadian border. Fort Drum covers
a geographic area the size of metropolitan Toronto, and is
intensively used by both U.S. and Canadian troops for
urban-warfare and house-to-house "search and seizure"
exercises. The entire Division is winter-capable, is
trained in shock assault and urban-warfare tactics, and is
currently reported to be learning French. Its only attached
transportation assets are helicopter squadrons capable of
lifting it a relatively short distance very rapidly.

At least one respected Canadian analyst has theorized
that it has been positioned to intervene in a future
Canadian "crisis" by seizing the Canadian Forces
communications centre at Kingston and cutting Highway
401 at that point. That would effectively paralyze any
Canadian military response, cut the country in two at
its English/French centre, utilize the Canadian Shield
[which runs almost down to Lake Ontario in that locality]
to block any alternative East-West movement, prevent any
reinforcement or defense of Ottawa from Toronto, and
permit a rapid advance up the 401 to seize the capital.

The only Canadian military unit which could have offered any
credible resistance to such an assault, the Canadian Airborne,
based at Petawawa, was recently disbanded because of the "furor"
which "erupted" - largely in the media - over videos taken of
hazing and initiation rites performed by soldiers who, in
almost every case, had already completed their tour of duty
in the Airborne and returned to their own regiments.

U.S. military spokesmen originally claimed that Fort Drum was
intended for "jungle warfare training". Now they prefer not to
 answer questions about it. But the distinct possibility of a
 crisis caused by Quebec's separation has some Canadian eyes
 turning nervously, once again, to Fort Drum.

**************************************************************
(c) Copyright, NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE, 1995, 1996
**************************************************************

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  San Diego CA Drugs? From Mexico? A real news flash (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 08:54:28 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

---------- Forwarded message ----------



San Diego Union-Tribune
letters@uniontrib.com
http:// www.uniontrib.com
Doug Hope Managing Editor
                             August  4, 1996, Sunday


HEADLINE: The drug trade climbs aboard shipments of goods from Mexico

BYLINE: Peter Andreas

ANDREAS is a research fellow at the Brookings Institution and coauthor of
" Drug War  Politics: The Price of Denial," to be published this summer by the
University of California Press.

 BODY:
   Mexico has long been enmeshed in the drug trade, but its involvement has
been transformed in the last decade.  Primarily, Mexico has emerged as the
primary
shipping point for Colombian  cocaine  into the United States.

The State Department estimates that the percentage of the  cocaine  bound
for the U.S. market entering through Mexico was negligible during the
mid-1980s but  increased to as much as 70 percent by 1995. Mexico also
supplies up to 30
percent of the  heroin  consumed in the United States and up to 80 percent of
the imported  marijuana,  according to a March 1996 State Department report.

   Mexico earns more than $7 billion a year from the illegal drug trade, the
Drug Enforcement Administration estimates. Some Mexican estimates place the
figure much higher.  The prosecutor general's office estimates that drug
traffickers operating in Mexico accumulated revenues of approximately $30
billion in 1994.

   Mexico's growing role in the drug trade has significantly increased the
power and wealth of Mexico's trafficking organizations and that has, in
turn,
exacerbated well-entrenched political corruption.

   Corrupt officials sell an essential service to drug traffickers: the
nonenforcement of the law.  Not surprisingly, as Mexico's role in the illicit
drug trade has grown, so too has the buying off of law enforcement -- not only
within Mexico, but on the U.S. side as well.

Not coincidentally, Mexico's expanding role in the drug trade parallels the
opening of the Mexican economy and the deepening of U.S.-Mexican economic
integration.

   Colombian  cocaine  traffickers began turning to Mexico as a major entry
point to the U.S. market in the early 1980s after the United States cracked
down on  cocaine  shipping through the Caribbean.  By now a strategic
alliance exists between Colombian and Mexican traffickers.  The Colombians
process the  cocaine  and ship it to Mexico, the Mexicans smuggle it into
the United States.

   Mexican imports of legal goods from Colombia increased from $17 million in
1980 to $121 million in 1985. At the same time, Mexican imports from the
rest of Latin America decreased from $768 million to $630 million.

   Legal exports from Mexico to the United States doubled between 1986 and
1993. Hiding drug shipments within the growing volume of goods exported
from Mexico to the United States has become an increasingly favored method
of smuggling
 cocaine.

   These trends thrive under the North American Free Trade Agreement.

A report written by an intelligence officer at the U.S. embassy in Mexico
City claims that  cocaine  traffickers established factories, warehouses and
trucking companies as fronts in Mexico in anticipation of the cross-border
commerce boom under NAFTA.

   "If NAFTA provides opportunity for legitimate businesses, it may clearly
provide opportunities for illegitimate businessmen," Assistant U.S. Attorney
Glenn MacTaggart has said.

   Trucking provides the most concrete illustration of this trend.
According to one senior customs official, to inspect every truck coming
across the border
would create a traffic jam as far as Mexico City. So only a small
percentage of  trucks are fully inspected.

   Under the NAFTA agreement, trucking into the United States from Mexico is
increasing rapidly.  In 1994, 2.8 million trucks crossed over from Mexico. In
1993, on the eve of NAFTA, the number was 1.9 million. The U.S. Southwest
Border Capital Improvement Program will upgrade the road network so that it
will be
able to handle more than double today's traffic level -- as many as 8.4 million  trucks annually.

Mexican truckers will soon be allowed to operate throughout the border
states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas.  They will eventually
be able to
travel anywhere in the United States and Canada.

   Trucks can carry illegal goods as easily as legal goods.  One truck that
was  stopped near San Diego carried 8 tons of  cocaine  stuffed into cans
of jalapeno peppers.  Law enforcement officials believe that the  cocaine
belonged to a
businessman who owns one of the biggest trucking companies in Mexico.

   As part of an effort to hide drugs within trans-border shipments of legal
goods, some Mexican traffickers have reportedly hired trade consultants to
determine which products move most quickly through border inspection under
NAFTA guidelines.  "They have very specific issues," notes Craig Chretien,
the special agent in charge of the DEA's San Diego office.  "Does a
perishable get through
quicker than a load of steel?  What kind of cargoes go through faster than
others?"

   Concerns about drug control were not discussed during the negotiations over
NAFTA.  "This was in the too hot to handle' category," says Gary Hufbauer, an
economist at the Institute for International Economics in Washington, D.C.
Reportedly, U.S. customs and drug enforcement personnel openly call NAFTA the
"North American Drug Trade Agreement."

Meanwhile, the privatization of state-owned enterprises and the
deregulation  of the Mexican banking system facilitate the laundering of
drug profits.

   And the cutting of government subsidies in Mexico's rural areas are
increasing the incentive for peasant farmers to produce illegal crops such as
 marijuana.

   An internal DEA report -- obtained by the National Security Archive through
the Freedom of Information Act -- concludes that "increased illicit drug
production will probably be a direct result of the discontinuation of
subsistence crop subsidies." Drug production is expanding in Mexico's more
remote rural regions.

   Efforts to cut the foreign drug supply into the United States have a long
history of failure.  And the likelihood of success diminishes further as
market  liberalization and economic integration propel ever more extensive
cross-border  exchange.

   Evaluations of free market reform are largely divorced and insulated from
evaluations of drug market prohibition.  Thus, congressional committees and
government agencies endlessly debate how to attack the drug supply and gain
greater cooperation from Mexico and other Latin American countries.

Meanwhile, those concerned with the implementation of market-based reforms
carefully monitor an assortment of economic indicators.  The reports they
publish rarely even mention the drug trade, let alone discuss its ties to the
formal economy.

   It is as if drug trafficking were not an economic matter at all.  But while
such institutionalized denial may be politically convenient, it perpetuates
both a fundamental misreading of the problem and unworkable strategies for
dealing
with it.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Probe demanded in L.A. of reported crack-CIA tie (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 08:56:53 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From jon.roland@the-spa.com Sun Aug 25 02:47:29 1996

Dear Editor:

It will be interesting to see whether the two major party candidates
will do the responsible thing and address the issues raised by the
recent revelations of government complicity in illegal drug smuggling,
and whether Congress will take up the subject and appoint a special
prosecutor with sufficient authority and funding to investigate these
issues, or whether both the candidates and Congress will continue to
perpetrate the cover-up of activities they have been aware of for a long
time, and in which many of them may be personally involved.

It is time, at least, for responsible journalists to stop participating
in the cover-ups of these and other networks of official abuse and
corruption that pervade government at all levels. They need to stop
worrying about losing access by uncovering wrongdoing. Access is too
high a price to pay for becoming accomplices in official offenses
against the American people that, if done to us by a foreign enemy,
would be justification for going to war.

--Jon Roland
Sacramento, CA, 916/927-4935

=======================================================================

Probe demanded in L.A. of reported crack-CIA tie

By Gary Webb
and Pamela Kramer

Knight-Ridder Newspapers

African American groups in Los Angeles and elsewhere Friday demanded a
full-scale investigation of recent revelations by the San Jose Mercury
News that CIA-linked drug dealers provided cocaine and sophisticated
weapons to the gangs of Los Angeles.

The Black American Political Association of California, Los Angeles
chapter, took to the steps of Los Angeles City Hall and its City Council
chambers to demand "an immediate, full, thorough and complete
investigation ... to determine not only the identities and roles of
those who participated in the activity, but also those who covered it
up, protected it and knowingly tolerated it."

The Mercury News, in a three-part series, reported that Danilo Blandon,
a former Nicaraguan government official, was the conduit for thousands
of kilos of cocaine that flowed to Los Angeles street gangs between 1982
and 1986. Blandon, who pleaded guilty to cocaine trafficking charges in
1992 and went to work for the Drug Enforcement Administration, testified
recently that he began selling cocaine in Los Angeles' African American
neighborhoods as a way of raising money for a Nicaraguan guerrilla army
run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, an army commonly known as
the contras.

Blandon has testified that he was one of the army's top civilian
officials in California.

Sweet Alice Harris, a community leader who has lived in South Central
Los Angeles for 40 years, was blunt in her reaction to the allegations.

"The worst thing you can do is hurt a mother's children, and they have
killed our children," she said. "I'm as mad as I can be now. I'm real
mad."

Harris repeated the stories that have pervaded the African American
community in South Central for years -- stories of truckloads of guns
and ammunition appearing mysteriously on the neighborhood streets, of
authorities seeming to encourage drug abuse by young African Americans
and even encouraging their gang wars on each other.

Said Theresa Allison, founder of a group called Mothers Reclaiming our
Children: "We've been portrayed as bad people" and bad parents when, in
fact, parents have been up against a powerful and mysterious enemy in
the fight for their children's futures.

At Friday's meeting, the Los Angeles City Council approved a motion by
Councilman Nate Holden that the city ask the U S. attorney general to
"conduct a complete, thorough and independent investigation of serious
and credible allegations as to the ongoing sale of illegal street drugs
to American citizens of African American descent, with the apparent
approval of the United States government, on behalf of and to support
the efforts of the Nicaraguan contra army."

In his motion, Holden said "These allegations, even if unproven, raise
serious and very disturbing questions which further support
long-standing suspicions that there is a connection between drugs in the
inner city and our CIA and foreign-policy activities."

Even if the allegations are found to be untrue, he wrote, a thorough
investigation could "allay community suspicions and fears."

In Nashville, Tenn., meanwhile, Washington, D.C., radio talk show host
Joe Madison urged reporters at the National Association of Black
Journalists Convention to use their influence to push for a full
investigation.

"I will challenge them to use all of their editorial influence and
resources to get Congress and both presidential candidates to
investigate this matter immediately, including appointing a special
prosecutor," Madison said in a prepared statement.

"Freeway Rick" Ross, the former crack cocaine king of Los Angeles, was
Blandon's biggest customer during the 1980s and his first target when
the Nicaraguan became an undercover operative for the DEA. Records show
Blandon and the DEA set Ross up for a sting, and Blandon was the star
witness during Ross' cocaine conspiracy trial last March. Ross and two
other men were convicted and were originally scheduled to be sentenced
Friday.

However, that was postponed after Ross' attorney, Alan Fenster, filed a
motion for a new trial based on the revelations contained in the Mercury
News' series.

"These articles provide support for defendant Ross' previously raised
claim that the United States government created and nurtured his role as
a major drug dealer and ultimately created the circumstances for his
arrest,"

Assistant U.S. Attorney L.J. O'Neale would not talk to reporters and did
not directly address Fenster's claim in court.

In addition, Fenster told Judge Marilyn Huff, at least two people have
recently told federal officials that Blandon has continued to deal
cocaine while on the DEA's payroll, something Blandon denied at the
trial.

Huff agreed to postpone Ross' sentencing -- he faces a possible term of
life without parole - until Sept. 13 to take testimony from the two men.

=======================================================================
Visit our Web site at http://www.constitution.org/       Sacramento, CA
If you need help setting up your own Web site, call us at 916/927-4935.
=======================================================================



----- End Included Message -----



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  The Growing Tyranny (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 09:00:24 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
X-Sender: leroy@popd.ix.netcom.com

When I came across this, I just knew it should be posted



The Growing Tyranny

The Federal Government of the United States is presently merging our
beloved country into the long conspired for New World Order. This
World State is nothing other than a jack booted, armor-vested, blood
thirsty, Neo-Bolshevik, tyranny. The horrible fate which the ruling
elite has in store for us has already been demonstrated by the
cold-blooded slaughter of innocent men, women and children at the
sieges of Ruby Ridge and Waco.

A once free and prosperous nation is being systematically turned into
a police state - - a land where no man can own property, keep the
fruits of his own labor, or raise a healthy, wholesome family -- a
land of abject poverty -- a continent turned into one vast slave labor
system -- a land dotted with concentration camps, concertina wired
prisons, and chambers of unbearable tortures. In order to forestall
patriotic resistance to their sinister plans, the statists are
attempting to disarm all Americans as quickly as possible. Toward this
end, an incessant barrage of federal, state, and local gun control
initiatives (such as the recently passed Brady Bill) are being
launched in direct violation of the second article of our Bill of
Rights.

A brief perusal of the federal gun control initiatives which were
introduced in the U.  S. Congress, in 1993 alone, should convince any
skeptic that the Neo- Bolsheviks who have seized control of our nation
are deadly serious about disarming the American people.

Bills That Would Regulate or Ban Handguns and/or Ammunition:

S-109, Hoynihan (D-NY), would require a record of every round of
ammunition used.

S-178, Hoynihan (D-NY), would prohibit the manufacture, sale or
importation of .25 caliber, .32 caliber and 9mm ammunition.

S-376, Lautenberg (D-NJ) and HR-544, Torricelli (D-NJ), would prohibit
purchase of two (2) or more handguns in any thirty (30) day period.

S-892, Chafee (R-RI), would ban all handguns.

HR-711, Gonzalez (D-TX), re quires that handguns be avail able only to
persons who demonstrate, to the government's satisfaction, that they
possess knowledge and skill in their safe use, maintenance and stor
age.

HR-1501, Yates (D-IL), would ban handguns.

HR-1616, Collins (D-IL) requires the mandatory registration of
handguns.

HR-1734, Gutierrez (D-IL), prohibits possession or transfer of all
handguns.

HR-1833, Norton (D-DC), prohibits the transfer of a handgun and/or
ammunition to any person that does not have a state permit to possess
a handgun or ammunition (Permission from the state to exercise a
function which is in truth a God-given right).

HR-3132, Owens (D-NY), bans handguns, handgun ammunition.

HR-3398,
bans expanding bullets.

Bills That Ban Magazines:

S-1607, Biden (D-DE), Passed in the Senate. The "Crime Bill", includes
the Feinstein Amendment which bans magazines with a capacity of over
10 rounds.

HR-2321, Sangmeister (D-IL), bans the possession or transfer of
magazines with a capacity of 15 rounds or more.

HR-3398, Barrett (D-WI), bans expanding bullets, including hunting
bullets.

  Bills That Would Ban Semi- Automatic Handguns, Rifles and Shotguns:

S-108, Moynihan (D-NY)

S-639, DeConcini (D-AZ)

S-653, Metzenbaum (D-OH)

S-1607, Biden (D-DE), Passed in the Senate, called the "Crime Bill"
and includes the Feinstein Amendment -- the semiauto ban.

HR-893, Gutierrez (D-IL)

HR-1421, Stark (D-CA)

HR-1472, Schumer (D-NY)

HR-1568, Gibbons (D-FL)

HR-1571, Hughes (D-NJ)

HR-1706, Mfume (D-MD)

HR-3184, Reynolds (D-IL)

These bills would prohibit the manufacture importation,transfer and/or
possession of any semi-auto firearm not deemed suitable for sporting
purposes by the BATF. Some would prohibit all "assault weapons".
Magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds are also banned. Sporting
purposes is usually defined as hunting or competitive target shooting.

Taxes as Gun Control:

S-179, Moynihan (D-NY) would put a 1,000% tax on .25 caliber, .32
caliber, and 9mm ammunition.

S-496, increases the annual fee for an FFL to $750 per year and allows
unlimited inspections of the FFL holders records and premises.

S-496, Irray (D-WA) increases taxes on handguns, "assault weapons" and
gun dealers.

S-1616, Moynihan (D-NY) would put a 50% tax on any cartridge where the
case is less than 1.3 inches and a 10,000% tax on hollow point handgun
ammunition.

HR-737, Reynolds (D-IL) would increase the tax on firearms.

HR-2276, Meek (D-FL) would impose a tax on all transfers of handguns
and assault weapons, including private sales.

HR-3245, Reynolds (D-IL) tax on "assault weapons."

Liability as Gun Control:

S-496, Simon (D-IL)

HR-661, Collins (D-IL)

HR-737, Reynolds (D-IL) would make the manufacturer, importer, or
dealer of a handgun or an "assault weapon" liable for damages that
result from the use of the firearm. This bill is obviously designed to
drive the targeted people out of business.

Conclusion

This government has shown its evil intent by its constant and purpose-
ful violations of every right granted to us by Almighty God and
guaranteed by the United States Constitution. It strives to disarm us
as if we were an enemy. It treats us as its enemy.  And, with its
calculated massacres of our people, it has shown itself to be our
enemy.

We must not stand by and cravenly allow these brutal tyrants to betray
our country, erase our heritage, and enslave our children for
generations to come. We must make our country once again a land of
liberty and justice. And, like our patriotic forefathers, who in 1776
pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors to make
this land free and independent, we must not allow our enemies to
disarm us.

NEVER SURRENDER YOUR FIREARMS!

    "Give me Liberty or give me Death."

    Patrick Henry

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 10:12:08 EDT

Brad,

Has it worked?  Check out the facts and be honest with yourself.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 10:12:08 EDT

Lew,

Do you think that ALL individuals are going to hold themselves to a
standard that is clear and cut down the line?  Come on!  Be realistic. 
Not everyone is going to be able to make reasonable and rash decisions
concerning their own personal responsibilities.  

I might not be seeing your whole point but I'm willing to listen.

GHB

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 10:12:08 EDT

Chad,

I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to spark a little debate.  

Let's take alcohol for instance.  Correct me if I wrong but the
libertarian view is I should have the right to have as much as I want
when ever I want it.  What about that person that says that is his right
and indulges, gets into his automobile, and goes out and kills a whole
family because he was impaired to the point that he could not operate
that automobile responsibility?  Where is that families rights to life
LIBERTY and per suit of happiness.  Hence the reason from locking them
away from the rest of society.  

All I'm wanting to do is come up with a workable solution to an ongoing
problem.  Maybe we should all go back to saying "Gity-up horse". 


Capt. G.H. Burkepile
Communications Officer
First Alabama Regiment
VII Ranger Corps

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 08:28:41 -0600

>Brad,
>
>Has it worked?  Check out the facts and be honest with yourself.

Gary

That is what many of us are asking you to do.  Check the facts.  The Drug
War is the ONE major thing bringing us to Tyranny.  And it is immoral.  It
is coercion.  Is it right to force other people to be good?

best regards
Chad

ps: Welcome to ROC and don't think we don't welcome you because many of us
disagree with you.


------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 09:23:04 -0600

>Chad,
>
>I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to spark a little debate.

Good, same here

>
>Let's take alcohol for instance.  Correct me if I wrong but the
>libertarian view is I should have the right to have as much as I want
>when ever I want it.

The libertarian viewpoint also says that your have the responsibility that
goes with that alcohol.  Any action you undertake is your responsibility,
impaired or not.  In addition, I do not believe the libertarian viewpoint
is that you have the right to drive while under the influence.  I (and
probably most libertarians) have no problems with DWI/DUI laws (maybe the
enforcement in some jurisdictions is a problem).  Trying to pass
prohibition again is another matter.

Passing a law does not fix the problem.  In fact, it usually makes the
problem worse, as is seen with drugs.

> What about that person that says that is his right
>and indulges, gets into his automobile, and goes out and kills a whole
>family because he was impaired to the point that he could not operate
>that automobile responsibility?  Where is that families rights to life
>LIBERTY and per suit of happiness.  Hence the reason from locking them
>away from the rest of society.

This happens all to frequently as it is with the DUI/DWI laws (and I am not
against such laws prohibiting driving under the influence) and these
victims "rights to life
LIBERTY and per suit of happiness" is not protected as it is.  Show me how
the current laws have protected that family.

Someone who commits murder because he drove under the influence of alcohol
or drugs should be put away (or maybe executed?).  He committed murder.

best
Chad

>
>All I'm wanting to do is come up with a workable solution to an ongoing
>problem.  Maybe we should all go back to saying "Gity-up horse".
>

The workable solution is to legalize drugs, get rid of government doles,
and to make people responsible for their actions without excuses.  In other
words, to "Restore Our Constitution."

best
Chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE: Tobacco & BATF Form 4473
Date: 26 Aug 1996 10:25:17 -0500

>>On BATF Form 4473 is the question asking something like:
>>
>>	Are you a user of or addicted to a stimulant, narcotic, or depressant
>> drug?
>>

>HUuuum, sounds like the best way to stop a big part of the firearms 
>sales to the public. You Smoke? No guns for you!

-----

It can get much worse than that. Here's how:

The single largest cause of the destruction of the ozone layer is flatulance. 
Yes folks, it's actually true. Methane gas is much more destructive than
CFCs, according to NASA.

So I envision the Fart Police - arresting people who are obviously violating
the letter if not the sprirt of this nation's anti-pollution laws.

Next time you go to buy a gun, you will have to fill out a form in which you
swear that you haven't passed gas lately - or you can't get the gun.

Wouldn't want any felons to have guns, would we?

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 11:32:05 -0400 (EDT)



On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> Brad,
> 
> Has it worked?  Check out the facts and be honest with yourself.
> 

By "it," I assume you mean drug decriminalization in the Netherlands.
The answer is, yes, it has worked very well.

I've walked through the Nieuw Market (drugs 'n sex) district of Amsterdam 
with my family a number of times - without any fear.  It's *much* safer 
than comparable districts in LA, NYC, Atlanta, etc.

bd




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 09:47:11 -0600

>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:
>
>> Brad,
>>
>> Has it worked?  Check out the facts and be honest with yourself.
>>
>
>By "it," I assume you mean drug decriminalization in the Netherlands.
>The answer is, yes, it has worked very well.
>
>I've walked through the Nieuw Market (drugs 'n sex) district of Amsterdam
>with my family a number of times - without any fear.  It's *much* safer
>than comparable districts in LA, NYC, Atlanta, etc.
>
>bd


According to Dr. Dean Edel (or however he spells it)(nationwide medical
talk show on the radio), the Netherlands has the lowest teenage marijuana
use in the industrialized world.  Some city there is going to set-up a soft
drug store including all sorts of clinical help to help people understand
the dangers of drug use and to counsel people at the same time helping them
get their fix...

regards
chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 08:43:21 -0700 (PDT)

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, Chad Leigh wrote:

> >Chad,
> >
> >I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to spark a little debate.
> 
> Good, same here
> 
> >
> >Let's take alcohol for instance.  Correct me if I wrong but the
> >libertarian view is I should have the right to have as much as I want
> >when ever I want it.
> 
> The libertarian viewpoint also says that your have the responsibility that
> goes with that alcohol.  Any action you undertake is your responsibility,
> impaired or not.  In addition, I do not believe the libertarian viewpoint
> is that you have the right to drive while under the influence.  I (and
> probably most libertarians) have no problems with DWI/DUI laws (maybe the
> enforcement in some jurisdictions is a problem).  Trying to pass
> prohibition again is another matter.

This is very very important. In Seattle, a well known conservative talk 
radio host, founder of a conservative think tank and acquaintance of mine 
likes to repeatedly portray Libertarians as the "pro drug" party. 
-Nothing- could be further from the truth. the Libertarian party doesnt 
want you to take drugs, it doesnt want you to prohibit yourself from 
taking drugs. Libertarians want you to have the freedom to decide for 
yourself what you do to your body. I don't know about the rest of you, 
but that's a responsibility I handle well every day. I don't need 
President Clinton to tell me I can't see cigarette ads (I've never smoked 
anything, ever.) I don't need Mr. Dole to involve the military more 
deeply in the war on drugs (while I've experimented with alcohol, I've 
never had any desire to try other  so called "controlled" substances). 
That my friends is -Liberty-, that is personal repsonsibility.
 
> Passing a law does not fix the problem.  In fact, it usually makes the
> problem worse, as is seen with drugs.

Amen. Markets work.

> > What about that person that says that is his right
> >and indulges, gets into his automobile, and goes out and kills a whole
> >family because he was impaired to the point that he could not operate
> >that automobile responsibility?  Where is that families rights to life
> >LIBERTY and per suit of happiness.  Hence the reason from locking them
> >away from the rest of society.
> 
> This happens all to frequently as it is with the DUI/DWI laws (and I am not
> against such laws prohibiting driving under the influence) and these
> victims "rights to life
> LIBERTY and per suit of happiness" is not protected as it is.  Show me how
> the current laws have protected that family.

Is it not -obvious-, that this person has committed two seperate and 
distinct acts? It certainly seems clear as day to me that taking an 
impairing drug is a different act then driving a car n public roads while 
impaired.
 
> Someone who commits murder because he drove under the influence of alcohol
> or drugs should be put away (or maybe executed?).  He committed murder.

Damn right.
snip
> >
> >All I'm wanting to do is come up with a workable solution to an ongoing
> >problem.  Maybe we should all go back to saying "Gity-up horse".
> >
> 
> The workable solution is to legalize drugs, get rid of government doles,
> and to make people responsible for their actions without excuses.  In other
> words, to "Restore Our Constitution."

Ach, yer crazed man. Next you'll be calling for a repeal of the ban on 
scary guns and long magazines over on Noban ; )
Boyd Kneeland
(the opinions I express are mine alone, no one else should be held 
responsible for them)
(btw, I'm not a Libertarian voter. I vote for individuals and will most 
likely be going with the pineapple man this time)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land" from ["Robert E. Day" <day-1@medctr.osu.edu>]
Date: 26 Aug 1996 10:55:44 -0600

Robert -- the system thinks you are a nonmember because your subscribed
address is not the same one as the one you sent from...


regards
Chad

>Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:15:34 -0600 (MDT)
>From: owner-roc@xmission.com
>To: owner-roc@mail.xmission.com
>Subject: BOUNCE roc: Non-member submission from ["Robert E. Day"
><day-1@medctr.osu.edu>]
>
>>From roc-owner@mail.xmission.com  Mon Aug 26 10:15:31 1996
>Received: from achilles.medctr.ohio-state.edu
>(achilles.medctr.ohio-state.edu [140.254.128.20]) by mail.xmission.com
>(8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id KAA02668 for <roc@xmission.com>; Mon, 26 Aug
>1996 10:15:30 -0600 (MDT)
>Received: by achilles.medctr.ohio-state.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id
>AA08904; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:16:44 -0400
>Received: from DECNET-MAIL (DAY_R@NORSE) by hermes.medctr.ohio-state.EDU
> (PMDF V5.0-6 #15327) id <01I8QBA1P04G8X0K1G@hermes.medctr.ohio-state.EDU> for
> roc@xmission.com; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:14:11 -0400 (EDT)
>Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:14:11 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "Robert E. Day" <day-1@medctr.osu.edu>
>Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>To: roc@xmission.com
>Message-Id: <01I8QBA1REXE8X0K1G@hermes.medctr.ohio-state.EDU>
>X-Vms-To: JUNO::IN%"roc@xmission.com"
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
>
>>>Chad,
>>>
>>>I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to spark a little debate.
>>
>>Good, same here
>>
>>>Let's take alcohol for instance.  Correct me if I wrong but the
>>>libertarian view is I should have the right to have as much as I want
>>>when ever I want it.
>>
>>The libertarian viewpoint also says that your have the responsibility that
>>goes with that alcohol.  Any action you undertake is your responsibility,
>>impaired or not.  In addition, I do not believe the libertarian viewpoint
>        [...]
>>Passing a law does not fix the problem.  In fact, it usually makes the
>>problem worse, as is seen with drugs.
>
>I am not a Libertarian, so I cannot speak to their view, but as I see it,
>there are two types of laws. I call them reactive & proactive laws.
>
>Reactive laws would make illegal the items that cause direct harm to others.
>You know, robbery, beatings, murder, etc. Reactive laws cannot stop the crime
>from happening, they are there only to punnish the offender after the fact, in
>an attempt that, after seeing the punishment, others would be fearful of this
>punshment, and not be willing to commit the crimes.
>
>Proactive laws are ones that would try to stop these actions by making
>associated actions illegal. Carring a conceled weapon is a crime because it
>(the conceled gun) could be used to rob, hurt or kill someone. In this, you are
>attempting to stop the robery/murder by keeping the gun out of the criminal's
>hand. Drug use is a crime because of the lack of responsibility that you have
>while under the effects and the lengths to which you would go go get the money
>for your next fix. You are once again trying to stop the robery/murder by
>removing the need for cash.
>
>The first types of laws, most folks belive are good laws. The second type of
>laws are the ones that I see the Libertarian opposed to. These are the
>"reductions in liberties for the sake of security" that our forfathers warned
>us about. We should be on guard against further encrochment to our liberties.
>
>Roert Day



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 26 Aug 1996 11:42:30 -0500

From the "news":

	Today's Topic: Gun Control  
	President Clinton began unveiling a barrage of policy  
initiatives today with a call for a ban on the sale of handguns 
to people convicted of domestic violence. In Columbus, Ohio, at 
the start of the second leg of a train trip to Chicago, Clinton 
said public safety shouldn't be a partisan issue but ``an 
American issue.'' Clinton intends to grab headlines with a new 
proposal every day on his tour taking him to the Democratic 
national convention in Chicago. Tuesday's will concern 
education, Wednesday's the environment. 

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-23 Briefing by Shalala Kessler Lee on Tabacco Regulation (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 12:41:21 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab

Keywords: Agriculture, Business, Economy, Education, Government, Healthcare,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/

				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                    August 23, 1996     

				    
			   PRESS BRIEFING BY
		     SECRETARY OF HHS DONNA SHALALA
	 FDA COMMISSIONER OF FOOD AND DRUGS, DR. DAVID KESSLER,
	      AND ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF HHS, DR. PHIL LEE	     
				    

                         The Briefing Room   


2:30 P.M. EDT
	     
	     
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Good afternoon, everyone.  You've witnessed
the President's historic announcement a short while ago, and to brief
you further about our strategy to curb tobacco use by young people in
America, I'm delighted to have Secretary Donna Shalala here from the
Department of Health and Human Services; Dr.  David Kessler,
Commissioner of Food and Drugs from the Food and Drug Administration;
and Assistant Secretary for Health Policy, Phil Lee.  They're all here.
	     
	     Donna, why don't you start?  And mostly we'll be taking
questions if you have any about the materials we've now given you.
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  Thanks, Mike.
	     
	     Questions?
	     
	     Q	Dr. Kessler, can I just ask you, does this rule allow
the FDA now to regulate changes in packaging of cigarettes, filters,
control the content of cigarettes at all?
PW HOW CAN THIS BE LEGAL UNDER THE CONSTITUTION?	     

	     DR. KESSLER:  This rule focuses on kids and kids only.

	     Q	But, I mean, the focus aside, technically by declaring
the cigarette a delivery device for a drug, could you theoretically do
that?
PW SO THE CONSTITUTION CAN BE OVER RIDDEN IF IT IS FOR CHILDREN?	     

	     DR. KESSLER:  Just so you know what we've put out -- this
is the regulation.  This is the new regulation we're putting out today.
This is the evidence.  If you read this regulation, which gives us the
authority, it focuses only on children.
	     
	     Q	But the question is, could you, would you like to at
some point in the future --
PW SO WILL THIS LEAD TO A POLICE STATE JUST LIKE NAZI GERMANY?	     

	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  The answer is no, we have no plans to
regulate tobacco for adults.  It is a legal activity.  Our total focus
is on children.  It is illegal for children to buy cigarettes in the
United States; the total public health focus is on reducing the number
of children -- this is all about 3,000 young people who start smoking
each day and the fact that 1,000 of them will die prematurely because
they start smoking each day.
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  Well, I think we don't talk about the
relationship as much as a set of risky behaviors that are going on in
adolescent and our deep concern about a literal culture of adolescence
that seems to provide a haven for risky behaviors.  So it's not simply
tobacco and drug use, but it's also, as you know, abusing alcohol, risky
sexual behavior.  And tobacco is one manifestation of it, but not
necessarily linked to the others.
	     
	     Q	Dr. Kessler, the advertising industry says this is a
freedom of speech issue and that you can be prepared to fight this at
the Supreme Court level.  What's your strongest card if it gets that
far?
PW WHAT ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  Encouraging advertising and promotion that
encourages illegal behavior is simply not the right thing to do, nor is
it protected under the First Amendment.  The government can protect
children.
	     Q	Don't you anticipate, though, that you're going to be
tied up in the courts with this?  Don't you anticipate that they'll go
in and seek some kind of legislation to --
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  Well, we already, as you know, on the
preliminary proposal there is a court act.  But we think we're doing the
right thing.  We know that we're on the strongest possible legal
grounds.  The Justice Department has worked very closely with the
Department in working through this issue.  And we believe we will be
able to put the comprehensive strategy in place and that it will begin
to have an impact on this country's public health, particularly on its
kids.
	     
	     Q	-- with regard to advertising in specific, Dr.  Kessler.
Where's your statutory authority to regulate advertising?
PW YES WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION DO YOU GET THIS AUTHORITY, THE WAR 
POWERS ACT?	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  Under the Food and Drug Act.
	     
	     Q	  To regulate advertising?
PW SO DO YOU IGNORE THE COSTITUTION VERY OFTEN?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  We regulate the advertising of drugs all the
time.
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  Yes.
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  We regulate whether it's valium or prozac.
We regulate that advertising.
	     
	     Q	But is there an age-based precedent, where the
advertising is okay if it's to a legal destination for an otherwise
legal product?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  There certainly is law on that -- on being
able to protect children.
	     
	     DR. SHALALA:  There's a whole history of laws, including
constitutional decisions, in loco parentis, for example -- on the right
of government on finding that children are at risk to protecting
children.
	     
	     Q	If tobacco-related disease is, in your words, an
epidemic and the health risk problem facing our society is as grave as
you say -- 10 times worse than polio at its height -- why aren't you as
health officials calling for immediate illegalization of tobacco today?
PW SO WHY DON'T YOU CALL FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE WHOLE CONSTITUTION?

	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  Because that would not be effective.
We also know the history of prohibition and attempts to ban alcohol in
this country, which led to black markets.  And so the aim here is to
reduce the number of people that start smoking in the first place, and
that is the public health strategy.
	     
	     Q	Madame Secretary, as you know, though, there's a lot of
legislation on the Hill that would basically incorporate almost
everything the President proposed today.  Why not just sign on to that
legislation, avoid all these costly and lengthy court fights and just
get this program off the ground immediately instead of two or three
years from now?
PW DOES THE CONSTITUTION SAY ALL LAWS HAVE TO COME FORM THE 
LEGISLATURE?	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  We have said before that we would be
happy to support legislation that's as comprehensive and as effective as
these sets of regulations that we've laid out.  We have not yet seen a
piece of legislation that is as comprehensive and as effective.  But we
have never said that we thought regulation was the best approach; we
have always said that we were prepared to take legislation and to work
with the Congress to produce legislation.
	     
	     Q	Dr. Kessler, when it comes to declaring these a delivery
system for nicotine, can we expect the FDA to have some sort of testing
of these as devices, as medical devices?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  You're right.  I mean, these are drug
delivery systems.  I mean, nicotine is an addictive drug; that's why
people smoke.  Tobacco companies know this.  But our regulation focuses
on restricting access and reducing the appeal to children.  That's what
the regulation focuses on.  Because as the Secretary said, that's the
right public health strategy.  That's where we're focused.
	     
	     Q	For example, prescription bottles have child-proof caps.
Could we see some sort of regulation that would make cigarettes
inoperable for children?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  This is the regulation.  This focuses on
kids.  I really do commend it to you.  I mean, it's one page.  It's
eminently reasonable, it makes sense.
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  And readable.
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  I mean, it's compellingly common sense.
	     
	     Q	When will we see these steps implemented, actual vending
machines out, advertising gone?
PW SO I GUESS THIS IS A EXECUTIVE ORDER UNDER THE 1933 WAR POWERS ACT 
CODIFIED AT 50USC?
 	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  The regs, once they go into effect,
take between six months and a year for all the parts of the regulation
to take effect.  It now goes -- there's a 60-day period in which
Congress has an opportunity to comment and review the regulations and
then they will go into effect.  They will be published on Wednesday in
the Federal Register.  Dr. Kessler and I signed them yesterday.
PW SO HOW CAN A APOINTED BUREAUCRATS SIGN WAR POWER EXECUTIVE ORDERS?
	     
	     Q	Doesn't taking color out of billboards affect everyone,
and how is that particular spot reached in the agreement?
PW IS THIS THE FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS WHERE YOU TAKE A LITTLE OF 
OUR RIGHTS AT A TIME SO WE WONT BECOME ALARMED?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  What we focused on was reducing the appeal,
reducing the imagery.  For so long we send children mixed messages.  You
go out, you drive on the highway and you see billboards that focus --
that play on themes of fun, independence, glamor.  And, yet, we as
parents and we as physicians, we tell our kids not to smoke.  We've been
sending very mixed messages.  We need, as the President said today -- as
the President stood up and said, those images are not the kind of images
that we should be sending our children.
	     
	     Q	My follow-up just would be how does color on a billboard
do that?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  Secretary, if you'd like, we can hold it up
again.  I think that probably --
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  It attracts your eye in a way that
black and -- I'm supposed to look mean with this -- (laughter.)
	     
	     Q	Well, I mean, how long do you think a case that would go
to Supreme Court could drag out?
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  You're asking three public health
officials a question that you could -- I think it could be anyone's
guess in terms of how long it would take.  But we will be as efficient
as we possibly can in getting into court if we're sued again.  But we're
now in court, as you know, in federal court in North Carolina.  But it's
our intention to push forward and to do that.  It's the strength of our
arguments that we think will prevail, and the righteousness of our
cause.
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  The evidence, the case is very, very strong.
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  It's overwhelming.
	     
	     Q	Can you talk a little bit about enforcement.  There are
a couple things at issue here.  The magazine industry says it's not easy
for them to pin down numbers on youth readership.  And what happens if
somebody, in your opinion, breaks the law?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  These are very -- the regulations are very
clear-cut.  They're not hard to enforce, and we will work in partnership
with the states.  But on this question of surveys, there's some very
credible surveys out there, and as we stated in the rule, we will accept
those surveys.
	     
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  The violations are the same violations under
the act available for any other product, includes civil money penalties
and other remedies under the act.
	     
	     And since we have time, this is a gradual impact -- and I
think we've passed out information that points that out.  We have always
said that we're prepared to work with Congress to work through those
issues.
	     
	     Q	How is the FDA going to enforce this?  Already there's
this feeling that the FDA doesn't have enough resources to do its
current job, so how do you enforce this?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  These are very simple requirements.  They're
clear cut.  There's a vending machine where it shouldn't be, or it's
not.  Either the billboard is black and white, or it's not.  They're
very simple to enforce.
	     
	     Q	Just to follow up on that, in regard to the vending
machines and the billboards, how will you identify areas in which
children congregate?  Will there be a set --
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  Fairly straightforward in terms of
where children are.  There are, obviously, businesses like bars in this
country that card at the door, where they don't allow children in.  They
can continue to have their vending machines.  That's pretty
straightforward.  What you don't want them to have is any kind of a sign
that shows to the outside of the building.  But they can continue to
have advertising that's stuck firmly -- and as well as continue their
vending machines.
	     
	     So, in adults-only places, they can continue to have
vending machines and advertising.  But wherever children will see it, it
will be banned.
	     
	     Q	-- the educational campaign that the FDA would like to
require, that would be a separate rule-making?  Where is that?  How does
that --
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  That would be done under 518 of the act.
It's not rule-making, per se, it's a process that would lead -- that
could lead to an order.
	     
	     Q	  When would you initiate that?
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  We will begin the process -- we're going to
begin to work on it, but it is a process under 518 of steps that we have
to follow.
	     
	     Q	And you would like to see it in effect maybe within a
year or --
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  We will actually begin the process after the
60-day congressional review process.
	     
	     SECRETARY SHALALA:  There's a new congressional law that
requires that all regulations go through a 60-day process.  So we have
to honor that and then we'll start the implementation process.
	     
	     Q	  So you don't support a ban on tobacco.
	     
	     DR. KESSLER:  Absolutely not.  It won't work.  It's not the
right public health approach.
	     
	     THE PRESS:  Thank you.  

             END                          2:53 P.M. EDT



--




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-23 President on FDA Rule on Children and Tobacco (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 11:55:20 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Lines: 232
Sender: daemon@ai.mit.edu

Keywords: Agriculture, Business, Economy, Government, Healthcare, Personnel,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/



		
				    
				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release					 August 23, 1996     

				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
		DURING THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF FOOD AND DRUG
	      ADMINISTRATION RULE ON CHILDREN AND TOBACCO
				    
			    The Rose Garden

1:52 P.M. EDT



	     THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you, Linda, for
your courage and your commitment to carry on Victor's legacy and your
own crusade.  Thank you, Mr. Vice President, Secretary Shalala, General
McCaffrey.  I'd like to say a special word of thanks to Commissioner
Kessler and to Phil Lee, the Assistant Secretary of HHS.  In different
ways they have a great triumph today.  Thank you, Dick Durbin, for being
the first member of Congress ever to talk to me about this issue.  Thank
you, Marty Meehan.  Thank you to my former colleagues, the Attorneys
General.  Mr. Kelly, I know you're retiring this year as the Senior
Attorney General of America, and we served together back in the dark
ages and I can't imagine a more fitting capstone to your career than the
fact that you've been a part of this and we thank you.  Thank you, Mark
Green.
	     
	     I thank all the medical professionals who are here.  I
thank all the young people who are here, including Anna Santiago and
Neal Stewart McSpadden, who came out here with us.  I want to say a
special word of thanks to three members of Congress who are not here,
but who deserve to be because of their work on this issue -- Senator
Lautenberg of New Jersey, Senator Wellstone of Minnesota, and
Congressman Henry Waxman of California.  Thank you, Joe Califano, for
beating on me about these issues all these years we've been friends and
long before I ever became President.  Thank you, sir.  (Laughter.)
	     
	     Thank you, Dr. Koop, for everything you have done to try to
bring some sanity into the health policy of this country.  This has been
a great week for you -- we had the Kassebaum-Kennedy bill a couple of
days ago and this today.  Maybe you can design an encore for us over the
next month or two.  (Laughter.)  But you have been a great force for
good in this country and we're grateful to you.
	     
	     If I might, I'd like to say just a couple of personal words
to some people who really deserve an enormous amount of credit for this
decision.  The Vice President was altogether too modest and too
restrained, but the first time we began to discuss this was about the
time the FDA opened their inquiry.  And he looked at me and I looked at
him and I said, well, you know what this might lead to?  And he said, I
certainly hope so.  (Laughter.)  And I said, well, you know -- I
shouldn't say this, this is our private conversation -- I said, you
know, it really isn't an accident that nobody else has ever tried to do
this.  (Laughter.)  It's not an accident.  This is not going to be one
of those freebies, you know.  (Laughter.)
	     
	     And he began to talk about his sister who died of lung
cancer, and how much he loved his sister.  We've had so many
conversations about his sister that -- not just about this, but about
her life, the fact that she was one of the very first Peace Corps
volunteers -- that I feel almost that I know her personally.  And I
could see in his eyes this determination to redeem the promise of her
wonderful life.  And I would also like to thank Nancy Gore Hunger's
husband, Frank Hunger, who now serves as our Assistant Attorney General
for the civil division.  Thank you for being here, Frank.  I know this
is a great day for you.
	     
	     I'd like to thank my wife, who has been talking to me about
this issue for 20 years; and my wonderful daughter, who convinced my
mother to quit smoking on her eighth birthday -- something I was never
able to do.
	     
	     So each of us has a personal journey here that has brought
us to this point.  But today we are here as a nation, to try to help our
parents do a better job in raising their children to be strong and
healthy and good citizens, and to do our duty in that regard.  We've
tried to do a lot of things to help our kids over the last four years,
and to help parents raise their children.  We've worked hard on cultural
issues, supporting things like the V-chip and educational television.
	     
	     We had a big increase in support for anti-drug programs in
our schools and for drug treatment.  And we vetoed efforts to reduce
those, although we should be investing more.  We have a zero tolerance
policy to keep guns out of school; we're requiring our states to enforce
anti-drinking and driving laws; we defended drug testing cases involving
student athletes; we've worked to bring order and discipline into our
children's lives by encouraging and giving support to communities that
try things like community-based curfews and school uniforms and tougher
enforcement of truancy laws.
	     
	     We know, however, that in spite of all the things that are
going right in this country -- with the economy up and more jobs, with
the crime rate down, with fewer people on welfare and food stamps,
dramatically higher percentage of our young children immunized -- that
we have continued to see substantial rises in tobacco and drug use among
our young people.  We know that while the scientific evidence is clearly
unclear, children who do smoke cigarettes are much more likely to engage
in other risky behavior, including the use of marijuana and cocaine.
	     
	     So we have to keep pressing forward to deal with these
challenges, every one of them.  And I want to thank General McCaffrey
for being willing to give up his four stars and magnificent campaign to
take on the drug fight for America's children and America's future.  I
thank you, sir.
	     
	     Today we are taking direct action to protect our children
from tobacco and especially the advertising that hooks children on a
product.  I hear from time to time politicians say that they don't
really think advertising has much to do with it.  And whenever I hear
one say that I say, well, how come we're all spending so much money
advertising when we run for office then?  (Laughter.)  If it's
immaterial, let's just pull it all off and see what happens to us.
(Laughter.)
	     
	     Cigarette smoking is the most significant public health
problem facing our people.  More Americans die every year from smoking
related diseases than from AIDS, car accidents, murders, suicides and
fires combined.  The human cost doesn't begin to calculate the economic
costs -- the thing that galvanized the legal claims of the Attorney
Generals, the absolutely staggering burdens on the American health care
system and on our economy in general.
	     
	     But make no mistake about it, the human cost is by far the
most important issue.  For every day, even though it's illegal, 3,000 of
our young people start smoking, and 1,000 of them will die earlier than
they would otherwise die as a result.  The vast majority of people who
smoke in America today started when they were teenagers.  If they don't
start smoking when they're on a schoolyard, it's very likely they never
will.
	     
	     This epidemic is no accident.  Children are bombarded daily
by massive marketing campaigns that play on their vulnerabilities, their
insecurities, their longings to be something in the world.  Joe Camel
promises that smoking will make you cool.  Virginia Slims' models
whisper that smoking will help you stay thin.  T-shirts and sports
sponsorships sends the message that healthy and vigorous people smoke
and that smoking is fun.

	     A year ago this month, we launched a comprehensive strategy
to kick tobacco out of the lives of our children.  We proposed strong
restrictions on advertising, marketing and sales of cigarettes to
children.  In the year that followed, the FDA received a torrent of
comments from the public -- more than 700,000 -- by far the largest
outpouring of public response in the FDA's history.  The FDA has heard
from doctors, scientists, tobacco companies and tens of thousands of
children.  We have carefully considered the evidence.  It is clear that
the action being taken today is the right thing to do, scientifically,
legally, and morally.
	     
	     So today we are acting.  First, young people will have to
prove their age with an ID to buy cigarettes.  Second, cigarette vending
machines will be banned from anywhere children and teenagers can go.
Third, children will be free of tobacco advertising on billboards near
their schools and playgrounds, and billboards in other locations will be
restricted to black and white, text only messages.  Fourth, if a tobacco
ad is in a publication children and teenagers are likely to read, it
also has to be black and white with no pictures.  Fifth, companies will
no longer be permitted to target young people with marketing gimmicks
like T-shirts and gym bags.  Sixth, cigarette companies may no longer
use brand names to sponsor tennis tournaments, auto races and other
sporting events.
	     
	     Finally, the FDA will soon take steps to require the
tobacco industry to educate our children about the real dangers of
smoking.  There is abundant evidence of both these troubling trends that
a lot of young people simply don't believe there's any risks to their
health.
	     
	     With this historic action we are taking today Joe Camel and
the Marlboro Man will be out of our children's reach forever.
(Applause.)
	     
	     I want to be clear -- we've said it before, let's say it
again -- cigarettes are a legal product for adults.  They have a perfect
right to decide whether to smoke.  There are many, many good people who
have been farming, growing tobacco for generations in their families.
They have a right to make a living for themselves and their families,
and they will continue to do so.  But let's be honest:  We hope that
over the long run, if we can dramatically reduce rates of smoking among
children, the overall consumption of cigarettes will decline.  If that
happens, these good people who farmed the land and worked hard should
not be left behind.  And all of us who have sought this course have a
responsibility to help them if they face difficulties.  (Applause.)
	     
	     The cigarette companies still have a right to market their
products to adults.  But today we are drawing the line on children,
fulfilling our obligation as adults to protect them from influences that
too often are stronger than they are.
	     
	     As I said before, I want to say again, this action is a
tribute to so many of you who are here today.  To the parents, the
teachers, the doctors, the public officials.  Dr. Bristow, I
particularly want to commend the AMA for its writings in its journal,
its relentless efforts to educate the American people through the
physicians of this country.  But I'd like to pay special tribute to the
children of America who have joined this crusade, who have organized and
led a massive grass-roots movement throughout America to educate and
inform people about the dangers of tobacco smoking for children.
	     
	     They've staged teach-ins and "Kick Butts" days all across
the country.  They have used positive peer pressure on people who could
care less what a lot of us old fogies think to teach their fellow
students that smoking is not cool.  So I want to thank these children
for the work they have done to save their generation.  (Applause.)
	     
	     A lot of the work we do around here we know will only be
fully manifest in people's lives in the future.  We know we can't
guarantee the success of any individual or family, but we have to
guarantee them the tools and conditions that will enable them to make
the most of their own lives.  Today we take a real step to make sure
that they have those lives in full measure.  We have today met our
responsibility to help our country protect its values, protect its
children, and ensure its future.
	     
	     Thank you all for what you've done.  (Applause.)
	     
             END                          2:07 P.M. EDT



--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) FBI investigates Perot re Norm Olson (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 11:52:18 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------


There was a report on CNN's "Early Morning News" today that both the IRS
and the FBI are investigating Ross Perot's past support of the Michigan
Militia and its ex-leader, Norm Olson. Apparently IRS investigators have
stated that they are concerned about the likelihood of various cash
transfers from Perot to Olson, during a period of four years when Perot
supported the Michigan Militia, being improperly claimed by Perot as
business expenses. Apart from this tax evasion investigation, however, the
FBI is actively conducting a wide-ranging investigation of the
inter-relationship between Perot and Olson, which was described by one high
ranking FBI agent as "very troubling."

Earlier this week, Reform Party officials confirmed that Norm Olson is one
of Ross Perot's closest and most trusted advisors, and is expected to have
a significant role in both Perot's election campaign and any Perot
administration. On Tuesday, in Cedar Falls, Perot met with Olson and
publicly confirmed that Olson was one of his principal foreign policy
advisors. The New York Times ran a report in its "Forum" section on Friday
that Olson played an important advisory role in Perot's 1992 campaign and
that this year, Perot was considering naming Olson as his vice-presidential
running mate.


--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-24 Radio Address by President to the Nation 
Date: 26 Aug 1996 12:55:53 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/

                            THE WHITE HOUSE

                     Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                    August 24, 1996

				    
		     RADIO ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT
			     TO THE NATION
				    
			    The Oval Office


	     Today I want to talk about something else we have to do to
really strengthen America's families, making sure that children can walk
home from school or play in their backyards without the plague of
violence.  We've certainly come a long way, with sweeping anti-crime
measures that have helped to reduce our crime rate for four years in a
row now.  We passed the Brady Bill, which already has stopped 60,000
felons, fugitives and stalkers from buying handguns.  We're putting
100,000 new police officers on the beat and banning assault weapons.

	     Here's how it will work.  Every time a sex offender is
released, their state will force them to register.  Then the FBI will
compile these state lists into a national database.  Within six months,
a new computer network will give states information from every other
state for the very first time.  A police officer could get information
about any known sex offenders in Cleveland, even if the crimes were
committed in New York or Los Angeles.  Then they will share that
information with the families and communities that have a right to know.
	     
	     This national registry sends a simple message to those who
would prey on our children:  The law will follow you wherever you go.
	     
	     Above all, we must move forward to the day when we are no
longer numb to acts of violence against children, when their appearance
on the evening news is both shocking and very rare.  Our approach is
working.  We're putting cops on the beat; taking guns, drugs and
criminals off the streets.  More and more, our children can learn and
play and dream without risk of harm.  That is an America that is moving
in the right direction.
	     
	     Thanks for listening.
	     
                                 END



--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Clinton calls for ban on handguns (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 14:00:10 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------

   Reuters New Media
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   Monday August 26 12:05 PM EDT 
   
Clinton Stokes Train Trip with Anti-Crime Initiative

   COLUMBUS, Ohio (Reuter) - President Clinton Monday launched a
   Democratic Convention-linked barrage of policy initiatives by calling
   for a ban on the sale of handguns to people convicted of domestic
   violence.
   
   Clinton unveiled the anti-crime proposal, which was designed to widen
   the issue-driven gender gap which gives him an edge over Republican
   Bob Dole among women voters, as he started the second leg of 559-mile
   train trip to Chicago, where party activists were gathered to
   renominate him.
   
   Using the Columbus Police Academy as a backdrop, Clinton said public
   safety should not be a partisan issue but ``an American issue.''
   
   ``Under the current law, thousands of people who are wife- beaters or
   child abusers...can still buy handguns with potentially deadly
   consequences,'' Clinton said. ``I believe strongly in the right of
   Americans to own guns. I have used them with great joy myself.
   
   ``But make no mistake: those who threaten the safety of others do not
   deserve our trust,'' he said.
   
   A White House fact sheet said there were 88,500 incidents of domestic
   violence in which a firearm was present in 1994, and that over a
   10-year period ending the same year, 65 law enforcement officers were
   killed when they responded to family quarrels.
   
   Many spousal abusers are not now affected by a ban on the sale of
   firearms to convicted felons because many domestic violence cases are
   treated as misdemeanors.
   
   Clinton's proposal would require expansion of the Brady Bill, which
   requires a five-day waiting period for handgun purchases. He also
   called for a ban on cop-killer bullets, saying every law enforcement
   group backs it and Congress should as well.
   
   ``If a bullet can slice through a bulletproof vest like a hot knife
   through butter, it should be against the law,'' he said.
   
   Clinton, whistlestopping through small town America with his daughter
   Chelsea, 16, while his wife Hillary conducted a separate schedule in
   her old hometown, intended to grab headlines with a new proposal every
   day of his trip. Tuesday's will concern education, Wednesday's the
   environment.
   
   His focus on crime was designed to tie into the opening session of the
   convention, which featured a speech by Sarah Brady, wife of former
   White House spokesman James Brady, who inspired the eponymous gun law.
   
   Brady is wheelchair-bound because of the gunshot wounds he suffered
   when John Hinckley, Jr. tried to kill then-President Ronald Reagan in
   front of the Washington HIlton Hotel in 1981.
   
   Clinton, campaigning through five states with 64 of the 270 electoral
   votes needed to win the presidency on his way to Chicago, is on the
   559-mile trip to energize grassroots support for his re-election bid.
   
   He boarded his ``21st Century Express'' for the four-day whistlestop
   in Huntington, W.Va., on Sunday and rolled through parts of Kentucky
   before reaching Ohio. His train will also roll through Michigan and
   Indiana.
   
   As he has at every previous stop, Clinton slammed the tax cut proposal
   at the heart of Dole's campaign. ``We cannot afford to blow a hole in
   the deficit again,'' he said.
   
   Clinton was heckled at the start of his speech by a small group of
   demonstrators, but he silenced them by saying they did not want the
   American people to know of his record.
   
   If the public learns the truth, Clinton said, his opponents ``won't
   have a chance.''
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   Earlier Related Stories
     * Clinton Aims at Guns on Train Tour (Mon Aug 26 4:33 AM)
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   Previous Story: Clinton to Call for Extending Brady Bill
   Next Story: Democrats Ready to Launch Convention
     _________________________________________________________________



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Dole is Zero.Zero.Zero on the Constitution (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 14:00:26 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

   Reuters New Media
   
   Sunday August 25 11:40 PM EDT 
   
Dole Vows War on Drugs, Cites Moral Terrorism
   
   PALOS PARK, Ill (Reuter) - Campaigning within shouting distance of
   Chicago on the eve of the Democratic convention, Republican
   presidential candidate Bob Dole Sunday vowed an all-out war on illegal
   drugs, which he decried as the ``moral equivalent'' of terrorism.
   
   Harshly attacking the White House for what he called a ''Don't Worry,
   Be Happy'' stance on drugs, Dole promised to deploy all resources
   necessary to fight drugs -- including the army, the navy, the Coast
   Guard, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Guard.
   
   Citing the study released last week that showed that drug use among
   12-17 year-olds has doubled since President Clinton took office, Dole
   blasted the attitude of the Democratic administration.
   
   ``This president has been known not for his eloquence but his
   silence,'' he said. ``This administration replaced the unambiguous
   message of 'Just say no' with this message: 'Just say nothing.'
   
   ``We will treat drugs for what they are -- the moral equivalent of
   terrorism,'' Dole said. ``The terrorism of drugs destroys our young
   people and hijacks America's future.''
   
   The Clinton-Gore campaign responded by accusing Dole, the former
   Senate Republican leader, of responsibility for providing nearly $800
   million less for federal drug efforts than Clinton requested in his
   budget last year.
   
   ``Arm-in-arm with (House Speaker) Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole attempted to
   dismantle initiatives that would help young people avoid drug use,''
   Democratic campaign spokesman Joe Lockhart said in a statement. He
   said Dole's proposed 15 percent across-the-board tax cut would require
   40 percent cuts in a broad range of domestic programs, including
   anti-drug ones.
   
   Breaking with a tradition in which candidates do not venture close to
   their opponents' nominating conventions, Dole made the speech at a
   picnic and rally in a park in affluent suburbs southwest of Chicago,
   where the Democratic convention begins on Monday.
   
   Dole campaigned in Portland, Ore. later Sunday, reuniting with running
   mate Jack Kemp after their first separate campaign appearances. Dole
   pressed on with his attack on Clinton on drugs, saying he managed to
   have a ``rapid response'' to Dole speeches but lacked a rapid response
   on drug abuse or a host of other problems facing the country.
   
   Dole starts a working vacation in Santa Barbara, California, Monday.
   
   In the Chicago speech, which dwelt far more on stopping drug traffic
   than on prevention and education, Dole noted the traditional
   reluctance to use the military to confront domestic problems but said
   drugs come from abroad and were thus not only a home-grown problem.
   
   He said that if elected he would call on his defense secretary and
   military leaders to draw up battle plans for the war on drugs,
   including contingency plans for interdiction along the southern U.S.
   border.
   
   ``Now, one would hope that such interdiction by U.S. military forces
   would never need to take place. But just as U.S. combat readiness is a
   deterrent to those who would challenge us in a war, so will the
   knowledge that all the capabilities -- I said all the capabilities --
   of our federal government will be used to reduce the flow of drugs
   across our border if necessary,'' Dole said.
   
   In an oblique reference to recent reports that some White House
   staffers had used drugs in the past, he said his own stance would be
   ``zero tolerance'' from the White House on down to every workplace and
   school in America.
   
   ``In the Dole administration we're going to return to what works -- a
   clear and forceful policy of zero tolerance. That's zero tolerance.
   Zero tolerance for drug smugglers, zero tolerance for drug pushers.
   Zero tolerance for drugs in the workplace and zero tolerance for
   illegal drugs period. Zero. Zero. Zero.''
     _________________________________________________________________
   
   Earlier Related Stories
     * Dole Brands Drugs Moral Terrorism, Vows War (Sun Aug 25 7:12 PM)
     * Dole Blasts Clinton on Rise in Teen Drug Use (Sun Aug 25 4:23 AM)
     _________________________________________________________________



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Sign of the Times (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 12:55:21 PST

This one should be spread to businesses far and wide.....

On Aug 26, Fran Haga wrote:

[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]

>From North Carolina,

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

    A sign recently spotted in a restaurant in the square in Burnsville.
"Concealed Weapons License Holders Welcome. We all have them."
I would bet this restaurant doesn't get held up or have some crazy come in
shooting!

    We couldn't stop grinning from this one.

[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: More on Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 26 Aug 1996 15:47:06 -0500

More on:

>	Today's Topic: Gun Control  
>
>	... He [klintoon] says he believes strongly in the right of 
>Americans to own guns.

But after the election he will change his mind and grab all the guns his
JBGTs can get ahold off. Actually all he has to do is ban ammo, and all our
popguns won't go pop anymore: We, The Militia, become Toy Soldiers.

>"But make no mistake: those who threaten the safety of others do not
deserve >our trust,"" he said.

He wants to keep spousal abusers from getting guns. But why not keep them
from getting cars, or knives, or baseball bats?

These can just as easily be employed to abuse spouses by running them down,
cutting them, or hitting them over the head. Come to think of it, spousal
abusers could just as easily hit them with their fists - much more likely
than shooting them. So why not amputate their hands, too?

Does *any* reasonable person in America buy any of this clown's nonsense? Or
is this little charade just another dialogue between the DNC and the media?

Bob Knauer

--
       
********************************************************
      A I M N E T          Advanced Internet Marketing
      Corporation           World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>        http://www.aimtec.com/
********************************************************



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: dgilbow@olympus.net (Delbert Gilbow)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 13:54:06 -0700


>The current anti-drug hysteria has a lot in common with the anti-gun
>hysteria.  Both are driven by government propaganda.  Both ignore
>reality (human weakness, economics, medical facts) in favor of demonizing
>the "enemy".  These demons are human beings, our neighbors and ourselves,
>in both cases.  (unless you are a teetotler, don't use tobacco, ...)
>
>Dole's "drugs are the moral equivalent of terrorism/ use the military"
>proposals are pathetic, unConstitional, and amazingly stupid.  We have
>corrupted major segments of our society (CIA, DEA, FBI, Justice, state
>and local equivalents) in the WOSD.  Now he wants to add the military
>to the list.
>
Probably the most threatening thing about the drug issue is the
militarization of our local and state police.  I have watched the law
enforcement agencies go from honorable peace officers (when I was in the
Border Patrol) to law enforcement officers who, if they can't do it
otherwise, will manifacture and/or plant evidence just to convict.  Until we
turn that around and get law enforcement under local control we continue to
be in deep sh-t.

Delbert Gilbow


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) FBI investigates Perot re Norm Olson (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 17:34:40 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

>I just talked to Norm Olson, he would NOT deny this information.
 He said that anything can happen between now and November, and
 that the militia movement could use a fifty million dollar shot
 in the arm.
 --Mark    8/26/96  4:19pm
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: More on Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 26 Aug 1996 15:41:21 -0700 (PDT)

"Offensive" language lies herein.

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:
> More on:
> 
> >	Today's Topic: Gun Control  
> >
> >	... He [klintoon] says he believes strongly in the right of 
> >Americans to own guns.
> 
> But after the election he will change his mind and grab all the guns his
> JBGTs can get ahold off. Actually all he has to do is ban ammo, and all our
> popguns won't go pop anymore: We, The Militia, become Toy Soldiers.
> 
> >"But make no mistake: those who threaten the safety of others do not
> deserve >our trust,"" he said.
> 
> He wants to keep spousal abusers from getting guns. But why not keep them
> from getting cars, or knives, or baseball bats?

This is the key to the truth of what Clinton's saying. He wants to ban 
everything but their -Freedom-! Bastards like this might rehabilitate, we 
can well afford to infringe rkba, we can afford to give up a little of our 
freedom of speech to "help" make the world safer but we must not hurt 
these poor confused abusers! What crap! How can a person who physically 
abuses another person EVER be in a position where a  background check 
would be necessary for anything? You put them in -jail- you put a 
-number- on their chest and you ensure that NO wife, husband, child or 
innocent grazing herd animal is ever abused by that one person again. It 
is societies minimal responsibility to protect its members from 
people who initiate violence.

Oh, no, gee. What was I thinking. Sorry folks I guess I just got caught 
up there a little bit. Clearly we need more laws to prevent abusers from 
purchasing firearms. Wow, dunno what I was thinking up there. Better go 
watch my MTV. -Floyd Neylon "Swords into plowshares, 9's into high cap 
.40's." (the opinions expressed are mine alone) 

> These can just as easily be employed to abuse spouses by running them down,
> cutting them, or hitting them over the head. Come to think of it, spousal
> abusers could just as easily hit them with their fists - much more likely
> than shooting them. So why not amputate their hands, too?
> 
> Does *any* reasonable person in America buy any of this clown's nonsense? Or
> is this little charade just another dialogue between the DNC and the media?

Sadly, yes.

> Bob Knauer
> 
> --
>        
> ********************************************************
>       A I M N E T          Advanced Internet Marketing
>       Corporation           World Wide Web Publishing 
> 
>  <websales@aimtec.com>        http://www.aimtec.com/
> ********************************************************
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: RE: Clinton calls for ban on handguns (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:17 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 pwatson@utdallas.edu wrote:
>    ``Under the current law, thousands of people who are wife- beaters or
>    child abusers...can still buy handguns with potentially deadly
>    consequences,'' Clinton said. ``I believe strongly in the right of
>    Americans to own guns. I have used them with great joy myself.

Okay, so guns are banned...the wife-beater/child abuser still does his 
thing with a baseball bat, a kitchen knife, his bare hands.  But if guns 
AREN'T banned, then women have the ability to arm themselves to protect 
both themselves and their children....

>    A White House fact sheet said there were 88,500 incidents of domestic
>    violence in which a firearm was present in 1994,

"Present"???  Doesn't mean it was USED.....

>    and that over a
>    10-year period ending the same year, 65 law enforcement officers were
>    killed when they responded to family quarrels.

Again, nothing in this statistic to show how many of those 65 law 
enforcement officers were SHOT....

;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land" from ["Robert E. Day" <day-1@medctr.osu.edu>]
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

Very appropriate Mr Day.  If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?" 
Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

Chad,

Point well taken.  Laws are like trying to kill ants with an eight pind
sledge hammer.

Regards, 

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-24 Radio Address by President to 
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

And whats to stop big brother from moving on to the next individual group
of individuals.  Say like skate boarders or people that like to go skinny
dipping.  Is there no end?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

And why not repeal the ban on socalled scary gun and long magizines.  If
I want to own one of these firearms, I should be able to.  Now I do draw
the line on wepon of mass distrction.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: ForeignCorrespondent Which Russian finger is on the nuclear button? (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 19:12:50 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

			Foreign Correspondent

		      Inside Track On World News
	    By International Syndicated Columnist & Broadcaster
		 Eric Margolis <emargolis@lglobal.com>

	                  ,,ggddY"""Ybbgg,,
	             ,agd888b,_ "Y8, ___`""Ybga,
	          ,gdP""88888888baa,.""8b    "888g,
	        ,dP"     ]888888888P'  "Y     `888Yb,
	      ,dP"      ,88888888P"  db,       "8P""Yb,
	     ,8"       ,888888888b, d8888a           "8,
	    ,8'        d88888888888,88P"' a,          `8,
	   ,8'         88888888888888PP"  ""           `8,
	   d'          I88888888888P"                   `b
	   8           `8"88P""Y8P'                      8
	   8            Y 8[  _ "                        8
	   8              "Y8d8b  "Y a                   8
	   8                 `""8d,   __                 8
	   Y,                    `"8bd888b,             ,P
	   `8,                     ,d8888888baaa       ,8'
	    `8,                    888888888888'      ,8'
	     `8a                   "8888888888I      a8'
	      `Yba                  `Y8888888P'    adP'
	        "Yba                 `888888P'   adY"
	          `"Yba,             d8888P" ,adP"'
	             `"Y8baa,      ,d888P,ad8P"'
	                  ``""YYba8888P""''


Which Russian finger is on the nuclear button?
By 
Eric Margolis 26 August 1996

Consider this scenario:  A senior army general appears at
the underground command facility of Russia's Strategic
Rocket Forces southwest of Moscow.  He orders the base
commander to launch a `preemptive' nuclear strike against
Washington and all US offensive nuclear forces. 

The base commander refuses. He has not received proper
launch codes from the Kremlin or Defense HQ over the 
national command authority.  The general screams, `The
American are about to attack and destroy Russia.' 

`The president is dying. Before he went into coma, he signed
this order. ' The general  shoves a letter on Kremlin
stationary under the commander's nose which orders him to
launch a nuclear attack. The order is signed:  Boris
Yeltsin.  

The commander calls the national command authority  on his
special secure phone. The president is `unavailable.' So is
the defense minister, and Rocket Forces Commander.   `You
must launch immediately,' yells the four-star general, `or
you will be shot.'

Pulp fiction melodrama?  Look at what happened this week in
war-torn Chechnya.  

As Russia's national security chief, Aleksander Lebed
struggled to shape some sort of peace settlement with
Chechen independence fighters, Russia's federal commander in
Chechnya, Gen. Konstantin Pulikovsky, announced his big
guns, rocket batteries and warplanes would end Chechen
resistance in Grozny for good- by pulverizing what remains
of the city,

Pulikovsky is a general of the powerful Interior Ministry's
200,000 man plus internal security army.  The Interior
Ministry(or MVD) and KGB began the war against Chechnya and
have been its most ardent partisans.  Both MVD and KGB are
making a great deal of money from the Chechen war by
diverting hard currency `economic aid' supplied by the IMF,
US and Europe, into their coffers.  

When Lebed ordered Pulikovsky to desist, Pulikovsky pulled
out an order on Kremlin letterhead, signed by President
Boris Yeltsin, ordering the assault to begin.  

Lebed furiously denounced the order as a forgery.  

Russia's new defense minister, Col. Gen. Igor Rodionov, 
proclaimed the offensive would go ahead. A day later, he
reversed himself, saying it would not, and that Gen.
Pulikovsky was being `reassigned.'  As of this writing, the
Final Solution to Grozny is on hold, and more negotiations
are underway.  But that could change any moment, as Russia
is convulsed by political and military infighting. 

Last week, a smiling Boris Yeltsin suddenly rematerialized
on TV, after spending a week, the Kremlin claimed, scouting
sites for his next vacation!  Gogol would have relished this
exquisite piece of Russian farce.  

Critics of Yeltsin claimed he was ducking the Chechen mess
and allowing his feuding subordinates to deal with what
seems an insoluble problem.  Others maintained the president
was truly disabled. Last week, this column reported Yeltsin
had suffered a stroke.

Whatever the truth, the row over who is in charge in
Chechnya brings us back to the question: whose finger is on
the trigger of Russia's huge nuclear arsenal?  How many
vodkas have dulled the brain that controls the finger that
can unleash thermonuclear war?  No one seems in charge of
Russia's nuclear weapons, armed forces, secret police, 
internal security army, and border forces?  

Pretty scary stuff, this.  It may get scarier.  The
humiliating fracas in Chechnya between Lebed and Pulikovsky
might be the opening salvo of what Russians have feared
since the anti-Gorbachev coup exactly five years ago this
month: civil war.

Right after the coup, senior Russian army officers in Moscow
told me some of their units had almost come into conflict
during crisis.  There were also hair-trigger confrontations
between army troops and elite Interior Ministry units, known
as OMON, backed by KGB.  Patriotic Russian army officers
managed to prevent bloodshed.

But the seeds of future conflict had been sown.  The late
Chechen leader, Dzhokar Dudayev, predicted, before his
assassination by the Russians, that the war in Chechnya
would eventually destroy Russia.  Yeltsin also warned the
conflict could ignite civil war in Russia.  

The regular armed forces have openly split over the war. 
Older brass tend to favor the war; younger officers, notably
veterans of the disastrous Afghan War, called `Afghani,'
like Lebed and Gen. Boris Gromov, oppose it.   

This week, the highly respected Gromov, the last Russian
soldier to leave Afghanistan, called for a Russian pullout
from the tiny mountain republic.  He and Lebed speak for the
honor of the Russian Army.  The army that so nobly won
Borodino and Stalingrad, is now being forced to disgrace
itself in Chechnya by slaughtering civilians and battling
lightly armed freedom-fighters.

As the struggle to secede the ailing Yeltsin intensifies, so
do the dangers that the military - which was  the last
effective, cohesive force in battered Russia - is being 
drawn into the political maelstrom.  What would have
happened if Gen. Pulikovsky had refused to call off his
offensive, and Lebed relieved him at gunpoint? This could
have produced a major battle between  army and MVD forces in
Chechnya, a conflict that might have quickly spread to
Moscow.  

Russians are rightly aghast. The Communists were lousy at
providing consumer goods and brutes, but they knew how to
keep order and discipline. And when they ruled, at least
Russia didn't look like a banana republic. 
copyright Eric Margolis 1996
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************


 
 
	To receive Foreign Correspondent via email send a note
	to Majordomo@lglobal.com with the message in the body:
		subscribe foreignc
	To get off the list, send to the same address but write:
		unsubscribe foreignc
	Back Issues can be obtained from:
		ftp.lglobal.com/pub/foreignc
	For Syndication Information please contact:
	   Email: emargolis@lglobal.com
	   FAX: (416) 960-4803
	   Smail:
		Eric Margolis
		c/o Editorial Department
		The Toronto Sun
		333 King St. East
		Toronto Ontario Canada
		M5A 3X5


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Clinton calls for ban on handguns (fwd)
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

Here we go again boys, hide um and keep your powder dry.  He doesn"t want
the people to know  "his record or he would loose his bid for reelection.
 Little does he know that the people know what his record is and he's
already lost it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 19:04:45 -0700 (PDT)


I don't think everyone will adhere to any standard.

However, we have to have people understand that the Constitution
prescribes individual behavior, not just gov behavior.

We have cops, FBI, gov officials ignoring their oaths of office.  We have
individuals being racist, sexist, putting their ideology/morality re:
drugs, abortion, education, ... above the clear intent and meaning of the
Constitution.

That is, they take the attitude that Freedom for them must be the same
as Freedom for me.

This BS has to stop, and we all have to begin holding the 
Constitution as a higher standard than our other beliefs.  Otherwise, the 
system can't work.

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> Lew,
> 
> Do you think that ALL individuals are going to hold themselves to a
> standard that is clear and cut down the line?  Come on!  Be realistic. 
> Not everyone is going to be able to make reasonable and rash decisions
> concerning their own personal responsibilities.  
> 
> I might not be seeing your whole point but I'm willing to listen.
> 
> GHB
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 19:07:09 -0700 (PDT)


Easy:  if you are under the influence of ANYTHING, and commit a crime,
it is evidence of intent.

I can live with that.

As for "drink it all, go out and kill someone", there is no way to stop
this.  Same argument as with guns: guns don't kill, people do.  Alcohol,
pills, crank, coke don't kill, people kill.

Governments shouldn't pass laws they can't enforce.  They can punish, but
neither prescribe nor proscribe.

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> Chad,
> 
> I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to spark a little debate.  
> 
> Let's take alcohol for instance.  Correct me if I wrong but the
> libertarian view is I should have the right to have as much as I want
> when ever I want it.  What about that person that says that is his right
> and indulges, gets into his automobile, and goes out and kills a whole
> family because he was impaired to the point that he could not operate
> that automobile responsibility?  Where is that families rights to life
> LIBERTY and per suit of happiness.  Hence the reason from locking them
> away from the rest of society.  
> 
> All I'm wanting to do is come up with a workable solution to an ongoing
> problem.  Maybe we should all go back to saying "Gity-up horse". 
> 
> 
> Capt. G.H. Burkepile
> Communications Officer
> First Alabama Regiment
> VII Ranger Corps
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Tobacco & BATF Form 4473
Date: 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT

Well somebody pass me the limas and the butter beans.  So it:

                                                       Beans, Beans,
they're good for the heart
                                                       The more you eat,
the more you fart
                                                       The more you fart,
the better you feel
                                                       So eat beans beans
for every meal.

I've got a good solution folks every one stop eating and that will cure
the methane gas problem.  

I'm only TRYING to be sarcastic.

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 19:53:16 -0700 (PDT)


What your God says to you is completely independent of what my God
(if any) says to me.

Your God's directives apply to you, and to your relationships with others
who accept the same God.

The Constitution is the higher law which regulates your conduct with
me, and mine with you.

This is the basic agreement which allows us all to live in peace and
respect.

Violate the order of precedence, and we can be Ireland, Israel, Lebanon,
India, ...

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?" 
> Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
> 
> Gary
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 21:42:48 -0600

>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?"
>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>
>Gary


Gary

This is my concern too.  But it CANNOT be a concern for the governments of
men.  Man does not have the understanding, intelligence, charity,
compasssion, patience, nor the justice of God.  Trying to emulate God's
laws through man's laws can only lead to Tyranny.  God can send you teo
"hell".  Man cannot.  Man is not perfect.  Man cannot enforce God's laws
like God can.  Let's let God take care of his laws and lets try to govern
ourselves in the best way possible with maximum freedom and liberty.  We
can teach one another of God's laws but we cannot force them on others.
God does not force them on us (though he holds us accountable in the
hereafter).  We cannot either.

best
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 21:42:52 -0600

>And why not repeal the ban on socalled scary gun and long magizines.  If
>I want to own one of these firearms, I should be able to.  Now I do draw
>the line on wepon of mass distrction.

Such questions are not needed as they are not practical.  How many people
can afford a nuke or the like.

But hey, if a person is an honest trustworthy individual, how he gets his
jollies (full auto, cannons, .22s, whatever) that is his business.

But yes, we are all for repealing the scary weapons ban.

Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 23:13:10 -0500

At 08:56 PM 8/26/96 EDT, you wrote:
>And why not repeal the ban on socalled scary gun and long magizines.  If
>I want to own one of these firearms, I should be able to.  Now I do draw
>the line on wepon of mass distrction.
>
Be careful there, lest your scarey looking semi auto, or more realistically
your pump shotgun, be classified as a "weapon of mass destruction". Besides
I doubt laws would keep anyone who could afford one from having their own
nasty little bomb, or NBC  weapon. 

The Constitution does say "arms", not firearms, or guns or individual
weapons,...just arms.

If you must "ban" some arms, at least have the decency to amend the
Constituion *before* doing so, just like the WCTU did with prohibition. 





              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 18:50:58 EDT

Chad,

Exactly why I like living in this land.  I can voice my ideas and listen
to others ideas as well.  Hey, if I don't like what's being said, there's
always the delete key.

Regards,

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack@minerva.com
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 22:55:25 PDT

roc@xmission.com wrote :

>>The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
>>the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
>>the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
>>want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
>>
>
>Hi Gary
>
>On the drug issue you may not actually disagree.  Let me explain the
>libertarian position in two different ways and we'll see if you might not
>agree.
>
>Way #1
>
>True freedom is allowing each to be his own master, for good or for evil,
>as long as what he does does not directly harm others (and this is the case
>with drugs).

It most certainly is not the case and will not be as long as any public
care is extended to those who take drugs or as long as there are mandates
that force people to buy medical insurance that covers substance abuse.
The way it is now all the accursed drug addicts have the rights to mess
up their bodies as you say ......but everyone else gets stuck with paying
for it.  Unless / Until Society is willing to let addicts just rot in
the gutter when they pass out and not answer their 911 calls when they
OD themselves then the actions of drug users are most certainly hurting 
others.  I have no idea whether there is anyplace in the United States
where people can only buy the type of medical coverage they desire but
if there was then the difference in premium between medical insurance that
covers substance abuse and related diseases and one that just covers the
problems that happen to rational people would be a good indication of the
amount of harm that those who use drugs do to others.

Conservatively about 20% of health spending or about 200 billion a year is
a direct result of substance abuse tho I have no idea how to allocate that
between drugs, tobacco and alcohol.  More than enough to get rid of the
deficit.  However, I never hear any of the Libertarians telling how cool
drugs are offering to pay their share of all this expense.  The only fair
way is if people want to abuse themselves with substances quit having any
of the related medical problems paid for by public expense and either make
all items related to substance abuse be available only with a separate rider
on medical insurance so that people like myself who never touch the filth
do not have to pay much higher rates than I should in order to have a bigger
pool and hence lower rates for those that do  ......or win the drug war
in the cheapest most intrusive way possible and simply make it illegal
to sell medical insurance to cover illegal activities.

I notice you were very careful above to say: "as what he does does not
directly harm others".  Since only females directly produce crack babies
I suppose your statement is literally true but one suspects you were
speaking in general and meant to cover both sexes and that being true how
could one ever say that the consumption of drugs by a pregnant woman that
leads to crack babies / birth defects beyond count / mental retardation /
learning disabilities does no harm to others.  Worse since those with 
learning disabilites often consume five times as much a year for their 
education as normal children how can you possibly say that the use of 
drugs does not harm others.  It comes close to destroying the children
of these absolutely evil women and the expense of trying to do the 
impossible amounts to 10% of the California budget for Special Education 
or close to 6 billion a year ....and while not all a very great part of 
that is directly attributable to either drugs during pregancy or drugs 
in the homes that these children are forced to grow up in

When you do away with gymnastics / art / music and such for well behaved
kids in order to fund all the special ed rot I fail to see how the actions
of those who used the drugs are not directly harming those who are denied
what they should have.

As a practical matter all illegal drugs and most legal drugs are 
immunosuppressive and so over a life time all those who use drugs will
on average have much life time medical expenses than those who do not.

Unless / Until we get away from all this insurance muck to things like MSAs
then all those who use drugs are increasing expenses for those who do not
and thus hurting them

Jack




  Even if it is stupid (which in the case if drugs, IT IS),
>true freedom (and real property rights) says that I am in complete control
>of my own body and noone has the right to deny me freedom to my own body.
>
>Way #2
>
>Government is the wrong way to take care of society's problems.  Government
>is a monopoly of force.  Coercion is not the way to solve any problem -- it
>only causes hate, resentment, and black markets (which bring with them
>crime to control them).  Society needs to work out its problems without
>force and coercion but through dialog, debate, convincing, education, etc.
>Drugs ARE STUPID.  Taking drugs is stupid.  But what right does my neighbor
>have to coerce me to stop?  What right does the government have to butt
>into society's problems?  Let society solve its own problems.
>
>
>Libertarians are not drug fanatics.  They are not drug pushers.  Most
>l/Libertarians probaby do not even encourage/support drug use, though some
>do.  But they all recognize that it is none of government's business or
>society's business to use force to coerce people to live how you THINK they
>should live.  (The same way God gives us commandments to help us make good
>decisions but he does not coerce us into following them.)  They would much
>rather let people have real freedom including freedom to screw yourself up.
>(Of course, no libertarian supports the use of force to coerce society
>into taking care of people who have screwed themselves up -- ie, government
>doles).  That is the philosophical viewpoint.  The practical viewpoint is
>that the War on Drugs has been a disaster.  Very expensive, has caused drug
>prices to stay high which encourages crime to control the trade in drugs,
>and has made it difficult for people who need help or want to get off drugs
>to get help.  Name ONE problem in society caused by drugs.  It is difficult
>to name one.  Now, name ONE problem caused by the illegality of drugs.
>Almost all problems that people associate with drugs are actually caused by
>the War on Drugs / illegality of drugs and the attempt at controlling the
>lucrative market.
>
>Why do you think that people are out trying to hook school kids on drugs?
>Because they are market-building.  They are building up a market for their
>expensive wares. (The same way the Democrats and some Republicans hook
>people into the welfare trap and raise generations of entrapped voters).
>
>RE: Abortion.  I have to disagree with the Libertarian Party platform with
>regards to abortion.  There is a strong, though minority part of the party
>who is pro-life.  To me, if you choose to have sex, you risk getting
>pregnant.  You should take the responsibility to follow through with that
>decision.  I believe that abortion is wrong and immoral.  I base my this on
>my religious beliefs and on common sense that an unborn baby is still a
>human being.  Luckily, the libertarian viewpoint on abortion has little
>real impact because even if the libertarians were in power and kept
>abortion legal, they would not spend one red cent of government money
>paying for them through welfare/any other government program
>
>Libertarianism is about REAL FREEDOM.  The freedom to think, do, and say
>what you want to (as long as you do not directly affect others negatively).
>It is the freedom to make the best of your life, or to screw it up.  It is
>not about being a serf or slave to any person's notion on how you should
>live.  You are free to follow whatever lifestyle you like and taking the
>responsibility for that lifestyle's choices.  To be your own master.
>
>Sadly, Republicans and Democrats do not share that vision.  Their only
>vision (as parties) is to 1. get elected.  2.  to force society to live
>according to their viewpoint.  To use force and coercion to "fix" the
>problems of society.
>
>best regards
>Chad
>
>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>Activism Info
>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------
>
>
>
>



    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 07:01:06 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------
Cc: tab@hollyent.com


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HARRY BROWNE, LIBERTARIAN FOR PRESIDENT
2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington DC 20037
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For additional information:
Bill Winter, Director of Communications
Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 226
Internet: 73163.3063@CompuServe.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CAMPAIGN NEWS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 26, 1996


Dole's militarized War on Drugs would create
"more suffering, more crime," says Browne

        
        WASHINGTON, DC -- Bob Dole's proposal to use U.S. 
military forces to escalate the War on Drugs creates the 
frightening specter of a militarized America, soaring 
crime, and a ravaged Bill of Rights, warned Libertarian 
presidential candidate Harry Browne today.

        "Dole wants to turn a rhetorical War on Drugs 
into a real war -- complete with troops massed along our 
borders, CIA surveillance, and rapid response military 
units. But all freedom-loving Americans should reject 
this vision of a nation at war with its own citizens," 
said Browne.

        Over the weekend, Republican nominee Dole called 
drugs "the moral equivalent of terrorism," and promised 
to use the U.S. military, the National Guard, and the 
Central Intelligence Agency for drug interdiction efforts. 
He also proposed setting up "rapid response" military 
units and stationing troops along the Mexican border.

        "Like many other Republican politicians, Dole 
loves the insane War on Drugs," said Browne. "It allows 
him to pretend to be tough on crime; it allows him to 
demand more police, more prosecutions, more laws, more 
government power, and more prisons. And it leaves American 
citizens with fewer individual freedoms and a ravaged 
Bill of Rights."

        The fundamental problem, said Browne, is that Dole 
is unwilling to admit that government doesn't work, and 
that the War on Drugs hasn't worked.

        "Before there were drug laws, there was no drug 
problem as we know it today," said Browne. "There were no 
muggers on the streets, trying to support $100-a-day habits; 
no pushers in high schools, trying to hook kids on drugs; 
no gangs fighting over drug profits; no drive-by shootings 
killing innocent children; no crack babies; no epidemic of 
overdoses. All these things began in the 1960s with the 
insane War on Drugs. And expanding the war on drugs will 
only create more suffering, more crime, and more innocent 
victims."

        Further, Browne noted, the federal government will 
spend $14 billion in 1996 to "control drugs" -- and has 
spent more than $250 billion over the past 15 years on the 
War on Drugs. Despite this, more than 1.3 million Americans 
are arrested every year for drug offenses, and cocaine and 
heroin are more affordable than ever, acknowledged a 1995 
White House report.

        "Government can't keep drugs out of the country; 
it can't even keep drugs out of its own prisons," said Browne. 
"Militarizing the War on Drugs won't solve the problem -- the 
only realistic solution is to end the war. Ending the insane 
War on Drugs will take the criminal profit out of the illicit 
drug trade and bring peace to our cities once again."

        Browne said he expects Republican and Democratic 
politicians to attempt to portray his call to end the War 
on Drugs as "extremist."

        "But the real extremists are the ones who continue 
to let children die in drive-by shootings rather than give 
up their love affair with the War on Drugs," he said.

-- 
Harry Browne for President                         Campaign@HarryBrowne96.org
http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/                               fax: 202-333-0072
2600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100, Washington DC 20037     voice: 202-333-0008


* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 18:50:58 EDT

Chad,

Exactly why I like living in this land.  I can voice my ideas and listen
to others ideas as well.  Hey, if I don't like what's being said, there's
always the delete key.

Regards,

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack@minerva.com
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 26 Aug 1996 22:55:25 PDT

roc@xmission.com wrote :

>>The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
>>the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
>>the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
>>want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
>>
>
>Hi Gary
>
>On the drug issue you may not actually disagree.  Let me explain the
>libertarian position in two different ways and we'll see if you might not
>agree.
>
>Way #1
>
>True freedom is allowing each to be his own master, for good or for evil,
>as long as what he does does not directly harm others (and this is the case
>with drugs).

It most certainly is not the case and will not be as long as any public
care is extended to those who take drugs or as long as there are mandates
that force people to buy medical insurance that covers substance abuse.
The way it is now all the accursed drug addicts have the rights to mess
up their bodies as you say ......but everyone else gets stuck with paying
for it.  Unless / Until Society is willing to let addicts just rot in
the gutter when they pass out and not answer their 911 calls when they
OD themselves then the actions of drug users are most certainly hurting 
others.  I have no idea whether there is anyplace in the United States
where people can only buy the type of medical coverage they desire but
if there was then the difference in premium between medical insurance that
covers substance abuse and related diseases and one that just covers the
problems that happen to rational people would be a good indication of the
amount of harm that those who use drugs do to others.

Conservatively about 20% of health spending or about 200 billion a year is
a direct result of substance abuse tho I have no idea how to allocate that
between drugs, tobacco and alcohol.  More than enough to get rid of the
deficit.  However, I never hear any of the Libertarians telling how cool
drugs are offering to pay their share of all this expense.  The only fair
way is if people want to abuse themselves with substances quit having any
of the related medical problems paid for by public expense and either make
all items related to substance abuse be available only with a separate rider
on medical insurance so that people like myself who never touch the filth
do not have to pay much higher rates than I should in order to have a bigger
pool and hence lower rates for those that do  ......or win the drug war
in the cheapest most intrusive way possible and simply make it illegal
to sell medical insurance to cover illegal activities.

I notice you were very careful above to say: "as what he does does not
directly harm others".  Since only females directly produce crack babies
I suppose your statement is literally true but one suspects you were
speaking in general and meant to cover both sexes and that being true how
could one ever say that the consumption of drugs by a pregnant woman that
leads to crack babies / birth defects beyond count / mental retardation /
learning disabilities does no harm to others.  Worse since those with 
learning disabilites often consume five times as much a year for their 
education as normal children how can you possibly say that the use of 
drugs does not harm others.  It comes close to destroying the children
of these absolutely evil women and the expense of trying to do the 
impossible amounts to 10% of the California budget for Special Education 
or close to 6 billion a year ....and while not all a very great part of 
that is directly attributable to either drugs during pregancy or drugs 
in the homes that these children are forced to grow up in

When you do away with gymnastics / art / music and such for well behaved
kids in order to fund all the special ed rot I fail to see how the actions
of those who used the drugs are not directly harming those who are denied
what they should have.

As a practical matter all illegal drugs and most legal drugs are 
immunosuppressive and so over a life time all those who use drugs will
on average have much life time medical expenses than those who do not.

Unless / Until we get away from all this insurance muck to things like MSAs
then all those who use drugs are increasing expenses for those who do not
and thus hurting them

Jack




  Even if it is stupid (which in the case if drugs, IT IS),
>true freedom (and real property rights) says that I am in complete control
>of my own body and noone has the right to deny me freedom to my own body.
>
>Way #2
>
>Government is the wrong way to take care of society's problems.  Government
>is a monopoly of force.  Coercion is not the way to solve any problem -- it
>only causes hate, resentment, and black markets (which bring with them
>crime to control them).  Society needs to work out its problems without
>force and coercion but through dialog, debate, convincing, education, etc.
>Drugs ARE STUPID.  Taking drugs is stupid.  But what right does my neighbor
>have to coerce me to stop?  What right does the government have to butt
>into society's problems?  Let society solve its own problems.
>
>
>Libertarians are not drug fanatics.  They are not drug pushers.  Most
>l/Libertarians probaby do not even encourage/support drug use, though some
>do.  But they all recognize that it is none of government's business or
>society's business to use force to coerce people to live how you THINK they
>should live.  (The same way God gives us commandments to help us make good
>decisions but he does not coerce us into following them.)  They would much
>rather let people have real freedom including freedom to screw yourself up.
>(Of course, no libertarian supports the use of force to coerce society
>into taking care of people who have screwed themselves up -- ie, government
>doles).  That is the philosophical viewpoint.  The practical viewpoint is
>that the War on Drugs has been a disaster.  Very expensive, has caused drug
>prices to stay high which encourages crime to control the trade in drugs,
>and has made it difficult for people who need help or want to get off drugs
>to get help.  Name ONE problem in society caused by drugs.  It is difficult
>to name one.  Now, name ONE problem caused by the illegality of drugs.
>Almost all problems that people associate with drugs are actually caused by
>the War on Drugs / illegality of drugs and the attempt at controlling the
>lucrative market.
>
>Why do you think that people are out trying to hook school kids on drugs?
>Because they are market-building.  They are building up a market for their
>expensive wares. (The same way the Democrats and some Republicans hook
>people into the welfare trap and raise generations of entrapped voters).
>
>RE: Abortion.  I have to disagree with the Libertarian Party platform with
>regards to abortion.  There is a strong, though minority part of the party
>who is pro-life.  To me, if you choose to have sex, you risk getting
>pregnant.  You should take the responsibility to follow through with that
>decision.  I believe that abortion is wrong and immoral.  I base my this on
>my religious beliefs and on common sense that an unborn baby is still a
>human being.  Luckily, the libertarian viewpoint on abortion has little
>real impact because even if the libertarians were in power and kept
>abortion legal, they would not spend one red cent of government money
>paying for them through welfare/any other government program
>
>Libertarianism is about REAL FREEDOM.  The freedom to think, do, and say
>what you want to (as long as you do not directly affect others negatively).
>It is the freedom to make the best of your life, or to screw it up.  It is
>not about being a serf or slave to any person's notion on how you should
>live.  You are free to follow whatever lifestyle you like and taking the
>responsibility for that lifestyle's choices.  To be your own master.
>
>Sadly, Republicans and Democrats do not share that vision.  Their only
>vision (as parties) is to 1. get elected.  2.  to force society to live
>according to their viewpoint.  To use force and coercion to "fix" the
>problems of society.
>
>best regards
>Chad
>
>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>Activism Info
>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------
>
>
>
>



    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Fwd: GOA alert 26 Aug 96 (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 07:13:26 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by txjohn47@ix.netcom.com (John Johnson)
<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->

Newsgroups: tx.guns
Organization: Rocky Mountain Internet Inc.

 "Smoking Gun:" Texas Officials Using Brady Law to Register Gun
Owners -- Stockman Brady repeal bill needed more than ever

 Gun Owners of America, 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield, VA 
22151, (703)321-8585, fax: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org

 ACTION: 1. Urge your legislators to cosponsor H.R. 2470, the bill to 
repeal the Brady registration act. GOA now has a brand new message for 
those who want to send a Western Union mailgram. This mailgram includes 

the new information listed below, showing how the inevitable has
occurred -- that some gun owners' names are being illegally retained
through the background checks conducted on gun buyers. Send a Western
Union mailgram by calling 1-800-651-1486. A fee of $6.95 will be
charged to your phone.

 2. Order postcards that you can distribute to pro-gun friends and 
family. Call 1-800-417-1486. Use your circle of influence to flood 
legislators with postcards supporting the Stockman repeal bill (H.R. 
2470). First set of 52 postcards=$6; 2nd set=$4; others=$2.50.

 3. Distribute this alert to your pro-gun friends and family. People
can also call their Congressman by dialing 202-225-3121.

 (Monday, August 26) -- GOA has clear evidence that some police
officials in Texas are keeping the records of firearms purchases,
in defiance of the Brady law. These records (taken from the Brady-
mandated background checks) go back many months and have been used
for purposes other than that which they were intended for, such as
collecting fines or fees. These records include the name, address
and driver's license number of the gun owner.

 This registration of gun owners is something that Gun Owners of
America has warned about from the very start. No matter how many
prohibitions against registration one writes into the law, the
question arises: "Who guards the guardians?" Who will be responsible
for punishing officials that break the law? Can we really depend on
officials to prosecute their fellow brothers in blue for a crime that
might be considered harmless by some?

 Indeed, the former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA)
admitted in 1991 that the instant background check was easily
susceptible to abuse. The OTA said that "the potential [for
registration] exists regardless of legal prohibitions."

 Gun registration (or gun owner registration) is dangerous because of
the potential for firearms confiscation. Consider that in New York
City, police used gun registration lists to confiscate the firearms
of law-abiding citizens. The Daily News (9/5/92) reported in 1992 that,
"Police raided the home of a Staten Island man who refused to comply
with the city's tough ban on assault weapons, and seized an arsenal of
firearms....Spot checks are planned [for other homes]."

 New York City police were able to use the gun registration lists,
which were started in the 1960's, to determine which gun owners were
not complying with the semi-auto ban. Clearly, gun owner registration
can be, and often is, a prelude to gun confiscation.

 The simple fact is that it is too great a temptation for officials to
keep names on file even after they are supposed to be deleted. This is
a risk that gun owners, and all law-abiding citizens, should be
unwilling to take.

 Let's pull out the stops. Please call and fax your Representatives.
Send him postcards and mailgrams. Ask him to get onto the Brady repeal
(H.R.2470) as a cosponsor. We have to build the momentum to repeal this
dangerous piece of legislation. We can't just rely on what the Supreme
Court might do. We have to fight this battle on every front. 

To receive GOA alerts via e-mail send subscribe to davisda@rmi.net

>---- End Forwarded Message ----<

-- 

>From the main computer of:
John Johnson
TXJohn47@ix.netcom.com

The opinions expressed above represent those of the writer (me)
and not necessarily those of his employer (also me).  <G> ;-)

--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 07:36:10 -0600

>roc@xmission.com wrote :
>
>>>The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue and
>>>the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up all of
>>>the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give them all they
>>>want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!
>>>
>>
>>Hi Gary
>>
>>On the drug issue you may not actually disagree.  Let me explain the
>>libertarian position in two different ways and we'll see if you might not
>>agree.
>>
>>Way #1
>>
>>True freedom is allowing each to be his own master, for good or for evil,
>>as long as what he does does not directly harm others (and this is the case
>>with drugs).
>
>It most certainly is not the case and will not be as long as any public
>care is extended to those who take drugs or as long as there are mandates
>that force people to buy medical insurance that covers substance abuse.
>The way it is now all the accursed drug addicts have the rights to mess
>up their bodies as you say ......but everyone else gets stuck with paying
>for it.  Unless / Until Society is willing to let addicts just rot in
>the gutter when they pass out and not answer their 911 calls when they
>OD themselves then the actions of drug users are most certainly hurting
>others.  I have no idea whether there is anyplace in the United States
>where people can only buy the type of medical coverage they desire but
>if there was then the difference in premium between medical insurance that
>covers substance abuse and related diseases and one that just covers the
>problems that happen to rational people would be a good indication of the
>amount of harm that those who use drugs do to others.


No more so than any other recreational activity.  Long term costs of care
do not make society direct victims. Everything you do affects others.
Everything.  Whether it is farting, driving your car, or eating too many
hamburgers and dieing of a heartattack.  Show me DIRECT harm from drug use
of others.  Not indirect.   Not that what you say is not important.  And
you notice that the libertarians take care of it in their plans.

>
>Conservatively about 20% of health spending or about 200 billion a year is
>a direct result of substance abuse tho I have no idea how to allocate that
>between drugs, tobacco and alcohol.  More than enough to get rid of the
>deficit.  However, I never hear any of the Libertarians telling how cool
>drugs are offering to pay their share of all this expense.  The only fair
>way is if people want to abuse themselves with substances quit having any
>of the related medical problems paid for by public expense and either make
>all items related to substance abuse be available only with a separate rider
>on medical insurance so that people like myself who never touch the filth
>do not have to pay much higher rates than I should in order to have a bigger
>pool and hence lower rates for those that do  ......or win the drug war
>in the cheapest most intrusive way possible and simply make it illegal
>to sell medical insurance to cover illegal activities.

" I never hear any of the Libertarians telling how cool drugs are offering
to pay their share of all this expense. "

Then you haven't been listening. Libertarians would eliminate the public
dole including publically financed health care. Do you think substance
abusers cost more than say bad eaters (ie lots of fat etc.)?  Go look it
up.  I don't know the number but that is probably the biggest killer in
America.  I don't want to pay for your hamburgers either.  Lets make
McDonalds illegal!

How much of that 200 billion a year goes back to illegal drugs?  Probably a
small amount.  Tobacco and alcohol are MUCH MUCH more of a problem.  I
would wager that most of the burden on the health care system from illegal
drugs are actually affects of the War on Drugs (victims of violence as well
as thos who got sucked into drug use through the war on drugs).

>
>I notice you were very careful above to say: "as what he does does not
>directly harm others".  Since only females directly produce crack babies
>I suppose your statement is literally true but one suspects you were
>speaking in general and meant to cover both sexes and that being true how
>could one ever say that the consumption of drugs by a pregnant woman that
>leads to crack babies / birth defects beyond count / mental retardation /
>learning disabilities does no harm to others.

That is a good but rare example.  No different than a pregnant woman
harming her baby through alcohol, hang gliding (crashing / rough landing),
or any other more dangerous activity.

>Worse since those with
>learning disabilites often consume five times as much a year for their
>education as normal children how can you possibly say that the use of
>drugs does not harm others.  It comes close to destroying the children
>of these absolutely evil women and the expense of trying to do the
>impossible amounts to 10% of the California budget for Special Education
>or close to 6 billion a year ....and while not all a very great part of
>that is directly attributable to either drugs during pregancy or drugs
>in the homes that these children are forced to grow up in
>
>When you do away with gymnastics / art / music and such for well behaved
>kids in order to fund all the special ed rot I fail to see how the actions
>of those who used the drugs are not directly harming those who are denied
>what they should have.

Maybe we should look at public financing of education?  Maybe that is the
problem.  Most of the above are indirect effects.  All kinds of other
activities produce the same type of problems.  Let's outlaw all of them.

As a percentage, how many babies are born every year with mental problems
due to mother's drug use?  I don't know and so would like to know.

>
>As a practical matter all illegal drugs and most legal drugs are
>immunosuppressive and so over a life time all those who use drugs will
>on average have much life time medical expenses than those who do not.

That is not a problem.  The problem is expecting me to pay for ANY of YOUR
medical expenses.  That is a different subjuect.

>
>Unless / Until we get away from all this insurance muck to things like MSAs
>then all those who use drugs are increasing expenses for those who do not
>and thus hurting them
>
>Jack
>

Well Jack, so far we've outlawed: hamburgers, steak, pork, ice cream, any
other fatty substances, alcohol, tobacco, hang gliding, mountain climbing,
rapelling, walking outside after dark in big cities (curfews for all!),
automobiles, firearms, and a lot of stuff that doesn't come to mind.  We've
put in mandatory daily exercise.   We've made ourselves a much safer and
healthier society.   We've saved some in medicare/medicade costs so it is a
great boon to society to have saved all that.  What a great country we are.

I would wager that the costs of the drug war and the effects of the drug
war are more expensive on society than treating a few addicts.  I really
believe that drug use has gone up as a result if the war on drugs.
Violence and crime certainly have as have the costs associated with trying
to stop it.  MOney that could be spent in education and helping those who
have this problem.

The War on Drugs has failed.  It is also an immoral war robbing us of our
freedoms and liberties.  Stop it now!

Chad
never tried drugs and don't think I ever will.  Don't encourage it either.

>
>
>
>  Even if it is stupid (which in the case if drugs, IT IS),
>>true freedom (and real property rights) says that I am in complete control
>>of my own body and noone has the right to deny me freedom to my own body.
>>
>>Way #2
>>
>>Government is the wrong way to take care of society's problems.  Government
>>is a monopoly of force.  Coercion is not the way to solve any problem -- it
>>only causes hate, resentment, and black markets (which bring with them
>>crime to control them).  Society needs to work out its problems without
>>force and coercion but through dialog, debate, convincing, education, etc.
>>Drugs ARE STUPID.  Taking drugs is stupid.  But what right does my neighbor
>>have to coerce me to stop?  What right does the government have to butt
>>into society's problems?  Let society solve its own problems.
>>
>>
>>Libertarians are not drug fanatics.  They are not drug pushers.  Most
>>l/Libertarians probaby do not even encourage/support drug use, though some
>>do.  But they all recognize that it is none of government's business or
>>society's business to use force to coerce people to live how you THINK they
>>should live.  (The same way God gives us commandments to help us make good
>>decisions but he does not coerce us into following them.)  They would much
>>rather let people have real freedom including freedom to screw yourself up.
>>(Of course, no libertarian supports the use of force to coerce society
>>into taking care of people who have screwed themselves up -- ie, government
>>doles).  That is the philosophical viewpoint.  The practical viewpoint is
>>that the War on Drugs has been a disaster.  Very expensive, has caused drug
>>prices to stay high which encourages crime to control the trade in drugs,
>>and has made it difficult for people who need help or want to get off drugs
>>to get help.  Name ONE problem in society caused by drugs.  It is difficult
>>to name one.  Now, name ONE problem caused by the illegality of drugs.
>>Almost all problems that people associate with drugs are actually caused by
>>the War on Drugs / illegality of drugs and the attempt at controlling the
>>lucrative market.
>>
>>Why do you think that people are out trying to hook school kids on drugs?
>>Because they are market-building.  They are building up a market for their
>>expensive wares. (The same way the Democrats and some Republicans hook
>>people into the welfare trap and raise generations of entrapped voters).
>>
>>RE: Abortion.  I have to disagree with the Libertarian Party platform with
>>regards to abortion.  There is a strong, though minority part of the party
>>who is pro-life.  To me, if you choose to have sex, you risk getting
>>pregnant.  You should take the responsibility to follow through with that
>>decision.  I believe that abortion is wrong and immoral.  I base my this on
>>my religious beliefs and on common sense that an unborn baby is still a
>>human being.  Luckily, the libertarian viewpoint on abortion has little
>>real impact because even if the libertarians were in power and kept
>>abortion legal, they would not spend one red cent of government money
>>paying for them through welfare/any other government program
>>
>>Libertarianism is about REAL FREEDOM.  The freedom to think, do, and say
>>what you want to (as long as you do not directly affect others negatively).
>>It is the freedom to make the best of your life, or to screw it up.  It is
>>not about being a serf or slave to any person's notion on how you should
>>live.  You are free to follow whatever lifestyle you like and taking the
>>responsibility for that lifestyle's choices.  To be your own master.
>>
>>Sadly, Republicans and Democrats do not share that vision.  Their only
>>vision (as parties) is to 1. get elected.  2.  to force society to live
>>according to their viewpoint.  To use force and coercion to "fix" the
>>problems of society.
>>
>>best regards
>>Chad
>>
>>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
>>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
>>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
>>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>>Activism Info
>>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
>  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
>  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 10:03:35 EDT


On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Robert Lewis Glendenning
<rlglende@netcom.com> writ
>One day very soon Lew you will understand.  God's law, (the God of
Abraham, Isasic, and Jacob) must be above all laws no matter what.  Else
we strugle in vain.  The constitution is good as written.  But God law
must be above it.  No exceptions.

Gary
>This BS has to stop, and we all have to begin holding the 
>Constitution as a higher standard than our other beliefs.  Otherwise, 
>the 
>system can't work.
>
>Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
>"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin 
>Ideology!
>We have a CONSTITUTION!"  
>
>The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the 
>CONSTITUTION.
>
>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:
>
>> Lew,
>> 
>> Do you think that ALL individuals are going to hold themselves to a
>> standard that is clear and cut down the line?  Come on!  Be 
>realistic. 
>> Not everyone is going to be able to make reasonable and rash 
>decisions
>> concerning their own personal responsibilities.  
>> 
>> I might not be seeing your whole point but I'm willing to listen.
>> 
>> GHB
>> 
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 10:03:35 EDT

Chad,

Either we allow ourselves to be governed by God's laws or be ruled over
by despots.  God's laws are supreem.

Regards,

Gary
On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:42:48 -0600 chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The
Electronic GunShop) writes:
>>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?"
>>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>>
>>Gary
>
>
>Gary
>
>This is my concern too.  But it CANNOT be a concern for the 
>governments of
>men.  Man does not have the understanding, intelligence, charity,
>compasssion, patience, nor the justice of God.  Trying to emulate 
>God's
>laws through man's laws can only lead to Tyranny.  God can send you 
>teo
>"hell".  Man cannot.  Man is not perfect.  Man cannot enforce God's 
>laws
>like God can.  Let's let God take care of his laws and lets try to 
>govern
>ourselves in the best way possible with maximum freedom and liberty.  
>We
>can teach one another of God's laws but we cannot force them on 
>others.
>God does not force them on us (though he holds us accountable in the
>hereafter).  We cannot either.
>
>best
>Chad
>
>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! 
>---------------------------
>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop 
>(sm)
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text 
>interface
>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>Activism Info
>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW 
>space!!!--------------------
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 08:15:19 -0600

>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Robert Lewis Glendenning
><rlglende@netcom.com> writ
>>
>One day very soon Lew you will understand.  God's law, (the God of
>Abraham, Isasic, and Jacob) must be above all laws no matter what.  Else
>we strugle in vain.  The constitution is good as written.  But God law
>must be above it.  No exceptions.
>
>Gary

Man trying to enforce God's Laws leads to Tyranny.

I am also a religious person and wish that people would follow God's Laws.
However, man is not God and cannot make God's Laws the law of man.  Man can
live by God's Laws but can man enforce God's Laws?  Nope.  And God does not
expect us to.  He will take care of the enforcement of his laws.

best regards
Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: CCCS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU
Subject:      Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 10:05:47 EDT

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT GARY H. BURKEPILE said:
>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?"
>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>
And the Rabbis brought a prostitute to the temple and said, "Jesus,
here's a prostitute.  Wanna help us stone her in accordance with the
law?"  The Christ said, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the
first stone."  Those gathered dropped their stones and walked off in
embaressment until there was no one left but Christ and the woman.
Jesus said to her, "Is there no one left to condem you?"  The
prostitute said, "Guess not."  Jesus said, "Then I don't condem you
either."

God gave humans free will.  He wishes that we use that free will to
worship him and follow the example set by Christ.  But as the lesson
shows, He does not want us to be punished harshly and arbitrarily by
our brothers for engaging in behaviour that injurs only ourselves.

Sodem and Gamorah involved the wrath of God, not the wrath of man.
The distinction is crucial.  It is also useful to note that S&G is
one of the rare instances where God takes the active path of divine
intervention.  God almost always works through men, and that work
usually involves loving council, not draconian punishment.

So what *does* God say on the subject?  "Love your neighbor."
      todddddddddddddddddd
>Gary

-   __      __________   - Todd Pukanecz -----  ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
--  \ \    / ___  ___/  --  CALS AGNIS   ---- "Laws do not persuade just
---  \ \  / /  / /     --- 303 Hutcheson ---   because they threaten."
----  \ \/ /  / /     ---- Virginia Tech --     - SENECA, a.d. 65
-----  \__/  /_/     ----- Blacksburg VA -

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 08:30:25 -0600

>Chad,
>
>Either we allow ourselves to be governed by God's laws or be ruled over
>by despots.  God's laws are supreem.

I do not disagree that God's Laws are supreme.  What I do disagree on is
that Man can take over God's role and position and enforce those same laws
on his fellow man.  That cannot happen without  tyranny
 and despotic rule.  It is a physical impossibility.

What Man CAN do is to convince (through dialog and discourse, not coercion
and force)  his fellow man of the importance of these laws so that we
voluntarily live them.  That is how God has set things up.  He will take
care of the final enforcement of his laws and all people will have to
suffer the consequences of their actions in regards to God's Laws.  But
that is His matter.  One that Man cannot presume to take over.  We do not
have the Charity, Love, Patience, Knowledge, Wisdom, Mercy, Justice, and
Intelligence of God.  We cannot take over his role in enforcement of His
Laws.

Even God does not coerce or force man to live the higher laws.  He attempts
to persuade, warn, and predict the consequences of not doing it but he
allows man the freedom to sink or swim (or float easily on ones back).

Once again, I do not disagree that God's Laws are supreme.  But trying to
coerce socity into following them can only have ONE effect -- tyranny.  And
God is not a tyrant and does not expect man to become one in his place.

What man can and should do is to make laws that punish those who hurt
others and otherwise they should make laws that support freedom and liberty
so that man can engage in dialog and discourse and freely choose to follow
God's Laws.

best regards
Chad

>
>Regards,
>
>Gary
>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:42:48 -0600 chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The
>Electronic GunShop) writes:
>>>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?"
>>>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>>>
>>>Gary
>>
>>
>>Gary
>>
>>This is my concern too.  But it CANNOT be a concern for the
>>governments of
>>men.  Man does not have the understanding, intelligence, charity,
>>compasssion, patience, nor the justice of God.  Trying to emulate
>>God's
>>laws through man's laws can only lead to Tyranny.  God can send you
>>teo
>>"hell".  Man cannot.  Man is not perfect.  Man cannot enforce God's
>>laws
>>like God can.  Let's let God take care of his laws and lets try to
>>govern
>>ourselves in the best way possible with maximum freedom and liberty.
>>We
>>can teach one another of God's laws but we cannot force them on
>>others.
>>God does not force them on us (though he holds us accountable in the
>>hereafter).  We cannot either.
>>
>>best
>>Chad
>>
>>------------------------- Live Free or Die !
>>---------------------------
>>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop
>>(sm)
>>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text
>>interface
>>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>>Activism Info
>>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW
>>space!!!--------------------
>>
>>
>>

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 08:50:36 PST

It should be noted here, that beyond a certain point, not even God will
attempt to save you from yourself.....

On Aug 27, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:

>>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Robert Lewis Glendenning
>><rlglende@netcom.com> writ
>>>
>>One day very soon Lew you will understand.  God's law, (the God of
>>Abraham, Isasic, and Jacob) must be above all laws no matter what.  Else
>>we strugle in vain.  The constitution is good as written.  But God law
>>must be above it.  No exceptions.
>>
>>Gary
>
>Man trying to enforce God's Laws leads to Tyranny.
>
>I am also a religious person and wish that people would follow God's Laws.
>However, man is not God and cannot make God's Laws the law of man.  Man can
>live by God's Laws but can man enforce God's Laws?  Nope.  And God does not
>expect us to.  He will take care of the enforcement of his laws.
>
>best regards
>Chad
>
>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>Activism Info
>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------
>
>

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 09:01:06 PST

A Military that is guarding our borders is one that is doing it's
Constitutionally mandated job.  Would you rather have them doing house to
house searches of our homes?  Hopefully they will stop the flow of illegals
as well as drugs.....

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Another Believer
Date: 27 Aug 1996 11:16:15 -0500

>From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
>Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT
>Subject: Re: Clinton calls for ban on handguns (fwd)

>Here we go again boys, hide um and keep your powder dry.  He doesn"t want
>the people to know  "his record or he would loose his bid for reelection.

>Little does he know that the people know what his record is and he's
>already lost it.

-----

Good Grief! I am not alone!

Someone else out there actually believes klintoon will not get re-elected.

Can I have your autograph, please?

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 09:42:50 -0700 (PDT)

(Had to chirp in here, as Bill said not even God will save me from myself 
; )

YES! Amen Chad. Men who think they are fit to enforce Gods law are by 
definition Tyrants in Boyd's Big Dictionary..
Boyd (the opinions I express are mine alone.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Fritz Sands <fritzs@MICROSOFT.COM>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 09:55:39 -0700

You go Yahweh, and I'll go mine.

Biblically-based disputes are a lousy way to run a country.   Just look
at European history.
 
      Fritz

>----------
>From: 	gburke1@juno.com[SMTP:gburke1@juno.com]
>Sent: 	Monday, August 26, 1996 5:56 PM
>To: 	roc@xmission.com
>Subject: 	Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>
>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?" 
>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>
>Gary
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 13:14:07 -0400


	RE:  God's laws.   I don't presume to know *exactly* what they are, but it
	is worth noting that the Constitution seems to be founded upon natural law,
	which is probably as close an approximation as secular authorities are willing
	to agree on.    I also note that the DofI refer's to the Creator, but does not
	seem to rely upon an explication of God's law.   I guess the founders thought 
	that natural law was good enough, and as the country was started by religious 
	people fleeing persecution by the orthodoxy, then, maybe, the founders were 
	right.

	To keep it simple, the Constitution and the DofI were the work of man.   Let's 
	defend them and restore them.   Anyone who talks with certainty of "God's law" makes 
	me *very* nervous.

	Jack Curtis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Skip Leuschner <skipl@PACIFIER.COM>
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-24 Radio Address by President to  the Nation
Date: 27 Aug 1996 10:20:24 -0700 (PDT)


On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> And whats to stop big brother from moving on to the next individual group
> of individuals.  Say like skate boarders or people that like to go skinny
> dipping.  Is there no end?
> 

Nope.  There is no end.  That's precisely the point of that amorphous
thing called "government reform."    

Politics is about Power, and Power is about imposing my will on you and
others.   If I've got political power, I can force the masses to do what 
I want them to do, whether they like it or not, and I will do it.  

The more I use my power, the better I feel about it, and the more
confident I become that I am someone special and that everything I do is
divinely inspired and right for "my people."  A more familiar way of
saying this is, "Power corrupts," and it applies to corporate, military
and religious leaders as well as to politicians.   The only difference is
one of scale, and social danger.   Politicians have armed troops to back
up their egos and whims.

That's why I'm a term limits guy.   "Power corrupts" is not a statement
about politics.   It's a statement about human nature.  Some resist better
than others, but power will corrupt everyone eventually, and the
more one has, the faster it happens.   Term Limits is the only way I know
to get them out of there before they start trying to impose their will on
us instead of representing us. 

FWIW, Skip








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey)
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 12:20:31 CDT

Fritz Sands <fritzs@MICROSOFT.COM> wrote:

>You go Yahweh, and I'll go mine.

Holy Moses!  It must be time to leave Goshen, but for where?  :-^)

>Biblically-based disputes are a lousy way to run a country.   Just look
>at European history.

Amen.

The opinions which I have expressed herein are entirely my own, unless other-
wise noted.  No-one else should be held responsible for what I think.

| D. N. Dickey               |  Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and |
| Research Associate         |  timidity, are no match for armed and       |
| Northern Illinois Univ.    |  resolute wickedness.                       |
| neil@earth.geol.niu.edu    |                       - W. S. Churchill     |
| **Finger for public key**  |                                             |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Slate - a relevant thread
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:57:02 -0400


	Gentlefolk:

	I just browsed through some of Slate, the Microsoft/Michael Kinsley (barf)
	on line magazine.   In one newsgroupie like section entitled "The Fray" they 
	had a thread entitled:

	"The NRA
	A respectable organization representing a legitimate cause, or an
	exploitation show taking cover behind the constitution?"

	The format is a little wierd (kind of overengineered and slow, like you expect 
	from Microsoft), but there is a battle to be joined here, as liberal uninformed 
	comments from Everyman seem to dominate.

	These guys require registration (just your email address), and the thread is 
	moderated (i.e. swear at them and they'll throw you off).

	Turn your web browsers to http://www.slate.com 

	ciao,

	jcurtis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 16:09:47 EDT

Chad,

You almost got it or maybe I didn't state it.  Man should be governed by
God's law.  The key word is "governed".  If man makes laws they should
reflect what God's law states. OK?

Regards,

Gary
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 08:15:19 -0600 chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The
Electronic GunShop) writes:
>>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Robert Lewis Glendenning
>><rlglende@netcom.com> writ
>>>
>>One day very soon Lew you will understand.  God's law, (the God of
>>Abraham, Isasic, and Jacob) must be above all laws no matter what.  
>Else
>>we strugle in vain.  The constitution is good as written.  But God 
>law
>>must be above it.  No exceptions.
>>
>>Gary
>
>Man trying to enforce God's Laws leads to Tyranny.
>
>I am also a religious person and wish that people would follow God's 
>Laws.
>However, man is not God and cannot make God's Laws the law of man.  
>Man can
>live by God's Laws but can man enforce God's Laws?  Nope.  And God 
>does not
>expect us to.  He will take care of the enforcement of his laws.
>
>best regards
>Chad
>
>------------------------- Live Free or Die ! 
>---------------------------
>Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
>Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop 
>(sm)
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
>http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text 
>interface
>Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
>Activism Info
>--------------------$4/month commercial WWW 
>space!!!--------------------
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 16:09:47 EDT


On Tue, 27 Aug 96 10:05:47 EDT CCCS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU writes:
>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT GARY H. BURKEPILE said:                
                     "What does God say about the Subject?"
>>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>>
>And the Rabbis brought a prostitute to the temple and said, "Jesus,
>here's a prostitute.  Wanna help us stone her in accordance with the
>law?"  The Christ said, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the
>first stone."  Those gathered dropped their stones and walked off in
>embaressment until there was no one left but Christ and the woman.
>Jesus said to her, "Is there no one left to condem you?"  The
>prostitute said, "Guess not."  Jesus said, "Then I don't condem you
>either."
>
>God gave humans free will.  He wishes that we use that free will to
>worship him and follow the example set by Christ.  But as the lesson
>shows, He does not want us to be punished harshly and arbitrarily by
>our brothers for engaging in behaviour that injurs only ourselves.
>
>Sodem and Gamorah involved the wrath of God, not the wrath of man.
>The distinction is crucial.  It is also useful to note that S&G is
>one of the rare instances where God takes the active path of divine
>intervention.  God almost always works through men, and that work
>usually involves loving council, not draconian punishment.
>
>So what *does* God say on the subject?  "Love your neighbor."
>      todddddddddddddddddd
>>Gary
>
>-   __      __________   - Todd Pukanecz -----  ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
>--  \ \    / ___  ___/  --  CALS AGNIS   ---- "Laws do not persuade 
>just
>---  \ \  / /  / /     --- 303 Hutcheson ---   because they threaten."
>----  \ \/ /  / /     ---- Virginia Tech --     - SENECA, a.d. 65
>-----  \__/  /_/     ----- Blacksburg VA -
>
Todd,

Is a way of life (fredom) worth fighting for?  No matter who we have to
fight??

Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:48:21 -0600

>On Tue, 27 Aug 96 10:05:47 EDT CCCS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU writes:
>
>Is a way of life (fredom) worth fighting for?  No matter who we have to
>fight??
>
>Gary

Yes.  The real question is:  Is it worth coercing and forcing everyone else
to follow that way of life?  Or should we make it so that you can live it
without having to fight?

regards
Chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 15:03:24 -0600

The thing I just posted was wrongly attributed.  It should have said:


On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 GARY H. BURKEPILE said:

and not from  EDT CCCS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU

Sorry
Chad

>>On Tue, 27 Aug 96 10:05:47 EDT CCCS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU writes:
>>
>>Is a way of life (fredom) worth fighting for?  No matter who we have to
>>fight??
>>
>>Gary
>
>Yes.  The real question is:  Is it worth coercing and forcing everyone else
>to follow that way of life?  Or should we make it so that you can live it
>without having to fight?
>
>regards
>Chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:09:07 -0700 (PDT)

At 10:05 AM 8/27/96 EDT, you wrote:
>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT GARY H. BURKEPILE said:
>>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?"
>>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>>
>And the Rabbis brought a prostitute to the temple and said, "Jesus,
>here's a prostitute.  Wanna help us stone her in accordance with the
>law?"  The Christ said, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the
>first stone."  Those gathered dropped their stones and walked off in
>embaressment until there was no one left but Christ and the woman.
>Jesus said to her, "Is there no one left to condem you?"  The
>prostitute said, "Guess not."  Jesus said, "Then I don't condem you
>either."

You might finish out what Jesus said. He said "Go your way and SIN NO MORE."
As for Love your neighbor, I think this statement reflects that love. Jesus
did not stop the stoning because "nobody had sinned" but because they were
all guilty of a death penalty offense -- bearing false witness -- AND THEY
KNEW IT. They had claimed that they caught her "in the very act" of
adultery. Oh? Was she committing adultery alone?
The Law required that a false witness suffer the same punishment he wished
to inflict upon the other person. In this case, stoning to death.
>
>God gave humans free will.  He wishes that we use that free will to
>worship him and follow the example set by Christ.  But as the lesson
>shows, He does not want us to be punished harshly and arbitrarily by
>our brothers for engaging in behaviour that injurs only ourselves.

God gave us free will, but He also designed human government and authorized
governments to enforce just and godly laws.
>
>Sodem and Gamorah involved the wrath of God, not the wrath of man.
>The distinction is crucial.  It is also useful to note that S&G is
>one of the rare instances where God takes the active path of divine
>intervention.  God almost always works through men, and that work
>usually involves loving council, not draconian punishment.

In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
according to law, was carried out by the people under government authority.
>
>So what *does* God say on the subject?  "Love your neighbor."
>      todddddddddddddddddd
>>Gary

And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:13:29 -0700 (PDT)

At 09:42 AM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>(Had to chirp in here, as Bill said not even God will save me from myself 
>; )
>
>YES! Amen Chad. Men who think they are fit to enforce Gods law are by 
>definition Tyrants in Boyd's Big Dictionary..
>Boyd (the opinions I express are mine alone.)
>
The word tyrant comes from the Greeks who defined it as one who ruled
"without the sanction of the gods" or those who did not rule under God's
authority. So Boyd's definition is exactly backawrds. PLEASE NOTE: This is
not to say that anyone wh SAYS they are rulung under God's authority
actually is doing so.

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Fritz Sands <fritzs@MICROSOFT.COM>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:26:57 -0700

>----------
>From: 	sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>Sent: 	Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>To: 	roc@XMISSION.COM
>Subject: 	Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>
>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>according to law, was carried out by the people under government authority.

Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
story right.  

I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
 Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
restoring constitutional government.

      Fritz

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: caps@visigenic.com (Cap Schwartz)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:43:40 -0700

At 02:09 PM 8/27/96 -0700, sabutigo wrote:

>>So what *does* God say on the subject?  "Love your neighbor."
>>      todddddddddddddddddd
>>>Gary
>
>And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
>
>S.
>
>
So, given one's omniscience in knowing that one's neighbor is
destroying himself, to what lengths may one go to "save" him?

cAp_



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ken L. Holder" <kholder@shell.liberty.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 14:46:02 -0700

So, when did ROC turn into a theology discussion list?

Y'all seem to forget the old saying: "One man's theology
is another man's belly-laugh."

And so it is.

--Ken
kholder@liberty.com
http:/www.liberty.com/home/kholder/


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: The Phosphorous-Headed Missile and TWA Flight 800 (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 16:44:05 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------


        The Phosphorous-Headed Missile and TWA Flight 800
        
                      by J. Orlin Grabbe

        In "Bill Clinton's Choo-Choo" I reported that TWA Flight 800 
had been taken down by a missile with a phosphorous head.
        
        The phosphorous head was originally designed to take out fuel
tanks.  An oil storage tank, for example.  The low-powered explosive
behind the phosphorous scatters it somewhat, and the glowing phosphorous
ignites the surrounding fuel in the target.  This type of missile is
well-known in the intelligence community.

        The exterior surface of the phosphorous warhead is covered with a 
substance that flakes off in the atmosphere.  The phosphorous will not be 
exposed until the missile travels a certain distance.  Then the exposed 
phosphorous will begin to incandesce.  The missile is laser-guided to a 
locked-in target from the body behind the head, and the glowing head does 
not interfere with the missile's guidance system. (This system differs from  
a normal Stinger, which has a passive infrared seeker.) 
        
        About six inches behind the missile's phosphorous head is a
small door that gives access to the missile's three or four computer 
boards. These boards guide the missile to its target, set the detonation
configuration, and so on.

        In this missile, the explosive behind the head and the missile 
propellant are one and the same.  It represents a more recent technological 
development than C-12.

        The sophistication of the missile suggests it was stolen from 
military inventory or purchased from a foreign power (one of the many to 
which the U.S. sells similar munitions).  

        The terrorist group involved, which gave advance warning of the 
attack to the New York office of the FBI, was trained in Syria's college 
devoted to terrorism (guerrilla warfare), and is additionally believed to be 
working on behalf of Syria. Basically speaking, Syria wants the U.S. and 
France to back off from the pressure they've been exerting on Syria to give 
up any claim to the Golan Heights.  Syria is sending out a "don't tread
on me" statement.

        The group, believed to have fired the missile from a small boat off 
the shore of Long Island (and to have used a stationary missile launcher),
targeted (and hit) the center fuel tank on TWA Flight 800.  The initial 
explosion spread from there to the nearest fuel tank in the right wing, and 
blew off engine number three.
        
        An intelligence analysis of the correlated satellite and radar
data, which pin-points both the flight path of the missile and of TWA Flight 
800, indicates that TWA Flight 800 was taken out at around 7600 feet. A
spectral analysis of the satellite data shows the missile was phosphorous-
headed.

        The FBI has persistently lied about its knowledge that a missile
was involved.  The FBI general consensus is "we can't let the public 
know".  The public would put pressure on the organization to do something 
about the terrorist threat--one they have no idea how to handle.  So, 
instead, the FBI lies about the real terrorist threat, continues to feed the 
media false details (including falsified radar data), and in the meantime 
asks the Congress for more authority to wiretap ordinary American citizens 
and to put limitations on their access to cryptology. 

August 26, 1996
Web Page: http://www.aci.net/kalliste




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 15:02:12 -0700

        Robert,

        >>>>>>>
        Easy:  if you are under the influence of ANYTHING, and commit a crime,
it is evidence of intent.
        <<<<<<<

        I must take exception to that statement.

        Being under _any_ influence, is not evidence of intent.

        Intent is determined, by preparation and malice aforethought.

        Simply being 'under the influence' and commiting a crime, is
attributed to a lack of responibility.
        The measure there, is that a person did something that no normal
and thoughtfull person would otherwise do. In that regard, the crime is
measured as a manslaughter.
        However, in regards to physical abuse that may have been committed,
if a person is under the influence of whatever substance and goes beyond
the simple accident scenario, and engages in violent acts, then not only is
one guilty of the lack of responsibility for using a substance to the
extent that irresponsible acts were comitted, but also of having broken the
social contract that demands an absence of violent acts against other
members, ie., violating their Rights.

Ed


In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
 "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
  Tacitus, Roman Senator and historian (a.d. 56-115)
>>>A kind thank you to: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net><<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 15:02:16 -0700

        In regards to the conversation:

        Let he, who is without imperfection, make the law.

        Let the rest of us decide if we good enough to obey it.

        Let no one judge another, who is without compasion to understand
the deed.

        If no bad deed should go unpunished, then no good deed should go
unrewarded.

        If a good deed is reward unto itself, then a bad deed will surely
punish the doer.

Ed


In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
 "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
  Tacitus, Roman Senator and historian (a.d. 56-115)
>>>A kind thank you to: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net><<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: More on Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 27 Aug 1996 15:02:04 -0700

        Bob,

        >>>>>>>
        Does *any* reasonable person in America buy any of this clown's
nonsense? Or
is this little charade just another dialogue between the DNC and the media?
        <<<<<<<

        Believe it or not, there are a _significant_ number of people who
work at Boeing (where I work also) who have told me in _no uncertain terms_
that they are going to vote for Clinton, because they are _deathly_ afraid
of Dole. These same people proclaim that they would prefer a Libertarian in
office, but "the Libertarians have not a chance to win".

        Significantly, a number of other people, who believe in the
Libertarian message, and would like to see a libertarian in the Oval
office, have said that Harry Browne has not a chance, so they are going to
vote Republican, because _they_ are deathly afraid of Clinton.

        In the above two groups, I often comment that if the number of
people who tell me they want a Libertarian as President, actually voted
that way - it would truely happen. But alas, they all figure themselves a
minority.
        Such a shame, that a majority of people who think alike, but have
no idea they have a powerful choice and will not exercise it, for fear of
being ineffectual.
        I think 1996 will go down in history, as the year that most
everyone I talked to said that they would want to see a Libertarian in
office, but where afraid to vote that way, for fear of having someone else
in office.
        It is not logical to say that you would like more freedom, but must
choose less freedom because to choose more will mean even less.
        You are give three choices:
                A cup of hemlock,
                A cup of cyanide,
                A cup of water.
        One of the choices will sustain life, the remainders will remove
it. The choice is yours.

        Of course, there is another large group of people with whom I work,
and to them the Libertarians are too weird to even consider.
        There is no accounting for taste.

Ed


In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
 "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
  Tacitus, Roman Senator and historian (a.d. 56-115)
>>>A kind thank you to: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net><<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<

                                <----------------------->




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: PHOSPHOROUS MISSILE (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 17:04:15 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Friends,

Several items have been posted on the net about a missile with a "Phosphorous Warhead" glowing in the dark as pieces of phosphorous flaked off the warhead in flight.

This is pure garbage. Munitions containing White Phosphorous are made in the form of grenades, mortar rounds and artillery shells. For all I know there may also be bombs and missile warheads containing white phosphorous. White phosphorous is commonly referred to as either WP, or, Willy Peter. 

WP is a soft metallic element and it is NOT an explosive. It does however spontaneously burn in the presence of oxygen. Munitions containing WP also include a small high explosive bursting charge designed to spread the WP around the target area so as to inflict maximun casualties as an anti-personnel device. I know of only two uses for wp, one is the anti-personnel role mentioned above. The other, particularly in artillery shells is to mark where rounds are falling for the forward observer who is adjusting the fire. This is because the bursting Willy Peter round gives off a characteristic heavy white smoke as it burns. This is a lot more readily visible on the battlefield than the bursting of a regular HE (High Explosive) round which makes a much smaller cloud of black smoke when it detonates.

WP would NOT be used to ignite a fuel tank because it will not burn submerged in water or anything else (JP-8 fuel in a 747 tank) that cuts off oxygen. In Vietnam we were trained to give first aid to WP victims who had pieces of WP shrapnel inside their bodies by keeping the wounds covered with wet rags to keep the WP from igniting.

I happen to think the missile shoot down theory makes a lot of sense. What witnesses saw would have been the exhaust plume of the missile as it climbed. All SAM's that I am aware of are powered with solid fuel rocket boosters. In flight this would have a red orange plume similar to the SRB's on the Space Shuttle.

All this crap about WP warheads as opposed to HE, and, WP flaking off in flight is either the ignorant rantings of an uninformed individual, or, disinformation posted by the government to discredit the serious evidence of a SAM shootdown of TWA Filght 800.

We need more serious information on this subject & less off the wall theories by the Elvis-in-a-UFO crowd.

Dean Allen
* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest in
returning our federal and state governments to limited,
constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message to
majordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this message
in its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 18:05:04 EDT

AGREED!  AGREED!!  VERY MUCH AGREED!!!  Give that man a cuppie doll.

Gary
On Tue, 27 Aug 96 09:01:06 PST roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
writes:
>A Military that is guarding our borders is one that is doing it's
>Constitutionally mandated job.  Would you rather have them doing house 
>to
>house searches of our homes?  Hopefully they will stop the flow of 
>illegals
>as well as drugs.....
>
>--
>An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | 
>Keep
>weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | 
>Your
>hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | 
>Powder
>on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | 
>Dry.
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Another Believer
Date: 27 Aug 1996 18:05:04 EDT

Well acording to Chuck Harder, The banana man has already won.  Why? 
Because he acts more presidential vs. Slick Willie who is followed by
scandle.  Never mind if some or all or none of it is true, Dole looks
more prez.  The world banks are backing him.(Dole).   The media backs him
also.  It might not seem like it, but step back and take in the big
picture.

Gary
  
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 11:16:15 -0500 "R. Knauer-AIMNET"
<rcktexas@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>>From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
>>Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Clinton calls for ban on handguns (fwd)
>
>>Here we go again boys, hide um and keep your powder dry.  He doesn"t 
>want
>>the people to know  "his record or he would loose his bid for 
>reelection.
>
>>Little does he know that the people know what his record is and he's
>>already lost it.
>
>-----
>
>Good Grief! I am not alone!
>
>Someone else out there actually believes klintoon will not get 
>re-elected.
>
>Can I have your autograph, please?
>
>Bob Knauer
>
>--
>       
>**************************************************
>    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
>    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 
>
> <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
>**************************************************
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 16:37:56 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, sabutigo wrote:
whack 
> And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
Is this responsibility one that you can delegate to government? (I'm 
interested in your opinion). Personally, I believe that much like self 
defense it is something I have to personally do. And that delegating it 
to government is not acceptable (IMO).
 > S.
Boyd Kneeland (the opinions I express are mine alone)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 16:45:44 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, sabutigo wrote:

> At 09:42 AM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
> >(Had to chirp in here, as Bill said not even God will save me from myself 
> >; )
> >
> >YES! Amen Chad. Men who think they are fit to enforce Gods law are by 
> >definition Tyrants in Boyd's Big Dictionary..
> >Boyd (the opinions I express are mine alone.)
> >
> The word tyrant comes from the Greeks who defined it as one who ruled
> "without the sanction of the gods" or those who did not rule under God's
> authority. So Boyd's definition is exactly backawrds. PLEASE NOTE: This is
> not to say that anyone wh SAYS they are rulung under God's authority
> actually is doing so.
> 
> S.
Well, since this seems to be the day for correcting others, I'll point 
out that "S." has confused etimology with definition. etimology is the 
historical background of a word, a words historical development and 
origin. Definition is the statement of meaning of a word wich takes into 
account modern perception and uses. So, Boyd's definition of Tyrant may 
not seem correct to some but it is not "exactly backwards" or a linguistic 
breakdown of the words etimology as "S." has offered us above. My 
statement of my opinion about people who take it on themselves to enforce 
God's will was not meant to reflect on anyone in this forum, I'm sorry of 
S was bothered by it. So far I am not persuaded to change that opinion by 
this linguistic foray.
Semantically yours,
Boyd Kneeland (the opinions I express are mine alone).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 16:12:12 PST

On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:

>>----------
>>From:  sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>To:    roc@XMISSION.COM
>>Subject:  Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>
>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government authority.
>
>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
>story right.  
>
>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>restoring constitutional government.

Where do you think Constitutional Government came from?  Who do you think
created it?



--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 17:12:00 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, Bill Vance wrote:

> On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
> 
> >>----------
> >>From:  sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
> >>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
> >>To:    roc@XMISSION.COM
> >>Subject:  Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
whack 
> Where do you think Constitutional Government came from?  Who do you think
> created it?

Are ROC members willing to lose allies in the fight for a restoration of 
the constitution in order to pursue theological questions? I am not. (But 
then I work with a guy with a PHD in this stuff so I can always get my 
fix of theology very easily ; ) I also subscribe to several -religion- 
based lists). Boyd 


 > > 
> --
> An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
> weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
> hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
> on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: L&J: Re: More on Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 27 Aug 1996 19:37:42 -0500

>Such a shame, that a majority of people who think alike, but have
>no idea they have a powerful choice and will not exercise it, for fear of
>being ineffectual.

No, I think the tragedy is the LP does not have its act together. They can't
even mail information to people who have a genuine interest in joining.

That's unacceptable, especially if you want to build an organization. And
you wonder that people conclude that the LP is a side show. Unfortunately.

Then you add the klintoon re-election factor, and it's enought to scare the
living crap outta you even to think of voting LP nationally. Unfortunately.

>I think 1996 will go down in history, as the year that most
>everyone I talked to said that they would want to see a Libertarian in
>office, but where afraid to vote that way, for fear of having someone else
>in office.

No shit, Sherlock. Now, whose fault is that? Don't blame the messenger!

>        Of course, there is another large group of people with whom I work,
>and to them the Libertarians are too weird to even consider.

And, again, whose fault is that? Just getting flamed on the L&J list a few
times from LP faithful is enough to turn most people off. Unfortunately.

(But not me!)

>        There is no accounting for taste.

There's no accounting for the incredible poor taste of most of the human race.

But since we are not cannibals, it doesn't matter how bad people taste. :-)

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Fritz Sands <fritzs@MICROSOFT.COM>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 18:05:59 -0700

I think American constitutional government came from the minds of a
group of intelligent men who negotiated and compromised their way to a
government structure they could live with.  They had knowledge of
various other attempts at self-governance, notably those of Greek
city-states and the Roman Republic.  They had deep knowledge of the
English common-law tradition, and of the writings of Locke, Grotius,
etc.

If you compare the structure of the government outlined in the
Constitution, it has clear resemblances to those previous models.  I
don't think it has a clear resemblance to the government structure of
Solomon or David, or to that which existed in Israel at the slaughter of
the tribe of Benjamin.  

Is there something in your question which has eluded me?

     Fritz

>----------
>From: 	roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org]
>Sent: 	Tuesday, August 27, 1996 5:12 PM
>To: 	roc@xmission.com
>Subject: 	RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
>
>On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
>
>>>----------
>>>From:  sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>>To:    roc@XMISSION.COM
>>>Subject:  Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>>
>>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government authority.
>>
>>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
>>story right.  
>>
>>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
>> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>>restoring constitutional government.
>
>Where do you think Constitutional Government came from?  Who do you think
>created it?
>
>
>
>--
>An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
>weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
>hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
>on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Libertarians RE: Re: L&J: Re: More on Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:23:57 -0500 (CDT)

Well, I think the proper action is for the Christians, Right-Wingers, Gun 
owners, ect to co-opt the Libertarian party just the same way the 
Socialist and American Communist party did to the Democrats when FDR took 
over. We can turn it from a Computer Nerd debating society into a real 
political party that the Republicans and Democrats will loose members to 
such that one of them expires, anyone heard of the Wig party lately?
No offense to the Libertarians out there, you all have your heart in the 
right place, they just lack a little real world experience. As gun owners 
we have got to get out of the defensive mode, ask George Pattons ghost how 
many battles were won that way vs a good offense. I don't know about the 
rest of you but I am damn sure tired of the back stabbers like DOLE-KEMP 
and the Marxist Clintons. I think we are getting like Saddom's elite army 
that was under constant B52 carpet bombing for weeks on end in Desert Storm. 
It is time to get out of the foxholes and start an offense. Bob Dole 
sure is not going to be the great white hope, he has already started the 
Ollie North-CIA-BUSH-Wakenhut-MENA-BCCI-P2- War on Drugs (Constitution) 
crusade of we need to use extreme prejudice on the American citizens in 
order to save them from those evil CIA supplied black market drugs.
Regards,
Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu   Senior Buyer UTD          
The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 214/883-2307,fax# 214/883-2348
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, 
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,
and to provide new Guards for their future security.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David LeVine" <Dave_L@Mainstream.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 21:32:31 +0000

> Let's take alcohol for instance.  Correct me if I wrong but the
> libertarian view is I should have the right to have as much as I
> want when ever I want it.  What about that person that says that is
> his right and indulges, gets into his automobile, and goes out and
> kills a whole family because he was impaired to the point that he
> could not operate that automobile responsibility?  Where is that
> families rights to life LIBERTY and per suit of happiness.  Hence
> the reason from locking them away from the rest of society.  

So you feel that it is okay for the government to take away your 
freedom to give you safety?

> All I'm wanting to do is come up with a workable solution to an
> ongoing problem.  Maybe we should all go back to saying "Gity-up
> horse". 

No, maybe we should say "DWI and die."  Most dangerous drunk drivers 
have a long history.

Dave 8{)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David LeVine" <Dave_L@Mainstream.net>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 21:32:31 +0000

> The only problem I have with the 'l'ibertains is the abortion issue
> and the drug question.  How ever I would be in favor of rounding up
> all of the drug users put them in one location (say S.F.) and give
> them all they want.  Let them O.D.  End of problem!

Gary,

Consider for a moment the idea of an authority saying "You can't have 
XXX, it's bad for you, it kills people."  Now let XXX be guns, or 
drugs, or fast automobiles, or motorcycles.  If you institute a 
government which controls people's actions by fiat, it can stop 
drugs, or guns, or alcohol, or smoking about as easily.

That is what we have.  I would rather give up control of drugs by the 
government than give up control of my freedom to the government.  
Where do you stand?

DAve  8{)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 19:53:27 EDT

Well then that person that won't support is just along for the ride. 
Right?  It's like the old saying goes, "There ain't no such thing as a
free lunch."  

The only thing that I know of that's free is SALVATION.  And that came at
a very heavy price.  

I might not be answering my mail for a couple of days,  I'm trying to
throw off something (i.e. virus etc...). I came down with a fever of
almost 104.  

Will answer when I can.

Regards, Gary

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:48:21 -0600 chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh) writes:
>>On Tue, 27 Aug 96 10:05:47 EDT CCCS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU writes:
>>
>>Is a way of life (fredom) worth fighting for?  No matter who we have 
>to
>>fight??
>>
>>Gary
>
>Yes.  The real question is:  Is it worth coercing and forcing everyone 
>else
>to follow that way of life?  Or should we make it so that you can live 
>it
>without having to fight?
>
>regards
>Chad
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-24 Radio Address by President to 
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:12:14 -0700

At 10:20 AM 8/27/96 -0700, Skip Leuschner wrote:
>
>
>Politics is about Power, and Power is about imposing my will on you and
>others.   If I've got political power, I can force the masses to do what 
>I want them to do, whether they like it or not, and I will do it.  
>
>That's why I'm a term limits guy.   "Power corrupts" is not a statement
>about politics.   It's a statement about human nature.  Some resist better
>than others, but power will corrupt everyone eventually, and the
>more one has, the faster it happens.   Term Limits is the only way I know
>to get them out of there before they start trying to impose their will on
>us instead of representing us. 

I'd disagree only to this extent.  Power itself does not corrupt honest
people; but as F. A. Hayek notes in _The Road to Serfdom_, power _attracts_
the corruptable.  People who are more likely to abuse government power flock
to government service to _obtain_ that power. They're willing to do almost
anything to obtain and to keep it.  Honest and honorable people will be
repelled by what they need to do to obtain and keep the power, but the
scoundrel will not.  

Let me draw an analogy;  shit doesn't CAUSE flies. But it sure does draw them! 
Ken Mitchell      |"Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. 
8037 Stone Canyon |counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing
Citrus Heights, CA|citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent
95610             |crimes and it appears to produce no increase in
kmitchel@gvn.net  |accidental deaths. If those states which did not 
916-449-9152 (vm) |have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had
916-729-0966 (fax)|adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders;
                  |4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults
                  |would have been avoided yearly."  Crime, 
                  |Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
                  |John R. Lott, Jr., School of Law Univ. of Chicago
-------------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-24 Radio Address by President to  
Date: 27 Aug 1996 23:13:08 -0500

At 08:12 PM 8/27/96 -0700, Ken Mitchell  wrote:
>At 10:20 AM 8/27/96 -0700, Skip Leuschner wrote:
>>
>>
>>Politics is about Power, and Power is about imposing my will on you and
>>others.   If I've got political power, I can force the masses to do what 
>>I want them to do, whether they like it or not, and I will do it.  
>>
>I'd disagree only to this extent.  Power itself does not corrupt honest
>people; but as F. A. Hayek notes in _The Road to Serfdom_, power _attracts_
>the corruptable. 
>
>Let me draw an analogy;  shit doesn't CAUSE flies. But it sure does draw them! 

Oh I don't know, without shit or other rotting stuff maggots could never
grow up to be flies.
Almost a Chicken and Egg situation. 




              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 23:25:18 EDT

This is true.
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 16:37:56 -0700 (PDT) boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM> writes:
>On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, sabutigo wrote:
>whack 
>> And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
>Is this responsibility one that you can delegate to government? (I'm 
>interested in your opinion). Personally, I believe that much like self 
>
>defense it is something I have to personally do. And that delegating 
>it 
>to government is not acceptable (IMO).
> > S.
>Boyd Kneeland (the opinions I express are mine alone)
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 21:45:53 -0700 (PDT)


On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, E. J. Totty wrote:

>         Robert,
> 
>         >>>>>>>
>         Easy:  if you are under the influence of ANYTHING, and commit a crime,
> it is evidence of intent.
>         <<<<<<<
> 
>         I must take exception to that statement.
> 
>         Being under _any_ influence, is not evidence of intent.
> 
>         Intent is determined, by preparation and malice aforethought.
> 
>         Simply being 'under the influence' and commiting a crime, is
> attributed to a lack of responibility.
>         The measure there, is that a person did something that no normal
> and thoughtfull person would otherwise do. In that regard, the crime is
> measured as a manslaughter.

Yes, of course.  I was not precise in my language, and thought the context
implied "should" where I used "is".

I was prescribing a solution:  If you use drugs, and commit an act which
would normally be "without intent", it should be punished as if you had
done it intentionally.  This is because you intentionally took the substance,
and voluntarily abandoned a normal state of mind.  

Thus, manslaughter would become Murder I.


> Ed
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
> we have more laws against freedom than those that
> protect it.
> If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
> things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
> >>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
> -------------------------------------------------------
>  "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
>   Tacitus, Roman Senator and historian (a.d. 56-115)
> >>>A kind thank you to: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net><<<
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
> >>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
> the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
> Beware of Imitations.
> Accept No Substitutes.
> Insist on the Genuine Articles.
> >>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
> -------------------------------------------------------
> "You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
> your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
> people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
> greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
> >>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 23:49:24 -0500

At 09:01 AM 8/27/96 PST, Bill Vance wrote:
>A Military that is guarding our borders is one that is doing it's
>Constitutionally mandated job.  Would you rather have them doing house to
>house searches of our homes?  Hopefully they will stop the flow of illegals
>as well as drugs.....

Since drugs are as much or more demand pull, rather than supply push, this
will be a near hopeless effort, and will result in our Armed Forces being
turned into what too many Latin American militaries already are.  I'd just
as soon not see our military corrupted that way. They exist to protect the
country from physical invasion. To expect them to in effect protect us from
ourselves is asking too much.  The *only* solution to the drug problem is
education, and that will take at least a generation, and even then it will
only beat back the problem, not irradicate it altogether. People have been
taking drugs as long as there have been people, perhaps longer. 
They will continue to do so. The only question is how much of our liberties
will have left after the drug war is lost. As was said of "Global
Thermonuclear War" so it should be said of the war on *some* drugs, "The
only way to win is not to play".




              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Lewis Glendenning <rlglende@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 27 Aug 1996 21:54:51 -0700 (PDT)


Right.  We will surely stop the flow of both drugs and illegals.  Merely
use the military to guard the borders, the CIA ( a known major drug
smuggling organization ) to provide intelligence, and Clinton ( a known
associate of drug smuggling and drug money laundering people and
partner in their orgnizations) as Commander in Chief to lead the effort.

We have already become a narco-republic.  Drugs are the largest business
in the world.  Drug profits are larger than the next 5 businesses put
togather.  The accumulated wealth of drug lords, ladies, knights, bishops,
... is staggering, as is the accumulated political power.

The borders are long.  The number of containers of cargo, the number of 
trucks, train cars, ... crossing the border every hour is huge.  The 
chance of affecting the supply of drugs in any country is precisely zero,
no matter what violations of the Constitution you re willing to tolerate.

Now, think of illegal immigrants as cocaine sacks with legs, arms and
brains.  The chance of affecting the number of illegals is precisely
zero, no matter what biolations of the Constitution you are willing to
tolerate.

This reasoning is well known.  It is backed up by massive experience,
world-wide.  We do not need to try this path.  The outcome is well known.

Dole's proposals are ludicrous, pathetic, stupid, insane.  The fact that
people on this list buy it is amazing to me.

Lew Glendenning		rlglende@netcom.com
"Ideology?  We don't got no Ideology. We don't need no stinkin Ideology!
We have a CONSTITUTION!"  

The CONSTITUTION, the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, and NOTHING BUT the CONSTITUTION.

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

> AGREED!  AGREED!!  VERY MUCH AGREED!!!  Give that man a cuppie doll.
> 
> Gary
> On Tue, 27 Aug 96 09:01:06 PST roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
> writes:
> >A Military that is guarding our borders is one that is doing it's
> >Constitutionally mandated job.  Would you rather have them doing house 
> >to
> >house searches of our homes?  Hopefully they will stop the flow of 
> >illegals
> >as well as drugs.....
> >
> >--
> >An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | 
> >Keep
> >weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | 
> >Your
> >hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | 
> >Powder
> >on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | 
> >Dry.
> >
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 23:01:43 PST

On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:

>I think American constitutional government came from the minds of a
>group of intelligent men who negotiated and compromised their way to a
>government structure they could live with.  They had knowledge of
>various other attempts at self-governance, notably those of Greek
>city-states and the Roman Republic.  They had deep knowledge of the
>English common-law tradition, and of the writings of Locke, Grotius,
>etc.
>
>If you compare the structure of the government outlined in the
>Constitution, it has clear resemblances to those previous models.  I
>don't think it has a clear resemblance to the government structure of
>Solomon or David, or to that which existed in Israel at the slaughter of
>the tribe of Benjamin.  
>
>Is there something in your question which has eluded me?
>
>     Fritz
>
>>----------
>>From:  roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org]
>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 5:12 PM
>>To:    roc@xmission.com
>>Subject:  RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>
>>On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
>>
>>>>----------
>>>>From:  sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>>>To:    roc@XMISSION.COM
>>>>Subject:  Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>>>
>>>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>>>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government authority.
>>>
>>>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>>>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
>>>story right.  
>>>
>>>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>>>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
>>> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>>>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>>>restoring constitutional government.
>>
>>Where do you think Constitutional Government came from?  Who do you think
>>created it?

This will fill you in on some basic stuff.  I'll keep looking for a couple
other more detailed files, but probably wont find them till tomorrow, as
there is a bunch to go through.  (Thanks Monte).




Taken from John Hagee Ministries' July-August 1996, Vol. 7, No. 4 
Newsletter.  Re-typed and entered into EMail.  Although copyrighted, 
the back cover tells the reader to read and pass on to a friend.  This 
is one of the best short form versions of American history I've ever 
read.  Quoted verbatim.  Please pass to a friend of yours, your 
congressman, area pastors (especially those that don't believe God and 
politics are supposed to mix), disbelievers, influential community
leaders, etc.



A NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherwith Christ hath made us free, 
and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.  Galatians 5:1

This July 4th marks the 220th anniversary of the day our Founding 
Fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor in 
defense of our God-given rights as free citizens.

As they signed the Declaration of Independence late that afternoon, 
they knew the cost would be high.  Breaking the silence that followed 
the vote, John Hancock remarked wryly, "Gentlemen, the price on my head 
has just been doubled!"

Why were these men willing to stake their very lives on Independence?  
Perhaps Samuel Adams' comment that day says it best: "We have this day 
restored the Sovereign, to Whom alone men ought to be obedient.  He 
reigns in heaven and...from the rising to the setting sun, may His 
Kingdom come."

You won't read that quote in most modern history books.  The deep, 
personal faith of our Founding Fathers has been censored by those who 
wish to rewrite history.

But it doesn't change the fact that our nation was founded by godly 
patriots.  And if our nation is to survive, a new generation of godly 
patriots must rise up and reclaim our heritage.

In the upcoming national election we again have an opportunity to make 
an impact on the direction of our country.  As Christians, we must 
participate in the political process, and we must do so by electing men 
and women who will uphold biblical standards of morality in government.

To do that, Samuel Adams said, is to be a true friend of liberty: "He 
therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries 
most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence 
extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and 
trust who is not a wise and virtuous man."

Noah Webster, whose history textbook was used for over 100 years, 
instructed America's public school students: "When you become entitled 
to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be 
impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, 
'just men who will rule in the fear of God.'  The preservation of our 
government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the 
citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the 
government will soon be corrupted...If our government fails to secure 
public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens 
neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer 
the laws."

Note that Webster quoted the Bible in that passage: "He that ruleth 
over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God" (2 Samuel 23:3).  He 
interpreted this passage to mean that we have an obligation before 
Almighty God to elect good, moral, upright, God-fearing people to be 
our rulers.

It is high time that we, as Christians and citizens, take a stand for 
righteousness and morality in public policy.  It may not be easy...it 
may not be popular...but it is absolutely necessary to stand up and 
make our voices heard.

If we don't, how long will America continue to be "one nation, under 
God"?

THE SOURCE OF LIBERTY

The men who signed the Declaration of Independence were willing to pay 
the ultimate price for freedom.  They recognized the source of liberty 
as God Himself, not the government.

That's what the Declaration says.  Our "certain unalienable rights" are 
given to us by God, not the government.  Governments are instituted, 
the Declaration says, "to secure these rights"...and if any form of 
government becomes destructive of individual liberty, "it is the right 
of the people to alter or abolish it."

Many of the ideas in the Declaration of Independence came straight out 
of the Bible.  Take the idea: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, 
that all men are created equal..."  Where do you suppose the idea came 
from that all men were created equal?

Galatians 3:28 says, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither 
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in 
Christ Jesus."  If we are all equal in Christ, it does not take much 
stretch of the imagination to picture all men as equals in the social 
construct.

While only one minister actually signed the Declaration, the Rev. John 
Witherspoon, the influence of colonial pastors on the move toward 
independence cannot be overstated.

In fact, when the Continental Congress ordered the Declaration of 
Indpendence to be printed and distributed, they specified that it first 
be sent to the local pastors---not the newspapers or town clerks---who 
were instructed to "read the same to their respective congregations, as 
soon as divine service is ended, in the afternoon, on the first Lord's 
day after they have received it."

Harry S. Stout, Jonathan Edwards Professor of American Christianity at 
Yale University, says this about the influence of the colonial pastors: 
 "Over the span of the colonial era, American ministers delivered 
approximately 8 million sermons, each lasting one to one-and-a-half 
hours.
The average 70-year-old colonial churchgoer would have listened to some 
7,000 sermons in his or her lifetime, totaling nearly 10,000 hours of 
concentrated listening...The colonial sermon was prophet, newspaper, 
video, Internet, community college, and social therapist wrapped in 
one. Such was the range of its influence on all aspects of life that 
even contemporary television and personal computers pale in 
comparison."

Our Puritan forefathers, following the heritage of the Protestant 
Reformation, taught the priesthood of the believer.  Each believer 
stands equally before Christ, and each has access to the Father through 
the sacrifice of Jesus Christ---there is no other Mediator.

The equality of believers was proclaimed from American pulpits 
throughout the colonies.  This idea of equality influenced the 
political discourse, as well.

Trusting that it was God's own hand that had led their forefathers to 
religious and political freedom in America, the colonists were 
determined not to lose that freedom.  Sermons were preached from texts 
like Galations 5:1, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith 
Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of 
bondage."

THE BEGINNINGS OF SELF GOVERNMENT

In a sense, Americans had always considered themeselves free and 
independent.  The Pilgrims came to this country seeking religious 
freedom, and they formed their own governments as soon as they reached 
the New World.

When the Mayflower sighted land on November 9, 1620, the Pilgrims 
discovered that the storms endured during the crossing had blown them 
off course by about 100 miles.  Their charter authorized them to plant 
a colony in the northern part of Virginia, about two days' voyage to 
the south.

Heading in that direction, they were again blown off course and forced 
back at sea to wait out the weather.  As they waited, they prayed and 
sought God's direction.  After much prayer and deliberation, they 
determined God had intended them to settle where they had originally 
landed, in the vicinity of Cape Cod.

This presented a problem.  Their charter was for Virginia, not 
Massachusetts.  Therefore they would no longer be under the 
jurisdiction of the Virginia Company; and since they had no charter
from the New England Company, they would not be under the jurisdiction 
of any recognized authority.

Their solution was to form their own civil government, under God's 
authority.  Before disembarking from the ship, they drew up a covenant 
agreeing to form themselves into a "civil body politic" and to enact 
laws for their own governance.  The Mayflower Compact, signed on
board ship the 11th of November, 1620, marked the fist time that free 
men had voluntarily joined together in a covenant to create a civil 
government.

****************insert*******************

THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT

In the Name of God, Amen.  We, whose names are under-written, the loyal 
subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James by the grace of God of 
Great Britian, France and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the glory of God and advancement of the 
Christian Faith and honor of our King and country, a voyage to plant 
the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these 
presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of 
another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body 
politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of 
the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame 
such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, 
from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the 
general good of the colony.  Unto which we promise all due submission 
and obedience.  In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our 
name at Cape  Cod, the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of 
our sovereign lord, King James of England, France, and Ireland the 
eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini 1620.

***************end insert****************

Puritan settlers who arrived during the Great Migration of the 1630s 
took their self-government to the next step:  a written Constitution.  
Almost 140 years before the Declaration of Independence, the first 
written Constitution in history was produced in America.  The 
Fundamental Orders of Connecticut became of model for the government of 
other colonies.

On May 31, 1638, the Rev. Thomas Hooker of Connecticut preached a 
sermon to the recently-elected General Court (which was probably not in 
session at the time), based on Deuteronomy 1:13, "Take you wise men, 
and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them 
rulers over you."  This was God's command to Moses for the government 
of the children of Israel as they traveled to the Promised Land.

Hooker said that "the foundation of authority is laid in the free 
consent of the people, " and that "the choice of public magistrates 
belongs unto the people, by God's own allowance."

His preaching had a great influence on the Christian men of that 
colony.  In January 1639 the General Court met to adopt a Constitution. 
 Many of its ideas can be traced directly to the colony's beloved 
pastor.

In that first Constitution there was not a single reference to the King 
or to Britain, nor to any government outside of Connecticut itself.  
There is, however, ample testimony to their faith: "Well knowing that 
where a people are gathered together the word of God requires that to
maintain the peace and union of such a people there should be an 
orderly and decent government established according to God...We do 
therefore enter into combination and confederation together, to 
maintain and preserve the liberty and purity of the gospel of our Lord
Jesus which we now profess, as also the discipline of the Churches, 
which according to the truth of the said gospel is now practiced 
amongst us..."

PREACHING FREEDOM

The influence of gospel preaching and Christian principles was felt 
throughout the history of the early colonies.

In 1683 the Crown revoked the Charter of Massachusetts because the 
colony refused to allow Anglican clergy to form churches.  (The state 
church of Massachusetts was the Congregational church, supported by 
public monies until "disestablished" in 1833.  This was not a violation 
of the First Amendment, which only prohibited the federal government 
from establishing a national church.)

The colonists whose fathers and grandfathers had fled the persecution 
of the Church of England now turned the tables, outlawing the Anglican 
church in Massachusetts.  England recongnized that the colonists' 
resistance was not just political, but spiritual.

"The ministers are preaching freedom," the King was warned.

The colonists refused to submit their Charter, even when word reached 
them that 5,000 British troops were being sent to compel their 
obedience.  The leading pastor, Increase Mather, fasted and prayed 
until he received assurance from God that the colony would be spared.

Months later they learned that Charles II had died suddenly on the very 
day Mather fasted and prayed.  The new king had decided not to send the 
troops.

In the 1760s, when George III imposed the Stamp Act and the Townsend 
Acts, the colonial pastors again declared it was a spiritual as well as 
a political battle.

Rev. Jonathan Mayhew of Boston proclaimed:  "God gave the Israelites a 
king in His anger, because they had not sense and virtue enough to like 
a free commonwealth, and to have Himself for their king.  That the Son 
of God came down from heaven to make us "free indeed," and that "where 
the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty," this made me conclude 
that freedom was a great blessing."

Rev. Josiah Quincy declared: "In defense of our civil and religious 
rights, with the God of armies on our side, we fear not the hour of 
trial; though the hosts of our enemies should cover the field like 
locusts, yet the sword of the Lord and Gideon shall prevail."

In colonial days, such sermons were regularly printed in the 
newspapers.  King George may not have taken note of these sermons, but 
the American people certainly did.  Protest after protest took place 
against the Crown.

One of the Crown-appointed governors wrote back to England: "If you ask 
an American, who is his master?  He will tell you he has none, nor any 
governor but Jesus Christ."  Perhaps that's why the slogan of the 
Committees of Correspondence, organized to keep information flowing
between the colonies, became, "No King But King Jesus!"

When war actually broke out, pastors again played an important role.  
There were so many fighting pastors that the Tories dubbed them the 
"black regiment", referring to the clerical robes worn by most pastors 
in those days.

One Sunday morning in 1775 a Lutheran pastor preached from Ecclesiastes 
3:1, "To everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose 
under heaven."  At the end of his sermon he said, "There is a time to 
preach and a time to fight...and now is the time to fight!"

He then took off his clerical robe and revealed his colonel's uniform.  
Ordering the drums to sound, he began to enlist recruits for the 
Continental Army.  By that afternoon 300 men had answered the call.  
Pastor Peter Muhlenberg served his country valiantly and rose to the 
rank of brigadier general under Washington's command.

All along the pastors had said the battle for Independence was a 
spiritual battle. They were proved right.

During the course of the war, non-Anglican churches were systematically 
destroyed by British troops.  Over 50 churches were completely 
destroyed, and many more were damaged seriously.  Steeples were sawed 
off and pews were burned for heating fuel.  Dozens of churches were
turned into stables, barracks and prisons.

Indeed, it was---and is---a spiritual battle.

TAKE THE "RIGHT GROUND"

Today we may hear it called a "culture war", which is an apt 
description.  But beyond that, it is a spiritual war for the heart and 
soul of this nation.

It is time for pulpits across America to once again ring with the 
declaration, "Brethren, ye have been called unto liberty" (Gal.5:13).  
We must stand fast in the liberty for which our Founding Fathers paid 
with their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.

Too much of that precious liberty ahs been chipped away by a spirit of 
secularism, a spirit that says "religion and politics don't mix".  The 
next time you hear that phrase, inform the speaker that he or she is 
completely ignorant of American history.  Listen to what the father of 
our country, George Washington had to say on the subject:  "Of all the 
dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion 
and morality are indispensable supports.  In vain would that man claim 
the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great 
pillars."

The public record of our Founding Fathers soundly refutes that notion 
that "religion and politics don't mix."  A ten-year study conducted by 
politcal science professors examined the writings of the Founding 
Fathers to see if the source of their ideas could be determined.  They 
studied some 15,000 writings, isolating 3,154 quotes and identifying 
the source of each quote.

It surprises the average secular humanist---but comes as no surprise to 
serious scholars of the period---that the most often quoted source in 
the writings of the Founding Fathers is the Bible.  Thirty-four percent 
of their quotes came straight out of Scripture.

Yet the Christian principles of the Founding Fathers have been edited 
out of schoolbooks, and out of public life.  It's time we re-educated 
ourselves to our own history.  It's time we reclaimed our heritage.  
It's time to write our own declaration of independence from the spirit 
of our age---time to shake off the shackles of secularism.

And it's time we quit ignoring the character of a political candidate 
in order to vote our pocketbooks.  Noah Webster's prophecy has come to 
pass.  He said, "If the citizens neglect their duty and place 
unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted."  
That day is here.

It's quite simple.  Good men make good laws.  Bad men make bad laws.  
We have bad laws because we started placing bad people in public 
office.

And the lion's share of the blame must go to the church, the men and 
women of God who remained silent while our godly heritage was trampled 
underfoot by the godless.  Christians quit running for public office, 
and either quit voting altogether or voted wihtout regard to a 
candidate's character.

Political candidates today do not want their private lives examined.  
You will hear it said that "character doesn't count".  But character is 
all that counts.  "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he" (Prov. 
23:7).  Character counts in every candidate for every public office, 
from the city council to the Congress, from the school board to the 
Senate, from the precinct chairman to the President.

In America we enjoy a freedom known by relatively few in this world.  
We hold the power to elect those who govern over us.  And we, the 
church, must fulfill our responsibility to elect "just men who will 
rule in the fear of God."

The great American revivalist Charles Finney said, "The church must 
take the right ground in regards to politics...Politics are a part of a 
religion in such a country as this, and Christians must do their duty 
to the country as part of their duty to God."

May the men and women of God do their duty.  May the church rise up and 
"take the right ground" in America once again.

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:54:38 EDT

Sorry,  after I answer these, I will sease and decist!

Gary
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:46:02 -0700 "Ken L. Holder"
<kholder@shell.liberty.com> writes:
>So, when did ROC turn into a theology discussion list?
>
>Y'all seem to forget the old saying: "One man's theology
>is another man's belly-laugh."
>
>And so it is.
>
>--Ken
>kholder@liberty.com
>http:/www.liberty.com/home/kholder/
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:54:38 EDT

As much as it takes.  I'm talking verbaly now.  Ask him if there's any
way you can help. If he says no, and to leave him alone and mind your own
business then do just that.  Wheather he want you to or not,  Pray for
him.

Gary

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:43:40 -0700 caps@visigenic.com (Cap Schwartz)
writes:
>At 02:09 PM 8/27/96 -0700, sabutigo wrote:
>
>>>So what *does* God say on the subject?  "Love your neighbor."
>>>      todddddddddddddddddd
>>>>Gary
>>
>>And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
>>
>>S.
>>
>>
>So, given one's omniscience in knowing that one's neighbor is
>destroying himself, to what lengths may one go to "save" him?
>
>cAp_
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:54:38 EDT

Excelent point!
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:13:29 -0700 (PDT) sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
writes:
>At 09:42 AM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>(Had to chirp in here, as Bill said not even God will save me from 
>myself 
>>; )
>>
>>YES! Amen Chad. Men who think they are fit to enforce Gods law are by 
>
>>definition Tyrants in Boyd's Big Dictionary..
>>Boyd (the opinions I express are mine alone.)
>>
>The word tyrant comes from the Greeks who defined it as one who ruled
>"without the sanction of the gods" or those who did not rule under 
>God's
>authority. So Boyd's definition is exactly backawrds. PLEASE NOTE: 
>This is
>not to say that anyone wh SAYS they are rulung under God's authority
>actually is doing so.
>
>S.
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:54:38 EDT

All I'm trying to do is stimulate a little debate

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:26:57 -0700 Fritz Sands <fritzs@MICROSOFT.COM>
writes:
>>----------
>>From: 	sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>Sent: 	Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>To: 	roc@XMISSION.COM
>>Subject: 	Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>
>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 
>men
>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government 
>authority.
>
>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember 
>the
>story right.  
>
>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based 
>government".
> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>restoring constitutional government.
>
>      Fritz
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 27 Aug 1996 20:54:38 EDT

Preach on brother!  Preach on.

Gary
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:09:07 -0700 (PDT) sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
writes:
>At 10:05 AM 8/27/96 EDT, you wrote:
>>On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:56:21 EDT GARY H. BURKEPILE said:
>>>But my main concern is:   "What does God say about the Subject?"
>>>Remember Sodom and Gomorrah.
>>>
>>And the Rabbis brought a prostitute to the temple and said, "Jesus,
>>here's a prostitute.  Wanna help us stone her in accordance with the
>>law?"  The Christ said, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the
>>first stone."  Those gathered dropped their stones and walked off in
>>embaressment until there was no one left but Christ and the woman.
>>Jesus said to her, "Is there no one left to condem you?"  The
>>prostitute said, "Guess not."  Jesus said, "Then I don't condem you
>>either."
>
>You might finish out what Jesus said. He said "Go your way and SIN NO 
>MORE."
>As for Love your neighbor, I think this statement reflects that love. 
>Jesus
>did not stop the stoning because "nobody had sinned" but because they 
>were
>all guilty of a death penalty offense -- bearing false witness -- AND 
>THEY
>KNEW IT. They had claimed that they caught her "in the very act" of
>adultery. Oh? Was she committing adultery alone?
>The Law required that a false witness suffer the same punishment he 
>wished
>to inflict upon the other person. In this case, stoning to death.
>>
>>God gave humans free will.  He wishes that we use that free will to
>>worship him and follow the example set by Christ.  But as the lesson
>>shows, He does not want us to be punished harshly and arbitrarily by
>>our brothers for engaging in behaviour that injurs only ourselves.
>
>God gave us free will, but He also designed human government and 
>authorized
>governments to enforce just and godly laws.
>>
>>Sodem and Gamorah involved the wrath of God, not the wrath of man.
>>The distinction is crucial.  It is also useful to note that S&G is
>>one of the rare instances where God takes the active path of divine
>>intervention.  God almost always works through men, and that work
>>usually involves loving council, not draconian punishment.
>
>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 
>men
>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>according to law, was carried out by the people under government 
>authority.
>>
>>So what *does* God say on the subject?  "Love your neighbor."
>>      todddddddddddddddddd
>>>Gary
>
>And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
>
>S.
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Fwd: ANTI-ONE WORLD TOTALITARIAN GOV'T URLS (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 08:03:18 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by txjohn47@ix.netcom.com (John Johnson)
<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns

Conservative and Independant Pages of Interest.

http://www.best.com/~jdulaney/politics.html - From where all the
following URLS were taken and a HARD RIGHT Page exposing the One World
Government Conspiracy and much more. Dozens of ON TARGET articles and
even more URLS as well.

http://www.johnbirch.org/
  THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY Main WEB PAGE. Your Most Important
Source on the facts about the ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT Conspiracy.
Join the JBS, I have. 

http://execpc.com/~jfish/na/
  THE NEW AMERICAN Magazine, a Great Monthly Publication by
The JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY. More info. here than you can read in
a year and you can be SURE it's all FACTUAL and ON-TARGET

http://www.ksfo.com/metcalf
  Geoff Metcalf's New WEB PAGE! The best talk-show host in the
San Francisco Bay Area. Unafraid to speak out on One World Gov't,
FBI crimes etc. KSFO 56.0 AM 9:30am-12:00PM 5 days a week and
repeats on weekends. The Hardest Hitter on Air! 

http://Syninfo.COM/crier/index.html
  THE PENNSYLVANIA CRIER - A Great WEB PAGE! Much of the text
in my political page came from here, with permission. (By
Preston Jackson.) Credit goes to Ed Balajeski and the late
Helen Somers. 

http://accessone.com/~rivero
  Michael Rivero's Incredible Collection Proving that our
Government is full of murderers and felons of every stripe!.
Hold on to your seats as you read this giant and finely
documented Page - Plenty of great images as well! 

http://www.cris.com/~dhathaw/otherside
  A Great WEB PAGE for Conservatives.

http://accessus.net/~eagle
  The Invaluable and On-Target Phyllis Schlafley Column WEB PAGE.
See this is you have children! 

http://www.alaska.net/~schoedel/home.htm
  CHRISTIAN IDENTITY - Probably THE most Controversial Web Page
in the entire WWW. 

http://www.204.181.176.4/stormfront
  Probably the Second Most Controversial Page in the WWW.
This is STORMFRONT - White Supremist Page

http://www.primenet.com/~tevans/jbs.html
  JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY Info page

http://www.mixcom.com/bbs/eeppee/jbs/index.html
  JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY Schedule of Events

http://www.well.com/user/srhodes/militia.html
  Link to Militia Web Pages

http://www.greyware.com/authors/pitman/m1.html
  Neo-Militia Links Page

http://www.WWW.vote-smart.org
  PROJECT: VOTE SMART

http://www.flinet.com/~rmplstiskn/resistr.html
  THE RESISTER - Official Publication of the Special Forces
Undergound - These Guys might Save our Nation and Our Necks,
One Day! 

http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley
  NEW WORLD ORDER and GUN CONTROL Expose'! HOT! 

http://www.concentric.net/~alcanh
  A Jewish Guy with a Conservative Attitude! Check it out! 

http://www.thomas.loc.gov
  THOMAS - Check the status of any Bill Before Congress

http://www.primenet.com/~lion
  SUPRESSED NEWS - News the Controlled Mainstream media will never
print: One World Government, Militias, Patriots, AIDS, Sovereignty,
Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Liberty etc. etc.  etc. 

http://www.gototown.com
  Go To Town, "WELCOME TO HOMETOWN AMERICA"! 

http://www.bradyinc.com/change/
  CHANGE OUR WORLD at "THE COALITION for an AMERICAN FUTURE" 

http://www.cais.Net/carma/facts.html
  CARMA INTER'L analysis of the MEDIA

http://www.rtis.com/nat/pol/liddy/
  The G. GORDON LIDDY WEB PAGE

http://www.reagan.com
  The Michael Reagan INFORMATION EXCHANGE

http://www.hamlbin.com
  The KEN HAMBLIN WEB PAGE

http://cc.org/cc/welcome/rrwelc.html
  RALPH REED's Christian Coalition Web Page - loaded with gold
for families and Americans!

http://www.pixi.com/~bewise
  A giant WP loaded with, often, penetraiting works they may
shock some, will surely educate and (should) provoke conclusions
you never thought you'd make. See This One! 

http://www.europa.com/~johnlf/
  Great collection of Shocker Scandals in our land today.
Grabbe, Conspiracy Nation, OKC Bombing etc.

http://www.dcia.com
  The DE-CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY!

http://www.prolife.org/ultimate/
  PROLIFE - and GREAT!

http://www.govt-waste.org/
  Citizens Against Government Waste

http://ezmail.net/detax/
  PAUL ANGUS SULLIVAN'S WEB PAGE

http://www.bath.ac.uk/~adsjrc/eu/inf-main.html
  A U.K. WEB PAGE

http://www.cgx.com/
  Conservatives Generation X Page!

http://www.together.org/orgs/wcw/gov.html
  Together

http://www.dso.com/sources
  Sources!

http://www.coltsneck.com/
  John Crudele's NY Post column

http://www.webcom.com/~worldgov/indrob.html
  World Government

http://www.buller.se/USR/MARCUS.WENDEL/
  Tries to give Links to every political Web Page on the Planet!
A Great source! 

http://pirateradio.com/law
  Pirate Radio - Law!

http://users.aol.com/itzthelaw
  Its The Law!

http://alive.com/law alive.com/law

http://theriver.com/Public/tucson_parents_edu_forum/
  Tucson Parents Educ. Forum

http://www.mixi.net/~feustel/
  David Feustel's great archive on CIA cocaine smuggling

http://www.pfcc.com/
  Alliance to Expose Government Corruption and Corp. Crime

http://www.webcom.com/~lpease
  Lisa Pease's Real History Archives

ftp://pencil.cs.missouri.edu/pub/mena/
  Duan Robert's mena Documents archived at an FTP site

http://www.delve.com/consort.html
  Bob Parry's The Consortium is filled with important
investigative reporting that the mainstream media won't touch

http://www.worldmedia.com/caq/
  Covert Action Quarterly home page

http://www.fas.org/pub/gen/fas/
  Federation of American Scientists' library of U.S. intelligence
documents

http://www.cruzio.com/~tim/wcpa/how.html
  How the One World Gov't works.

http://crystalpt.com/alshome/alshome.htm
  Tangled Web of Government Deceit - Amazing and entertaining
facts about life in the U.S.A. - better read all of this one
and Think! (Act?)

http://www.peg.apc.org/~newdawn
  NewDawn is a great magazine for conspiracy theorists and all
kinds of pop-thoughts.This PAGE has some readable articles as
well. 

http://www.instanet.com/~vct
  VCT - Loaded with Great Facts!

	LET'S EXCHANGE LINKS!

	jdulaney@best.com

>---- End Forwarded Message ----<

-- 

>From the portable computer of:
John Johnson
TXJohn47@ix.netcom.com

The opinions expressed above represent those of the writer (me)
and not necessarily those of his employer (also me).  <G>  :-)

--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: piml] Missile Photo? (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 08:07:50 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

To see a picture of the possible missile that the FBI is showing a lot of
interest in, go to:

http://www.artbell.com

One of the first links right now (but will change later probably) goes to
the photo on the MSNBC page. That page also has the story.

Ed Wolfe


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject:  THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 08:37:23 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
X-Sender: powens19@mixcom.com (Unverified)

How about an unemployment rate of 1/3 of the American workforce.
Lester Thurow, who recently appeared on C-Span as guest speaker at the
Washington Press Club is an economist who does not see the future as the
Republicans and Democrats espound, and that the working Americans future
looks bleak. As Clinton pronounces there are more jobs than ever ... keep
the following in mind.  



Thurow:  "In the fall of 1995, American's offical unemployment rate was
hovering around 5.7 percent.  But like an iceberg that is mostly invisible
below the waterline, officially unemployed workers are just a small part of
the total number of workers looking for more work."

"If we combine the 7.5 to 8 million officially unemployed workers, the 5 to
6 million people who are not working but who do not meet any of the tests
for being active in the workforce and are therefore not considered
unemployed, and the 4.5 million part-time workers who would like full-time
work, there are 17 to 18.5 million Americans looking for more work.  This
brings the real unemployment rate to almost 14 percent."

Slow growth has also generated an enormous contingent workforce of
underemployed people. There are 8.1 million American workers in temporary
jobs, 2 million who work "on call," and 8.3 million self-employed
"independent contactors" (many of whom are downsized professionals who have
very few clients but call themselves self-employed consultants because they
are also looking for more work and better jobs.) Together these contingent
workers account for another 14 percent of the workforce.  In the words of
Fortune magazine, "Upward pressure on wages is nil because so many of the
employed are these 'contingent' workers who have no bargaining power with
employers, and payroll workers realize they must swim in the same Darwinian
ocean."  Like the unemployed, these contingent workers generate downward
wage pressures.

"In addition there are 5.8 million missing males (another 4 percent of the
workforce) 25 to 60 years of age.  They exist in our census statistics but
not in our labor statistics.  They have no obvious means of economic
support.  They are the right age to be in the workforce, were once in the
workforce, are not in school, and are not old enough to have retired.  They
show up in neither employment nor unemployment statistics.  They have either
been dropped from, or have dropped out of, the normal working economy.  Some
we know as the homeless; others have disappeared in the underground illegal
economy."

"Put these three groups together and in the aggregate about one-third of the
American workforce is potentially looking for more work than they have now.
Add in another 11 million immigrants (legal and illegal) who entered the
United States from 1980 to 1993 to search for more work and higher wages,
and one has a sea of unemployed workers, underemployed workers, and
newcomers looking for work."

"These millions of job-hunters lead to a more human-scale result that
everyone can understand.  At 5 p.m. a midsized metal-ceramic firm posts job
openings for 10 entry-level jobs on its bulletin board.  By 5 a.m. 2,000
people are waiting in line to apply for those 10 jobs."

"Restrictive monetary and fiscal policies have unemployment rates not seen
since the Great Depression."


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: RE: Terrorized by local law enforcement (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 08:41:53 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

America 1996 = Germany 1938. Any questions?



Return-path: <eplurib@megalinx.NET>
>Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 01:57:19 -0400
>From: eplurib@megalinx.NET (Helen Reed-Johnson)
>Subject: Terrorized by local law enforcement
>X-Sender: eplurib@megalinx.net
>To: eplurib@.megalinx.net
>
>======================================================================
>This posting is being forwarded to my email network at the request of:
>Charles Ray Morrison III
>pandar@megalinx.net
>http://home.megalinx.net/~pandar/
>======================================================================
>
>Some of you may have heard the woman on WWCR 5.065 on Friday the 23rd of
>September.  She was a caller on Helen Reed-Johnson's E Pluribus Unum
>program.  Following a few personal comments is a letter from the sister of
>the woman sent to various local newspapers.
>
>Three neighboring houses were surrounded on Aug. 23rd.  One belonged to the
>suspect's parents, one belonged to her aunt and uncle, and the last belonged
>to her Grandparents.
>
>The first time that the intruders gave any indication they were officers was
>to a 12 year-old girl who had just wet herself after an officer broke in the
>upstairs bathroom door.  Firearms were held on terrified children and
>adults, including another twelve year old who was holding an infant.  There
>was no warrant at this time but since the suspect's mother opened the door,
>none was needed-or so the police said.
>
>Though only the house belonging to the suspect's parents was invaded, all
>three households were surrounded and terrorized.  The grandfather, a long
>time supporter of the law enforcement now repeatedly states that he now
>knows why some people shoot at the police.
>
>This raid is one of 26 by the Delaware County Sheriff's Department on
>Friday, August 23rd.  Election time is coming up.  The suspect has lived in
>Franklin County for over a year.  As of yesterday, she was the only one who
>had been released (on her own recognizance).
>
>I am withholding names at the family's request.  I understand that legal
>action against Delaware County Sheriff's Department is being considered.
>
>I and several other people in the patriot movement personally know the
>family involved.  The following letter is being sent out at the author's
>request.  The family is not asking for any other help.  We feel it is
>important that people find out about incidents like this.  
>
>Charles Ray Morrison III
>
>pandar@megalinx.net
>http://home.megalinx.net/~pandar/
>
>
>************************************************************************
>To the editor,
>
>What my niece did is not the question.  What the Delaware County Sheriff's
>dept. did, is in question.  On Friday Aug. 23, 1996 they came in full force
>at approximately 4:30-5:00 AM and surrounded my parents', mine, and my
>sister's homes.  My mother awoke to the dog barking and security lights
>coming on.  She looked out the window to see men dressed in black with guns
>running through the yard.  She yelled out the window, "Hey, what's going
>on?"  No reply.  The same thing was happening at my sister's.  
>Someone beats on the door.  My mother answers and they say they are looking
>for my niece, she gave this address as hers.  "She doesn't live here" is the
>reply.  
>
>"Where is she?"
>
>"I don't know." She answers.  The same questions are asked at my sister's.
>"We have a warrant for her arrest" the deputy says.
>
>My father gets dressed and goes to my sister's house.  It's her daughter
>they want.  He asks "Where's the warrant?"  During this time, deputies are
>going through my sister's motor home, they are in her house because she
>opened the door.  They are threatening my sister with jail if she doesn't
>take them to her daughter's house.
>
>During my father's conversation, he learns there is no warrant for her
>arrest.  She lives in Franklin County and they can go get her, only if
>someone takes them there.  He learns they have her correct address the whole
>time.  Three hours later a warrant is issued.
>
>I am outraged!  How much of our tax money was spent on this fiasco?  Are
>they legally allowed to harass a family over one person's actions?  What
>about the phone taps and air surveillance?  Are they legal?  How many other
>families are being harassed this way?  If these men don't identify
>themselves, is it any wonder they get shot at?  If I had run out the door
>with gun in hand, could they have shot me, legally?  Who can I file a
>complaint with and not have it fall on deaf ears?  Everyone in Delaware
>County should be outraged.  If this has happened to you, please call the
>Sheriff's dept. and complain.  Maybe if we let them know we won't stand for
>it, things will change.  I'd like my privacy and rights back.
>
>Thank you,
>Name withheld at family's request
>
>
>Helen Reed-Johnson - Fridays - 8:00 pm EST - WWCR 5.065 Mhz
>E Pluribus Unum & The Ohio Unorganized Militia
>PO Box 477; Stockport, Ohio  43787; Office: 614-559-3468 Fax: 614-559-3469
>Web Site - http://home.megalinx.net/~eplurib/home.html
>"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" Hosea 4:6
>"..The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much" Jms:5:16
>
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Re: FM transmitters (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 08:57:56 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
X-Sender: kocjmb@tiger.avana.net


There is a very good article in the 8/21/96 issue of Radio World (a weekly
magazine targeted mostly to technical types) on the FM low power movement,
which has been underway for several years, spearheaded by Free Radio
Berkeley founder Steven Dunifer, San Fransisco.  It's too long for me to
type in the entire piece, but here are some outstanding excerpts, starting
with the title and opening paragraphs.  *** designates a break in the story
line.

Radio Rebels Claim the Airwaves
by Frank Beacham

-San Fransisco-
To tune into the micro radio movement, the first rule is never, never refer
to it as "pirate" radio.  The real pirates, say these radio rebels, are the
large corporations that have stolen the airwaves from the public.

The concept of the airwaves belonging to the public . . . is at the heart of
a movement that currently boasts as many as 300 unlicensed low-power radio
stations now broadcasting in neighborhoods throughout the United States.

***
The FCC fined Dunifer $20,000 and has taken him to court in an effort to
stop his unlicensed broadcasts.  However, Dunifer, represented by attorney
Louis N. Hiken, was able to convince U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilkins
that there are substantial constitutional arguments at stake in the FCC
attempt to ban micro radio stations.

Twice this year, Judge Wilkins has refused to issue injunctions that would
stop Dunifer and possibly force Free Radio Berkeley off the air.  It is the
first time a judge has turned down an FCC request to shut down an unlicensed
radio station.

While both sides wait on the next ruling from the judge, the movement is
"kicking ass," said attorney Peter Franck, a micro radio expert at the
National Lawyers Guild.  He said there is an effort to sprout so many micro
radio stations that the FCC will lose control of the regulatory process by
the time the issue winds its way through the courts.

***
Dunifer builds and sells 15 to 20 W [Watt] transmitters that "properly sited
with a good location can easily cover a distance of a five to 10 mile
radius."  Complete micro radio stations can be built at a cost of well under
$2,000.

[Transcriber's note:  There is a gentleman in Atlanta building and selling
units for $150, complete with instructions for optimum construction of
low-cost antenna (strung wire).  They reportedly offer superior signal
quality to anything else on the market.]

***
"Our research turned up the fact that for the first 400 years after
Gutenberg invented the printing press, one had to have a license to own a
printing press.  I don't think the issue here is about frequency
interference.  The current regulatory framework is that the government says
you have to have a license to broadcast," Franck said.  "The will not
consider a license application for less than 100 W of power and without very
expensive engineering studies.  The filing fee at the initial stage is $2,500."

This is no coincidence, said Hiken, Dunifer's attorney.  "Because of the
Telecommunications Act there is a land rush going on now that is
unparalleled in the history of radio.  Within five years, a very few
corporations are going to own 95 percent of the AM and FM bands in this
country.  What we seek as a movement with micro radio - the same thing that
the Internet offers to the rich and literate - is an ability to communicate
with each other without filters," Hiken said.  "The American people do not
have access to radio.  They cannot participate in it.  They have no voice."

***
"The last thing the FCC will ever do is allow a trial of whether or not they
are giving out licenses in the public interest," Hiken said.  By the time
that trial takes place they have lost, and they know that."

***
For more technical and legal information on Micro Radio, visit Free Radio
Berkeley's Web site at
http://www.best.com/pub/frb

[Transcriber's note:  When I got into commercial radio in 1964, "in the
public interest" was the deciding factor as to whether a broadcaster held
onto his license after the 3-year term was over and he was up for renewal.
By 1980, when I left radio, there was never a mention of the public
interest.  By then, stations licensed to medium and smaller markets outside
metro areas had begun to move their towers as close to the metro as they
could so as to garner the larger ad dollars.  In the process, little or no
attention is given to their city of license.  In the last few years, the
really small stations moved closer to the medium markets.  Nobody broadcasts
in the public interest anymore.  Now the license is granted for 7 years.

In the same issue of Radio World, the front-page, headline article relates
the pending merger of  Jacor Communications and Noble Broadcast Group.  That
will give Jacor eight stations in Denver.  They already own six of the top
15.  When I left radio, the limit was seven AM, seven FM total, with no
market duopoly.  The American Association of Advertising Agencies is
screaming bloody murder.  Jacor already controls more than 50 percent of the
radio advertising dollars in Cincinnati.  There is no discussion in the
article of the near-monopoly on the dissemination of news and all the
obvious dangers that presents.  As is typical with radio owner mentality
since the 1970's, the *only* consideration is the bottom line.]

Here's a toast to low power and shortwave.  Happy listening!
Kevin O'Connell


************************************************




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: piml] The Exploitation of Poor Jim <fwd>
Date: 28 Aug 1996 09:02:25 -0500

>Return-Path: <daemon@mars.galstar.com>
>Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:24:57 -0500 (CDT)
>From: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net>
>X-Sender: gonzalez@Mars.mcs.com
>To: piml@mars.galstar.com
>Subject: piml] The Exploitation of Poor Jim
>Reply-To: piml@mars.galstar.com (The piml mailing list)
>Errors-To: piml-owner@mars.galstar.com
>X-bmw: Black Marble Wombat Version 5.1
>
>
>
>Permission granted to forward, download, copy, and distribute, providing 
>attribution is made to the below-named author.
>
>**************************************************************************
>
>Tuesday, 27 August 1996. FROM THE SCENE OF THE DNC NATIONAL CONVENTION:
>
>If you watched the farce last night, you will have seen Mrs. Sarah Brady 
>orchestrating her vulgar put-the-gimp-on-display show with predatory 
>glances, furtive hand signals to shills in the audience, and at least one 
>withering stare at her dearly-beloved marionette...er, husband, when he 
>chanced to speak at a moment when Mrs. Brady had expected him to keep his 
>aphasic lip buttoned.  
>
>Despite his thoroughly heart-warming show of courage just a few minutes 
>earlier--when he managed to walk from his wheelchair to the lectern to 
>acknowledge the cheers of the crowd--Sarah shot him a venomous look 
>when he suddenly amplified one of her declarative statements with the 
>unexpected exclamation "And we WILL!".  The head of the former chairwoman 
>of Handgun Control Incorporated (HCI) whipped around and impaled her poor
>crippled husband with a dagger-laden if-looks-could-kill glare from which 
>he averted his gaze while an assistant snatched the auxiliary microphone 
>from  Mr. Brady's hand before the hapless former Reagan press secretary 
>could utter another unscripted remark at this (reportedly) "unscripted" 
>Democratic National Convention.
>
>Mrs. Brady's routine honorarium for delivering this laced-with-lies 
>blame-the-gun diatribe is $17,500---$35,000 if she wheels her aphasic,
>partially-paralyzed husband out to make a few thick-tongued exhortations
>to the crowd.  Not bad for a few minutes' work.  One wonders if Sarah 
>would be able to turn such a buck today had tragedy not befallen  her 
>husband back in March of 1981, when one of John Hinckley's bullets 
>smashed into his skull, turning a large portion of his brain to mush.
>
>Since then, his struggle to regain some semblance of a "normal" life can 
>be described with but one word: heroic.  The audience acknowledged this 
>heroism as it cheered his halting shuffle from wheelchair to lectern and 
>back, after he had flashed his characteristic "thumb's up" signal. 
>
>Yes, fate looked most unkindly upon Jim Brady that day in 1981, but the 
>glance it gave him pales in comparison to the icy glare bestowed by his 
>own beloved wife when he distracted her as she was plying her current 
>trade, described by philosophers and poets alike as the world's oldest.  
>
>Please, folks---say a little prayer for a courageous man, Jim Brady.  He 
>could certainly use one!
>
>
>				-30-
>
>
>David M. Gonzalez
>Wheeling, Illinois
>
>Replies/Abuse: gonzalez@mcs.com
>
>
>
>
--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: THE CREATION
Date: 28 Aug 1996 09:45:39 -0500

For you Computer Nerds out there. :-)

Bob Knauer

+++++

> THE CREATION:
>
> In the beginning there was the computer.  And God said
>
> %>Let there be light!
>
> #Enter user id.
>
> %>God
>
> #Enter password.
>
> %>Omniscient
>
> #Password incorrect.  Try again.
>
> %>Omnipotent
>
> #Password incorrect.  Try again.
>
> %>Technocrat
>
> #And God logged on at 12:01:00 AM, Sunday, March 1.
>
> %>Let there be light!
>
> #Unrecognizable command.  Try again.
>
> %>Create light
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run heaven and earth
>
> #And God created Day and Night. And God saw there were 0 errors.
>
> #And God logged off at 12:02:00 AM, Sunday, March 1.
>
> #And God logged on at 12:01:00 AM, Monday, March 2.
>
> %>Let there be firmament in the midst of water and light
>
> #Unrecognizable command.  Try again.
>
> %>Create firmament
>
> #Done.
>
> %>Run firmament
>
> #And God divided the waters. And God saw there were 0 errors.
>
> #And God logged off at 12:02:00 AM, Monday, March 2.
>
> #And God logged on at 12:01:00 AM, Tuesday, March 3.
>
> %>Let the waters under heaven be gathered together unto one place and let
>
> the dry land appear and
>
> #Too many characters in specification string. Try again.
>
> %>Create dry_land
>
> #Done.
>
> %>Run firmament
>
> #And God divided the waters. And God saw there were 0 errors.
>
> #And God logged off at 12:02:00 AM, Tuesday, March 3.
>
> #And God logged on at 12:01:00 AM, Wednesday, March 4.
>
> %>Create lights in the firmament to divide the day from the night
>
> #Unspecified type. Try again.
>
> %>Create sun_moon_stars
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run sun_moon_stars
>
> #And God divided the waters. And God saw there were 0 errors.
>
> #And God logged off at 12:02:00 AM, Wednesday, March 4.
>
> #And God logged on at 12:01:00 AM, Thursday, March 5.
>
> %>Create fish
>
> #Done
>
> %>Create fowl
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run fish, fowl
>
> #And God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that
>  creepeth wherewith the waters swarmed after its kind and every winged =
> fowl
> after its kind. And God saw there were 0 errors.
>
> #And God logged off at 12:02:00 AM, Thursday, March 5.
>
> #And God logged on at 12:01:00 AM, Friday, March 6.
>
> %>Create cattle
>
> #Done
>
> %>Create creepy_things
>
> #Done
>
> %>Now let us make man in our image
>
> #Unspecified type. Try again.
>
> %>Create man
>
> #Done
>
> %>Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it and have
> dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over
> every living thing that creepeth upon the earth
>
> #Too many command operands. Try again.
>
> %>Run multiplication
>
> #Execution terminated. 6 errors.
>
> %>Insert breath
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run multiplication
>
> #Execution terminated. 5 errors.
>
> %>Move man to Garden of Eden
>
> #File Garden of Eden does not exist.
>
> %>Create Garden.edn
>
> #Done
>
> %>Move man to Garden.edn
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run multiplication
>
> #Execution terminated. 4 errors.
>
> %>Copy woman from man
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run multiplication
>
> #Execution terminated. 2 errors.
>
> %>Create desire
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run multiplication
>
> #And God saw man and woman being fruitful and multiplying in Garden.edn
>
> #Warning: No time limit on this run. 1 errors.
>
> %>Create freewill
>
> #Done
>
> %>Run freewill
>
> #And God saw man and woman being fruitful and multiplying in Garden.edn
>
> #Warning: No time limit on this run. 1 errors.
>
> %>Undo desire
>
> #Desire cannot be undone once freewill is created.
>
> %>Destroy freewill
>
> #Freewill is an inaccessible file and cannot be destroyed.
>
> #Enter replacement, cancel, or ask for help.
>
> %>Help
>
> #Desire cannot be undone once freewill is created.
>
> #Freewill is an inaccessible file and cannot be destroyed.
>
> #Enter replacement, cancel, or ask for help.
>
> %>Create tree_of_knowledge
>
> #And God saw man and woman being fruitful and multiplying in Garden.edn
>
> #Warning: No time limit on this run. 1 errors.
>
> %>Create good, evil
>
> #Done
>
> %>Activate evil
>
> #And God saw he had created shame.
>
> #Warning system error in sector E95.  Man and woman not in Garden.edn. 1
>
> errors.
>
> %>Scan Garden.edn for man, woman
>
> #Search failed.
>
> %>Delete shame
>
> #Shame cannot be deleted once evil has been activated.
>
> %>Destroy freewill
>
> #Freewill is an inaccessible file and cannot be destroyed.
>
> #Enter replacement, cancel, or ask for help.
>
> %>Stop
>
> #Unrecognizable command. Try again
>
> %>Break
>
> %>Break
>
> %>Break
>
> #ATTENTION ALL USERS *** ATTENTION ALL USERS: COMPUTER GOING DOWN FOR
> REGULAR DAY OF MAINTENANCE AND REST IN FIVE MINUTES. PLEASE LOG OFF.
>
> %>Create new world
>
> #You have exceeded your allocated file space. You must destroy old files
> before new ones can be created.
>
> %>Destroy earth
>
> #Destroy earth: Please confirm.
>
> %>Destroy earth confirmed
>
> #COMPUTER DOWN *** COMPUTER DOWN. SERVICES WILL RESUME SUNDAY, MARCH 8 AT
>
> 6:00 AM. YOU MUST SIGN OFF NOW.
>
> #And God logged off at 11:59:59 PM, Friday, March 6.

+++++

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: WSJ: More Guns, Less Violent Crime
Date: 28 Aug 1996 10:28:02 -0500

This article appears in today's WSJ - you can get it yourself from the WSJ
Interactive site - free for now - see http://wsj.com/ for details.

There is a link in the article which takes you to the study itself:
http://law-lib.uchicago.edu/faculty/lott/guns.html

John Lott's bio is at the end of the article. He is an academic who promotes
RKBA for good reason - it works. Why does klintoon therefore promote gun
control - like Hitler did "to make the streets safe"? Duh, I wonder why!

Now we need to convince the ACLU to change their foolish, hoplophobic
mis-interpretation of the Second Amendment. I am certain Professor Lott's
study will help convince them - and maybe pressure them to get with it.

I wonder how many more deaths and rapes klintoon wants on his conscience for
promoting gun control? Oh, I forgot - he doesn't have a conscience.

Bob Knauer

+++++

               Rule of Law
               More Guns, Less Violent Crime

               By JOHN R. LOTT JR.

               For the Democratic Party, whose convention this week is
               showcasing gun-control advocates, the solution to violent
               crime is clear--more regulation of guns. Monday's
               convention speeches by James and Sarah Brady were
               filled with moving stories of their personal suffering.

               While the impacts described on both sides of the issue do
               exist, the crucial question underlying all gun-control laws
               is: What is their net effect? Are more lives lost or saved?
               Do they deter crime or encourage it? Anecdotal evidence
               obviously cannot resolve this debate. To provide a more
               systematic answer, I recently completed a study of one
               type of gun-control law--laws on concealed handguns,
               also known as "shall-issue" laws. Thirty-one states give
               their citizens the right to carry concealed handguns if they
               do not have a criminal record or a history of significant
               mental illness. My study, with David Mustard, a graduate
               student in economics at the University of Chicago,
               analyzed the FBI's crime statistics for all 3,054 American
               counties from 1977 to 1992.

               Our findings are dramatic. Our most conservative
               estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws, states
               reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated
               assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that
               did not permit concealed handgun in 1992 had permitted
               them back then, citizens would have been spared
               approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000
               aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. To put it even
               more simply: Criminals, we found, respond rationally to
               deterrence threats.

               The benefits of concealed handguns are not limited to just
               those who carry them or use them in self-defense. The
               very fact that these weapons are concealed keeps
               criminals uncertain as to whether a potential victim will be
               able to defend himself with lethal force. The possibility
               that anyone might be carrying a gun makes attacking
               everyone less attractive; unarmed citizens in effect
               "free-ride" on their pistol-packing fellows.

               Our study further found that while some criminals avoid
               potentially violent crimes after concealed-handgun laws
               are passed, they do not necessarily give up the criminal
               life altogether. Some switch to crimes in which the risk of
               confronting an armed victim is much lower. Indeed, the
               downside of concealed-weapons laws is that while
               violent crime rates fall, property offenses like larceny
               (e.g., stealing from unattended automobiles or vending
               machines) and auto theft rise. This is certainly a
               substitution that the country can live with.

               Our study also provided some surprising information.
               While support for strict gun-control laws usually has been
               strongest in large cities, where crime rates are highest,
               that's precisely where right-to-carry laws have produced
               the largest drops in violent crimes. For example, in
               counties with populations of more than 200,000 people,
               concealed-handgun laws produced an average drop in
               murder rates of more than 13%. The half of the counties
               with the highest rape rates saw that crime drop by more
               than 7%.

               Concealed handguns also appear to help women more
               than men. Murder rates decline when either sex carries
               more guns, but the effect is especially pronounced when
               women are considered separately. An additional woman
               carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for
               women by about three to four times more than an
               additional armed man reduces the murder rate for men.
               Victims of violent crime are generally physically weaker
               than the criminals who prey on them. Allowing a woman
               to defend herself with a concealed handgun makes a
               much larger difference in her ability to defend herself than
               the change created by providing a man with a handgun.
               Guns are the great equalizer between the weak and the
               vicious.

               At the Democratic convention, President Clinton is likely
               to play up his proposed expansion of the 1994 Brady
               law, which by making it harder for men convicted of
               domestic violence to obtain guns is designed to reduce
               crime against women. Our study is the first to provide
               direct empirical evidence of the Brady Law's effect on
               crime rates--and we found just the opposite result: The
               law's implementation is associated with more aggravated
               assaults and rapes. Mrs. Brady's exaggerated estimates
               of the number of felons denied access to guns in her
               speech Monday are a poor measure of the law's impact
               on crime rates.

               We also collected data on whether owners of concealed
               handguns are more likely to use them in committing
               violent crimes. The rarity of these incidents is reflected in
               Florida's statistics: More than 300,000
               concealed-handgun licenses were issued between Oct. 1,
               1987, and Dec. 31, 1995, but only five violent crimes
               involving permitted pistols were committed in this period,
               and none of these resulted in fatalities.

               What about minor disputes such as traffic accidents? Are
               legal owners of concealed handguns more likely to use
               them in such situations? In 31 states, some of which have
               had concealed weapons laws for decades, there is only
               one recorded incident (earlier this year in Texas) in which
               a concealed handgun was used in a shooting following an
               accident. Even in that one case, a grand jury found that
               the shooting was in self-defense: The shooter was being
               beaten by the other driver.

               And what about accidental deaths? The number of
               accidental handgun deaths each year is fewer than 200.
               Our estimates imply that if the states without "shall issue"
               laws were to adopt them, the increase in accidental
               handgun deaths would be at most nine more deaths per
               year. This is small indeed when compared to the at least
               1,570 murders that would be avoided.

               While no single study is likely to end the debate on
               concealed handguns, ours provides the first systematic
               national evidence. By contrast, the largest prior study
               examined only 170 cities within a single year. The nearly
               50,000 observations in our data set allow us to control
               for a range of factors that have never been accounted for
               in any previous study of crime, let alone any previous
               gun-control study. Among other variables, our
               regressions control for arrest and conviction rates, prison
               sentences, changes in handgun laws such as waiting
               periods and the imposition of additional penalties for
               using a gun to commit a crime, income, poverty,
               unemployment, and demographic changes.

               Preventing law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns
               does not end violence, but merely makes them more
               vulnerable to attack. The very size and strength of our
               results should at least give pause to those who oppose
               concealed handguns. The opportunity to reduce the
               murder rate by simply relaxing a regulation ought to be
               difficult to ignore.



               Mr. Lott is a professor at the University of Chicago
               Law School. The results of his study will be published
               in the January 1997 issue of the university's Journal
               of Legal Studies.

+++++

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 11:59:29 EDT

Point well taken!

Gary
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 23:49:24 -0500 Joe Sylvester
<joesylvester@texoma.net> writes:
>At 09:01 AM 8/27/96 PST, Bill Vance wrote:
>>A Military that is guarding our borders is one that is doing it's
>>Constitutionally mandated job.  Would you rather have them doing 
>house to
>>house searches of our homes?  Hopefully they will stop the flow of 
>illegals
>>as well as drugs.....
>
>Since drugs are as much or more demand pull, rather than supply push, 
>this
>will be a near hopeless effort, and will result in our Armed Forces 
>being
>turned into what too many Latin American militaries already are.  I'd 
>just
>as soon not see our military corrupted that way. They exist to protect 
>the
>country from physical invasion. To expect them to in effect protect us 
>from
>ourselves is asking too much.  The *only* solution to the drug problem 
>is
>education, and that will take at least a generation, and even then it 
>will
>only beat back the problem, not irradicate it altogether. People have 
>been
>taking drugs as long as there have been people, perhaps longer. 
>They will continue to do so. The only question is how much of our 
>liberties
>will have left after the drug war is lost. As was said of "Global
>Thermonuclear War" so it should be said of the war on *some* drugs, 
>"The
>only way to win is not to play".
>
>
>
>
>              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
>                   of the United States Constitution.  
>      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 
>
>
>Joe Sylvester
>Don't Tread On Me !
>
>
>
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 09:25:31 -0700

        Fritz,

        >>>>>>>
        I think American constitutional government came from the minds of a
group of intelligent men . . .
        [...]
        If you compare the structure of the government outlined in the
Constitution, it has clear resemblances to those previous models.  I
don't think it has a clear resemblance to the government structure of
Solomon or David, or to that which existed in Israel at the slaughter of
the tribe of Benjamin.
        <<<<<<<

        As a matter of correction here, the American form of government was
most directly related to the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Nation, which
Benjamin Franklin visited (1754) and was inspired by, prior to deciding
upon a course of action for government design.

        While the other governments you speak of may have been discussed,
it was the Haudenosaunee government structure that had the greatest impact.

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Fritz Sands <fritzs@MICROSOFT.COM>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 09:35:50 -0700

Let's say you were taking a political science class, and the following
multiple-choice question was on the test:

23) Which of the following earlier forms of governance has the LEAST
relationship to American constitutional government?
   A) The Roman Republic
   B) Athenian democracy
   C) A Norse allthing
   D) The kingdom of David or Solomon

Is there any arguement that the correct answer is (D)?

I'm really not interested in debating theology.  I'm perfectly willing
to state that almost all of the people who wrote the Constitution were
Christians of one form or another.  But If people start pulling examples
out of Israelite history as proper models for American governance, I
will say NO.  I'm not quite sure exactly what actions sabutigo would
suggest the government take against homosexual Americans (he was the one
who brought up the charming story of the tribe of Benjamin), but I would
bet his proposed actions would not consist of "equal rights under the
law".

Get a grip, guys. You can decide who you want to "tolerate" in your
churches.  You can't do that within your country.

     Fritz -- a bisexual, pagan constitutionalist

>----------
>From: 	roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org]
>Sent: 	Wednesday, August 28, 1996 12:01 AM
>To: 	roc@xmission.com
>Subject: 	RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
>
>On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
>
>>I think American constitutional government came from the minds of a
>>group of intelligent men who negotiated and compromised their way to a
>>government structure they could live with.  They had knowledge of
>>various other attempts at self-governance, notably those of Greek
>>city-states and the Roman Republic.  They had deep knowledge of the
>>English common-law tradition, and of the writings of Locke, Grotius,
>>etc.
>>
>>If you compare the structure of the government outlined in the
>>Constitution, it has clear resemblances to those previous models.  I
>>don't think it has a clear resemblance to the government structure of
>>Solomon or David, or to that which existed in Israel at the slaughter of
>>the tribe of Benjamin.  
>>
>>Is there something in your question which has eluded me?
>>
>>     Fritz
>>
>>>----------
>>>From:  roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org]
>>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 5:12 PM
>>>To:    roc@xmission.com
>>>Subject:  RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>>
>>>On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
>>>
>>>>>----------
>>>>>From:  sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>>>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>>>>To:    roc@XMISSION.COM
>>>>>Subject:  Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>>>>
>>>>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>>>>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>>>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government
>>>>>authority.
>>>>
>>>>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>>>>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
>>>>story right.  
>>>>
>>>>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>>>>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
>>>> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>>>>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>>>>restoring constitutional government.
>>>
>>>Where do you think Constitutional Government came from?  Who do you think
>>>created it?
>
>This will fill you in on some basic stuff.  I'll keep looking for a couple
>other more detailed files, but probably wont find them till tomorrow, as
>there is a bunch to go through.  (Thanks Monte).
>
>...
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 09:38:42 -0700 (PDT)

On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, Joe Sylvester wrote:

> At 09:01 AM 8/27/96 PST, Bill Vance wrote:
> >A Military that is guarding our borders is one that is doing it's
> >Constitutionally mandated job.  Would you rather have them doing house to
> >house searches of our homes?  Hopefully they will stop the flow of illegals
> >as well as drugs.....
> 
> Since drugs are as much or more demand pull, rather than supply push, this
> will be a near hopeless effort, and will result in our Armed Forces being
> turned into what too many Latin American militaries already are.  I'd just
snip
> They will continue to do so. The only question is how much of our liberties
> will have left after the drug war is lost. As was said of "Global
> Thermonuclear War" so it should be said of the war on *some* drugs, "The
> only way to win is not to play".

Militarizing the War on Some Drugs isnt about keeping foreign powers from 
invading your borders (yeesh). It is about increasing the cost of illegal 
drugs to lower demand. It is not done by national gaurdsmen stopping 
wetbacks, it's done by freeing multibillion dollar AWACs to patrol, 
sometimes over foriegn territory, for small aircraft that are no threat 
to our airspace (we're talkin' beachcraft, not F18's here). It's done to 
fund some of the (expensive) research into non lethal "weapons" with 
military dollars, it's done to train military personnell (who could be 
over in the korean DMZ, a place that might become a serious threat soon) 
in law enforcement tactics. That's what the militarization of the WOSD 
has gotten us. And I gaur-on-tee ya I can walk less then a mile from 
where I type to you now and buy or witness the trade of: Cocaine, Crack 
cocaine, heroine, smack or -any- other illegal drug imaginable and 
probably quite a few I can't possibly imagine (thank goodness). 

Markets work, people. We have probably marginally raised the cost of 
illegal drugs. Unfortunately, since it is already a crime to consume 
them (just as it's already a crime to commit murder) people are 
perfectly willing to commit crime to obtain them (just as people ignore 
gun laws to commit murder). This is the demand disconnect for drug cost. 
An addict doesnt "pay" for drugs with economic activity so there is a 
high "price elasticity" in the market (crackheads dont give a damn about 
price).

I would be very surprised if gun owners who are the victims of theft (ie 
some crack head breaks in and steals your shiny new ruger, perhaps along 
with the safe it's in) don't soon become the victims of new legislation 
to prevent the illegal circulation of guns. After all, guns cause crime 
and by allowing that misguided youth to steal your weapon -you- have set 
in motion events that will lead to murder and mayhem. Think about this 
sort of "reasoning" the next time you think about how reasonable it is to 
have soldiers (professionals trained to defend our country) imitate 
police officers (professionals trained to enforce our laws) to drive up 
the cost of illegal drugs.

> Joe Sylvester
> Don't Tread On Me !

	Boyd Kneeland. Liberty is the best policy.
	  The opinions I express are mine alone.

boydk@wrq.com   PGP key at BAL's. Fingerprint;   D0 6E 1E DC 4E 15 AC 4B
Don't know about Pretty Good Privacy? email me   AC 26 40 19 4B 5E 27 44
     -->  Your Bill of Rights, insist on the genuine articles.  <--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: piml] The Exploitation of Poor Jim <fwd>
Date: 28 Aug 1996 09:45:12 PST

I've commented on this elsewhere, if not as completely.  Jim seems to have
taken on the countenance of a somewhat frightened, trained seal.  The only
thing his handlers missed, was tossing him a fish after each trick.  Someone
Official should check this out for the abuse factor, but I haven't the
foggiest as to just who would be appropriate.  Maybe examining other
existing videos would help here too.  I can't see where it would hurt our
cause if Mrs. Brady were to be hauled in for Spouse Abuse, even if the case
were to fail, (it's still a blot on her record the way things are these
days).

On Aug 28, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:

>>Return-Path: <daemon@mars.galstar.com>
>>Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:24:57 -0500 (CDT)
>>From: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net>
>>X-Sender: gonzalez@Mars.mcs.com
>>To: piml@mars.galstar.com
>>Subject: piml] The Exploitation of Poor Jim
>>Reply-To: piml@mars.galstar.com (The piml mailing list)
>>Errors-To: piml-owner@mars.galstar.com
>>X-bmw: Black Marble Wombat Version 5.1
>>
>>Permission granted to forward, download, copy, and distribute, providing 
>>attribution is made to the below-named author.
>>
>>**************************************************************************
>>
>>Tuesday, 27 August 1996. FROM THE SCENE OF THE DNC NATIONAL CONVENTION:
>>
>>If you watched the farce last night, you will have seen Mrs. Sarah Brady 
>>orchestrating her vulgar put-the-gimp-on-display show with predatory 
>>glances, furtive hand signals to shills in the audience, and at least one 
>>withering stare at her dearly-beloved marionette...er, husband, when he 
>>chanced to speak at a moment when Mrs. Brady had expected him to keep his 
>>aphasic lip buttoned.  
>>
>>Despite his thoroughly heart-warming show of courage just a few minutes 
>>earlier--when he managed to walk from his wheelchair to the lectern to 
>>acknowledge the cheers of the crowd--Sarah shot him a venomous look 
>>when he suddenly amplified one of her declarative statements with the 
>>unexpected exclamation "And we WILL!".  The head of the former chairwoman 
>>of Handgun Control Incorporated (HCI) whipped around and impaled her poor
>>crippled husband with a dagger-laden if-looks-could-kill glare from which 
>>he averted his gaze while an assistant snatched the auxiliary microphone 
>>from  Mr. Brady's hand before the hapless former Reagan press secretary 
>>could utter another unscripted remark at this (reportedly) "unscripted" 
>>Democratic National Convention.
>>
>>Mrs. Brady's routine honorarium for delivering this laced-with-lies 
>>blame-the-gun diatribe is $17,500---$35,000 if she wheels her aphasic,
>>partially-paralyzed husband out to make a few thick-tongued exhortations
>>to the crowd.  Not bad for a few minutes' work.  One wonders if Sarah 
>>would be able to turn such a buck today had tragedy not befallen  her 
>>husband back in March of 1981, when one of John Hinckley's bullets 
>>smashed into his skull, turning a large portion of his brain to mush.
>>
>>Since then, his struggle to regain some semblance of a "normal" life can 
>>be described with but one word: heroic.  The audience acknowledged this 
>>heroism as it cheered his halting shuffle from wheelchair to lectern and 
>>back, after he had flashed his characteristic "thumb's up" signal. 
>>
>>Yes, fate looked most unkindly upon Jim Brady that day in 1981, but the 
>>glance it gave him pales in comparison to the icy glare bestowed by his 
>>own beloved wife when he distracted her as she was plying her current 
>>trade, described by philosophers and poets alike as the world's oldest.  
>>
>>Please, folks---say a little prayer for a courageous man, Jim Brady.  He 
>>could certainly use one!
>>
>>          -30-
>>
>>David M. Gonzalez
>>Wheeling, Illinois
>>
>>Replies/Abuse: gonzalez@mcs.com
>>
>--
>       
>**************************************************
>    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
>    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 
>
> <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
>**************************************************

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 11:07:36 -0600

Boyd said (not quoted as support or not of his own beliefs):
>Militarizing the War on Some Drugs isnt about keeping foreign powers from
>invading your borders (yeesh). It is about increasing the cost of illegal
>drugs to lower demand.

I don't have any data to support this but I would bet that driving the
costs  of drugs higher increases demand.

Why is this?

1.  The more expensive they are the higher the profits to the drug dealers.
They need to stimulate demand to get these higher profits.

2.  Market economics (simplified).  As demand goes up, so do prices.  Well,
that can be reversed in some instances as well.  As prices go up, so does
demand.  (Higher prices point to high demand so demand then increases to
meet that expectation).


So far it looks to be true -- the War on Drugs has increased demand.

regards
Chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: CNN: The CIA News Network
Date: 28 Aug 1996 13:04:03 -0500

>But have you all dialed up CNN lately?  It'll make smoke come out your
>ears. Outside this conservative bubble, there is some really heinous
>thought (and I use the word "thought" out of kindness and generosity).

-----

I wouldn't miss CNN (CIA News Network) for anything! Where else would you be
able to get inside information, unadulterated by any big network spin,
directly from the CIA.

But in order to appreciate that, you have to become accustomed to reading
between the lines, like a physician staring at a cancerous growth. To the
layman a cancer looks pretty much like ordinary tissue - but to the trained
eye of the pathologist it looks unmistakedly like cancer.

There are many rules for diagnosing the Network News Cancer - most based on
common sense. But there are special rules that apply only to CNN because of
its direct connection to the covert govt.

For example, whenever Judy Wudfluff goes to work with her usual ritual, you
know you must begin an alternate interpretation. First she sits there
looking chagrined, kinda bored, smacks loudly, sucks air loudly, and begins
that sad-sack, seemingly disinterested presentation only she can do.

Here's an excerpt from a recent broadcast:

---

Judy Wudfluff:

"Well the facts are in <smack> - a study just released by Handgun Control Inc 
says that <sigh> *GUNZ*R*BAD*! Yes - <sigh look="wrinkled brow">*REALLY*BAD*!

"According to this study, <gape look="astonished">40,000,000 or more poor,
defensless children, all of them homeless thanks to Newt (That Brute)
Gingrich, were killed by guns last year.
<smack><wheez><inhale sound="loud"><sigh>

"And our all-caring <perk-up look="delighted">president, <snicker>who says he 
relaly likes guns, says he is going to <emphasis> *do* something about it. 

He is going to <shreik sound="squeeky"> confiscate all those
<sigh>*BAD*GUNZ* and make America safe for widows and orphans, which
according to a Democratic Party spokesman, <sigh tone="ugh">Bob Dole says he
is going to put out in the <emphasis>street to give the <anger
tone="self-righteous"> rich a <bluster sound="exasperation"> tax break."
<sigh> <wheez> <splutter> <smack> <inhale sound="softly">

<stare look="blank"><duh>

---

Wouldn't miss it for anything.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Unsub info - send to liberty-and-justice-request@pobox.com with "unsubscribe"
in body (not subject) of the msg.  List-Owner - Mike Goldman <whig@pobox.com>

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: piml] The Exploitation of Poor Jim <fwd>
Date: 28 Aug 1996 13:16:23 -0500

>I've commented on this elsewhere, if not as completely.  Jim seems to have
>taken on the countenance of a somewhat frightened, trained seal.  The only
>thing his handlers missed, was tossing him a fish after each trick.  Someone
>Official should check this out for the abuse factor, but I haven't the
>foggiest as to just who would be appropriate.  Maybe examining other
>existing videos would help here too.  I can't see where it would hurt our
>cause if Mrs. Brady were to be hauled in for Spouse Abuse, even if the case
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>were to fail, (it's still a blot on her record the way things are these
>days).

-----

So *that's* why klintoon wants to take guns away from Spousal Abusers - he's
afraid Sarah will shoot her husband!

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 11:26:25 -0700 (PDT)

Sorry if this is a bit far afield, the basic idea here from my POV is 
that freedom is freedom. It requires personal repsonsibility and liberty.

On Wed, 28 Aug 1996, Chad Leigh wrote:

> Boyd said (not quoted as support or not of his own beliefs):
> >Militarizing the War on Some Drugs isnt about keeping foreign powers from
> >invading your borders (yeesh). It is about increasing the cost of illegal
> >drugs to lower demand.
> 
> I don't have any data to support this but I would bet that driving the
> costs  of drugs higher increases demand.
> 
> Why is this?
> 
> 1.  The more expensive they are the higher the profits to the drug dealers.
> They need to stimulate demand to get these higher profits.

The first sentence is certainly true, this is the "monopoly rent" that 
government bans impart to banned objects. I can sell the 4 High cap glock 
mags I bought in 92 for 4 times what I paid for them, same thing for 
other banned items. I dont understand the second bit. The higher profit 
comes at the same demand level because the per unit price is up more then 
the per unit cost.

> 2.  Market economics (simplified).  As demand goes up, so do prices.  Well,
> that can be reversed in some instances as well.  As prices go up, so does
> demand.  (Higher prices point to high demand so demand then increases to
> meet that expectation).
Um, this makes sense to me in "status" type items. With banned drugs I 
can see where higher prices would increase supply and convenience of 
buying (there's a surplus of dealers) so that might increase "sales". But 
either way the ban here is just as ineffective as any other object ban.

> So far it looks to be true -- the War on Drugs has increased demand.
At the very least it's the most expensive law enforcement boondogle in 
the planets history IMO.

> Chad
Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: CNN: The CIA News Network, also NPR
Date: 28 Aug 1996 14:46:51 -0400


	The thing that really toasts my onions is the blatent bias of NPR towards the 
	Democrats.   Two years ago these guys actually started slanting their news 
	coverage away from the sycophantic left - they were scared of threatened 
	Republican budget cuts.    These intelligent idiots are now back on track,
	as the threat has receded.    I'll stand up and cheer anyone who cuts their 
	budget.

	jcurtis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 13:46:53 -0700 (PDT)

At 02:26 PM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>----------
>>From: 	sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>Sent: 	Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>To: 	roc@XMISSION.COM
>>Subject: 	Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>
>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government authority.
>
>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
>story right.  

You remember it wrong.
>
>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>restoring constitutional government.
>
>      Fritz
>
If you want no covenant with Yahweh, then you shall have none -- but neither
will you have freedom.

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 13:57:14 -0700 (PDT)

At 04:45 PM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, sabutigo wrote:
>
>> At 09:42 AM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>> >(Had to chirp in here, as Bill said not even God will save me from myself 
>> >; )
>> >
>> >YES! Amen Chad. Men who think they are fit to enforce Gods law are by 
>> >definition Tyrants in Boyd's Big Dictionary..
>> >Boyd (the opinions I express are mine alone.)
>> >
>> The word tyrant comes from the Greeks who defined it as one who ruled
>> "without the sanction of the gods" or those who did not rule under God's
>> authority. So Boyd's definition is exactly backawrds. PLEASE NOTE: This is
>> not to say that anyone wh SAYS they are rulung under God's authority
>> actually is doing so.
>> 
>> S.
>Well, since this seems to be the day for correcting others, I'll point 
>out that "S." has confused etimology with definition. etimology is the 
>historical background of a word, a words historical development and 
>origin. Definition is the statement of meaning of a word wich takes into 
>account modern perception and uses. So, Boyd's definition of Tyrant may 
>not seem correct to some but it is not "exactly backwards" or a linguistic 
>breakdown of the words etimology as "S." has offered us above. My 
>statement of my opinion about people who take it on themselves to enforce 
>God's will was not meant to reflect on anyone in this forum, I'm sorry of 
>S was bothered by it. So far I am not persuaded to change that opinion by 
>this linguistic foray.
>Semantically yours,
>Boyd Kneeland (the opinions I express are mine alone).
>
At some point words must mean something. The origins are important --
despite the loose usage. However, one ruling without the authority of God
may be either religious (Torquemada) or non-religious (the French
Revolutionary government). The results are usually similar. The point of
seeing the "authority of God" is not so much whether someting has a
religious element, but whether the ruler himself submits to the authority of
the laws as well as the people. Lex rex, not rex lex.
Nor was i bothered by your comments. I just wanted to educate a little. Your
point is that often people who claim to be acting in the name of God are
tyranical. Point taken. Often, they are also not acting in the name of
anyone but themselves -- and are very forthright to says so.

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: CNN: The CIA News Network, also NPR
Date: 28 Aug 1996 14:46:25 -0700 (PDT)

Hmm, while I'll heartily cheer the notion of cutting (no, eliminating) 
their budget I sure wouldnt agree that NPR's bias has worsened since the 
threatened cuts of 94. In fact, on my way in to work from lunch here, I 
heard conservative talk host Michael Medved (sorry, no sp, this is the 
guy who does movie reviews on npr and sits in for Limbaugh) opine about 
how well they've done with the conventions. NPRs convention coverage is 
the -only- coverage other then cspan worth tuning in to, it's actually 
quite good IMHO.
Boyd, the ex liberal.
The opinions I express are mine alone.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 16:01:47 -0600


>sabutigo wrote (in reference to Boyd):
>Nor was i bothered by your comments. I just wanted to educate a little. Your
>point is that often people who claim to be acting in the name of God are
>tyranical. Point taken. Often, they are also not acting in the name of
>anyone but themselves -- and are very forthright to says so.
>
>S.

But that misses my point about making the laws of God the laws of men.
Irrespective of authority to act in God's name etc. it is *impossible* for
a government to enact as its own the Laws of God (assuming one had the
exact Laws of God even given to one in vision and not just assuming ones
interpretation of the Bible is correct) without becoming a Tyranny.  This
simple fact is one that is hard for people of the Christian faith to grasp.
I was arguing this just the other day with a co-worker during a discussion
of drug laws after he found out I am a libertarian (both of us are faithful
LDS).  The only way, repeat: ONLY way for man to enforce God's Laws is
through force and coercion (something God Himself does not do).  Force and
coercion are trademarks of Tyrrants.

Believers can exercise their right of speech and try to help others to the
path of Faith and acceptance of God's Laws for themselves.  And in
following these laws people find ultimate Freedom.

However, you CANNOT mix governments of man with the Laws of God, no matter
what good intention you have.  Like Motor Oil and Water, they don't mix.

And this mailing list is for us all, Pagans, Christians, Jews,
Moslems/Islamics, Hindus, Atheists, Agnostics, and all the other people of
whatever faith I may have forgotten, who want earthly freedom and liberty,
to work together towards that goal.  To Restore Our Constitution to this
United States of America.  This Freedom and Liberty can only come when we
can all agree that force and coercion have no role (except self defense) in
society.  We need to forget our theological differences in this matter.

Let us all, Fritz, Gary, Sabutigo, Boyd, and everyone else work together
towards this goal.  And when we have the chance, when we have regained
freedom and liberty, maybe we can sit around and discuss theology.  I am
happy to discuss theology with any one offline of course :-)

best regards and to all of us in freedom
Chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 13:49:50 -0700 (PDT)

At 04:37 PM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, sabutigo wrote:
>whack 
>> And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
>Is this responsibility one that you can delegate to government? (I'm 
>interested in your opinion). 

To some degree. Especially if that destruction is not confied to the
individual -- and not much truly is.

Personally, I believe that much like self 
>defense it is something I have to personally do. And that delegating it 
>to government is not acceptable (IMO).
> > S.
>Boyd Kneeland (the opinions I express are mine alone)
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 16:50:33 -0600


>sabutigo wrote (I believe quoting Boyd who was quotin Sabutigo?):
>>whack
>>> And if you love him, you won't let him go on destroying himself.
>>Is this responsibility one that you can delegate to government? (I'm
>>interested in your opinion).
>
>To some degree. Especially if that destruction is not confied to the
>individual -- and not much truly is.
>

I once heard Gordon Liddy reading a Dr. Walter Williams essay.  The
specific topic was taxes and welfare and all but it touched on some more
general points on the authority of government.

As best I can I will summarize what I remember he said :-)

-- Goverments get their power where?  From the people.  The people allow
themselves to be governed.  (or from the end of a gun and they force
themselves on the people).

-- Governments get their power from the people who delegate certain
responsibilities to the government.

-- People can only delegate those powers which they themselves have

-- If I as a person do not have the power, authority, and right to do
something to someone (like force them to not take drugs) then I cannot
delegate this power to the government.  Therefore, the only way things like
drug laws can be enforced is through usurpation of power from the people --
the beginings of the police state/tyranny.

**

A related matter came up with a discussion I had with my brother (claims
not to be a libertarian though the more we talk the more he agrees with me
:-).  Through this discussion we decided that about the only laws society
can justify is ones where society agrees that if need be the death of the
offender is accepted.  In other words, in order to enforce a law, the
government has to use force (guns).  If the intimdation of a gun waving at
you is not enough to convince you then they have to use that gun or else
there is no enforcement.  To rephrase that, if the threat of forceful
enforcement is not enough to get cooperation then the force must actually
be used.  This can lead to the death of the offender.  If society is not
willing to demand death of an offender who does not cooperate with the
authorities, then it should not make a law on that subject.

It is a hard one to describe but an easy one to understand.

best
Chad



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 14:10:40 -0700 (PDT)

At 09:35 AM 8/28/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Let's say you were taking a political science class, and the following
>multiple-choice question was on the test:
>
>23) Which of the following earlier forms of governance has the LEAST
>relationship to American constitutional government?
>   A) The Roman Republic
>   B) Athenian democracy
>   C) A Norse allthing
>   D) The kingdom of David or Solomon
>
>Is there any arguement that the correct answer is (D)?

Please read your Bible before trying to use it for supporting your point.
The nation of Israel *rebelled against God* when they asked for a king. The
republic that preceded the kings was the model for the American republic.
The separation of powers was based upon Scripture which described God as
King, Judge, and Lawgiver. The circuit system of judges was based upon the
book of Judges' examples. The appellate court system was fashioned after the
advice given to Moses by his father-in-law, the Ethiopian named Jethro. Much
more, but too much to address here.

S.
>
>I'm really not interested in debating theology.  I'm perfectly willing
>to state that almost all of the people who wrote the Constitution were
>Christians of one form or another.  But If people start pulling examples
>out of Israelite history as proper models for American governance, I
>will say NO.  I'm not quite sure exactly what actions sabutigo would
>suggest the government take against homosexual Americans (he was the one
>who brought up the charming story of the tribe of Benjamin), but I would
>bet his proposed actions would not consist of "equal rights under the
>law".
>
>Get a grip, guys. You can decide who you want to "tolerate" in your
>churches.  You can't do that within your country.
>
>     Fritz -- a bisexual, pagan constitutionalist
>
>>----------
>>From: 	roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org]
>>Sent: 	Wednesday, August 28, 1996 12:01 AM
>>To: 	roc@xmission.com
>>Subject: 	RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>
>>On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
>>
>>>I think American constitutional government came from the minds of a
>>>group of intelligent men who negotiated and compromised their way to a
>>>government structure they could live with.  They had knowledge of
>>>various other attempts at self-governance, notably those of Greek
>>>city-states and the Roman Republic.  They had deep knowledge of the
>>>English common-law tradition, and of the writings of Locke, Grotius,
>>>etc.
>>>
>>>If you compare the structure of the government outlined in the
>>>Constitution, it has clear resemblances to those previous models.  I
>>>don't think it has a clear resemblance to the government structure of
>>>Solomon or David, or to that which existed in Israel at the slaughter of
>>>the tribe of Benjamin.  
>>>
>>>Is there something in your question which has eluded me?
>>>
>>>     Fritz
>>>
>>>>----------
>>>>From:  roc@xpresso.seaslug.org[SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org]
>>>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 5:12 PM
>>>>To:    roc@xmission.com
>>>>Subject:  RE: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>>>
>>>>On Aug 27, Fritz Sands wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>----------
>>>>>>From:  sabutigo[SMTP:sabutigo@teleport.com]
>>>>>>Sent:  Tuesday, August 27, 1996 2:09 PM
>>>>>>To:    roc@XMISSION.COM
>>>>>>Subject:  Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In israel, the tribe of Benjamin was nearly completely destroyed (600 men
>>>>>>left) for simply TOLERATING homosexuals in their midst. The judgemen,
>>>>>>according to law, was carried out by the people under government
>>>>>>authority.
>>>>>
>>>>>Charming story.  As I recall, they then came up with a fascinating way
>>>>>of replenishing the tribe -- something about mass rape if I remember the
>>>>>story right.  
>>>>>
>>>>>I think this is ample illustration why sane people start looking for
>>>>>defensible cover when someone starts proposing "Bible-based government".
>>>>> Scary stuff.  None for me, thanks.  I have *no* covenant with Yahweh,
>>>>>nor do I want one.   I thought this mailing list was dedicated to
>>>>>restoring constitutional government.
>>>>
>>>>Where do you think Constitutional Government came from?  Who do you think
>>>>created it?
>>
>>This will fill you in on some basic stuff.  I'll keep looking for a couple
>>other more detailed files, but probably wont find them till tomorrow, as
>>there is a bunch to go through.  (Thanks Monte).
>>
>>...
>>
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: More on Today's Topic: Gun Control
Date: 28 Aug 1996 18:56:29 EDT

Hey!!  Watchout who you callin a computer nerd!  Them's fighten words!!!
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996 20:23:57 -0500 (CDT) pwatson@utdallas.edu writes:
>Well, I think the proper action is for the Christians, Right-Wingers, 
>Gun 
>owners, ect to co-opt the Libertarian party just the same way the 
>Socialist and American Communist party did to the Democrats when FDR 
>took 
>over. We can turn it from a Computer Nerd debating society into a real 
>
>political party that the Republicans and Democrats will loose members 
>to 
>such that one of them expires, anyone heard of the Wig party lately?
>No offense to the Libertarians out there, you all have your heart in 
>the 
>right place, they just lack a little real world experience. As gun 
>owners 
>we have got to get out of the defensive mode, ask George Pattons ghost 
>how 
>many battles were won that way vs a good offense. I don't know about 
>the 
>rest of you but I am damn sure tired of the back stabbers like 
>DOLE-KEMP 
>and the Marxist Clintons. I think we are getting like Saddom's elite 
>army 
>that was under constant B52 carpet bombing for weeks on end in Desert 
>Storm. 
>It is time to get out of the foxholes and start an offense. Bob Dole 
>sure is not going to be the great white hope, he has already started 
>the 
>Ollie North-CIA-BUSH-Wakenhut-MENA-BCCI-P2- War on Drugs 
>(Constitution) 
>crusade of we need to use extreme prejudice on the American citizens 
>in 
>order to save them from those evil CIA supplied black market drugs.
>Regards,
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu   Senior Buyer UTD          
>The University of Texas at Dallas ph# 214/883-2307,fax# 214/883-2348
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, 
>deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
>But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
>the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute 
>Despotism,
>it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,
>and to provide new Guards for their future security.
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: PIML: Release: military drug war (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 19:59:41 EDT

Now you sound like a dog chasing his tail.  Round and round in circles.
On Wed, 28 Aug 1996 11:07:36 -0600 chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh) writes:
>Boyd said (not quoted as support or not of his own beliefs):
>>Militarizing the War on Some Drugs isnt about keeping foreign powers 
>from
>>invading your borders (yeesh). It is about increasing the cost of 
>illegal
>>drugs to lower demand.
>
>I don't have any data to support this but I would bet that driving the
>costs  of drugs higher increases demand.
>
>Why is this?
>
>1.  The more expensive they are the higher the profits to the drug 
>dealers.
>They need to stimulate demand to get these higher profits.
>
>2.  Market economics (simplified).  As demand goes up, so do prices.  
>Well,
>that can be reversed in some instances as well.  As prices go up, so 
>does
>demand.  (Higher prices point to high demand so demand then increases 
>to
>meet that expectation).
>
>
>So far it looks to be true -- the War on Drugs has increased demand.
>
>regards
>Chad
>
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Children Taken... (fwd)
Date: 28 Aug 1996 18:43:38 PST

On Aug 28, Gene Gross wrote:

[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------]

Okay, everyone take a deep breath before reading this one!!

Make sure you are sitting down and as calm as you can be!!

Okay, ready!!?

Then scroll down and begin reading....

























CHILDREN TAKEN FROM FAMILY FOR POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS REASONS.

In the court of common pleas in the County of Northumberland, Pennsylvania,
two children were taken from their parents because the parents passed out
what is termed anti-government booklets and the Constitution.  Leslie Brydon,
an Attorney for the government, stated in court that the parents believed the
Constitution was still relevant and that the parents read the Bible to the
children and that those kinds of things are a danger to the children. Richard
Medellin and his Att. Herschel Lock entered petitions against the parents
stating that the parents were mentally ill and read the Bible without having
Religious training.  The children were taken from the parents without
notification and the parents were not summoned to the custody proceedings.
The custody for the little girl were filed at 12:40 pm and the order was
signed at 1:58 pm. It is unknown when the proceedings in which the little boy
was taken took place because that proceeding is being kept secret and the
only documentation available is a court order. Judge Ranck, who was involved
in the taking when asked "How do you take children away from parents without
the parents being notified?" Judge Ranck responded "You'll have to ask Att
Jeffery Mench." Att. Jeffery Mench stated that the bogus charges were made up
due to the mother not listening and that it is standard procedure to make up
charges.  The court transcripts, Judge Ranck stating that he was reversing
his previous order but, he did not say that in court nor did he reverse his
order. The parents, Stephen Ames  and Dawn Stoll filed a a Civil Rights
action in Federal Court against numerous state employees and Atts, but
Federal Judge James F. McClure wrote in his Memorandum that political and
religious takings of children are within the authority of the State and its
personel and and dismissed the case.  Stephen Ames also showed documents to
Tom Bowman who is an aide of Sen. Arlen Spector.  Tom Bowman responded by
saying to Stephen Ames "What the money powers want, the money powers get and
they don't want people reading the Bible or the Constitution and if you or
your wife try to get custody of your children or even visit them you will
spend the rest of your life in jail" Children and Youth Services have taken
steps to make sure that the parents are not allowed to even visit the
children.  You can help this family by spreading the word.  Court transcripts
and other documents are available.  Write to:


 Stephen Ames Jr. Family  
 c\o P.O. box 5373 
 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania  17110 
 phone 717-657-7026
 Fax 717-671-1124 

The parents are in hiding due to threats made against them by Tom Bowman.
The statements mentioned above that were made by Judge Ranck and Jeffery
Mensch were recorded on audio tape.

[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------]

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 28 Aug 1996 22:38:33 -0400 (EDT)

It has always been my understanding that the founding fathers
were mostly deists (Webster's 9th defines deism: a movement or
system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing
morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the
Creator with the laws of the universe).

For example, Thomas Paine seems to be a deist, based on his
statements in _The Age of Reason_.

(Chapter I. The Author's Profession of Faith)

[...]

I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness
beyond this life.

I believe the equality of man, and I belive that religious duties
consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make
our fellow creatures happy.

But, lest it should be supposed that I believe many other things
in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work,
declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not
believing them.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by
the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by
the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of.  My own
mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian,
or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to
terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe
otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to
mine.  But it is necessary to the happiness of man that he be
mentally faithful to himself.  Infidelity does not consist in
believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to
believe what he does not believe.

[...]

(Chapter II.  Of Missions and Revelations)

[...]

As it is necessary to affix right ideas to words, I will, before
I proceed further into the subject, offer some observations on
the word revelation.  Revelation when applied to religion, means
something communicated immediately from God to man.

No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make
such a communication if He pleases.  But admitting, for the sake
of a case, that something has been revealed to a certain person,
and not revealed to any other person, it is a revelation to that
person only.  When he tells it to a second person, a second to a
third, and third to a fourth, and so on, it ceases to be a
revelation to all those persons.  It is revelation to the first
person only, and hearsay to every other, and, consequently, they
are not obliged to believe it.

[...]

When Moses told the children of Israel that he received the two
tables of the commandments from the hand of God, they were not
obliged to believe him, because they had no other authority for
it than his telling them so; and I have no other authority for it
than some historian telling me so, the commandments carrying no
internal evidence of divinity with them.  They contain some good
moral precepts such as any man qualified to be a lawgiver or a
legislator could produce himself, without having any recourse to
supernatural intervention.

[...]

(Chapter XI.  Of the Theology of the Christians, and the True
Theology)

[...]

That which is now called natural philosophy, embracing the whole
circle of science, of which astronomy occupies the chief place,
is the study of the works of God, and of the power and wisdom of
God in His works, and is the true theology.

[...]


[Paine was a wonderfully lucid writer.  I can't recommend him enough. -bd]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 22:17:44 EDT

Sabutigo,

Would you please give me your personal e-mail address.  I would like to
discuss some personal thoughts.  My address is gburke@juno.com.

Gary H. Burkepile
Mobile, Al

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 28 Aug 1996 20:49:50 -0700 (PDT)

At 10:17 PM 8/28/96 EDT, you wrote:
>Sabutigo,
>
>Would you please give me your personal e-mail address.  I would like to
>discuss some personal thoughts.  My address is gburke@juno.com.
>
>Gary H. Burkepile
>Mobile, Al
>
sabutigo@teleport.com is my e-mail address.

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack@minerva.com
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land" / Buyers
Date: 28 Aug 1996 20:38:55 PDT








roc@xmission.com wrote :


>
>-- Governments get their power where?  From the people.  The people allow
>themselves to be governed.  (or from the end of a gun and they force
>themselves on the people).
>
>-- Governments get their power from the people who delegate certain
>responsibilities to the government.
>
>-- People can only delegate those powers which they themselves have
>
>-- If I as a person do not have the power, authority, and right to do
>something to someone (like force them to not take drugs) then I cannot
>delegate this power to the government.  Therefore, the only way things like
>drug laws can be enforced is through usurpation of power from the people --
>the beginnings of the police state/tyranny.

How stupid.  The drug laws can be very easily enforced with no government
tyranny and giving a lot of rights back to the rational part of society.

At present drug users have lots of rights  ....and the only rights non-drug
users have is to be taxed to death to provide services for drug users:
substance abuse treatment / staggering medical bills / suffer with the 
monsters they produce for children: Crack Babies

It would seem quite elementary that if one wants to prevent drug use one
should stop the insane procedure of richly rewarding the CRIMINALS: Drug
Users and Punishing the law abiding rational part of society with taxes.

Simply let those who use drugs take responsibility for their own lives and
if as expected most will die writhing in the gutter make sure as many gory
pictures as possible appear on the evening news so that all know how 
dangerous drugs are.  This gets rid of a lot of government / police state 
that is now required to coerce / steal the money from productive people 
so that services can be provided to filthy drug users.

Also it is necessary to amend the ADA act ....if not get rid of it completely
to stop treating drug users and a form of protected hero.

So, lets have responsibility in the world and let those who use drugs have
the right to rot in perpetual agony and those who do not use drugs have the
right to not pay for the services required by those who do.

The reason the efforts to stamp out drug use are so unsuccessful is that
they target the sellers instead of the true causes of civilization being
destroyed by drugs: THE BUYERS

Jack

>
>best
>Chad
>
>
>
>




	






    Jack Perrine    |  ATHENA Programming, Inc  |  818-798-6574  |
  ----------------  |  1175 No. Altadena Drive  |  fax 398-8620  |
  jack@minerva.com  |  Pasadena, CA  91107  US  |


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: "This Land Is Our Land"
Date: 29 Aug 1996 00:27:04 EDT


On Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:10:40 -0700 (PDT) sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
writes:
>At 09:35 AM 8/28/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>Let's say you were taking a political science class, and the 
>following
>>multiple-choice question was on the test:
>>
>>23) Which of the following earlier forms of governance has the LEAST
>>relationship to American constitutional government?
>>   A) The Roman Republic
>>   B) Athenian democracy
>>   C) A Norse allthing
>>   D) The kingdom of David or Solomon
>>
>>Is there any arguement that the correct answer is (D)?
>
Fritz,

It's people like you that are tring to rewrite hisyory to fit their on
little causes.  In that test you for got one distractor:  E) NONE OF THE
ABOVE.  do like the man said, read the Book, check it out.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: RE: Humor Break (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 06:07:59 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Forwarded FYA:


The Court of King George III
London, England

July 10, 1776


Mr. Thomas Jefferson
c/o The Continental Congress
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Dear Mr. Jefferson:

We have read your "Declaration of Independence" with great interest.
Certainly, it represents a considerable undertaking, and many of your
statements do merit serious consideration.  Unfortunately, the Declaration
as a whole fails to meet recently adopted specifications for proposals to
the Crown, so we must return the document to you for further refinement.
The questions which follow might assist you in your process of revision:

1.  In your opening paragraph you use the phrase "the Laws of Nature and
    Nature's God."  What are these laws?  In what way are they the criteria
    on which you base your central arguments?  Please document with
    citations from the recent literature.

2.  In the same paragraph you refer to the "opinions of mankind."  Whose
    polling data are you using?  Without specific evidence, it seems to
    us the "opinions of mankind" are a matter of opinion.

3.  You hold certain truths to be "self-evident."  Could you please
    elaborate.  If they are as evident as you claim then it should not be
    difficult for you to locate the appropriate supporting statistics.

4.  "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" seem to be the goals of
    your proposal.  These are not measurable goals.  If you were to say that
    "among these is the ability to sustain an average life expectancy in
    six of the 13 colonies of at last 55 years, and to enable newspapers
    in the colonies to print news without outside interference, and to
    raise the average income of the colonists by 10 percent in the next
    10 years," these could be measurable goals.  Please clarify.

5.  You state that "Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of
    these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,
    and to institute a new Government...."  Have you weighed this assertion
    against all the alternatives?  What are the trade-off considerations?

6.  Your description of the existing situation is quite extensive.  Such a
    long list of grievances should precede the statement of goals, not
    follow it.  Your problem statement needs improvement.

7.  Your strategy for achieving your goal is not developed at all.  You
    state that the colonies "ought to be Free and Independent States," and
    that they are "Absolved from All Allegiance to the British Crown."  Who
    or what must change to achieve this objective?  In what way must they
    change?  What specific steps will you take to overcome the resistance?
    How long will it take?  We have found that a little foresight in these
    areas helps to prevent careless errors later on.  How cost-effective are
    your strategies?

8.  Who among the list of signatories will be responsible for implementing
    your strategy?  Who conceived it?  Who provided the theoretical research?
    Who will constitute the advisory committee?  Please submit an organization
    chart and vitas of the principal investigators.

9.  You must include an evaluation design.  We have been requiring this
    since Queen Anne's War.

10. What impact will your problem have?  Your failure to include any
    assessment of this inspires little confidence in the long-range
    prospects of your undertaking.

11. Please submit a PERT diagram, an activity chart, itemized budget, and
    manpower utilization matrix.

We hope that these comments prove useful in revising your "Declaration of
Independence."  We welcome the submission of your revised proposal.  Our due
date for unsolicited proposals is July 31, 1776.  Ten copies with original
signatures will be required.


Sincerely,


Management Analyst to the British Crown


---------===========================================---------
       __ __                      ___               __  
      / // /_ ____ _  ___  ____  / _ )_______ ___ _/ /__
     / _  / // /  ' \/ _ \/ __/ / _  / __/ -_) _ `/  '_/
    /_//_/\_,_/_/_/_/\___/_/   /____/_/  \__/\_,_/_/\_\ 

         A no-cost moderated email joke mailing list
   See the WWW page referenced below for subscription info

  morph@ict.org            http://www.ict.org/~morph/jokes/
---------===========================================---------



-- 
Michael E. Glasgow     --     don@paranoia.com
                              http://www.paranoia.com/

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do 
nothing."  -- Edmund Burke


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: piml] PIML: Clinton scandal chart (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 06:14:09 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

forwarded from libernet-d

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Newgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater

 Oh - THOSE scandals...



               A CONCISE GUIDE TO THE CLINTON SCANDALS


                           ______Jean Lewis_________
                          /                         \
                         /           Web Hubbell  RTC criminal
                        /           /          \  referrals
                       /    Arkansas            \      \
The Clintons ___Whitewater__Indictments    RTC/Treasury coverup
            |\                      \             \
            | \___ Travelgate__      \___ David Hale's loan_
            |              |   \                            |
            |              ?    \____ Billy Dale Trial      |
            |WH coverup &  | Helen     \                    |
            |_office search| Dickey     \__Missing documents|
            | \            |     \                          |
            |  \___Vince Foster's death______ Fiske coverup |
            |     \                    |\                   |
            |      \_Foreign trips     | \___ Starr coverup |
 The Ives   |                          |                    |
 case-Mena  | Walsh coverup/9 quashed  |_Park Police coverup|
 connection |  \ investigations        |                    |
 +--------->|   \    The Ives case(A)  |_Forged suicide note|
 |          |    \  /                                       |
 |          |___ Mena____ L.D. Brown allegations ___________|
 |          |     |   \
 |          | massive  \__ Terry Reed Litigation   Larry Nichols
 |          | media &   \                             /       |
 |     +---<| congressnl.\__ Money Laundering ___ ADFA___(B)  |
 |     |    | coverup                                         |
 |     |    |                                                 |
 |     |    |____ Troopergate ________Allegations of troopers |
 |     |    |                   \    \                        |
 | Lasater  |____ Paula Jones affair  \________ Gennifer Flowers
 | - ADFA   |                       \           Sally Perdue
 |connection|                        \         "Bimbo Eruptions"
 |     |    |_____"The Body Count"___Kathy Ferguson ++  |
 |     |    | |  \                  \                   |
 |     |    | |   \__ Dennis Patrick \___Luther "Jerry" Parks +
 |     |    | |(A)              |         |
 +---------<| |__ The Ives Case |         |
       |    |        ++++++++   |         |
       |    |_____Allegations of|cocaine use____
       |    |                   |               \
       +--->|     (B)ADFA       |                \
            |       \           |                 \
            |        \_The Lasater connection___"Angel Fire"
            |                         |     |
            |____ Diversion of bank funds to|campaign __
            |     personal and business use |           |
            |                               |           |
            |______Political favors for business favors_|_______
            |    \                          \           |       |
            |     \___The Tyson connection__ \_Flowerwood Farms |
            |        \                |     \            \      |
            |         \___ Cattlegate_|_ HRC's shady busines deals
            |                \        |        |\               |
            |                 \__  Jim Blair   | \__Rose Law Firm
            |                     "Red" Bone   |          |
            |                                  |          |
            |____ HRC's medical stock windfall_|    Vince Foster +
            |                                  |    Web Hubbell
            |____ HRC's Health Panel deceptions-    Bernie Nussbaum
            |
            |____ WJC's draft dodging deceptions
            |
            |____ WJC's participation in foreign anti-U.S.
                  demonstrations during the Vietnam War


     NOTE: "+" denotes a death, possibly related to "the body
           count."




******************************************************************
 visit GODDARD'S GALLERIA:  http://www.erols.com/igoddard/art.htm 
 some of the lanscapes, nudes, and visionary art of IAN W GODDARD 
__________________________________________________________________

Holistic logic --->  http://www.erols.com/igoddard/reality.html


--------- End forwarded message ----------


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: piml] U.S. Denies Quashing Gulf Chemical Report (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 07:06:50 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

U.S. Denies Quashing Gulf Chemical Report 

WASHINGTON (Reuter) - The Defense Department denied Wednesday that it
intentionally quashed a 1991 classified report suggesting that U.S. troops
were exposed to Iraqi chemical weapons in the Gulf War. 

But the department conceded that ``the full relevance of the report ... was
not recognized at the time'' and it was not investigated until this year,
providing indications that perhaps 150 soldiers were exposed to chemical
agents when they blew up the Kamisiyah ammunition dump in southern Iraq. 

Defense Secretary William Perry, commenting on a New York Times report, said
the secret document was circulated within the government and to U.S.
military officials at the time and that the ``complex'' issue was still
being investigated. 

But the document, based on a visit by U.N. inspectors to the Kamisiyah
weapons complex in 1991, was not made available to the U.S. engineer
battalion involved or to the public. The government, on orders from
President Clinton, last year mounted a major effort to solve medical
complaints from thousands of Gulf War veterans. 

``The department flatly denies that there was ever an attempt to withhold
information from either the troops or from the public regarding this
matter,'' Navy Capt. Michael Doubleday, a Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday. 

But ``the full relevance of the report, because there was no such thing as
'Gulf War illness' ... was not recognized at the time,'' Doubleday told
reporters. 

The Times said the long-classified intelligence report showed the White
House, the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department were alerted
that chemical weapons had been stored in a big Iraqi ammunition depot that
was blown up in March 1991 by American troops. 

The report was circulated to U.S. military commanders worldwide and then
filed away even as the Defense Department repeatedly suggested it had no
evidence that large numbers of U.S. troops might have been exposed to
chemical arms. 

The report was marked ``priority,'' a designation for intelligence
considered of moderate importance, the Times said. But it was never shared
with the troops themselves. 

Defense officials confirmed the Times report that as many as 150 U.S.
soldiers who took part in the 1991 mission to blow up Iraq's Kamisiyah
ammunition dump were told only this spring that they may have been exposed
to a cloud of mustard gas and sarin, a nerve agent. 

But officials denied that many of the soldiers who destroyed the arms depot
had since developed debilitating medical problems that they say may be
linked to exposure to chemical weapons. 

Nearly 60,000 other veterans of the Gulf War have asked for special health
screenings to determine if they were suffering from ailments related to
their service in the Gulf. 

Pentagon officials said much of the material in the November 1991 report
came from the U.N. arms inspectors who traveled to Iraq after the war ended
in February of that year. 

The inspectors had found evidence of chemical weapons at the depot at
Kamisiyah when it was destroyed. The report drew little attention when it
was circulated. 

Doubleday said the U.N. inspectors who visited the area in November, 1991,
reported that they were told by the Iraqis that U.S. troops earlier that
year had blown up stocks of weapons there. 

But he said U.S. officials had reason to be doubtful of those claims. 

``Iraq was the one country in the world that we least believed at that
time,'' he told reporters. 

``In 1991, the question was not whether (chemical) weapons had been
destroyed, but whether they had even existed.'' 

He said it was only in late 1995, based on a new CIA analysis, that
government experts began to understand how the destruction of the Kamisiyah
depot might have exposed U.S. troops to chemical weapons. 



Copyright 1996 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication and
redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior
written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or
delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. 
---
Chris Hart
email: chart@superior.net
web: http://www.superior.net/~chart
irc: StrmShdow



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: New book on the April 19th 1995 Bomb: Oklahoma City Day one (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 08:36:52 -0500 (CDT)


Folks, I have heard Michele on Short Wave Radio for several hours 
describing the Oklahoma Bomb. Michele and her husband live in Oklahoma 
and recorded all the local TV, Police, Fire and EMT broadcast for the 
first day and weeks on April 19th 1995. Michele verified all information 
with 3 separate documented sources that had to be independent of each other
before she used them in her analysis. She did extensive and detailed 
interviews with signed affidavits from many rescue workers and survivors. 
She has done exhausting physical analysis of the site, ownership land records, 
digitized helicopter pictures and much more. I would say that Sherlock 
Holmes has met his match and maybe the Government has as well! 
Michele has literally risked her life and livelihood to produce this book.
I can not give a stronger recommendation for great American and a great book!
Regards,
Paul Watson C.P.M., pwatson@utdallas.edu   Senior Buyer UTD          
DISCLAIMER MY WORDS ONLY AND NOT THE UNIVERSITY!


Info about the book:
=======================================================================

                        OKLAHOMA CITY:  DAY ONE
                       A Detailed Account of the
            Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building
                        Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
                            April 19, 1995

       by Michele Marie Moore, with a Foreword by William Cooper

Officials claim the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building 
is a simple open-and-shut case; that the bomber was an anti-
government extremist exacting revenge with a fertilizer bomb 
packed inside a Ryder truck.  The media tells us that we must 
fear American patriots... and the Militia.

              NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!

In this monumental work, encyclopedic in scope and fully documented
-- the first of several volumes -- you are taken on a journey which 
begins with the explosions and continues through the final dramatic 
rescue of the last survivor.  The real story of the bombing is a 
mind-numbing account of federal deceptions, media manipulation, 
witness intimidation, the deliberate suppression and manufacture 
of evidence, the cruel exploitation of survivors and their family 
members, attempts to destroy independent investigations, and the 
government's efforts to conceal the documentation that reveals a 
foreknowledge of the pending disaster by many federal, state, and 
local officials. 

The true facts of the bombing bear no resemblance to the "official 
story."  The truth is shocking....

You must read OKLAHOMA CITY:  DAY ONE or you will never really know 
what happened on April 19, 1995.  Every piece of evidence is fully 
documented.  Complete references are provided.  You will never put 
this book down until you have finished it... then you will return to 
it again and again.

OKLAHOMA CITY:  DAY ONE is but the beginning of a very long story... 
blood red, born in flames. 

=========================================================================
Quantities Are Limited!  Order Your Copy Now!

__ Limited Hardcover Signed & Numbered Edition (Only 500 printed) $65.00

__ Paper-Trade Edition	                                          $35.00	

Prices are postpaid.		TOTAL PURCHASE:		  	________
==========================================================================

Please provide an address to which UPS can ship.  
UPS will not deliver to post office boxes.

Name:_____________________________________________________________________

Address:__________________________________________________________________

City, State, Postal Zone__________________________________________________

Send MONEY ORDERS ONLY to Harvest, P.O. Box 1970, Eagar, AZ  85925
Allow six to eight weeks for delivery.
===========================================================================





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 29 Aug 1996 09:49:09 -0400


>It has always been my understanding that the founding fathers
>were mostly deists (Webster's 9th defines deism: a movement or
>system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing
>morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the
>Creator with the laws of the universe).
>
	Thanks for posting this.   It crossed my mind to post something about 
	Jefferson being a deist, and having to be somewhat coy about his beliefs as 
	they offended some of the more orthodox in society.

	I didn't post because I didn't have enough detailed knowledge.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 29 Aug 1996 11:15:32 EDT

Did Jefferson actually say in public or in writing, "I am a diest"?

Gary
On Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:49:09 -0400 John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
writes:
>
>>It has always been my understanding that the founding fathers
>>were mostly deists (Webster's 9th defines deism: a movement or
>>system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing
>>morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the
>>Creator with the laws of the universe).
>>
>	Thanks for posting this.   It crossed my mind to post 
>something about 
>	Jefferson being a deist, and having to be somewhat coy about 
>his beliefs as 
>	they offended some of the more orthodox in society.
>
>	I didn't post because I didn't have enough detailed knowledge.
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 29 Aug 1996 11:44:04 -0400


>
>Did Jefferson actually say in public or in writing, "I am a diest"?
>
>Gary
>
	No, I don't believe that he ever did.   He realized that a declaration
	that he was a Deist would lead to all sorts of religious recriminations.
	
	My knowledge of this comes from sketchy memory of the one biography of Jefferson
	that I have read.

	I do have on my bookshelf "The Jefferson Bible", which is a redacted version of
	the New Testament.   Jefferson took a pair of scissors to the Bible and removed 
	every item of the story of Jesus Christ that contained content that he thought 
	contradicted natural science.    The result is the moral and religious teachings of 
	Jesus without any miracles.

	Sounds like a pretty good case that he was a Deist to me.

	ciao,

	jcurtis

	

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gburke1@juno.com (GARY H. BURKEPILE)
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 29 Aug 1996 12:12:02 EDT

Well then, If in fact he did that, he had best go back to the OT and cut
out all refferences of JC made there also because it is chocked full of
them.

Gary

On Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:44:04 -0400 John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
writes:
>
>>
>>Did Jefferson actually say in public or in writing, "I am a diest"?
>>
>>Gary
>>
>	No, I don't believe that he ever did.   He realized that a 
>declaration
>	that he was a Deist would lead to all sorts of religious 
>recriminations.
>	
>	My knowledge of this comes from sketchy memory of the one 
>biography of Jefferson
>	that I have read.
>
>	I do have on my bookshelf "The Jefferson Bible", which is a 
>redacted version of
>	the New Testament.   Jefferson took a pair of scissors to the 
>Bible and removed 
>	every item of the story of Jesus Christ that contained content 
>that he thought 
>	contradicted natural science.    The result is the moral and 
>religious teachings of 
>	Jesus without any miracles.
>
>	Sounds like a pretty good case that he was a Deist to me.
>
>	ciao,
>
>	jcurtis
>
>	
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 11:31:05 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Posted to texas-gun-owners by txjohn47@ix.netcom.com (John Johnson)
More thoughts to ponder before running out and getting a TxCHL.

<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->

Newsgroups: tx.guns

At the request of a friend who follows this group regularly, I have
transcribed the article Chris Stark referred to.  After you've had a
chance to read it, go buy the magazine--there are other articles worth
reading in it, and I feel badly enough about posting their copyrighted
material.  However, I believe they would want their message spread and
discussed, and I think this is an appropriate forum for that.  It's not
that long, but as Chris noted, it's worth reading the entire article.

+++===+++===+++===+++===+++

Transcribed from the column "2nd Amendment" in the October, 1996, issue
of Guns & Ammo

Concealed-Carry Laws are Not the Answer (Some Gun Owners Believe that
Permit Systems Play into the Hands of the Antis).  by Ed Moats

"The most effective means of fighting crime in the United states is to
outlaw the possession of any type of firearm by the civilian populace." 

So said Janet Reno at a 1991 B'nai B'rith meeting in Fort Lauderdale,
Florida.  Reno was then the chief prosecutor of Dade County, Florida. 
Today she is the attorney general of the United States and her doctrine
of civilian disarmament is official federal crime control policy.  For
the United States government, fighting crime means rendering civilians
completely defenseless.  And federal constitutional doctrine is that
there is no constitutional right to keep and bear arms, notwithstanding
whatever the Constitution itself might have to say on the subject.

Why then has the United States Justice Department remained silent as
state after state has passed statutes allowing concealed-carry permits
(CCPs)? Today 31 states have "shall issue" concealed-carry laws,
requiring the issuance of a CCP to any citizen who pays the fee and is
not disqualified (felon, mental health, drug or alcohol commitment,
etc.).

We can understand this federal silence as a clever application of the
technique for cooking frogs.  Question:  How do you cook a frog?
Answer: Very slowly.  If you toss a frog into a pot of boiling water
the frog will leap out.  But if you gently place the frog in a pan of
cool water and slowly raise the temperature, the frog will be too
cooked to leap by the time he realizes he's in trouble.  Question:
"How do you steal the liberties of a free people?"  Answer:  "The same
way you cook a frog: very slowly."  This is the socialist doctrine of
gradualism, employed successfully by socialists since World War II to
erode the liberties of America s citizens.

The feds tolerate the explosion of state concealed-carry laws because
they know these concealed-carry laws are gradually creating a culture
that will facilitate the confiscation of all firearms.

"A simple man believes anything, but a prudent man gives thought to his
steps," says the Scripture, accurately describing the simple among us
who imprudently celebrate the liberalization of concealed-carry laws.
As ignorant as lambs bleating their way to slaughter is the pitiful
glee of gun owners rejoicing that their state is going to allow permits
for concealed carry.

Concealed-carry permits are the deadly enemy not the friend of the
right to keep and bear arms.  Everyone who purchases a permit plays
into the hands of the gun confiscators, who are patiently biding their
time until the moment is ripe.

A gun owner who buys a concealed-weapon permit steps into six traps:

Confusing the distinction between "Concealed Carry" and "Carry."
In many states the CCP is required to carry a handgun at all, concealed
or not.  And some require the CCP to carry any firearm, even long guns,
except to the hunt or the firing range.  Soon a CCP will be required to
take your grandfather's .22 to the dump to shoot rats.  Ultimately in
my opinion, a CCP will be required to possess any firearm anywhere
outside your own home.

Paying for a Constitutional Right.
Every gun owner who buys a CCP helps establish the principle that the
government may charge a fee for constitutional rights.  If a CCP is
$50, what shall it be for a free speech permit, or a permit granting
protection from unreasonable searches and seizures?  We all long ago
acquiesced to buying government permission to build a house or operate
a motor vehicle. Shall we now place constitutional rights in the same
category?

Turning a Right into a Privilege.
Similarly, everyone who obtains a CCP assents to the proposition that
bearing arms is a privilege, not a right.  There is an infinite gulf
between these two concepts.  A privilege is granted at the state s
discretion, revocable at its will (or whim).  A right is vested in an
individual, not subject to the grace of the state.  What is done by
state license is a privilege, not a right.  A CCP law is itself an
infringement of the constitutional right to bear arms.

Camouflaged Registration.
Everyone buying a CCP registers himself as a gun owner.  Registration
is the necessary antecedent to confiscation.  Confiscators don t need
to have the firearms registered.  What they really need is to have the
owners registered.  Concealed-weapon permits do exactly that.  When the
time comes, confiscators will know whose house to search.  Ominously,
the March 1996 issue of Guns & Ammo reports a secret federal gun
registration scheme in Pittsburgh that uses a computer program to
generate a map of the city with the homes of legal firearm owners
circled.  The data for this map will come partly from concealed-carry
permits.

Any data source that identifies gun owners will serve the confiscators 
purpose.  On a recent visit to a gun store in Seattle, I was told by
the owner that he had recently received a call from the BATF inquiring 
whether he kept records on his sales of gun safes. To the storekeeper's
"why?" the BATFman replied "Well, we figure where there's gun safes,
there's guns."

This should be no surprise.  Gun owners  enthusiasm for concealed-carry
laws has been misplaced from the beginning.  CCP laws are camouflaged
registration laws, registering owners, which is even worse than
registering guns.  This is the reason some states require a CCP to
carry a handgun at all, even if not concealed.  The purpose is not to
liberalize firearms possession for the law-abiding, but rather to get
owners of firearms registered for the day of confiscation. [Editor's
Note:  In point of fact, "registration" already exists on the federal
level whenever a gun buyer completes a Form 4473.]

Misplaced Faith in Lawmakers.
The fifth trap is thinking that lawmakers who create the concealed-
carry laws are motivated by support for the constitutional right to
bear arms. If they were, they would not create the complex
concealed-carry machinery, complete with application forms, fees,
waiting periods, record checks, required concealment, mandatory
training, renewal fees, etc.  That complex machinery is irrelevant to
any legitimate purpose.  All that is needed to support the
constitutional right to bear arms and protect the public is a
simple statute making it a crime for the disqualified (felons, drug
addicts, alcoholics, etc.) to carry a firearm.  Nothing further is
required or helpful.

Proponents may claim concealed-carry laws allow the law-abiding to pack
heat while restricting firearms from the disqualified.  No thinking
person can be fooled by this patent canard.  Denying criminals
concealed-weapon permits does not deny them concealed weapons.  Such
laws only affect the law-abiding.  Concealed-carry laws only restrict
weapons from those law-abiding citizens who are unable or unwilling to
pay the fee.  The criminals are unaffected.  No law can keep guns from
gremlins.

Hence this vital question:  What is the difference between a
concealed-carry statute and a statute declaring it a felony for a felon
to possess a firearm?  To the felon there is no difference at all.  But
the law-abiding person must register and pay a fee.

Thus, the net practical effect of a concealed-carry statute is to 1)
compile a registration list of gun owners, 2) establish that bearing
arms is a privilege, not a right, and 3) extract a fee for this
privilege.

Solidifying Bias against Open Carry.
Most concealed-carry laws permit only concealed carry.  That is, they
disallow open carry.  These laws thus further cement the current
cultural bias against open carry.  Yet open carry is the direction we
must move if we're going to actually stop the crime wave in this
country.

It has been noted that "An armed society is a polite society."  True,
but incompletely stated.  An armed society will be a polite one only if
everyone knows it is armed.  Concealed weapons won t induce politeness. 

Someone rejoins "Under concealed-carry laws, you'll be polite to
everyone, because you won't know who is armed."  I reply: You don't
know now who is armed!

All the infamous public massacres of recent times the Long Island
Railroad, the Killeen, Texas, Luby s Cafeteria are characterized by one
critical fact:  The killer believed that he would be the only one there
armed.  Concealed carry won t change that.  Open carry will.

Gun Owners Come Out of the Closet.
Consider this:  If you carry a weapon concealed, just who are you
concealing it from?  Not the vermin:  You want them to know you're
armed. Then you're less likely to have to use your weapon.  You are
concealing the weapon from the police and from the public who might
call the police. In our unfortunate mindset, it is socially
unacceptable for the peaceable to be armed.  Because of this attitude
armed crime is ubiquitous.  But let the citizen carry his arms openly,
and this mindset and the crime it promotes will rapidly reverse.

If our lawmakers were truly interested in curbing crime they would
mandate that every qualified adult man and woman carry a firearm, long
or short, concealed or open.  Instead, lawmakers are creating
camouflaged registration laws, while mouthing fidelity to the Second
Amendment.

To counter this, gun owners should come out of the closet.  In every
jurisdiction where it is still legal, gun owners should carry their
weapons openly.  The public will at first be shocked, but will soon
applaud it as violent crime skids to a halt.

===+++===+++===+++===+++===

>---- End Forwarded Message ----<

-- 

>From the main computer of:
John Johnson
TXJohn47@ix.netcom.com

The opinions expressed above represent those of the writer (me)
and not necessarily those of his employer (also me).  <G> ;-)

--
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
with the word help in the message body.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 29 Aug 1996 09:58:59 -0700

        John,

        <<<<<<<
        (Webster's 9th defines deism: a movement or
>>system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing
>>morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the
>>Creator with the laws of the universe).
>>
>        Thanks for posting this.   It crossed my mind to post something about
>        Jefferson being a deist, and having to be somewhat coy about his
>beliefs as
>        they offended some of the more orthodox in society.
        <<<<<<<

        From the American Heritage Dictionary (V4.0)

        The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the
universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no
influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.


Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 29 Aug 1996 09:07:02 PST

I seem to recall hearing that only one or two of the Founders were Deists,
Paine being one.

On Aug 29, GARY H. BURKEPILE wrote:

>Did Jefferson actually say in public or in writing, "I am a diest"?
>
>Gary
>On Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:49:09 -0400 John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
>writes:
>>
>>>It has always been my understanding that the founding fathers
>>>were mostly deists (Webster's 9th defines deism: a movement or
>>>system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing
>>>morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the
>>>Creator with the laws of the universe).
>>>
>> Thanks for posting this.   It crossed my mind to post 
>>something about 
>> Jefferson being a deist, and having to be somewhat coy about 
>>his beliefs as 
>> they offended some of the more orthodox in society.
>>
>> I didn't post because I didn't have enough detailed knowledge.
>>
>>
>

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Libertarian Aliance
Date: 29 Aug 1996 10:27:40 PST

Brad;

Did Sean Gabb ever get back to you with the Libertarian Alliance Tactical
Notes, or did you ever get a URL or a sitename for them?

Thanks.

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 29 Aug 1996 13:40:26 -0500

From the so-called "news":

	Clinton Consultant Resigns  
	White House sources say the president's top political  
consultant, Dick Morris, has resigned following reports that he 
was involved in an affair with a $200-an-hour prostitute. The 
resignation came just hours before Clinton was to address the 
Democratic National Convention to accept the party's 
presidential nomination. The tabloid magazine Star broke the 
story of the relationship. It said Morris has been carrying on a 
year-long affair with call girl Sherry Rowlands at a Washington 
hotel. The magazine said Morris allowed Rowlands to listen in on 
private phone conversations with the president and even let her 
read the first lady's speech to the convention five nights 
before Mrs. Clinton delivered it. 

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: ACLU News 8/28/96: Guns
Date: 29 Aug 1996 13:58:55 -0500

As this article below shows, the ACLU is willing to defend gun traders,
albeit not on the groungs of the Second Amendment. But we will take all the
help we can get.

Maybe some day soon the ACLU will drop its foolish hoplophobic
mis-interpretation of the 2nd Am., especially since it is not only wrong on
Constitutional grounds, but also moral grounds (see Lott's Report on CCW).

Slowly but surely the RKBA pendulum is gaining momentum as it begins its
swing back toward the Right.

Bob Knauer

-----

From the ACLU newsfeed:

>ACLU of Arkansas Challenge Ordinance Requiring Social Security Numbers of
>Gun Traders and Others
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>Wednesday, August 28, 1996
>
>LITTLE ROCK -- The ACLU of Arkansas filed a lawsuit today in U.S. District
>Court of Western District of Arkansas on behalf of Anthony Zuckert, a man
>who enjoys gun-trading.
>
>Mr. Zuckert and his wife, Jeanne, object to a Harrison ordinance requiring
>that "itinerate" salespeople wishing to participate in trade shows provide
>to the show-operator their social security numbers.
>
>Federal law already requires that regular gun-traders obtain a federal
>firearms license that lasts for three years.  In order to obtain such a
>license, social security numbers and other information is provided by the
>applicant so that a criminal background check can be performed by
>authorities:  Mr. Zuckert already has a current license.
>
>The ACLU claims that the Harrison ordinance unduly burdens Mr. Zuckert's
>right to engage in commercial speech by demanding he provide his social
>security number, because no legitimate government interest can be
>demonstrated for making such a request: this, we claim, violates the First
>Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
>
>Second, we believe that the ordinance is "impermissibly vague," by providing
>"no ascertainable standards for determining whether any salesperson is
>'itinerate' [sic] or any location is 'transitory,'" and is also vague
>regarding the supposed exceptions for "farm products" "garage sales" and
>"trade shows."
>
>We further believe the plaintiff's right to due process has been violated
>for all the above reasons.  Lastly, we believe that the ordinance violates
>the federal Privacy Act by requiring the use of social security numbers.
>
>"Once upon a time, social security numbers were supposed to be used only for
>the management of social security benefits," says ACLU Executive Director
>Rita Spillenger.  "These days, everyone from your doctor to your mechanic
>thinks they have the right to get and use that number.
>
>"People who object to this common practice of using the number for
>identification are within their rights, but they fight an increasingly
>uphill battle with every request," Spillenger added.
>
>"Most people are unaware that you can refuse to provide your social security
>number in many situations, like obtaining a driver's license," Spillenger
>said. "We are happy to help the Zuckerts stand up for their right not to
>hand over their number to every government official that asks for it."
>
>The ACLU attorney who is representing the Zuckerts, Charles Kester of
>Rogers, added, "The City of Harrison placed Mr. Zuckert in the unfortunate
>position of having to choose whether to give up his right to privacy and
his >social security number or give up his right to engage in commercial speech.
>Fortunately, the Constitution and the federal Privacy Act forbid such a
>Hobson's choice."
>
>The suit asks for the ordinance to be found unconstitutional and to be not
>enforced.  A gun show is scheduled in Harrison for Labor Day, and the
>Zuckerts would like to participate.  They did not participate in the last
>show because of this ordinance.
>
> _________________________________________
> ONLINE RESOURCES FROM THE ACLU NATIONAL OFFICE
> _________________________________________
> ACLU Freedom Network Web Page:  http://www.aclu.org.  
> America Online users should check out our live chats, auditorium events,
> *very* active message boards, and complete news on civil liberties, at
> keyword ACLU.
> 
> _________________________________________
> ACLU Newsfeed
> American Civil Liberties Union National Office
> 132 West 43rd Street
> New York, New York 10036
> 
> To subscribe to the ACLU Newsfeed, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org
>with "subscribe News" in the body of the message.  To terminate your
>subscription, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "unsubscribe News"
>in the body of the message.
> 
> For general information about the ACLU, write to info@aclu.org.
> _________________________________________

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 29 Aug 1996 12:08:21 PST

On Aug 29, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:

> From the so-called "news":

[snip]

> It said Morris has been carrying on a
>year-long affair with call girl Sherry Rowlands at a Washington 
>hotel. The magazine said Morris allowed Rowlands to listen in on 
>private phone conversations with the president and even let her 
>read the first lady's speech to the convention five nights 
>before Mrs. Clinton delivered it. 

How absolutely appropriate.....:-)

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: ACLU News 8/28/96: Guns
Date: 29 Aug 1996 12:46:09 PST

What a lot of people do is give out the following Social Security Number:

      078-05-1120

That's the phoney one they used to put in new wallets, so that you'd have an
idea of what they'd look like when you bought them.  It's never issued to
anyone.  The practice has been discontinued, but the number is still never
used, and a _lot_ of people are unaware of that.....:-)

On Aug 29, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:

>As this article below shows, the ACLU is willing to defend gun traders,
>albeit not on the groungs of the Second Amendment. But we will take all the
>help we can get.
>
>Maybe some day soon the ACLU will drop its foolish hoplophobic
>mis-interpretation of the 2nd Am., especially since it is not only wrong on
>Constitutional grounds, but also moral grounds (see Lott's Report on CCW).
>
>Slowly but surely the RKBA pendulum is gaining momentum as it begins its
>swing back toward the Right.
>
>Bob Knauer
>
>-----
>
> From the ACLU newsfeed:
>
>>ACLU of Arkansas Challenge Ordinance Requiring Social Security Numbers of
>>Gun Traders and Others
>>
>>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>>Wednesday, August 28, 1996
>>
>>LITTLE ROCK -- The ACLU of Arkansas filed a lawsuit today in U.S. District
>>Court of Western District of Arkansas on behalf of Anthony Zuckert, a man
>>who enjoys gun-trading.
>>
>>Mr. Zuckert and his wife, Jeanne, object to a Harrison ordinance requiring
>>that "itinerate" salespeople wishing to participate in trade shows provide
>>to the show-operator their social security numbers.
>>
>>Federal law already requires that regular gun-traders obtain a federal
>>firearms license that lasts for three years.  In order to obtain such a
>>license, social security numbers and other information is provided by the
>>applicant so that a criminal background check can be performed by
>>authorities:  Mr. Zuckert already has a current license.
>>
>>The ACLU claims that the Harrison ordinance unduly burdens Mr. Zuckert's
>>right to engage in commercial speech by demanding he provide his social
>>security number, because no legitimate government interest can be
>>demonstrated for making such a request: this, we claim, violates the First
>>Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
>>
>>Second, we believe that the ordinance is "impermissibly vague," by providing
>>"no ascertainable standards for determining whether any salesperson is
>>'itinerate' [sic] or any location is 'transitory,'" and is also vague
>>regarding the supposed exceptions for "farm products" "garage sales" and
>>"trade shows."
>>
>>We further believe the plaintiff's right to due process has been violated
>>for all the above reasons.  Lastly, we believe that the ordinance violates
>>the federal Privacy Act by requiring the use of social security numbers.
>>
>>"Once upon a time, social security numbers were supposed to be used only for
>>the management of social security benefits," says ACLU Executive Director
>>Rita Spillenger.  "These days, everyone from your doctor to your mechanic
>>thinks they have the right to get and use that number.
>>
>>"People who object to this common practice of using the number for
>>identification are within their rights, but they fight an increasingly
>>uphill battle with every request," Spillenger added.
>>
>>"Most people are unaware that you can refuse to provide your social security
>>number in many situations, like obtaining a driver's license," Spillenger
>>said. "We are happy to help the Zuckerts stand up for their right not to
>>hand over their number to every government official that asks for it."
>>
>>The ACLU attorney who is representing the Zuckerts, Charles Kester of
>>Rogers, added, "The City of Harrison placed Mr. Zuckert in the unfortunate
>>position of having to choose whether to give up his right to privacy and
>his >social security number or give up his right to engage in commercial speech.
>>Fortunately, the Constitution and the federal Privacy Act forbid such a
>>Hobson's choice."
>>
>>The suit asks for the ordinance to be found unconstitutional and to be not
>>enforced.  A gun show is scheduled in Harrison for Labor Day, and the
>>Zuckerts would like to participate.  They did not participate in the last
>>show because of this ordinance.
>>
>> _________________________________________
>> ONLINE RESOURCES FROM THE ACLU NATIONAL OFFICE
>> _________________________________________
>> ACLU Freedom Network Web Page:  http://www.aclu.org.  
>> America Online users should check out our live chats, auditorium events,
>> *very* active message boards, and complete news on civil liberties, at
>> keyword ACLU.
>> 
>> _________________________________________
>> ACLU Newsfeed
>> American Civil Liberties Union National Office
>> 132 West 43rd Street
>> New York, New York 10036
>> 
>> To subscribe to the ACLU Newsfeed, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org
>>with "subscribe News" in the body of the message.  To terminate your
>>subscription, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "unsubscribe News"
>>in the body of the message.
>> 
>> For general information about the ACLU, write to info@aclu.org.
>> _________________________________________
>
>--
>       
>**************************************************
>    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
>    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 
>
> <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
>**************************************************
>

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: piml] Hot Stuff, Please Repost Widely (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 14:58:05 -0500 (CDT)





---------- Forwarded message ----------

Hot stuff, please repost widely:

On August 26 at 4:56 CDT I posted a Harry Browne press release
entitled "Superman is wrong" to three mailing lists:  old PIML
(Patriot Information Mailing List), new PIML, and TAB (Take
America Back.)  There are two PIMLs because PIML is currently
undergoing a change of listowner and listserver.

Today I received an undeliverable mail message dated August 29 at
11:27 EDT.  This message, which is copied below, came from the
mailserver MAILER-DAEMON@family.mveca.ohio.gov and shows the
Browne release being sent from me to addresses for the President,
the Vice President, and the first lady.  The trailer at the bottom
of the undeliverable mail message shows the Brown release to have
been received on the old PIML mailing list.  Those addresses are
not subscribed to old PIML.

I have been aware of what appears to be a government address being
a subscriber to old PIML for some months.  That address is
Dale.Hatten@family.mveca.ohio.gov.  Not everyone in government is
evil and I was not concerned about this particular address, but 
now it seems that a government mailserver has been programmed to
forward PIML messages to the White House.  As best I can tell, the
White House server must have been down for a while and the
undeliverable mail message was sent to me because my personal
address was shown as the sender on the Browne release which was
forwarded to the White House.

The purpose of PIML has always been to act as an information
service to inform the public and I am pleased that Bill, Al, and
Hillary chose to subscribe.  However, I am disturbed at the
clandestine manner in which they chose to receive PIML messages.
Knowing that several people who could have been annoyances to the
Clintons have died in recent years, I think that it is prudent for
me to let the patriot community know of these secret
subscriptions.

I am probably the last patriot who would become paranoid, but
perhaps my time has come.  This information is being posted
publicly to serve as an insurance policy for me and my wife Ann.
If we should happen to disappear or experience some kind of
accident, look to the Clintons for the cause.  Neither of us is
the slightest bit inclined to commit suicide.  I would like to
extend this insurance policy to the new PIML listowner, Marvin
Warren.  Since I will no longer be publishing PIML, he will be the
next one to take the heat.

In my humble opinion, PIML has been one of the highest quality
sources of patriot information on the net.  I congratulate the 
Clintons for their discrimination in choosing lists to which to
subscribe.  Marvin intends to continue PIML in the same tradition.
To subscribe to new PIML, send an e-mail message to
piml-request@mars.galstar.com with "subscribe" in the subject
field of the message (without the quotation marks.)  Do not put
"subscribe" in the body of the message; put it in the subject
field.  Not as a part of the subscription process, send a message
to piml-owner@mars.galstar.com if you desire to contact Marvin
Warren.

I will send a message to Dale.Hatten@family.mveca.ohio.gov asking
why he is forwarding messages to the White House WHICH SHOW MY
NAME AS THE SENDER and I will post this inquiry to the same three
mailing lists.  I really don't expect to receive an answer.  In
the meantime, if anyone has any information about Dale Hatten, I
would appreciate it if they would send it to me at
butterb@connecti.com and if any computer wizards have any
information about the manner of programming the mailserver to
forward PIML messages SHOWING MY PERSONAL ADDRESS AS THE SENDER
INSTEAD OF THE MAILING LIST LISTSERVER ADDRESS, I would appreciate
receiving that information also.  It would be interesting to know
the location of the government mailserver.

Be aware that everything on the net can be monitored.  I do not
use PSP because there is nothing that I send and nothing that I
receive that can not be public information. 

for Liberty,
Bill Utterback

* Bill Utterback    butterb@connecti.com    campaign@connecti.com
* Libertarian Party candidate for Texas House of Representatives,
* District 45 (Comal and Guadalupe Counties)
* "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen
* from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to
* keep the Government from falling into error."
* U.S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v.
* Douds, 339 U.S. 382,442

==================================================================

Begin copied undeliverable mail message:


This message was not deliverable for a 24 hour period.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~HARRY BROWNE, LIBERTARIAN FOR PRESIDENT2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100Washington DC 20037
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~For additional information:Bill Winter, Director of CommunicationsPhone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 226Internet: 73163.3063@CompuServe.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CAMPAIGN NEWSFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 27, 1996

Superman is wrong, says Browne:Government is not our family
        

        WASHINGTON, DC -- Superman doesn't know what he's talking about.

        That was the blunt assessment of Libertarian presidential candidate Harry Browne after listening to actor Christopher Reeve speak at the Democratic National Convention last night.

        "I respect Mr. Reeve as an actor and as a man who has struggled against great odds to overcome a tragic accident," said Browne. "But when it comes to public policy pronouncements, Mr. Reeve is not only wrong -- he's profoundly wrong."

        While giving credit to the paralyzed actor's "moving and dignified" speech, Browne said he objected to Reeve's use of the "family" metaphor as an excuse to demand more government spending.

        "It's a tragically flawed comparison," said Browne, 
"because it doesn't acknowledge the fundamental differences between a family and government. To put it simply, a family is love; government is force. 

        "A family is a group of people bound together voluntarily by ties of love and respect; government is bureaucrats using force to demand your obedience. To compare one to the other insults the very idea of family."

        In his speech, the actor who flew to fame in the popular Superman movies said that America was a "family" -- and "we've got to take care of our family" by spending more tax money on medical research and by enforcing the Americans With Disabilities Act.

        "Predictably, Mr. Reeve wants to gloss over the coercion that hides behind every government action," said Browne. "But coercion is what makes government the opposite of a family.

        "For example, a family does not send IRS agents to seize the income of another family member to fund favorite social programs.

        "A family does not fine, arrest, or imprison a family member if he doesn't spend tens of thousands of dollars to make a staircase 'wheelchair friendly.' 

        "A family doesn't spend the future earnings of their children and grandchildren and burden them with a $5 trillion debt.

        "But government has done all those things -- and will continue to do them as long as people reflexively turn to government to solve every problem," said Browne. 

        "If Mr. Reeve really thought that America was a family, he would have used his eloquence to ask for voluntary contributions to the hundreds of non-profit, charitable, and scientific groups who are working to unlock the medical mysteries of disease and disability, and struggling to make life better for handicapped Americans. That would have shown a real understanding of what a family is."

        Browne acknowledged that he may take some heat for criticizing Reeve.

        "I'm sure the Democrats thought no one would dare argue with Mr. Reeve, given his stature as an American hero and as a man with a serious disability. But honesty requires us to stand up against a bad message -- no matter who the messenger is."

-- Harry Browne for President                         Campaign@HarryBrowne96.orghttp://www.HarryBrowne96.org/                               fax: 202-333-00722600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100, Washington DC 20037     voice: 202-333-0008


* Patriot Information Mailing List (PIML)
* A service to help inform those who have an active interest inreturning our federal and state governments to limited,constitutional government.
* http://www.constitution.org/piml/piml.htm
* For subscription instructions send an e-mail message tomajordomo@connecti.com with "info <piml>" in the body (no " ").
* See World's Smallest Political Quiz:  www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
* PIML grants permission to copy and repost this messagein its entirety with headers and trailers left intact.


End copied undeliverable mail message.

==================================================================




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-27 President Remarks at Royal Oak MI (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 15:10:11 -0500 (CDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Keywords: Arkansas, Business, Civil-Rights, Communications, Computers, Crime,
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/
				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary
		   (Aboard The 21st Century Express)
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                     August 27, 1996     
				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
		  TO THE PEOPLE OF THE ROYAL OAK AREA
				    
				    
			  Royal Oak, Michigan   			       


5:35 P.M. EDT
		
		
		THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  
		
		AUDIENCE:  Four more years, four more years -- 
(cut)		

	     Let me also say that the reason I ran for President four
years ago is the reason I seek reelection -- I wanted to prepare our
country for the 21st century.  I want us to go into that next century,
only four years away now, roaring with the American Dream alive for
every person, a possibility for every person to live up to their
God-given abilities, for every person to live out their dreams -- no
matter where they live, what they start with, what their racial or their
religious background is.  (Applause.)
	     
	     And we have followed a simple strategy:  Create more
opportunity for people, expect more responsibility from our people, and
tell everybody that we have got to go forward together.  We have got to
go forward together.  We know that this country, when we're together,
never loses.  And I don't know how you feel but I look around the world
today -- I spent so much time as your President trying to bring peace to
places like Bosnia, the Middle East, Northern Ireland -- dealing with
the slaughters in Rwanda and Burundi.  Why?  Because all over the world
there are people who insist upon looking down on each other because of
their racial, their ethnic, their religious or their tribal differences;
instead of joining together hand in hand to move forward.  And whenever
I see that in America I want to stamp it out.  That's why I have done
everything I could to make us all stand up against the church burnings.
(Applause.)  And whenever a synagogue or a Muslim center is defaced,
it's wrong.  (Applause.)
	     
	     We have to fight that.  The America I want for our children
is one that says we don't care anything else about you if you believe in
the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence,
you work hard, pay your taxes, obey the law and believe in our country
-- you're our kind of American and we're going with you into the 21st
century.  (Applause.)
	     
	     
	     We had a police officer named Mike Robbins from Chicago
there.  I don't know if you heard him speak, but I'll never forget when
I met him and he said, I served my country in Vietnam, in Desert Storm
and by the grace of God I was never harmed; I came home to serve my
country on the streets of Chicago and within 45 seconds I had nine
bullets in my body from an assault weapon.  And when I heard the
President say we all had to speak up, I decided if I got out of my
hospital bed I was going to do my part.  Mike Robbins is the kind of
person I'm fighting for, the kind of person we need in uniform today.
The kind of person that's giving his life for our people.  (Applause.)

	     The second thing we've got to do is to make sure we do an
even better job of educating our children.  (Applause.)  And our adults.
(Applause.)  In the next four years I intend to spend a great deal of
time trying to make sure that every single person in this country gets a
world-class education.  (Applause.)
(CUT)	     
	     Number one, in Wyandotte earlier today I said that I want
us to have a national goal that by the year 2000 every single child in
America in the 3rd grade will be reading well, at grade level and not be
behind.  Every one.  And we can do that.  (Applause.)  We can do it.
	     
	     Number two, I want us by the year 2000 to make sure every
single classroom in America and every library not only has computers,
not only has teachers qualified to use the computers and teach the kids,
but is hooked up to the Information Superhighway so everybody can know
everything every other class can know.  (Applause.)
	     
	     Now, you think about this.  You think about this.  If we
can do this, it means in the poorest inner-city school, in the most
remote rural mountain village, they will have access to the same
information that people in the wealthiest schools do today.  We can
explode learning in America if we just give everybody the same
resources.  (Applause.)
(cut)	     
	     I just want to mention a couple of other things.  These
fine police officers have been here.  In 1994, a lot of the folks that
voted with them for the Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban and the
100,000 police got beat when they ran for reelection.  They got beat in
places like Michigan and Arkansas because we live in a state -- I did
and you do -- where probably nearly half the people have a hunting or a
fishing license or both.  I guess I was 12 years old the first time I
picked up a .22 and started shooting cans off fence posts.
	     
	     But, you know, I couldn't figure out what they were all
saying back in '94, -- "well, if this is a terrible thing if we check to
see if a person's got a criminal record before we give them a handgun."
"This is a terrible thing that we're not going to keep pedaling these
assault weapons that were designed to kill people."  And a lot of folks
said to folks in Michigan and Arkansas, you're going to lose your rifle;
boy, they're coming after you next.  Let me tell you something, folks.
We've had two deer seasons since then, not a single Michigan or Arkansas
hunter has lost the rifle they were hunting with in 1994.  Not a one.
Not a one.  Not a one.  (Laughter.)
	     
	     But according to what Sarah Brady said last night, 100,000
felons, fugitives and stalkers did lose the right to get a handgun and
we're a safer country because of that.  (Applause.)  I would never -- I
would never knowingly do anything to interfere with the right of the
American people to hunting and sporting, use of their weapons.  But I'm
telling you, folks, a lot of those folks who talk about it have never
seen the war zone that a lot of American children live in.  I have
looked into the faces of people who live on blocks where 13 year old
kids have been shot down on lark drive-by shootings.  I was as -- as I
said last night, the convention was opened by a man who fought in
Vietnam without incident and had his body riddled with nine bullet holes
in 45 seconds.
	     
	     So we can find a way to hunt and to fish and to shoot in
contest and to have a big time and protect people.  Surely, we can.  I
want the Congress to ban these cop-killer bullets.  They're fighting
that, too.  (Applause.)

	     We need a doctor.  They'll get it.  We got it.  The doctor
is already there.

	     You know, I have never seen a deer in a bullet-proof vest.
(Laughter.)  And if they can show me one I'll reassess my position on
this issue.  But until I find a deer or a duck or a wild turkey wearing
a Kevlar vest, I'm going to stick with these folks and be for banning
those cop-killer bullets.  (Applause.)
	     So I ask you, if you agree we're better off than we were
four years ago, if you agree we've got to keep working until we create
opportunity for all Americans, make all communities responsible and go
forward together, I want to ask you if you will, at least in your mind
and heart, will you get on this train with me for 70 days and keep us on
the right track?  (Applause.)  Will you stay with me to take America
into the 21st century?  (Applause.)  Do you believe we can do it?

	     THE AUDIENCE:  Yesss!
	     
	     THE PRESIDENT:  I know we can.  Thank you and God bless you
all.  (Applause.)
	     
            END                        6:05 P.M. EDT



--



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh)
Subject: Re: ACLU News 8/28/96: Guns
Date: 29 Aug 1996 14:29:33 -0600

There is a whole range of numbers guaranteed to not bee issued.

There is a SSN FAQ around somewhere that goes into great details on the SSN
including these numbers.

I made one up once when trying to get a traffic ticket repealed at the
local university where my company I was working for had rented a hall for
the morning.  They wouldn't accept my appeal without the number...

best regards
Chad

>What a lot of people do is give out the following Social Security Number:
>
>      078-05-1120
>
>That's the phoney one they used to put in new wallets, so that you'd have an
>idea of what they'd look like when you bought them.  It's never issued to
>anyone.  The practice has been discontinued, but the number is still never
>used, and a _lot_ of people are unaware of that.....:-)
>
>On Aug 29, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:
>
>>As this article below shows, the ACLU is willing to defend gun traders,
>>albeit not on the groungs of the Second Amendment. But we will take all the
>>help we can get.
>>
>>Maybe some day soon the ACLU will drop its foolish hoplophobic
>>mis-interpretation of the 2nd Am., especially since it is not only wrong on
>>Constitutional grounds, but also moral grounds (see Lott's Report on CCW).
>>
>>Slowly but surely the RKBA pendulum is gaining momentum as it begins its
>>swing back toward the Right.
>>
>>Bob Knauer
>>
>>-----
>>
>> From the ACLU newsfeed:
>>
>>>ACLU of Arkansas Challenge Ordinance Requiring Social Security Numbers of
>>>Gun Traders and Others
>>>
>>>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>>>Wednesday, August 28, 1996
>>>
>>>LITTLE ROCK -- The ACLU of Arkansas filed a lawsuit today in U.S. District
>>>Court of Western District of Arkansas on behalf of Anthony Zuckert, a man
>>>who enjoys gun-trading.
>>>
>>>Mr. Zuckert and his wife, Jeanne, object to a Harrison ordinance requiring
>>>that "itinerate" salespeople wishing to participate in trade shows provide
>>>to the show-operator their social security numbers.
>>>
>>>Federal law already requires that regular gun-traders obtain a federal
>>>firearms license that lasts for three years.  In order to obtain such a
>>>license, social security numbers and other information is provided by the
>>>applicant so that a criminal background check can be performed by
>>>authorities:  Mr. Zuckert already has a current license.
>>>
>>>The ACLU claims that the Harrison ordinance unduly burdens Mr. Zuckert's
>>>right to engage in commercial speech by demanding he provide his social
>>>security number, because no legitimate government interest can be
>>>demonstrated for making such a request: this, we claim, violates the First
>>>Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
>>>
>>>Second, we believe that the ordinance is "impermissibly vague," by providing
>>>"no ascertainable standards for determining whether any salesperson is
>>>'itinerate' [sic] or any location is 'transitory,'" and is also vague
>>>regarding the supposed exceptions for "farm products" "garage sales" and
>>>"trade shows."
>>>
>>>We further believe the plaintiff's right to due process has been violated
>>>for all the above reasons.  Lastly, we believe that the ordinance violates
>>>the federal Privacy Act by requiring the use of social security numbers.
>>>
>>>"Once upon a time, social security numbers were supposed to be used only for
>>>the management of social security benefits," says ACLU Executive Director
>>>Rita Spillenger.  "These days, everyone from your doctor to your mechanic
>>>thinks they have the right to get and use that number.
>>>
>>>"People who object to this common practice of using the number for
>>>identification are within their rights, but they fight an increasingly
>>>uphill battle with every request," Spillenger added.
>>>
>>>"Most people are unaware that you can refuse to provide your social security
>>>number in many situations, like obtaining a driver's license," Spillenger
>>>said. "We are happy to help the Zuckerts stand up for their right not to
>>>hand over their number to every government official that asks for it."
>>>
>>>The ACLU attorney who is representing the Zuckerts, Charles Kester of
>>>Rogers, added, "The City of Harrison placed Mr. Zuckert in the unfortunate
>>>position of having to choose whether to give up his right to privacy and
>>his >social security number or give up his right to engage in commercial
>>speech.
>>>Fortunately, the Constitution and the federal Privacy Act forbid such a
>>>Hobson's choice."
>>>
>>>The suit asks for the ordinance to be found unconstitutional and to be not
>>>enforced.  A gun show is scheduled in Harrison for Labor Day, and the
>>>Zuckerts would like to participate.  They did not participate in the last
>>>show because of this ordinance.
>>>
>>> _________________________________________
>>> ONLINE RESOURCES FROM THE ACLU NATIONAL OFFICE
>>> _________________________________________
>>> ACLU Freedom Network Web Page:  http://www.aclu.org.
>>> America Online users should check out our live chats, auditorium events,
>>> *very* active message boards, and complete news on civil liberties, at
>>> keyword ACLU.
>>>
>>> _________________________________________
>>> ACLU Newsfeed
>>> American Civil Liberties Union National Office
>>> 132 West 43rd Street
>>> New York, New York 10036
>>>
>>> To subscribe to the ACLU Newsfeed, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org
>>>with "subscribe News" in the body of the message.  To terminate your
>>>subscription, send a message to majordomo@aclu.org with "unsubscribe News"
>>>in the body of the message.
>>>
>>> For general information about the ACLU, write to info@aclu.org.
>>> _________________________________________
>>
>>--
>>
>>**************************************************
>>    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
>>    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing
>>
>> <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
>>**************************************************
>>
>
>--
>An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
>weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
>hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
>on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pwatson@utdallas.edu
Subject: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-27 President Remarks at Michigan State University (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 17:06:35 -0500 (CDT)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Document-Id: PDI://OMA.EOP.GOV.US/
				    
			    THE WHITE HOUSE
				    
		     Office of the Press Secretary
		   (Aboard The 21st Century Express)
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                     August 27, 1996     
				    
			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
			    TO THE PEOPLE OF 
		THE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY
				    
		       Michigan State University
			 East Lansing, Michigan			       
11:15 P.M. EDT
		
		
(cut)	     
	     I have a simple formula, folks, for what I've been trying
to do -- more opportunity for people, more responsibility from our
citizens and a strong sense of American community.  The special thing
about this country is that we are bound together not by race or
religion, but by our shared values.

	     In my America, if you believe in the Constitution, the Bill
of Rights and the Declaration of Independence and you're willing to show
up and be counted every day and be a good law abiding citizen, nothing
else matters.  We're going into the future together.  (Applause.)

	     I want to tell you that it's not just on economics that
we've made progress.  The crime rate has been coming down for four
years, but it is still too high.  It has come down because we're putting
100,000 police on the street, because we're emphasizing prevention as
well as tough punishment, because we banned assault weapons, and because
we passed the Brady Bill.  (Applause.)  And I want you to think about
this -- in Michigan, in Arkansas, some awful good people in 1994 lost
their seats in Congress because they had the courage to vote for 100,000
police, a ban on assault weapons and the Brady Bill.  They had the
courage to vote for it and many of their constituents were told, the
government is going to come take your gun away, they're going to stop
you from hunting, they're going to stop you from going to the sporting
contest.
	     
	     Well, folks, we've had two deer seasons in Michigan and two
in Arkansas and all our hunters still got the same rifles they started
with.  But 100,000 felons, fugitives and stalkers could not get handguns
because of the Brady Bill.  (Applause.)  And now I say to you, we've got
to keep this going.  And every one of you young people, you might feel
very safe tonight, you may feel very secure, but you want to bring your
children into the world when you turn on the television news at night,
if the lead story is a crime story you're shocked, stunned and
surprised.  Today we take it for granted.  We can change all that.
We've got to keep that crime rate coming down.
	     
	     And I'll tell you how we're going to do it.  First of all,
we ought to ban cop-killer bullets.  I've been trying to do it for two
years.  (Applause.)  I hear the same thing.  I want you young people to
help us do that.  I hear the same thing.  They say, oh, this is a
slippery slope; pretty soon they'll come get our ammunition.  I have
never seen a deer in the woods with a bulletproof vest on.  (Laughter.)
I'm not trying to interfere with anybody's hunting.  These bullets are
designed to kill police officers and they'll kill people, too, and we
ought to ban them.

	     And then we ought to extend the Brady Bill in addition to
felons to incidents where violence is used in a domestic setting.  If
people commit domestic violence they shouldn't be out there with guns
where they can kill people in the family.  (Applause.)

	     And finally let me say again -- I want you to think about
this when you vote for Congress -- one of the reasons I vetoed that
budget that they passed, one of the reason I let them shut the
government down without caving in is that the Congress sought to abolish
-- the Republican leadership sought to abolish our commitment to 100,000
police.  Now, why in the world they were against it I don't know.  But
they sought to abolish it once.  They sought to do it again.  And
they're trying to restrict it today.

	     I'm telling you, folks, the way you make streets safer is
to put police out there, let them get to know the kids, let them get to
know the neighbors, let them get to know the reality of what's going on
in the neighborhood, have people be friends and partners on the streets
in making streets safe and stopping crime from happening.  Keep the Safe
and Drug-Free Schools program going.  Get the law enforcement officers
in there with the grade school kids, with the DARE program and other
things.  Give these kids something to look forward to, something to be
lifted up about.  That is the key to the future, and I want you to help
me do it.  It's your future, your safety that is at stake, and I want
you to help me fight for it.  (Applause.)
(cut)
	     We are a great country when we are together.  If we let
people divide us and make us small and make us look down on one another,
we will never reach our potential.  But if you look around this sea of
folks tonight and you say, they're all my brothers and sisters, we're
all Americans and we are still the greatest country in human history and
our best days are still ahead, then they will be.  Will you help me?
(Applause.)  Will you walk with me?  (Applause.)  Will you stay with me
for 70 days and on for four years and on into the 21st century?
(Applause.)
	     
	     Thank you and God bless you all.  Good night.  Thank you.
(Applause.)

            END                        11:38 P.M. EDT



--




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 16:40:00 -0700 (PDT)

Sorry, I agree with much of this, but not enough that I cn bring myself 
not to reply. BK
On Thu, 29 Aug 1996 pwatson@utdallas.edu wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 08:44:43 -0700
> From: John Johnson <txjohn47@ix.netcom.com>
> Subject: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!!
> 
> Posted to texas-gun-owners by txjohn47@ix.netcom.com (John Johnson)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> More thoughts to ponder before running out and getting a TxCHL.
> 
> <---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
> 
> From: sonoftlpot@aol.com (SonOfTLPot)
> Newsgroups: tx.guns
> Subject: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!!
> Date: 29 Aug 1996 02:51:47 -0400
> 
> At the request of a friend who follows this group regularly, I have
snip 
> Transcribed from the column "2nd Amendment" in the October, 1996, issue
> of Guns & Ammo
> 
> Concealed-Carry Laws are Not the Answer (Some Gun Owners Believe that
> Permit Systems Play into the Hands of the Antis).  by Ed Moats
> 
Reno's background and anti slant snipped

> We can understand this federal silence as a clever application of the
> technique for cooking frogs.  Question:  How do you cook a frog?
> Answer: Very slowly.  If you toss a frog into a pot of boiling water
> the frog will leap out.  But if you gently place the frog in a pan of
> cool water and slowly raise the temperature, the frog will be too
> cooked to leap by the time he realizes he's in trouble.  Question:
> "How do you steal the liberties of a free people?"  Answer:  "The same
> way you cook a frog: very slowly."  This is the socialist doctrine of
> gradualism, employed successfully by socialists since World War II to
> erode the liberties of America s citizens.
Marx called it incrementalism when I use incrementalism think of it as 
gradualism if you like.
 
> The feds tolerate the explosion of state concealed-carry laws because
> they know these concealed-carry laws are gradually creating a culture
> that will facilitate the confiscation of all firearms.
Wrong (IMO). I agree that there are dangerous effects of widespread ccl 
including the acceptance of:

snip 
> Paying for a Constitutional Right.
snip 
> Turning a Right into a Privilege.
snip (IMO 1 and 2 are the same) 
> Camouflaged Registration.
snip
but it is an incremental move toward rkba not away from it.
The author does a good job describing incrementalism and how politically 
profitable it's been for the opponenets of our civil rights. He then 
talks about how registration will inevitably lead to confiscation. The 
dichotomy here is that confiscation doesnt fit into an incrementalist 
plan. Sure, the public mindset isnt going to accept me walking down main 
street Seattle openly carrying (for now), but neither is it going to go with 
the cops busting down the doors on more then half the homes in america to 
steal private property. We've got problems, sure. and if we allow the 
continued erosion or our rights we might one day get to the point where 
the gestapo can work in america. But that day hasnt arrived yet. His 
incrementalism argument collides with his confiscation argument quite loudly.

> Misplaced Faith in Lawmakers.
> The fifth trap is thinking that lawmakers who create the concealed-
> carry laws are motivated by support for the constitutional right to
I -completely- disagree here. The people I know working to get ccw laws 
passed know exactly what time it is in regards lawmakers and their 
motivations. This is the weirdest part of this editorial IMO because it 
complains about ccw being an example of our enemies usingi incrementalism 
on us when all the people I know veiw it as us using incrementalism on our 
opponents. _Of_course_ ccw is not rkba, of course some idiots will 
confusedly think it's ok that we have to pay for our right (IF you 
confuse ccw and rkba). BUT it does in effect if not in spirit allow more 
people the tools of self defense (legally) as they pursue their daily 
lives. NO, it's -not- a final reaching of our goal. But by at least 
allowing some people the legal priviledge of legal carry it moves us 
closer. We can now start to educate people about the difference between 
rkba and ccw priviledges. CCW is moving the mindset of the public in our 
direction IMHO.
 > 
> Proponents may claim concealed-carry laws allow the law-abiding to pack
> heat while restricting firearms from the disqualified.  No thinking
> person can be fooled by this patent canard. 
Right, so why bring it up? Canards belong on wing tips not email ; )

> Thus, the net practical effect of a concealed-carry statute is to 1)
> compile a registration list of gun owners, 2) establish that bearing
> arms is a privilege, not a right, and 3) extract a fee for this
> privilege.
> 
snip 
> It has been noted that "An armed society is a polite society."  True,
> but incompletely stated.  An armed society will be a polite one only if
> everyone knows it is armed.  Concealed weapons won t induce politeness. 
No, where I live in washington criminals all know that a small percentage 
of the populace carries concealed but they dont know who. That way, I 
who normally travel properly accessorized, allow some of the benefit of 
that deterrent to accrue to my arthritic mother who -might- have a 
concealed weapon on her person, the criminal just won't know. I -like- 
the deterrent of concealed carry because it introduces uncertainty into 
the career of a criminal. (It's also easier then a paddle holster. Drier 
and more comfortable).

> Someone rejoins "Under concealed-carry laws, you'll be polite to
> everyone, because you won't know who is armed."  I reply: You don't
> know now who is armed!
Yep, and recent studies prove that the states -with- ccw have less 
violent crime then those without. the guy's arguing against himself.
(note that I'm not anti open carry, I just dont think concealed cary is bad)
snip

> If our lawmakers were truly interested in curbing crime they would
> mandate that every qualified adult man and woman carry a firearm, long
> or short, concealed or open.  Instead, lawmakers are creating
> camouflaged registration laws, while mouthing fidelity to the Second
> Amendment.
Wow, what a horrible idea. It's not bad enough that government should 
have the power to take away our legal rkba, now we want to give 
government the power to -require- the exercise of this right and mandate 
the related expenses to all citizens. Somebody doesnt get it, government 
is not the answer.

> To counter this, gun owners should come out of the closet.  In every
> jurisdiction where it is still legal, gun owners should carry their
> weapons openly.  The public will at first be shocked, but will soon
> applaud it as violent crime skids to a halt.
Everyone who owns a gun needs to stop worrying about lists and "them" and 
start coming out of the closet, that's for damned sure. If I could carry 
open I would despite the inconvenience here in rainy Washington. But the 
important "coming out" is political. We need to move the mainstream of 
public opinion back to the bedrock of individualist republicanism, we 
need (and do not have) a country where mom's wont grab there kids close 
when a stranger with an open firearm walks by them on a city street. And 
we arent IMO gonna get there by encouraging people in outer Whitefish MT 
to carry open everyday (not a bad idea mind you, just not very effective 
right now IMO). We're going to get there when city dwellers talk 
to their co workers about the fun they had last week at the range. When 
parents tell other parents that maybe that Nickleodeon special "kids and 
guns" didnt quite get it right and...  would you like to come over and see 
how responsible gun owners gun proof kids? When shotgunners will  give up 
15 minutes a week to read and write editorial letters.

All just my humble opinion. Boyd Kneeland (thanks for the fwd paul)
> 
> ===+++===+++===+++===+++===
> 
> >---- End Forwarded Message ----<
> 
> -- 
> 
> >From the main computer of:
> John Johnson
> TXJohn47@ix.netcom.com
> 
> The opinions expressed above represent those of the writer (me)
> and not necessarily those of his employer (also me).  <G> ;-)
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@zilker.net
> with the word help in the message body.
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Constitution Party <patriot@NETAXS.COM>
Subject: TAPES
Date: 29 Aug 1996 21:25:28 -0400

Hey, list:

Anyone know where I can get a quick copy of Linda T's Concentration Camp
video? I asked her and she has none.  Need it quick.

Mike I.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Alpert <balpert@sky.net>
Subject: I can't make it to the gunshow tomorrow
Date: 29 Aug 1996 21:35:49 CST

Hi, Terry. 
 
I will be leaving my office at around noon tomorrow, having by then 
(hopefully!) successfully finished a demonstration web page project on 
behalf of my agency for the Executive Director, and for which I've been 
working very hard these past 3 or so weeks. 
 
Because of my early departure from work, I won't be attending the gun show, 
so don't trouble yourself with taking the material there that we discussed 
for my inspection. 
 
It's no loss, though.  I am certain that you, Paul Wisner, Tim Wisner, and 
Kevin Jamison are more than capable of putting together the new 
organizational newsletter without any help from me, or so I've been given 
every reason to believe - given the apparent enthusiasm of the motion you 
made as the first order of business to have me dismissed as Editor at this 
month's board meeting, which was followed by the other two affirmative votes 
on the part of Mr. Wisner and Mr. Higdon.  But I do appreciate the courtesy 
of your having asked me to provide input on the new format which, 
nonetheless, I suspect has already been decided upon by your new Editor. 
 
Who is your new Editor, by the way?  People are asking me, and I don't know 
what to tell them. 
 
And Finally, given the abrupt manner in which my services 
were rendered unwanted, I would prefer that I be able to say, in future and 
truthfully, that I had nothing whatever to do with whatever publication will 
be emanating from under the orgaizational aegis. 
 
I was proud of what I did with that little newsletter and am content to be 
associated with what it was rather than what it will be under your new 
regime. 
 
In closing, let me offer congratulations on your having gotten  
an attendance at a regularly-scheduled board meeting sufficient to have the 
minimum quorom necessary to have me dismissed as Editor of The BULLET. 
If memory serves, this was the first time in several months that enough of 
our 9-member board has attended.  And also - no, I am not sorry that I 
brought you into WMSA from the outside 4 years ago. 
 
Best wishes, 
 
Brad 
 
 




cc: dmcguire@sunflower.org
    vieamie@aol.com
    jimstout@sky.net
    cwittig@tyrell.net
    cdhart@smartnet.net
    jjulien@shrike.depaul.edu
    jacq@sky.net
    lpyleprn@mcs.net
    jam@sky.net
    loboazul@icsi.net
    roc@xmission.com
    ferriscc@mainstream.net
    craig@mainstream.net

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gdoty@earthlink.net (Greg Doty)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 29 Aug 1996 20:32:06 -0700 (PDT)

The first question which crosses my mind is for those well-intentioned
individuals who thought they were doing right and applied for a license. How
do they go about reversing the situation and getting off the confication lists?

Greg


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-27 President Remarks at Michigan
Date: 29 Aug 1996 23:11:52 -0500

At 05:06 PM 8/29/96 -0500, you wrote:
>

>				    
>			    THE WHITE HOUSE
>				    
>		     Office of the Press Secretary
>		   (Aboard The 21st Century Express)
>________________________________________________________________________
>For Immediate Release                                     August 27, 1996     
>				    
>			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
>			    TO THE PEOPLE OF 
>		THE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY
>				    
>		       Michigan State University
>			 East Lansing, Michigan			       
>
>			    
>			    THE WHITE HOUSE
>				    
>		     Office of the Press Secretary
>		   (Aboard The 21st Century Express)
>________________________________________________________________________
>For Immediate Release                                     August 27, 1996     
>				    
>			REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
>		  TO THE PEOPLE OF THE ROYAL OAK AREA
>				    
>				    
>			  Royal Oak, Michigan   			       

Paul, 
Do you have the nation wide keyboard cleaning and refurbishment franchise. 

Just think how many keyboards around the country are now covered  in puke
after folks read those "remarks".






              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gdoty@earthlink.net (Greg Doty)
Subject: SAINTS: Where are we going?
Date: 29 Aug 1996 22:39:26 -0700 (PDT)

One lonley little question: Where is this list going?

Greg


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Brad Dolan <bdolan@use.usit.net>
Subject: Jefferson on religion
Date: 30 Aug 1996 07:28:06 -0400 (EDT)

Some of Jefferson's thoughts on religion:

[Letter to Peter Carr]

[...]

Religion.  Your reason is now mature enough to examine this
object.  In the first place, divest yourself of all bias in favor
of novelty and singularity of opinion.  It is too important, and
the consequences of error may be too serious.  On the other hand,
shake off all the fears and servile prejudices, under which weak
minds are servilely crouched.  Fix reason firmly in her seat, and
call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion.  Question with
boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one,
He must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of
blindfolded fear.  You will naturally examine first, the religion
of your own country.  Read the Bible, then, as you would read
[Roman historians] Livy or Tacitus.  The facts which are within
the ordinary course of nature, you will believe on the authority
of the writer, as you do those of the same kind in Livy and
Tacitus.  The testimony of the writer weighs in their favor, in
one scale, and their not being against the laws of nature, does
not weigh against them.  But those facts in the Bible which
contradict the laws of nature must be examined with more care,
and under a variety of faces.  Here you must recur to the
pretensions of the writer to inspiration from God.  Examine upon
what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that
evidence is strong, as that falsehood would be more improbable
than a change in the laws of nature, in the case he relates.  For
example, in the book of Joshua, we are told, the sun stood still
several hours.  Were we to read that fact in Livy or Tacitus, we
should class it with their showers of blood, speaking of statues,
beasts, etc.  But it is said, that the writer of the book was
inspired.  Examine, therefore, candidly, what evidence there is
of his having been inspired.  The pretension is entitled to your
inquiry, because millions believe it.  On the other hand, you are
astronomer enough to know how contrarary it is to the law of
nature that a body revolving on its axis, as the earth does,
should have stopped, should not, by that sudden stoppage, have
prostrated animals, trees, buildings, and should after a certain
time have resumed its revolution, and that without a second
general prostration.  

[...]

I repeat, you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and
neeither believe nor reject anything, because any other persons
or description of persons, have rejected it or believed it.  Your
own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you are
answerable, not for the rightness, but the uprightness of the
decision.

[...]



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: DNC (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 07:43:35 -0400 (EDT)

And the thing is, those arrested are "Liberals"....

---------- Forwarded message ----------

URGENT ALERT!!: Spread widely and quickly.
Wednesday, August 28

Summary:
Chicago police raid mobile command center of CounterMedia, a collective of
media activists covering the protests at the Democratic National Convention
in Chicago, soon after two members of the collective are arrested.  Press
conference at 10 am tomorrow at 1638 W. Van Buren.  

********

Release:
At approximately 3:45 this afternoon, more than a dozen Chicago police
pulled over and illegally searched a van filled with six members of
CounterMedia, a collective of media activists who are providing alternate
coverage of the protests, demonstrations and alternative events at the
Democratic National Convention.  

Less than ten minutes after allowing the CounterMedia members to go, more 
police forced the van onto the side of the road and commanded those 
inside to get out.  They ordered the six collective members up against 
the van and searched them as they proceeded to board it.

When asked why they pulled the vehicle over, an officer responded that those
inside were not wearing their seatbelts.  As one officer exposed film from a
CounterMedia photographer's camera, others claimed that they could arrest
the collective members for having an unsafe vehicle; the police only fell
back when nine other media collective members arrived on the scene and began
filming the incident. 

CounterMedia has placed image captures from the incident onto the 
CounterMedia web site at "http://www.cs.uchicago.edu/cpsr/countermedia".

This incident is only the most recent in a string of confrontations the
Chicago Police Department, supposedly "kinder and gentler" at this
Democratic National Convention, have forced with CounterMedia.  Yesterday
morning the CPD arrested a CounterMedia videographer during a tension-filled
pro-choice/Operation Rescue clinic defense demonstration.  The videographer,
Eddy Nix, was taping pro-lifers (in the immediate vicinity of other members
of the media) when they, sensing that Nix was not with the mainstream press,
motioned to the police that he should be removed.  Police checked Nix's
press pass and deemed it insufficient to prove that he was a member of the
"official" media.  They carried him forcefully into the paddy wagon and
charged him with disorderly conduct.  Other CounterMedia videographers
documented Nix's arrest as well and have placed image captures from the
incident onto the CounterMedia web site at
"http://www.cs.uchicago.edu/cpsr/countermedia".

Last night, as ConterMedia videographer Jeff Perlstein waited for the "Not
on the Guest List" march/rally to arrive at the heavily secure United
Center, home to the Democratic National Convention, he interviewed two
African-American youth from the Henry Horner Homes.  (The Homes are a public
housing project located directly across the street from the Center.)  As
Perlstein was asking the youth what they thought about Democratic delegates
invading their neighborhood, police ordered the youth off the sidewalk.
When Perlstein questioned why the police specifically demanded the youth off
the sidewalk and not him, a white videographer, officers took him into
custody and charged him with disorderly conduct.  Other CounterMedia
videographers documented his arrest.

Though the mainstream media have lauded the Chicago Police for their
hands-off treatment of protesters at the DNC, the CPD's harassment of
CounterMedia is part of a pattern of untoward "attention" police have paid
to those obviously unwanted here.  Members of the CPD have been consistently
intimidating participants of Active Resistance, a national convention of
anarchists that has been occurring here since August 21.  Police have
visited the site of the convention workshops several times and have held the
building under regular surveillance, occasionally photographing participants
as they pass to and from the site.  Also, the Chicago Housing Authority has
imposed a 10pm curfew on residents at the Henry Horner Homes for the
duration of the convention and has subjected residents to sweeps and arrests
for questionable conduct.  CounterMedia is closely connected with Active
Resistance and has been actively reporting the truth about the increased
security at Horner.

Tomorrow morning at 10am (Chicago time), at its office at 1638 Van Buren
Street (just four blocks from the United Center), CounterMedia will be
holding a press conference with Active Reistance and residents of the Horner
homes.  Please spread word of these incidents as quickly as possible and
certainly alert any contacts you have in Chicago that CounterMedia, Active
Resistance and the Horner residents need their support.

For more information contact CounterMedia at (312) 243-8342 and/or check out
the web site at "http://www.cs.uchicago.edu/cpsr/countermedia".




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 07:41:49 -0700

        Bill,

        >>>>>>>
        How absolutely appropriate.....:-)
        <<<<<<<

        My goodness, Bill, are you intimating that the First Lady (?) is a
high priced wench?  :-)

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 08:16:04 -0700

At 08:32 PM 8/29/96 -0700, Greg Doty wrote:
>The first question which crosses my mind is for those well-intentioned
>individuals who thought they were doing right and applied for a license. How
>do they go about reversing the situation and getting off the confication lists?


I don't share the fear that CCW permits can ever be used to confiscate guns.
What do you have if you've got a list of CCW permit holders?  The names of
armed people who have demonstrated an above-average willingness, and often
the _ability_, to defend themselves against criminal attack, whether the
criminals carry badges or not. 
Ken Mitchell      |"Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. 
8037 Stone Canyon |counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing
Citrus Heights, CA|citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent
95610             |crimes and it appears to produce no increase in
kmitchel@gvn.net  |accidental deaths. If those states which did not 
916-449-9152 (vm) |have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had
916-729-0966 (fax)|adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders;
                  |4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults
                  |would have been avoided yearly."  Crime, 
                  |Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
                  |John R. Lott, Jr., School of Law Univ. of Chicago
-------------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 10:07:30 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 30 Aug 1996, Kenneth Mitchell wrote:

> At 08:32 PM 8/29/96 -0700, Greg Doty wrote:
> >The first question which crosses my mind is for those well-intentioned
> >individuals who thought they were doing right and applied for a license. How
> >do they go about reversing the situation and getting off the confication lists?
> 
> 
> I don't share the fear that CCW permits can ever be used to confiscate guns.
> What do you have if you've got a list of CCW permit holders?  The names of
> armed people who have demonstrated an above-average willingness, and often
> the _ability_, to defend themselves against criminal attack, whether the
> criminals carry badges or not. 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> Ken Mitchell      |"Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. 
Ken is absolutely right IMO. If you also throw in the myriad ways of 
being classed as a "gun owner" then you can take some comfort in the 
futility of hiding. Ever used a credit card in a gun shop? Ever purchased 
a -new- firearm (form 4473)? Ever posted to ROC (particularly if your ISP 
runs standard Unix utits like fingerd and whoisd)? Besides, folks. We're 
not going to win this by "hiding" IMO.
Boyd Kneeland

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: wootan@dmi.net
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 11:09:11 -0700

Sez Boyd:

>Ken is absolutely right IMO. If you also throw in the myriad ways of 
>being classed as a "gun owner" then you can take some comfort in the 
>futility of hiding. Ever used a credit card in a gun shop? Ever purchased 
>a -new- firearm (form 4473)? Ever posted to ROC (particularly if your ISP 
>runs standard Unix utits like fingerd and whoisd)? Besides, folks. We're 
>not going to win this by "hiding" IMO.
>Boyd Kneeland

I would join with Ken and Boyd, but with a slightly different view.

Both sides of this argument have merit.  "....SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" seems 
pretty clear in its meaning to me.  Yet, by refusing to obtain a permit, and 
possibly ending up with a criminal record, that the anti's are trying hard to 
make a felony, you may well end up losing your Constitutional rights.  I 
personally don't have a problem with felons losing rights, including the rkba. 
 I do have a problem with some of the things they are trying to make a felony 
out of, like excercising your rkba without a permit.

Carry permits ARE un-Constitutional in any reasonable assesment.  We can only 
bring about the recognition of that fact by working from the inside.  If we 
are all on the outside, as convicted criminals, it becomes too easy for the 
anti's to simply say, "You lost those rights!"

Incrementalism works in two directions.  We need to work incrementally to 
restore what has been incrementally taken from us.  I would submit that those 
looking for instantaneous redress of our grievance are dreamers.  I believe 
that a national CCW is an increment in the right direction, as 
un-Constitutional as we all know it is.

Jerry Wootan



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Skip Leuschner <skipl@PACIFIER.COM>
Subject: DF8 Revisited
Date: 30 Aug 1996 11:58:01 -0700 (PDT)



Two years ago this month DF8 took shape and began the process that removed
House Speaker Tom Foley from office.   That was possible because there was
a team of anti-Foley activists already formed in Foley's district, ready
to launch a well-planned effort, but looking for the financial support to
fund their printing needs, rallies, radio/TV ads, etc.  DF8 contributions
provided a start, and served as a catalyst to attract other anti-Foley
organizations with big advertising budgets. The rest you know.

Now there is a well organized team formed up in St Louis, MO to oppose
Dick Gephardt, an ultra-liberal who sees himself the savior of America's
downtrodden masses, and more specifically as Speaker of the House in the
105th Congress, and the man to take over from Clinton as President of the
United States in 2001.  

I can think of no more befitting fate for an ambitious liar like
Gephardt than to have his political career cut short in 1996, not to
mention the great relief it will be to me personally if I never again have
to watch his grim face on TV reciting the anti-reform buzzwords
("extremist" and "slashing medicare, medicaid, education and the
environment") from his socialist script. 

The team in St Louis calls itself TAG, originally Taxpayers Against
Gephardt, but changed to Taxpayers for Accountable Government to satisfy
FEC rules for naming fundraising PACs.

I have asked them for an update, and will forward it when received. 

FYI and regards, Skip









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 15:27:08 -0400

>
>Carry permits ARE un-Constitutional in any reasonable assesment.  We can only 
>bring about the recognition of that fact by working from the inside.  If we 
>are all on the outside, as convicted criminals, it becomes too easy for the 
>anti's to simply say, "You lost those rights!"
>
	I hold a CCW as basically a political gesture.   It also removes 
	all ambiguity about the mode of carry when target shooting, etc.

	The bottom line is:  I'm glad I live in a must issue state (NH).   If 
	they start conviscating firearms, 70% of my neighbors will go nuts.

	ciao,

	jcurtis

	Somali law of gun conviscation:  give up the worst, bury the best.





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 12:28:13 -0700

At 20:32 8/29/96, Greg Doty wrote:
>The first question which crosses my mind is for those well-intentioned
>individuals who thought they were doing right and applied for a license. How
>do they go about reversing the situation and getting off the confication lists?
>
>Greg


        Well, Greg, duck and cover! Then get ready to face the action - head on.

        It seems that here in the great State of Washington, the State
Patrol has been real busy recording not only the fact that you have a CCW
permit, but also every purchase (from an FFL dealer) of a firearm by Model,
Serial Number, and Caliber.
        Dandy, huh?


        Now _they_ know who has what, and where, presumably at your house.
        Oh, and lest you think a storage locker somewhere is safe,
registered under your name, that data may also be compromised.

        This Data Base can be accessed by _any_ cop on the beat, for any
purpose.
        I was _distinctly_ under the impression that the info on the BATF
form 4473 was destroyed after a specified period of time. But it appears,
that the _form only_ is destroyed, the data is recorded _permanently_.

        I remains to be seen whether that same info can be accessed under
the Wa. St. FOIA. If it can, it would point to why there have been several
burglaries at residences _not_ previously known to have fire arms stored
there, but those were the only things taken.

        I seems a friend has 'washed' (as in laundered) his CCW permit. He
called the Marysville PD at a late hour, and asked about what he would need
to do to get it replaced. He also asked about some other info, and in the
process was told how many guns he had and what makes they were!
        That _really_ blew his mind! Most of those guns he had sold or
traded a long time ago. It seems the record went back about 12 years.
        Well, upon hearing of this episode, I got really - shall we say
irritated, and decided to do some looking into this myself.

        I called a really nice lady at the Everett, Washington, Police
Department Information Section, and grilled her for about half an hour. I
was sure to be nice, but I was also quite forward about my disgust
concerning what I had found out about, during the prior night at work.

        Her concern was for the cop on the beat having to go to a
residence, and not knowing what kind of fire power he/she might run into.
        My instant reply was that _any_ cop who presumed that anyone was
either armed or not was presuming a lot, and that all police must be on
guard for whatever eventuality may occure.
        Let's face the facts, it is a dangerous job, and no one made you
take it.
        Going to someone's residence who may not have a recorded weapon and
presuming the least firepower will get one into trouble faster than a
falling on a snot slippery deck.

        On the other hand, going to a persons residence whom is recorded as
having many guns, will only up the ante when a cops arrive with weapons
at-the-ready, anticpating the encounter of hellfire. Presumptions of guilt
before the fact have killed more people that presumptions of innocence ever
did.

        I'm pissed.

        When I made the statement about knives being just as deadly as
guns, sometimes more so, and that there is no requirement to fill-out BATF
4473 for cutlery, _and_that as many or more murders are the results of
knife wounds, the lady had no answer. I had presumed she would not, not
being a law maker.
        But I just _had_ to make that point. I am sure she understood,
because for a long moment there, she had no answer, untill she made the
comment, "Well, you do have a good point there".
        She also griped most readily about having to do "all that extra
record keeping, and not to mention that we sometimes have to deny permits
(CCW) because of the filing requirements".

        The nice people at the 2nd Amendment Foundation (especifically John
(no last name)) told me that it probably wasn't against the law to record
that data - especially as concerns long guns. He said that there was no
mechanism for them to obtain that data, and was at a loss as to how it was
being provided to the State Police.
        Never the less, he was not inclined to positively look into it either.
        I replied that just because it's not, doesn't mean that they can.
The police are mandated to operate in a certain _honorable_ fashion. They
have their task cut out for them, and just because their is no law
specifically denying an act, does not mean it is ethical to conduct that
act.

         (There is no law telling them that they cannot surrepticiously
acquire info on what brand of skivvies I wear, does that mean that they may
do so?)

        I expressed my gravest reservations to John about confiscation, in
much the same fashion as I did to the nice lady at the police station, in
that the great(?) State of New York did much the same thing as Washington
State is now doing, and _that_ eventually lead _directly_ to confiscation.
        The fact of the matter is: they have the info -  now what?

        John, recomended that I obtain what data I could about me from the
police concerning fire arms.
        So, come Tuesday, September 03, 1996, I will get to the bottom of
this, by dealing with the Records Supervisor directly, and I will insist
that a copy be given to me as to what items the State Patrol has recorded
concerning my firearms purchases.
        Further, if in fact they have long gun data, I will be very
insistant in demanding to know as to what mechanism is being employed to
acquire that information.

        Ah'll be bach!



Ed

In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
 "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
  Tacitus, Roman Senator and historian (a.d. 56-115)
>>>A kind thank you to: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net><<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: (fwd) CLINTON: 1996-08-27 President Remarks at Michigan	  State University  &
Date: 30 Aug 1996 12:28:19 -0700

        Joe,

        >>>>>>>
Just think how many keyboards around the country are now covered  in puke
after folks read those "remarks".
        <<<<<<<


        My Mac has some neat sound effects, especially the one that sounds
like a toilet flushing, whenever the trashcan is emptied.

        It works appropriately!

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: SAINTS: Where are we going?
Date: 30 Aug 1996 12:28:22 -0700

At 22:39 8/29/96, Greg Doty wrote:
>One lonley little question: Where is this list going?
>
>Greg


        Greg, sometimes you have to walk in circles to discover where you
have been and to find out where you want to go.

        All good things take time. Let us not rush the process.

Ed



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 12:43:58 PST

On Aug 30, E. J. Totty wrote:

>        Bill,
>
>        >>>>>>>
>        How absolutely appropriate.....:-)
>        <<<<<<<
>
>        My goodness, Bill, are you intimating that the First Lady (?) is a
>high priced wench?  :-)

I wouldn't give her 2 bits!

I _was_ intimating that it was appropriate that a "high priced wench" read
it first, thus placing the First Lady in the, "position", of quoting her....

The wench probably had better, "delivery", too.....:-)

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: ACLU News 8/28/96: Guns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 15:09:45 -0500

>I made one up once when trying to get a traffic ticket repealed at the
>local university where my company I was working for had rented a hall for
>the morning.  They wouldn't accept my appeal without the number...

-----

I love it! Phony SSN's.

Maybe what we need to do it require the other person to give us *their* SSN
before we give them ours - and then give them a fake one.

Take theirs down in a little black book that has some ominous acronym on it
like OFFICIAL UNABOMBER SSN BOOK.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 15:13:35 -0500

>The first question which crosses my mind is for those well-intentioned
>individuals who thought they were doing right and applied for a license. How
>do they go about reversing the situation and getting off the confication
>lists?

-----

Change your identity or die - that will make it irrelevant. Once you get the
mark of the Beast on your person, it seems it is with you for life.

Bob Knauer

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: John Curtis <jcurtis@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 17:18:21 -0400


	With all this talk re: 4473 and gun owner data banks, does anyone
	know what the status is on Federal record keeping.   I thought that 
	it was illegal for the BATF to computerize records on gun purchases.

	Are the State registries illegal in some states?  How about if the 
	BATF supplies the info, and then wipes its tapes, and the State maintains
	the data record?

	Any legal action on this front?

	jcurtis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 15:23:31 -0700 (PDT)

Ed, both your anecdotes were about local departments wich -might- be 
explained since one of the myriad press thru copies of the form 4473 goes 
to local law enforcment. Fer instance, one night during a friendly talk 
with some Redmond officers (where'd I'd bought) one asked me if I had my 
Glock 17 on me. He looked -very- sheepish when I asked him why he asked 
so I suspect redmond has computerized those records (couldnt prove it) 
and from what you said it sounds like marysville and everett have to. 
What makes you think the State patrols in on it? FWIW (and possibly 
nothing) there is at least one Seattle Police officer who claims this 
isnt easily available to SPD (I'm sure it's not available on their car 
laptops, or at least it wasnt a few months ago.) Boyd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gdoty@earthlink.net (Greg Doty)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 30 Aug 1996 16:36:23 -0700 (PDT)

>X-Sender: eschelon@pop.seanet.com
>Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 12:28:13 -0700
>To: roc@xmission.com
>From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
>Cc: roc@xmission.com
>Sender: owner-roc@xmission.com
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: roc@xmission.com
>X-UIDL: f7f85f08f81f6e1a2a3276249f6c7b7f
>
<snip>
>        Her concern was for the cop on the beat having to go to a
>residence, and not knowing what kind of fire power he/she might run into.
>        My instant reply was that _any_ cop who presumed that anyone was
>either armed or not was presuming a lot, and that all police must be on
>guard for whatever eventuality may occure.
>        Let's face the facts, it is a dangerous job, and no one made you
>take it.
>        Going to someone's residence who may not have a recorded weapon and
>presuming the least firepower will get one into trouble faster than a
>falling on a snot slippery deck.
>
>        On the other hand, going to a persons residence whom is recorded as
>having many guns, will only up the ante when a cops arrive with weapons
>at-the-ready, anticpating the encounter of hellfire. Presumptions of guilt
>before the fact have killed more people that presumptions of innocence ever
>did.
>
<snip>

Interesting point. I think it's a matter of over reacting to a given
situation. Of all the badge toting people I have ever had to deal with, the
cop is the worse, and the game warden is the best - he knows you are armed
and treats you accordingly like a decent human being.

Greg


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gdoty@earthlink.net (Greg Doty)
Subject: Re: ACLU News 8/28/96: Guns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 16:36:32 -0700 (PDT)

>X-Sender: rcktexas@popd.ix.netcom.com
>Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 15:09:45 -0500
>To: roc@xmission.com
>From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: Re: ACLU News 8/28/96: Guns
>Sender: owner-roc@xmission.com
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: roc@xmission.com
>X-UIDL: dcdcb6636aad50439841125a1da20610
>
>>I made one up once when trying to get a traffic ticket repealed at the
>>local university where my company I was working for had rented a hall for
>>the morning.  They wouldn't accept my appeal without the number...
>
>-----
>
>I love it! Phony SSN's.
>
>Maybe what we need to do it require the other person to give us *their* SSN
>before we give them ours - and then give them a fake one.
>
>Take theirs down in a little black book that has some ominous acronym on it
>like OFFICIAL UNABOMBER SSN BOOK.
>
>Bob Knauer
>
Interesting thought. Then take the other fellow's SSN and use it when asked
by someone else who doesn't have the right to ask in the first place.

Greg

>--
>       
>**************************************************
>    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
>    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 
>
> <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
>**************************************************
>
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 21:27:24 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 30 Aug 1996, Bill Vance wrote:
> I _was_ intimating that it was appropriate that a "high priced wench" read
> it first, thus placing the First Lady in the, "position", of quoting her....
> 
> The wench probably had better, "delivery", too.....:-)

Did anyone watch "Politically Incorrect" Thursday night?  I didn't catch 
her name, but one of the panel of guests was a writer for the American 
Spectator, and she came out with a great line, basically to the effect 
that having a whore "vett" Hillary's speech gives a whole new spin on the 
Democratic Party describing itself as "the party of working women"....

But what I don't understand...and maybe this is a "guy" thing, in which 
case those of the male persuasion on this list can explain it to me...but 
just what is the turn on in having your high-priced whore read speeches, 
listen in on conversations with the President, etc.?  I can tell you, it 
definitely wouldn't float MY boat, it's the LAST thing I'd consider to 
get ME "in the mood"....hell, if that got their juices flowing, why not 
read the current Tax Codes?  Maybe I'm missing something here?  Maybe 
because I'm not a guy, let alone one who'd pay $200/hour to get it on, 
then off...but if I WAS, I could think of dozens of other things I'd 
rather be doing for that amount of money than talk to my boss or read his 
wife's speeches.

Can we now expect "It Takes A Village" to be published in installments in 
"Oui" magazine?  Soon to be a miniseries on the Playboy Channel?

Another burning question which has caused me to lose sleep wondering....
if this guy got off having this whore suck his toes, did they have sex 
with Socks on, or did they get Socks off...and get him his own p***y?

Donna (blame it on no sleep) Logan
;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: chad@pengar.com (Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop)
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 21:31:45 -0600

Donna Logan said:
>But what I don't understand...and maybe this is a "guy" thing, in which
>case those of the male persuasion on this list can explain it to me...but
>just what is the turn on in having your high-priced whore read speeches,
>listen in on conversations with the President, etc.?  I can tell you, it
>definitely wouldn't float MY boat, it's the LAST thing I'd consider to
>get ME "in the mood"....hell, if that got their juices flowing, why not
>read the current Tax Codes?  Maybe I'm missing something here?  Maybe
>because I'm not a guy, let alone one who'd pay $200/hour to get it on,
>then off...but if I WAS, I could think of dozens of other things I'd
>rather be doing for that amount of money than talk to my boss or read his
>wife's speeches.
>


Probably showing off how much power and influence he had.  Trying to
impress her.  Exercising his power.  (I think his Franklins probably were
more impressive to her).

Chad

------------------------- Live Free or Die ! ---------------------------
Chad Leigh              |  When Guns are Outlawed, Criminals Win!
Pengar Enterprises, Inc -- Home of          The Electronic GunShop (sm)
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop     mailto:gunshop@pengar.com
http://www.xmission.com/~pengar/gunshop/egs_text.html  for text interface
Ask me about it!  Classifeds and Commercial Ads & free Firearms and
Activism Info
--------------------$4/month commercial WWW space!!!--------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance)
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 30 Aug 1996 23:53:50 PST

On Aug 30, Donna J. Logan wrote:

>On Fri, 30 Aug 1996, Bill Vance wrote:
>> I _was_ intimating that it was appropriate that a "high priced wench" read
>> it first, thus placing the First Lady in the, "position", of quoting her....
>> 
>> The wench probably had better, "delivery", too.....:-)
>
>Did anyone watch "Politically Incorrect" Thursday night?  I didn't catch 
>her name, but one of the panel of guests was a writer for the American 
>Spectator, and she came out with a great line, basically to the effect 
>that having a whore "vett" Hillary's speech gives a whole new spin on the 
>Democratic Party describing itself as "the party of working women"....

Love it, ROFL!!!

>But what I don't understand...and maybe this is a "guy" thing, in which 
>case those of the male persuasion on this list can explain it to me...but 
>just what is the turn on in having your high-priced whore read speeches, 
>listen in on conversations with the President, etc.?  I can tell you, it 
>definitely wouldn't float MY boat, it's the LAST thing I'd consider to 
>get ME "in the mood"....hell, if that got their juices flowing, why not 
>read the current Tax Codes?  Maybe I'm missing something here?  Maybe 
>because I'm not a guy, let alone one who'd pay $200/hour to get it on, 
>then off...but if I WAS, I could think of dozens of other things I'd 
>rather be doing for that amount of money than talk to my boss or read his 
>wife's speeches.

I think maybe he might have had her fulfilling fantasies of Hillary reading
it at the Convention, en le nue entregal, i.e., while wearing the "Empresses
new clothes".  :-)

>Can we now expect "It Takes A Village" to be published in installments in 
>"Oui" magazine?  Soon to be a miniseries on the Playboy Channel?

Do you mean her gohst writers version, or the alternative, "It Takes A
Village, (To Satisfy Her Husband)".  :-)

>Another burning question which has caused me to lose sleep wondering....
>if this guy got off having this whore suck his toes, did they have sex 
>with Socks on, or did they get Socks off...and get him his own p***y?

I believe Bill Clinton allready filled that last role, or at least he used
to.....:-)

--
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | If Guns are     | Let he who hath no  | Keep
weapon in every | by COLT; | outlawed, only  | weapon sell his     | Your
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | RIGHT WINGERS   | garment and buy a   | Powder
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | will have Guns. | sword. Jesus Christ | Dry.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Donna J. Logan" <revcoal@pcnet.com>
Subject: Re: Clinton Consultant Resigns
Date: 31 Aug 1996 06:33:28 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 30 Aug 1996, Chad Leigh -- The Electronic GunShop wrote:
> Probably showing off how much power and influence he had.  Trying to
> impress her.  Exercising his power.  (I think his Franklins probably were
> more impressive to her).

Another good bit on "Politically Incorrect" Thursday night was comedian 
Chris Rock exclaiming about the guy not having a clue, thinking he had to 
impress a "hoe"...."like his money wasn't GOOD ENUF?"....

;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 9 Num. 01
Date: 31 Aug 1996 08:08:54 -0400

More points to ponder.
Tom

>Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 14:55:01 -0500 (CDT)
>Reply-To: bigred@duracef.shout.net
>Sender: owner-CN-L@cornell.edu
>From: Brian Redman <bigred@duracef.shout.net>
>To: Conspiracy Nation <CN-L@cornell.edu>
>Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 9 Num. 01
>X-PH: V4.1@cornell.edu (Cornell Modified) 
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2(a) -- ListProcessor by CREN
>
>The following is brought to you thanks, in part, to the kind 
>assistance of CyberNews and the fine folks at Cornell University.
>
>
>              Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 9  Num. 01
>             ======================================
>                    ("Quid coniuratio est?")
> 
> 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>TRAFFICKERS OF DEATH
>====================
>[La Jornada, 8/25/96. Translation by Conspiracy Nation.]
> 
>Mexico -- The Ministry  of  Agriculture  of  the  United  Kingdom
>"invited"  the  British  authorities to not control the source of
>more than 2 million cows  exported  to the European continent, in
>spite of the danger of infections and death caused  by  "mad  cow
>disease."   At  the  same time it decided to prohibit the sale of
>the dangerous  meat  in  continental  Europe,  it  authorized its
>exportation to eastern Europe and to the Third World.  Also,  you
>will  recall,  the  sale  in  Latin  America of radioactive milk,
>contaminated by the Chernobyl disaster,  has been allowed -- milk
>which still has no European market.  In our country [Mexico], has
>been destined for human consumption corn not fit  for  pigs.   In
>fact,  money  does not stink, as the Romans used to say and, when
>it comes to business, there are  no  lack of states which push to
>one  side  all  scruples  and  play  with  death,  for   supposed
>advantage.
> 
>The war in Chechnya, terrible  for  the number of victims and for
>the atrocities suffered by a colonized people, is almost  a  case
>study  in  how private fortunes are amassed at the cost of public
>misery and misfortune.  General Alexander Lebed, in his collision
>with the  recycled  Establishment  that  controls  always oil and
>armaments and holds high places in the  Russian  government,  has
>denounced  the  fact that these persons have a financial interest
>in war and oppose peace.   Journalists  add, for their part, that
>behind the combats, what is liberated is a  battle  for  oil  and
>lining the pockets of many military commands.  The thing is that,
>to its misfortune, Chechnya is very rich in hydrocarbons and oil,
>and   what   is   produced  or  passes  through  there  can  make
>millionaires, in the  blink  of  an  eye,  those  who, in Moscow,
>secretly export fuel.  Besides, a war gives power to the military
>and serves to conceal a contraband in weapons.  It is enough,  in
>effect, to declare that the combatants have consumed or destroyed
>quantities  of  arms  and  munitions  beyond what has occurred in
>order to be able to sell them clandestinely in the exterior via a
>traffic that ensures that combats  and bombings will be intensive
>and will last as long as possible.
> 
>Power, evidently, corrupts so-called  "democratic  societies"  as
>much as it corrupts any others.  The world technocrats, for their
>part,   tend  to  consider  the  common  human  being  a  simple,
>predictable variable and  to  think  that  anything is good which
>offers the opportunity to oil the economic machine  --  even  the
>deaths  of  thousands  of  unknowns.   Society, even in civilized
>Europe, can  control  neither  the  governments  nor the economic
>decisions of the grand *senors* of finance.  And from  the  point
>of  view  of ethics, we live in a period similar to the period of
>Roman decadence.  More than  ever  is needed a total transparency
>to reveal acts  of  government,  and  social  control  over  that
>government,  a  total liberty of investigation and information on
>the part of a free and  independent press.  At first glance, this
>might seem little, but that can be enough to put obstacles in the
>way of those who massively line their pockets by means of death.
> 
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>       Views expressed do not necessarily  reflect  those
>       of Conspiracy Nation, nor of its Editor in Chief.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>        I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail 
>address, send a message in the form "subscribe cn-l My Name" to 
>listproc@cornell.edu          (Note: that is "CN-L" *not* "CN-1")
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>    For information on how to receive the improved Conspiracy 
>  Nation Newsletter, send an e-mail message to bigred@shout.net
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Want to know more about Whitewater, Oklahoma City bombing, etc? 
>(1) telnet prairienet.org (2) logon as "visitor" (3) go citcom
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>       See also: http://www.europa.com/~johnlf/cn.html
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>          See also: ftp.shout.net  pub/users/bigred
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
>Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et 
>  pauperem.                    -- Liber Proverbiorum  XXXI: 8-9 
>
>
>
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Computer Files on Fliers?
Date: 31 Aug 1996 10:39:41 -0500

From the "news":

	Computer Files on Fliers?  
	The Washington Post says a presidential commission on  
aviation security is considering plans that would require U.S. 
airlines to scrutinize all passengers at U.S. airports using 
massive computer files. If the plan is enacted, the federal 
government would require creation of a computer profiling system 
that would examine passengers' bill-paying records, flying 
habits and other data to identify potential terrorists and other 
suspicious individuals. Numerous legal issues still need to be 
resolved, including whether airlines would be given access to 
information from government computer systems like those 
containing criminal records. 

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "R. Knauer-AIMNET" <rcktexas@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Poll: Scandal Cost Clinton
Date: 31 Aug 1996 15:34:24 -0500

As much as I distrust published political opinion polls, I hope this one is
correct for a change (see below).

And don't forget to watch for the upcoming presentation of the:

                           ******************

                       _November 1996 Landslide_!

* Be amazed when a Republican president, for the first time in recent
history, finally has a supermajority in both houses of congress.

* Be dazzled when over half the governors of the country are Republican and
have predominately Republican legislatures to work with.

* Be estatic when all gun control tyranny is abolished by Constitutional
Amendment!

* Coming Soon To A Voting Booth Near You!

* Don't Miss It!

                           ******************

Bob Knauer

+++++

From the "news":

	Poll: Scandal Cost Clinton  

	Nearly a quarter of U.S. voters surveyed said they were less  
likely to vote for President Clinton following the resignation 
of his top campaign adviser Dick Morris, a poll released today 
said. Morris quit the campaign this week after a sensationalist 
supermarket tabloid reported he had a year-long affair with a 
prostitute who claimed he confided White House secrets to her. 
The Newsweek poll conducted on Thursday found 24 percent of 401 
respondents ``less likely'' to vote for Clinton because of the 
Morris resignation. Of those describing themselves as Clinton 
supporters, 6 percent said the resignation made them less likely 
to vote for the president. 

+++++

--
       
**************************************************
    A I M N E T       Advanced Internet Marketing
    Corporation        World Wide Web Publishing 

 <websales@aimtec.com>   http://www.aimtec.com/
**************************************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Sylvester <joesylvester@texoma.net>
Subject: Re: Poll: Scandal Cost Clinton
Date: 31 Aug 1996 16:25:04 -0500

At 03:34 PM 8/31/96 -0500, you wrote:
>And don't forget to watch for the upcoming presentation of the:
>
>                           ******************
>
>                       _November 1996 Landslide_!
>
>* Be estatic when all gun control tyranny is abolished by Constitutional
>Amendment!

Uhhmm, hasn't this been tried before? :-(

>
>supporters, 6 percent said the resignation made them less likely 
>to vote for the president. 
>
>

Oh wow, this means that less than 3% of all voters, and if all of them went
over to Dole, he would still be behind in the polls. A more interesting
number would be the fraction of the previously uncommitted who were now less
likely to vote for Clinton, because of the "scandal".

              The Second Amendment is the RESET button 
                   of the United States Constitution.  
      ("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) 


Joe Sylvester
Don't Tread On Me !






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: sabutigo <sabutigo@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Religious beliefs of the founding fathers
Date: 31 Aug 1996 14:39:17 -0700 (PDT)

At 09:49 AM 8/29/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>It has always been my understanding that the founding fathers
>>were mostly deists (Webster's 9th defines deism: a movement or
>>system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing
>>morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the
>>Creator with the laws of the universe).
>>
>	Thanks for posting this.   It crossed my mind to post something about 
>	Jefferson being a deist, and having to be somewhat coy about his beliefs as 
>	they offended some of the more orthodox in society.
>
>	I didn't post because I didn't have enough detailed knowledge.
>
Several of the FF were deists. Most were Christians of some sort -- though
there is little to tell us how seriously Christian they were. Pat Henry,
Paul Revere, the Adams clan and otheres were very outspoken and strong
Christians according to all reports. Washington was also -- though more
private about it.

S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com (E. J. Totty)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 31 Aug 1996 15:54:42 -0700

        Boyd,

        >>>>>>>
        What makes you think the State patrols in on it? FWIW (and possibly
nothing) there is at least one Seattle Police officer who claims this
isnt easily available to SPD (I'm sure it's not available on their car
laptops, or at least it wasnt a few months ago.) Boyd
        <<<<<<<

        Well, let me state this for the record.
        Firstly -

        The young lady I spoke with over the phone yesterday (friday) told
me that the Forms go _directly_ to the State Patrol. It is they who input
the records for the rest of the state. All police departments that have
access to the State's criminal database have access to that data also.

        Secondly -

        My acquaintence, who divulged that initial information to me, also
informed me that he was listening in on a scanner a while back, and was
surprised to hear the Police Dispatcher state that person X at address Y
had the following arms . . .

        Lastly -

        Well, guess what? I heard the same thing myself on my scanner, just
this morning.

        Gawd, I just love it here in Amerika.

        Ed


In the land of the free and the home of the brave,
we have more laws against freedom than those that
protect it.
If this country is so damned free, why are there so many
things I can't do without breaking some idiotic law?
>>>eschelon@eschelon.seanet.com<<<
 "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
  Tacitus, Roman Senator and historian (a.d. 56-115)
>>>A kind thank you to: David Gonzalez <gonzalez@mcs.net><<<
The 2nd Amendment IS THE reset button for the United States Constitution.
>>>("Doug McKay" <mckay003@maroon.tc.umn.edu>) <<<
The  Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and
the Bill of Rights -- These are the ORIGINAL Contract with America.
Beware of Imitations.
Accept No Substitutes.
Insist on the Genuine Articles.
>>>Thanks in part to: John Gear (catalyst@pacifier.com)<<<
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made in the shape of
your conscience to block the pleasures permitted by mine.  When you
people prevail, you commit a crime against freedom, and that is the
greatest immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
>>>A hearty thanks to: foolery@bright.net<<<



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Kenneth Mitchell <kmitchel@gvn.net>
Subject: Re: Poll: Scandal Cost Clinton
Date: 31 Aug 1996 17:10:25 -0700

At 03:34 PM 8/31/96 -0500, R. Knauer-AIMNET wrote:
>As much as I distrust published political opinion polls, I hope this one is
>correct for a change (see below).

>
>>From the "news":
>
>	Poll: Scandal Cost Clinton  
>
>	Nearly a quarter of U.S. voters surveyed said they were less  
>likely to vote for President Clinton following the resignation 
>of his top campaign adviser Dick Morris, a poll released today 
>said. Morris quit the campaign this week after a sensationalist 
>supermarket tabloid reported he had a year-long affair with a 
>prostitute who claimed he confided White House secrets to her. 
>The Newsweek poll conducted on Thursday found 24 percent of 401 
>respondents ``less likely'' to vote for Clinton because of the 
>Morris resignation. Of those describing themselves as Clinton 
>supporters, 6 percent said the resignation made them less likely 
>to vote for the president. 

It doesn't matter WHY Dick Morris quit or was forced from office.  The mere
fat that he's gone will serve us well.  Let's look at the history here; 

When Morris was hired, Clinton was taking far-left positions and stood at
about 30% in the polls.  He hired Morris, a supposedly _conservative_
adviser, to help him turn that around.  Morris dragged Clinton to the
"center" and in some cases farther, and Clinton is now around 55% in the
polls. It was Morris who pressured Clinton to adopt many of the best GOP
ideas and propose them as his own. 

With Morris gone, and only Clinton's other far-left advisers remaining,
Slick Willie is likely to swing back to the left again, and _losing_ those
supporters who figured that Clinton was a "like Dole, only less so"
candidate. The election is still 2 months away; anything could happen. 
Ken Mitchell      |"Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. 
8037 Stone Canyon |counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing
Citrus Heights, CA|citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent
95610             |crimes and it appears to produce no increase in
kmitchel@gvn.net  |accidental deaths. If those states which did not 
916-449-9152 (vm) |have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had
916-729-0966 (fax)|adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders;
                  |4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults
                  |would have been avoided yearly."  Crime, 
                  |Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
                  |John R. Lott, Jr., School of Law Univ. of Chicago
-------------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/home.htm----------------
     !yaw gnorw eht su gnikat si noitartsinimdA notnilC ehT


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: boydk <boydk@WRQ.COM>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: CONCEALED CARRY - REAL TRUTH!! (fwd)
Date: 31 Aug 1996 17:31:05 -0700 (PDT)

On Sat, 31 Aug 1996, E. J. Totty wrote:

>         Boyd,
> 
>         >>>>>>>
>         What makes you think the State patrols in on it? FWIW (and possibly
>         <<<<<<<
> 
>         Well, let me state this for the record.
>         Firstly -
> 
>         The young lady I spoke with over the phone yesterday (friday) told
> me that the Forms go _directly_ to the State Patrol. It is they who input
Oh, sorry I missed that part.

>         Secondly -
snip 
>         Lastly -
> 
Sure, when I was in a redmond apartment the scanner told me more about my 
neighbors then I ever heard from them or probably should have ever heard. 
Again though, the last two points corroborate that the locals have the 
information but not that the state patrol is necessarily involved. 
(though I'll grant you they are, I just hadn't noticed that first point in 
your previous message). I too will bring this up with SAF, sounds like 
they're legal department might well enjoy a FOIA romp thru the State Patrol.
I must say that since the staters are involved they're doing a shitty 
job. Again, as of just a few months ago I can tell you first hand that 
the data was not available from a patrol car computer (perhaps by radio 
tho...), this was in a training officers car, not some rookies.



> >         Gawd, I just love it here in Amerika. > 
Completely agreed! The only thing worse are all the substitutes ; )
Liberty has got to make a comeback.
Boyd (all opinions I express are mine alone)

>         Ed > > 
snip

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Tom Cloyes <foolery@bright.net>
Subject: Ohio Congressional Elections
Date: 31 Aug 1996 23:00:32 -0400

This election doesn't hold much hope for unseating the incumbants here in
Ohio, HOWEVER, in the 14th District there is. I just received a call from
one of my Columbus contacts, and he informed me that the incumbant, an F
rated democrat, is being challenged by an A rated Republican. Since my
district's rep is Regula, and he is a shoe-in, my coordinator efforts will
be directed there. The challenger's info is as follows:

                    Joyce George
                    Bart Ralston campaign manager
                    3020 W. Market St.
                    Akron, Ohio 44333
                    Ph. 330-869-9919

If you're looking for a campaign to work for, or support with your dollars,
this is the one in Ohio.

Let's show them that 1994 wasn't a fluke.
Tom
"You exceed your rights when you urge that laws be made
in the shape of your conscience to block the pleasures
permitted by mine.  When you people prevail, you commit
a crime against freedom, and that is the greatest
immorality I know."  -Vance Bourjaily, Country Matters
(no date avail). Thanks to:Mark Johnson (onethumb@why.net)

"A lie on the throne is a lie, still, and truth in a dungeon is truth,
still; and a lie on the throne is on the way to defeat, and truth in a
dungeon is on the way to victory." --Anonymous.