From: Subject: IT DIDN'T START WITH LORAL (fwd) Date: 01 Jun 1998 07:50:22 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Apparently-To: wwlist@dolphin.gulf.net IT DIDN'T START WITH LORAL The Clinton National Security Fire Sale By Carl Limbacher OYSTER BAY -- The revelation that the Clinton administration may have traded U.S. national security for campaign cash from China exploded like a Long March rocket just two weeks ago. Johnny Chung's confession to investigators that some of the money he donated to help re-elect Bill Clinton came directly from the People's Liberation Army finally set off mainstream media smoke alarms. On the Sunday chat shows, the topic is picking up steam - and has even managed to supplant Monica-gate as the biggest bulb on the Clinton scandalabra. But the story of Bill Clinton's national security sell out doesn't begin with Jeff Gerth's May 16 New York Times bombshell about Liu Chaoying and her PLA bagman, Mr. Chung. Nor did it start when Gerth began exploring the Loral Corp.'s technology transfers to China on the Times front page six weeks earlier. In fact, the Clinton administration has long demonstrated what could only be described as a pattern and practice of behavior towards China: a series of decisions where the best interests of America have consistently taken a back seat to the designs of Clinton's Chinese patrons. It's not a pretty picture. SUPERCOMPUTERS Last year's revelation that the Clinton administration had looked the other way while supercomputer technology was transferred to potential foes foreshadowed the current controversy. In February 1997, Long Island's Newsday first reported that California's Silicon Graphics was under investigation for selling to Russia a high-powered unit that ended up in the Chelyabinsk-70 nuclear weapons laboratory. Reportedly, SGI delivered the computer without even getting the required license. No wonder. The Silicon-Chelyabinsk supercomputer was twice as powerful as anything that was legal for an American firm to ship overseas. According to the report, the Russians had been very anxious to acquire the high tech equipment. And they made no bones about how they intended to use it. In a Sept. '96 letter to then Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary, Russia's Nuclear Energy Minister Viktor Mikhaylov explained that he wanted the high performance computer to "guarantee the reliability of....Russia's nuclear stockpile." Just days after the Newsday story, The Wall Street Journal reported that Silicon Graphics had sold two similar computers to China's Academy of Sciences, which conducts research into nuclear weapons and missiles. SGI claimed that the sale was in full compliance with U.S. export regulations. But the Journal revealed that at least one of the SGI units was transferred to the Chinese without benefit of the required license. Moreover, that unit was capable of six billion theoretical operations per second, making it twice as powerful as the model SGI sold to the Russians. How was SGI allowed to get away with all this during the final years of the first Clinton term? Just lucky, perhaps. Although the fact that SGI's chairman, Edward McCracken, was a big time Democrat donor in '92 and '96 surely didn't hurt. And McCracken didn't waste any time taking advantage of the access his money bought. According to the previously cited Newsday report: It was three weeks after a private luncheon with McCracken at the White House in September, 1993, that Clinton announced sweeping liberalization of computer export standards, allowing computers of up to 194 MTOPS to be sold without a license. Until then only machines with up to 12.5 MTOPS - the power of a 486 chip desktop PC - could be sold without a license. By May of 1997, the full scope of China's American supercomputer bonanza had become public. Under the Clinton "liberalization", The Peoples' Republic of China had acquired no less than 46 of the prized high performance machines. House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde was quoted that same month by the Washington Times observing that the computer technology transfers "may have given the PRC more supercomputer capacity than the entire (U.S.) Department of Defense." COSCO'S BEACHHEAD While he was not too busy helping the Chinese build up their arsenal abroad, Mr. Clinton took time to do what he could for Chinese state business interests at home. The transfer of the Long Beach, California naval station to the China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) is by now notorious. But what wasn't widely reported last year was the degree to which the Clinton White House leaned on local Long Beach office holders to pave the way for COSCO's beachhead on American soil. Here's how The New York Times described the intense White House lobbying for that deal: During a tough battle last year ('96) over how a closed Navy base in Long Beach, Calif., would be used, a Clinton administration official made what several people involved describe as highly unusual telephone calls to push for construction there of a container terminal that would be leased to a shipping company owned by the Chinese Government....There was no evidence that there was anything improper about the calls, but several officials who received them said it was highly unusual for the White House to intervene of behalf of one side in a local battle like this one, especially when the intervention benefited the cause of a private company....Several of those officials said the White House pressure had been unprecedented. "We'd never had a phone call like that in this office before," said Lee Keatinge of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. "There's no base re-use fight that's come close to Long Beach" for that kind of high level involvement. Another Long Beach official, Ruthann Lehrer, told the Times: "It was made clear that this container terminal plan was the preference of the White House, not any of the other ideas some people were talking about. This was clearly not something that the White House wanted studied further." Although the Times quoted Long Beach officials who were primarily concerned with the historic preservation of their port, others were more troubled by the tenant. Just months before Bill Clinton enlisted in the battle of Long Beach on the Chinese side, BATF and Customs agents intercepted contraband shipped on a COSCO container ship docked up the coastline in Oakland. The state owned Chinese ship was being used by the state run arms company to smuggle machine guns to American street gangs. Still, priorities are priorities. And the priority here for Bill Clinton may have had something to do with the fact that the ubiquitous and generous Mr. Chung was linked to COSCO through Hongye Zheng, a senior COSCO advisor who accompanied Chung to the White House for a Clinton radio address. "ASSAULT WEAPONS" FOR U.S. But of all the decisions, waivers and export liberalizations executed on behalf of the Chinese by the Clinton White House, none rivals what the administration did for Wang Jun, the princeling chairman of China's state owned arms conglomerate, Poly Technologies. For years, China had been doing a land office business exporting to the U.S. semi-automatic rifles and ammo made by Poly and another arms manufacturer, Norinco. Reportedly, the gun trade was worth hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the PRC. But suddenly in 1994, there was a problem: the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban. Overnight, China's weapons cash cow evaporated. Not to worry. According to a Scripps Howard report by Michael Hedges, which ran on the front page of the March 14, 1997 edition of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, the Clinton administration granted Wang Jun's Poly Technologies importation permits to flood America with over 100,000 semi-automatic weapons and millions of rounds of ammunition -- despite the president's own cherished gun ban. That was on Feb. 2, 1996 -- just days before Clinton issued the first satellite waivers for Loral Corp. It gets worse. On Feb. 6, just four days after the assault weapon waivers were issued, Wang Jun was ushered into the White House for a personal meeting with Bill Clinton. Wang's escort was Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie, who had laundered over $600,000 from Chinese sources for the Clinton Defense Fund. Combined with his campaign donations to the DNC, Trie's total contributions to Clinton coffers topped the million dollar mark in 1996. For that kind of money, it's a good bet Charlie Trie could bring anybody he wanted to the White House. And Charlie Trie wasn't Wang's only solid White House reference. Charlie had worked with longtime F.O.B. Ernest Green to get Wang a U.S. visa, though Wang conveniently forgot to mention that he was a Communist arms dealer on the visa application. Had he disclosed that fact, Wang Jun would never have been let in the country, let alone the White House. The day after Wang's visit with Clinton, Ernie Green's wife donated $50,000 to the DNC. Except for these import waivers, issued two years after Poly's rifles had been banned at the president's own direction, there would have been no legal U.S. market for Wang Jun's guns. Michael Hedges interviewed lawyers involved in negotiating the deal, nearly all of whom were stunned when Poly Technologies got the exclusive approval. "All of a sudden there was a breakthrough. I can't account for it.", said one attorney. Another admitted that the Clinton administration had been tying other arms importers in knots to keep guns out of the country because the president was opposed. He described the abrupt turnaround in U.S. import policy as "highly suspicious". And this was from a guy who was working to make this deal happen. Last year, Hedges told me that his evidence included signed copies of the importation permits for Wang Jun's guns. Between the on-the-record interviews and the documentation, his expose was rock solid. Yet, despite the fact that the implications of his report were absolutely staggering, only one New York or Washington paper thought its readers were entitled to this news. Eleven days later, The New York Daily News followed up on the Wang Jun 100,000 gun story. News Columnist Michael Daly managed to uncover the destination for Wang's 100,000 guns: a Detroit firm which investigators have linked to the Chinese Armed Police. The Chinese Armed Police used similar assault rifles to mow down demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989. The massive gun shipment would have gone through, flooding America's cities with weapons ruled inappropriate by the Clinton administration, but the deal was suspended in the wake of the aforementioned COSCO connected smuggling operation - which was short-circuited by federal agents just weeks after Wang Jun's importation waivers were granted. On the night of March 18, 1996, undercover Customs and BATF agents accepted delivery of guns smuggled aboard the COSCO ship Empress Phoenix, as part of an ongoing sting operation dubbed "Dragon Fire." The undercover agents had lured the Chinese into making a trial shipment of Chinese machine guns: a dry run set up to establish a working relationship before the Chinese granted access to their full inventory. Besides the smuggled guns, which they recommended for the California street gang market, the Chinese operatives explained that they were ready to sell everything from grenade launchers to shoulder fired Red Parakeet surface to air missiles, which they boasted could "take out a 747". (Coincidentally, a Boeing 747 was taken out over the skies of Long Island just months later.) That March night, federal agents secretly unpacked COSCO crates containing 2,000 Poly Technologies AK-47's delivered from the hold of the Empress Phoenix. It was the largest seizure of fully operational automatic weapons in the history of U. S. law enforcement. With that claim to fame, one might expect the agents responsible for Operation Dragon Fire to be boasting of their unqualified success. However, as the BATF's Dick Stoltz and the Customs Bureau's Matthew King explained all of the above to Vanity Fair Magazine last December, they emphasized that Dragon Fire's goal was much larger. The real targets of their undercover investigation were Poly and Norinco lieutenants who controlled the deal from China and whom Stoltz and King had managed to lure to America for a brief visit. And they suspected Wang Jun's direct involvement. As King told Vanity Fair: "Can you imagine the reactions or how Congress would have voted (on MFN for China) if we had been allowed to keep going? If we had arrested the Norinco officials who had come here to sell Red Parakeet missiles? If Dragon Fire had been able to nail the princelings? This country's China policy would be a hell of a lot different today." So why, instead of stopping with the March 18th gun seizure, didn't they keep going? Stoltz and King had wanted to - but inexplicably, somehow word had leaked about Dragon Fire. First their office got a call from a Los Angeles Times reporter, who shocked them with his detailed knowledge of their supposedly still secret sting. This reporter's silence was purchased with the promise of an even bigger exclusive after the investigation had culminated in indictments of Chinese kingpins. Shortly thereafter, The New York Times called and had to be promised a similar deal to keep the investigation secret. But it was too late. After the second inquiry Stoltz and King realized that their own undercover agents were now in jeopardy. They had to act fast before the entire operation came unraveled. That's why Dragon Fire's ultimate prize turned out to be Chinese AK-47's rather than the Chinese operatives close to arms merchant, Wang Jun. The mystery of the Dragon Fire leak has never been solved. But there are disturbing clues. Reporters for both the L.A. and New York Times worked in Washington, where the only people familiar with Dragon Fire were top government officials. According to Vanity Fair, the journalists involved would reveal only that their tips came from "diplomatic sources". And evidently these reporters weren't the only ones who got the word. Several of Wang Jun's top lieutenants hotfooted it back to China just one jump ahead of federal indictment. One was Robert Ma, chief of Poly Technologies' U.S. subsidiary, who fled just two days before his arrest warrant was executed. Was a federal probe into a massive Chinese arms smuggling operation foiled by insiders who knew the investigation put Clinton's China connection at risk? Is it significant that leaks about an investigation run out of San Francisco came from a Washington source? If so, this would constitute a more blatant (though potentially less dangerous) national betrayal than even Clinton's Loral satellite waivers. If the Loral waivers damaged national security, as a still secret internal Pentagon study reportedly claims, then what national interest, pray tell, was served by sabotaging an investigation into Chinese gun smuggling? And just which Americans would have benefited when the White House tossed it's own gun control policy over the side to welcome in 100,000 outlawed Chinese guns? Though the press has virtually ignored this aspect of the Clinton "China First" policy, House Government Reform and Oversight Chairman Dan Burton has not. Reached Friday on Sean Hannity's New York talk radio show, Burton told me: "We continue to investigate the Wang Jun connection. Our concentration has been on the illegal campaign contributions and Wang Jun is one of the people that we've been looking into. Obviously if there was a quid pro quo where the president signed off on those guns coming into the country in exchange for campaign contributions, that's something that he should be held accountable for and we are looking into that." Quid quo pro or not, this president needs to explain why his administration waived its own gun law for a Chinese princeling arms merchant whose lieutenants were intent on smuggling even more to firepower to American street gangs. Published in the Jun. 1, 1998 issue of The Washington Weekly Copyright 1998 The Washington Weekly (http://www.federal.com) Reposting permitted with this message intact Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574 -----------------| 1175 N Altadena Dr | -------------- Jack@Minerva.Com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-309-8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Lone Star FIJA News (fwd) Date: 01 Jun 1998 07:35:07 -0500 (CDT) If your not a member of FIJA join. Some day a jury maybe your only hope for a federal firearm trial, and only a jury who who knows their rights from FIJA has a chance of helping you despited the judges orders. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Texas FIJA Fans, Two pieces of news: o First, we have updated our web site at www.lsfija.org Check it out. Give us feedback, please. Hope to keep on improving as we go. o Second, we will be running several booths at Texas party state conventions: Republican - Tarrant County Convention Center (Fort Worth) on June 12 (Fri) and June 13 (Sat). Democratic - Alamodome (San Antonio) June 28 (Fri) and June 29 (Sat) Libertarian - Fredonia Hotel (Nacogdoches) June 13-14. No booth, but Clay Conrad is speaking for us. Reform - Harvey Hotel (Dallas) June 13. No booths allowed, but distribution of literature allowed. Volunteer needed. American Constitution - Washington-on-the-Brazos State Park Convention Center - 10am - 4pm. June 13 (Sat). No formal booths, but distribution of literature allowed. Volunteer needed. We think we have the Democratic Party Convention covered, but if you are burning to be there let us know. We still need volunteers for the GOP, Reform, and American Constitution Party on 6/12-13. Please let Tom Glass know at 713 467-2989 or reply via email to tomglass@lsfija.org if you can help. We know of at least 6 Senate District conventions that called for Fully Informed Jury Language in the GOP platform, and we have two folks who are or have been on the FIJA list on the GOP platform committee. Toward liberty, Tom Glass President Lone Star FIJA (713) 467-2989 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: To Whom it May Concern Date: 01 Jun 1998 21:15:48 -0700 For those of you who knew of my affiliation (half ownership) of The Idaho Observer, this is to inform you that that affiliation has ceased, as of tonight (June 1, 1998). I've been feeling something funny in the wind from Don Harkins, the editor, for a while now, especially since his girlfriend, Patty Neill, decided she was going to be moving out here this summer, but tonight Don informed me that my services are no longer wanted with The Idaho Observer. Which is interesting, since I essentially do everything there is to do, save the final putting the paper together (a couple of days of work). I've done essentially all the advertising, all the subscriptions, handling the database, the bulk mailing and the preparation thereof, answering the phone while he's at work 8 to 5, *all* the promotion for the paper (shortwave and other publications), etc. etc. etc. In short, he's gonna have his hands full. And why? Who knows? Human beings, especially those that don't know the Lord, do some strange things. I'm actually learning to pretty much take them in stride the older I get. But I must confess, this one was a surprise. But as I say, you take things in stride. Since I will no longer be maintaining the website, there will no doubt *be* no website shortly. Oh well. It had gotten behind what with my recently being married and all anyway. It was a lot of work, and I've been rather proud of it, especially as net folks have stumbled across it and written to compliment us on what we're doing. But all good things must come to an end, I guess. At any rate, I thought you'd all want to know. - Monte (Jefferson Adams) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: Gun Control Bills before Congress (fwd) Date: 01 Jun 1998 22:28:52 PST On Jun 01, Eugene W. Gross wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Hi Folks, These are the bills before Congress on gun control. I don't know the present status of the bills, but at least you know what we are facing at the federal level. En Agape, Gene ======================================== 1 . Yates Firearm Registration and Crime Prevention Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1998.IH] 2 . To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide that certain muzzle loading firearms are to be treated as antique firearms for purposes of the Federal firearms laws. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.3140.IH] 3 . Gun Shop Safety Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.922.IS] 4 . Gun Shop Safety Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2359.IH] 5 . To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit gunsmiths to obtain a Federal firearms license without having to comply with State or local laws relating to zoning of firearms businesses. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2342.IH] 6 . To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for reciprocity in regard to the manner in which nonresidents of a State may carry certain concealed firearms in the State. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2722.IH] 7 . Anti-Gun Invasion Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.723.IS] 8 . Anti-Gun Invasion Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1570.IH] 9 . Consumer's Choice Protection Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2734.IH] 10 . Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.27.IH] 11 . To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry certain concealed firearms in the State, and to exempt... (Introduced in the House)[H.R.339.IH] 12 . To prevent children from injuring themselves with firearms. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.814.IH] 13 . Second Amendment Restoration Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1147.IH] 14 . Personal Safety and Community Protection Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.816.IS] 15 . Law Enforcement Protection Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.837.IS] 16 . Firearms Safety and Violence Prevention Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.788.IH] 17 . Trigger Lock Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2673.IH] 18 . To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for the prospective application of certain prohibitions relating to firearms. (Introduced in the Senate)[S.262.IS] 19 . To provide that the firearms prohibitions applicable by reason of a domestic violence misdemeanor conviction do not apply to a government official engaged in official conduct while... (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2255.IH] 20 . Child Firearm Access Prevention Act (Introduced in the Senate)[S.1917.IS] 21 . Gun Kingpin Penalty Act (Introduced in the Senate)[S.658.IS] 22 . Gun Kingpin Penalty Act (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1264.IH] 23 . To authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to ban the importation of firearms that have been cosmetically altered to avoid the ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2702.IH] 24 . To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide that the firearms prohibitions applicable by reason of a domestic violence misdemeanor conviction do not apply if the conviction occurred... (Introduced in the House)[H.R.26.IH] 25 . To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to increase the maximum term of imprisonment for offenses involving stolen firearms. (Introduced in the Senate)[S.992.IS] 26 . To provide that the firearms prohibitions applicable by reason of a domestic violence misdemeanor conviction do not apply to government entities. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.445.IH] 27 . Real Cost of Destructive Ammunition Act (Introduced in the Senate)[S.133.IS] 28 . To provide for increased mandatory minimum sentences for criminals possessing firearms, and for other purposes. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.424.IH] 29 . Stop Arming Felons (SAFe) Act (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1228.IH] 30 . Firearm Child Safety Lock Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1044.IH] 31 . Expressing the sense of the Congress that State and local governments should be encouraged, and have the right, to pass laws and ordinances designed to preserve and protect the safety... (Introduced in the House)[H.CON.RES.70.IH] 32 . Firearm Child Safety Lock Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1074.IH] 33 . Gun Safety Act (Introduced in the House)[H.R.116.IH] 34 . To require the national instant criminal background check system to be established and used in connection with firearms transfers by November 28, 1997. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.102.IH] 35 . To provide for increased mandatory minimum sentences for criminals possessing firearms, and for other purposes. (Reported in the House)[H.R.424.RH] 36 . Twelve is Enough Anti-Gunrunning Act (Introduced in the House)[H.R.12.IH] 37 . Anti-Gun Trafficking Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.466.IS] 38 . Brady Voluntary Compliance Act (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2935.IH] 39 . To reform criminal procedure, and for other purposes. (Introduced in the Senate)[S.168.IS] 40 . To provide for increased mandatory minimum sentences for criminals possessing firearms, and for other purposes. (Passed by the House)[H.R.424.EH] 41 . Violent Crime Control Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.135.IS] 42 . Public Health and Safety Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.787.IH] 43 . Violent Crime Reduction Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.136.IS] 44 . Gun Kingpin Death Penalty Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.796.IS] 45 . Ammunition Safety Act of 1997 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.1349.IH] 46 . Ammunition Safety Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.553.IS] 47 . Federal Gang Violence Act (Introduced in the Senate)[S.54.IS] 48 . Crime Identification Technology Act of 1998 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.2022.IS] 49 . Nuclear Regulatory Commission Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.3532.IH] 50 . Anti-Gang and Youth Violence Act of 1997 (Introduced in the Senate)[S.362.IS] [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: Congressional pay raise (fwd) Date: 02 Jun 1998 09:40:16 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Congressional Reform Briefings=09=09=09=09June 2, 1998 to subscribe to Congressional Reform Briefings send the message: subscribe cong-reform your name to listproc@essential.org -- Groups Send Letter Opposing Congressional Pay Raise =09A coalition opposing a congressional pay raise sent a letter today to House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-MO). The letter follows: Dear Speaker Gingrich and Minority Leader Gephardt: =09We are writing to oppose yet another congressional pay raise. =20 =09 Taxpayers grow angry when elected officials enrich themselves at public expense. Five months ago, Members of Congress received a generous $3,072 raise. You do not need another. Members of Congress are already paid a regal $136,672 annual salary, plus pensions, perks, and other benefits. =20 =09The American people want leadership by example. They want you to adopt self-restraint and self-discipline to serve the public good. =09Instead, you have given yourselves pay raise after pay raise against the wishes of the American people, who wanted you to have humbler salaries. During the last ten years, House Members gave themselves five pay raises, Senators six. Congressional salaries grew by $47,172 -- about $11,000 above inflation. =09Most Americans have been less fortunate. Many haven't enjoyed a real wage increase in more than a generation. Average private hourly earnings were higher in 1968 =96 30 years ago =96 than they are today, adjusted for inflation.=20 =09Our country is deep in debt. The federal debt is over $5.5 trillion.=20 As a debtor nation, we cannot afford to waste our money on frivolity. =09This is an arrogant, greedy, corrupt affront to the American taxpayers. It will undercut your moral authority to govern. We ask you to publicly reject this pay raise. =09=09=09=09=09=09 =09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09=09Sincerely, Ralph Nader Gary Ruskin, Director, Congressional Accountability Project=09=09 Paul Jacob, Executive Director, U. S. Term Limits Thomas A. Schatz, President, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste Russell Verney, Chairman, Reform Party, and Executive Director, United We Stand America Paul M. Weyrich, President, Free Congress Foundation Ralph DeGennaro, Executive Director, Taxpayers for Common Sense Steve Dasbach, National Chairman, Libertarian Party Following is an article from the June 1, 1998 edition of Roll Call , a Capitol Hill newspaper. Reprinted with permission. =20 Gingrich Pushes for Another Pay Boost Second Straight COLA Could Push Member Salaries Over $140,000 Per Year=20 By Francesca Contiguglia=09=09=09=09=09=09 =20 Opposition has already started to mount to House Speaker Newt Gingrich's (R-Ga) call to give another cost-of-living adjustment to Members, who received a $3,073 pay boost last year. =20 During a closed-door meeting before the Memorial Day recess, Gingrich brought up the subject of a COLA with Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo), according to aides. Both sides are planning to discuss the potential ramifications of introducing such a measure in an election year, though it would not take effect until next January. =20 One Democratic leadership aide said the Minority Leader would probably not oppose debate on the issue. "His main concern is that it is done in the open" with a vote, said the aide. =20 It's unclear exactly how big the COLA would be. Last September, Congress passed a 2.3 percent COLA for Members, the first adjustment since 1993, even though it appeared to be a dead issue just a few months before. The increase of $3,073 brought Congressional salaries to $136,700. =20 Although the recess prevented any movement on Gingrich's suggestion, which was first reported by the Associated Press, opponents are already gearing up for the fight. =20 Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project has already circulated a letter opposing the measure, and he is urging voters to contact their Representatives to tell them they don't need a raise. =20 "Speaker Gingrich is trying to take advantage of the taxpayers again, and hopefully his colleagues won't follow," said Ruskin, who claimed that Members want "to live like kings." =20 Since Republicans have been accused of running a "do-nothing Congress," Ruskin said that "less work for more pay" seems to be the institution's motto this year. =20 Ruskin added that most Americans have not received a raise in 30 years, saying that average private hourly earnings 30 years ago, when adjusted for inflation, exceed today's average. "The point is most Americans haven't been as fortunate as Congress," he said. =20 And Members are beginning to respond as well. Rep. Phil English (R-Pa) said last week that he opposes the COLA and noted that he refused to take the raise that took effect Jan. 1. =20 And while Rep. Mark Neumann (R-Wis) thinks a COLA would pass this year, he vowed in an interview to oppose it. =20 "Service to our country is not about money, it's about the good of the country," said Neumann, who is the likely Republican challenger to Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis) in November. "You should go back to the private sector if you're here about money." =20 Neumann acknowledged that a Congressional pay raise has the potential to become a hot election-year issue, but said, "The facts are that in Washington, only a few seats are contested.... So a lot of people in safe seats will vote for more money." =20 But Congressional aides on both sides of the aisle stressed that the COLA is far from a done deal. "It's in the embryo stage," said a House GOP aide. =20 A Democratic staffer agreed, saying, "I don't think this is the first thing" on the mind of top leaders. "People will talk to other people, but nothing immediate will happen." =20 The Democratic aide said there has been no follow-up to the leaders' meeting and that Gephardt has not yet spoken to any of his colleagues about the issue and is not planning to discuss the issue in the near future. =20 A Republican aide suggested that leadership is learning from its past mistakes and talking to Members before moving ahead with the measure. =20 Several Members were upset about the measure last year, not necessarily because they disagreed with it but because it was brought to the floor without warning. "What are we supposed to do, sit by the desk every minute of the day to see what the leadership is trying to pull?" Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind) said at the time (Roll Call, Sept. 22, 1997). =20 How much Congress might give itself this year is not yet known. Under a law passed in 1989, Members of Congress are entitled to a COLA equal to the base salary pay boost received by federal workers. This adjustment happens automatically unless it is reversed. =20 President Clinton, in his budget request for fiscal 1999, has called for an overall increase of 3.1 percent. That would raise Congressional salaries by $4,237, bringing them up to $140,937. =20 An increase of the current salary by 2.6 percent -- which takes out an additional adjustment known as a locality pay, to which Members are not entitled -- would increase Member pay to $140,254 per year. =20 Copyright =A9 1998 Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. =09Please contact your Members of Congress to oppose a congressional pay raise. The congressional switchboard phone number is (202) 224-3121. =20 For congressional e-mail addresses, see the Electronic Activist at . =20 =09The Congressional Accountability Project is a congressional watchdog group affiliated with Ralph Nader. For more information about congressional reform issues or congressional pay and perks, see the Congressional Accountability Project web site at , send e-mail to , or call (202) 296-2787. To subscribe to Congressional Reform Briefings send the message: subscribe cong-reform your name to listproc@essential.org PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY Gary Ruskin | gary@essential.org | Congressional Accountability Project | 1611 Connecticut Ave. NW Suite #3A | Washington, DC 20009 Phone: (202) 296-2787 | Fax (202) 833-2406 http://www.essential.org/orgs/CAP/CAP.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fwd: Poll On Women & Guns (fwd) Date: 02 Jun 1998 10:33:57 PST On Jun 2, C. D. Tavares wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] This announcement really belongs on a national mailing list. All of you women (or women "trapped in men's bodies" at least for today), vote. >Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:57:40 -0400 >From: Jim Gonzalez >Subject: Poll On Women & Guns >To: ma-firearms@world.std.com >Sender: ma-firearms-approval@world.std.com >Precedence: list >Reply-To: ma-firearms@world.std.com > > >From Maxi, an online women's 'zine. > > http://www.maximag.com/poll/ > >For the benefit of those without access, the form looks like this: > > The Jonesboro and Oregon shootings make you think that: > > [] We need to campaign for better family values. > [] We need to reduce violence in TV and video games. > [] Forget the NRA, we need more gun control. > [] It's clearly the testosterone hangups of little boys- little > girls don't seem to be the problem. > [] It's all a bunch of media hype, kids today are no more violent > than they're ever been. > [] The shootings are no big deal. Let's get over it. > > Would you ever carry a gun? > > [] Yes, for self defense. Women should. > [] I already do-- I'm a card carrying NRA member. > [] No way in hell. > > How many online women's zines do you read? > > [] All of 'em > [] 5-10 > [] A few, regularly > [] Only this one > [] This is the first time I've ever read a woman's zine! > >The questions reveal a pronounced bias. > > -Jim. > -- Tavares@alum.mit.edu --If you presume that I speak for my company, users.aol.com/Tavares/ write now for my special Investors' Packet! [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Loose Ends: OKC, Steven Emerson, Hamas & Bin Laden (fwd) Date: 05 Jun 1998 07:48:02 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- --------------------- NOTE ABOUT ATTACHED ARTICLE BELOW: So now the DoJ decides to confirm that threats had been made against Steven Emerson's life.... 'Bout time. =20 For those of you who may not remember, Emerson has long been active exposing foreign terrorist activities and organizations within the United States, some of which have operated with both the knowledge and cooperation of the U.S. Intel Community. It was in November 1994 -- a mere five months before the OKC bombing -- that Steven Emerson's PBS production "Jihad in America" aired on national television, exposing (among other things) a Hamas cell operating in Oklahoma City, with connecting groups in both Stillwater and Tulsa, Oklahoma. After this television production, Emerson testified before a Senate Subcommittee. U.S. Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen from Miami, Florida, told the press that she had notified the FBI of Emerson's testimony. She stated that Emerson had described witnessing a meeting in Oklahoma City attended by 3000 "Islamic fundamentalists." =20 According to Lehtinen's press conference, Emerson had testified that a "militant Islamic leader based in Pakistan," Kamal Kelbawi, had addressed the group, saying, "O brothers, the Palestine cause is not a conflict of borders and land only. It is not even a conflict over human ideology. And not over peace. Rather it is an absolute clash of civilizations, between truth and falsehood, between two conducts: one satanic, headed by Jews and their conspirators; and the other religious, carried by Hamas, the Islamic people in general, and the Islamic movement in particular." Then the Oklahoma City bombing occurred. News reports conclusively established that the FBI's early analysis indicative of what was called "the Middle Eastern terrorist signature," and the judgment of other counterterrorism experts pointed towards foreign responsibility for the Oklahoma City bombing. CBS News reported shortly after the bombing that the FBI had received claims of responsibility for the attack from at least eight organizations. Seven of the claimants were thought to have Hamas connections.=20 Said Steven Emerson, "There is no smoking gun. But the modus operandi and circumstantial evidence leads in the direction of Islamic Terrorism." The FBI's suspicion of an Islamic Jihad connection was further reinforced by a sobering fact: Oklahoma City is probably considered one of the largest centers of Islamic radical activity outside the Middle East.=20 In addition, the United States government has been aware for many years that intelligence agents of foreign nation-states operate in the United States in furtherance of foreign interests against United States citizens. These concerns were brought before Congress in a still classified top secret staff report prepared for the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on International Operations. Portions of this top secret report were made public by the press and published by the Washington Post in 1979. The report analyzes the thorny foreign relations problem concerning illegal actions on the part of foreign intelligence agents against citizens in the United States. The government seeks a balance between enforcing domestic laws, even against foreign intelligence agents, and foreign policy concerns and recriminations against U.S. intelligence agents in other countries. The subcommittee report, according to the Washington Post, examined cases of harassment and surveillance as well as suspected assassination plots against United States citizens by the intelligence agencies of Chile, Iran, the Philippines, the Republic of China (Taiwan), the former Soviet Union, and Yugoslavia. To choose just one example, the Iranian SAVAK, at the peak its influence under the Shah, had at least 13 full-time case officers running a network of informers and infiltration covering 30,000 Iranian students on United States college campuses. The head of the SAVAK agents in the United States operated under the cover of an attach=E9 at the Iranian Mission to the United Nations, with the FBI, CIA, and State Department FULLY AWARE of these activities. Thus, the presence of foreign intelligence operatives in the United States is a fact of international foreign policy and for such operatives to carry out the policies of their foreign sponsors is not unusual.=20 Steven Emerson -- for his continued exposure of foreign terrorists and terrorist organizations operating in the United States, and particularly for his information pertaining to foreign terrorist involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing, has earned a standing death threat from Hamas and its sub-groups... a situation which the Department of Justice has, until today, denied. THOSE THREATS BEGAN IN 1995 when Emerson publicly exposed the connections between the OKC bombing and the OKC/Philippine/Pakistani/Hamas terrorist groups. Those threats have continued to the present day. =20 One more thing: =20 On June 3rd, 1998 - TWO DAYS AGO - the U.S. State Department advised Americans to use caution when traveling in and around Saudi Arabia because of threats made last week by Osama Bin Laden, long identified as a major financier of Hamas terrorism on a global scale.=20 In February, 1995, United States authority named Osama bin Laden among 172 unindicted co-conspirators with the eleven (11) Muslims charged for the World Trade Center bombing and the associated plot to blow up other New York landmarks. Bin Laden has long been a major financial backer of the Abu Sayyaf, (sometimes known as the Philippine Liberation Army, a subgroup of the Palestine Liberation Army), with intimate ties to Hamas in the Middle East, the United States, and Pakistan. Abdullah Hakim Murad, a member of Bin Laden's Hamas group in the Philippines (led by Ramzi Yousef), while on trial in New York City for conspiracy to blow up American airliners, readily admitted to a prison guard that he was a member of the Liberation Army, and that the Liberation Army was responsible for the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma Cit= y.=20 The prison guard had asked Hakim Murad what he thought about the bombing when it was reported on the radio, and, according to an FBI 302, Murad responded to the guard's question by stating that the Liberation Army (Hamas) was responsible for the bombing in OKC. Murad also confirmed this in writing. Specifically, the prison guard was asked "What was the identification of Liberation Army referred to by Murad?" He stated, according to the FBI interview notes, "It was the Palestine Liberation Army and/or the Islamic Jihad which Murad was referring to. . . . This army is associated with Hamas and based in Lebanon."=20 NOW YOU TELL ME: Why did the Justice Department wait until the date of Nichols' sentencing to publicly admit that Emerson's information has been correct, that his exposure of state-sponsored terrorism in the United States has been accurate? And if it had not been accurate, why would anyone bother killing him? Does anybody want to know what evidence exists to connect Terry Nichols to the Abu Sayyaf (PLO/Hamas) group in the Philippines? There's plenty of it. The FBI knows. The CIA knows. The State Department knows. The Department of Justice knows. Judge Matsch knows. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals knows. Why doesn't the American public know?=20 =2E..Oh.... I forgot. It doesn't matter now. Nichols was sentenced to life in prison today so it's all over. We can forget about it. We don't need to study it. And if enough times passes, we will forget all of this information. And when another incident of state-sponsored terrorism occurs in the United States, we'll all scratch our heads and say, "Hmmm... seems like I vaguely remember something...." Source: PR Newswire Setting the Record Straight: Terrorism Expert Steven Emerson's Statements In Senate Testimony Backed up by U.S. Justice Department=20 WASHINGTON, June 4 /PRNewswire/ -- The following release was issued by the International Association of Counterterrorism and Security Professional= s: The U.S. Department of Justice confirms that Federal law enforcement authorities discovered a threat to investigative journalist Steven Emerson's life in 1995. In a June 1, 1998 letter to the editor of the Tampa-based Weekly Planet, Justice Department Public Affairs Director Bert Brandenburg corrected comments attributed to Department spokesman John Russell by Weekly Planet journalist John Sugg. Sugg quoted Russell as contradicting Emerson's statement in his February 1998 Senate testimony that he was the target of a radical Islamic hit squad. Mr. Brandenburg wrote, "... we have checked with the FBI and determined that the FBI did in fact receive information concerning a threat in 1995 and that they so advised Mr. Emerson of the danger to his life. Mr. Russell conveyed the information he had, but we do regret that his answer turned out to be inaccurate." Brandenburg continued: "In response to the reporter's queries, Russell also recalls noting that his ignorance of Mr. Emerson's financial wherewithal made Emerson seem an enigma. Although Mr. Russell may have erroneously suggested that Mr. Emerson lives a lavish lifestyle, the Justice Department has no reason to believe that such a conclusion is true.= " Using the Weekly Planet article as evidence of Emerson's "misstatements," the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called for an investigation into his testimony. This attack is part of CAIR's effort to discredit those who expose radical Islamic links in the United States. Former FBI Assistant Director and Chief of the Counterterrorism section, Steven Pomerantz, wrote about CAIR in a special report on radical Islamic groups in the Spring 1998 issue of The Journal of Counterterrorism and Security International. According to Pomerantz, "The modus operandi of CAIR has been to falsely tar as 'anti-Muslim' the US government, counter-terrorist officials, writers, journalists and others who have investigated or exposed the threat of Middle East based terrorism. In particular, CAIR has targeted Steven Emerson, the producer of 'Jihad in America' and someone I, and many others in the counter-terrorist community, consider to be among the foremost experts on Middle East terrorist groups operating in the United States." Pomerantz also wrote, "CAIR has defended individuals involved in terrorist violence, including Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzouk, and has embraced people who have engaged in promoting violence or hateful and bigoted rhetoric."=20 A look at CAIR's roots help illustrate its radical links. Prior to becoming CAIR's Executive Director, Nihad Awad, was the editor of The Muslim World Monitor, a publication of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP). Speaking at a March 22, 1994 panel discussion at Barry University in Florida while at IAP, Awad stated, "I am in support of the Hamas movement..= =2E." Writing in the March 1995 Middle East Quarterly, former FBI Assistant Director and Head of FBI Investigations, Oliver "Buck" Revell stated: "Numerous front groups supporting Hamas have been established in the United States and several collect funds as tax exempt 501(c)(3) organizations... The Islamic Association of Palestine... is one such organization." According to an April 8, 1996 Dallas Morning News article, IAP has reprinted the Hamas charter, which calls for the killing of Jews, praised Hamas in its publications, and produced Hamas videos. Steven Pomerantz's article will be available on the Web site Friday, June 5, 1998. The Web address is http://www.securitynet.net. SOURCE International Association of Counterterrorism and Security Professionals CONTACT: Gary Skulnik of the International Association of Counterterrorism and Security Professionals, 703-761-6708, or e-mail, terrornewswire@hotmail.com NOTE TO EDITORS: For additional information and/or copies of the Justice Department letter or the other articles cited above, please call the contact below. Web Site: http://www.securitynet.net =A91998 PR Newswire.=20 ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.=20 ----------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: Fratrum: Authentication? Full text attached of EO (fwd) Date: 05 Jun 1998 11:37:00 PST On Jun 5, CHURSEY@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] This is the full text of the Executive Order in Question, found at the url that Ed supplied. Cliff White House Press Release FEDERALISM THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary (Birmingham, England) ________________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release May 14, 1998 EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - FEDERALISM By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to guarantee the division of governmental responsibilities, embodied in the Constitution, between the Federal Government and the States that was intended by the Framers and application of those principles by the Executive departments and agencies in the formulation and implementation of policies, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) "State" or "States" refer to the States of the United States of America, individually or collectively, and, where relevant, to State governments, including units of local government and other political subdivisions established by the States. (b) "Policies that have federalism implications" refers to Federal regulations, proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects on the States or on the relationship, or the distribution of power and responsibilities, between the Federal Government and the States. (c) "Agency" means any authority of the United States that is an "agency" under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5). Sec. 2. Fundamental Federalism Principles. In formulating and implementing policies that have federalism implications, agencies shall be guided by the following fundamental federalism principles: (a) The structure of government established by the Constitution is premised upon a system of checks and balances. (b) The Constitution created a Federal Government of supreme, but limited, powers. The sovereign powers not granted to the Federal Government are reserved to the people or to the States, unless prohibited to the States by the Constitution. (c) Federalism reflects the principle that dividing power between the Federal Government and the States serves to protect individual liberty. Preserving State authority provides an essential balance to the power of the Federal Government, while preserving the supremacy of Federal law provides an essential balance to the power of the States. (d) The people of the States are at liberty, subject only to the limitations in the Constitution itself or in Federal law, to define the moral, political, and legal character of their lives. (e) Our constitutional system encourages a healthy diversity in the public policies adopted by the people of the several States according to their own conditions, needs, and desires. States and local governments are often uniquely situated to discern the sentiments of the people and to govern accordingly. (f) Effective public policy is often achieved when there is competition among the several States in the fashioning of different approaches to public policy issues. The search for enlightened public policy is often furthered when individual States and local governments are free to experiment with a variety of approaches to public issues. Uniform, national approaches to public policy problems can inhibit the creation of effective solutions to those problems. (g) Policies of the Federal Government should recognize the responsibility of -- and should encourage opportunities for -- States, local governments, private associations, neighborhoods, families, and individuals to achieve personal, social, environmental, and economic objectives through cooperative effort. Sec. 3. Federalism Policymaking Criteria. In addition to adhering to the fundamental federalism principles set forth in section 2 of this order, agencies shall adhere, to the extent permitted by law, to the following criteria when formulating and implementing policies that have federalism implications: (a) There should be strict adherence to constitutional principles. Agencies should closely examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any Federal action that would limit the policymaking discretion of States and local governments, and should carefully assess the necessity for such action. (b) Agencies may limit the policymaking discretion of States and local governments only after determining that there is constitutional and legal authority for the action. (c) With respect to Federal statutes and regulations administered by States and local governments, the Federal Government should grant States and local governments the maximum administrative discretion possible. Any Federal oversight of such State and local administration should not unnecessarily intrude on State and local discretion. (d) It is important to recognize the distinction between matters of national or multi-state scope (which may justify Federal action) and matters that are merely common to the States (which may not justify Federal action because individual States, acting individually or together, may effectively deal with them). Matters of national or multi-state scope that justify Federal action may arise in a variety of circumstances, including: (1) When the matter to be addressed by Federal action occurs interstate as opposed to being contained within one State's boundaries. (2) When the source of the matter to be addressed occurs in a State different from the State (or States) where a significant amount of the harm occurs. (3) When there is a need for uniform national standards. (4) When decentralization increases the costs of government thus imposing additional burdens on the taxpayer. (5) When States have not adequately protected individual rights and liberties. (6) When States would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations because of fears that regulated business activity will relocate to other States. (7) When placing regulatory authority at the State or local level would undermine regulatory goals because high costs or demands for specialized expertise will effectively place the regulatory matter beyond the resources of State authorities. (8) When the matter relates to Federally owned or managed property or natural resources, trust obligations, or international obligations. (9) When the matter to be regulated significantly or uniquely affects Indian tribal governments. Sec. 4. Consultation. (a) Each agency shall have an effective process to permit elected officials and other representatives of State and local governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. (b) To the extent practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any regulation that is not required by statute, that has federalism implications, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on States and local governments, unless: (1) funds necessary to pay the direct costs incurred by the State or local government in complying with the regulation are provided by the Federal Government; or (2) the agency, prior to the formal promulgation of the regulation, (A) in a separately identified portion of the preamble to the regulation as it is to be issued in the Federal Register, provides to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of the agency's prior consultation with representatives of affected States and local governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and the agency's position supporting the need to issue the regulation; and (B) makes available to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget any written communications submitted to the agency by States or local governments. Sec. 5. Increasing Flexibility for State and Local Waivers. (a) Agencies shall review the processes under which States and local governments apply for waivers of statutory and regulatory requirements and take appropriate steps to streamline those processes. (b) Each agency shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, consider any application by a State or local government for a waiver of statutory or regulatory requirements in connection with any program administered by that agency with a general view toward increasing opportunities for utilizing flexible policy approaches at the State or local level in cases in which the proposed waiver is consistent with applicable Federal policy objectives and is otherwise appropriate. (c) Each agency shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, render a decision upon a complete application for a waiver within 120 days of receipt of such application by the agency. If the application for a waiver is not granted, the agency shall provide the applicant with timely written notice of the decision and the reasons therefor. (d) This section applies only to statutory or regulatory requirements that are discretionary and subject to waiver by the agency. Sec. 6. Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order. Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person. (b) This order shall supplement but not supersede the requirements contained in Executive Order 12866 ("Regulatory Planning and Review"), Executive Order 12988 ("Civil Justice Reform"), and OMB Circular A-19. (c) Executive Order 12612 of October 26, 1987, and Executive Order 12875 of October 26, 1993, are revoked. (d) The consultation and waiver provisions in sections 4 and 5 of this order shall complement the Executive order entitled, "Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments," being issued on this day. (e) This order shall be effective 90 days after the date of this order. WILLIAM J. CLINTON THE WHITE HOUSE, May 14, 1998. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #88 (fwd) Date: 07 Jun 1998 09:23:35 PST On Jun 07, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Heads Up A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia June 7, 1998 #88 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net Previous Editions at: http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/list-hu.htm and http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html CLINTON GOES TO CHINA As the suspect-in-chief flies off to continue relations with his second most famous campaign contributor, Clinton may be about to learn a new political word: Blackmail. Communist China's President Jiang Zemin sees Santa Claus coming in the form of Bill Clinton. But, in this case it's Jiang who's making a list and checking it twice. And a very expensive list it will be. For instance, Jiang has already said he will seek a pledge from Clinton that the U.S. will not interfere with Red China's dealings with Taiwan. Red China wants Taiwan back in the communist fold. Soon. And now they have a military strong enough to force that -- as long as we stay out of it. And, evidently, the Clinton Administration will. Last week, the South China Morning Post reported Jiang as saying: "The US side has very clearly pledged not to support . . . the independence of Taiwan or its re-admittance into international organizations." And sure enough, word is that White House aides have already started indicating informally that Washington does not support Taiwanese independence or its re-entry into the UN. So, what's the quid pro quo here? What will Clinton get in return for giving up Taiwan to communist dictators? China will not give Clinton up, that's what. We already know that one laundering route for illegal Chinese campaign funds the Democratic National Committee accepted ran through Ted Sioeng of Indonesia. Sioeng, an operative of the world's largest producer of cigarettes -- Pagoda Red Mountain, which is a Chinese government-owned tobacco company -- ponied up at least $400,000 in illegal funds. The Senate hearing report says that Ted Sioeng "worked, and perhaps still works, on behalf of the Chinese government," and that $200,000 of the $400,000 given to the Democrats by Sioeng and his family was directly "funded by transfer from overseas accounts." Ted Sioeng just happens to be a close friend of Mochtar and James Riady, who own the infamous Lippo Group. Both Riadys are friends of Clinton from the Arkansas days. They are also, interestingly enough, partners with the communist Chinese military in at least two major ventures. So, the Riadys felt confident to help by acting as go between for at least that $400,000 contribution. And, as of now, the Riadys and Sioeng are all suspected of serving as intelligence agents for Beijing. Cozy, isn't it? So, if Clinton does not give up Taiwan, it would be very easy for the communist Chinese government to give up Clinton. There's more, though. A lot more. Already indicted for money laundering Chinese funds to the Democratic National Committee campaign war- chest are Johnny Chung, Maria Hsia and Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie. Conveniently, while James Riady lived in California, he had close ties with Maria Hsia -- who is best remembered for laundering money in conjunction with Al Gore at the California Hsi Lai Temple fund-raiser. Hsia has also worked for a People's Republic of China diplomatic post in the U.S. Riady saw contributions to U.S. political campaigns as a way of advancing his family's Asian business concerns. Huang served as Riady's lieutenant for political matters and Hsia provided Riady and Huang with access to Democratic politicians -- a number of Democratic politicians over the years. The Buddhist temple proved to be a ready cash cow for campaign funds that they milked often. That was all quite illegal, of course. But, there was Al Gore anyway. Johnny Chung is now in the news for admitting that he received $300,000 from Red Chinese Army Colonel Liu Chao-ying, who also happens to be an executive with a Chinese government owned aerospace company. Her father was China's chief general, and a member of the politburo. He wanted American technology. Chung introduced Liu to Clinton at a California fund-raiser. Charlie Trie, of course, is another Arkansas friend of Bill. Trie, along with his good buddies John Huang and Johnny Chung, were responsible for contributing at least $2.2 million in illegal campaign contributions, much of it coming from foreign businessmen with strong ties to the government of Communist China. Friend of Bill, John Huang, was the head of U.S. operations for the Riady's Lippo Group before Clinton installed him as a mid-level Commerce Department official. Huang was said to enjoy extraordinary access to Clinton. And as part of the Commerce Department, he attended dozens of briefings and was privy to all types of classified information -- all along maintaining close ties to the Lippo Group. Along with Maria Hsia, Huang set up the fund-raiser at the Hsi Lai Temple near Los Angeles, where they laundered $140,000 in illegal campaign funds with Al Gore. The Riadys have been friends and supporters of Clinton since his days as Arkansas governor. At the same time, as the Thompson Senate Governmental Affairs Committee report on campaign finance abuses states, the Riadys: "have had a long-term relationship with a Chinese intelligence agency." Yeah. And as always happens when a number of government officials are involved in wrongdoing, the specific intelligence information on which the report's conclusions are based are said to be withheld from the document 'to protect sources and methods' used to gather it. In other words, the dirt was swept under that huge carpet of "national security" so the voters will not learn exactly how filthy some in government actually are. The FBI and CIA have agreed on a watered down report, but the Justice Department does not want even that released to the American public. However, we did learn that the Riadys relationship with Chinese intelligence is primarily "based on business interests." Which means that the Riadys trade communist Chinese assistance for business opportunities "in exchange for large sums of money and other help," like spying and compromising politicians. Just as an aside here: If this very same scenario had happened back in the 1960's with agents of the Soviet Union involved, rather than communist Chinese agents as are today, dozens of Americans and Russians would still be buried deep in some federal prison. Yet today, the Department of Justice performs a slip-shod investigation only including the periphery players, no one is in prison, and no elected officials are under investigation. And, to date, Janet Reno refuses to appoint an independent counsel for this matter. Knowing all this, and knowing that Communist China's President Jiang Zemin knows all this as well as the activities of a couple dozen other Chinese nationals involved in campaign money laundering, Clinton goes to China. Therefore, expect the whole of the Chinese wish list to be filled. -- For more information, visit the Senate campaign finance report at: http://www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/sireport.htm PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Over the past two years we have pointed out numerous inconsistencies between the "original intent" of the authors of our Constitution and the actions of today's central government. Even when we consider that the "shall nots" in the Constitution have been interpreted down to "maybe nots," there are still gross inconstancies between the written text and the actions of government. This makes understanding the law of the land very difficult for the average American citizen, and needs to be corrected. Over the years we, along with thousands of others, have asked numerous elected officials why they do not obey the Constitution, and have never received an adequate reply. The fact is, were government to follow the Constitution to the letter, 90 or more regulatory agencies would instantly disappear, hundreds of federal programs would end, and the central government would lose much of it's power over the American people and State and local governments. Therefore, those in Washington have no intention of ever again obeying the Constitution. And, unless we the people are ready for civil war, we may as well quit asking. That being said, perhaps we should take another approach. Below are proposals for a few simple amendments to the Constitution of the United States. These amendments would go far in adjusting our Constitution to better reflect the way today's central government is actually operated. Towards that end, we suggest that all readers copy this text and send it to their three Members of Congress: ** Congress shall take careful notice of the limits on legislative authority enumerated in the Constitution, except that Congress may also legislate on those matters it determines could or would help a segment of the American people. ** The right of the people to move about in society and function as they please unimpeded by police shall not be violated, except at airports and other public areas where police feel the necessity to stop and search citizens. ** Certain controls being immediately necessary to the internal control of the people of the United States, the President may unilaterally legislate instantly by executive order. ** The timely collection of tax moneys being necessary for the efficient operation of the central government, the safeguards guaranteed the people by the Constitution shall not apply to tax collectors. ** State and local governments being incompetent in the stewardship of their regional areas, all land management shall be controlled by the central government. ** A well organized state requiring that crimes against government be enforced to the fullest extent of the law, government shall always brandish arms superior to those allowed the people. ** The expediency of the police being necessary to a perfectly controlled society, a well armed paramilitary standing federal police force shall be maintained. ** Technical issues requiring control being above the competency of Members of Congress, the executive regulatory agencies shall unilaterally legislate in the form of rules and regulations. ** Government agents shall respect the Constitutional rights of all citizens equally, except in those matters where legislation or regulation or executive orders have suspended or altered specific Constitutional rights. ** Challenging candidates being difficult to beat in a fair election, the incumbent shall be authorized to accept campaign contributions from those with business before government. ** The restraints of the Constitution impeding the investigation of crimes in some circumstances, policing agencies shall unilaterally impose fines in the form of asset forfeiture on suspects not able to be charged with a crime. ** All tax moneys collected shall be used to benefit the citizens of these United States, except for that part of the budget the legislative and/or executive branch determines shall be given to foreign governments and/or multinational businesses and organizations. ** The central government shall respect all Constitutional rights in respect to all citizens, except that the President may suspend all or part of the Constitution at any time by emergency executive order. ** The American people being unable to shop intelligently, the central government shall regulate all products and the means of commerce. ** Local school boards having demonstrated an inability to conform to proper education standards, the federal government shall regulate all schools. ** A well regulated citizenry being necessary to the security of the state, the authority of government shall not be questioned. GUNS: ONE ASPECT OF THE PROBLEM In our form of government, it is said that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the United States Supreme Court is the interpreter of that law. Originally, all law enforcement agencies and other departments of government were required to follow the opinions of the Supreme Court as if they were the written text of the Constitution. That system worked rather well until Franklin D. Roosevelt became president. FDR's fights with the Court are legendary, and it is because he ultimately won over the Court that we now have strict central government control of everything. Nevertheless, legally speaking, all departments of government are to honor all Supreme Court opinions. One would think that the legal-eagles at the Justice Department would know this, and they do. However, when Justice does not wish to honor the opinions of the Supreme Court, they just ignore them. A case in point is the Brady Act. Last year in "Printz et al v. U.S." (95-1478, 1997) the Court said that the central government may not require that county sheriffs and other public officials perform background checks to screen purchasers of handguns. "We held in 'New York' [91-543, 1992] that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State's officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the State's officers or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case-by-case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty." That lasted about two weeks. Then the central government, through the Justice Department and the BATF, requested that the Brady checks be completed anyway. And, in most areas of the country, they still are. Now comes the next step in oppressive gun control. The Attorney General announced it in the Federal Register of June 4, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 107) http://www.jya.com/doj060498.txt "The 'Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act' (Brady Act), requires the Attorney General to establish by November 30, 1998, 'a national instant criminal background check system that any [firearms] licensee may contact, by telephone or by other electronic means in addition to the telephone, for information, to be supplied immediately, on whether receipt of a firearm by a prospective transferee would violate section 922 of title 18, United States Code, or State law.' "The United States Department of Justice is publishing a proposed rule for the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to establish policies and procedures for ensuring the privacy and security of this system and to implement a NICS appeals policy for persons who have been denied the purchase of a firearm because of information in the NICS they believe to be erroneous or incorrect. Specifically, this rule will detail policies for validating NICS data, storing, accessing, and querying records in the system, retaining and destroying NICS information, and correcting erroneous data in the system. "Written comments must be received on or before September 2, 1998. "All comments concerning this proposed rule should be mailed to: Mr. Emmet A. Rathbun, NICS Project Manager, Federal Bureau of Investigation, CJIS Division, Module C-3, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306-0147." Telephone number: (304) 625-2000." The problem is, the central government has no Constitutional authority to do this. "U.S. v. Lopez" (93-1260, 1995) was right on target here: "To uphold the Government's contention that [the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990] is justified because firearms possession in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce would require this Court to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional Commerce Clause authority to a general police power of the sort held only by the States." When an object is no longer in interstate commerce, it may not be regulated by the central government. And anyone of reasonable intelligence would quickly realize that your local gun shop is not an interstate commerce concern any more than is the neighborhood restaurant frying up chicken that was purchased from a vender who originally bought them in another state. However, based on past history, we must believe that the Justice Department is serious about these new oppressive rules. When Randy Weaver altered the length of a couple gun barrels about a half-inch shorter then government allows, the Justice Department came to kill him -- and did kill members of his family. And the massacre at Waco was brought about simply because government agents "suspected" the church residents neglected to pay the required $200 tax on weapons they were "thought" to possess. These gun control laws are but an outward sign of the malignancy permeating the central government. When we add willful disobedience of the Constitution and indifference to Court opinions to the mounting evidence of numerous large government concentration camps and the fact that rogue Army and Marine units are practicing attacking American citizens, it appears that we have a serious problem looming. This, in turn, is evidenced by the attitudes expressed in recent statements of the President and Attorney General. Today, they freely, publicly, and without question, label Americans who support our Constitution as anti-government extremists. THE RESULT OF STUPID LAWS You can't help but feel sorry for those kids. I mean, how would you like to be a seven or eight year old kid and moved to a different country, with different customs and a new language? Bummer. Then, how about they tell you that you have to go to school anyway, that it's the law. Worse yet, you know that you're going to stay in the new country, but the teachers teach you in the old- country's language anyway. That's got to be scary. Damn stupid, too. As a child growing up in the old neighborhood, most neighbors spoke a language other than English. It was Polish next door and with most of my friends. At the little market on the corner, it was Italian. One friend stumbling with English was from Germany, another was from the French area of Canada. We had a number of Russians around and even a family from Turkey. But, in school, we all -- no matter what nationality our parents were -- struggled to diagram those very same complex sentences in English. No student ever got a break on that. I can still remember the teacher's words when once there was a minor protest: "You are here. You will learn proper English." And so we did. So, by 12 years old, we all had a working command of the English language. Not perfect, of course -- we were still kids, after all. But every kid in the neighborhood knew all the words to at least a dozen patriotic songs and the Fats Domino, Bill Haley and Elvis songs. And there were no accents to be heard among the young teen set. We took pride in that. Better yet, when the next wave of immigrants came they were encouraged to learn English even faster. It was the same with prayer in school. We did it. Every day. Just after the Pledge of Allegiance. We all had to say the words to the Pledge of Allegiance, and we took turns leading the class for that. But no one even had to say the words to a prayer if they didn't wish. Everyone was expected, however, to stand and bow their head. That prayer was never a problem for any of us because there was an accepted rendition that (we thought) was used by all. That is, till a substitute teacher said it differently one day. We laughed. But, that turned out to be a good thing, too. Kids asked questions of parents, priests, ministers and rabbis. And, from that we learned new things about other people. I guess the point of all this is to relate that once upon a time there was a better way. Government schools were actually local school board and PTA run schools that supported the neighborhood. When someone wanted to bow their head and say Grace at lunch, the polite response from those of us who did not say Grace very often was to stop eating and respect their moment. This everyone did -- as long as the person saying Grace didn't take too long about it. And even when the Jewish kids did something differently, no one ever said anything because every Polish and Russian kid in the neighborhood knew all about the Warsaw Ghetto. It took government to change this relationship. Generally, when I was a kid, if you spoke a language other than English in front of people who could not understand what you were saying, someone might smack you up-side the head for being impolite. However, if you bothered someone's religion, getting smacked was probably a sure thing. That was called meanness, and not tolerated. I took government meddling to change that. When I was a young adult traveling, they called people visiting a foreign country the ugly Americans when they could not speak the language. Today, people from those very same countries come here and refuse to learn English. So I ask: What shall we call them? If we are to keep an English speaking country, all government business must be conducted in English only. That includes the issuing of all licenses, voting, and especially teaching in government schools -- extracurricular tutoring excepted. And, if we are to keep a country with freedom of religion, government must not even comment on the issue. Else, we have some sort of hybrid. Hundreds of students of many nationalities still remember Mrs. Sharon's English class, Mr. Gazley's American government class and our Principal, Mrs. O'Hara, leading a prayer and enforcing discipline with a stern kindness not often found lately. There was no need for them to be our nationality or religion. That was not important to anyone. It was simply because they were outstanding teachers that everyone prospered. Times have changed, but not for the best. -- End -- [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Another Poll (fwd) Date: 07 Jun 1998 12:19:34 PST On Jun 07, Ronald W. Hambrick wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Here's another poll we ought to concentrate on: http://www.worldnet.att.net/poll/survey.html [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Gun Violence Prevention Act--Brady II (fwd) Date: 07 Jun 1998 23:39:15 PST On Jun 8, R.J.K. wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTHY TO INTRODUCE COMPREHENSIVE LEGISLATION TO KEEP FIREARMS OUT OF THE HANDS OF CHILDREN At a press conference on Wednesday, May 6, 1998, Sarah Brady and Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY-4) were joined by four mothers who have lost a child to gun violence. At that time, Representative McCarthy announced that she will be introducing, in the next few weeks, a comprehensive piece of legislation that will address all areas of concern about children's access to firearms. This legislation will be introduced in mid-June. Please call your Representative and demand that he/she denounce this draconian legislation. The Gun Violence Prevention Act--Brady II Brady II is a comprehensive approach to enacting gun confiscation. Brady II will stem the flow of guns and ammunition by: a) Requiring the licensing of handgun owners and the registration of all handgun transfers, including private sales; b) Limiting handgun purchases to one per month; c) Strengthening the dealer licensing system so that "kitchen table" dealers will be put out of business; d) Requiring that ammunition be sold only through licensed dealers, and that it only be sold to license holders; and e) Requiring that licensed dealers sell only at their place of business--thereby reducing the number of guns sold at gun shows. Brady II will deter possession of guns by high-risk persons by: a) Adding new categories of prohibited buyers--convicted spouse and child abusers; b) Prohibiting transfer of handguns to and possession by minors under the age of 21 and maybe up to 24; c) Imposing criminal penalties on gun owners who leave guns accessible to children under the age of 16; d) Making it more difficult for convicted felons to legally own a gun; e) Requiring an arsenal license for those who are stockpiling guns and ammunition. Brady II will prevent unintentional shootings by: a) Requiring safety training as a condition of receiving a license; b) Holding parents responsible for proper storage of their weapons--and holding them liable when they do not; and c) Requiring gun manufacturers to install certain safety features in every gun--including load indicators and magazine safeties. Brady II will restrict the distribution of guns and ammunition designed for crime by: a) Prohibiting the low-quality, easily concealable handguns known as Saturday Night Specials, the gun most often used in crime; and b) Halting the sale and manufacture of non-sporting ammunition, like the "Dragon's breath" bullet, and large caliber bullets. Brady II will strengthen enforcement of existing federal laws by: a) Allowing gun violence victims to sue gun law violators in federal court for damages caused by gun dealers selling guns to prohibited buyers; b) Requiring registration of handgun transfers so that traces of guns used in crime will no longer result in dead ends; c) Closing the loophole that allows the unregulated sale of firearm parts; and d) Requiring common carriers to check a dealer's license before delivery. Licenses (or permits, as they are often called) are issued by governments for purposes of regulating the transfer or possession of a handgun or firearm. License or permit holders may be issued a simple permit or a card, similar to a driver's license, which contains a picture ID and other identifying data, including address and date-of-birth. The license may be generally applicable to all handguns or firearms or may be limited to a specific gun. Licenses may be issued for life or for a limited period ((e.g. 2 years (both subject to revocation)). Licensing requirements may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. They may include such things as age limitations; proof of residency (which stops buyers and gunrunners from going interstate); fingerprint identification; a firearms safety test or course; and a criminal and/or mental health background check(s). The length of time required to obtain a license may vary. Licensing also makes it possible to regulate private or secondary transfers of handguns or firearms. The licensing requirement of Brady II ensures that even private purchasers will be subject to a background check, and that those who sell handguns to unlicensed individuals are breaking federal law. Gun owners, will be required to record any subsequent sale of the gun. Under Brady II, any person selling a handgun without recording and reporting the sale will be subject to prosecution. Registration is just the first step towards confiscation. Today, eleven states provide for the registration of handguns or firearms: Hawaii North Carolina Maryland Oregon Michigan Pennsylvania Mississippi South Carolina New Hampshire Washington New York These laws may prevent law-abiding citizens from having access to guns and there could be an attempt to disarm residents in these states or the united States with full registration if the president declares it. Registration applies to a specific handgun or firearm. Registration will require owners of handguns or firearms register them by serial number and description with local and/or state police. Registration, will not be limited to the registering of handgun or firearm transfers. Under this stricter approach, handguns or firearms are registered when they are sold or otherwise transferred. Information on the sale or transfer, including the name and address of the purchaser, is sent to local or state police by the dealer (if done through a gun store) or by the individual seller. The required registration of all handgun transfers, together with full licensing, will make it possible to identify and prosecute those who illegally sell or transfer guns to criminals, youth and other prohibited purchasers. Requiring the registration of secondary transfers allows for faster tracing of weapons used in crimes and puts "straw purchasers" and illegal gun dealers at risk of criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits for selling guns to prohibited purchasers. Brady II raises the fee (presently $200 for 3 years) for Federal Firearms Licenses (FFLs) to $1,000 per year--an increase that would reduce substantially the number of FFLs while giving the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) the additional resources needed to adequately regulate gun dealers. Today there are only 240 ATF inspectors to monitor the activities of more than 280,000 federally-licensed gun dealers. Brady II also imposes stricter requirements on gun dealers. Dealers would be required to: 1) make all sales from their licensed business premise, stopping the sales from car trunks and "kitchen tables;" and 2) carry liability insurance to cover damages resulting from the wrongful or negligent transfer of a handgun. Brady II will reduce citizens from buying or possessing firearms. It will require the buyer of a handgun to get a license, pass a safety test, and record any subsequent sale, but that's no different or burdensome than what we ask of those who want to drive a car. This will keep guns out of the hands of children, convicted felons and those who have a history of domestic violence. Look at what we have done over the past twenty-five years to reduce automobile deaths. We tightened up the licensing requirements for drivers. We built safer cars and safer highways. And we prosecuted drunk drivers. As a result, the auto fatality rate dropped by 36 percent. And we can do the same thing with firearms. We can license gun purchasers, we can build safer guns, and we can vigorously prosecute those who illegally sell guns to children and criminals. And that will save lives. These minimum standards do not stop states from maintaining or establishing stricter standards or requirements. This is how each state measures up, according to Handgun Control, Inc. Each state was carefully rated both for the existence of five types of legislation that protect children from guns, and also for the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of that legislation. The five types of legislation include: 1) Carrying Concealed Weapons law 2) Juvenile Handgun Possession law 3) Juvenile Handgun Sale/Transfer Prohibition law 4) Child access prevention law 5) "Local Rights" law, or "Preemption" Alabama -- D Alaska -- D-minus Arizona -- D Arkansas -- D California -- B Colorado -- C Connecticut -- B Delaware - C Florida -- C-minus Georgia -- D Hawaii -- B-minus Idaho -- D Illinois -- B Indiana -- D Iowa -- B-minus Kansas -- B-minus Kentucky -- F Louisiana -- F Maine -- D Maryland -- B-minus Massachusetts -- B+ Michigan -- D+ Minnesota -- C Mississippi -- D Missouri -- C Montana -- F Nebraska -- B-minus Nevada -- D+ New Hampshire -- D+ New Jersey -- B New Mexico -- C New York - C North Carolina -- C-minus North Dakota -- D Ohio -- C Oklahoma -- D Oregon - D Pennsylvania -- D Rhode Island -- C South Carolina -- D+ South Dakota -- D Tennessee -- D+ Texas -- D Utah -- D Vermont -- D-minus Virginia -- C Washington -- C-minus West Virginia -- D Wisconsin - C+ Wyoming -- F More information will be available at the website, http://www.handguncontrol.org - - UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES _____________________________________ Laws that forbid the carrying of arms, disarm only those who are incline to obey the law. - [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacques Tucker Subject: Joe Farah on the Second Date: 08 Jun 1998 06:47:01 -0500 Make http://www.worldnetdaily.com your home page, and support Joe Farah and his crew! http://www.worldnetdaily.com/btlines/980608.btl.semi_auto_assau.html ------------------ Monday, June 8, 1998 The semi-automatic assault media The following column was adapted from remarks Farah delivered to the National Rifle Association Convention in Philadelphia yesterday. PHILADELPHIA -- Three months after I took over as editor of the Sacramento Union, then, in 1990, the oldest daily in the West, Howard Kurtz, the media critic of the Washington Post wrote the first column his paper had ever devoted to my paper in its 145-year history. Kurtz's intentions were to sound the alarm on a dangerous development in California's state capital. It seemed a daily newspaper was marching to the beat of its own drummer -- not playing by the rules established in elite and secret conclaves at Columbia University or in studies commissioned by the Gannett Foundation or the Pew Charitable Trusts. One of Kurtz's biggest gripes with me was the fact that I banned the use of the term "assault weapon" from the pages of the Sacramento Union. Instead of this phrase, our reporters and editorial writers would be required to be more precise in their language. Did they mean "semi-automatic weapons"? Did they mean "fully automatic weapons"? Or were they simply referring to guns that looked real mean? What this little anecdote illustrates is that the traditional role of the press as watchdog of government has been stood on its head. Today, the watchdogs of the press are more likely to be guarding their industry's own politically correct mythologies and pathologies. The fact is that the establishment press in this country is constantly bombarding our senses with lies about guns. Even worse is the way it carefully and systematically censors real news that could actually end up saving the lives of Americans. For instance, when was the last time you read a story in your local newspaper or saw a TV news report about someone who used a gun defensively and effectively? I can't remember the last time. Yet, such incidents occur some 2.5 million times a year. How often have you heard this argument against gun ownership? Friends or relatives are the most likely killers -- or, more precisely, 58 percent of murder victims are killed by relatives or acquaintances. According to the broad definition of "acquaintances" used in the FBI's reporting, most victims are, indeed, classified as knowing their killer. However, using such definitions, the FBI includes drug buyers killing drug dealers, cabdrivers killed by first-time customers, gang members killing other gang members, prostitutes killed by their clients, etc. When such non-acquaintance killings are actually taken out of the equation, it turns out only 17 percent of murder victims were either family members, friends, neighbors or roommates. Who's cooking the numbers? And why? The media have also whipped up a lot of hysteria about concealed handgun permits. The perception has been created that, if such permits were made more readily available, there would be shoot-'em-ups at every street corner in America. The fact of the matter is that millions of people already have concealed handgun permits. Yet only one permit holder has ever been arrested for using a concealed handgun after a traffic accident and that case was ruled self-defense. If you believe the major media, you would think that a household gun is more likely to kill you or a member of your family than an intruder. Once again, lies, damn lies and statistics. Overwhelmingly, people killed in their homes are killed by intruder's guns, not their own. No more than 4 percent of gun death victims can be attributed to the homeowner's gun. We hear a lot from the news media about "rights" -- both real and imagined. Yet, one of America's actual, constitutionally guaranteed rights is under assault by the media as never before. The press responds to gun issues in Pavlovian-style, with semi-automatic, rapid-fire disinformation. The government knows better, the media tell us. Individuals can't be trusted to make intelligent and mature decisions about protecting themselves, the press claims. We'd all be a lot safer if there were fewer guns around, they suggest. It makes you wonder: Why is a class of people who make their living under the protections of the First Amendment, so willing to give up our rights under the Second Amendment? ------------------ Joseph Farah is editor of the Internet newspaper WorldNetDaily.com and executive director of the Western Journalism Center, an independent group of investigative reporters. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: More on Steven Emerson (fwd) Date: 08 Jun 1998 07:55:22 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Source: US Newswire Fla. Editor Responds to Supporters of 'Jihad' Journalist U.S. Newswire 5 Jun 13:59 Florida Editor Responds to Supporters of 'Jihad' Journalist To: National Desk, Media Writer Contact: Council on American-Islamic Relations, 202-659-2247 or 202-659-2254 (fax); E-mail: cair1(At)ix.netcom.com URL: http://www.cair-net.org WASHINGTON, June 5 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The editor of a Florida newspaper has responded to claims put forward in a news release issued by colleagues of Steven Emerson, the controversial journalist who produced the 1994 PBS program "Jihad in America." The release, issued by the International Association of Counterterrorism and Security Professionals (IACSP), quoted from a letter by a Justice Department official that purportedly supports recent statements Emerson made in testimony before a February Senate subcommittee hearing on terrorism. (Contact CAIR to receive a copy of the letter.) In that testimony, Emerson claimed "an actual hit team had been dispatched from another country" to assassinate him. He also claimed that law enforcement officials told him he "could get permission to enter the Witness Security Program." In a statement published on the Internet, John Sugg, senior editor of the Miami Weekly Planet newspaper, defended a recent article in which he questioned these claims and made reference to other allegations against Emerson by wire service reporters, a former CIA official and American Muslim groups. (see "Ties to Spies?" -- http://www.cair-net.org/articles/article052098.htm) Referring to the Justice Department letter that Emerson's colleagues and attorney claim supports his subcommittee testimony, Sugg wrote: "As for the alleged death threat on Emerson, (the Justice Department spokesperson) refused to elaborate on the nature of the threat or to provide information that would allow an evaluation to be made about Emerson's claims. "Moreover, you have an incredible situation that the Justice Department's Terrorism and Violent Crimes Section did not know there was a band of assassins roaming U.S. streets attempting a hit on a prominent journalist. Nothing in (the Justice Department's) letter challenges the fact that Justice's Terrorism and Violent Crimes officials said they were unaware of any threat to Emerson. A retired, very high level Justice official who is a national authority on terrorism and espionage, when given the description made by Emerson, told me: 'At the point where these people had entered the United States, and reached the stage described, I would find it unusual, nearly impossible for Justice not to be informed....' "...apparently the alleged assassination threat information was not sufficient to merit referral to Justice. Nor did it result in any indictments or prosecutions. Nor did the media pick it up -- and it would, if true, be a helluva story." Sugg also noted that the IACSP press release quoted sources attesting to Emerson's credentials and characterizing American Muslim groups as allies of terrorists. Sugg wrote: "These sources are Steven Pomerantz and Oliver 'Buck' Revell. Not noted (in the press release) is that Pomerantz and Revell are officers of the same institute, and that both have a close association with Emerson. They are hardly independent sources. In fact, the three spend most of their time nowadays quoting each other about what excellent terrorism experts they all are. Revell is prominent in Emerson's 'Jihad in America.' "There's a fourth member of the association -- Yigal Carmon. A ranking member of Israel's intelligence and military establishment, he is considered to the right of even the current Likud government. As The Nation has reported (and never disputed by Emerson), Carmon was part of the 'gang of three' that spent much time lobbying Congress to derail the Middle East peace process -- and Carmon even stayed at Emerson's home on his visits to the United States. (The Nation, August 28/September 4, 1995 and May 15, 1995) Carmon is part of Revell's and Pomerantz's institute -- its 'Mideast Regional Director.' ...And Emerson even shuttles Carmon around to introduce him to journalists as an 'expert' on the Middle East. "Of course, these four people spend their time (and make money) out of portraying Arabs and Muslims as terrorists...I don't think it's too extreme to conclude that, considering the involvement of a top Israeli spook with Emerson and his friends, we have something much more sinister going on that 'journalism' and an institute studying terrorism." In a letter faxed to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Emerson's attorney called on the Islamic advocacy group to "not issue further statements" repeating what he called "false" and "defamatory" information in Sugg's earlier article. (CAIR has been the frequent target of Emerson's rhetorical attacks on American Muslim organizations.) This request resulted from CAIR's call for an investigation into the accuracy of Emerson's Senate testimony. (see CAIR's news release at: http://www.cair-net.org/presses/press052698.htm) The letters from the Justice Department to the Weekly Planet and the letter from Emerson's attorney to CAIR both failed to address the other challenges to Emerson's credibility by fellow journalists, terrorism experts and American Muslim groups. ------ To join CAIR-NET, CAIR's read-only mailing list: Send "subscribe cair-net" in the body of a message to majordomo(At)cair-net.org ------ Editors: Some computer systems do not recognize the "at" sign. It is an important component of e-mail addresses and should be used in place of the symbol (At) in the contact information above. -0- /U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ 06/05 13:59 Copyright 1998, U.S. Newswire ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. ----------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: 1of4-IMPORTANT EXCERPTS (fwd) Date: 08 Jun 1998 10:29:20 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- [PART ONE OF FOUR] Dear Linda: Regarding: >Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 01:01:03 EDT >Subject: Re: [Fwd: (no subject)] > >I want to know more about the foreign terrorists who drove the explosives out >of Las Vegas. Is there any more info on that? I hadn't heard a word about >this. > >Thanks, April EXCERPTS FROM CONFERENCE LECTURE 1997 WORK IN PROGRESS I'd like to give you a small taste of the case that was presented to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (by way of the Defendant's Petition for Writ of Mandamus [available to download from www.telepath.com/believer], and this will provide for you a small indication of the defense that Jones was prepared to present on behalf of Mr. McVeigh, had he been allowed to do so. Consider first six of the introductory paragraphs of the Defendant's Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and from there, we will examine some history. "The plan was arranged for a Middle Eastern bombing engineer to engineer the bomb in such a way that it could be carefully transported and successfully detonated. There is no reported incident of neo-Nazis or extreme right-wing militants in this country exploding any bomb of any significant size let alone one to bring down a nine (9) story federal building and kill 168 persons. In fact, not even members of the left-wing militant groups such as the Weatherman were ever able to accomplish anything of this magnitude. "This terrorist attack was 'contracted out' to persons whose organization and ideology was friendly to policies of the foreign power and included dislike and hatred of the United States government itself, and possibly included was a desire for revenge against the United States, with possible anti-black and anti-semitic overtones. Because Iraq had tried a similar approach in 1990, but had been thwarted by Syrian intelligence information given to the United States, this time the information was passed through an Iraqi intelligence base in the Philippines. "Operating out of the Philippines as a base, the state-sponsored terrorists, with the Murrah Building already chosen as the target, enlisted the support and assistance of members of the Radical American Right. The defense believes the evidence suggests that American neo-Nazis were chosen to carry out the bombing of the Murrah Building because of a shared ideological bent of hatred against the American government. It is possible that those who carried out the bombing were unaware of the true sponsor. "The evidence collected by the defense suggests that the desired ideology was found by the state-sponsored {Hamas-sponsored] terrorists in Elohim City, Oklahoma, a small compound near Muldrow, Oklahoma, consisting of between 25 and 30 families and described as a terrorist organization which preaches white supremacy, polygamy and overthrow of the government. Elohim City was a haven for former members of The Covenant, The Sword and the Arm of the Lord ('CSA'), another extremist organization that had been raided by the federal government on April 19, 1985, exactly ten years to the day prior to the Oklahoma City bombing. One member of CSA turned on the organization and testified in court at the trial of Richard Snell and others who were charged in Arkansas with sedition in that they conspired to destroy the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City with a rocket launcher in the early 1980's. Snell was convicted on unrelated capital charges and sentenced to death in Arkansas. He was executed the day of the Oklahoma City bombing--April 19, 1995--and is buried at Elohim City. It is from this group of people that the defense believes that the evidence suggests foreign, state-sponsored terrorists groomed the most radical persons associated with Elohim City and extracted monumental revenge against the federal government by destroying the Murrah Building on the day of Richard Snell's execution and the anniversary date of the federal raid. "But the defense hypothesis also entails evidence, very strong evidence, that the federal government, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, had an informant in Elohim City, an informant who warned federal law enforcement prior to April 19, 1995, that former residents, including the former chief of security, of Elohim City were planning to "target for destruction" federal buildings in Oklahoma, including the Alfred P. Murrah Building. The defense believes this scenario is true, that it is eerily similar to the World Trade Center bombing where the FBI had an informant infiltrate the terrorist group but failed to stop that criminal act, and that, absent judicial intervention, information concerning these matters in the possession of the federal government will be forever buried. "The defense for Mr. McVeigh is not engaged in a fishing expedition. As the information set forth in this Petition demonstrates, the McVeigh defense, using resources provided to it by the district court, has conducted a wide-ranging and increasingly narrow focused investigation. But without subpoena power, without the right to take depositions, and without access to national intelligence information, the McVeigh defense can go no further." [END OF INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPHS] And it did NOT go no any further than that. And there is a "further" that needs to be considered. in order for you to fully understand this course of events, I need to first introduce you to Mr. Cary Gagan who, during the weekend of June 21st, 1997, spent hours of what can only be described as hyperactive testimony with many of the independent investigators in the Oklahoma City area, and others who came from out of town to meet with this man. The most efficient way to introduce you to him is to just read a few paragraphs written by Bill Jasper who writes for the "New American" magazine. The "New American" is, as most of you know, the monthly publication of the John Birch Society, and in my thinking that is a somewhat compromised source. However, because I am personally absolutely certain of this information, because I have had the opportunity to work with Bill Jasper on some of these bombing issues and have come to know him rather well, and because the documentation for Gagan's story does exist, I have no qualms about quoting the "New American" in this particular instance. It saves time. "Cary Gagan, a man in his early 50s, is a federal informant who had received immunity from the U.S. Justice Department when he provided them with specific information regarding plans to blow up a federal building in April 1995 - months before the bombing actually took place. The government has since belittled Gagan's information and has attempted to portray him as unstable and unreliable. However, after meeting with Gagan and reviewing his information and documentation, The New American is persuaded that the major media have been altogether too hasty in accepting the government's decree on Gagan's reliability. "On September 14, 1994, United States Attorney for the District of Colorado Henry L. Solano and Assistant United States Attorney James R. Allison for the same district provided a letter of immunity for Gagan, who is from Denver. [This letter, by the way, appears on pages 390 and 391 of Oklahoma City: Day One.] "The letter, signed by Allison and Gagan, is an agreement regarding 'information concerning a conspiracy and/or attempt to destroy United States court facilities in Denver and possibly other cities.' Under the terms of the letter, Gagan was told, 'the United States agrees that no evidence derived from the information or statements provided by you will be used in any way against you.' "Gagan claimed to have been recruited by Arabs or Iranians operating through Mexico to deliver explosives for a series of planned bombings of federal buildings in Denver, Phoenix, and Oklahoma City. At various meetings in Las Vegas, Denver, and Kingman, Arizona, he met with 'Omar,' 'Ahmad,' and other representatives of the Hizbollah terrorist organization, as well as male Caucasian American citizens. "In a civil suit filed in the U.S. District Court in Denver against Solano, Allison, and others, for violation of the immunity agreement, Gagan writes: " 'On March 17, 1995, in this meeting at the Hilton Inn South in Greenwood Village, Colorado where Plaintiff was present with three members of this terrorist organization, displayed on the table were the construction plans of the Alfred Murrah Federal Building bearing the name J.W. Bateson Company of Dallas, Texas, with one of these terrorists allegedly traveling to Denver for this meeting from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.' "On March 27, 1995, and again on April 6, 1995, Gagan delivered urgent written warnings to federal authorities in Denver alerting them to an imminent bombing attack. He insists that he followed these up with repeated telephone calls, all of which were ignored. In his handwritten warning of April 1st to U.S. Marshall Tina Rowe Gagan said: " 'Dear Ms. Rowe: After leaving Denver for what I thought would be for a long time, I returned here last night because I have specific information that within two weeks a federal building(s) is to be bombed in the area or nearby. The previous requests I made for you to contact me, 27th & 28th of April (sic - March) '95, were ignored by you, Mr. Allison and my friends at the FBI. I would not ignore this specific request for you personally to contact me immediately regarding a plot to blow up a federal building. If the information is false, request Mr. Allison to charge me accordingly. If you and/or your office does not contact me as I so request herein I will never again contact any law enforcement agency, federal or state, regarding those matters set out in the letter of immunity. -- Cary Gagan.' "After interviewing Gagan and examining his documents in light of other known facts in this case, The New American finds that his claims have far more credibility than do those of the officials who have been attempting to debunk them over the past two years. "In a February 1, 1996 letter to Gagan, Solano and Allison wrote: 'Attempts by federal law enforcement officers to meaningfully corroborate information you have alleged to be true have been unsuccessful.... Therefore, the immunity granted by the letter of September 14, 1994 is hereby revoked.' Moreover, wrote the pair, 'You are warned that any statement you make which would incriminate you in illegal conduct, past, present or future can be used against you. You are no longer protected by the immunity granted by letter on September 14, 1994.' " [END OF MAGAZINE EXCERPTS] And that is the present state of Mr. Gagan at this time. He is unprotected; he is guilty -- as you will soon see -- of actively participating in the preparations for both the internal and external explosions that destroyed the Murrah Building; he is without cover; he is surveilled and stalked by both his so-called friends and his enemies because of what he knows, and what he did, and who he is telling. The fact that he did what he did with the blessing of United States federal government agencies -- and on their behalf -- doesn't seem to matter to them anymore. Mr. Gagan is a man who has absolutely nothing to lose. We of course have a similar situation with BATF Informant Carol Howe who, when it became known that she was going to be called as a witness for the defense, was hurriedly indicted on charges of conspiracy to make explosives or some similar rap, and the rumors began flying about alleged drug abuse, unreliability, and flakiness in general. This is a pattern I assume is familiar to all of you by now. [NOTE: THE MAJORITY OF CAROL HOWE/ELOHIM CITY INFORMATION HAS BEEN DELETED FROM THESE EXCERPTS BECAUSE THE FOCUS HERE IS THE MATTER OF STATE-SPONSORED (HAMAS) TERRORIST ACTS IN THE U.S. AND THE PARTICIPATION OF FOREIGN TERRORISTS IN THE MURRAH BUILDING BOMBING. A FEW OF THE ENTRIES REMAIN IN THE EXCERPTS DEMONSTRATIVE OF THE LINKS BETWEEN THE FOREIGN TERRORISTS AND E.C. BUT THE DETAILS OF HOWE/E.C. MUST REMAIN THE SUBJECT OF ANOTHER SET OF POSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF BREVITY HERE.] Let's look at this event, how it developed, who was playing, what the witnesses said, and so forth. We will start the chronological study of the Oklahoma City bombing in 1980. 1980-81 - The man who was to become a long-standing and highly-paid government informant for the FBI, the DEA, and the U.S. Marshals Service, as well as a major player in the Oklahoma City bombing, Cary Gagan, was recruited by the Russian Embassy in Mexico City to do some minor forging of identification documents for some of its people that they needed to get into the United States. After this initial contact with the Soviets, Gagan was recruited, along with his work partner at Martin Marietta (Dan Howard), to smuggle technological secrets out of the company to give to the Russians. Gagan reported all of these activities to the FBI who encouraged him to continue working with the Russians as an undercover agent for the FBI. 1983 through 1986 - Gagan made Iranian and Iraqi contacts through the Russians. These Arabian men were presenting themselves at that time as Colombians, and spoke Arabic, English, and Spanish fluently. His assignments at this time involved drug running and money laundering, primarily out of Las Vegas. Gagan reported these activities to both the FBI and the DEA. DEA Agent Richard Gregory became his contact within that agency and they had continued contact through and after the Oklahoma City bombing. 1986-1990 - Informant Cary Gagan was convicted on a 5-count felony charge and put in jail. At the trial, because Gagan knew it was a concocted charge designed to achieve some other purpose, he chose to represent himself pro se. The judge in the matter decided that Gagan must be insane to want to represent himself, and ordered that Gagan submit to a mental evaluation before the trial could proceed. Gagan agreed and was evaluated by psychiatrists for several weeks while being housed in a mental institution. The results of the evaluation were that he was as sane as any attorney they knew, and he was allowed to continue representing himself at trial. But what this procedure did was create for Gagan a record of psychiatric so-called "treatment." The trial proceeded with Gagan representing himself -- since he had been determined to be completely sane -- and he lost his case and went to prison on a felony conviction. During his jail sentence, he was interviewed several times by the FBI on another espionage matter, so they were regularly in contact with him during his incarceration. Also, a four-year sentence on a 5-count felony conviction is really pretty light. Gagan was biding his time and staying in contact with federal officials. However, the record of the psychiatric evaluation would later be used against him publicly to indicate that he was unreliable. This same sort of ploy was used against Carol Howe to discredit her. For both of these individuals, the accusations against them were fabricated to cover the federal government's involvement in all of their activities -- and this at the expense of their own operatives. Summer 1988 - Andreas Strassmeir came to the United States, presumably to be a participant in the 125th-anniversary re-enactment of the Battle of Gettysburg. A review of his background shows that Andreas Strassmeir is a German national whose father is a well-regarded and successful politician in the Christian Democrat Coalition, who recently retired as Secretary of State for West Germany, BUT whose grandfather was a founding member of the German Nazi party. Andreas Strassmeir was a former Lieutenant in Germany's elite Panzer Grenadiers, similar to our Special Forces, and was trained in military intelligence. Strassmeir later said that he moved to the United States in 1988 "because he was planning to work on a special assignment for the U.S. Justice Department." According to Strassmeir, "It never worked out." A retired USAF Colonel, Vince Petruskie, was helping Strassmeir at the DEA and Treasury Department, but he said ultimately nothing came through. However, this association of Strassmeir with Petruskie has always been a troublesome matter because Petruskie is surrounded by rumors of his involvement with the CIA in the 1950s, matters which have not been confirmed but seem likely. On the day of the Murrah Building bombing, Strassmeir was in this country illegally on an expired visa. Subsequently, when Strassmeir became the subject of intense media and defense scrutiny, his attorney, Kirk Lyons, a well-known North Carolina lawyer (and member of the C.A.U.S.E. Foundation), openly boasted that he had "spirited" Strassmeir out of the country through Texas, Mexico, and France at an expense of $12,000, telling his supporters that it would be "easier to defend Strassmeir from Germany than from inside a federal detention facility." Strassmeir, originally presented to the press as a starry-eyed German interested in American military history, was later identified as the Chief of Security at Elohim City, but always denied this allegation. The C.A.U.S.E. Foundation is at this time actively denying that Strassmeir played any big role in Elohim City security, stating that Pastor Robert Millar's son-in-law Zara Patterson, a former Marine Viet Nam vet, was always in charge of Elohim City's security. However, persons who lived at Elohim City at the time of Strassmeir's tenure have confirmed to a man that security was Strassmeir's job while he was there. Strassmeir was also an active participant in a Klan rally in Texas. He illegally overstayed his visa in this country and traveled on false identity papers. He was arrested in Oklahoma by State Highway Patrolman Vernon Phillips while using the identity of Peter Ward -- who, by the way, is a real person and friend of Strassmier. Strassmeir is also a suspect in multiple investigations concerning weapons violations, including making weapons fully automatic. Strassmeir was interviewed and extensively written about by "London Telegraph" journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a man whose own agenda and connections are suspect. Nevertheless, counsel for Defendant McVeigh personally interviewed Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Washington, D.C., and confirmed the statements that Pritchard had made relating to Strassmeir. Pritchard represented to defense counsel that Strassmeir strongly suggested to him that there was an informant at Elohim City. Pritchard believed that Strassmeir was that informant, but he came to that conclusion and made his assumptions in print prior to the public release of the information concerning BATF informant Carol Howe. Strassmeir naturally would not expressly admit to being an informant for anyone, and the United States government has also denied that Andreas Strassmeir was employed by it. The testimony of BATF informant Carol Howe blatantly contradicts this denial. According to Carol Howe's statements, Strassmeir was the senior intelligence asset in place at Elohim City, but Howe was never able to specifically state that he was a BATF informant, as she was. That Strassmeir was an intelligence asset on the scene for somebody seems very plausible, but given his associations with Dennis Mahon (whom we will discuss in detail in a few moments), the governments of Iran and Iraq, and his family background, as well as his present-day affinity for Nazism, it seems possible and even probable that his connections were more at the Central Intelligence Agency level. While we cannot confirm an association with the CIA, we can confirm that the terrorist cell operating out of Las Vegas with which Informant Cary Gagan was working knew an "Andy" and a "Dennis" and considered them sympathetic and capable assistants in their terrorist efforts. Despite government denials that Andreas Strassmeir has never been the subject of an investigation of the Oklahoma City bombing case, defense counsel obtained documents -- generated by the government -- which indicate that he most assuredly was. One official document, dated January 11, 1996, discussed Strassmeir and stated, "Subject is wanted for questioning by FBI, Oklahoma City. Detain and notify [the FBI]." The document then gave the phone number, the FBI case number, the Oklahoma City bombing case number, and then concluded that "subject is possibly armed and may be dangerous." In addition, defense counsel learned of significant official communications between the United States government and its representatives in Germany concerning Strassmeir and that Strassmeir was of great interest to the Counterterrorism Division of the Diplomatic Protective Service of the Department of State. This document specifically bears the Oklahoma City bombing investigation case number and photographs of Strassmeir, and is still under seal. To say, in light of these documents and others filed under seal that Strassmeir was "never the subject of the investigation" is simply untrue. Strassmeir remained a suspect and subject of the Oklahoma City investigation as demonstrated by the fact that: (1) Carol Howe was sent back to Elohim City where Strassmeir lived, to obtain additional information about him and Dennis Mahon; (2) cable traffic between the U.S. Department of State and its representatives at the Embassy in Bonn, Germany, clearly identify official interest in Strassmeir, (3) his picture and other information was circulated by the Department of State with respect to the Oklahoma City bombing, and (4) in January 1996, he was considered to be "armed and dangerous" and was to be detained for investigation and interview by the FBI. For the government to represent as it did that Strassmeir had never been the subject of an investigation is not consistent with the known facts. Strassmeir not only was a subject of the investigation and a suspect of official interest on two continents, but that interest lasted at least from the middle of April 1995 to January 1996. In his own interviews, Strassmeir said, "The BATF had an informant inside this operation. They had advanced warning and they bungled it. What they should have done is made an arrest while the bomb was still being made instead of waiting until the moment for a publicity stunt." 1990 - Informant Cary Gagan, after his release from prison, was sought out by the Iranians who had been posing as Colombians, and continued drug running operations for them with the knowledge of both the FBI and the DEA. One of the things Gagan had been reporting to the FBI concerned large sums of money being run by the Arabs out of the MGM Grand Hotel in Las Vegas for the purpose of laundering it at another location. 1990 - Terry Nichols married his second wife, Marife, by way of a mail-order bride service in the Philippines. [CONTINUED IN PART TWO] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: 2of4-IMPORTANT EXCERPTS (fwd) Date: 08 Jun 1998 11:00:58 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- [PART TWO OF FOUR] 1991 - The Iraqi government began giving Dennis Mahon thousands of dollars and would continue to do so for the next six years. Mahon admitted to receiving money from Iraq approximately once a month and stated that "it's coming from the same zip code where the Iraqi Embassy is, but they don't say it's from the Iraqi Embassy." The money started arriving in 1991 after Mahon started holding rallies protesting the Persian Gulf War. Mahon was a close friend of Andreas Strassmeir, the ex-head of security at Elohim City, where Mahon had also lived from time to time. By way of background, Dennis Mahon is a virulent racist and avowed enemy of the U.S. government. He is the No. 3 person in authority in the White Aryan Resistance movement led by Tom Metzger. There are videotapes featuring Mahon, in full Ku Klux Klan uniform, lighting a cross at a Klan recruiting trip in Germany, and yet another videotape of Mahon firing a semi-automatic rifle during paramilitary training for Klan members. Mahon conducted a "tour" in Germany in order to recruit other right-wing extremists. The costs of the trip were split between Mahon and his "German supporters." Mahon joked that if he was fined the usual 1,000 Deutsche Marks (approximately $600) for every time he gave the Nazi salute, he would owe 10,000,000 Marks, explaining "I gave hundreds while I was there." Mahon is presently headquartered in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and has referred to the Oklahoma City bombing as a "fine thing" and stated further, "I hate the federal government with a perfect hatred . . . I'm surprised that this [the bombing] hasn't happened all over the country." He has further been quoted as saying that "all methods are legitimate to save your nation." A defense attorney interviewed Mahon after the bombing, and received, through an intermediary, a tape recording that Mahon had made to be given to McVeigh in prison. The attorneys did not know whether the purpose of this tape recording was to encourage McVeigh to "sacrifice" himself for the eventual "justice" of the cause or was a subtle threat intended to remind McVeigh that members of his family were vulnerable. On the tape Mahon says, "Tim, I want to thank you for 'hanging-tough'. I believe you are innocent, because of entrapment. I believe you have been set-up!" The tape was handed over to the defense. Mahon described Tim McVeigh as a "good soldier, who from the beginning wanted to be the fall guy in the bombing -- securing his place in history as a patriot hero." When Mahon was shown a sketch of "Robert Kling," the man, shorter than McVeigh with a pocked complexion -- who was supposed to have rented the Ryder truck used in the bombing -- (even though at trial the jury determined [wrongly] that Kling and McVeigh were the same individual) -- Mahon identified the Robert Kling sketch immediately as Pete Ward, whom he described as "Andy Strassmeir's shadow'". Said Mahon, "Ward went everywhere Strassmeir did and is dumb as dirt." Asked whether Ward rented the Ryder truck in Junction City, Mahon replied, "Well, you know his brother, Tony, has a pocked complexion. Maybe you ought to go to Belen, New Mexico and get a picture of him, too." After pouring over photographs of the bomb damage, Mahon volunteered, "I'll tell you who didn't build that bomb -- Tim or Terry. Hell, they don't know the first thing about how to build what did this!" After the bombing had occurred, Mahon was asked why the IRS building wasn't blown up at night instead of the federal building during the day with children inside. Mahon's answer was given in a sealed deposition. However, defense investigators have said that Mahon indicated that the results of the bombing were not as he had anticipated. He felt that the bombing should have caused a coming together of radicals around the country who would begin a campaign of terrorism. In retrospect, Mahon said he feels like the IRS building should have been bombed instead of the Murrah Building, and probably should have been bombed at night. The day care center and the killing of the children was having a negative effect on his intended progress. In a January 1996 interview, Mahon was told that Andreas Strassmeir was suspected of being a German intelligence officer who still maintained ties with the German military and the U.S. CIA. He reacted violently, turning pale and screaming obscenities. Mahon began to pace about the room, shaking his head and saying "I can't believe it....not Andy....God, no....It can't be true!" Mahon then said that he must contact Mark Thomas, an Aryan Nations official in Pennsylvania, and Mike Brescia, and indicated that the two men were deeply involved in the bomb plot. [SIDE NOTE: Peter Langan was the head of the Aryan Republican Army in Pennsylvania, and was commanding officer over Mark Thomas and Mike Brescia. Recent court documents from Langan's previous incarceration in Georgia indicate that he was released and recruited to work specifically for the U.S. Secret Service as an infiltrator and provocateur of "extremist" groups.] Mahon then called Thomas who was very upset that the conversation was even occurring. Mahon and his brother subsequently placed a call to someone in Germany so they could have Strassmeir checked out to determine if he could be an agent for the German government. Mahon said that Andreas Strassmeir had once been a friend and a very good friend, but if it turned out that Andreas Strassmeir had double-crossed him, then he wanted to Strassmeir "shot in both kneecaps and a confession elicited from him, then a 30 minute trial and an execution." This death threat was reported to the FBI. 1991 - Andreas Strassmeir, having allegedly failed to find a job in Washington, went to Texas where he found work at a computer company, and where he seemingly drifted into the subculture of the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Nations, and the extreme fringes of the so-called Christian right. In investigating this situation, defense counsel learned that during Strassmeir's stay in Texas, certain members of the Texas Light Infantry began to believe that Strassmeir was a government informant. Members of the infantry placed a "tail" on Strassmeir and followed him one night. Strassmeir went into a federal building in which was housed a local BATF office. On the doors of this particular federal building were combination locks that required a specific sequence of numbers to be punched in to gain entrance. Members of the Texas Light Infantry reported that they watched while Strassmeir punched in the proper code, unlocked the door, and went into the building. Strassmeir did not go to Elohim City to find a wife (as alleged by the C.A.U.S.E. Foundation and Kirk Lyons. He was placed there deliberately on assignment and received adequate compensation for his efforts. February 28, 1992 - On this date, Andreas Strassmeir, who was trained in terrorist tactics while in the German military, was arrested near Elohim City for not only carrying false identity papers, but also statements from foreign bank accounts, and a copy of The Terrorist Handbook. The Terrorist Handbook states that its purpose is "to show the many techniques and methods used by those people in this and other countries who employ terror as a means to political and social goals.... [A]ny lunatic or social deviant could obtain this information, and use it against anyone.... [The publisher] feels that it is important that everyone has some idea of just how easy it is for a terrorist to perform acts of terror. That is the reason for the existence of this publication." The table of contents includes chapters on low-order explosives; high-order explosives, including how to build bombs from fertilizer and fuel oil; ignition devices; advanced uses for explosives; delay devices and explosive containers, including plastic containers. As a result of this arrest, Strassmeir's maroon station wagon was impounded by the Oklahoma Highway Patrol. The police found in his briefcase a collection of documents, some of them in German. According to the tow-truck driver, Kenny Pence, Strassmeir soon brought heavy pressure to bear. Said Pence, "Boy, we caught hell over that one. The phone calls came in from the State Department, the Governor's office, and someone called and said he had diplomatic immunity. He was just a weird cookie." When questioned about Pence's remarks, Strassmeir said, "Some calls did come in to rattle their cage, but he must have been confused about some of the details. Something may have been said about my father's position." [Yeah, right!] February 26, 1993 - The World Trade Center bombing occurred, killing 6 and injuring over a thousand. The weapon of mass destruction employed was a bomb-laden rented Ryder van. Fragments of the van were quickly found in the rubble. Upon tracing the VIN number from the axle of the van, the FBI was able to locate the renter of that van. They then arrested 26-year-old Mohammed Salameh at the Ryder rental agency in New Jersey when he tried to collect his $400 deposit on the van after claiming that the van had been stolen from him. An infamous international terrorist named Ramzi Yousef, who also operates under the name of Abdul Basit, was convicted on September 5, 1996 as the mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing. Yousef was also convicted in New York City of a conspiracy to blow up 12 American jumbo jets in one day. Also charged in the World Trade Center bombing was Abdul Hakim Murad. While in prison on April 19, 1995, Abdul Hakim Murad told the FBI that a Muslim group, the Liberation Army in the Philippines (a subgroup of Hamas), was responsible for the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. He later explained that the Liberation Army in the Philippines is a terrorist army associated with Hamas and based in Lebanon." In addition, Murad specifically identified and named a member of this terrorist army who was a friend of Terry Nichols in the Philippines and had been seen visiting Nichols' home there in late 1992 or early 1993. It must be remembered, however, that the World Trade Center bombing was achieved using Muslim terrorists in tandem with the FBI. Trial documents show that the conspiracy to bomb the New York World Trade Center in 1993 was penetrated by the FBI. The papers disclosed that a government informant, an employee of the FBI, accompanied the accused bomber, Mohammed Salameh, to a New Jersey apartment that they used as a bomb factory and then instructed Salameh how to drive the bomb van two days before the explosion. The involvement of the FBI in the World Trade Center bombing was doubly confirmed in secretly taped conversations between FBI informant, Elim Ali Salem, a former Egyptian army officer, and his agency handlers. Transcripts of these tapes were published in the October 28, 1993 issue of the "Los Angeles Times." The transcripts were also subsequently published in the "New York Times." The tapes made by Elim Ali Salem revealed that the FBI refused his request to use phony explosives in the bomb he was helping to build under FBI supervision -- the bomb ultimately used in the World Trade Center explosion. Salem later told the "New York Times" that the FBI had planned on building the bomb with a phony powder and then grabbing the people who had been entrapped in the plot. But Salem said the powder scheme was called off by the FBI. In the end, not only did the FBI teach the suspects how to make a proper bomb and how to drive the bomb van, but it gave them the bomb itself. And as for Ramzi Yousef and his band of Muslim Filipino, Palestinian, and Pakistani terrorists, Yousef and his group have been observed, studied, and marked by the Central Intelligence Agency as an extremely dangerous, worldwide terrorist organization for well over a decade. One can only assume that the CIA would willingly allow such persons into this country ONLY if that agency itself intended to engage them in some form of covert intel operation, probably justifying that use by saying, "You have to use bad guys to catch bad guys," which they have, in fact, said. Many of the more detailed inquiries into the CIA's associations with Yousef and his followers have been ignored, and often the answers remain hidden behind the veil of national security. One must ask: whose national security? The World Trade Center bombing was a classic case of an agency of the U.S. federal government planning and promoting a criminal act that aligned with the political or religious sentiments of the men it claimed to be trying to entrap, while simultaneously assisting and allowing that criminal act to occur, in order to further a draconian political agenda in this country without arousing the suspicion of the American people or, even in some cases, the Congress. Two days later, on: February 28, 1993 - The standoff at the Branch Davidian Church in Waco, Texas began. July 1993 - Supplement #4 - FEMA determines two "soft targets" in the Oklahoma City area in "exercise," Murrah Building is one of the targets, information reported to CIA and Secret Service. November 1993 - According to defense counsel, FBI Director Louis Freeh invited a subject to accompany him on a trip to Italy and Germany at this time, shortly after Mr. Freeh became director of the FBI. The subject did in fact accompany Mr. Freeh first to Italy and then to Germany. Counsel was told that Mr. Freeh specifically invited the subject to be present when Freeh met with German internal security officials under the condition that he not write anything about what he heard. The subject was present in the meeting in Germany in November 1993, and stated that the German security officials specifically mentioned Andreas Strassmeir, said that he was "nation hopping" back and forth between the United States and Germany, that he had been associated with neo-Nazis in the United States, and that they were very concerned about their activities. Director Freeh replied that the FBI was aware of Strassmeir, and was "monitoring" his activities, but that: "because of the First Amendment, there isn't anything we can do." March 1994 - Informant Cary Gagan met with two of his Arab friends, known only as Omar and Ahmad, at the Western Motel in Las Vegas. He reported this meeting to the DEA. May 1994 - During the middle of this month, Informant Cary Gagan spent two weeks in and around in Las Vegas at the expense of his Middle Eastern connections and met with some new players -- big money people, well-educated, banker types. Gagan described most of them as looking like Middle Eastern men, but mentioned that it was said that one of the men was from the Philippines. There were usually between six to eight persons present at all of the meetings during this period. It was only later that Gagan learned that during this meeting he was being assessed for a special assignment. It was also during this time that he removed from Omar's trash a crumpled piece of paper with bomb plans on it. He gave copies of this to the FBI, and also provided copies to Bill Jasper, Charles Key, and other independent investigators into the Oklahoma City bombing. It was suggested at Gagan's most recent visit to Oklahoma City during the weekend of June 21st, 1997, that General Partin review that drawing and try to determine exactly what it was. The paper appeared to be bomb-building instructions written in a foreign language, but Partin has not yet released analysis of the illustration. It was also during Gagan's two-week Las Vegas visit in May of 1994 that Gagan first saw the man later called John Doe #2 and a man he believed to be Terry Nichols. According to Gagan, during that meeting Nichols never said a word, didn't seem to fit in, and Gagan described him as "sort of nerdy, a scientist-type, quiet, with glasses." He said he never saw either of those two men again. This particular meeting took place in Henderson, Nevada. Informant Cary Gagan mentioned that It was also at this time, in May of 1994, that he first heard the names of Andy and Dennis -- whom he later assumed to be Andreas Strassmeir and Dennis Mahon -- spoken of by his Arab friends as cooperative connections that might help in some of their projects. He did not know at that time who Andy and Dennis were, nor where they were located, nor did he ever meet with them. However, the interactions between Muslim terrorists, the remaining Nazi elements in Germany, and the neo-Nazi movement in this country is a matter of documentable, historical fact. When shown the surveillance photographs that we obtained of certain Middle Eastern men who had been operating in and around Oklahoma City at the time of the bombing, Gagan was able to identify the man known as Khalil in our surveillance photos. By the way, Khalil's ex-wife, Carole Sue Khalil, was killed in the Murrah Building bombing. She worked for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Late May, 1994 - Upon preparing to leave Las Vegas, Gagan was given an innocent-looking gym bag to carry back to Denver, Colorado where he was living at the time. He thought he was carrying a couple of kilos of cocaine -- something he had done many times before. He was told to check this gym bag at a specific place in the Las Vegas airport, at a specific time, to a specific person. The gym bag was put on the plane without any problems and Gagan returned to Denver. Gagan had possession of this bag for approximately two weeks after his return to Denver, and it was only toward the end of that two weeks that he opened the bag, expecting to find drugs, and discovered that he had been couriering C4 explosives to Denver for his terrorist contacts. The C4 package weighed approximately 40 lbs. In Denver, Gagan maintained a mail drop box at a business called The Postal Center, located at 3000 E. Colfax. His was box number 272. This postal center was located across the street from the Executive Motel, the side lot of which was operated as a Ryder Rental Center. This operation was owned by a man named George Colombo, a long-time friend of Gagan's. Gagan often stayed in a second-floor apartment that was maintained by Colombo at the Executive Motel, and it was here that he stored the bag of C4, waiting until he was told to delivered it or to leave it at a drop spot. After the May 1994 trip to Las Vegas, Gagan's Middle Eastern connections offered George Colombo several hundred thousand dollars to buy his Ryder rental operation. Gagan did not say whether this transaction finally took place. Colombo did sell the business and moved to Florida, but we do not know to whom he sold it. While Gagan was waiting for the hand-off of the C4, and after he discovered that it was C4, he called the Denver Police Intelligence Bureau. He told them about the C4, gave them names and descriptions of his Las Vegas contacts, and also gave them the name of Robert Gregory, his contact inside the DEA. For several weeks, the police did nothing. When Gagan contacted them again, he was told, "Since you're the source of the information, we're not going to investigate." This was the first indication that Gagan had that he was being abandoned by his federal contacts and handlers, and this abandonment occurred as soon as it became known that Gagan was involved in terrorist plans involving explosives, a development that was certainly bigger and more dangerous than simple drug running and money laundering. It began to seem to Gagan that the federal authorities wanted to let the terrorist activities occur. They seemed to be going out of their way to avoid receiving his reports; and when he did manage to get the FBI, the DEA, and the U.S. Marshals Service to listen to his story, nothing ever happened as a result. July 1, 1994 - Cary Gagan called both the FBI and his DEA contact, Robert (Richard) Gregory to see what the DEA could do with the information he had given them about couriering the C4 into Denver from Las Vegas. He was also curious about what the Gregory might have told the Denver Police Intelligence Bureau that had caused them to ignore his report. After working successfully for, and with the full cooperation of, these federal agencies for approximately 14 years, Gagan was suddenly told by Gregory, "We've decided you're not credible." It was at this point that Gagan began making sure that he left a discoverable paper trail for all of his activities. September 1994 - Informant Cary Gagan's Middle Eastern contact, Omar, came to Denver and offered Gagan $250,000 to participate in terrorist bombings in the United States. Gagan reported this offer to the FBI and to the Denver police, who seemed only remotely interested in his story. Because Gagan looks like a typical American and does not attract attention, he was to serve as support personnel. He decided that he was going to need some extra protection for this job, and made deliberate attempts to stay in closer contact with the FBI, but the FBI expressed no interest and basically told him to get lost. During these early weeks of September, Gagan learned that the first terrorist project was to be the bombing of a federal building somewhere in the 10th Judicial Circuit, possibly in Denver, Colorado. September 14, 1994 - Early on this morning, Cary Gagan contacted the U.S. Marshals service in Denver by telephone and spoke to a man named David Floyd. He contacted the Marshals because the FBI had already said they would not investigate his reports and the DEA had abandoned him. Gagan told Floyd his story, and Floyd said that the U.S. Marshals would help with a letter of immunity. Gagan also telephoned Raymond Moore at the Federal Building in Denver. Moore told Gagan to call back at noon. At noon, Gagan was told that he could pick up his letter of immunity from the FBI office. After the somewhat abusive treatment he had already taken at the hands of the FBI, Gagan was not too pleased with this arrangement and was fully expecting to be arrested when he entered the building. However, the FBI did conduct a cursory interview with Gagan at that time and gave him the letter, which we published on pages 390 and 391 of Oklahoma City: Day One. The letter was signed by Gagan and Assistant United States Attorney James R. Allison of the District of Colorado. In spite of his immunity, and in spite of the fact that he was working under-cover on this terrorist plot on behalf of the United States Government, not one single U.S. attorney would meet with him face-to-face in the District of Colorado from that point on. Gagan's next contact with any identifiable federal agent came in July of 1995 after the bombing when he met with FBI Special Agent in Charge Dave Shepherd in Las Vegas. In April of 1995, he met with and received instructions from a man he assumed to be a U.S. Intel agent, but Gagan never knew positively who this man was. Interestingly enough, the indictment bought against McVeigh and Nichols states that "beginning on or about September 13, 1994 and continuing thereafter until on or about April 19, 1995...the defendants herein did knowingly, intentionally, willfully and maliciously conspire, etc., etc., etc." That this date specified by the grand jury should so closely mesh with McVeigh's letter to Fortier suggesting that action be taken against the government, as well as the date that Informant Cary Gagan received his letter of immunity, cannot be coincidental. And by the way, in spite of the fact that Gagan was known to prosecutors, had official immunity from prosecution in this incident, and his reports had been received by the Department of Justice, he was never called to testify before the federal grand jury that was convened in Oklahoma City to indict the men accused of the bombing. Mid-October 1994 - The FBI contacted Cary Gagan because the Worldwide Jewish Convention was meeting in Denver. They wanted to know if he had any information about any possible terrorist actions that might be taken against the group. Gagan didn't know of any, and none occurred. November 1994 - Dennis Mahon and Andreas Strassmeir discussed "targeting federal installations for destruction," such as the Tulsa IRS Office, the Tulsa Federal Building, and the Oklahoma City Federal Building. According to BATF Informant Carol Howe, they made at least three trips to Oklahoma City to case the federal building, the first in November 1994, the second in December 1994, and the third in February 1995. Week of November 9, 1994 - Terry Nichols arrived in Las Vegas and stayed for two weeks with his ex-wife, Lana Padilla, visiting with their son Josh. He was scheduled to leave for the Philippines two weeks later. While there is evidence that Nichols may had been initially involved in the planning of the bombing of a federal building, by this date he wanted out. Among the documents federal prosecutors handed over to defense lawyers is testimony that McVeigh had begun to solicit help from other people because Nichols was expressing a great reluctance to participate. November 22, 1994 - Lana Padilla took her ex-husband, Terry Nichols, to the airport in Las Vegas, Nevada where he left for the Philippines. When they arrived at the airport, Nichols gave Padilla a folded brown paper bag and allegedly said, "If I'm not back in 60 days, open it and follow the instructions." Josh ran after his father, who had turned to go to the plane, and hugged him. When he returned to the car, Padilla said that Josh slumped in the seat and burst into tears crying, "I'll never see my dad again!" With regard to the significance of Terry Nichols' many trips and phone calls to the Philippines, there is much that must be said, and this is as good a time to address this as any. There are definitely two equally possible scenarios here. I have become pretty convinced that Terry Nichols may have been some sort of contact man in the planning of the Oklahoma City bombing as it related to the involvement of the terrorist cell operating out of Las Vegas. I am also completely convinced that no one in his family is aware of anything he may have done, or any of the persons with whom he might have done business in this regard. I also believe that Terry Nichols did indeed decide that he wanted out of the whole mess after he returned from this November trip to the Philippines, but by then it was far too late to stop anything. Much has been made in the media and by some of the investigators of Terry Nichols' phone records to the Philippines. For example, there was one day in particular when he made 37 calls to the same number in the Philippines. The number turned out to be a hardware store or similar small commercial establishment. It was discovered that Marife Nichols' family in the Philippines, with whom she lives when she is in that country, have no telephone of their own. When Terry needed to contact her, he had to call a friend, neighbor, relative, or nearby store and ask someone to find Marife to bring her to that telephone where he could call her back. This could account for 37 calls to one telephone number on one day. However, on the one hand, there are Filipino terrorists in jail cooperating with federal officials who have identified Terry Nichols as having very friendly contact with other known Filipino terrorists, even to the point of inviting those men into his house near Cebu City. In the federal grand jury investigation leading to the indictment of Nichols and McVeigh, the grand jurors linked Terry Nichols personally, by way of the testimony of Edwin Angeles, a Filipino terrorist, to convicted international terrorists Ramzi Yousef and Abdul Hakim Murad, as well as other Philippine terrorist groups. Defense counsel interviewed in the Philippines a known terrorist, Edwin Angeles, in the custody of the Philippine government. The purpose of the inquiry was to determine his knowledge of foreign "mail-to-order bride" businesses, which introduce American males to Filipinas who are ostensibly "tour guides" for the visiting foreigners, and to determine any links between that group and criminal activity in the Philippines and/or terrorism. This investigation was also necessary because Terry Nichols had selected his present wife, Marife, through one of these mail-order-bride services. During the course of the investigation, the following information was discovered by defense counsel: [CONTINUED IN PART THREE] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: Video info Date: 08 Jun 1998 12:19:45 -0400 >From: Foolery@aol.com >Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:05:16 EDT >To: foolery@bright.net >Subject: Fwd: Video info >X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 49 > >From: SN2112@aol.com >Return-path: >To: Foolery@aol.com >Subject: Video info >Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 19:53:30 EDT >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit > > >by BOB LESMEISTER > > > >The Law Enforcement Alliance of America (LEAA) has produced a professional >quality video of six street cops testifying before Congress, expressing their >views against gun control. > >HIS 53-MINUTE VIDEO is everything that the Brady Bunch will try to prevent you >from seeing and hearing. Cops tell Congress that gun control doesn't make them >safer, it only endangers civilians. They inform Congress that most of the gun >control schemes are nothing more than an attempt to disarm honest citizens by >lying to the public about how fewer guns in honest hands make a cop's life >safer and easier. Well, they don't and these cops should know. > >This session was recorded April 5, 1995 during official Congressional >testimony before the House Subcommittee on Crime. You have never seen >Congressman Schumer (the Goomer) more frustrated, more out of his league, more >spittin' mad, more put in his place, than ever before. The following cops >informed Congress about the inherent dangers of gun control: Sgt. Bill Hinz >(Minneapolis, MN), Lt. Dennis Tueller (Salt Lake City, UT), master Police >Officer Craig Roberts (Tulsa, OK), Chief Dwaine Wilson (Kennesaw, GA), Officer >Bryant Jennings (Memphis, TN) and Officer Steve Rodriguez (Albuquerque, NM). > >You say you never heard of these hearings? You didn't see anything in the news >or on TV? Well, of course not! This is the kind of testimony that NBC, CBS and >ABC hope you never hear. Even Hanoi Jane's CNN kept the viewing public from >ever hearing these cops. > >The video is called What Real Cops Think About the Gun Ban and the real cops >mentioned above dispel the public's distorted view that all law enforcement >backs the government's idea of gun control. Fact is, only a small portion of >street cops are in favor or gun control. According to Executive Director of >LEAA, Jim Fotis, "Real cops shred the anti-gun `big lies' about alleged law >enforcement support for gun bans and gun control and expose how anti-gun >politicians manipulate political police administrators and organizations to >advance their big brother, big government agenda. Real cops reveal how anti- >gun politicians manipulate law enforcement to create the myth that law >enforcement supports the Clinton Gun Ban and gun control in general." > >This is a must have video and it should be shown in homes, in gun shops, in >civic centers, at rallies, in schools and wherever people need to know the >truth. You can order a copy by sending $24.95 plus $3.75 shipping to LEAA, >Dept. AFI, 7700 Leesburg Pike, Suite 421, Falls Church, VA 22043. Make the >checks payable to "LEAA Video." Or you can order by phone with a credit card >by calling 1-800-766-8578. You can bet Wild Bill and the Brady Bunch hope you >never write that check or make that call. > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: http://www.freedom.org (fwd) Date: 09 Jun 1998 13:09:08 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Serving the people who are keeping the world free Our mission is to assist and encourage individuals and organizations to advance America's vision of individual freedom, private property rights, free markets, and national sovereignty. Hosted by freedom.org Sovereignty International Environmental Conservation Organization Environmental Perspectives, Inc. Freedom Week Watch for new services offered by freedom.org as we continually expand our efforts to make your work more effective. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: The Four Corners Manhunt Date: 11 Jun 1998 18:09:19 -0400 >Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 >From: E Pluribus Unum >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U) >To: E Pluribus Unum Email Distribution Network >Subject: The Four Corners Manhunt > >The Four Corners Manhunt >by Sarah Thompson, M.D. > >"Tonight I'm standing on Highway 666 running through towns like >Cortez, Shiprock, Sheep Springs and ending in Gallup, New Mexico. To >some, a beautiful stretch of the American landscape, but to Alan Pilon >and Jason McVean, who are still at large, it is literally a candyland of >murder and mayhem." - paraphrased from Natural Born Killers (NBK) > >Today is day 12 of what the Denver Post calls "the greatest Western >manhunt in recent memory." The search has "included 51 local, state >and federal agencies and 500 heavily armed SWAT teams using 17 >national guard helicopters." The monetary costs so far are estimated >at about $1.6 million. The real cost is much higher. > >"Patrolman Dale Claxton was just the first of three peace officers >that Pilon and McVean shot during their reign of terror." - >paraphrased from NBK=20 > >For those of you who are unfamiliar with the "Four Corners Manhunt", >it started on May 29 when Cortez, Colorado police officer Dale Claxton >stopped a suspected stolen truck and was shot and killed by one or more >of the occupants.=20 > >The murder of a police officer is a tragic, but unfortunately not >uncommon event. To date, 68 law enforcement officers have died in >1998, 27 of them by gunfire. What is uncommon is the response to this >murder, along with the subsequent non-fatal shootings of two sheriff's >deputies. > >Cortez is a small tourist town of just under 7300 people, and had 23 >officers before Claxton was killed. It's about 38 miles from "Four >Corners", where Utah, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona meet. > >In Cortez, reality, fantasy and the media fused to create an >apocalyptic vision worthy of an Oliver Stone movie. This is >particularly ironic, since the only other mention of Cortez I've ever >heard was in Stone's film, "Natural Born Killers", where Cortez is >listed as one of the scenes of the fictional Mickey and Mallory Knox's >killing spree. "Natural Born Killers" is a bloody meditation on the >role the media play in glamorizing murder and mayhem. > >And like the killers in Stone's film, these killers were not >"ordinary". They didn't kill in some burned out inner city. They >weren't wearing baggy pants, baseball hats or flashing gang symbols.=20 >They didn't use a handgun. No, these killers, about whom absolutely >nothing was known, were immediately labeled "militia types" because >they were "dressed in camouflage and black paramilitary gear". > >Worse, these "militia types" had "fully automatic" weapons. Actually, >the firearms involved have been identified as SKS rifles. Most SKS >rifles are _not_fully automatic, although it's entirely possible that >those in question were. But is killing someone with a fully automatic >weapon _worse_ than killing someone with a bolt action rifle, or a >semiautomatic pistol? What about clubbing someone to death with a >baseball bat, stabbing him with a knife, or running him off the road?=20 > >Is shooting someone with a fully automatic SKS rifle worse than a >government sniper with a high-power rifle killing an innocent woman >holding her child? Is it worse than gassing and burning members of an >unpopular religion? Is it worse than using sarin nerve gas to kill >military deserters? How does it compare with killing innocent >bystanders while engaged in a high-speed chase of a teenager who ran a >stoplight? > >Later I learned that two SKS assault rifles (an assault rifle is by >definition fully automatic, but the press uses the term to mean any >ugly rifle, so I'm at a loss again), a duffel bag filled with >ammunition, a two-way radio and a cell phone had been discovered.=20 >Worse, some of the ammunition was in .308 caliber, which would fit a >"high power military rifle" (but not an SKS). > >While this equipment was portrayed as indicative of serious and >extremely dangerous criminals, with the exception of the allegedly >fully-automatic SKS rifles, it's pretty ordinary stuff. Similar >equipment could no doubt be found in the trucks of many local >residents and tourists; .308 caliber is one of the most commonly-used >hunting loads. And while I don't hunt, my weekend shooting >expeditions often find me equipped with a military M-1 carbine, a >range bag full of ammo, and my cell phone. Sometimes I'm even >carrying .308 ammo for my high-power long-distance target rifle. And >I guess I should confess that my sun hat has a camouflage pattern. > >Within hours of the shootings, students at Pleasant View School were >stranded as school bus service was canceled. Several entirely >innocent families were told they couldn't go back to their homes, >presumably because their presence might deter law enforcement officers >from shooting at anything that moved. (Had it been for their own >protection, I should think they'd have been given a choice!) A >helicopter equipped with infrared night vision was in the sky by 10 PM. > >By the next day, both the FBI and the National Guard were involved, >along with specially equipped helicopters. Two hundred officers from >four states and two Indian reservations were searching the ground.=20 >Computer checks of "persons of interest" were being run. Records of >"recent arrestee(s) who favored black army boots and green, brown and >black camouflage clothing" were being reviewed. > >But who's a "person of interest"? Judging from the above, I guess I >am, although I've never been convicted of anything worse than >speeding. Are you? And what about those "recent arrestees"? Being >arrested in no way means that you're guilty of anything. And isn't >selectively targeting people based on their choice of clothing a >violation of their civil liberties? Why are there even databases of >what arrestees wear? Had the killers been wearing Utah Jazz T-shirts, >no doubt the entire state of Utah would now be under martial law! > >And what about the National Guard? Why is the military involved in >law enforcement, in direct violation of _posse comitatus_? Because >Colorado Governor Romer declared a "state of emergency" in order to >mobilize the National Guard and utilize funds from the state Disaster >Emergency Fund. (Governor Leavitt of Utah also declared a state of >emergency, but stated that the Utah National Guard would only be used >to provide transportation for SWAT officers.) If the murder of one >single human truly warranted declaring a "state of emergency", then >the National Guard would be patrolling the streets of every major city >in this country on a permanent basis. > >By June 2, the suspects had been identified, not as a result of >exemplary police detective work or the intensive manhunt, but because >an ex-girlfriend of one of the men turned them in. The suspects: Alan >Lamont "Monty'' Pilon, Robert Matthew Mason, and Jason Wayne McVean. > >According the the Denver Post: "It appears to us their friendship is >based upon similar interests,'' (Colorado Bureau of Investigation >Director) Whiteside said." (Huh? Aren't _most_ friendships based >upon similar interests? Do we need the CBI to figure that out for >us?) "They're outdoorsmen and they have an interest in firearms and >camping." > >"None of the men have any known affiliation with paramilitary groups," >(Cortez Police Chief) Lane said, "although Pilon may be >'anti-government'. Specifically, he is believed to be angry with the >Internal Revenue Service." (Say what? Isn't _everyone_ angry with >the IRS?) > >Pilon also has a "criminal record" consisting of drunk driving and >driving without a license. > >In other words, while the media have done their best to portray these >men as hardened criminals and terrorists, "a person who has an >interest in firearms and camping and is angry at the IRS" could easily >describe half the people I know! Later Mason's brother, who >coincidentally works for the corrections department, reported that >Mason held anti-government and anti-law enforcement beliefs, but there >are certainly many non-criminal Americans who share those views. In >fact, holding anti-government views is one of our rights as free >citizens, and it shouldn't in any way be considered evidence of >criminality. > >On June 4, a San Juan County (Utah) Sheriff's deputy was shot and >injured by a "camouflage-clad man" believed to be one of the fugitives >near the San Juan River, just outside Bluff, Utah. Later in the day, >one of the suspects, subsequently identified as Mason, was found dead, >apparently of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.=20 > >Bluff was immediately sealed and evacuated. All roads in the area >were blocked and vehicles were searched at gunpoint. Armed personnel >evacuated tourists rafting on the San Juan River. Even the National >Park rangers were carrying M-16 military assault rifles. (Remember >that when federal law enforcement personnel carry assault rifles it's >"good", but should a citizen have one, he's a "dangerous criminal".) > >And in yet another case of "life imitating Stone", the Denver Post >reported that "Gov. Roy Romer was flying with a team of CBI agents to >the Four Corners area to assist in what he is now saying may be a >well-planned conspiracy involving more than the three 'young men who >have demented minds.'" Assuming that the Post didn't mean to say that >Gov. Romer was assisting the "conspiracy", they must have meant that >several CBI officers were occupied with guarding and entertaining the >governor and his public relations staff, and were thus prevented from >doing anything meaningful. No evidence of a conspiracy has yet been >found. > >After ten days, San Juan County Sheriff Mike Lacy admitted defeat.=20 >"We have found no leads. We have nothing to go on... We have not the >slightest idea of where they are." > >The tally? One officer is dead, two injured. One alleged killer is >dead, two escaped. At least $1.6 million has already been spent on >law enforcement, and the search continues. Hundreds of innocent >people were forced from their homes and deprived of their civil >rights. No doubt additional hundreds of innocent people were >subjected to warrantless searches of their vehicles, searches that >were conducted at gunpoint. Tourists had their vacations abruptly >terminated. > >Tourism, the major source of income in Bluff, is dead for the rest of >the season. (Bluff has about 350 residents and hosts about 250,000 >visitors a year.) The same can most likely be said for the entire >Four Corners area. That hundreds or thousands of people may lose >their jobs, businesses, homes and savings is irrelevant. What matters >is that our masters once more put on a stunning show of force to remind >us that they _are_ our masters.=20 > >The media have colluded with the tyrants once again by vilifying gun >owners and creating a new class of undesirables based on their >clothing. Unfounded claims of lawless "militia-type" terrorists and >vast, dangerous conspiracies, have once again been used to frighten >the general public into believing they need 51 law enforcement >agencies and the military to protect them from _three_ criminals. =20 >Anger at the IRS, a nearly universal sentiment, has now been branded >as "anti-government" and potentially criminal. Where does that leave >those of us who are not only angry at the IRS, but angry at the FBI, >BATF, DEA, FEMA, or even FICA?=20 > >If only it had worked out a little better, it would have been the >blockbuster summer movie of 1998. After all, no one can tell the >difference between "news" and fiction these days anyway. The story >had all the right elements: lots of gunfire, terrified children, >fleeing townspeople, mysterious military helicopters, and awesome >scenery. > >But alas, the combined forces of all those agencies, armed with the >very best equipment, accomplished nothing more than creating a media >feeding frenzy. The suspects were identified only because an >ex-girlfriend turned them in. The only one ever found was dead, >apparently by his own hand. And the "heroes" ended up looking like >Keystone Kops. > >In "Natural Born Killers", Mickey and Mallory Knox escape and live >happily ever after. It's looking like Pilon and McVean may do the >same. Life imitates art once again. > >And to be perfectly honest, I'm conflicted about the whole thing, as >are many other people with whom I've discussed the Four Corners >manhunt. One correspondent commented that he was glad he wasn't in >Bluff because he'd be dead, or more police would be dead, since he >wouldn't take kindly to being searched at gunpoint. Many expressed >outrage that both military and law enforcement personnel were >knowingly depriving residents and tourists of their constitutional >rights. A few have expressed the opinion that since law enforcement >and the military have now been given an unlimited license to kill as >long as they do so "in the line of duty", the only proper course for >free people is to shoot them. > >I can't condone the unprovoked murder of a police officer. But >neither can I condone the behavior of overzealous law enforcement and >military personnel. I would not submit to being searched at gunpoint, >nor would I agree to evacuate my home unless _I_ thought it was >dangerous to stay. > >Even some area residents are skeptical of the "greatest Western >manhunt in recent memory". "There are all kinds of stories -- people >in Bluff claim they have seen these guys,'' said 70-year-old Bluff >resident R. G. Drummond. "But I can't believe all these people >stomping through the desert and flying over my head in those gizmos >can't find two people. I mean, what do you figure this is costing >me?'' > >What it is costing us is our freedom. When our militarized system of >law enforcement launches an operation, the operant policy is "scorched >earth". Anything and everything that stands between them and their prey >is destroyed as if by a plague of locusts. The Constitution is >irrelevant. So are the rights of the people they claim to be >"protecting". > >Millions of men have fought to preserve our Constitution and our >freedom. Is the life of one police officer, a man who took his own >oath to defend our Constitution, worth surrendering our freedom and >nullifying the law he swore to uphold? > >Why is the life of a law enforcement officer more valuable than the >life of any other person? And why is the death of Officer Claxton >more important than the death of any other law enforcement agent? > >On June 5, Officer Chris Lydon of the California Highway Patrol was >killed in an accident while pursuing a drunk driver. No suspect was >arrested. On June 3, Agent Alexander Kirpnick of the Border Patrol in >Arizona was killed while attempting to apprehend alleged drug >smugglers. One of the suspects was captured, but four others escaped >to Mexico. > >Yet there are no manhunts going on in California, nor have any cities >been evacuated. The National Guard has not been mobilized to invade >Mexico. I guess Orwell was right: All people are equal but some >people are more equal than others. > >Do you think you're safe in your home? You're not. You can be >forceably "evacuated" any time law enforcement officers or the >military decide to play "war games" and want a "free-fire" zone. Are >you, like many of us, planning a summer vacation? Think about it.=20 >The tiny, picturesque town you're planning to visit may be evacuated, >and you may spend your vacation in a junior high school gym. You may >be pulled out of a river or off a hiking trail and abruptly sent home.=20 >You and your vehicle may be searched at gunpoint. Presumably you may >also be detained should you be in possession of a politically >incorrect firearm, book, or camping outfit. > >This is America, folks, and you'd best be prepared. We're already >living under martial law, and we only have "rights" when our masters >graciously allow us to exercise them. And a "right" than can be >revoked at will is no right at all. > >What will you do when some SWAT team performs a dynamic entry into >your bedroom at 2 AM? How will you respond when you're ordered to >evacuate your home? What will you say to the officer who orders you >out of your car at gunpoint? How do you explain any of this to your >children? How do you protect them? You need to think through each of >these scenarios carefully and decide what response is right for _you_. > >It's not a movie. I can't write the script for you, direct the >action, or add a happy ending. It's live, uncut, and unrated. There's >no "take two" and the blood is real. You get one chance, at most, so >you'd better learn your lines and recognize your cues. > >I cannot condone the murderous behavior of Pilon and McVean. But I >applaud their escape and survival skills. Like Butch Cassidy and the >Sundance Kid, who hid out in the same desolate valley, they are both >outlaws and heroes. And I must admit, the fact that Pilon and McVean >got away, even if it's only temporarily, gives me hope. Because if >they can evade the combined forces of law enforcement and the >military, others can too. And if it comes down to it, as I believe it >will, I'd like to know that the real "good guys", those people willing >to resist a tyrannical police state in order to restore liberty, will >stand a chance of prevailing. > > >Information for this article was provided by the online editions of >the Salt Lake Tribune, The Deseret News, The Denver Post, AP Wire and >the Officer Down Memorial Page, http://www.ODMP.org "Natural Born >Killers" is a film by Oliver Stone, based on a script by Quentin >Tarantino. > >=A91998 Sarah Thompson, M.D. >--=20 >****************************************************************** > E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group > P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 > Grove City, OH 43123 > >Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse > 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) > >http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com >****************************************************************** >=20 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Perrine Subject: A Show That Says Yes to Firepower Date: 11 Jun 1998 19:18:50 -0700 A Show That Says Yes to Firepower By GARY KRIST NYT In Hollywood . . . there are more gun owners in the closet than homosexuals." -- Charlton Heston, new president of the National Rifle Association. In an announcement that took Hollywood insiders by surprise, Helen LaCorcia, star of the hit ABC sitcom "Helen," admitted today that she has for many years secretly been the owner of a handgun. "It's time to come clean," Ms. LaCorcia said, patting a holster strapped stylishly under her left shoulder. "If Hollywood and the rest of America can't accept me for what I am, it's their problem, not mine." Ms. LaCorcia, appearing at a hastily called press conference, then drew her Sig Sauer 9-millimeter semiautomatic and brandished it in front of the cameras. "And yes, it's loaded," she said. "Deal with it." Later, in an unscheduled appearance on "Oprah," Ms. LaCorcia elaborated on her revelation. "Hollywood has been hypocritical on this issue for years," she said. "Everyone knows that the industry is full of weapons enthusiasts, but no one wants to admit it. They're all afraid that nobody will cast them if word gets around that they're packing heat." Asked if her eponymous television character will also be coming out as a gun owner, the gamine comedian said: "Absolutely. In fact, we've already scripted an episode in which Helen meets someone -- someone special -- who takes her to a firing range and persuades her to fire off a couple practice rounds. She's converted immediately." Ms. LaCorcia then added, "We're hoping to get Quentin Tarantino for the part." Across the nation, gun industry analysts were quick to hail the announcement as a milestone. "Sure, we've had plenty of sitcoms with pistol-toting sidekicks and best friends," said Graydon Menaker, media critic for Guns & Ammo magazine. "But this is the first time we'll be seeing a fully armed major character in a top-rated comedy series. It's historic." Some television executives were more cautious. "The audience for shows like 'Helen' tends to be a lot more pacifist than we realize," said Les Goreham, the vice president for product placement at CBS. "Our friends at ABC are in uncharted waters here." Lobbyists and representatives of gun-control organizations responded to the announcement with derision. "These are supposed to be family shows," complained Adelaide Tift of Americans Against the Propagation of Firearms. "Next we'll have the Nanny toting a .22-caliber Beretta. Or Frasier with an Uzi in his briefcase. And where will it end? 'Third Glock From the Sun'?" The real test of Ms. LaCorcia's decision, however, will come from regular watchers of "Helen," and at least some of them were cheering her courage. "I'm proud of her," said Malia, a self-described munitions performance artist from New York. "It's about time someone stood up and showed the world that owning a handgun doesn't make us any different from anyone else. I had actually lost interest in the show recently, but now I'll be glued to my set every week." But other longtime fans were less certain in their reactions. "I guess I'll still watch it," said Jennifer, a Chicago native who has been a devotee of the show since its premiere. "As long as the writers don't get too trigger-happy, you know? I watch 'Helen' to have a few laughs, not to be lectured at about the social acceptability of possessing weapons." Looking suddenly embarrassed, she quickly added, "Not that there's anything wrong with that." Gary Krist is the author of the novel "Bad Chemistry." Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming | 626 - 798- 6574 ----------------- | 1175 N Altadena Dr | ------------------- Jack@Minerva.com | Pasadena, Ca 91107 | FAX 398 8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: linzellr@datastar.net (Robert Linzell) Subject: Fwd: SECRETARY OF THE NAVY RESIGNATION Date: 11 Jun 1998 22:28:57 -0500 Forwarded FYI. Names and e-mail addresses were omitted in the interest of privacy. This may be another piece in the puzzle, or just another non-event. It does seem consistent with a book review in the May 11-17, 1998, issue of the national weekly edition of _The_Washington_Times_ ("'The Downsized Warrior' in the new world order," p. 28). The following came from a lab director, so I'm reasonably sure it's authentic. Yours in the struggle, Bob in Mississippi >From: XXX@XXX.XXX.navy.mil >To: allhands >Subject: SECRETARY OF THE NAVY RESIGNATION >Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 09:45:31 -0500 > > >Subject: SECRETARY OF THE NAVY RESIGNATION > > >Capt Buckley wanted this message from the Secretary of the Navy to be >available to all hands. >Thanks, >XXX > > 1. Today, June 8, I wrote both President Clinton and >Secretary of Defense Cohen to inform them that I would be stepping down >as Secretary of the Navy effective in December of this year. I intend >to return to the private sector. Even though I will not be leaving >office until later this year, I felt that letting my intentions known >now would allow the President sufficient time to identify a new >Secretary, have that person confirmed by the United States Senate, and >allow for a smooth transition. > 2. During my five-year tenure as Secretary of the Navy, I >have been honored, privileged and humbled to have served in my position >as civilian head of the greatest, most powerful and most professional >Navy/Marine Corps team in the history of the world. During my time as >Secretary, I have met with tens of thousands of Sailors and Marines and >their families and marveled at your commitment, dedication, >professionalism, courage and endless sacrifice. You and your families >have my undying respect, and that of my wife, Margaret, as well. > 3. As your Secretary, I have also met with Myriad National >and World leaders, including Mayors, Governors, Cabinet Officers, >Ambassadors, Congressmen, Senators, Presidents, Prime Ministers and >Chief Executive Officers of Global Corporations. Without exception, >each of them has expressed profound respect for the job that you do as >part of the Navy/Marine Corps team. That is why I am proud to be your >Secretary of the Navy - Your leader and your strongest advocate. > 4. As I look back on my time in office, I feel very >fulfilled over what we have accomplished together. The Department of >the Navy has been transformed, and I am proud to have participated in >that. Even though we have seen the biggest drawdown since World War II >resulting from our victory in the Cold War, we remain an extremely ready >and capable force. That ready capability continues to evidence itself >day in and day out as the Navy and Marine Corps remain forward deployed >and engaged in a still dangerous world. > 5. Many challenges remain. But the leadership and the many >programs which have been put in place tell me that we are ready for the >21st century. > 6. In my remaining six months in office, I will continue to >travel to fleet units and commands around the world where I hope to see >many of you and your family members to thank you personally for your >outstanding service. Being your Secretary of the Navy makes me realize >that I am richly blessed and fulfilled. This opportunity is the >experience of a lifetime. Be assured that I will continue to sing your >praises and tell your story. May god bless you all. > 7. Released by the Honorable John H. Dalton, Secretary of >the Navy. > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Conservative Bumper Stickers (fwd) Date: 12 Jun 1998 11:49:06 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Warning: The following is sure to offend somebody, so if you choose to proceed, do so with caution. For the rest of us, sit back and enjoy. 1. Liberals: So open minded their brains fell out. 2. Bill Clinton: The reason stupid people should not be allowed to vote. 3. Bill Clinton: The best president communist Red China can buy. 4. For a "strong woman" Hillary sure does whine a lot. 5. Anybody counted the White House silverware lately? 6. Just another slave of the "Welfare State". 7. Vote Democrat! It's fun to bankrupt a nation! 8. Vote Democrat! Punish your successful neighbor! 9. Ted Kennedy for Life Guard. 10. Vote Democrat! It's better than thinking! 11. I was a Democrat... then I got a job. 12. Fur is warm. 13. Stop Global Whinning! 14. AIDS... Drugs... Abortion... don't Liberals just kill you? 15. No job? No money? No problem! Vote Democrat! 16. Annoy a liberal, work hard and make your own money. 17. Annoy a liberal, grow tobacco and give it out for free. 18. Communist money runs the White House. 19. EQUAL RIGHTS FOR unborn WOMEN! 20. Forget the sex. How about the FBI files and China? 21. Kennedy's car has killed more people than my handgun. 22. Question Liberalism. 23. It takes a village... to take my gun. 24. Sure you can have my gun. Bullets first! 25. All in favor of gun control- raise your right hand. (Shown with picture of Hitler with right arm extended). 26. If you are out of work and hungry... eat an environmentalist. 27. You feel my pain? You are my pain. 28. Crime doesn't pay. Unless you're the President. 29. Hitler was " FOR THE CHILDREN" too. 30. Visualize Impeachment. 31. Guns don't kill people, kids on welfare do. 32. Poor Rush. So many scandals & only 3 hours a day to talk about them. 33. To a Liberal- peace means the "Absence of any Opposition". 34. Equal Opportunity Employer: (Majorities need not apply). 35. Affirmative Action: (I refuse to make it on my own). 36. Clinton / Gore Indictments / Pending 37. If things get any worse, we'll have to ask the government to stop helping. 38. Democrats love the poor so much they want to create more. 39. Save the baby seals. Club a Liberal. 40. Vote Republican. The money you save will be your own. 41. But... Clinton promised. 42. Abortion: One dead. One wounded. 43. Hey Hillary! The residents of your "Village" better keep their hands off my children. 44. Save a tree. Eat a beaver. 45. Socialism works. Just ask the Cubans. 46. Put the Clinton Cabinet back in the closet. 47. Clinton Creed: Take credit, not responsibility. 48. No wonder Clinton is for legalized abortion. Look at all the child support he's saving. 49. What did Clinton do when the Abortion Bill came across his desk? He paid it! 50. Friends don't let friends vote Democrat. 51. Hey Bill. It's the "White House" not the "Whore House". 52. Is your Church B.A.T.F. approved? [Bureau of Alcohal, Tobacco and Firearms]. 53. Communist Manifesto. DNC Handbook. 54. Increase the minimum wage... cut taxes! 55. BILL CLINTON. Made in China. 56. If his private life doesn't matter... let him date your daughter. 57. I hired Craig Livingstone! 58. God judge the U.S.A. 59. War Vet. A dying breed in an ungrateful nation. 60. Karl Marx was a Democrat. 61. It's 10 pm. Do you know where your president is? 62. Support the IRS. Vote Democrat! 63. If Vince Foster had a gun he'd be alive today. 64. Are you a Liberal or just plain stupid? 65. The two scariest words in the English language: President Gore. 66. When does the ACLU defend "second hand smoke". When it's the American Flag. 65. "Pro Life"! And my children will vote too! 66. Ignore the media. Think for yourself. 67. How do you know that scandal is rocking the White House? When Socks the cat and Buddy the dog make headline news. (Think about it) 68. I'm not this way because I listen to Rush. I listen to Rush because I'm this way. 69. Ever notice how all the "Celebrate Diversity" stickers look the same? 70. Celebrate Diversity not Perversity. 71. Please work harder. There are millions on welfare counting on you. 72. Fight Crime. Shoot back. 73. I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6. 74. Quarrentine AIDS. 75. If guns cause crime, than matches cause arson. 76. MODERN DAY AMERICAN DREAM: A liberal fleeing the country with an illegal alien under each arm. 77. LIBERAL LOGIC: Against the death penalty. For abortion. 78. LIBERAL LOGIC: Ban tobacco. Legalize pot. 79. I survived Roe vs Wade. 80. If it's not a baby, then you're not pregnant. 81. The Holocaust: Gun Control in Action. 82. What's wrong with this country when you can't hate someone unless they're white? 83. Make getting welfare as hard as a bulding permit. 84. I love animals... they taste so good. 85. Only in America does a draft dodger live in the White House while a Vietnam Vet lives in a cardboard box. 86. If the Liberals can't get your guns they'll take your ammo. 87. Save a cop. Shoot a criminal. 88. Driver carries no more tha $20.00... (worth of ammo). 89. Impeach Clinton. And her husband too. 90. Jimmy Carter. No longer the worst President we ever had. 91. I believe Paula. 92. I voted for Clinton. Please forgive me! 93. Have faith that Democrats are so "Pro-Abortion"- that they'll make themselves extinct. 94. Vote Democrat! It's easier than getting a job. 95. Missing Clinton? Check under tires. 96. How can you tell when a Democrat is lying? You see their lips moving. 97. Impeach Clinton. "For the Children". 98. James Carville. What you get when you drag a hundred dollar bill down Pennsylvania Avenue. 99. Spotted Owels taste like chicken. 100. Gays in the military? Why not? They're in the White House. 101. To Republicans everyday is like July 4th. To Democrats everyday is like april 15th. Click below for more pearls of wisdom. Rush-Online.com (Rush Limbaugh) - Conservativ... --part2_896032408_boundary-- --part1_896032408_boundary-- Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574 -----------------| 1175 N Altadena Dr | -------------- Jack@Minerva.Com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-309-8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: Conservative Bumper Stickers (fwd) Date: 12 Jun 1998 11:54:44 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Warning: The following is sure to offend somebody, so if you choose to proceed, do so with caution. For the rest of us, sit back and enjoy. 1. Liberals: So open minded their brains fell out. 2. Bill Clinton: The reason stupid people should not be allowed to vote. 3. Bill Clinton: The best president communist Red China can buy. 4. For a "strong woman" Hillary sure does whine a lot. 5. Anybody counted the White House silverware lately? 6. Just another slave of the "Welfare State". 7. Vote Democrat! It's fun to bankrupt a nation! 8. Vote Democrat! Punish your successful neighbor! 9. Ted Kennedy for Life Guard. 10. Vote Democrat! It's better than thinking! 11. I was a Democrat... then I got a job. 12. Fur is warm. 13. Stop Global Whinning! 14. AIDS... Drugs... Abortion... don't Liberals just kill you? 15. No job? No money? No problem! Vote Democrat! 16. Annoy a liberal, work hard and make your own money. 17. Annoy a liberal, grow tobacco and give it out for free. 18. Communist money runs the White House. 19. EQUAL RIGHTS FOR unborn WOMEN! 20. Forget the sex. How about the FBI files and China? 21. Kennedy's car has killed more people than my handgun. 22. Question Liberalism. 23. It takes a village... to take my gun. 24. Sure you can have my gun. Bullets first! 25. All in favor of gun control- raise your right hand. (Shown with picture of Hitler with right arm extended). 26. If you are out of work and hungry... eat an environmentalist. 27. You feel my pain? You are my pain. 28. Crime doesn't pay. Unless you're the President. 29. Hitler was " FOR THE CHILDREN" too. 30. Visualize Impeachment. 31. Guns don't kill people, kids on welfare do. 32. Poor Rush. So many scandals & only 3 hours a day to talk about them. 33. To a Liberal- peace means the "Absence of any Opposition". 34. Equal Opportunity Employer: (Majorities need not apply). 35. Affirmative Action: (I refuse to make it on my own). 36. Clinton / Gore Indictments / Pending 37. If things get any worse, we'll have to ask the government to stop helping. 38. Democrats love the poor so much they want to create more. 39. Save the baby seals. Club a Liberal. 40. Vote Republican. The money you save will be your own. 41. But... Clinton promised. 42. Abortion: One dead. One wounded. 43. Hey Hillary! The residents of your "Village" better keep their hands off my children. 44. Save a tree. Eat a beaver. 45. Socialism works. Just ask the Cubans. 46. Put the Clinton Cabinet back in the closet. 47. Clinton Creed: Take credit, not responsibility. 48. No wonder Clinton is for legalized abortion. Look at all the child support he's saving. 49. What did Clinton do when the Abortion Bill came across his desk? He paid it! 50. Friends don't let friends vote Democrat. 51. Hey Bill. It's the "White House" not the "Whore House". 52. Is your Church B.A.T.F. approved? [Bureau of Alcohal, Tobacco and Firearms]. 53. Communist Manifesto. DNC Handbook. 54. Increase the minimum wage... cut taxes! 55. BILL CLINTON. Made in China. 56. If his private life doesn't matter... let him date your daughter. 57. I hired Craig Livingstone! 58. God judge the U.S.A. 59. War Vet. A dying breed in an ungrateful nation. 60. Karl Marx was a Democrat. 61. It's 10 pm. Do you know where your president is? 62. Support the IRS. Vote Democrat! 63. If Vince Foster had a gun he'd be alive today. 64. Are you a Liberal or just plain stupid? 65. The two scariest words in the English language: President Gore. 66. When does the ACLU defend "second hand smoke". When it's the American Flag. 65. "Pro Life"! And my children will vote too! 66. Ignore the media. Think for yourself. 67. How do you know that scandal is rocking the White House? When Socks the cat and Buddy the dog make headline news. (Think about it) 68. I'm not this way because I listen to Rush. I listen to Rush because I'm this way. 69. Ever notice how all the "Celebrate Diversity" stickers look the same? 70. Celebrate Diversity not Perversity. 71. Please work harder. There are millions on welfare counting on you. 72. Fight Crime. Shoot back. 73. I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6. 74. Quarrentine AIDS. 75. If guns cause crime, than matches cause arson. 76. MODERN DAY AMERICAN DREAM: A liberal fleeing the country with an illegal alien under each arm. 77. LIBERAL LOGIC: Against the death penalty. For abortion. 78. LIBERAL LOGIC: Ban tobacco. Legalize pot. 79. I survived Roe vs Wade. 80. If it's not a baby, then you're not pregnant. 81. The Holocaust: Gun Control in Action. 82. What's wrong with this country when you can't hate someone unless they're white? 83. Make getting welfare as hard as a bulding permit. 84. I love animals... they taste so good. 85. Only in America does a draft dodger live in the White House while a Vietnam Vet lives in a cardboard box. 86. If the Liberals can't get your guns they'll take your ammo. 87. Save a cop. Shoot a criminal. 88. Driver carries no more tha $20.00... (worth of ammo). 89. Impeach Clinton. And her husband too. 90. Jimmy Carter. No longer the worst President we ever had. 91. I believe Paula. 92. I voted for Clinton. Please forgive me! 93. Have faith that Democrats are so "Pro-Abortion"- that they'll make themselves extinct. 94. Vote Democrat! It's easier than getting a job. 95. Missing Clinton? Check under tires. 96. How can you tell when a Democrat is lying? You see their lips moving. 97. Impeach Clinton. "For the Children". 98. James Carville. What you get when you drag a hundred dollar bill down Pennsylvania Avenue. 99. Spotted Owels taste like chicken. 100. Gays in the military? Why not? They're in the White House. 101. To Republicans everyday is like July 4th. To Democrats everyday is like april 15th. Click below for more pearls of wisdom. Rush-Online.com (Rush Limbaugh) - Conservativ... --part2_896032408_boundary-- --part1_896032408_boundary-- Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574 -----------------| 1175 N Altadena Dr | -------------- Jack@Minerva.Com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-309-8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: rkba-list: Making Politics on the Backs of One's Children (fwd) Date: 13 Jun 1998 09:32:31 PST On Jun 13, ccurley wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] The following article was published in the Casper (Wyoming) Star Tribune today, June 13th. Enjoy. The text, showing edits by the CST, is on the Wyoming libertarian Party Web page at http://www.GeoCities.com/CapitolHill/1799 Making Politics On the Backs Of One's Children Charles Curley The vultures are circling. In 1974, Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) guerrillas made war on Israel by attacking schools and kindergartens. The series of attacks culminated with that on Maalot on May 15th. Three PLO goons shot up a vanload of (Arab) workers. They then entered the school at Maalot, killed the housekeeper, his wife and their child. They then took about 100 children hostage. When rescue forces assaulted the hostage takers, the terrorists blew up explosives and sprayed the children with machine gun fire. 25 people died, 66 more were wounded. Golda Meir said during the Maalot incident, that one does not make politics on the backs of one's children. That is exactly what the gun control freaks are doing now. Children are dying in what appear to be random attacks on government schools throughout the country. And the victim disarmers are using the tragedy to push their discredited, blood-soaked agenda. Their policies are discredited and blood-soaked because it is precisely the policies that they have advocated that make possible such attacks. We know from the studies of Prof. Gary Kleck that Americans use firearms more than two million times a year to stop criminal attacks. We know from the works of Professor John Lott and graduate student David Mustard that prohibitions on concealed carry of guns are responsible for approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies every year. Why should schools be any different than the rest of the world? It is well know that gun control utopias like Washington, D.C. and New York City have much higher crime rates than the benighted redneck "gun nut" states like Wyoming, Nevada and Vermont. Of course, the crime rates are so high because those who obey the law cannot defend themselves from those who break the laws, including the gun control laws. What are the government schools but miniature Washington, D.C.s? They are just as bureausclorotic, just as mind-numbing as D.C., except in miniature. And guns are prohibited -- to the law abiding -- on school grounds. Why not go all the way, and put up signs that say, "Child Murdering Scum Welcome Here" around our schools? It should be clear by now that the current spate of school massacres are premeditated by the perpetrators. For example, in the Springfield, Oregon, massacre this Thursday (21 May), Kipland Kinkel went armed with three firearms, and, according to police, a "backpack loaded with ammunition clips (sic) and loose ammunition". And it should also be clear that the police cannot be on duty at the schools at all times to stop these attacks. Nor have they any legal duty to do so. In the Springfield incident, it was students who stopped Kinkel. Jacob and Josh Ryker (17 and 14, respectively) rushed Kinkel with bare hands while he changed magazines on his rifle. Jacob took two 9mm bullets for his trouble. How many more students would have died had not the Ryker brothers taken up responsibility for their own self defense? It was the "gun culture" which the blood-stained victim disarmament lobby so disdains which made possible the Ryker brothers' brave counter-attack. Their father, Robert Ryker, is a U.S. Navy diver who taught his boys firearms and firearms safety. Linda Ryker, their mother, said, "They know how to respect a gun, and I think all of that did lead to the fact that my boys did not panic when they saw them, and they tried to assist and help." And it was a deliberate, brave act for Robert Ryker to wear an NRA cap at the press conference. All four of the Rykers are heroes. The brothers, for doing what they did. Their parents, for preparing them to do it. Nor will you ever see any of the Rykers indiscriminately slaughtering children like unarmed fish in a barrel. It is cowards, not brave men, who attack children. And from this, Charles Schumer, Teddy Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and similar sniveling "right-thinking" people, and their sycophants in the press, will conclude that we have to take guns away from Americans. -- After the Maalot incident, the Israelis changed their policies. Strict gun control laws left over from the British Mandate were ended. People in the settlements were issue personal arms. Anyone with a clean record could get a concealed carry permit, and many did. Army reservists continued to keep their small arms at home, as the Swiss do. Teachers and kindergarten nurses now started to carry guns. Schools were protected by parents (and often grandparents) guarding them in voluntary shifts. No school group went on a hike or trip without armed guards. The police involved the citizens in a voluntary civil guard project "Mishmar Esrachi", which even had its own sniper teams. The Army taught firearms safety and shooting techniques. These efforts had an effect: PLO attacks became less effective and more costly to the PLO. By the early 1980s, the attacks ceased. As Dr. David Schiller, a former Israeli expert on the attacks put it, "Terrorists and other evildoers don't like risks." Or, as John Lott put it, "Criminals, we found, respond rationally to deterrence threats." The Israelis also saw a connection between the press and the PLO attacks. The press gave the PLO the media attention they wanted to "promote their cause". Mind you, you have to be at least as deranged as prozac patient Kip Kinkel to think that sort of publicity will help your cause, but that's what they believed. And the press gave it to them. According to Schiller, "Now THAT is the underlying 'reason' behind each and every incident that involved killing sprees in schools... from Maalot to Dunblane to Jonesboro." The time has come to stop risking our children in the name of discredited and bloodstained policies. The time has come to stop whimpering and sniveling in cowardice, and take responsibility once again. It is time to take responsibility for our own self defense, and the defense of our neighbors and community. Attacks on our children will continue as along as they are defenseless. Those who pursue policies of victim disarmament are accessories before the fact to such attacks because they prevent the victims from responding with full measure. A .25 ACP in the purse of a teacher is a far more effective deterrent to murderers than all the Handgun Control, Inc., pamphlets in the world. Jacob Ryker is alive in a hospital, not dead in a morgue, because he took full responsibility for protecting himself. Are you willing to do less? -- C^2 I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Benjamin Rush, 1800 A.D. Thomas Jefferson, Patron Saint of the Internet: http://w3.trib.com/~ccurley/Jefferson.html [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: Interesting Please Read and Distribute (fwd) Date: 13 Jun 1998 09:30:45 PST On Jun 13, Mike Riddle wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:54:27 -0500, larry ball wrote: >Here is a VERY good article. Read and distribute not only to other >gunners but to the outside world also. Here it is a bit more readably formatted: THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 35, January 15, 1998 Crank Up The Enola Gay By L. Neil Smith (lneil@ezlink.com) Exclusive to The Libertarian Enterprise So the Japanese (it says here) are ramrodding a drive in the UN to relieve everybody on the planet of their personal weapons. Especially -- it goes without saying -- us ugly Americans. The Japanese, of course, are the exemplars of moral excellence who gang-raped their way across the Asian mainland and ate Allied prisoners during World War II. The Japanese are the paragons of virtue whose government and corporate leaders resign in disgrace (they usually slither back later on, an argument for the earlier tradition of seppuku) with such regularity they could print schedules of it like a railroad. The Japanese are the upholders of decency who let children who show the faintest spark of individuality be beaten into conformity (the practice is called ijime -- "The nail that sticks up shall be pounded down.") by their little schoolmates. The Japanese are the keepers of the public trust who bullied their own folk out of their guns to please a vile, self-serving aristocracy, who routinely torture suspects until they confess, and who subject their citizens to searches of their homes twice a year -- by police fully as corrupt as those of New Orleans -- to make sure no nasty old guns sneaked under the floorboards when nobody was watching. Fact is, the Japanese establishment is terrified of creeping individualism within its own anthill -- their classical and postwar culture, a sick, twisted mishmash of intimidation, brutality, class exploitation, and perversion, is on the verge of collapse -- and is desperately trying to shut the threat off at its source, by destroying its most potently articulate symbol, the gun in private hands. The effort is doomed. The Japanese people are fed up grinding their lives away for the sake of industrial feudalism. Fed up seeing their kids kill themselves when they don't do well on the SATs. Fed up with rapacious taxes and paying higher prices than anyone else in the world for TVs and stereos they make themselves. Fed up with $10 hamburger, rice at twice the world price, and real estate prices that lift my own humble domicile into the multimillion dollar range. Fed up with bosses who conduct "business" by getting drunk in restaurants where the main attraction is groping and licking the parts of nude female dancers that can be pressed through openings in a chickenwire barrier. But I digress. All this puts me in an awkward position. Everything I own that uses electricity is Japanese. So is my car, an '84 Subaru wagon. I like Japanese stuff. My longing for a new Toyota Land Cruiser is a palpable presence in our home, like Harvey the Rabbit. My wife feels the same about a Mitsubishi Spyder (but only the one with the big engine). In the ordinary course of events, our fortunes currently being on the rise, we'd have acquired both vehicles, uncomfortably close to a hundred grand worth of rolling stock, sometime in the next few years. We've worked hard, we've waited a long time, we deserve it. But now we're not so sure. To an extent unappreciated by the most cynical American student of politics, the keiretsu or zaibatsu, a handful of corporations that comprise "Japan, Inc." are the Japanese government; democracy means about as much there as it does in Mexico. What the Japanese government and its UN delegation want is what the zaibatsu want. If the Japanese government wants to disarm us, it's because Toyota and Mitsubishi (and half a dozen others) want to disarm us. The US government always claims that every stupid war this country ever blundered into was to save the Constitution and the Bill of Rights from foreign devils (the British come to mind) who wanted to destroy them. That being the case, why shouldn't the average Joes and Janes coerced into fighting those wars regard Japanese anti-gun activity as an act of war? Let me repeat it so you'll know I meant it: why shouldn't we regard Japanese efforts to destroy the Bill of Rights as an act of war? Why shouldn't we carpet-nuke their crappy little islands from one end to the other this time and obliterate a culture -- I refuse to say "civilization" -- as worthy of such treatment as the Aztecs were? Well for one thing, because we're the good-guys. We just don't do that kind of thing. We still feel guilty about the pair of puny A-bombs we used to save millions of lives (most of them Japanese) in 1945. For another, we're individualists. We understand that it isn't the Japanese people who are the problem (they love guns) but the corrupt and evil leaders of a corrupt and evil corporate and political structure that was forced on them, largely by us. In fact, it's the likelihood that the Japanese people are growing restive, and worst of all, individualistic, that has their corrupt and evil leaders on the rag. So what should we do? Well, we already have a predisposition to feel ambivalent about imported products, especially Japanese products, and especially automobiles. On one hand, we love the damned things, they're pretty, they work, and even with the most punitive tariffs our own corrupt and evil leaders can levy against them, they're still a bargain. On the other, until the Japanese bought the unions off by building factories here (neatly dodging tariffs, as well), Japanese cars used to get torched in Detroit parking lots. Plenty of people still vividly remember World War II. Many more have learned enough about Japanese politics and culture to resist to the last breath any attempt to impose them here. For those determined to resist, Japan's sociopolitics leave it uniquely vulnerable. If, for example, Detroit's Big Three all went belly-up tomorrow, the US government (perhaps this is unfortunate) would react lugubriously, but would also go on without a hiccup. Ayn Rand and Robert LeFevre would have maintained that Japan -- often cited as an ideal "partnership" between big government and big business -- is the ultimate expression of fascism. In Japan, when one of the Big Eight gets a sniffle, the state mainlines Nyquil, because there is no meaningful distinction between Corporate and Official Japan. One of my correspondents compares it to lichen, a symbiotic combination of algae and fungus. Now what do you suppose a year or two of depressed auto sales -- if we inavoidably linked it to Japan's asinine gun polices -- might have? I'm (reluctantly) willing to postpone purchase of my Land Cruiser, to consider buying a Suburban like G. Gordon Liddy and my mother, or even look into the new SUV by Mercedes. I notice that my wife's been eyeing that little BMW that looks like a shark. My suspicion, in this age of the MBA, is that if Japan, suffered as little as a 2 or 3 percent drop in their American auto sales, they'd be pathetically willing to straighten up and fly right. What does "straighten up and fly right" consist of? For openers, they would cease their worldwide personal disarmament advocacy. And it would be good if they withdrew from the UN altogether. We're going to do it, sooner or later, and there's no time like right now to start a trend. After profuse and abject apologies, the Japanese government would adopt the Bill of Rights and make a point of seeing that their people acquire guns, preferably from us -- no registration, Vermont Carry only. Finally, the architects of the current policy would be "invited" to do the right thing, which, in Japan, I'll remind you, involves a long, razor-sharp knife and a good friend standing by to behead whatever's left. Failure on any one of these points will be a signal for the boycott to continue. People often ask me what the Libertarian Second Amendment Caucus is for, what its coordinators across the country can do. Well, they (and anybody else who wants to help) can start by copying this column to everyone they know. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce it anywhere as long as it remains unaltered and credit is given. Above all, send it where it'll do the most good: Japanese diplomatic establishments and your local purveyors of Japanese road machines. My dad fought World War II and was a prisoner of war. One of my uncles was crippled and another died in a submarine. They all believed (because the government told them and in those days folks believed it) that they were fighting the Japanese and Germans for our rights. Starve Toyota, feed the Bill of Rights. Detroit will love us for it and so (for once) will the unions. And by liberating ourselves, we liberate the Japanese people. Which I guess beats nuking them until they glow. Novelist and political essayist L. Neil Smith is the only Libertarian ever to be called a "thug" within the pages of the LP News. He's also been characterized by a disgruntled reader as having written the "single most repugnant ... piece of tripe ... ever seen in an American newspaper." In his spare time, he's the award-winning author of The Probability Broach, Pallas, Henry Martyn, and Bretta Matryn and 15 other novels, as well as founder and publisher of The Libertarian Enterprise. Order his books from Amazon.com via "The Webley Page" at http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/lnsbooks.html#amazon, or give Laissez Faire Books a toll-free call at 1-800-326-0996. "The right of self-defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." -- Henry St. George Tucker (in Blackstone's Commentaries) [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Survey - need pro-gun support (fwd) Date: 13 Jun 1998 09:31:35 PST On Jun 13, Gary Stocker wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > > We have learned that the Weekly CGI Web Poll concerns opinions about > firearms and firearms laws (gun control). If possible, please visit > this site before 6/15 so that our side can be heard in proper > proportion. The poll is at: > > http://www.dreamscape.com/throb/index.html [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Resource from the anti-gunners (fwd) Date: 13 Jun 1998 20:46:10 PST On Jun 13, Bob Mueller wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Courtesy of Join-Together, we hear that--- "To assist you in your efforts, we have prepared this Sample Law section outlining a handful of gun laws which are commonly introduced at the state level. These laws are intended to provide you with sample legislation that has been successfully enacted in various states. " They also mention a brochure: Addressing Gun Violence Through Local Ordinances: A Legal Resource Manual for California Cities and Counties - this from the Legal Community Against Violence in SF, CA. It might be worthwhile to browse through some of the info there and use it to be go ahead and get ready to block any of these proposals if/when they are introduced in your area. Sorry I don't have a better URL, but they use frames at JTO, so go to http://www1.jointogether.org/gv/ , and get to the Strategy |Public Policy section. ______________________________________ Bob Mueller Second Amendment Research Network - http://www.infinet.com/~bmueller/Index.html D, 6/52 ADA Alumni Association Commander http://www.gather.com/d652ada/ [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: Stallone on Guns in America Date: 12 Jun 1998 17:05:04 -0700 QUOTE BY SYLVESTER STALLONE ABOUT GUNS MRC 6/12=20 The only way to make America safe: go house to house and confiscate=20 every gun. Reacting to the shooting death of Phil Hartman, actor=20 Sylvester Stallone who is best known for glamorizing in his Rambo=20 films military weapons not even the NRA wants legal, urged the repeal=20 of the 2nd amendment. MRC entertainment analyst Tom Johnson transcribed his ranting from a=20 June 8 segment on Access Hollywood, the show carried by NBC-owned=20 stations and syndicated to other markets.=20 Stallone conceded, "I know we use guns in films," but insisted the=20 time has come "to be a little more accountable and realize that this=20 is an escalating problem that's eventually going to lead to, I think,=20 urban warfare." Access Hollywood then showed a clip from a comment he made in London=20 a few weeks ago: "Until America, door to door, takes every handgun,=20 this is what you're gonna have. It's pathetic. It really is pathetic.=20 It's sad. We're living in the Dark Ages over there." "Over there"? Yes, the man who wants to control what Americans have=20 in their homes is now living in England. Back to Stallone's interview=20 with the show, he demanded that the 2nd amendment be abandoned: "It=20 has to be stopped, and someone really has to go on the line, a=20 certain dauntless political figure, and say, =91It's ending, it's over,=20 all bets are off. It's not 200 years ago, we don't need this anymore,=20 and the rest of the world doesn't have it. Why should we?" - Monte -------------------------------------------------------------------- "Maybe freedom's just one of those things that you can't inherit." - Peter Bradford, in the film "Amerika" -------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tanya Metaksa Subject: Re: Survey - need pro-gun support (fwd) Date: 14 Jun 1998 22:46:34 -0400 At 09:31 AM 6/13/98 -0800, you wrote: >On Jun 13, Gary Stocker wrote: > thanks for letting me know about the poll.... Tanya - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harry Barnett Subject: Re: Survey - need pro-gun support (fwd) Date: 14 Jun 1998 23:45:05 -0700 (PDT) On Sun, 14 Jun 1998, Tanya Metaksa wrote: > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 22:46:34 -0400 > From: Tanya Metaksa > Reply-To: roc@lists.xmission.com > To: roc@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: Survey - need pro-gun support (fwd) > > At 09:31 AM 6/13/98 -0800, you wrote: > >On Jun 13, Gary Stocker wrote: > > > thanks for letting me know about the poll.... > Tanya I am curious about that poll. For a poll that is ostensibly for the purpose of determining political attitudes towards gun control, why is it relevant to ask: 1. Do you own any firearms? 2. What type(s) of firearms do you own? It was also curious that the distractor "None of your Business" was not available to answer these questions. Perhaps someone can give a rational reason for the possible correlations to be developed by that poll, and for what purpose. ----- Harry Barnett - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: Hearthside, June 15, These Colors Don't Run Date: 15 Jun 1998 11:57:08 -0400 >From: "Hearthside Family Publications" >To: "Our friends at Hearthside"hearth@hancock.net >Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:11:49 +0000 >X-Distribution: Moderate >Subject: Hearthside, June 15, These Colors Don't Run >Reply-to: hearth@hancock.net >Priority: normal > > >Hearthside, June 15, These Colors Don't Run > >Yesterday was flag day. Ours flew high at Hearthside from sunup to >sundown. Coming home from church, we saw 5 more on the 11 mile trip >through the countryside. Not a good showing, but good enough to >demonstrate there are still a few "Mike's" out there. > >Thanks to the forwards that brought this post. It is worth a little >extra length in the Daily Reflections. > >"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things >not seen." Hebrews 11:1 > >Dave and Helen Delany > >"Honoring the American Flag" > Condensed from a speech by Leo K. Thorsness, > recipient of The Congressional Medal of Honor. > >You've probably seen the bumper sticker somewhere along the road. It >depicts an American Flag, accompanied by the words "These colors >don't run." I'm always glad to see this, because it reminds me of >an incident from my confinement in North Vietnam at the Hao Lo POW >Camp, or the "Hanoi Hilton," as it became known. Then a Major in the >U.S. Air Force, I had been captured and imprisoned from 1967-1973. >Our treatment had been frequently brutal. After three years, however, >the beatings and torture became less frequent. > >During the last year, we were allowed outside most days for a couple >of minutes to bathe. We showered by drawing water from a concrete >tank with a homemade bucket. One day as we all stood by the tank, >stripped of our clothes, a young Naval pilot named Mike Christian >found the remnants of a handkerchief in a gutter that ran under the >prison wall. Mike managed to sneak the grimy rag into our cell and >began fashioning it into a flag. > >Over time we all loaned him a little soap, and he spent days cleaning >the material. We helped by scrounging and stealing bits and pieces of >anything he could use. At night, under his mosquito net, Mike worked >on the flag. He made red and blue from ground-up roof tiles and tiny >amounts of ink and painted the colors onto the cloth with watery rice >glue. Using thread from his own blanket and a homemade bamboo >needle, he sewed on stars. > >Early in the morning a few days later, when the guards were not >alert, he whispered loudly from the back of our cell, "Hey gang, look >here." He proudly held up this tattered piece of cloth, waving it as >if in a breeze. If you used your imagination, you could tell it was >supposed to be an American flag. When he raised that smudgy fabric, >we automatically stood straight and saluted, our chests puffing out, >and more than a few eyes had tears. > >About once a week the guards would strip us, run us outside and go >through our clothing. During one of those shakedowns, they found >Mike's flag. We all knew what would happen. That night they came for >him. > >Night interrogations were always the worst. They opened the cell door >and pulled Mike out. We could hear the beginning of the torture >before they even had him in the torture cell. They beat him most of >the night. > >About daylight they pushed what was left of him back through the cell >door. He was badly broken; even his voice was gone. Within two weeks, >despite the danger, Mike scrounged another piece of cloth and began >another flag. The Stars and Stripes, our national symbol, was worth >the sacrifice to him. Now whenever I see the flag, I think of Mike >and the morning he first waved that tattered emblem of a nation. It >was then, thousands of miles from home in a lonely prison cell, that >he showed us what it is to be truly free. >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >--- > "Liberty Begins at Hearthside" >Copyright: Hearthside Family Publications > PO Box 212 Conklin NY 13748 > http://www.hancock.net/~freedom > * * * * * > Free! > ><> To Subscribe (or unsubscribe) > Send request to hearth@hancock.net > and ask about Hearth Tabs: >regular doses of historical perspective! > Free! > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Boyd Kneeland Subject: Re: Interesting Please Read and Distribute (fwd) Date: 15 Feb 1998 10:35:00 -0700 Snipped mike and bills header > > >THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 35, January 15, 1998 > > >Crank Up The Enola Gay > >By L. Neil Smith (lneil@ezlink.com) > >Exclusive to The Libertarian Enterprise BACK ISSUES of The Libertarian Enterprise (TLE) are available at http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/index.html. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Boyd Kneeland Subject: Re: Survey - results as of about 11am PST Date: 15 Feb 1998 13:09:29 -0700 the results as of about 11am PST: Total Respondents: 2878 Do you currently have one or more firearms in your household? Yes 2204 votes 78% No, but we used to 128 votes 5% No, we never have and probablynever will 386 votes 14% No, we never have but we might (or would) consider getting one someday 104 votes 4% (Please note: percentages do not add to 100% due to rounding.) What kinds of firearms do you currently own or have you previously owned? Pistol 2096 votes 32% Shotgun 1886 votes 29% Rifle 2109 votes 32% Other 438 votes 7% What's the primary reason you own (or previously owned) a firearm? Protection/self defense 922 votes 39% Hunting 292 votes 2% Sport/Recreation 947 votes 40% Job requirement (police, security, etc) 35 votes 1% Other 162 votes 7% Have you, your friends, or any member of your family ever fell victim to a firearm injury? Yes 347 votes 12% No 2507 votes 88% Have you, your friends, or any member of your family ever been threatened with a gun? Yes 908 votes 32% No 1948 votes 68% Do you think owning a firearm for self-defense is a good idea? Yes 2392 votes 84% No 467 votes 16% On a scale of 1 to 5, please let us know how important you think it is for the government to address gun control? 1 means you want little/no government involvement, 5 means you want the government to play a large role in it. 1 1791 votes 62% 2 329 votes 11% 3 235 votes 8% 4 165 votes 6% 5 349 votes 12% Is the government currently doing too much, too little or just enough when it comes to addressing gun control? Too much 2138 votes 75% Too little 561 votes 20% Just enough 163 votes 6% Should a person be required to obtain a police permit before being able to purchase a firearm? Yes 879 votes 31% No 1981 votes 69% Should a person be required to attend and pass a certified training program on proper/responsible firearm use before being able to purchase a firearm? Yes 1265 votes 44% No 1588 votes 56% Do you support the Brady bill, a law which poses a five day waiting period and tighter eligibility requirements for firearm ownership? Yes 692 votes 24% No 2002 votes 70% Don't know enough about the Brady bill to say 174 votes 6% In your opinion, what's the minimum age someone should be before they can legally own a firearm? 15 or under 163 votes 6% 16 216 votes 8% 17 16 votes 1% 18 999 votes 35% 19 16 votes 1% 20 14 votes < 1% 21 498 votes 17% Over 21 383 votes 13% There should be no minimum age limit 558 votes 19% Have you ever carried a firearm in your car for protection? Yes, I've carried a firearm in my car before 1623 votes 57% No, but I've considered carrying a firearm in my car 472 votes 17% No, and I probably never will 760 votes 27% Do you think the National Rifle Association has too much influence, too little influence, or the right amount of influence over gun control laws in the United States? Too much influence 417 votes 15% Too little influence 1702 votes 60% Right amount of influence 378 votes 13% I'm not sure 363 votes 13% How much of a reduction in violent crime do you think would result with tighter gun control laws? A large reduction 194 votes 7% A moderate reduction 292 votes 10% A slight reduction 202 votes 7% No reduction 2176 votes 76% On a scale of 1 to 5, how worried are you (or would you be) about sending your child(ren) to school in today's day and age? 1 means you (would) have little or no worry, 5 means you (would) worry a lot about it. 1 1024 votes 36% 2 543 votes 19% 3 635 votes 22% 4 306 votes 11% 5 344 votes 12% Are guns appearing in schools today a concern for you? Yes, it is a large concern for me 1002 votes 35% Yes, it is a moderate concern for me 611 votes 21% Yes, it is a slight concern for me 740 votes 26% No, it is of no concern to me 509 votes 18% In your opinion, is the problem of guns appearing in schools as serious as the media would have you believe? Yes, the gun problem in our schools is just as bad or worse than the media's spin on it. 703 votes 25% No, the gun problem is not as bad or "out of control" as the media would have us believe 2151 votes75% If there was a gun violation rumor by a student at your child's school, would you pull your child out of school for the day? Yes 967 votes 34% No 1868 votes 66% Please rate this week's poll on a scale of 1 to 5. 5 459 votes 16% 4 725 votes 25% 3 983 votes 35% 2 545 votes 19% 1 133 votes 5% - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brad Alpert" <1911a1@gte.net> Subject: Photos of Philly protestors Date: 17 Jun 1998 09:10:25 +0500 I got my photos from NRA-CON developed and posted 6 photos of protestors working outside the convention hall. http://home1.gte.net/1911a1/pix-2.htm if you want to take a look and try not to gag. Brad - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Boyd Kneeland Subject: Re: Photos of Philly protestors Date: 17 Feb 1998 08:13:03 -0700 Excellent, it's always best to start off the day with a laugh and thanks to Brads excellent photography I'm cheered by the images of our enemies. Frankly, I'd have been tempted to sneak out there and lead them all in a touching rendition of "We are the world, we are the pinheads..." but that may have been a little -too- touching. Sorry I couldn't make it to the convention, thanks for putting the pictures up. Boyd Kneeland At 9:10 AM +0500 6/17/98, Brad Alpert wrote: >I got my photos from NRA-CON developed and posted 6 photos of >protestors working outside the convention hall. > >http://home1.gte.net/1911a1/pix-2.htm > >if you want to take a look and try not to gag. > >Brad > > >- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brad Alpert" <1911a1@gte.net> Subject: Re: Photos of Philly protestors Date: 17 Jun 1998 10:46:03 +0500 > Excellent, it's always best to start off the day with a laugh and thanks to > Brads excellent photography I'm cheered by the images of our enemies. > Frankly, I'd have been tempted to sneak out there and lead them all in a > touching rendition of "We are the world, we are the pinheads..." but that > may have been a little -too- touching. Sorry I couldn't make it to the > convention, thanks for putting the pictures up. Boyd Kneeland Thanks, Boyd! What's interesting is that there were more NRA people outside who'd stepped out to take a smoke than there were protestors. By the way, the group photos were taken on Friday (the people were chanting "GO AWAY NRA! GO AWAY NRA"! but they did not reappear on Saturday or Sunday. These were folks who didn't have to miss work to be there on Friday, if you know what I mean. Brad - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: CNN threatens former military adviser Date: 17 Jun 1998 22:57:26 -0400 >Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 22:08:12 -0400 >From: E Pluribus Unum >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U) >To: E Pluribus Unum Email Distribution Network >Subject: CNN threatens former military adviser > >Wednesday, June 17, 1998 > >WorldNetDaily Exclusive > >CNN threatens former military adviser > >General quit in protest of Arnett Vietnam War special > >Copyright 1998, WorldNetDaily.com > >By Joseph Farah > > Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Perry Smith, who quit as CNN's military >adviser in protest of Peter Arnett's report alleging the U.S. murdered >defectors and used nerve gas during the Vietnam War, is now being forced >into silence by the network at the threat of a lawsuit, WorldNetDaily >has learned. > > Smith protested to CNN's top executives that he was deliberately >excluded from the production process of the special program on >"Operation Tailwind" called, "The Valley of Death," airing June 7. After >the program, Smith demanded of Chief Executive Officer Tom Johnson that >CNN retract the central allegations and issue letters of apology to >veterans whose testimony had been misrepresented. When his >demand was rejected, Smith resigned. > > "There was a time when CNN had quite high standards," Smith wrote. "The >downhill slide in the past year has been frightening." > > Smith had served as a consultant to CNN since the Persian Gulf War. > > "I had tried very hard for a week to convince (top executives) to do a >major retraction, but to no avail," said Smith. "Lot's of people at CNN >were solidly with me on this, but not the top bosses and the team that >put that terrible special together. There is an outside chance that my >resigning in protest may finally get attention -- only time will tell." > > But that was before Smith was told by CNN lawyers, in no uncertain >terms, to shut up. The official word from CNN's public relations >department is that Smith has "retired." The network is also telling some >who ask about the general's departure that he was, indeed, "the military >consultant on the Tailwind story." > > On June 15, Smith went public with his resignation in a letter to his >West Point classmates: > > "I wanted you all to know that I have just quit CNN," he wrote. "For >a solid week I tried to convince the top bosses that the special last >Sunday night was profoundly wrong. I have not been able to do so." > > His resignation and decision to speak out were prompted, Smith >wrote, by a letter he received from a Vietnam vet [at] Fort Benning. > > "So many of the men of SOG (Studies and Observations >Group) that ran those dangerous missions are dying now as a result of >the wounds received, the diseases that ran through them, malaria, >dengue, etc., the physical abuse one's body had to absorb in the >performance of duties, that this (the CNN special) is having a terrible >effect on them," the letter read. "Please don't let their last thoughts >be that once again their sacrifices were in vain, and that the press can >once again crucify us as they did 30 years ago." > > Smith's letter to classmates continued: "There is an outside >chance that my resigning in protest will finally get the attention of >the top guy and he will run a full reatraction. A few of his people >snuck this special by him -- a real sad story. You might be interested >in knowing that a lot of the lower level troops at CNN were with me on >this." > > Smith urged Johnson to handwrite personal letters of apology to the >military men who tried so hard to convince Arnett, and co-producer April >Oliver, that their premise for the story was wrong. > > "This is the very least you can do for these brave and honest >Americans," he wrote in a letter to the top CNN executive. > > His letter continued: "I think it is very important to remind >you, Tom, that there were two very special types of Air Force personnel >in Southeast Asia. Their primary mission was to save lives of downed >crewmen or of infiltration teams in great distress. They often took very >great risks; many were shot down and killed. These two groups were the >A-1 Sandies and Spads and the Jolly Greens. The only time I wept with >joy during my 180 combat missions was the moment the Jollies and the >Sandies rescued my leader who was shot down and badly wounded over Laos. > > "On 14 September, 1970, two A-1 pilots, at great risk to their >lives, were largely responsible for saving over 100 lives," he >continued. "CNN has accused the most heroic of the heroic of using >lethal gas to kill fellow Americans. The only analogy I can think of >would be if CNN accused two Medal of Honor winners with extreme >cowardice -- it is that bad, Tom." > > On Tuesday, June 16, Smith confirmed in an e-mail that CNN officials >were attempting to silence him in his public criticism of the network. >Most consultants in similar situations sign confidentiality agreements >that would prevent them from such criticism. Before taking off for >vacation and refusing several interview requests, Smith e-mailed a >friend who has warned of likely efforts by CNN to intimidate through >threats of a lawsuit. He said: "It has already happened. I am welcoming >a chance. What a great trial that would be." > > CNN's report alleged the U.S. government used lethal nerve gas during >a mission to kill American defectors in Laos in 1970. Arnett claimed to >have based his report on eight months of work and 200 interviews. Yet, >the sensational charges hung primarily on the claims of one man -- lt. >Robert Van Buskirk, a platoon leader in "Operation Tailwind." Van >Buskirk recalled throwing a white phosphorous grenade down a >hole to kill two suspected U.S. defectors during the 1970 mission. He >also claimed to have witnessed the use of the nerve agent Sarin gas on a >base camp used by a group of defectors. > > Doubts were cast upon the claims when another Vietnam Specil >Forces vet, Tom Marzullo, pointed out that Van Buskirk had authored a >book in 1983 called "Operation Tailwind," in which he made no mention of >the defectors or the Sarin gas. Van Buskirk's superiors also discounted >his story. > > CNN also failed to mention that shortly after his tour of duty in >Vietnam, Van Buskirk was arrested by U.S. Army Criminal Investigative >Division officials in Germany for arms trafficking and forced to leave >the military. > > Other troops and officers involved in the mission have come >forward to criticize Van Buskirk, Arnett's CNN special and the notion >that nerve gas was used. Even the historical records of the North >Vietnamese army make no claims that the U.S. ever deployed lethal >chemical weapons in its conduct of the war or in the Laotian incursion. > > Arnett served as CNN's "Man in Baghdad" during the Persian Gulf War. He >was granted unusual access to Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In a report last >September, Arnett also suggested U.S. Special Forces had used chemical >weapons on the battlefield in Vietnam. Some media critics and >commentators have characterized his reports from Baghdad and Southeast >Asia as "anti-American" in tone. >-- >****************************************************************** > E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group > P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 > Grove City, OH 43123 > >Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse > 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) > >http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com >****************************************************************** > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: New magazine (fwd) Date: 17 Jun 1998 20:36:53 PST On Jun 17, Larry Gibes wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] The well known Colorado libertarian activist (and gun dealer), Bob Glass has started a new magazine called "The Partisan". He calls it the journal of the American Freedom Fighter. The goal is to provide practical, proven methods to advance the cause of liberty. It is $19.95 per year, four issues per year, about 100 pages per issue. The Partisan P.O.Box 1085 Suite G Longmont, CO 80502 See also: http://partisan.com uzi1@frii.com 303-651-0070 [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: rkba-list: An Indictment (fwd) Date: 17 Jun 1998 20:38:58 PST On Jun 17, Edgar Suter wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] The following is Dr. Blackman's statement to the NAS IOM. It is an excellent summary of the nearly innumerable types of deception displayed by those who would frighten us into abandoning our inalienable rights. Edgar A. Suter MD National Chair Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research Inc. ******************************************* STATEMENT TO THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES' INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE'S COMMITTEE ON INJURY PREVENTION AND CONTROL by PAUL H. BLACKMAN, Ph.D. National Rifle Association Instead of attempting to refute shoddy research, I'll leave that to my handouts to the Committee, including a literature review by criminologist Gary Kleck (1995; see also Kleck, 1997) summarizing the findings that guns aren't the problem and that gun laws are unlikely measurably to impact it, but disarming the law-abiding would aid the criminal since guns are used more protectively than improperly, and I'll note that criminal violence is reduced by increasing the certainty, severity, and celerity of punishment (e.g., Marvell and Moody, 1997). I've also given the committee a variety of criticisms of the public health approach to firearms and violence (Blackman, 1997; Carlson, 1996; Kates et al., 1997; see also Kates et al., 1995), since that is the predominant substitute for the overwhelming criminological failure to make a case; even criminologists who dislike guns tend to posit mixed costs and benefits while discussing what would happen to crime absent guns, without determining how or if that could be achieved. (Cook, 1983 and 1991) I'll simply list briefly some of the failings of public health literature on guns and violence, and name a sampling of the researchers whose work exemplifies those failings. If that looks a bit like an ad hominem approach, it certainly fits in where Christoffel's response to criticism aimed at the American Journal of Public Health was to suggest that the Violence Policy Center -- a good choice, I might note -- "dig up some dirt" on the critic.1 This is a field where the other half of ad hominem -- if the work was in a peer reviewed publication, criticism of the work must be invalid -- has helped a small group of criminologists get over the modest amount of scientific integrity they used to have and hypercriticize pro-gun research while mindlessly defending that of self-styled epidemiologists. Such is some of the criminological work of Cook, Reiss, Roth, the National Academy of Sciences, et alles. (Satcher, 1995; Tarlov et al., 1995; Reiss and Roth, 1993) Examples of problems with the public health approach include: Dismissing research data and findings because the results were unappealing, as with the 15 surveys showing between 750,000 and four million protective uses of firearms annually: Cook, Hemenway, and others. (Cook, Ludwig and Hemenway, 1997; Cook and Ludwig, 1997; McDowall and Wiersema, 1994) Perhaps more seriously, keeping research data secret for years to prevent possible independent scrutiny, an act worthy of the opprobrium of all honest scientists: Kellermann, Rivara, et al. (Kates et al., 1995; Blackman, 1997; U.S. House of Representatives, 1996) Taking studies with acknowledged limitations and citing them ad nauseam as if they were definitive and nationally applicable: Kellermann, Rosenberg, Mercy, and -- calling preliminary research definitive under oath -- Teret. (Kellermann, 1993a and 1994; Kellermann et al., 1991; Cotton, 1992; Butterfield, 1995b; Kellermann, 1997; Teret, 1993) Using numbers instead of rates for rhetorical purposes -- effective but unscientific: Satcher, Mercy, and lots of others. (Mercy, 1993; Satcher, 1995; Cotton, 1992) Using words like "epidemic" for emotional impact without regard to its epidemiologic meaning, and sometimes in defiance of that meaning: Rosenberg, and Christoffel, who carefully misstated the meaning of epidemiology to exclude its real meaning while testifying under oath. (Rosenberg, 1993; Christoffel, 1996) Routinely glossing over problems of unreliable data; ignoring or failing to explain limitations of statistically significant but low odds ratios; glossing over massive odds ratios in favor of the alleged problems of small odds ratios; pretending, in community studies, that dissimilar communities are the same; and ignoring the limitations of inferences of matched case-control studies compared to general population controls: Loftin et al., Kellermann et al. (Loftin et al., 1991; Sloan et al., 1988; Kellermann, 1993a; Kellermann et al., 1992 and 1993; Bailey et al. 1997) Assuming the existence of guns in a home implies access to those guns: Lee. (Lee and Sacks, 1990) Assuming access implies problems, without making any effort to measure possible problems of assumed access: Lee, Hemenway, et al. (Lee and Sacks, 1990; Weil and Hemenway, 1992; Hemenway et al., 1995; Hemenway and Richardson, 1997) Implicitly assuming that a risk factor is causal, where, in reality, the finding of risk factors is supposed to be followed by efforts to determine whether the relationship is causal, or to determine whether another factor explains both phenomena, etc.; and then assuming various untested measures will reduce the problem, if there is one: Kellermann and lots of others. (Kellermann, 1994; Lee and Sacks, 1990; Wilkinson, 1993) Giving guns magical causal powers rather than look for underlying causes of gun ownership, thus having gun ownership cause homicides and suicides even when the guns were not involved in the deaths being studied: Cummings, Kellermann, and their colleagues. (Kellermann et al., 1992 and 1993; Cummings et al., 1997) Assuming guns are the problem to be addressed even if far more serious risk factors are uncovered which dwarf the possible risks of guns, such as mental illness for suicide -- or which would undercut assumptions that regulation of guns seems a hopeful response, such as drug abuse for homicide and suicide: Kellermann and his colleagues repeatedly. (Kellermann et al., 1992 and 1993; Bailey et al., 1997) Assuming gun laws curb crime on the grounds that things would have gotten worse without the gun laws when the data do not support the proposition, such as Loftin et al. regarding Detroit and Washington, D.C., and refusing to consider explanations others than guns or gun laws for changes in mortality trends. (O'Carroll et al., 1991; Loftin et al., 1991) Assuming the "no guns" position is easily achievable, a preposterous concept borrowed from Cook; Christoffel suggested that America should emulate the model of Japan, where banning guns was a way, she noted, for the ruling class to prevent the rise of democracy. (Cook, 1991; Sacks et al., 1994; Christoffel, oral presentation at the annual meeting of the American Trauma Society, McLean, Va., May 1992) Assuming there is only pro-gun bias, and that moneys from government and foundations are automatically pure and unsullied, despite pre-research anti-gun policy statements from the likes of Rosenberg and the CDC, the Joyce Foundation, and the California Wellness Foundation. In answer to a question, a CDC researcher told me that, yes, the ban-handguns decal on his briefcase was symbolic of objective science.2 (Kellermann, 1993b) Pretending protective use of guns hasn't occurred unless there is a corpse: Kellermann, Rushforth, and others. (Kellermann and Reay, 1986; Kellermann et al., 1993; Bailey et al., 1997; Rushforth et al., 1974; Kellermann, 1997) Identifying self-defense killings as murders, and self-defense with criminal misuse of firearms: Mercy, Kellermann, and most recently, public-health supporter, Zimring, who refers to self defense as a "social pathology." (Kellermann and Mercy, 1992; Zimring and Hawkins, 1997) That demonstrates one of the serious problems of addressing violence as a public health rather than as a criminological issue: for the medical profession, the lives of saints and sinners are equally valuable, and public health sometimes sees a young sinner's life as more valuable than that of an older saint. (CDC, 1994a) Using data dishonestly, by describing as affecting children and youth events occurring primarily to 15-19 and 15-24 year olds,3 falsely asserting increases in gun-related mortality among women when the rate is declining, or pretending data are equally applicable regardless of socio-economic status, degree of urbanization, and others: Teret, Wintemute, Rosenberg, Mercy, and others. (Teret and Wintemute, 1983; Cotton, 1992; Mercy, 1993; Butterfield, 1994a; Koop and Lundberg, 1992; CDC, 1994b; Rosenberg et al., 1992) And rarely, if ever, actually measuring trends or demographic variations in gun ownership, and relating them to data on gun-related violence or its absence. Misrepresenting the research of others. Kellermann and Mercy are worst, citing sources which contradict what they're supposed to support; but it's common to cite sources which fail to support the statement for which they're cited. (Mercy, 1992; Kellermann et al., 1992; Sloan et al., 1988) Pretending no criticism of peer-reviewed publications is valid -- an attitude which can be dangerous when treatment of gunshot wounds is at issue: Journal of Trauma, AJPH. (Satcher, 1995; Fackler, 1997a and 1997b) The CDC goes further and perceives scientific criticism as disloyalty warranting blackballing and censorship: Rivara, Kellermann, Christoffel, Rosenberg. (Personal communications from CDC employees) The CDC sees encouraging shoddy research as important enough to defy congressional bans on such research and lobbying. (Federal Register 62:12202, March 14, 1997) And, finally, rhetorically comparing gun and violence research to tobacco research, perhaps hoping to validate lousy research by citing research by others in a different field, which has been somewhat more successful: Kellermann, Rosenberg. (Butterfield, 1994b; Raspberry, 1994; Kellermann, 1997) Instead of further muddying the water, this committee should remove criminal violence and intentional injury from its purview. Thank you. REFERENCES Bailey, J.E., A.L. Kellermann, et al. 1997. "Risk Factors for Violent Death of Women in the Home." Archives of Internal Medicine 157:777-782. Blackman, P.H. 1997. "A Critique of the Epidemiologic Study of Firearms and Homicide." Homicide Studies 1:169-189. Butterfield, F. 1994a. "Teen-age Homicide Rate has Soared." New York Times, Oct. 14, p. A10. Butterfield, F. 1994b. "New Tactics Used in Fight Against Crime." New York Times, Oct. 16, p. A25. Carlson, T. 1996. "Handgun Control, M.D." The Weekly Standard, April 15, pp. 23-26. CDC. 1994a. "Firearm-Related Years of Potential Life Lost Before Age 65 -- 1980-1991." Journal of the American Medical Association 272: 1246. CDC. 1994b. "Homicides Among 15-19-Year-Old Males -- United States, 1963-1991." Journal of the American Medical Association 272:1572. Christoffel, K.K. 1996. Deposition in case of E. Gaffney v. City of Chicago et al., No. 91 L 16289, Cook County Circuit Court, January 26-February 2. Cook, P.J. 1983. "The Influence of gun Availability on Violent Crime Patterns." Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research 4:49-89. Cook, P.J. 1991. "The Technology of Personal Violence." Crime and Justice: A Review of Research 14:1-71. Cook, P.J., J. Ludwig, and D. Hemenway. 1997. "The Gun Debate's New Mythical Number: How Many Defensive Uses Per Year?" Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 16:463-469. Cook, P.J. and J. Ludwig. 1997. Guns in America: National Survey of Private Ownership and Use of Firearms. National Institute of Justice Research in Brief, U.S. Dept. of Justice (May). Cotton, P. 1992. "Gun-Related Violence Increasingly Viewed as Public Health Challenge." Journal of the American Medical Association 267:1171-1174. Cummings, P., T.D. Koepsell, D.C. Grossman, J. Savarino, and R.S. Thompson. 1997. "The Association between the Purchase of a Handgun and Homicide or Suicide." American Journal of Public Health 87:974-978. Fackler, M.L. 1997a. "Wound Ballistics Literature Review #2." Wound Ballistics Review 3:36-43. Fackler, M.L. 1997b. "Wound Ballistics Literature Review #4." Wound Ballistics Review 3:46-48. Fingerhut, L.A. and J.C. Kleinman. 1989. Firearm Mortality Among Children and Youth. NCHS Advance Data No. 178 (Nov. 3). CDC National Center for Health Statistics. Hemenway, D., S.J. Solnick and D.R. Azrael. 1995. "Firearms Training and Storage." Journal of the American Medical Association 273:46-50. Hemenway, D. and E. Richardson. 1997. "Characteristics of Automatic or Semiautomatic Firearm Ownership in the United States." American Journal of Public Health 87:286-288. Kates, D.B., H.E. Schaffer, J.K. Lattimer, G.B. Murray and E.W. Cassem. 1995. "Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence, or Pandemic of Propaganda?" Tennessee Law Review 62:513-596. Kates, D.B., H.E. Schaffer and W.C. Waters IV. 1997. "Public Health Pot Shots: How the CDC Succumbed to the Gun 'Epidemic'." Reason, April, pp. 24-29. Kellermann, A.L. 1993a. "Preventing Firearm Injuries: A Review of Epidemiologic Research." American Journal of Preventive Medicine 9(suppl.):12-15. Kellermann, A.L. 1993b. "Obstacles To Firearm And Violence Research." Health Affairs 12(4):142-153. Kellermann, A.L. 1994. "Do Guns Matter?" Western Journal of Medicine 161;614-615. Kellermann, A.L. 1997. "Gunsmoke -- Changing Public Attitudes toward Smoking and Firearms." American Journal of Public Health 87:910-913. Kellermann, A.L. and D.T. Reay. 1986. "Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home." New England Journal of Medicine 314:1557-1560. Kellermann, A.L. and J.A. Mercy. 1992. "Men, Women, and Murder: Gender-Specific Differences in Rates of Fatal Violence and Victimization." Journal of Trauma 33:1-5. Kellermann, A.L., R.K. Lee, J.A. Mercy and J. Banton. 1991. "The Epidemiologic Basis for the Prevention of Firearm Injuries." Annual Review of Public Health 12:17-40. Kellermann, A.L. et al. 1992. "Suicide in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership." New England Journal of Medicine 327:467-472. Kellermann, A.L. et al. 1993. "Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home." New England Journal of Medicine 329:1084-1091. Kleck, G. 1995. "Guns and Violence: An Interpretive Review of the Field." Social Pathology 1:12-47. Kleck, G. 1997. Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Koop, C.E. and G.D. Lundberg. 1992. "Violence in America: A Public Health Emergency: Time to Bite the Bullet Back." Journal of the American Medical Association 267:3075-3076. Lee, R.K. and J.J. Sacks. 1990. "Latchkey Children and Guns at Home." Journal of the American Medical Association 264:2210. Loftin, C., D. McDowall, B. Wiersema and T.J. Cottey. 1991. "Effects of Restrictive Licensing of Handguns on Homicide and Suicide in the District of Columbia." New England Journal of Medicine 325:1615-1620. McDowall, D. and Brian Wiersema. 1994. "The Incidence of Defensive Firearms Use by US Crime Victims, 1987 through 1990. American Journal of Public Health 84:1982-1984. Marvell, T.B. and C.E. Moody. 1997. The Impact of Prison Growth on Homicide." Homicide Studies 1:205-233. Mercy, J.A. 1993. "The Public Health Impact of Firearm Injuries." American Journal of Preventive Medicine 9(suppl.):8-11. O'Carroll, P.W., C. Loftin et al. 1991. "Preventing Homicide: An Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Detroit Gun Ordinance." American Journal of Public Health 81:576-581. Raspberry, W. 1994. "Sick People with Guns." Washington Post, Oct. 19, p. A23. Reiss, A.J. Jr. and J.A. Roth. Understanding and Preventing Violence. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Rosenberg, M. 1993. "The Faces of Injury." American Journal of Preventive Medicine 9(suppl.):3-7. Rosenberg, M., P.W. O'Carroll and K.E. Powell. 1992. "Let's Be Clear: Violence is a Public Health Problem." Journal of the American Medical Association 267:3071-3072. Rushforth, N.B., C.S. Hirsch et al. 1974. "Accidental Firearm Fatalities in a Metropolitan County (1958-1973)." American Journal of Epidemiology 100:499-505. Sacks, J.J., J.A. Mercy, G.W. Ryan, R.G. Parrish. 1994. "Guns in the Home, Homicide, and Suicide." Journal of the American Medical Association 272:847-848. Satcher, D. 1995. "Gunning for Research." Washington Post, Nov. 5, p. C2. Sloan, J.H., A.L. Kellermann et al. 1988. "Handgun Regulations, Crime, Assaults, and Homicide: A Tale of Two Cities." New England Journal of Medicine 319:1256-1262. Surgeon General's Workshop. 1986. Violence and Public Health Report, Leesburg, Va., October 1985. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Tarlov, A.R., P.J. Cook, J. Kelsey and M. Moore. 1995. Firearm Injury Prevention: Report of the Special Panel to Evaluate the Quality of Research on Firearm Injury Prevention that has been Supported by the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Teret, S.P. 1993. Testimony, John Doe & Jane Doe v. Portland (Me.)Housing Authority, Cumberland County Superior Court, Docket No. 92-1408 (December). Teret, S.P. and G.J. Wintemute. 1983. "Handgun Injuries: The Epidemiologic Evidence for Assessing Legal Responsibility." Hamline Law Review 6:341-350. U.S. House of Representatives. 1996. Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations on Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, Appropriations for 1997, Part 7, 104th Congress, Second Session, March 6. Weil, D.S. and D. Hemenway. 1992. "Loaded Guns in the Home: Analysis of a National Random Survey of Gun Owners." Journal of the American Medical Association 267:3033-3037. Wilkinson, F. 1993. "Gunning for Guns." Rolling Stone, Dec. 9, pp. 35 and 39. Zimring, F.E. and G. Hawkins. 1997. Crime is Not the Problem: Lethal Violence in America. New York: Oxford University Press. 1As the recipient of an open letter from Edgar A. Suter, M.D., Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research, K.K. Christoffel's Internet response in attempting to forward the message to her colleagues at Northwestern (July 16, 1997, 11:23:52 EDT) was: "Does this group have a web page; if so, does it list members? Might VPC dig up some dirt on it." 2Re: Rosenberg and the CDC: Fingerhut and Kleinman, 1989; Raspberry, 1994; Butterfield, 1994b; Surgeon General's Workshop, 1985, pp. 52-54. Re: Joyce Foundation: remarks of Deborah Leff, Steve Teret, and its contributions to such anti-gun "educational" groups as Handgun Control's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence and the HELP Network. Re: California Wellness: Explanation of its grant to the Rand Corp. by Rand's Peter Greenwood at the 1996 annual meeting of the Homicide Research Working Group, Santa Monica. Personal communication from CDC researcher at the Third National Injury Control Conference, Denver, April 1991. 3This has been politicized by the President, who espouses virtually all firearms proposals based on alleged utility in protecting children, an effort assisted by the CDC's politicization of firearms research and Mark Rosenberg's role both as head of that research and advisor to the presidential firearms working group. (Wilkinson, 1993) [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Gun Shipping Pointers (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 08:11:07 PST On Jun 18, BludyRed@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] I received this in the mail. It contains pointers concerning the shipment of firearms. I considered the information appropriate to post to the list. Regards, Dennis Baron Forwarded Mail >>As a gun owner and an 11-year UPS driver, I get alot of questions from people regarding the safest way to ship and insure firearms through UPS. Theft of firearms and other items by UPS employees, though rare, unfortunately does occur but there are a lot of surpisingly simple and inexpensive ways to virtually gurantee that you wont be a victim. Please pass this information along to anyone who may benefit from it. There are 2 ways that things get stolen from UPS...pilfering and overlabeling. Pilferers are mostly thieves of opportunity. Handguns, jewelry, cameras and prescription narcotics are their favorite targets because they are easily identifiable and can quickly be shoved into a pocket or inside of a shirt due to the SMALL SIZE of the packages they come in. The red and black "adult signiature required" (ASR) labels that are legally required to be on these package are often a dead giveaway.They are also called "steal me stickers" by thieves. Since most UPS facilities are fenced in and require employees belongings to be searched upon exiting, the size of the item is critical. The BEST way to protect your handgun is to simply put it in a big box. One gunsmith on my route "disguises" his handguns by putting them in used Amway boxes!! This works VERY well. Look at the box you are shipping your handgun in...if you can stick it inside your pants or under your shirt easily, it is vulnerable. As far as the ASR labels go, you are required by law to have them on firearms shipments. What many customers dont know, however, is that they can get a more "discreet" ASR label that is incorporated into the UPS tracking label. These are better because the words "adult signiature required" are very small and unnoticeable. More importantly, this barcode will electronically "prompt" the driver at the other end to get a signiature...if he accidentally tries to "release" the package on the customers porch without getting a signiature he will be unable to do so since the DIAD (that electronic clipboard that you sign) will read the barcode and will force him to get a signiature in order to complete the delivery. You can order these special tracking labels through your Customer Service rep, or you can print them yourself with the UPS shipping software. Another more sophisticated method of theft is "overlabeling". This involves several conspirators who plan ahead and may get jobs at UPS for that very purpose. What they do is to print up a bunch of fake labels, with generic barcodes and phony return addresses, that are all addressed to a storage unit or apartment that they have rented in advance. One or more employees who are sorting and processing these packages will then slap the phony label over the authentic one, and the package will then proceed along its merry way to the "destination" where an unsuspecting driver will deliver it to another accomplice who signs for it using a fake name. This will go on for a week or so until the thieves move on to another address to avoid suspicion. Since the original barcode is covered up, it is impossible to even trace these packages and they simply "vanish". The theives who do this will also target handguns and jewelry, but since they arent trying to sneak it past a guard they have the freedom to target larger packages such as rifles, TV's and computers. How do you avoid this? Its simple...put an address label on ALL 6 sides of the box. A package so labeled will be passed up by a prospective thief, since he must now try to cover up 6 labels instead of only one. This is too risky, since the areas where these packages are sorted are often under electronic surveillance. If you are a gunsmith or store owner who ships UPS, and the package you are shipping is worth over $1000, then inform the driver who picks it up and have him initial the pickup record. These "high value" packages are audited,segregated from other packages, they are not sorted or run over conveyor belts, and they are subject to a chain-of-custody type procedure that will prevent their being stolen. I feel 100% safe in saying that a handgun that is shipped in a larger- than-normal box of good quality, with a discreet ASR barcode and address labels on all 6 sides, will NEVER get stolen or lost. Its an unfortunate that a few of the 16 million pieces a day that we ship are in danger of being stolen, but if you take these simple precautions you wont be a victim. << [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: CRIMESTRIKE: VA Habitat For Humanity Under Fire (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 08:14:23 PST The section on IOLTA's is interesting, and may be of future use in litigation or legislation in the Several States..... On Jun 17, NRA Alerts wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] NRA CrimeStrike's CrimeWatch Weekly Breaking news on critical crime-fighting issues, policies and legislation Vol. 4, No. 24 June 16, 1998 VA Habitat For Humanity Under Fire For Decision On Parolee Yesterday, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities released a study that found the number of families in need of low-cost housing has increased dramatically over the last few years, and that today, two families compete for every one unit of low-cost housing available. The report comes at a time when one chapter of Habitat for Humanity, a non-profit organization that uses volunteer labor to build houses it then sells at low cost to needy families, has come under criticism for selling one of these scarce residences to a convicted murderer one who, authorities allege, tried to kidnap a 12-year-old last month. In 1995, the Prince William County, VA, chapter of Habitat for Humanity decided to sell its first house to Donald R. Dannemiller, a married, 37-year-old house painter with five children. Soon thereafter, fliers appeared in the neighborhood warning that in 1976, Dannemiller was convicted of the death of his 13-year-old stepsister, having had a sexual relationship with her and then shooting her in the head. The community confronted the local Habitat chapter, which confirmed Dannemiller's murder conviction, adding that Dannemiller was paroled from prison in 1982 after serving six years. The chapter stood by its decision despite community objections, and in February 1996, the Dannemillers moved into their new Dumfries, VA home. Residents had their worst fears realized on May 15, when Dannemiller was arrested for trying to force a 12-year-old girl into his van, and then shooting her and a witness with a pellet gun when the girl escaped. Investigators said the suspect was spotted later in a nearby county after a second girl reported being shot with a pellet gun by a man in a van that matched the earlier victim's description. Will Newman, Executive Director of the neighboring Northern Virginia chapter of Habitat for Humanity said, "I have a very hard time understanding how a Habitat affiliate could have done this knowing full well that [Dannemiller] had a criminal record of that kind." Ulysses X. White, president of the Prince William Chapter, continues to stand by his chapter's decision. High Court Strikes Blow To Misuse Of IOLTA Funds The Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (IOLTA) program, which was intended to benefit the poor in need of legal assistance but has been accused of "funding the left" instead, is in jeopardy now, following yesterday's Supreme Court ruling in Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation. The IOLTA program works as follows: lawyers holding clients' money on a short term basis are required to maintain the funds in specialized interest-bearing trust accounts. Through the IOLTA program, states pool the money into one much larger account that, in all states combined, generates $100 million in interest annually. If these clients funds were not pooled, the interest would be minimal. IOLTA collects the interest on clients' funds, then uses it to make grants to recipients without the clients' consent or even knowledge. According to The Washington Times, IOLTA grantees have included the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Connecticut Civil Liberties Union, opponents of welfare- eligibility requirements in Massachusetts and supporters of mandatory busing in Texas. The Court ruled that IOLTA funds are clients' private property, which could pave the way for a finding of unconstitutionality under the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits the government from "taking" property without compensation. However, it is now up to Texas courts to determine whether the IOLTA program constitutes a "taking" of what the Supreme Court has now held is private property. New Report: 1.7 Million Behind Bars As of June 30, 1997, United States authorities had 99,175 criminals incarcerated in federal prisons, 1,059,588 in state prisons, and 567,079 in local jails, for a total of 1.7 million criminals behind bars, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics' report, "Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 1997." Between July 1, 1996 and June 30, 1997, the number of inmates in jail, as opposed to state or federal prison, grew by 9%. This is the largest growth since 1989 and nearly twice the annual average growth since 1990. Jails are locally-operated and house persons awaiting trial, conviction or sentencing; persons sentenced to short terms (generally less than one year); juveniles awaiting transfer to juvenile facilities; and the "overflow" of criminals who cannot be housed in federal or state prisons due to prison overcrowding. Parolee Shoots Tourist Parolee Kendrick James Johnson allegedly robbed German physicist Wolfgang Mensch and his wife on May 26 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and then shot Mr. Mensch, 59, in the abdomen. Mensch remains in the hospital, where he has been overwhelmed by well wishes from the community. Johnson is charged with attempted first-degree murder, armed robbery, and gun charges. =+=+=+=+ This information is provided as a service of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Fairfax, VA. This and other information on the Second Amendment and the NRA is available at: http://WWW.NRA.Org [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: PDD 63 (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 14:23:08 PST On Jun 18, Eugene W. Gross wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Joseph Farah's column discusses the government's move toward martial law. Bit by bit, the story is getting out. It will not hit the public's radar until the banks are threatened and emergency orders limiting cash withdrawals are declared. Pay close attention to Sen. Robert Bennett's analysis: "It is entirely possible that every organization in America could get its own computers fixed ... and still have major problems. When people say to me, is the world going to come to an end, I say I don't know. I don't know whether this will be a bump in the road ... or whether this will in fact trigger a major worldwide recession with absolutely devastating economic consequences in some parts of the world." He understands the systemic nature of y2k: you have to fix all of the world's computers in order to secure any computer. Noncompliant data must be locked out of every system. Second, he's not sure that y2k is not a threat to the survival of the modern economy. He does not downplay it. He does not dismiss it with the standard, "yes, it's a problem," followed by assurances that "we'll get this fixed in time." He understands that "we" means the while world, which clearly isn't going to happen. This is from WORLD NET DAILY (June 18). * * * * * * * * * Presidential Decision Directive 63 "In the event of a Y2K-induced breakdown of community services that might call for martial law," will the military be ready? asked Sen. Robert Bennett, R-UT, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem, of Deputy Defense Secretary John Hamre. His reply? "We've got fundamental issues to deal with that go beyond just the Year 2000 contingency planning. And-- I think you're right to bring that up." Later, Bennett added ominously: "The world as a whole is almost doomed to have major problems because other countries are way behind, however badly prepared we are" to handle the problem. "It is entirely possible that every organization in America could get its own computers fixed ... and still have major problems. When people say to me, is the world going to come to an end, I say I don't know. I don't know whether this will be a bump in the road ... or whether this will in fact trigger a major worldwide recession with absolutely devastating economic consequences in some parts of the world." . . . It is, no doubt, this kind of panicky and opportunistic thinking that led President Clinton to issue Presidential Decision Directive 63 -- one of the most ominous and least understood orders to emanate from a White House notorious for issuing such directives. It was released by the White House, like so many others, with little fanfare May 22. Single-spaced, "The Clinton Administration's Policy on Critical Infrastructure Protection," prints out to some 15 pages. While it never explicitly mentions the Y2K bug, one can't help thinking it was in the mind of the authors, who dwell heavily on the importance of "cyber-based information systems." . . . So what does the White House have in mind? Clinton is calling for a plan to ensure "essential national security missions" as well as general public health and safety by the year 2000. Interesting that he would pick that date. The plan must also provide ways for state and local governments to maintain order and deliver minimum essential services and the private sector to keep the economy humming. Not interested in the federal plans? You may have to be. The document states that "it is preferred that participation by owners and operators in a national infrastructure protection system be voluntary." Note that word "preferred." The president's national security adviser will serve as the clearinghouse for developing the plans. The first drafts from federal agencies is due on his desk this November. The military plays a big role in the plans. The Defense Department serves as the "executive agent" through the end of this fiscal year, after which, Clinton's favorite department, Commerce, takes over. Link: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/btlines/980618.btl.pres.directive6.html [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kenneth Mitchell Subject: Re: Fratrum: PDD 63 (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 17:26:39 -0700 At 02:23 PM 6/18/98 PST, Bill Vance wrote: >On Jun 18, Eugene W. Gross wrote: > >[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > >Joseph Farah's column discusses the government's move toward >martial law. > >Bit by bit, the story is getting out. It will not hit the public's radar until >the banks are threatened and emergency orders limiting cash >withdrawals are declared. > >Pay close attention to Sen. Robert Bennett's analysis: > >He understands the systemic nature of y2k: you have to fix all of the >world's computers in order to secure any computer. Noncompliant >data must be locked out of every system. There's a fundamental flaw in the assumptions here; the Y2K problem affects _PROGRAMS_, not _DATA_. There's no such thing as "noncompliant data". Y2K-compliant programs must make certain assumptions concerning 2-digit years in its own data anyway, so compliant systems will automatically be able to import other-program 2-digit year data. Personally, I think that an effective stop-gap measure will be to change our programming assumptions concerning 2-digit years; assume that they fall between 1950 and 2049. That would push the deadline another 50 years into the future, by which time all the old systems will have been replaced anyway. Ken Mitchell Citrus Heights, CA kmitchel@gvn.net 916-955-9152 (vm) 916-729-0966 (fax) Registered Libertarian --------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/------------------------ "In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. They wanted a comfortable life, and they lost it all - security, comfort and freedom. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society, but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free." Gibbons: "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" Proud Member of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" since 1992! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Perrine Subject: Re: Fratrum: PDD 63 (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 17:57:04 -0700 At 17:26 6/18/98 -0700, you wrote: >At 02:23 PM 6/18/98 PST, Bill Vance wrote: >>On Jun 18, Eugene W. Gross wrote: >> >>[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >> >>Joseph Farah's column discusses the government's move toward >>martial law. >> >>Bit by bit, the story is getting out. It will not hit the public's radar >until >>the banks are threatened and emergency orders limiting cash >>withdrawals are declared. >> >>Pay close attention to Sen. Robert Bennett's analysis: >> >>He understands the systemic nature of y2k: you have to fix all of the >>world's computers in order to secure any computer. Noncompliant >>data must be locked out of every system. > >There's a fundamental flaw in the assumptions here; the Y2K problem affects >_PROGRAMS_, not _DATA_. There's no such thing as "noncompliant data". >Y2K-compliant programs must make certain assumptions concerning 2-digit >years in its own data anyway, so compliant systems will automatically be >able to import other-program 2-digit year data. > >Personally, I think that an effective stop-gap measure will be to change >our programming assumptions concerning 2-digit years; assume that they fall >between 1950 and 2049. That would push the deadline another 50 years into >the future, by which time all the old systems will have been replaced >anyway. But assumptions like that do not really solve any thing. Everyplace a date is processed one has to alter the code to make that assumption....and having gone to that much trouble one might as well fix it. If one reads the date from on an old....or perhaps even current file one has to effectively create a four character field and modify all the comparisons in sort routines to look at the new field in some jury rigged fashion or another. About all this solves is the horrendous problem of altering n jillion files to be in a new format and getting new files copied on to new media....and keeping track of what is where. Tho, my personal feeling is that the real challenge will be programs that have multiple files of input and getting them to behave properly when some of the files have been updated and some have not. One imagines operations types having nightmares at finding a program that is set up to process the combination of input data having to be procssed in a panic that day However, I tend to think that it is really much more of a problem of incompatible data than incompatible programs. While we hear much about having to look at all these millions of lines of programs and so forth and so on, in reality all one should have to do is alter the file definitions and recompile........then we have a compliant program and zillions of old reels of non-compliant data. One must remember that it is very very difficult to preread / double read data in most Cobol programs and such. One provides a record definition and the system makes a record of that spec available for processing by the names of the fields in the records....but this is not at all like more modern languages where one can scan an image in a file and then decide how to decode it Jack >------------------------------------------------------------------- >Ken Mitchell Citrus Heights, CA kmitchel@gvn.net >916-955-9152 (vm) 916-729-0966 (fax) Registered Libertarian >--------------http://www.gvn.net/~creative/------------------------ >"In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. >They wanted a comfortable life, and they lost it all - security, >comfort and freedom. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give >to society, but for society to give to them, when the freedom they >wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased >to be free." Gibbons: "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" >------------------------------------------------------------------- > Proud Member of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" since 1992! > >- > > Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574 -----------------| 1175 N Altadena Dr | -------------- Jack@Minerva.Com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-309-8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Fwd: Shades of things to come? Date: 18 Jun 1998 22:54:33 -0400 Does anybody else see any parallells? Tom >Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 22:42:47 -0400 >From: E Pluribus Unum >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U) >To: E Pluribus Unum Email Distribution Network >Subject: Shades of things to come? > >Source: New York Times > >June 17, 1998 > >China's Churches: Glad, and Bitter, Tidings > >By ERIK ECKHOLM > > NANJING -- New Bibles stream forth from a computerized printing press >in this onetime southern capital at a rate of two and a half million a >year, for sale to Christians all over China. > > Since opening in 1988, the publishing company, a joint venture of the >Government-approved Protestant Church and a global charity, United Bible >Societies, has shipped out 18 million inexpensive Bibles, an astonishing >turn in a country that only a few decades ago tried to stamp out >religion for good. > > The Bibles are quickly bought and eagerly used. In downtown Nanjing on >any Sunday morning at St. Paul's Church, one of the city's seven legal >Protestant churches, the pews overflow with more than 1,000 worshipers >at each of two services, while hundreds more watch from another building >on closed-circuit television. > > With hymns, a sermon and closing recitation of the Lord's Prayer, the >services here and at thousands of other churches around the country have >the rhythms of mainstream Protestant services anywhere. Like many urban >churches, this one has a preponderance of older women, some of whom were >Christian before the Communist takeover in 1949, but around the country >many men and women, young and old, are embracing Jesus Christ. > > Such open, joyous displays of worship were unusual in the 1950's, as >the Communists reshaped China, and unthinkable during Mao's Cultural >Revolution of 1966-1976, when churches were burned and those Christians >who were not jailed could only hold clandestine prayer meetings, and >dared not own a Bible. > > Yet even as Bibles flow and churchgoers worship, at least scores of >Protestant and Catholic leaders are held in in labor camps or jails for >refusing to bow to Government control. While the confirmed number of >imprisoned Christians appears to be lower than is often asserted abroad, >their travails are a telling sign that >religion here is not truly free. > > Just last month, security agents reportedly razed an unapproved >Catholic church in Fujian, while in Hebei, to the north, they arrested a >pro-Vatican bishop who was too energetically promoting his faith. Last >fall, the leader of a fervent born-again >sect known as the Weepers was sentenced to a three-year term for >disturbing public order. > > Millions of other Christians who reject the official church must >practice their faith with a wary eye, and even those who embrace the >Government cannot publicly proclaim or spread their faith as they might >wish to. > > The charge of religious persecution -- of Christians and also Tibetan >Buddhists and some Muslim groups -- has emerged as perhaps the most >potent human rights issue in Chinese-American relations, one President >Clinton cannot avoid as he prepares to visit Beijing. Clinton is under >pressure in Congress to raise the issue. In March, as the House passed a >human-rights resolution, Representative Chris Smith, Republican of New >Jersey, declared that Beijing's tight control over religion "is totally >unacceptable and ought to be condemned." > > Critics in the West point to the restrictions and repression as >evidence of systematic persecution, while the Government's defenders >here point, instead, to the relative freedom most Christians now enjoy. > > Paradoxically, the rising outcry abroad comes as Christianity in China, >especially evangelical Protestantism, is growing explosively. The Rev. >Don Argue, recent president of the National Association of Evangelicals >in the United States, says China may be experiencing "the single >greatest Revival in the history of Christianity." > > Much of that growth has occurred with official acquiescence, and though >they remain a small minority in a giant country, millions of Chinese >people like Zhang Linmei, a 32-year-old worshiper at St. Paul's, find >the same comfort in religion that Christians do anywhere, without >worrying much about politics. > > "I feel life is meaningless in society at large," Zhang said after >services as she picked up her 5-year-old daughter, dressed in her >finest, from Sunday school. > > "This is the only reliable place in my life," Zhang added. > > "The situation for religion is in many ways the best it's been since >1949," said Richard Madsen, an expert on Chinese religion at the >University of California at San Diego. Though the Government still >controls their growth and closely monitors their activities, he said, >the official churches enjoy more autonomy Wednesday than in the past. > > Even the illegal churches -- unregistered Protestant churches and >openly pro-Vatican Catholic groups -- function without serious trouble >in many places, Dr. Madsen and others say. But those who refuse to >pledge support to the Government and its apparatus of religious control, >and those with unorthodox or ecstatic styles of worship, can face harsh >repression. The situation is similar for other major religions here, >including Buddhists and Muslims. Many believers now enjoy relative >freedom, but Tibetan Buddhists who consider the Dalai Lama their leader >face repression. > > The History: After Repression, A Major Revival > > In 1949, there were fewer than one million Protestants here. In 1979, >three years after the end of the Cultural Revolution when Maoist mobs >attacked churches and the homes of believers, only three Protestant >churches were open in all of China. Estimates of the number of >Christians in China's population of 1.2 billion range from about 15 >million to 35 million, or some believe, many more. Chinese church >officials say there are 12 million Protestants, and outside experts like >Dr. Madsen say the actual number may be at least 20 million and rising. >More than 12,000 official Protestant churches are open and, again by >official estimates, Christians without access to churches or >professional pastors meet in some 25,000 homes or other meeting points. >These estimates ignore groups that the Government regards as criminal, >and are believed to understate the total greatly. > > The legions of Protestants include new converts like Xu Wenju, a >74-year-old widow in Beijing who first attended a large official church >in 1995 at the urging of a neighbor and, she says, found spiritual >sustenance. She was soon baptized and now says that she feels healthier, >and that her family has become more harmonious. > > It includes those born into Christian families like Dr. Wu, a >75-year-old retired physician in Beijing who read the Bible at age 6 and >has wanted to spread the Gospel ever since. > > Chafing at the controls of the official church, he was jailed for over >a year in the 1950's, he said, and he still prefers a house church, as >the illegal gatherings are known. > > In 1992 the police came to his house and took his religious books and >tapes, said Dr. Wu, who declined to give his full name. But they left >him his personal Bible, telling him, "You can believe but you cannot >preach." > > It includes a 30-year-old economics student in Beijing, Li, who said a >friend had introduced the Gospel to her. She, too, attends a small house >church, not for political reasons but because, she said, "I think there >is more a feeling of love, and more opportunity for fellowship." > > Officials say Catholics now number four million, while outside >researchers say the true total may be closer to 10 million, with many >secretly accepting the Pope as the true head of their church. > > The peculiar hybrid state of Christianity here reflects the general >obsession of the Communist Party with control: virtually any >organization, whether political or social or religious, must gain party >approval. > > The party is an officially atheist organization that asserts that >religion will eventually wither away. But in a policy spelled out in the >early 1980's, the Government officially guarantees freedom of religion >-- within prescribed boundaries including a required allegiance to the >state, adherence to certain styles of worship and limits on church >construction, evangelizing and the baptism of children, among other >rules. > > For those willing to accommodate, the 1990's seem a golden time. > > "From our perspective, now is the best period ever for implementing the >policy of religious freedom," said Han Wenzao, who as president of the >China Christian Council is the national leader of the official >Protestant church and a prime link to the Communist Government. "The >criterion should be, is the word of God being propagated or not? It is >and it's good." > > Han, who is 75 and has his office in the Jinling Union Seminary of >Nanjing, says he became a devout Christian at a missionary college >though he was never ordained. He helped create the official, "patriotic" >Protestant church here during the period after the Communist takeover in >1949, when, he says, it was politically necessary to repudiate the >"imperialist" sponsorship of foreign missionaries. The willing believers >joined in a generic, nondenominational church. > > Han and other official leaders are bitterly denounced as sell-outs and >"fake Christians" by some who reject the notion of saluting an atheistic >state, and who often suffered terribly for refusing to cooperate. > > Yuan Xiangchen, also known as Allen Yuan, 84, is one of the >best-known leaders of the house church movement. He simply says: "The >head of the church is not any agency or person. The head of the Church >is Christ." > > "The official church is led by the Communists," he added. "That's why >we worship at home." > > Yuan, like many of the more defiant figures here, spent more than 20 >years in jail for his beliefs, and in recent years has faced on-and-off >curbs on his travel and work. At present, he is allowed to preach to up >to several dozen followers in a dingy room, with a picture of the Rev. >Billy Graham tacked on the wall, in an alleyway in the center of Beijing >-- one of dozens such illegal gatherings that Beijing authorities suffer >to exist, under a tight watch. > > In an interview last month, Yuan said he was forbidden to collect money >from worshipers, and he added that controls were often more stringent on >house churches in rural areas. More recently, security officials have >warned him not to speak to reporters. > > The Politics: Beijing Accommodates To a Rising Tide > > While for those in prison the situation is all too stark, the religious >picture in China Wednesday is often painted in shades of gray. > > The printing press outside Nanjing can produce millions of Bibles, for >example, a clear boon to the church. But the press, the Nanjing Amity >Printing Company, must reach agreement each year with the Government's >Religious Affairs Bureau over how many Bibles it can >actually print -- well below its capacity -- and the books can only be >sold in churches, not in bookstores. > > Yet officials have also allowed the press to supply more than 1.2 >million Bibles, through an American missionary group led by Ned Graham, >a son of Billy Graham, to unapproved house churches. > > In the 1980's, as religious activity began to recover here, outside >evangelical groups had begun smuggling many Bibles into the country in >suitcases. One of the major smugglers was Doug Sutphen. > > Then, Sutphen's East Gates Ministries, from the Seattle area, >negotiated a deal in which it bought Nanjing Bibles to distribute >outside official channels. He later handed over the organization to Ned >Graham. > > "I see no need for smuggling any more," said Sutphen, who now dreams of >some day arranging -- legally -- for a Christian television station in >China. Graham has not responded to requests for an interview. > > To illustrate another gray area: officially, evangelizing is forbidden >in China. The definition has become blurred, though, as officials >struggle to co-opt rapidly spreading Protestantism, especially in rural >areas. > > During a surprise visit several weeks ago to the Saint James Protestant >Church in Yichang, a city on the Yangtze River in Hubei, the pastor, the >Rev. Zhu Zhigao, said that tens of thousands of people in the >surrounding mountains had become Christian through person-to-person >contact or under the influence of Hong Kong radio programs. > > So his church has brought in groups of rural Christian leaders, two >groups of 40 each in the last year, for two-month training sessions, to >serve as lay ministers in their villages. Among other things, he shows >them imported videotapes about Christianity. And he distributes Bibles >from the Nanjing press. > > One of the Government's greatest fears is the breakaway emergence of an >unorthodox sect that might seriously challenge public order -- at the >extreme, something like the Taiping Rebellion of the mid-1800's, which >began with a charismatic Christian sect leader, and eventually conquered >half of China, with Nanjing as its capital. > > From the Government's perspective, then, giving mainstream, if limited, >theological training to leaders of a budding rural church is preferable >to letting them forge their own paths, possibly into what the Government >considers illegal cults. > > "I feel very free to spread the Gospel," said Zhu, who also serves on >local Governmental bodies. > > The Catholics have a seemingly clear litmus test: do they accept the >leadership of the National Patriotic Catholic Movement and its selection >of bishops, or do they, like Catholics in other countries, reserve those >roles for the Pope? Some of the most pro-Vatican bishops and priests are >persecuted or jailed. Yet there are many permutations. > > Many priests in the official church say they remain privately loyal to >the Vatican. The Vatican, for its part, says that while many newer >priests and bishops are not legally ordained, they are true Catholics >with the spiritual power to celebrate Mass and perform other sacred >duties -- "valid but not licit" is the tortured phrase used by the >Vatican to describe their status.The Vatican has even granted secret >approval to some official church leaders, Dr. Madsen says. > > For many years, to help meet the acute shortage of theology teachers, >China has allowed groups of Vatican-ordained priests, from Hong Kong, >Taiwan and elsewhere, to teach in official seminaries in China, >according to church officials in Hong Kong. Groups of official Chinese >priests have also studied in the Vatican-run seminary in Hong Kong. > > The Repression: Jail Still Awaits The Defiant > > And still the repression of some Christians continues, to different >degrees among the country's far-flung regions. > > The number of people in jails or labor camps for their religious >activity is a matter of dispute, but loose assertions abroad that >thousands are in prison appear to be exaggerated. > > Two major human rights groups, Amnesty International, based in London, >and Human Rights Watch, in New York, both say -- while >admitting to deep uncertainties -- that they find solid evidence only >that scores of people are now in some form of long-term detention for >their Christian activities: several dozen Catholic leaders, and a >similar number of Protestants, are thought to be held. > > Imprisonment is increasingly reserved for major organizers and leaders, >while brief detentions and fines have been the more common penalty >levied against illegal Christian groups, said Arlette Laduguie of >Amnesty International. But she warned that information even on some >recent large-scale crackdowns, like the arrests of hundreds of Roman >Catholics last year in Jiangxi Province as part of a campaign against a >powerful illegal movement, may not emerge for many months. > > Nina Shea, director of the Center for Religious Freedom in Washington >and one of the sharpest American critics of China, said that on the >basis of various field reports her group believes that at least 500 >Christian leaders are serving sentences, while at least another 500 >followers are detained at any given time, justifying her published >statements that thousands are under arrest. > > Conflict and arrests may have intensified in the mid-1990's as the >Government, faced with an explosive spread of Christian groups and a >shortage of reliable pastors, made a strong new push to require all >religious groups to register with authorities. Those refusing have often >been hounded. > > While the registration drive is notorious among the house churches and >their international supporters, it is actually good for Christianity, >asserted Han, the official Protestant leader. > > "When you register, your legal status is protected," Han said. "That's >something we wanted," he said -- to provide a defense against the >lawless persecution seen in the past. The argument is rejected by those >who just wish to be left alone. > > Han admitted that local officials sometimes improperly harass the >church, and said he had on several occasions called on national >authorities to rectify a local problem. > > "At the grass-roots or country level, there are still some people who >cannot understand the central Government's policy of religious freedom," >he said. He adds that local officials sometimes have trouble >distinguishing cults, which are banned, from genuine Christian groups. > > On that question, the definition of a cult, opinions differ. Han's >sympathies do not extend to the likes of Xu Yongze, the Weepers leader >recently sentenced to three years. > > Xu's followers are said to cry, sometimes for days, until they find a >vision. Han said Xu's views were heresy, caused mental disorders and >disturbances to neighbors, and were a violation of the law. > > The very drive for conformity is part of the problem, rights advocates >say. In its effort to define acceptable beliefs and limit how religion >can be publicly expressed, China violates international standards of >religious freedom as laid out in international charters and resolutions. > > "The right to believe what you want and the right to publicly manifest >that belief when and where and with whom you want is what's at stake," >said Mickey Siegal, a Human Rights Watch researcher in New York. > > Another problem altogether is discrimination even against legal >Christians, who usually cannot hold senior positions in Government or >the vast state-run economy. This reflects a more fundamental trait of >China: high office is still almost entirely reserved for members of the >Communist Party -- who are not supposed to adopt Christianity or any >other religion. > > The Contrast: Evangelical Fire, Official Moderation > > Recent Sunday services at St. Paul's Church in Nanjing exemplified the >moderate, hybrid style of Protestantism that is promoted by Government >agencies. In what could have been a scene at an American Presbyterian or >Lutheran church, the members shared prayers and the Apostle's Creed, and >they sang hymns with the robed choir. The recited verses from Acts and >Psalms, and watched as six men from an ethnic minority group in Yunan, >here on an exchange, sang a hymn in thanks for the hospitality. > > They listened to a pleasant 20-minute sermon by the middle-aged Pastor >Lin De'en, telling the story of a man who on his deathbed finally >appreciated the Christianity of his wife and son, and concluding with an >ode to the value of personal worship: it will help you become modest, >honest, patient and love one another. > > Some of the house churches, in contrast, have the fiery spirit and >orations of a revival meeting, the passion fed by a shared sense of >persecution. Some also have links with foreign evangelists who slip into >China, in unknown numbers, to exhort their brethren, sometimes with just >the kinds of messages the Government most abhors. > > At a recent house church service in a central Chinese city that, to >protect the preacher, cannot be identified, two such missionaries, an >Asian woman and a European man, showed up anannounced and were given >the podium. > > "The early Christians were persecuted too," the Asian said. "We all >must go out and spread the word!" > > "We must take the word of Jesus to Tibet and Xinjiang," she said, >referring to the mainly Buddhist and Muslim border regions. > > The European man took over. "They burn down a church every week, but >the church is not made of wood," he said. "Let us go out and plant one >million house churches," he said to the crowd of perhaps 50. "It will >turn China upside down! God give us China or we die!" > > The Chinese pastor took over, his air a bit more moderate. "It's true, >we should all go out and start new house churches," he said. But he >added, "If you go to the official church, then don't come here." > >Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company >-- >****************************************************************** > E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group > P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 > Grove City, OH 43123 > >Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse > 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) > >http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com >****************************************************************** > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Another web vote (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 18:27:47 PST On Jun 18, brian.beck@usa.net wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >>Forwarded message At the New Jersey News: http://www.nj.com/news/ ..they are asking the question... In a recent speech, new NRA president Charlton Heston asked, "I want to know who's with me and who's against me?" What's your answer? O With him. I agree with the NRA's agenda O Against him. I disagree with the NRA's agenda ..why not let 'em know what you think? Mike Haas >> ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: Fratrum: PDD 63 (fwd) Date: 18 Jun 1998 18:36:08 PST On Jun 18, Kenneth Mitchell wrote: >At 02:23 PM 6/18/98 PST, Bill Vance wrote: >>On Jun 18, Eugene W. Gross wrote: >> >>[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >> >>Joseph Farah's column discusses the government's move toward >>martial law. >> >>Bit by bit, the story is getting out. It will not hit the public's radar >until >>the banks are threatened and emergency orders limiting cash >>withdrawals are declared. >> >>Pay close attention to Sen. Robert Bennett's analysis: >> >>He understands the systemic nature of y2k: you have to fix all of the >>world's computers in order to secure any computer. Noncompliant >>data must be locked out of every system. > >There's a fundamental flaw in the assumptions here; the Y2K problem affects >_PROGRAMS_, not _DATA_. There's no such thing as "noncompliant data". >Y2K-compliant programs must make certain assumptions concerning 2-digit >years in its own data anyway, so compliant systems will automatically be >able to import other-program 2-digit year data. > >Personally, I think that an effective stop-gap measure will be to change >our programming assumptions concerning 2-digit years; assume that they fall >between 1950 and 2049. That would push the deadline another 50 years into >the future, by which time all the old systems will have been replaced >anyway. Unworkable. In any case, as nasty as it's likely to get, my concern here is not Y2K so much as it's being used as the excuse for declaring Martial Law, which is in d*mn near _every_ PDD/Exec Order et al, that's come down the pike these last several years. King Klintoon we don't need. -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Cloyes Subject: Re: Another web vote (fwd) Date: 19 Jun 1998 07:11:24 -0400 Just voted, and these are the results: 73.9 With him 26.1 Against him Let's keep up the pressure. Tom At 06:27 PM 6/18/98 -0800, you wrote: >On Jun 18, brian.beck@usa.net wrote: > >[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > > >>>Forwarded message > >At the New Jersey News: http://www.nj.com/news/ > >..they are asking the question... > >In a recent speech, new NRA president Charlton Heston asked, "I want to > know who's with me and who's against me?" What's your answer? > > O With him. I agree with the NRA's agenda > O Against him. I disagree with the NRA's agenda > >..why not let 'em know what you think? > >Mike Haas > >>> > > > >____________________________________________________________________ >Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 > > >[------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] > >-- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** >----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- >An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no >weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his >hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a >on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ >----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- > >- > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: Here we go again (fwd) Date: 19 Jun 1998 11:16:46 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Reply-To: texas-gun-owners@Mailing-List.net Posted to texas-gun-owners by stevens@iglobal.net Implementation of National ID Imminent By Scott McDonald, SCAN THIS NEWS On Wednesday, June 17th, the U.S. Department of Transportation published the proposed "Driver's License/SSN/National Identification Document" guidelines which all states will be compelled to comply with over the next two years. The "Notice of Proposed Rule Making" (NPRM) sets out the "standard feature" requirements for driver's license cards and other "identification" documents. States that do not comply will find that their citizens will not be allowed to participate in routine, life-essential functions after the imposed federal deadline of October 1, 2000. Non-conforming licenses will not be accepted for identification by any federal agency. Once implemented no one in the U.S. will be able to engage in many basic, fundamental societal activities unless they carry with them at all times a conforming government-issued identification card. Not surprisingly, under the proposed rule it will become MANDATORY that social security numbers must be submitted in order for anyone to receive a state-issued driver's license. Perhaps the most pervasive implication of this new National ID scheme is that in the near future an identification card will be required just to engage in activities we now take for granted. Under the federal "New Hires Database" system and the related "Employment Eligibility Confirmation System" program, EVERYONE will be required to possess an approved identification document in order to get a job and work in the United States. Also, as a condition of the new and upcoming healthcare-provider requirements everyone will have to submit a conforming identification document in order to receive health care. Otherwise, the healthcare provider will forfeit all federal compensation for their services -- Medicaid, Medicare -- and you know they're not about to risk that. Of course other activities such as banking, purchasing insurance, writing a check, obtaining a passport, boarding a commercial airliner -- and the list goes on and on -- will all likewise require the new IDs. The proponents of this measure are intent on establishing a universal, nationwide identification system -- and state-issued driver's licenses are the method they have chosen as the "path of least resistance." Under the "Administrative Procedures Act" federal agencies must announce their intention to promulgate new rules, (as they have now done in this case), and they must provide an opportunity for the general public to comment on their proposal. Watch for more information on how to oppose this rule in upcoming editions of the CfCL Weekly Update. Read the Proposed DOT Rules (cut and paste URL into browser): http://www.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?IPaddress=3D&dbname=3D1998_reg ister&docid=3D98-16062 -- For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@mailing-list.net with the word help in the message body. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: Privacy and Security 2001, June Issue (fwd) Date: 19 Jun 1998 14:18:10 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Privacy and Security 2001SM Everyman's guide to coping in the modern, high-tech world Volume XIV, Number 6 Yogo 14.06 June 1998 Reminder: Your ultimate loss of privacy and security occurs when they kill you. IN THIS ISSUE Pages 1 & 2 (printed version) Technical, Legal and TSCM Questions Pages 3 & 4 (printed version) More Material from STOA Report Y2K & OMB Press reports recently stated that OMB is pressuring federal government agencies to "fix" the Y2K problem in the next 18 months. If you have any way to get through to the powers that be at OMB, let 'em know they only have 15 months to get Y2K under control. That's because the federal governments next fiscal year, FY 2000, starts on 1 October, 1999. On that date the Social Security Administration's computers will have me listed as minus 27 years old. Gad, what a check I'll have to write them! ANALOG TAPES ETC. AS EVIDENCE Background. Paul Hansen (a contractor) inquired about the legality of using a taped message from his answering machine in a contested court case. The situation was that a tenant had left a message regarding subletting property he was in, but later denied that he had considered violating his lease in that way. My Response. I advised Paul that, from the engineer's point of view, we'd probably be able to prevent the use of the tape in court. I told him that, if I were the expert witness by the other side in a court case, I'd have the lawyer on our side cross examine him on the chain of custody of the tape in question. If he could not document an absolutely unbroken chain of custody, we'd beat him because there are modern digital techniques that can create a new modified analog tape that no technique in the world can identify as a forgery. Please carefully note the engineer's exact words: "...document an absolutely unbroken chain of custody". That means for example that, if the witness testified that he did not have it in his possession continuously (or locked in a safe deposit box or whatever), the court will rule that the chain of custody might have been broken. His Rejoinder. "Thanks for your response. Intriguing idea. From an engineering standpoint, do you think your same argument could be made against "signed documents?" For example, using modern techniques, isn't it just as possible to create a "signed agreement" that no technique in the world can identify as a forgery (e.g. a rental agreement)? Then, the only recourse is a notarized signature, I suppose." My Response. "Interesting thought. But my field is electronics so I can safely dodge that question. "However, I once saw a demonstration of a document validation process that implanted magnetic particles in a document that can only be read by a special machine and the pattern detected while checking for validity must match the one stored elsewhere at the time the document is impregnated." Post Script. If you, dear reader, have any thought to pass along on this subject, I'd appreciate hearing from you or you can contact Paul at . CMT USED AS A BUG? Recently a friend asked if a cellular phone could be used as a bug, and did we have any knowledge of such use. Well, one or two years ago we carried a short blurb in this newsletter on just that subject and pointed out that many hand-held CMTs have an auto answer feature and also allow the user to turn off the ringer. What a setup! Let's say you are gathered around a table negotiating a deal with another company. In order to learn what their fall-back position is all you have to do is tell them it's apparent that they are not prepared and offer them a chance to meet in private. Then you leave your auto-answer CMT on the table, turned "on" and with the ringer turned "off". You and your colleagues leave the room, go to a pay phone, dial your CMT, and listen while the other side discusses how to deal with you. Do we have knowledge of such use? Not really. We heard of one case in which a participant in a high level meeting had forgotten to give her CMT the "end" command, but left it on because she was expecting a call with information the group needed. The person she had been talking with had his speakerphone on, so his whole office was privy to the details discussed in that meeting. TSCM TIP On a recent job Scott Parker discovered a very interesting vulnerability. As he was doing the carrier current testing he learned that the AC outlets in the CEO's office were RF-common with a power outlet in a tiny coffee service room well down the hall. What that means, of course, is that a carrier current transmitter installed in the CEO's office could be monitored by someone in that coffee room. In discussing that find with Kevin Reierson in Minneapolis, I learned that he had worked in a building in which the CEO's office was RF-common with a public restroom in the lobby area and also with power outlets in the parking area outside the building. (They are so far up north that they need to plug engine warmer circuits into power so they can start their car on sub-zero days.) TSCM TRAINING Several of our readers have forwarded some material from the 'net that pretends to provide information about our training program. Because that "information" is so far off the mark, we've decided that we should provide our readers with real facts as to what we do and how we see the North Carolina licensing program. (NC is the only state to require a specific TSCM license to legally perform TSCM service in the state.) Because we are one of the accredited courses for licensure in NC, we were recently asked our opinion on making the qualification standards tougher. Our response follows. "In answer to your basic question in your letter of 4-2-98, we are heartily in favor of increasing the training time required to qualify for a TSCM license in North Carolina. We offer only a two-week course so you can see we agree that one week is not enough. However, we don't call week #1 "basic" and week #2 "advanced", as Ray does; it's just a two-week course. It's given one week at a time because most people who work for themselves cannot afford to be away from their business for two weeks at a time, however, the tuition paid covers two full weeks and every student is encouraged to come back for the second week after he has had more time to work with the instrumentation and maybe get a little field experience. "Your letter seems to imply that the courses you have approved are mostly lectures with insufficient hands-on time; and, believe me, that description does not fit our course. During the first week each trainee uses every piece of essential equipment and performs every necessary step in TSCM. Yes, the first morning starts with some talking; we spend an hour or so getting acquainted and providing an orientation on how the course is organized - including the instruction to read the textbook outside of class and bring in the questions in the morning. However, before noon of the first day, each trainee has a basic tool kit in front of him and is involved in taking a telephone apart and converting it into a room bug in two different ways. Normally, before day one is over every trainee has created a bug (using either the handset speaker or the carbon microphone as the transducer), learned how to trace the wiring from the classroom to the telephone closet, and tested each bugging method by properly connecting to the appropriate pair in the closet and listening to the quality of the sound from the sound source in the training room. "Please don't misunderstand me. In the material above I do not mean to imply that I think one week is enough. On the contrary, we are totally in favor of increasing the time required for licensure by a full forty hours. Our experience is that the returnees add a lot of realism to the course because they are new at the game, and have questions based on field experience. "However, your comment on offering credit for government/military courses scares us because our experience with government trained people has been mostly bad - primarily because most of them don't think, don't listen, just plod on as they were trained without any thought as to what the threat is they are working on. The first man we used bragged about all of the courses he had taken; but, despite a written list of tasks with an attached floor plan, I found him taking the upholstery off a chair in a non-target room. His comment was: "That's what they told us to do on every job." He was a star though, when compared to the man with "tons of Navy experience" who skipped steps one and two in the carrier current test, signed off on completing a room that he had not even entered, and, to top it off, told my client that a classroom was unsafe for use the following day because two telephone cables had been cut off leaving two of the RJ-11s connected to nothing! "Final note. Please note our new name and address. The ownership is the same, the people are the same, and the course is the same; but we're gearing up to do more in the equipment design field, and to get involved with some allied technologies. Please call if you have any questions." ECHELON Ed Note. The material that follows was taken from the STOA Report as a part of our effort to bring our readers accurate information on ECHELON and its possible use against us. (To see the kind of information being provided by others on ECHELON, its impact on friendly countries, and how it is used to spy on us in our own country, try http://www.usajournal.com/page 34.htm.) The material that follows has not been edited; You'll find UK spellings unchanged. 4. DEVELOPMENTS IN SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY Surveillance technology can be defined as devices or systems which can monitor, track and assess the movements of individuals, their property and other assets. Much of this technology is used to track the activities of dissidents, human rights activists, journalists, student leaders, minorities, trade union leaders and political opponents. "Subtler and more far reaching means of invading privacy have become available to the government. Discovery and invention have made it possible for the government, by means far more effective than stretching upon the rack, to obtain disclosure in court of what is whispered in the closet." So said US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, way back in 1928. Subsequent developments go far beyond anything which Brandeis could have dreamt of. New technologies which were originally conceived for the Defence and Intelligence sectors, have after the cold war, rapidly spread into the law enforcement and private sectors. It is one of the areas of technological advance, where outdated regulations have not kept pace with an accelerating pattern of abuses. Up until the 1960's, most surveillance was low-tech and expensive since it involved following suspects around from place to place and could use up to 6 people in teams of two working 3 eight hour shifts. All of the material and contacts gleaned had to be typed up and filed away with little prospect of rapidly cross checking. Even electronic surveillance was highly labour intensive. The East German police for example employed 500,000 secret informers, 10,000 of which were needed just to listen and transcribe citizen's phone calls. By the 1980's, new forms of electronic surveillance were emerging many of these were directed towards automation of communications interception. This trend was fuelled in the U. S. in the 1990's by accelerated government funding at the end of the cold war, with defence and intelligence agencies being refocussed with new missions to justify their budgets, transferring their technologies to certain law enforcement applications such as anti-drug and anti-terror operations. In 1993, the US department of defence and the Justice department signed memoranda of understanding for "Operations Other Than War and Law Enforcement" to facilitate joint development and sharing of technology. According to David Banisar of Privacy International, "To counteract reductions in military contracts which began in the 1980's, computer and electronics companies are expanding into new markets - at home and abroad - with equipment originally developed for the military. Companies such as E Systems, Electronic Data Systems (founded by Ross Perot ) and Texas Instruments are selling advanced computer systems and surveillance equipment to state and local governments that use them for law enforcement, border control and Welfare administration." According to Banisar, the simple need for increased bureaucratic efficiency necessitated by shrinking budgets has been a powerful imperative for improved identification and monitoring of individuals. "Fingerprints, ID cards, data matching and other privacy invasive schemes were originally tried on populations with little political power, such as welfare recipients, immigrants, criminals and members of the military, and then applied up the socioeconomic ladder. One in place, the policies are difficult to remove and inevitably expand into more general use. These technologies fit roughly into three broad categories. namely surveillance, identification and networking, and are often used in conjunction as with video cameras and face recognition or biometrics and ID cards. For Banisar, "They facilitate mass and routine surveillance of large segments of the population without the need for warrants and formal investigations. What the East German secret police could only dream of is rapidly becoming a reality in the free world. 4.1 Vehicle Recognition Systems A huge range of surveillance technologies has evolved, including the night vision goggles discussed in 3 above; parabolic microphones to detect conversations over a kilometre away(see Fig.18); laser versions marketed by the German company PK Electronic, can pick up any conversation from a closed window in line of sight; the Danish Jai stroboscopic camera (Fig.19) which can take hundreds of pictures in a matter of seconds and individually photograph all the participants in a demonstration or March; and the automatic vehicle recognition systems which can identify a car number plate then track the car around a city using a computerised geographic information system.(Fig.20) Such systems are now commercially available, for example, the Talon system introduced in 1994 by UK company Racal at a price of ?2000 per unit. The system is trained to recognise number plates based on neural network technology developed by Cambridge Neurodynamics, and can see both night and day. Initially it has been used for traffic monitoring but its function has been adapted in recent years to cover security surveillance and has been incorporated in the "ring of steel" around London. The system can then record all the vehicles that entered or left the cordon on a particular day. Such surveillance systems raise significant issues of accountability particularly when transferred to authoritarian regimes. The cameras in Fig 21 in Tiananmen Square were sold as advanced traffic control systems by Siemens Plessey. Yet after the 1989 massacre of students, there followed a witch hunt when the authorities tortured and interrogated thousands in an effort to ferret out the subversives. The Scoot surveillance system with USA made Pelco camera were used to faithfully record the protests. the images were repeatedly broadcast over Chinese television offering a reward for information, with the result that nearly all the transgressors were identified. Again democratic accountability is only the criterion which distinguishes a modern traffic control system from an advanced dissident capture technology. Foreign companies are exporting traffic control systems to Lhasa in Tibet, yet Lhasa does not as yet have any traffic control problems. The problem here may be a culpable lack of imagination.(Fig.22) Several European countries are manufacturing vehicle and people tracking technologies, including France40, Germany41, The Netherlands42 and the UK43. 4.2 CCTV Surveillance Net Works In fact the art of visual surveillance has dramatically changed over recent years. of course police and intelligence officers still photograph demonstrations and individuals of interest but increasingly such images can be stored and searched. (Fig. 23) The revolution in urban surveillance will reach the next generation of control once reliable face recognition comes in. It will initially be introduced at stationary locations, like turnstiles, customs points, security gateways, etc., to enable a standard full face recognition to take place. However, in the early part of the 21st. century, facial recognition on CCTV will be a reality and those countries with CCTV infrastructures will view such technology as a natural add-on. It is important to set clear guidelines and codes of practice for such technological innovations, well in advance of the digital revolution making new and unforeseen opportunities to collate, analyze, recognise and store such visual images. Such regulation will need to be founded on sound data protection principles and take cognizance of article 15 of the 1995 European Directive on the protection of Individuals and Processing of Personal Data.44 Essentially this says that: "Member States shall grant the right of every person not to be subject to a decision which produces legal effects concerning him or significantly affects him and which is based solely on the automatic processing of data." The attitude to CCTV camera networks varies greatly in the European Union, from the position in Denmark where such cameras are banned by law to the position in the UK, where many hundreds of CCTV networks exist. Nevertheless, a common position on the status of such systems where they exist in relation to data protection principles should apply in general. A specific consideration is the legal status of admissibility as evidence, of digital material such as those taken by the more advanced CCTV systems. Much of this will fall within data protection legislation if the material gathered can be searched, e.g., by car number plate or by time. Given that material from such systems can be seamlessly edited, the European Data Protection Directive legislation needs to be implemented through primary legislation which clarifies the law as it applies to CCTV, to avoid confusion amongst both CCTV data controllers as well as citizens as data subjects. Primary legislation will make it possible to extend the impact of the Directive to areas of activity that do not fall within community law. Articles 3 and 13 of the Directive should not create a blanket covering the use of CCTV in every circumstance in a domestic context. A proper code of practice should cover the use of all CCTV surveillance schemes operating in public spaces and especially in residential area. The Code of Practice should encompass:- a) a purpose statement covering the key objectives of the scheme; b) a consideration of the extent to which the scheme falls within the scope of Data Protection legislation; c) the responsibilities of the owner of the scheme and those of local partners; d) the way the scheme is to be effectively managed and installed; e) the principles of accountability; f) the availability of public information on the scheme and the principles of its operation in residential areas; g) the formal approaches to be used to assess, evaluate and audit the performance of both the scheme and the accompanying Code of Practice; h) mechanisms for dealing with complaints and any breaches of the Code including those of security; i) detailing the extent of any police contacts or use of the scheme; and j) the procedures for democratically dealing with proposals of technological change. Given that the United Kingdom has one of the most advanced CCTV network coverage in Europe and that the issues of regulation and control have been perhaps more developed that elsewhere, it is suggested that the Civil Liberties Committee formally consider the model Code of Practice for CCTV produced by the Local Government Information Unit (LGIU, 1996) in London (A Watching Brief) at a future meeting of this committee, with a view to recommending it for adoption throughout the EU. ********************************************************** Privacy and Security 2001, James A. Ross, Editor comes to you via email at no charge. If you do not wish to receive it, please let us know at jross@rosseng.com. If you know of someone else who you think would be interested, please send along his email address. If you would be interested in receiving the smail version, just send us $35 for North American addresses, $55 elsewhere to: Ross Group, LLC, 7008 Tech Cir, Manassas, VA 20109 USA ********************************************************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #90 (fwd) Date: 21 Jun 1998 12:17:52 PST On Jun 20, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Heads Up A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia June 21, 1998 #90 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net Previous Editions at: http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/list-hu.htm and http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html PIPE DREAMS ON TAXES Some of the hard-line Social-Democrats in Congress seemed like they were about to have a heart attack this week. Two of their most favored methods of keeping control over the lives of the American people were not only assaulted, they were actually wounded. First, Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN), Chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, publicly related a fact that we've brought up here many times: federal regulations add almost $7,000 annually in regulatory tax to the average family's budget. That recognized, apparently he also wants to do something about it. "Enough is enough," says Thompson. And, with other members of Congress, he now proposes a plan to identify those regulations which are not cost-effective, and eliminate them. However, we see a few problems with that action. First, few regulations are "effective" because most are selectively enforced. Also, if some in the Senate would take an evening to read the U.S. Supreme Court opinions in "New York," "Lopez" and "Printz," the Senate would also find that many federal regulations are actually unconstitutional. Washington demands that we taxpayers obey the law, but on this matter it is the federal government that is in continuous and flagrant violation of the Constitution. To make matters worse, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) joined Thonpson in what they call bipartisan support for the new Regulatory Improvement Act (RIA). Yet, Carl Levin has a long history of disrespect for our Constitution and has voted in favor of every oppressive bill he sees presented to the Senate. Anyway, they start out by saying the RIA will ensure that federal regulatory agencies will be accountable for the impact of new regulations, which they already are, supposedly. It's Congress that never pays attention to what the agencies do. We are told that this new Regulatory Improvement Act would impose a cost-benefit analysis on both existing and proposed regulations which create large economic burdens. We've heard that before, too. But, nothing ever comes of it because Congress is derelict in its duty to the American people. "[The RIA] is an effort by some of us to devise a common solution to the problems of our regulatory system," Thompson said. "We have some real political differences among us, but we all share the same goals: clean air and water, injury-free workplaces, safe transportation systems, to name a few of the good things that can come from regulation. We also all share the goal of avoiding regulation which unnecessarily interferes in people's lives and businesses, which costs more than it benefits, or which, inadvertently, causes actual harm. ... The Regulatory Improvement Act will promote the public's right to know how and why agencies regulate, improve the quality of government decision making, and increase government accountability and responsiveness to the people it serves." B-O-R-I-N-G! This is the same old song and dance we've been hearing for years. The fact is, most of the regulatory agencies are extra-Constitutional departments of government. They were invented by Roosevelt because, in deference to the Constitution, FDR wanted strict federal government control of everything. The American people will never again realize the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution as long as these regulatory agencies exist. To say that the federal regulatory process is excessive in both cost and heavy handed tactics is, therefore, the understatement of the decade. The federal agencies represent, in fact, both legislation and taxation without representation. And that is a totally unconstitutional arrangement. On the House side, a bill was passed Wednesday to abolish the income tax code by the year 2003, with one major caveat: that Congress approves a simplified replacement tax system before then. Treasury Secretary Bobby Rubin -- who is a millionaire hundreds of times over -- immediately jumped on the bill, saying the bill should never became law. "If enacted, it would create enormous uncertainty which could well have a severe adverse impact on our economy, our workers, our businesses, our people," Rubin said Tuesday. "Families, for example, would not know what to pay for a house because they wouldn't know if their mortgage interest would be deductible." Really now, is that what it's all about? America will accept the corrupt practices of the IRS to make secure their deduction for mortgage interest? It's hard to believe that the American public wouldn't jump at a chance to collectively tell the IRS to shove their records, "tax identification numbers" intrusive reports, tyrannical behavior and the whole ball of wax. And to start the debate: On this end, we'll settle for a flat tax and a sales tax. However, lets make that a "flat sales tax," with a cap written in the law, and levied on everything except food, the homestead, medical services, medication, education, and books. House Speaker Newt Gingrich referred to the anger and frustration with the current tax system. He also noted that taxpayers pay about $200 billion a year just to comply with the income tax laws. "What we have today is a monstrosity," Gingrich told the National Federation of Independent Business as they presented boxes containing 750,000 signatures from small business people who support the repeal of the income tax. Pete Stark (D-CA) did a good job of representing the whining of the tax and spend Social- Democrats: "With the Republicans in leadership having no understanding of the basic tenets of economics and leading this house in the most amateurish, asinine way, we will destroy this economy, destroy the values upon which the families are based." Steve Forbes got it right: "The issue is simple: Who's for the IRS, and who's against it? Who thinks the anti-family, anti-small business tax code is fine just the way it is and who's for real change?" Indeed. House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, (D-MO), said the bill "is yet another irresponsible Republican idea masquerading as a solution. They refuse to have a real debate on tax reform because they know what we know: That the average taxpayer would be worse off under the Republican plans." No Dick, you socialists in Congress would be worse off. Such a scheme would abolish your most treasured and abused social engineering tool: the income tax. Any taxpayer making over $20,000 annually would greatly benefit from the above "flat sales tax" scheme. And the federal government would save a couple hundred billion dollars a year by firing that oppressive agency we call the IRS. In other words, we all benefit. Well . . . except for the control-freaks in Congress, that is. Then again, Rubin was probably correct and the bill will not be signed into law. The social engineers in government will not allow it. Next stop for the bill is the Senate, where they are already getting wishy-washy on the subject. Time to tell those Senators what "we" want, folks. Pick up the telephone and tell them to get it done, like pronto. BAD NEWS, NEW NEWS AND GOOD NEWS Big news in the liberal major media: Another liberal reporter releases a magazine. Steven Brill, founder of Court TV, American Lawyer magazine and now the new media review, Brill's Content, used an attack on Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr to publicize the launch of his new rag. In a 28-page essay, Brill maintains that Starr had secretly -- and illegally -- leaked information to reporters. Three days after the magazine was released, the retractions started. Apparently reporters do not like being misquoted. Neither did Starr. Worse yet, Brill added a few incorrect passages about our favorite choice for a debate with Hillary: Lucianne Goldberg. We think Brill may be playing a bit out of his league with Madam Goldberg. . . . "What he wrote was pure and absolute garbage," said Goldberg from her Manhattan apartment in a June 16 New York Post interview. "The story he wrote, which goes on forever, looks like it was written from the west wing of the White House." "He misquoted my son and I on at least four different occasions," she continued. "In one particular part when three separate sources denied I had anything to do with a part of the Lewinsky story, he wrote it anyway." So, Brill got the press, but the reviews of Brill's Content were not flattering. For instance, in a June 16 editorial the Wall Street Journal writes: "On careful reading, in fact, Mr. Brill's own account clearly shows that Mr. Starr and his aides were not 'orchestrating' anything; they were responding to revelations by Linda Tripp, her publicist friend Lucianne Goldberg, Kathleen Willey and others not bound by any requirement of grand jury secrecy. But on the cover, this becomes reporters 'Lapping up Ken Starr's leaks'." Aligning himself with the White House propaganda machine got Brill the publicity he wanted to kick off the publication. Now all he needs is some writers who can quote people correctly. There's a web page, but don't bother. Because, not making the news this week is a new daily Internet publication many Heads Up readers will want to check out. The "Conservative News Service" is now on line at: http://www.conservativenews.org/ So far, it's been very good, with only one small exception: Their scroll goes too fast. Great material, though. Good writing, too. This is definitely a good site to watch. Of course, for a very good roundup on the news we would also recommend the Western Journalism Center's WorldNetDaily at: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ Joseph Farah does a great job of posting the news there every day. So good, in fact, that the White House singled out the Western Journalism Center for one of the administration's special IRS audits as punishment. Also, as many people on the net know, Farah is becoming rather famous for those biting editorials. For more news with a correct viewpoint, we would also recommend the Washington Times at: http://www.washtimes.com/index.html and the New York Post at: http://www.nypostonline.com/ These are all daily's and free sites, and as far as we know not one of them ever displays any of the liberal bias permeating throughout most of the major news media. THE $6-MILLION FLY Hold the fly swatters. It appears that the tree-huggers have now mutated into insect coddlers. Therefore, for those of you who live near San Bernardino anyway, you had better closely examine that fly before you swat it. Else, according to federal law, men with guns can come and take you to prison. There are over 875,000 identified types of insects to be saved. This time, it's the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly, which grows to about an inch long as an adult. The "flies" spend most of their two year lives as larvae, buried under sand dunes in San Bernardino County. They don't appear as actual flies till mating season. The bug lovers say there may only be a few hundred of them -- but without sifting tons of sand they do not really know -- so they protected the fly under the Endangered Species Act. The fly was listed as protected in 1993. Because, as things happen, just as San Bernardino County broke ground on a sandy site for a $487-million hospital, Greg Ballmer, a Riverside entomologist, protested. "It is a very impressive insect and part of California's natural heritage," Ballmer said of the fly. Anyway, after a court squabble, county officials agreed to move the hospital 250 feet to the north. Then the federal government's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's bug police got into the act and wanted more. Fish and Wildlife wanted the county to preserve a 100-foot-wide "fly corridor." As it turned out, the federal bug cops found another colony of the flies a quarter-mile away, across a proposed service-road. The flies do not like to fly over asphalt or concrete, federal bug police said, and the flies might want to visit each other someday. So, the county was ordered to provide an unbroken sand corridor. Nothing as mundane as a human hospital, and the road leading to the new medical facility, can interfere with the free flight of the flies between the two colonies, it seems. But, alas, that still wasn't quite enough for the bug lovers. The bug people were winning against the big anti-bug humans, so they pushed their luck a bit more: August is mating season, when the flies are most active. Therefore, a federal bug cop started suggesting that traffic on the San Bernardino Freeway -- one of California's busiest -- be halted or slowed in late August. With that, the county had about enough. The fiasco had already cost the county and its taxpayers at least $6 million. Rerouting freeway traffic to benefit a fly was the last straw and the county went back to court. And today, that is how a stupid fly came to be at the center of a major legal battle over the reach of federal environmental laws. The county was joined in the case by a coalition including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Defenders of Property Rights, the American Farm Bureau and the California Farm Bureau Federation, and the case was recently presented to the U.S. Supreme Court. (National Assn. of Home Builders and County of San Bernardino vs. Babbitt, 97-1451) "We think this case raises directly the question about the limits of federal power" said Kenneth B. Bley, a Los Angeles lawyer who filed the appeal in the case. "This fly is not an article of interstate commerce. It has nothing to do with interstate commerce." There is one recent Supreme Court precedent on their side: U.S. v. Lopez (93-1260, 1995). The government says it has power to regulate the fly under interstate commerce powers. However, the fly only lives in California. Never mind, said the Clinton Administration. Since the fly is in a few museums around the country, and some bug collectors want a sample, that puts it in interstate commerce. However, in Lopez the Supreme Court said that when an object is not in interstate commerce, the federal government has no regulatory powers. "To uphold the Government's contention that [the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990] is justified because firearms possession in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce would require this Court to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional Commerce Clause authority to a general police power of the sort held only by the States." If this case is accepted by the Court, there is an excellent chance the bug lovers and tree huggers will lose. The 5-4 ruling in Lopez marked the first time in many years that the court had nullified a federal law on the grounds that Congress had no power to legislate on a subject. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said that even though the Constitution gives Congress broad power to regulate commerce among the states, that authority is not limitless. He said that, since mere gun possession has no "substantial" effect on interstate commerce, it is a state and local matter, not a federal issue. "I think the system is out of control and something needs to be done," Jerry Eaves, chairman of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors told the Los Angeles Times last Monday. "The Endangered Species Act was intended to save eagles and bears. Personally, I don't think we should be spending this money to save cockroaches, snails and flies." "The joke in our office is that with a can of Raid, we could solve this problem," Sacramento lawyer Anne Hawkins told the Los Angeles Times. She described the fly as looking "like a huge horsefly. It's about as thick as a thumb." We have a hint for the good people of San Bernardino County. Start sprinkling birdseed around the sand next month. Every day, put out a few large cupfuls of birdseed. It's just amazing how fast the bugs will disappear. Legally, too. STATE AND FEDERAL OFFICIALS VIOLATE LAW Unfortunately, I have personal knowledge of a crime in progress by at least a dozen public officials. Therefore, under the misprision of felony law (18 USC 4), I am required to "make known the same [information] to some judge or other person in civil or military authority." One of the serious crimes being committed at this time is a violation of the "deprivation of rights under color of law" statute (18 USC 242). This law states in part: "Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, . . . shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." I shall, therefore, inform the Chief Judge of the closest federal court as to the particulars of this crime. Meanwhile, a synopsis of the case is provided here in hopes that the information may help others with similar local situations. Last December 8, I wrote a letter to Winston Smith, Director, Air, Pesticides & Toxics Division of EPA for Region 4, in Atlanta. The text of the letter can be found in Heads Up issue #62 dated Dec. 7. The background material provided from U.S. Supreme Court opinions can be found in issue #52 dated Sept. 12. The letter concerned the U.S. EPA's insistence that Kentucky EPA write regulations forcing Northern Kentucky residents to have tail-pipe emissions tests performed on their motor vehicles. In the Supreme Court opinions provided, we showed conclusively that such action is unconstitutional. The same material was reviewed by the Kentucky cabinet secretary overseeing Kentucky EPA and at least two state legislators. It took Mr. Smith a few weeks to reply. His reply said nothing, except that Northern Kentucky is lumped in with the Cincinnati area, and therefore Kentucky EPA must initiate tail-pipe testing. The fact that there is no air pollution in Northern Kentucky is immaterial. U.S. EPA demands the tests be performed anyway. Worse, after reviewing the same material, Kentucky officials bowed down and said "yes master" to the federal EPA. Kentucky officials accepted their orders, and allowed the program to go forward. Therefore, they too have violated their oath of office. And, under color of false law, deprived nearly 150,000 Kentucky citizens of their Constitutional rights. Below are snippets from two U.S. Supreme Court opinions that directly apply to this matter. First, in "New York vs. U.S." (91-543, 1992), the Court discusses the necessity of separation of powers: "Where Congress exceeds its authority relative to the States, therefore, the departure from the constitutional plan cannot be ratified by the 'consent' of state officials. An analogy to the separation of powers among the Branches of the Federal Government clarifies this point. The Constitution's division of power among the three Branches is violated where one Branch invades the territory of another, whether or not the encroached- upon Branch approves the encroachment. . . . The constitutional authority of Congress cannot be expanded by the 'consent' of the governmental unit whose domain is thereby narrowed, whether that unit is the Executive Branch or the States." There is no authority within the Constitution for Congress (or the EPA) to regulate air pollution within the States. The federal government makes the States comply through trick and scheme. "State officials thus cannot consent to the enlargement of the powers of Congress beyond those enumerated in the Constitution." Furthermore, the federal government has no authority to compel States to regulate, because: "States are not mere political subdivisions of the United States. State governments are neither regional offices nor administrative agencies of the Federal Government. The positions occupied by state officials appear nowhere on the Federal Government's most detailed organizational chart. The Constitution instead 'leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignty,' (The Federalist No. 39), reserved explicitly to the States by the Tenth Amendment." . . . "Whatever the outer limits of that sovereignty may be, one thing is clear: The Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a Federal regulatory program." Rather clear and easy to understand, is it not? Yet, public servants cannot seem to grasp that this is the law of the land -- the controlling legal authority. Last year, in "Printz et al vs. U.S." (95-1478, 1997), the U.S. Supreme Court further defined the law on this topic: "The Constitution's structure reveals a principle that controls these cases: the system of 'dual sovereignty.' Although the States surrendered many of their powers to the new Federal Government, they retained a residuary and inviolable sovereignty that is reflected throughout the Constitution's text." . . . "Finally, and most conclusively in these cases, the Court's jurisprudence makes clear that the Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program." . . . Again, that is rather clear and easy to understand. And the carrot and the stick theory does not hold either. States may not be bribed into enforcing federal laws and regulations with federal funding programs: "Even assuming they represent assertion of the very same congressional power challenged here, they [bribery with funding programs] are of such recent vintage that they are no more probative [i.e. - proof] than the statute before us of a constitutional tradition that lends meaning to the text. Their persuasive force is far outweighed by almost two centuries of apparent congressional avoidance of the practice." The Court winds up in "Printz" by laying down the law as per the sovereignty of States: "Much of the Constitution is concerned with setting forth the form of our government, and the courts have traditionally invalidated measures deviating from that form. The result may appear 'formalistic' in a given case to partisans of the measure at issue, because such measures are typically the product of the era's perceived necessity. But the Constitution protects us from our own best intentions: It divides power among sovereigns and among branches of government precisely so that we may resist the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day." . . . "We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State's officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the State's officers or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case-by-case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty." Furthermore, 5 USC 706 instructs that "The reviewing court shall . . . hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be . . . arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion [or] . . . contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity." [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: The Entomopter Cometh (fwd) Date: 21 Jun 1998 21:41:42 PST On Jun 21, Ed Wolfe wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] To: Kepi Joe "6pk" sent me this most intriguing article. I found a related story and some links that I am attaching for your perusal. Upon reading about these "insects," Revelation 9:1-11 came to mind. Since Revelation is a book containing many metaphors, could there be a relationship between the two? Just a thought, folks. Kepi <>< =2E..........< Begin Forwarded Message >.......... >From: SBurton3@aol.com >The Entomopter Cometh = > >In April 1986, Moscow remained tight-lipped about a rumored leak at its = >Chernobyl nuclear facility, but a U.S. government "Keyhole" satellite = >captured an unobstructed view of the exploded power plant. Only 24 hours= = >after Pentagon analysts first saw the wreckage, ABC News broadcast the = >same view from a private satellite. The pictures were blurry, but the = >underlying message was clear: So much for the government monopoly on = >high-tech surveillance technology. = > >Since then, private aerospace ventures have further narrowed the = >technology gap. Privately owned satellites scheduled for launch this = >year can resolve images to one meter, rivaling the best technology of = >the world's intelligence services. Once these commercial systems are on = >line, detailed images of any spot on the planet will be available on the= = >open market. = > >On the ground, ever cheaper surveillance cameras are catching on as a = >means of law enforcement, most often for traffic control. The British, = >however, have been more ambitious. Today, more than 300,000 video = >cameras scan intersections across the United Kingdom for street crime = >and terrorist activity. Although some civil libertarians find the = >cameras Orwellian, the reality of safer streets has won over much of the= = >population. = > >All these systems rely on clunky hardware mounted in plain sight--but = >this too may change. Researchers at MIT are developing a camera that = >weighs less than one-tenth of an ounce and transmits high-definition = >television-quality images. And a 1992 RAND study on unmanned = >surveillance aircraft has spawned at least a dozen competing designs for= = >"micro air vehicles" (MAVs) with both military and civilian = >applications. Also known as "airplanes-on-a-chip," these MAVs are = >intended to weigh two to four ounces and to be no bigger than six inches= = >across. One of the most unusual designs on the drawing board is a = >four-inch-long, insect-like craft dubbed "the entomopter," equipped with= = >legs for crawling through buildings or ventilation ducts, and flapping = >wings for airborne reconnaissance. = > =2E..........< End Forwarded Message >.......... PD&D Net http://www.pddnet.com/DTOPICS/0498F1.HTM = April 1998 The Buzz on Robotic Bugs Diminutive flying machines known as micro air vehicles may soon be ready for missions ranging from battlefield reconnaissance to traffic monitoring. First, though, engineers must solve the swarm of technical problems posed by planes as small as insects. By William Leventon, Technical Editor Imagine an airplane as small as a dragonfly. In wartime, it could keep watch over enemy territory without being seen. Flying through the window of a building, it could hunt for hostages or fire victims. As a super-small sleuth, it could spy on bad guys, your business competitors, even your neighbors. At the Pentagon and elsewhere, researchers are doing more than imagine all this; they=92re working to make it real. Though the technical barriers ar= e immense, engineers in government, private industry, and academia see a variety of tiny flying machines =96 known as micro air vehicles, or MAVs = =96 taking to the air near the millennial border. Proponents cite many possible uses for MAVs, including monitoring traffic conditions, gathering information for police, and searching ruins for earthquake survivors. A soldier could send up an MAV to see if an ambush waits over the next hill. Or it could be equipped with detectors sensitive to deadly chemical and biological agents. Intrigued by the military possibilities, the Pentagon=92s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency= recently committed $35 million to MAV development. According to DARPA guidelines, an MAV should measure no more than 6 inches in any direction and weigh from 2 to 4 ounces. The aircraft should be able to stay aloft for up to an hour, fly at speeds from 20 to 40 mph, and operate up to 5 miles away from the person controlling it. Because of the MAV=92s range and small size, the operator will quickly lose sight of it after launch. Therefore, the craft must be designed for largely autonomous operation both in carrying out its mission and dealing with problems such as obstacles and wind gusts. All in all, it=92s a tall order to design a tiny aircraft. Complicating matters still further, air characteristics affect tiny fliers differently than larger ones. "To a mosquito, the air seems a lot thicker than it does to a 747 jet," notes Robert Michelson, a prominent MAV designer. "So you can=92t just scale down a 747 to make a micro air vehicle." Corporate Contender With millions in federal funds at stake, however, a growing number of companies are tackling the challenges of MAV development. AeroVironment Inc. of Simi Valley, CA, has gone through several MAV designs since it began work on the aircraft in early 1996. The company now pins its highest hopes on a 6-inch-diameter flying saucer known as the Black Widow. "It=92= s essentially a flying wing design, with a propeller at the nose and control surfaces at the rear," says Matt Keennon, AeroVironment=92s MAV project manager. The disc shape was chosen to provide the craft with maximum wing area, while conforming to the DARPA requirement that no dimension be greater than 6 inches, Keennon explains. Turning the Black Widow=92s tiny propeller is an electric motor powered b= y a pair of lithium batteries. The Black Widow has flown for 16 minutes at a stretch and reached speeds of over 40 mph, AeroVironment reports. For flight control, the Black Widow carries a 2-gram system that includes a computer, a radio receiver, and three micro motors that serve as flap actuators. Also weighing in at 2 grams is a special video camera developed by AeroVironment. Smaller than a sugar cube, this camera has flown on some of the company=92s larger MAV prototypes. The Black Widow takes off from a shoulder-carried storage case. Flipping open the top of the case to access the control console, the operator simply presses a button to launch the aircraft. Within a year, the case will also contain goggles that will let the operator see live video images transmitted from the aircraft, according to AeroVironment. Eventually, Keennon hopes the Black Widow will be capable of one-hour flights at a speed of 35 mph. To reach that goal, Keennon and his colleagues are working to boost the efficiency of the Black Widow=92s electric propulsion system, which is very reliable but doesn=92t provide nearly as much energy per unit weight as a gas-powered engine. Because of the limited power available, the designers are also working to minimize the weight and energy consumption of the onboard camera and transmitter. Keennon is optimistic that the remaining hurdles will be cleared. "Everything is doable," he insists. "It=92s just a matter of time and resources." School Work Some of the most ingenious MAV designs are flying through the minds of researchers at a handful of engineering schools. One of the first schools to study MAVs was the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where work on miniature planes began in 1994. Today, researchers at MIT=92s Lincoln Laboratory are working on a variety of MAV systems and also on how to integrate these tiny components to make a functioning aircraft. "Everything about this effort is hard, but propulsion is the most challenging thing," says William Davis, MAV program manager at Lincoln Laboratory. Though Davis and his colleagues are currently using a battery/electric-motor propulsion system, they think some type of internal combustion engine may be a better option. The team has built several engines in the required size range, but so far none has produced net power, Davis reports. A few years from now, Davis believes powerful, shirt-button-size gas turbine engines may be available for MAV duty. These engines, being developed by another group of MIT researchers, could be made fairly easily in large quantities using the same fabrication process that turns out computer chips. Such a micro-electromechanical system, or MEMS, combines tiny electronic and mechanical components in a single chip-size device, which could be embedded in the body of an MAV to save space. Besides tiny engines, the Lincoln Lab team is working on a super-small visible-light camera. Weighing 2 grams measuring just 1 cubic centimeter, the camera will use a silicon charge-coupled device to obtain images consisting of a million pixels =96 pictures sharp enough to show military= personnel and vehicles when taken from an altitude of 100 meters. After evaluating a number of alternatives, the Lincoln Lab team has decided on a propeller-driven, fixed-wing configuration. Though it=92s a proven configuration among larger aircraft, some designers believe fixed-wing MAVs could have trouble carrying out many of the missions envisioned for them. To generate adequate lift, which depends on wing area and wind speed, aircraft with tiny fixed wings will have to fly fast. This could make them ill-suited for indoor operations, which require maneuvering in close quarters. A Blow for Lift At Georgia Tech Research Institute in Atlanta, engineers are working on two very different solutions to this problem. One, based on two decades of research on full-size aircraft, exploits a phenomenon known as the Coanda effect. Robert Englar, a principal research engineer at Georgia Tech, plans to blow exhaust out of MAV wings through slots just a few thousandths of an inch wide. The flow of exhaust over the wing=92s rounded trailing edge produces extra lift, allowing slower flight and lower-speed takeoffs and landings. The amount of lift generated by blown exhaust is actually greater than that produced by conventional control surfaces, according to Englar. "In the wind tunnel, we have generated lift capabilities three to four times that which you get from a very good mechanical flap on an airliner," he says. Exhaust can also be used to control an aircraft without flaps and actuators. For example, a plane could turn left by increasing the amount of exhaust out of the right wing or reducing the amount of exhaust out of the left. Thus, blown exhaust may also banish moving parts from Englar=92s MA= V design. Perhaps the main advantage of the scheme is its simplicity. "All you need to make the whole system work is a compressed air source =96 say, a small= jet engine =96 and an internal valve that directs the engine exhaust wherever= you want it to go," says Englar, whose task now is to adapt technology originally developed for large aircraft to micro-scale planes. Birds and Bees For a more exotic solution to the lift problem, several designers are looking to the birds and the bees. "Everything in creation that flies does it by flapping its wings," notes Robert Michelson, also a principal research engineer at Georgia Tech, whose wing-flapping MAV may some day be capable of insect-like hovering and maneuverability. Powering Michelson=92s "entomopter" is a device called a reciprocating chemical muscle (RCM), which turns monopropellant fuel into gas that produces up-and-down wing motion. Michelson=92s current entomopter has an= RCM that flaps the craft=92s 10-inch wings =96 though not hard enough to get = it off the ground. The designer hopes to have an aircraft with a comparable wingspan flying by summer. In the meantime, Michelson will be looking for ways to slash the weight of his craft. "It takes me about 8 watts to fly if my vehicle weighs 100 grams. If I cut the weight in half, the power [needed] drops by a factor of 8 to 10, so it might only take me about 1 watt to fly," he explains. To achieve such dramatic weight reduction, all the components of the entomopter must do extra duty. "The wings have to be more than wings: they have to be antennas or store fuel," Michelson says. "Everything has to serve double or triple purposes." Like any good insect, the entomopter may one day be able to crawl as well as fly. Such a "multimode" device could fly into a building and then crawl around to carry out reconnaissance missions. A flier/crawler would be much less power hungry than a hummingbird-type device that remains in the air once indoors, Michelson points out. The RCM could power both crawling feet and beating wings, while also generating electricity for onboard sensors. More Bug Work Michelson has company in the quest for robotic bugs. Michael Goldfarb and Ephrahim Garcia, mechanical engineering professors at Vanderbilt University, have received a pair of DARPA grants to develop insect-like robots that crawl and fly. Goldfarb and Garcia want their bugs to be small and light enough that a soldier could carry large numbers of them into combat. They also want them to be relatively cheap so that losing some in action won=92t be a big deal. Powering the robotic bugs will be a small lithium battery like those used in wristwatches. To keep energy requirements to a minimum, Goldfarb and Garcia eschewed motors in favor of exotic motion schemes that rely on deformation and vibration. The key to both crawling and flying motion will be piezoelectric actuators. These thin ceramic-coated metal plates bend when supplied with electricity and snap back to their original form when the power goes off =96 the same technology that causes a pager to vibrate= =2E While motors normally have an efficiency of around 60 percent, piezoelectric actuators can turn more than 90 percent of electric power into movement, according to Goldfarb, who heads the flier development project. For ideas on how to design their flying insect, Goldfarb and Garcia turned to studies on the real thing. According to Goldfarb, scientists have discovered that an insect=92s wings flap five times faster than its brain= can issue "flap" commands. It turns out that skeletal vibration causes the wings to beat so fast, while commands from the brain simply excite the motion. The wing could be likened to a swing, which needs only an intermittent push to keep moving back and forth. Goldfarb and Garcia have come up with a metal skeleton they believe will imitate the vibration of a flying insect=92s exoskeleton. The piezoelectric actuators will provide the "push" that excites and maintains the vibration. "The drawback is that [the insects] will be able to walk at only one speed and fly at only one speed," Goldfarb notes. "They=92re not going to be real controllable, but they will be very efficient." Goldfarb and Garcia are already at work on "swarm dynamics" =96 the right= combination of crawling and flying insects to carry out various missions. Equipped with different types of sensors, hundreds or perhaps thousands of robot bugs could spread out over an area to conduct a search. If one bug finds something interesting but is ill-equipped to investigate, it could call in other insects with sensors better suited to the task. Before such gee-whiz missions can begin, however, the bugs have to get off the ground =96 something Goldfarb doesn=92t foresee before the summer of 1999. "Flapping flight dynamics are fairly complicated," he says. "Just because you have something with wings that flap doesn=92t mean it=92s going to fl= y." # # # **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the = included information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. = [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] ------------------------ LINKS Discovery Channel Online http://eagle.online.discovery.com/stories/technology/microplanes/power.ht= ml Robot Warriors http://www.hugh.demon.co.uk/Book2.html Aviation Links: UAV Sites http://www.howardcurtis.mcmail.com/uavs.html Micro Air Vehicle "Entromopter" Project http://avdil.gtri.gatech.edu/RCM/RCM/Entomopter/EntomopterProject.html A Reciprocating Chemical Muscle (RCM) for Micro Air Vehicle "Entomopter" Flight http://avdil.gtri.gatech.edu/RCM/RCM/Entomopter/AUVSI-97_EntomopterPaper.= html *************************************************************************= * DISCLAIMER: Articles I post are the opinions of the individual authors and DO NOT necessarily express my views. I do not deliberately print or forward false or misleading information. Although I make every attempt to disseminate accurate information, I am unable to confirm the veracity of the overall content. Therefore, all information I submit by E-mail is to be considered unsubstantiated rumor and examined judiciously. NOTE: E-mail can be altered electronically, thus the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed. -Kepi [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Cannibalism and LEOs (fwd) Date: 22 Jun 1998 08:10:33 PST On Jun 22, Grubb, Ken wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > The Federales are now feeding on dissenters within the ranks. > > http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a337331.htm > > Ken Grubb > Miami, FL [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: Never Again (fwd) Date: 22 Jun 1998 11:34:30 PST On Jun 22, Ed Wolfe wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > Never Again > Hearthside, June 19 > > "I heard no mention of the loss of personal freedom... Apparently this was > not much of a sacrifice. They couldn't have cared less." > > The quotes in this Daily Reflection are from William Shirer, Hitler and > the Third Reich: First Impressions, from The Nightmare Years: 1930-1940 > (Little, Brown, and Co., 1984) May they indeed scare the hell out of you. > > In a conversation with an acquaintance about Executive Order 13083 and the > rapid and ruthless demolition of State autonomy and authority, my > intelligent and usually rational friend told me, "You have to admit, Dave, > that increasing federal power would make things a whole lot easier." > > Yes, indeed. Easier... > > "What the outside world had not realized and what I was just beginning to > comprehend was that the Austrian-born dictator was giving the Germans -- > or most of them -- what they wanted... [H]e had unified the country, > stamping out the old divisions of lands, states, and provinces... Germany > had until then remained a sort of confederation, with each member...having > its own government... Hitler had made short work of that. No more > provincial governments or legislatures to put the brake on Berlin." > > If there was ever any doubt about William Jefferson Clinton's aspirations > to power, let them be settled. This American-born would-be dictator has > signed and delivered a much talked about -- but equally ignored -- > Executive Order 13083, which effectively makes "short work" of our > nation's divisions of lands and states, with their own governments. > > An Executive Order is a historically significant way for the president to > by-pass the Constitution and the legal means of creating law -- and power. > Originally, Executive Orders were commands that presidents made to address > their staffs. They were corrupted, and under Teddy Roosevelt, who wrote > over 1,100 of them, became a means of writing laws without Congress. Since > then they have become the president's greatest tool and most personally > fulfilling source of authority. > > Executive Orders have created the means for a president, or his "named > authority," to slip past the Constitution and the laws of Congress to > relocate population segments, control all shipping, all power and food > distribution, the seaways, radio waves, utilities and fuels. > > Yes, they are real. Yes, they are really in place. > > Now, William Jefferson Clinton has eliminated the authority of each and > every state, in all circumstances, from resisting the encroachment of his > federal mandates. > > By a stroke of his pen, the laws of the individual states are gone -- they > must fall to federal edict -- if any of an all-inclusive string of > conditions can be applied. The dictator has authority and supremacy if any > resistance can be shown to affect or involve neighboring states, if there > is a "need" for federal standards, if state control "imposes an additional > burden," if states have not "adequately protected" rights as defined by > the federal government, if the state shows "reluctance" due to "fear," if > the state impedes "regulatory goals" of any federal plan, if it in any way > "relates to" federally managed lands or resources, or if Indian tribes are > involved or affected. > > "The swift and ruthless unification of the Reich had answered, I began to > feel, a deep yearning in the Germans to be one. It had also made Germany > stronger and, for Hitler, easier to manage. It was this urge to be strong > again..." > > Never again. > > "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine > in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of > hearing the words of the Lord: And they shall wander from sea to sea, > and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro ... > They shall fall, and never rise again. (Amos 8:11-14 Webster's) > > Dave and Helen Delany [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Do We "HOLD THESE TRUTHS" Today? (fwd) Date: 23 Jun 1998 00:16:20 PST On Jun 22, Jim H. Hill Jr. wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] LETTER TO THE EDITOR (299 words) 6/22/98 Do We "HOLD THESE TRUTHS" Today? July 4, 1776, fifty-six men pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor as their commitment to a list of principles they believed were absolute truths. At the top of that list was the unalienable right to life. That document is known as the Declaration of Independence. January 22, 1973, nine Supreme Court justices legalized the utmost form of discrimination against a certain class of Americans based on their age, location, and their desirability to their immediate families. This landmark case we know as Roe vs. Wade. When the guilty receive capital punishment, we call it a barbaric practice. Nearly every case makes the national news. Vigils are held and TVs light up from coast-to-coast. When innocent children are put to death, we call it a Constitutional right. The silent screams of these children forever go unmentioned. During the time it takes you to read this letter, six babies will die in this country -- and you and I will never know their names. Fifty-six men, who believed that the unalienable right to life was a non-debatable issue, birthed the greatest country in the history of the world. Today, our elected representatives cannot even condemn infanticide. If "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" are cornerstones of freedom, will the abandonment of life ultimately lead to the "abortion" of freedom? Every 4th of July beaches and parks fill to capacity. Americans celebrate something, but most do not know what. Some remember the Founders and the principles they held. Some may question whether or not we still hold the same core values. This question will best be answered the next business day when the abortion mills fire up all across the country, at least 4000 more babies die, and another day proves that we, indeed, no longer hold those self-evident truths. Jim H. Hill Jr. 8 W 3rd St., Suite 700 Winston-Salem, NC 27101 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tel: (336) 727-2597 x3043 Email: HillJH@zeus.co.forsyth.nc.us ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Call, write, or email if you have any questions or comments. Not copyrighted. Permission granted to edit, reproduce, and distribute as desired. Okay to publish name, city/state and email address. If this was sent to the wrong address or department, please forward or let me know. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: Clinton's EO from hell (fwd) Date: 23 Jun 1998 09:59:10 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Clinton's EO from hell=20 Stealth executive order trashes 10th Amendment=20 =20 By Sarah Foster=20 Ever since Americans got wind of the executive order on "Federalism," which the president signed without fanfare in England, May 14, the Internet's been humming with warnings about the threat it poses to the Constitution and our system of government. Word is out that EO 13083 represents a major power-grab by Clinton and his administration, and if it goes into goes into effect Aug. 12 as scheduled -- 90 days after the signing -- the U.S. Constitution will be so much confetti and Clinton can work his will on the body politic.=20 The home folks are way ahead of their elected officials on this one. To date, Democrat and Republican lawmakers alike appear oblivious to what this executive order does and have been quick to flick away constituents' concerns. Yet Republicans in particular might not be so sanguine if they realized that by issuing EO 13083 Clinton thumbed his nose at the entire Republican Party -- from former president Ronald Reagan to the GOP leadership, members of Congress, and everything they claim to represent --- and they don't even know it. If ignorance is bliss, Republicans on the Hill must be some of the happiest people around.=20 A harsh judgment? Let's take a look.=20 Clinton's order actually revokes an earlier one -- EO 12612, issued by President Reagan Oct. 26, 1987 -- and replaces it with a hideous parody, an EO from hell. It also revokes EO 12875, which Clinton himself issued on the same date, but six years later in 1993. EO 12875 promised an end to unfunded mandates and was basically a way to steal some thunder from the Right and Newt Gingrich's Contract with America. Since it was never really acted upon, we won't notice it's gone.=20 The revocation of the Reagan executive order is a different matter. That's serious.=20 Both EO 12612 and its replacement deal with federalism, that is the relationship of the states to the federal government and the distribution of power between the two as established by the Constitution. They are policy directives to executive departments and agencies of the respective administrations -- guidelines to federal bureaucrats and law enforcement for determining when a regulation or legislation has "federalism implications." Therefore, they address questions of jurisdiction, state sovereignty, the degree to which the federal government can intervene in state affairs, and the extent of federal regulatory activity allowable within a state. In a word -- the limits, if any, to the power of the federal government.=20 Whoever crafted EO 13083 used the framework of its predecessor and borrowed some of its wording, but any resemblance between them stops there. When it comes to policy and constitutional interpretation, the two executive orders -- though about the same subject -- are opposed at virtually every point.=20 For example, federalism itself -- according to Reagan's EO 12612 -- is "rooted in the knowledge that our political liberties are best assured by limiting the size and scope of the national government." Not surprisingly, EO 13083 doesn't talk about small government and political liberty, nor is there any explanation as to why federalism was adopted as a system in the first place, merely that it's somehow "premised" on a system of checks-and-balances. According to the Clinton view of federalism it's OK for the "supreme" government to be of gargantuan size and unlimited scope and power so long as it's "balanced."=20 By issuing his executive order, Reagan was trying to repair the damage to our political system wrought by Supreme Court decisions and the "mission creep" of federal agencies. Towards that end EO 12612 stresses state sovereignty, sets real limits on how far regulatory agencies can go in carrying out mandates by Congress, and above all, specifically reaffirms that the Tenth Amendment -- the one that says that powers not delegated by the Constitution to the national government, nor prohibited by it (the Constitution) to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.=20 Consider these quotes from EO 12612:=20 "The Constitutional relationship among sovereign governments, state and national, is formalized in and protected by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution."=20 "Acts of the national government ... that exceed the enumerated powers of that government under the Constitution violate the principle of federalism established by the framers."=20 "In the absence of clear constitutional or statutory authority, the presumption of sovereignty should rest with the individual states. Uncertainties regarding the legitimate authority of the national government should be resolved against regulation at the national level."=20 Clinton's EO 13083, on the other hand, never mentions state sovereignty, enumerated powers, nor for that matter the Tenth Amendment. Here's a major pronouncement on federalism by a sitting president with no reference to the Tenth Amendment!=20 The heart of both executive orders is the criteria for policymaking -- the whys and wherefores that justify federal intervention in state affairs. For Reagan this was to be undertaken only if there were "clear and certain constitutional authority" for any federal activity, and such activity must be necessitated by "a problem of national scope."=20 That's way too restrictive for Clinton and his vision of big-is-beautiful government. EO 13083 empowers bureaucrats and federal agencies in his administration to "determine" for themselves if there is "constitutional and legal authority" for whatever they want to do without concerning themselves unduly about "clear and certain constitutional authority." And why limit federal action to mere problem-solving? For Clinton federal action is justified by a host of "matters of national or multi-state scope." To quote a few:=20 When decentralization might increase the cost of government and impose additional burdens on the taxpayer.=20 When States would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations because of fears that regulated business activity will relocate to other States.=20 When placing regulatory authority at the State or local level would undermine regulatory goals because high costs or demands for specialized expertise will effectively place the regulatory matter beyond the resources of State authorities.=20 When the matter relates to Federally owned or managed property or natural resources, trust obligations or international obligations.=20 That last is the worst of the lot. The agencies already claim they have a right to manage natural resources on private land, and with EO 13083 in place as official policy it will be much harder for a property owner to launch a challenge in court or for a "reluctant" state or local government to tell the feds to go home to Washington.=20 As for the surreptitious reference to international obligations -- that should have set off alarm bells, at least among Republicans, but didn't. The president's not talking only about treaties (though those are bad enough, goodness knows), but about deals and arrangements he makes with foreign governments like China, or decisions he makes on his own. For instance, take the Kyoto Summit's Convention on Global Warming -- one of many treaties that advance the agenda for world-wide eco-fascism. Though unratified by the Senate, Clinton has adopted it as a policy for his administration. Since the convention is a creature of the UN, Clinton can put our country under its mandates and deflect criticism by saying he's only following obligations.=20 And as if the green agenda weren't bad enough, the rationale of international obligations increases Clinton's warmaking powers exponentially. He's effectively given himself unlimited authority to send the boys to Bosnia, Cyprus, India, Pakistan -- anywhere and whenever he wants to do a show of force number. No need to ask Congress nor even the UN for a go-ahead. With EO 13083 he can just call up the troops.=20 So what's the bottom line on EO 13083? Is it as bad as folks are saying? Yes, it is. Can it completely wipe out what's left of the Constitution? You bet. Can it be stopped? Sure. But don't count on it. Most members of Congress -- including Republicans -- don't want to face down the president, and that's what canceling this executive order would require. Worse, our congressmen don't seem to give a zip about the Constitution or the survival of this country. If they did, we wouldn't be in the mess we are and Clinton wouldn't be on his way to China. With EO 13083 in his pocket, you can bet he's laughing all the way to Beijing.=20 =20 =A9 1998 Western Journalism Center=20 =20 Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574 -----------------| 1175 N Altadena Dr | -------------- Jack@Minerva.Com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-309-8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: A mightly blow against forfiture (fwd) Date: 23 Jun 1998 09:59:47 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- steve@kura.jpl.nasa.gov, pwatson@utdallas.edu June 23, 1998 High Court Reins In Overweening Government By ROGER PILON The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday struck a blow for both common sense and the Constitution. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by the court's four liberals, ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment limits the amount of money the government can seize from an individual for his failure to declare that he was taking money out of the country. If ever one needed evidence that the nation's forfeiture laws are in desperate need of reform, yesterday's case, U.S. v. Bajakajian, should provide it. On June 9, 1994, Hosep Bajakajian and his wife, immigrants from Syria, were waiting with their two daughters at the Los Angeles International Airport to board a flight to Cyprus when U.S. Customs agents, using trained dogs, discovered $230,000 in cash in their checked luggage. An agent approached the Bajakajians, informing them that they were required to report any money they were taking out of the country in excess of $10,000. Coming from a culture in which government agents often seize money on the spot, for their personal use, Mr. Bajakajian told the agent that he had $8,000 and his wife had $7,000. A search by the agents turned up a total of $357,144. The money had been earned legally through Mr. Bajakajian's gas-station business and was meant for repaying relatives who had helped him get started. Nevertheless, the government pursued Mr. Bajakajian, who pleaded guilty to trying to transport the money outside the U.S. without filing a report. The government also sought forfeiture of the entire $357,144, but a trial judge ruled that a forfeiture of more than $15,000 would be unconstitutional under the Excessive Fines Clause. The government wanted every last dollar, so it appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Under the forfeiture statute, a court imposing a sentence on someone found guilty of failing to report, as Mr. Bajakajian was, "shall order that the person forfeit to the United States any property, real or personal, involved in such offense." Although vague criminal statutes are supposed to be construed against the government, rarely does that happen when the issue is forfeiture. There are three basic rationales for forfeiture: contraband, ill-gotten goods and "facilitation." In most cases, the first two raise no problems: Few would object when counterfeit cash or the proceeds of a robbery are forfeited. But what is meant by property that "facilitates" a crime? It means that if you take back a second mortgage when you sell your house, and the buyer uses the house for prostitution, you lose your mortgage when the government seizes the home, for the house "facilitated" the crime. It means that if someone hires you and your charter jet to transport drug money, unbeknownst to you, you lose your jet, since it was an "instrument" of crime. Those examples, taken from real cases, have a thousand variations all across this country, and as many tragic stories behind them. Yet the courts have done nothing about it because, as Chief Justice William Rehnquist put it in a 1995 case, the law is "too firmly fixed in the punitive and remedial jurisprudence of the country to be now displaced." Two members of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in ruling for Mr. Bajakajian, found that the $357,144 was not the "instrumentality" of the crime. "The crime is the withholding of information, not the possession or the transportation of the money," the judges found. Yesterday, a majority of the Supreme Court agreed. What is perhaps most interesting is not the uncommon presence of Justice Thomas among the court's liberals but the approach he brought to the task before him. Bajakajian fell not on the civil side of forfeiture law, where so much of the mischief today takes place, but on the criminal side. In criminal-forfeiture cases, the government cannot simply seize property on a mere probable-cause showing that it may have been "involved" in a crime. Rather, the government must find the owner guilty of a crime before his property can be forfeited. That means that forfeiture is a form of "punishment," so that the Excessive Fines Clause comes to the fore, at least in principle. But Bajakajian was the first case in the court's history striking down a fine as "excessive" under the Eighth Amendment. Finding no text or history precisely on point, Justice Thomas drew from the Cruel and Unusual Punishments side of the Eighth Amendment to conclude, by analogy, that "a punitive forfeiture violates the Excessive Fines Clause if it is grossly disproportional to the gravity of the defendant's offense." But why does the judiciary, rather than the legislature, get to make that call? The legislature does make the call about appropriate punishments, Justice Thomas says. Moreover, "any judicial determination regarding the gravity of a particular criminal offense will be inherently imprecise," he adds. But that doesn't mean that the court's deference must be total. When the fine or punishment is "grossly disproportionate," the court must step in. Judicial activism? No. But neither is it judicial restraint of a kind that ignores the plain language of the Constitution. Yet Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing yesterday for the four conservative dissenters, was perplexed, to put it charitably. Repeatedly likening Mr. Bajakajian's failure to declare the amount of currency he was taking out of the country--his only crime--to "smuggling," Justice Kennedy went on to address the difficulty of proving money laundering--as if that were at issue here. The government "was unable to adduce affirmative proof of another crime in this particular case," Justice Kennedy noted, adding that "because of the problems of individual proof, Congress found it necessary to enact a blanket punishment." Thus, whatever the amount--$300,000 or $3 million--it is all subject to forfeiture. The reasoning here is, well, chilling. Rather than look at the Constitution, we look at the government's problems of proof. The government could not prove that Mr. Bajakajian had not done more than fail to fill out a form--but he might have. Given that, Justice Kennedy claims, Congress is entitled to make the punishment as large as may be necessary to deter such possible crimes--no matter how many people get hurt along the way. That is deference with a passion--a passion for crime-fighting. It is the passion that has given us the forfeiture law we have today. At the founding, fortunately, that passion was checked by a greater passion--the love of liberty and the fear of overweening government. It is a good sign that Justice Thomas has returned us to the first principles of the matter. Mr. Pilon is director of the Center for Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute. Return to top of page | Format for printing=20 Copyright =A9 1998 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.=20 =20 Jack Perrine | Athena Programming | 626-798-6574 -----------------| 1175 N Altadena Dr | -------------- Jack@Minerva.Com | Pasadena CA 91107 | FAX-309-8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: ABC's Slander (fwd) Date: 23 Jun 1998 12:42:48 PST On Jun 23, Josh Amos wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Here is ABC's address. They are going to be socially sodomizing gun owners' all week. Let's stay on top of them and keep hammering back. Please pass this on to your freinds, club members etc. http://www.abcnews.com/ [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: rkba-list: NCIPC official policy enclosed (fwd) Date: 23 Jun 1998 21:02:54 PST On Jun 23, wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] "Scientific Jargon" by Dyrk Schingman, Oregon State University After several years of studying and hard work, I have finally learned scientific jargon. The following list of phrases and their definitions will help you to understand that mysterious language of science and medicine. "IT HAS LONG BEEN KNOWN"... I didn't look up the original reference. "A DEFINITE TREND IS EVIDENT"...These data are practically meaningless. "WHILE IT HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE DEFINITE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS"... An unsuccessful experiment, but I still hope to get it published "THREE OF THE SAMPLES WERE CHOOSEN FOR DETAILED STUDY"... The other results didn't make any sense. "TYPICAL RESULTS ARE SHOWN"... This is the prettiest graph. "THESE RESULTS WILL BE IN A SUBSEQUENT REPORT"... I might get around to this sometime, if pushed/funded. "THE MOST RELIABLE RESULTS ARE OBTAINED BY JONES"... He was my graduate student; his grade depended on this. "IN MY EXPERINCE"... once "IN CASE AFTER CASE"... Twice "IN A SERIES OF CASES"... Thrice "IT IS BELIEVED THAT"... I think. "IT IS GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT"... A couple of other guys think so too. "CORRECT WITHIN AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"... Wrong. "ACCORDING TO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS"... Rumor has it. "A STATISTICALLY ORIENTED PROJETION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE FINDINGS"... A wild guess. "A CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF ABTAINABLE DATA"... Three pages of notes were obilterated when I knocked over a glass of beer. "IT IS CLEAR THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL WORK WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THIS PHENOMENA OCCURS"... I don't understand it. "AFTER ADDITIONAL STUDY BY MY COLLEAGUES"... They don't understand it either. "THANKS ARE DUE TO JOE BLOTZ FOR ASSITANCE WITH THE EXPERIMENT AND TO ANDREA SCHAEFFER FOR VALUABLE DISCUSSIONS"... Mr. Boltz did the work and Ms. Shaeffer explained to me what it meant. "A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT AREA FOR EXPLORATORY STUDY"... A totally useless topic selected by my committee. "IT IS HOPED THAT THIS STUDY WILL STIMULATE FURTHER INVESTIGATION IN THIS FIELD"... I quit. This may be used or broadcast in any form as long as I recieve credit. Dyrk Schingman [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: Prozac Implicated in Oregon School Shooting (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 08:54:25 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- The chorus on this topic is getting louder and louder. Here's an excerpt from another recent article. Another recent study showed correlation between the onset of the use of Prozac-like drugs in schoolage children and the drop in average SAT scores in this country. Apparently the two curves originate in the same school year. Not conclusive by itself, but definitely food for thought. I wonder if parents, teachers, and other supervisory adults look to drugs as a quick fix to "behaviorial problems" in children. If so, those adults bear at least some of the blame for what's happening. Raising and educating children is a serious commitment, not something to be fixed with a pill or an injection. ----- by MAUREEN SIELAFF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON - Before going on a wild shooting spree at his Springfield Oregon high school that left 2 dead and 22 injured, Kip Kinkel had been attending anger control classes and was taking a prescription drug called Prozac. This particular drug has factored in almost all wild shooting sprees which have taken place in the last ten years. Eli Lilly of Indianapolis, Indiana was recently sued over the homicidal tendencies this drug is alleged to induce in patients. Prozac is commonly given to youth as a treatment for depression. In the book "Prozac and other Psychiatric Drugs," by Lewis A. Opler, M.D., Ph.D., the following side effects are listed for Prozac: apathy; hallucinations; hostility; irrational ideas; and paranoid reactions, antisocial behavior; hysteria; and suicidal thoughts. Though many are demanding stricter gun control laws as a solution to this sudden increase in homicidal shootings, these events do not appear to correlate to a sudden increase in firearm ownership. But when the percentage of these killers that are on Prozac is compared to the percentage of the general public on Prozac, a very disturbing pattern emerges. Though Prozac does indeed help many people suffering from depression, it appears that it does indeed also drive many into homicidal rages. When Kip Kinkel's home was investigated several bombs that he had constructed were discovered. With a ban on bombs already in place, he nevertheless managed to have several in his possession that he might well have taken to school instead of guns. So the question arises, if guns had been banned like bombs, would the danger have been averted? The unmistakable answer is that it would not. And with the shootings correlating far more closely with the psychiatric drug Prozac, why is the public put in such great danger by its widespread use, while efforts are directed instead toward something that shows no correlation? Apparently it is easier to drug our youth, to fill their bodies with drugs that many times have worse side effects on their minds and spirits than the problems they have. You name the attitude and there is a drug to supposedly help or cure it. It may be time to take the War On Drugs to where it can really be effective; getting these society cop-out drugs out of our children's lives. It may be time we rise and help our children through productive activities and quit drugging them senseless. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: fwd: Vote in MI Poll (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 13:45:59 PST On Jun 24, Richard Hartman wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Forwarded.... We folks in Michigan could really use your help on this one. There seems to be a flood of "no" votes in the past hour. I think someone is putting the "fix" in. http://data.detnews.com:8081/poll/survey.hbs Jim jdolson@iserv.net [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Mother Jones- another gun poll (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 13:45:26 PST On Jun 24, R. Lunn wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] These guys never learn. We trounced them a few years ago... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- <> S N A P P O L L ___________________________________________________ THIS WEEK'S POLL: The mayors of Philadelphia, Chicago, and New Orleans are threatening to sue gun manufacturers in an attempt to hold them responsible for gun violence in the cities. Do you think gunmakers should be liable for deaths and injuries caused by their products? Vote and discuss at: http://www.motherjones.com/ <> So far the results are: 22.19% say Yes 77.81% say No 311 have voted Vote early and vote often... DVC -- Regards, >>Dick<< [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: RAPTUS: John Yonge : [CSRL] Saving Seed Becomes Illegal (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 13:44:09 PST On Jun 23, BaBette Z. Bechtold wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Thought what this guy had to say needed a broader audience, Blessings, BaBette --------- Begin forwarded message ---------- Message-ID: <9806232135471J.53959@svlist.com> Because I had to unsubscribe from the list temporarily, I can't see what is being said about the posts I sent in. Therefore, I want to send some pieces of a shcoking article I read in Natural Life Magazine in case anyone is interested. Here goes with my comments in square brackets: ________________________________ Saving Seed Becomes Illegal Mississipi-based Delta & Pine Land co. and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) have received a US patent on a new genetic technology designed to prevent unauthorized seed saving by farmers [and homesteaders]. The patented technology, called "Control of plant gene expression," allows seed companies to control the viability of progeny seed without harming the crop. In other words, the new technology alters the seed so that it will not germinate if replanted a second time. [You can plant the original seed you buy and produce a "normal" crop with it, but the seeds from that "normal" crop won't work so that you'll have to buy more seed the following year. The question now becomes, who owns the seed that the new crop produces, the seed company who sold the original seed, or the farmer who grew the crop? USDA is suggesting that they own the second-generation seed and will use their patent to deny us the right to re-seed.] The patent is broad, applying to all plants and seeds of all species [including vegetables]...If commercially viable, the patented technology could have far-reaching implications for farmers and the commercial seed industry. If the technology is widely licensed, it could be a boon to the seed industry--especially for companies marketing self-pollinating seeds such as wheat, rice, cotton, soybeans, oats, and sorghum. If commercially viable, the new technology could mean huge profits in entirely new sectors of the seed industry. For farmers, the patented technology will undoubtedly mean greater dependence on the commercial seed market. If widely utilized, farmers will lose the age-old right to save seed from their hervest [not without a big fight!]. And it appears that corporations are already moving in this direction. Recent reports say that Monsanto has hired Pinkerton investigators to identify unauthorized seed-saving farmers [can you believe that??? Farmers are being threatened with charges for using the seeds from their own plants!! This is control of a high order, and it threatens Christians in the tribulation because it promises to force us to buy seeds every year when the mark of the beast is in force.] [snip] The USDA wants the technology to be "widely licensed and made expeditiously available to many seed companies," says Phelps [of Delta and Pine co.] The goal is "to increase the value of proprietary seed owned by US seed companies and to open up new markets in Second and Third World countries." [I fail to see how this will increase the value of seed. Can anyone help me with this?] [end of article] John ************************************************************ Christian Self-Reliant Living and Homesteading List ************************************************************ List/Digest Commands SUBSCRIBE - subscribes you to the mailing list. UNSUBSCRIBE - unsubscribes you from the mailing list. SUBSCRIBE DIGEST - subscribes you to the digest. UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST - unsubscribes you from the digest. DIR - sends a listing of files available in the list's GET directory GET filename1.ext,filename2.ext - sends the requested file(s) HELP - send you a help file on using the list. PRIVATE - Send a private message to the list administrator. To issue a command/request to the mailserver: Send a message to csrl@techline.com with the command you wish executed as the only text in the subject of the message. ************************************************************ --------- End forwarded message ---------- _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: 2nd ABC poll (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 15:53:41 PST On Jun 24, William Gray wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] ABC News has T W O gun-related polls on their web site. 1. WHAT DO YOU FEAR MOST has guns as #2, biological weapons as #1 and two trivial choices in 3 and 4. 2. JUST BELOW THAT there is a 20/20 DoubleTake poll asking whether you regularly carry a knife or other weapon for self protection. Vote early and often. I fear bio weapons and I carry. Your mileage may vary. Regards, BIll [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Perrine Subject: RE: 2nd ABC poll (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 16:26:54 -0700 On Wednesday, June 24, 1998 4:54 PM, Bill Vance [SMTP:roc@xpresso.seaslug.org] wrote: > On Jun 24, William Gray wrote: > > [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > > ABC News has T W O gun-related polls on their web site. > > 1. WHAT DO YOU FEAR MOST has guns as #2, biological weapons as #1 and > two trivial choices in 3 and 4. > > 2. JUST BELOW THAT there is a 20/20 DoubleTake poll asking whether you > regularly carry a knife or other weapon for self protection. Over the last year while walking BARAK in the morning an ever larger percentage of the people walking for exercise seem to come with a short walking stick in one hand. I suppose this is a weapon. In most cases considering the physical condition of the walker I am sure it would just irritate a truly aggressive dog.....and while I have never asked I assume that they are afraid of dogs .....or even coyotes. I have less trouble believing that it would be an effective weapon against a young male bent on robbery or such....but then few people walking in the early morning have much to steal..... At any rate as time goes on a vry large percentage of the people who are brave enough to walk are carrying something that looks like a weapon......tho, the part of the population who are brave enough to walk any futher than front door to car door is becoming vanishingly small Five years ago on a warm summer evening on walking two miles with BARAK one could expect to pass a couple of dozen people getting a breath of air.....but now if one walks two miles a night one is lucky to see a single other pedestrian in a weeks time..... So, perhaps the poll needs another question: How many never leave a strongly fortified home for fear of crime....or words to that effect [ BARAK is an 8 year old Wolf Hybrid and he gets highly nervous when there is another person within blocks and insists on stopping and doing intensive observation when they are behind him......so, I am very aware of how few other people are actually on the streets walking ] Jack > Vote early and often. I fear bio weapons and I carry. Your mileage may > vary. > > Regards, > > BIll > > [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** > ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- > An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no > weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his > hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a > on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ > ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- > > - > Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming | 626 - 798- 6574 ----------------- | 1175 N Altadena Dr | ------------------- Jack@Minerva.com | Pasadena, Ca 91107 | FAX 398 8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacques Tucker Subject: ALERT! Dangerous desiccant? Date: 24 Jun 1998 20:46:45 -0500 A WMSA member in the boonies of Missouri advises us that he ordered various cartridges and surplus military ammo cans from the Cheaper Than Dirt catalog. CTD is a firm in Ft. Worth that apparently has a full page ad for their catalog in the American Rifleman mag. He says there was also desiccant listed in the catalog just under the ammo cans, so he ordered a batch to help preserve the items he planned to store. A cautious fellow, he called the desiccant manufacturer to verify it was wise to use it with his ammo, etc. "Oh," said the lady who answered, "don't use that for metal. It has sulphur in the paper and will destroy any metal." The manufacturer of the desiccant is United Desiccants, 127 Christine Dr., Belen, NM 67002. Their toll free line is 800-989-3374. The MilSpec on the 5.5 oz. packages is MIL-D-3464 Type I and II. Our member called the NRA several times to alert them of the problem. He indicates they really don't care. "It doesn't matter." Advertising revenue may be more important, I suppose? He was able to get credit from the vendor, CDT, for just trashing this stuff. It costs more to ship than it's worth. Let your gunner friends know of this potential disaster. Jacq' Jacques Tucker Western Missouri Shooters Alliance - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: RE: 2nd ABC poll (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 17:40:38 PST I used to do a lot of running years ago, about 5 miles a day. When I did I carried a 7 foot oak quarter stave. Once while running, I was accosted by a pair of shepherds, or shepherd/coyote mix, (it was getting dark). One got behind my legs while the other pushed me over backwards, onto the ground. They then circled and, "came in", whether for the kill or to play, I don't know. So anyway, I engaged them with a bit of ground fighting. Having the stave by the middle, I lay on my back and played, "helicopter", first one direction and then the other, striking both of them until they backed off. At that point they lost interest, and I got up, and striking at them, ran them off. Large critters are nothing to fool aound with. On Jun 24, Jack Perrine wrote: >Over the last year while walking BARAK in the morning an ever larger >percentage of the people walking for exercise seem to come with a >short walking stick in one hand. I suppose this is a weapon. In most >cases considering the physical condition of the walker I am sure >it would just irritate a truly aggressive dog.....and while I have >never asked I assume that they are afraid of dogs .....or even >coyotes. I have less trouble believing that it would be an effective >weapon against a young male bent on robbery or such....but then few >people walking in the early morning have much to steal..... > >At any rate as time goes on a vry large percentage of the people who >are brave enough to walk are carrying something that looks like a >weapon......tho, the part of the population who are brave enough to >walk any futher than front door to car door is becoming vanishingly >small > >Five years ago on a warm summer evening on walking two miles with >BARAK one could expect to pass a couple of dozen people getting a >breath of air.....but now if one walks two miles a night one is >lucky to see a single other pedestrian in a weeks time..... >So, perhaps the poll needs another question: How many never leave >a strongly fortified home for fear of crime....or words to that effect > >[ BARAK is an 8 year old Wolf Hybrid and he gets highly nervous when >there is another person within blocks and insists on stopping and >doing intensive observation when they are behind him......so, I >am very aware of how few other people are actually on the >streets walking ] > >Jack > > Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming | 626 - 798- 6574 > ----------------- | 1175 N Altadena Dr | ------------------- > Jack@Minerva.com | Pasadena, Ca 91107 | FAX 398 8620 -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brad Alpert" <1911a1@gte.net> Subject: RE: 2nd ABC poll (fwd) Date: 24 Jun 1998 21:15:27 +0500 > From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) > I used to do a lot of running years ago, about 5 miles a day. When I did I > carried a 7 foot oak quarter stave. Once while running, I was accosted by a > pair of shepherds, or shepherd/coyote mix, (it was getting dark). One got > behind my legs while the other pushed me over backwards, onto the ground. > They then circled and, "came in", whether for the kill or to play, I don't > know. So anyway, I engaged them with a bit of ground fighting. Having the > stave by the middle, I lay on my back and played, "helicopter", first one > direction and then the other, striking both of them until they backed off. > At that point they lost interest, and I got up, and striking at them, ran > them off. Large critters are nothing to fool aound with. So, the moral is - "Run softly and carry a really big stick?" Sorry, couldn't resist :-) Brad - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: larry ball Subject: Re: ALERT! Dangerous desiccant? Date: 24 Jun 1998 22:41:45 -0500 Let Cheaper Than Dirt know. They are on the Web. I think they might care. I have found them reputable. Larry Ball lball@inetnebr.com Jacques Tucker wrote: > A WMSA member in the boonies of Missouri advises us that he ordered various > cartridges and surplus military ammo cans from the Cheaper Than Dirt > catalog. CTD is a firm in Ft. Worth that apparently has a full page ad for > their catalog in the American Rifleman mag. > > He says there was also desiccant listed in the catalog just under the ammo > cans, so he ordered a batch to help preserve the items he planned to store. > > A cautious fellow, he called the desiccant manufacturer to verify it was > wise to use it with his ammo, etc. "Oh," said the lady who answered, > "don't use that for metal. It has sulphur in the paper and will destroy > any metal." > > The manufacturer of the desiccant is United Desiccants, 127 Christine Dr., > Belen, NM 67002. Their toll free line is 800-989-3374. The MilSpec on the > 5.5 oz. packages is MIL-D-3464 Type I and II. > > Our member called the NRA several times to alert them of the problem. He > indicates they really don't care. "It doesn't matter." Advertising > revenue may be more important, I suppose? > > He was able to get credit from the vendor, CDT, for just trashing this > stuff. It costs more to ship than it's worth. > > Let your gunner friends know of this potential disaster. > > Jacq' > Jacques Tucker > Western Missouri Shooters Alliance > > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacques Tucker Subject: Re: ALERT! Dangerous desiccant? Date: 24 Jun 1998 23:02:01 -0500 At 10:41 PM 6/24/98 -0500, you wrote: >Let Cheaper Than Dirt know. They are on the Web. I think they might care. I >have found them reputable. > Cheaper Than Dirt is aware. They're the vendor that told him to trash 'em. Jacq' - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: neil@geol.niu.edu (Neil Dickey) Subject: Re: ALERT! Dangerous desiccant? Date: 24 Jun 1998 23:48:35 CDT Jacques Tucker wrote in part: >A cautious fellow, he called the desiccant manufacturer to verify it was >wise to use it with his ammo, etc. "Oh," said the lady who answered, >"don't use that for metal. It has sulphur in the paper and will destroy >any metal." I confess that I'm not quite sure what the lady meant, but a very common laboratory dessicant is composed of calcium sulfate. That may have been what you got. If that is true, we have stored metal objects in dessicators charged with calcium sulfate for periods of years without any damage, though the objects are not in direct contact with the dessicant. The metal objects include items made of steel and brass. Offered for what it's worth. 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: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Big Stick Date: 25 Jun 1998 01:46:16 PST On Jun 24, Brad Alpert wrote: >> From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) > >> I used to do a lot of running years ago, about 5 miles a day. When I did I >> carried a 7 foot oak quarter stave. Once while running, I was accosted by a >> pair of shepherds, or shepherd/coyote mix, (it was getting dark). One got >> behind my legs while the other pushed me over backwards, onto the ground. >> They then circled and, "came in", whether for the kill or to play, I don't >> know. So anyway, I engaged them with a bit of ground fighting. Having the >> stave by the middle, I lay on my back and played, "helicopter", first one >> direction and then the other, striking both of them until they backed off. >> At that point they lost interest, and I got up, and striking at them, ran >> them off. Large critters are nothing to fool aound with. > >So, the moral is - "Run softly and carry a really big stick?" > >Sorry, couldn't resist :-) > >Brad And it's all your fault, too.....:-) About sticks as weapons though, there are a number of things to take note of. This particular one was about 1 1/4" in diameter by 7 feet. That's a bit large for some folks, but as a large one I could use it well, being as I was 5' 11" tall. Even at that it's on the long side, but that just means you want a slightly wider grip for some things. I had taken a square piece, and spoke shaved it down to 16 flat sides, so there were lots of little corners along it's length to add a bit of sting to any strike. Something else to consider, is the, "hammer handle", treatment. Ever noticed that hammer and axe handles etc., allways have a bit of a bevel? This is achieved with a grinding wheel, such as you might use for sharpening an axe etc. In ancient times people would sometimes use a spear with a wooden tip. basically, they would sharpen it to the proper shape, and then toast it next to the fire to harden it. The grinding wheel does both shaping and hardening in one process, as it heats it up as you shape the end and bevel the edge, (flat ends w/bevel in this case). This doesn't hurt the grinding wheel, and though it does load up a little with a bit of fine wood material/ dust, this stuff goes away the first time you try to sharpen/grind anything on it. No problem. I can hit someone with a stick 6 or 7 times in the time it takes to draw and aim a pistol, which means if I'm close enough and notice it, they'll never get the chance to use it. These days however, I use a cane, so I'd have to be a lot closer, even though I could strike more rapidly with it..... Sticks and stones are the oldest, and thus the most sophisticated of weapons. Think of a bullet as a sophisticted stone.....:-) -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paul M Watson Subject: BEIJING PLAYS HARDBALL AND WINS! (fwd) Date: 25 Jun 1998 07:58:21 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Dear Friends, "...America had best wake up. Last week's trade numbers were the most ominous yet. Exports to Asia fell, as imports soared. This nation is now running a merchandise trade deficit clocked in April at nearly $260 billion a year, and accelerating. Last year's trade deficit in goods came in at just under $200 billion...." FTC-Linda PS - Sorry to send Pat's article so late - I finally received it after making calls to his syndicate. ===================== BEIJING PLAYS HARDBALL AND WINS! BY PATRICK J. BUCHANAN JUNE 23, 1998 [ I certainly agree with Pat on this: If China says if you do not do something we will default, I would have simply said: "Be My Guest" Jack ] On the eve of Mr. Clinton's departure for China, Beijing decided to snap the White House to attention, with a naked threat to send the near-bankrupt economies of Asia into free fall. China's threat took the form of a warning: Either you and Tokyo intervene to stop the fall of the Japanese yen, or we will let China's currency and the Hong Kong dollar collapse, as well. China was threatening a financial Jonestown -- a U.S. market crash while Clinton is in Tienanmen Square. That's hardball. It worked. Goldman Sachs' wonder boy at Treasury, Robert Rubin, ditched his no-intervention-to-prop-up-the-yen line and dumped billions of U.S. dollars to arrest its fall, as the White House began to slobber all over Beijing for its "responsibility." Why would Rubin be terrified of China's igniting a new round of devaluations? Well, consider the total exposure of Western banks in Asia's "emerging markets." According to the Financial Times, as of one year ago, U.S. banks had $43 billion at risk there; Canada's banks had $15 billion; Japan's, $271 billion; Europe's, $353 billion. As a share of its bank capital, America had 12 percent at risk in the emerging Asian markets; Canada, 46 percent; Europe, 48 percent; Japan, 109 percent! Put starkly, devaluation by China could set off a new round of currency crises that would force huge new U.S.-IMF bailouts or a string of Asian defaults that could bring down the banks of Japan and Europe in a worldwide financial catastrophe. Query: Can someone explain what benefit America derives from the Global Economy to justify leaving us at such a risk? And what do we get from our China trade to justify giving Beijing such leverage over the United States? Last week, Beijing demonstrated two things: China fears its own devaluation less than we do, and in any game of "chicken" the Americans will blink first. What could we have done when Beijing issued its ultimatum? Well, we could have told Beijing: "Devalue and be damned! And if you do, we will impose on all goods made in China the same tariffs you impose on goods made in the United States. That would mean, fellas, your export market here will be taken over by Free Asia; your $50 billion trade surplus with us will be wiped out; your 7 percent anticipated growth will be more like 0 percent; and you can face the music of tens of millions of jobless Chinese rioting in your cities. So, don't fool with Uncle Sam!" Americans fail to realize that we hold all the high cards in any showdown. U.S. exports to China are but one-tenth of 1 percent of our economy, but Beijing's exports to us account for maybe 8 percent of its entire GDP. We could sink Beijing in six months. Why then dance to China's tune? Answer: Our god is Mammon; we are thus infinitely more terrified of offending the gods of globalism. America had best wake up. Last week's trade numbers were the most ominous yet. Exports to Asia fell, as imports soared. This nation is now running a merchandise trade deficit clocked in April at nearly $260 billion a year, and accelerating. Last year's trade deficit in goods came in at just under $200 billion. Through these gigantic deficits, and World Bank and IMF loans, America is shoveling money out to nations that are capturing ever-larger shares of our home market. Asia has now begun to gear up to "export its way out of recession." Those exports are coming our way. Tomorrow's trade deficits will make today's look anemic. Not to worry, writes economist Robert Samuelson in The New Republic's review of my book, "The Great Betrayal." We send dollars overseas and get neat things back -- "It is a good deal for us." Emeritus Professor David Landes of Harvard, in a book being universally hailed, "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are so Rich and Some Are so Poor"-- has a less cheery view. Comparing us to Holland of centuries ago, Landes writes: "As branches of manufacturing have shrunk before foreign competition, enterprises have discharged redundant labor or moved to lower-wage areas. New workers cost less than old. ... Poor immigrants have kept coming. Unions have struck, sometimes only hastening plant closings or transfers of orders to cheaper suppliers." The British also embraced free trade as a "matter of faith," an "economic religion," writes Landes, and rejected all warnings that their industrial supremacy was vanishing -- for, to accept that was to accept a "challenge to the sacred." We follow the same path and, burbling economists notwithstanding, shall reach the same end. c 1998 Patrick J. Buchanan =========end======= Jack Perrine | ATHENA Programming | 626 - 798- 6574 ----------------- | 1175 N Altadena Dr | ------------------- Jack@Minerva.com | Pasadena, Ca 91107 | FAX 398 8620 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #91 (fwd) Date: 27 Jun 1998 22:43:23 PST On Jun 28, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Heads Up A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia June 28, 1998 #91 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net Previous Editions at: http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/list-hu.htm and http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html BUILDING THE SAME KIND OF COUNTRY Let's see if we can work out some kind of accurate score here. There were 90-some people who either took the Fifth and/or fled the country rather than testify about those illegal Chinese campaign contributions made to the Clinton, Clinton & Gore campaign and the Democratic national committee. Investigations are finally starting to move on that matter. Albeit very slowly. Then, there's that little matter of the President of the United States allowing communist China to obtain much of our best cryptography, the supercomputers and tooling necessary to make nuclear weapons, the missile technology necessary to deliver said nuclear bombs over here, the satellite technology necessary to bring the Chinese military forces out of the dark ages, and all sorts of sophisticated high-tech military communications equipment. The impropriety of handing all this top secret equipment over to the barbarians running a communist country is also now under investigation in Congress. So, now Clinton goes to China with an entourage of about 1,200, including nearly one-third of the White House staff. What the hell are they going to do over there, plan Clinton's legal defense? They should. Because, if anyone in Congress ever starts finding their cajones and getting patriotic, the fur is going to fly. Clinton gave us a hint as to his intentions a while back. If we can believe anything Clinton says, one of his heroes was Franklin D. Roosevelt. FDR's authoritarian hero was, of course, 'Uncle Joe' -- as in Joe Stalin. Clinton doesn't have an Uncle Joe. The only person Clinton has available similar to Stalin is China's President, Jiang Zemin. This could quickly get a bit far-fetched, of course, so we will stop that line of thought right here. Besides, all FDR ever gave Stalin was a few hundred million dollars and some military support. Unlike Clinton, FDR did not give the communists the keys to all our best military equipment. Also, FDR was single minded in his quest to control nearly everything in the United States from the White House. Clinton is a control freak too, but he's generally schizophrenic about it. Actually, Clinton can't even make up his mind about China. For instance, in October 1992, Clinton told the Washington Post, "I believe our nation has a higher purpose than to coddle dictators and stand aside from the global movement toward democracy." In an April 30, 1998 press conference, when asked about China, Clinton told Sarah McClendon: "We are trying to get to a point where we can work more closely with them and where they cooperate more closely with us. So we're trying to build the same kind of world in the future and not a very different kind of world. And I hope we'll get there." Huh? "We're trying to build the same kind of world?" Like communist China? Now, this may have been an off-the-cuff comment. But even so, it came from the President of the United States at an official function. What kind of signal does this send to the rest of the world? China wants the United States to lift the sanctions placed after the 1989 military action at Tiananmen Square. Hundreds, maybe thousands, of freedom demonstrators were killed there. However, on the Clinton side, there was Waco. The people at Waco were doing nothing more ominous than holding a religious service on their own property when they were attacked. None of the killers involved in either incident were ever punished. So Clinton pretty much loses that Tiananmen Square trump card. No one in the Clinton entourage to China dares bring up the subject of the illegal campaign funds, either. China already put the American delegation on notice about that. According to former American ambassador to China, James Lilley, China is telling Washington to "back off" or risk calling Chinese President Jiang Zemin "a liar." "The Chinese have let the Americans know that if they pursue this one, the relationship is in trouble," Lilley said. The communist Chinese tyrants are also making another major demand. The commies want Taiwan back in the fold of the oppressed. Red China's Foreign Minister, Tang Jiaxuan, unabashedly presented the communist case again at a pre-summit news conference two weeks ago: "The president should, at an appropriate occasion, make a public statement reiterating what the U.S. has already promised on the Taiwan question. The U.S. side should also indicate it will take concrete actions to match the commitment it has made with deeds." Previous to the Clinton administration, Taiwan was our friend. Previous to the Clinton administration, the United States would fight the spread of communism on all fronts. But that was then and this is now. Today's United States President is aiding and abetting the spread of communism in the world. Towards that end, it appears that Clinton fully intends to commit our friends in Taiwan to a lifetime of oppression under communist Chinese dictators. "So we're trying to build the same kind of world in the future and not a very different kind of world," Clinton said of his relationship with the communist Chinese dictators. Unfortunately, we can probably believe that statement. For more on communist China, and the Chinese government's position on the above issues, visit the Chinese Embassy web page at: http://www.china-embassy.org/ There are a number of very interesting reports in both the News and the Issues and Events sections. A RESULT OF EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT A few months ago it was a day care center. Then, it was the home of an elderly couple. After that came a few more homes and a medium sized chemical plant. This time it was a gas station near the center of a major city. The modus operandi was the same in each instance: A group of well armed masked men burst into a building and quickly herd the unsuspecting people into a corner or small room. One or two of the men guard the people at gun point, and the others ransack the place. The intruders operate much like terrorists, in that they use the element of surprise to attack their marks. The attackers act like crooks because, in truth, there is no legal authority for their actions. And the invaders resemble a street gang in their methods, because they display absolutely no consideration for other people's property. But the attackers are none of the above. The masked men brandishing military weapons are government agents. They are the modern day tax collectors. In this case, a full squad of men quickly entered Elena Klochko's gas station, frightened her half-dozen employees into a room, and "secured the area" by posting armed guards around the premises. The once tidy office was then systematically ransacked as the tax collectors "examined" the business records and everything else. Knickknacks and papers ended up scattered throughout the building. Local police were told of the ruckus and, thinking it was a street gang robbery, responded quickly. But the police too were barred form entering by the armed men at the doors. Meanwhile, Ms. Klochko and her employees had to sit quietly, not allowed to use the telephone, or even the bathroom, until the attack squad of tax collectors decided to leave. Calling business owners "scofflaws," the government justifies such tactics by saying that small businesses alone neglect to pay over $100-million in taxes annually. The aim is to see if the lavish living style of some business people is possible on the income they declare for tax purposes. Even though in shock from the raid, Ms. Klochko tried to justify what happened. "I comprehend the government's desperation," Ms. Klochko told a Washington Post reporter. "It's true that many people evade taxes. I'm not one of them." Although somewhat frightened of government reprisals, Ms. Klochko is now fighting the action in court. "I feel it is wrong to remain silent. The government is right to look for ways to collect. But there is a flip side to power, and it can be brutal." She also recently formed a group to help protect business people against overbearing tax police. This raid created a scandal in Moscow, where it happened. Russians, you see, are no longer used to scenes of abuse by government agents. Interestingly enough, such oppressive tactics began in Russia shortly after a group of American academics went over as advisors to the Russian government. Here in the United States, we accept such actions by government. The federal government's police force is actually a standing army totaling over 60,000 armed agents. Just a few years ago, a federal regulator dressed in a sport coat, and brandishing nothing more ominous than a clipboard, investigated any suspected infraction of a law or regulation. Today, they send in a SWAT team outfitted with bullet-proof vests and armed with grenades and automatic weapons. No American business is any more violent than it ever was. That is, we in an office or factory workforce are not armed and dangerous. Yet, today's federal regulators often act as if they may be risking their lives by walking into a business unarmed. For some reason, we Americans have learned to accept these overreactions as normal. Perhaps we have something to learn about freedom from the people who are just now learning to exercise theirs. For an excellent series of reports on that standing army the Clinton administration operates as a federal police force, check out the WorldNetDaily archive site at: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/exclusiv/exindex.html As a starting point, scroll down to the August 15,1997 piece titled "Armed and dangerous: Federal agencies expanding use of firepower." The information related there is not only enlightening, it is frightening. Under Clinton, the training of armed federal agents and military trained SWAT teams has become a major growth industry. TAX FREEDOM ON THE NET Usually we would say that the Lords and Ladies of Capitol Hill never saw a tax they didn't like. However, we found one: the Internet tax. The Internet Tax Freedom Act passed the House last Tuesday. Upon passage, House Majority Leader Dick Armey released the following statement: "Congress recognizes that the Internet is the future of commerce. We're giving net consumers a break. "I applaud the administration for working with us to promote Internet tax freedom. But if they're serious about what they're saying, they should stop imposing taxes on gateways to the Internet. The Gore [telephone] Tax has got to go. "We've nipped the Internet tax in the bud, but we will need to keep up the pressure. The Clinton administration is always on the lookout for creative new opportunities to raid the taxpayers, and we need to be ever-vigilant to protect consumers." According to those proposing the bill, the Internet Tax Freedom Act's goal is to provide much more certainty in questions relating to tax liability. This is in everyone's best interest. It's in the best interest of the rural family that wants to start a business on the Internet so that they can have access to a global marketplace. It's in the best interest of Internet users, who want to know that any products or services that they purchase using the Internet aren't subject to multiple or special taxation. And it's in the best interest of tax collectors, who want clear rules about what kinds of transactions can be taxed and who will collect the tax. The bill will also prohibit state and local governments from imposing taxes on Internet access charges, such as any state and local taxes that discriminates against or singles out the Internet. It also calls on the Administration to demand that foreign governments keep the Internet free of taxes and tariffs. However, as always there is a caveat. The bill directs the Administration, in consultation with Congress, to study U.S. and international taxation of Internet commerce and to make recommendations to Congress on whether the Internet ought to be taxed and how taxes can be applied without subjecting Internet and electronic commerce to special, discriminatory, or multiple taxation. Interestingly enough, one intent of the bill is to protect against the imposition of new tax liability for consumers and vendors involved in commercial transactions over the Internet. This includes the application of discriminatory tax collection requirements imposed on out-of-state businesses through strained interpretations of 'nexus.' We can say, almost for certain, that some points in this bill will not last past the first court trial. Nevertheless, from an Internet users point of view, this seems to be a good deal. That is, it will stop every state and municipality from looking at the Internet as if it were another cash cow ready for milking. Now, if Congress will get off of its collective backside and get rid of that stupid telephone tax Gore had the FCC impose on us, we'll be all set for a while. Until the next Congress looks at it again, anyway. Fore more information, visit Representative Christopher Cox's Internet Tax Freedom Page at: http://cox.house.gov/nettax/ INVEST 15 MINUTES IN OUR FUTURE Pull it out, dust it off and give it a read. Next Saturday is Independence Day, which means we should all again review The Declaration of Independence. There's an important lesson to be learned there. History seems to be repeating itself. Offered here are a few select quotes from the Declaration of Independence. Where Jefferson wrote the word "He," we suggest that, just for fun, the reader substitute the words "Federal Government." Early in the text, Jefferson (and the Founding Fathers) instructs us on the purpose of government in a free society: He writes that to secure "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," . . . "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed." It would be very interesting if those in Washington would learn the meaning of "Liberty" again. Instead, by 'cracking down' on every real or perceived problem imaginable, the government regularly diminishes the Liberty of all Americans and makes the pursuit of individual happiness unnecessarily difficult. Later in the text, Jefferson writes: "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 new Government, laying its Foundation on such principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." That was written before the Constitution became the law of the land, of course. Historians say that "the Declaration of Independence was the promise; the Constitution was the fulfillment." Our problem today, therefore, is to find a way to get the central government to actually obey the Constitution and organize government in the form originally intended by the Founding Fathers. Jefferson writes prophetically that, "Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed." Today, Americans are again starting to worry about the course of government. Still, not enough are yet paying close attention. Given the time constraints of working and raising a family, sports, television, the Internet, and just taking care of the normal business of life, few Americans have time to be concerned with the actions of the central government. That is, until they get caught violating some silly law, rule or regulation no one except regulators even knew existed. In the body or the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson lists a number of major grievances. Many of these are surprisingly applicable again today. For instance: "He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly Firmness his Invasions on the Rights of the People." Today, the central government does not 'dissolve Representative Houses repeatedly.' Rather, the central government repeatedly overrules laws passed by our State legislatures. "He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers." This practice is not publicly known, but it is nevertheless common. The executive and legislative branches simply ignore judicial rulings they do not like. Numerous instances of the complete disregard for Supreme Court rulings in support of the Tenth Amendment have often been described in this publication. "He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices, and the Amount of Payment of their Salaries." This does not happen with 'normal' federal courts. However, Administrative Law Judges serve completely at the pleasure of the administration and/or the executive agency for which they are employed. "He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance." Today, there are over 110 executive agencies operated by hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats. Their only function is to enforce strict controls on the American people. We know many of them as the alphabet agencies, such as EPA, FBI, BATF, FCC, FDA, etc. "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power." More and more, the military is becoming part of the central government's law enforcement structure. >From the Delta Force at Waco, the Marines shooting a lone shepherd in Texas, to the Army and Marine special operations forces attack teams practicing live-fire exercises on our cities, the American military seems to be preparing for war against the American people. No member of the military should have rights greater than the average American civilian. That means that, in peacetime, military personnel may not be armed in public unless all citizens in that area of the country may also be armed with the same style weapon. Nor should military vehicles that are not clearly marked with easily discernible vehicle and unit numbers be allowed in a civilian area. These simple rules must again be enforced by all civilian police agencies. Else, the military looks like the masters of the people rather than the protectors of the nation. "He has combined with others to subject us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation." The Constitution is the law of the land. No law, rule, regulation, treaty or agreement may overrule anything in our Constitution. The central government has allowed a foreign government, the United Nations, to take up residence within our country. Today, the UN covets our land and attempts to change our laws. This is totally against our Constitution, and the UN should be swiftly expelled from this country. "For imposing Taxes on us without out Consent." June 25, the Americans for Tax Reform Foundation announced, was the "Cost of Government Day." That is, June 25 was the point in the year at which Americans have earned enough in collective gross income to pay all the financial obligations imposed by federal, state and local governments. Last week, Senator Fred Thompson identified that the average family annually pays yet another $7,000 in stealth charges resulting directly from regulatory excesses. Clearly, the tax burden brought about by excessive government programs is becoming overbearing. This commentary is by no means complete. Even a quick read of the Declaration of Independence will produce a number of other similarities between Colonial life under the British Crown and life as ruled by today's central government. -- End - [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fwd: Rambo the hypocrite (fwd) Date: 28 Jun 1998 11:49:06 PST On Jun 28, Charles Riggs wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] In reference to the recent remarks attributed to Sylvester Stallone about rounding up all the guns in this country, this is from an associate who's in law enforcement in California. ************************* I find it rather ironic that Mr. Stallone would like to confiscate firearms back in the US. If one would run him in the state of California, he would come back with dozens and dozens of firearms under his name. Point of fact, he has a CCW and would always carry concealed. I know this for a fact because I have stopped him twice (vehicle stops) and been involved in the countless calls when his bodyguards would beat the shit out of someone when his ex, Brigdette, would start fights. Stallone would always appear and would tell the handling unit, out of courtesy, he was carrying. Of course his bodyguards, all off duty or ex cops, would also be carrying. Once again the elite and privileged mandate their hypocrisies on the masses. Charles Riggs- Gunsite 1991- DVC! "Stop Crime- Be Armed- Fight Back!" Ky. Coalition to Carry Concealed (KC3) IDPA (Ky) - NRA - GOA Visit http://www.kc3.com/sheep.htm [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liberty or Death Subject: (fwd) Really Good Gun News Date: 28 Jun 1998 15:20:03 -0700 Forwarded... >To all true friends of liberty: > >One of the most interesting things about news reports is the way that >the same basic information can be presented and yet tell very different >tales. > >My all-time favorite has to be the Carter-era news release on the >standby gas rationing system that was then being implemented. In this >particular story, it was pointed out that the rationing system would be >triggered by a 20% shortfall in the nation's gas supplies. The system >was designed to ensure that every American would receive 70% of his >normal supply. > >So what we had was a system that would automatically turn a 20% >shortfall into a 30% shortfall. By careful presentation of the facts, >however, it made it look like this was a good deal for the average joe. >Incidentally, all of the gas rationing coupons had the same picture of >George Washington as is found on the one-dollar bill. They could >therefore be exchanged, not just for 70% of your usual gallon of gas, >but also for four quarters from any bill changing machine. Thus >completely useless for their designed purpose, the coupons were stored >for many years at the Pueblo Army Depot in southern Colorado and >eventually destroyed by burning inside the ammunition igloos in which >they were kept. > >The point of all this is that there is often a surprising amount of >good news to be found in what might otherwise be considered as >disastrous tidings. Take, for example, the recent Brady bill stories. >That the administration is interested in expanding Brady provisions to >rifles and shotguns is surely not welcome intelligence. That either >230,000 (according to some sources) or 17 (according to others) >convicted felons have been thwarted in their desire for a handgun is >really beside the point. Who cares how many have been denied a gun? >Let's look, instead, at the real story here. Slipped in to those >Clinton-sponsored stories about how many bad guys have been disarmed and >how the program should be expanded is some really, really encouraging >news. > >Over 10,000,000 Brady checks have been performed in the past four >years. Imagine! Ten million handgun sales (minus somewhere between 17 >and 230,000). Two and a half million a year! Nearly 7,000 a day, >including Sundays and holidays. By god, it makes you PROUD to be an >American, doesn't it? We're still number one at something and it's >something that's damned important, to boot. > >Imagine equipping the United States Army with just one year's worth of >handgun sales. Every soldier would have five handguns strapped to his >waist. Imagine equipping them with all of the handguns sold since Bill >Clinton took office. You'd need a line of native bearers to carry those >28 handguns. A good-sized truck to carry each soldier's share of the >rifles and shotguns. A small convoy for his portion of the ammunition >and reloading components. > >Let's not forget that these ten million Brady guns are just those sold >through FFL dealers. Think of the additional millions, perhaps tens of >millions, that changed hands between one private owner and another. >These are the statistics that really matter. Do you think Bill Clinton >really cares whether even one armed thug is gotten off the streets (I >mean someone other than Franciso Duran)? For the first time, >amalgamated statistics are landing on his desk and he can quantify just >how "successful" his effort at disarming America has been. At the same >time, he can blandly slip the real story (America's frantic rearmament) >past the inattentive patriots who are too busy moaning about the next >wave of evil NWO legislation. > >I say: Thanks, Bill. You've done more to awaken America and cause >even the most zombie-like citizen to rush out and buy a gun than any >other living human being. Ronald Reagan, John Wayne, Mark Koernke, John >Trochmann, et al ain't got nothing on you, baby. You are the merchants >of death's number one butt boy and the biggest spoke in the wheel of >your own utopia. Nice going, moron. Please don't come over to our side >because we want to win. Millions, I repeat: millions, of Americans who >would never have considered owning a gun now have a little bit of >insurance tucked underneath the bed. So don't give up on your fellow >citizens just yet. We're halfway home if you don't alienate them with >stupid human militia tricks. > >I dare say that the percentage of Americans who own guns is at an >all-time high. The number of Americans who own a gun is certainly at an >all-time high. The number of guns owned by Americans is certainly at an >all-time high. The quality (and military usefulness) of guns owned by >Americans is at an all-time high. The stockpile of ammunition and >reloading components owned by Americans is at an earth-shattering, most >Third-world continents can't even come close, all-time high. Don't >whine about the Brady bill. After all, the primary proponent of this gun >control legislation is someone who is brain-damaged. Rational arguments >just aren't going to work on someone who's only running on half-a-lobe. >They don't make sense to most liberals and network correspondents >either. Hmmm, I wonder why that is? > >Let's look at another interesting story-- the New Black Panther Party's >avowed defense against the Klan in Jasper, Texas. Why is this so >objectionable to so many patriots? It seems like capital news to me. Up >to now, the media has been able to portray the militia as some sort of >funky white suburban street gang. Having a highly-publicized appearance >of a new black militia is of tremendous value to those of us who are >dedicated to the restoration of constitutional liberty. I welcome any >and all who are willing to make their stand for freedom. I especially >welcome those whom the liberal media dare not portray as right-wing >lunatics. > >These are not the branded "Uncle Tom" black conservatives but the real >McCoy radical activist left proclaiming themselves as a militia. See >how much ground we have gained. Even those who do not agree with us >politically now find advantage in using our methods and rhetoric. When >our opponents must fly our colors in order to garner popular support-- >they have already lost. Whatever victory they attain will redound to >our credit and not to theirs. We should support these efforts to the >absolute limits of our abilities. > >There is a line in the Battle Hymn of the Republic that goes: "I have >seen him in the watchfires of a hundred circling camps..." Someone >finally shows up to build a blaze next to ours and we want to turn them >in for playing with matches. Get real. Get your priorities straight. > >There is a vast awakening in America. It would be even vaster if it >weren't for the legions of morons we have allowed to shelter under our >banners. They have to go if we are ever to make this thing work. So >often we make the mistake of going for numbers, numbers right now-- >without realizing that for every Christian Identity or Republic of Texas >loser in our ranks, there are dozens, maybe even hundreds, of more >like-minded patriots who will never swell our ranks for fear of >contamination by these dangerous anti-American fanatics. People with >money. People with important connections. People whose help we >desperately need but aren't going to get. People who won't touch us >with a ten-foot-pole because of our hobnobbing with nazis. > >Don't kid yourself. Look at deeds, not words. None of these Identity >swine love the United States. They all seek for a New World Order of >their own-- a successor state to be built on the ruins of a failed >America. The destruction of America is a crucial element of their >plans-- yet they have neither the numbers or the resources to make their >twisted dreams of a racial-religious empire a reality without the help >of those unwitting dupes in the militia. You wonder why the FBI and the >ATF are so interested in the militias? Well, wonder no more. If you >harbor traitors in your ranks, you yourself have earned a traitor's >wage. > >This is a struggle in which only the most virtuous will prevail. It is >a struggle between love and hatred. If you do not love your fellow man. >if you do not love America, if you do not value the mighty deeds of your >forefathers, you are not going to win. To all of you who know that >America belongs to those who are willing to fight for her in her hour of >greatest need, I say: Let us go forward together. > >The Union forever > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with >"unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject) >Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman > > - Monte Let the sea roar and its fulness, The world and those who dwell in it. Let the rivers clap their hands; Let the mountains sing together for joy before the Lord. For He is coming to judge the earth; He will judge the world with righteousness, And the peoples with equity. - Psalm 98 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: gun poll (fwd) Date: 29 Jun 1998 16:10:05 PST On Jun 29, Josh Amos wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] http://www.thirdage.com/polls/?lmenu We are getting wiped on this one too. Josh [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Skip Leuschner Subject: Re: gun poll (fwd) Date: 30 Jun 1998 07:29:32 -0700 Bill Vance wrote: > > On Jun 29, Josh Amos wrote: > > http://www.thirdage.com/polls/?lmenu > > We are getting wiped on this one too. > > Josh When the polling question is worded as it is, to wit: "Do we need new gun legislation or are the existing laws--if enforced--enough to stop the violent gun crimes on our streets?" We can do anything but get wiped out. This question equates gun-control legislation with reducing violent crime. As anyone with a 2-digit IQ who takes time to think about it knows, these 2 ideas aren't connected, or even on the same subject. It's not a matter of either gun control - or - violent gun crimes, one or the other must occur. You can't beat a poll designed to produce a political result. Skip. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Boyd Kneeland Subject: Re: gun poll (fwd) Date: 02 Mar 1998 07:55:56 -0700 The question you see when you go there and hit the "submit your oppinion" poll link, the question is: "I agree. We need new gun control legislation. The old laws obviously aren't working." Obviously twisted, but if we wait for a rationally worded poll to express an opinion, well, I hope your retirement fund covers interent access : ) As of 7:33, and a good 10 minutes for their CGI to produce the page, the results were: strongly agree 54 ..........agree 3 ......undecided 1 .......disagree 3 strongly disagree 38 as of 7:33 PST the results were: At 7:29 AM -0700 6/30/98, Skip Leuschner wrote: >Bill Vance wrote: >> >> On Jun 29, Josh Amos wrote: >> > >> http://www.thirdage.com/polls/?lmenu >> >> We are getting wiped on this one too. >> >> Josh > >When the polling question is worded as it is, to wit: > >"Do we need new gun legislation or are the existing laws--if > enforced--enough to stop the violent gun crimes on our streets?" > >We can do anything but get wiped out. > >This question equates gun-control legislation with reducing >violent crime. As anyone with a 2-digit IQ who takes time >to think about it knows, these 2 ideas aren't connected, or >even on the same subject. It's not a matter of either gun >control - or - violent gun crimes, one or the other must occur. > >You can't beat a poll designed to produce a political result. > >Skip. > >- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Yet another gun poll (fwd) Date: 30 Jun 1998 14:26:19 PST On Jun 30, Jeff Quinton wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] http://www.palmettojournal.com [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Time Magazine Poll (fwd) Date: 30 Jun 1998 14:24:01 PST On Jun 30, Richard Hartman wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] There are five questions, just under 5000 responses so far, and the numbers are in our favor. So are the comments on their bulletin board. Let's keep them that way. Remember, politicians use modern Clinton "poll-itics" to pick safe legislative targets. Let's make certain every such poll shows that more anti-gun laws will be met with the same kind of response they heard in November 1994. http://www.pathfinder.com/time/polls/gunpoll.html [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: gun poll (fwd) Date: 30 Jun 1998 14:27:09 PST On Jun 30, Harry Gilbert wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Josh Amos wrote: > > At 07:04 PM 6/29/98 -0700, you wrote: > >Josh Amos wrote: > >> > >> http://www.thirdage.com/polls/?lmenu > >> > >> We are getting wiped on this one too. > >> > >> Josh > >I wonder... 80% of the comments are against additional gun laws, yet > >the poll shows 67% in favor of more gun laws..... > > Funny isn't it? > > Josh I no longer bother too much about these polls, figuring most are either carefully worded to obtain a predetermined (anti-gun) result, or will be trumpeted if anti-gun and suppressed if they show no anti-gun response. Besides, even here there is an urging to fool the poll with multiple responses, so why would I trust ANY number the poll generates?.... Reminds me of the NRA -- most of my friends and acquantenances are leery of "the winning team" yet NRA publicizes that 67% are solidly behind LaPierre and crew. Come to think of it, isn't 67% the magic 2-sigma value?...... [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: The Chinese Gospel According To Bill (fwd) Date: 30 Jun 1998 16:08:57 PST On Jun 30, Exegesis wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Exegesis A Compass For Moral Excellence Published Worldwide From Washington=20 July 1, 1998=20 The Chinese Gospel According To Bill These are humid days in Washington. Almost daily, a massive thunderstorm washes away the stifling hot air. As with everything in the nation's capital, the symbolism is inescapable. One cannot help but notice the gathering storm clouds. The portents suggest that a gigantic storm is on the way. =20 The Elite are preparing. A few days ago, an extraordinary cast assembled here for apparently unconnected reasons. Following the $1 million fundraising visit of Gov. George Bush, in rolled Mikhail Gorbachev, Margaret Thatcher, Ex-President George Bush, Steve Forbes and Dan Quayle, who took the opportunity to announce a 2000 run for the White House. Such a pity to see a good fellow waste his time and energy. The absentee in the Elite Club was President Clinton, who has been reporting to Head Office in Beijing. =20 While there, halo and autocue in place, the Reverend Clinton has resumed his lapsed preaching career. As we already know, Mr. Clinton is fond of posing with a Bible in his hand, though apparently rarely opens it. Further evidence of this came during Mr. Clinton's Sunday sermon in Beijing's Chongwenmen church, one of the fake churches established by the Beijing regime, which vetoes the words of ministers. Mr. Clinton said: "In the Book of Acts, the 26th verse, it is said that God has made from one blood every nation to dwell on the surface of the Earth. I believe that is true. Therefore, I believe that Chinese and Americans are brothers and sisters as children of God." =20 The actual scripture is from Acts 17:26 and is part of the Apostle Paul's famous Mars Hill speech when he argued that God was not unknowable, as the Greeks believed: "From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us. `For in Him we live and move and have our being.'" (Acts 17: 26-28) This was not quite the message Reverend Clinton conveyed. The previous day, in presumably unconnected remarks, Mr. Clinton's boss, er, host, Chinese dictator Jiang Zemin proclaimed himself an atheist. So much for the idea of brotherhood. =20 Mr. Clinton took further liberties with the Scriptures as he preached the Gospel of Political Correctness: "Our faith calls upon us to seek unity with people across the world of different races and backgrounds and creeds." Different races and backgrounds, yes. There is indeed scriptural support for the unity of the Body of Christ. But different creeds? On the contrary, Jesus denounced those who taught other religions as "Blind Guides" (Matthew 23: 24) and said "Nobody comes to the Father but by me" (John 14:6). This bastardization of the Scriptures reveals the work of the largely Jewish team of White House speechwriters and spin-doctors who, to put it politely, are hardly in a position to know the New Testament; my life experiences have shown that few Jewish people are acquainted even with the Old Testament. For Bill Clinton, it was the perfect fit: the fake President in a fake church quoting fake scriptures in a fake sermon. As in the United States, some folks were completely taken in by Mr. Clinton. As Hong-Kong's South China Morning Post reports: "parishioners at the Chongwenmen Church were hopeful Mr. Clinton's appearance would make a difference [to the bloodthirsty Beijing regime's oppression and murder of Christians]. 'Now he's prayed with us, the Chinese government will greatly relax its policies toward us Christians and our churches,' said Liu Suxing." Do people genuinely believe that? Well, there are folks who believe the Three Stooges on the nightly news are telling the truth. The tragic parallels between the oppressed and deceived, clueless and naive peoples of China and the United States become daily stronger.=20 On matters religious, the Waffler-in-Chief is hopelessly out of his depth, even though the [London] Daily Telegraph quotes him this week as justifying his rejection of Monica Lewinsky after their affair because he had apparently made a promise 'to God' that he would not 'keep tripping over his wanger'". Of course the British newspapers do not operate under the secrecy of the American media and their forthright reporting has never wavered. The same newspaper published evidence showing that Vince Foster did not, after all, shoot himself, roll up his own body in a carpet and drive it to Fort Marcy Park as the US media have asked us to swallow. Indeed, their ace Washington reporter, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, published 'The Secret Life of Bill Clinton', a well-researched book filled with compelling evidence of Mr. Clinton's long history of drug-dealing, thefts and murders - it makes chilling, but accurate reading. Now another British newspaper has turned Primary Colors fiction into fact. The Daily Mail has published another revelation about Mr. Clinton's "wanger": details with photos, of his allegedly illegitimate son, Danny Jefferson Williams, whom they report is the result of his 1983 liaison with a black Little Rock prostitute, Bobby Ann Williams.=20 She met Bill Clinton one day as he was jogging. Clinton stopped to talk to her and returned three days later. She says he paid $200 for oral sex. Adds the Daily Mail: "Clinton returned again and offered her and two other black prostitutes $400 each to join him in an orgy.=20 He came that night, driven by Arkansas Trooper Buddy Young, Clinton's regular driver, who affirms the story is true. =20 The prostitutes were driven to Clinton's mother's home which he used when she was out of town." "When it was over, he gave us each a tip of $50", said Miss Williams. Says her sister Lucille Bolton: "The baby was white; that's when I started believing my sister. As Danny grew older, he started to look more and more like the Governor. Danny is Clinton's boy." Danny, now 13, attends a private Australian school.=20 Miss Williams and her sister passed two lie detector tests proclaiming that Clinton is Danny's father. (Photographs of Danny and his mother can be found on the Exegesis Web Page at http://www.sm.org/exegesis.) If this report is true, it illustrates once again Mr. Clinton's gross hypocrisy: the adulterous and illiterate preacher who can't keep his pants on, the advocate of pursuing absent fathers who turns out to be one himself, the candidate who denounced the "Butchers of Beijing" who turns traitor and becomes their bond servant, exchanging America's nuclear secrets for donations. At least Judas Escariot felt pangs of conscience before he hung himself. It is not known if Mr. Clinton's conscience survived his childhood. Bill Clinton should not be dismissed as merely a sex-craved buffoon:=20 he is also the most corrupt and dangerous president in American history. During a TV show with Mr. Clinton, President Jiang described as nonsense his government's illegal campaign contributions. Nonsense maybe, but accurate nonetheless. After all, over 100 people have taken the Fifth Amendment or fled the US to avoid testifying about them.=20 Nonsense? Jiang also dismissed the 1989 Tianenmen Square massacre:=20 "Had the Chinese government not taken resolute measures, we could not have enjoyed the stability we enjoy today," he declared, "Nobody's human rights record is perfect." No wonder the storm clouds are gathering, and the Elite are preparing to seize power. The Jiang-Clinton axis bodes ill for freedom, truth, peace and democracy.=20 =20 The human spirit can be suppressed by dictators for only so long. Some day, crowds will again gather in Tianenmen Square and perhaps at the White House too. Eventually, Jiang and Clinton and the ruling Elite will be powerful no more, and Mr. Clinton will be revealed as the duplicitous, sycophantic chameleon he is. Article 2, Section 4 of The United States Constitution states "The President ... of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."=20 America's national security demands that Congress wait no longer. With or without Kenneth Starr's report, it must urgently begin the process of liberation. =87 Steve Myers =D7 Editor ________________________________________________________________________ Steve Myers will be a featured speaker at Kansas City Arise, the Promise Keepers and Praise Keepers rally in Kansas City, Missouri on July 10-11. Please call us at (703) 734 5656 or The Rev. Michael Lyons at (816) 228 1655 for more information. ________________________________________________________________________ Exegesis is delighted to invite you to=20 AMERICAN RENEWAL=20 A Spiritual, Moral, and Financial Refreshment=20 to support the work of The Global Opportunity Foundation August 8, 1998: Washington DC=20 Westpark Hotel, McLean VA 22102 * An Inspiring Prayer Breakfast (8:30 am)=20 * Dynamic, Motivational Christian speakers * A One-Hour Business Meeting (11:00 am or 2:30 pm) * Sightseeing Opportunities In Washington =20 * A Grand Gala Banquet with Alan Keyes=20 * Other Top Guest Speakers=20 * Encouragement, Motivation, Practical Ideas To Restore America! * Hotel accommodation at special discount rates =09 =46or details and reservations please call (703) 734 5656 or send email to events@sm.org http://www.sm.org/events _________________________________________________ =20 We welcome your letters to the editor. =20 Please write to editor@sm.org Exegesis=20 http://www.sm.org/exegesis ___________________________________________________=20 http://www.sm.org Exegesis =20 http://www.sm.org/exegesis Come to the most exciting event of the summer! ********** AMERICAN RENEWAL ********** A Spiritual, Moral and Financial Refreshment WASHINGTON DC AUGUST 8, 1998 More details at http://www.sm.org/events ___________________________________________________ ExTel International Telecommunications Services HUGE SAVINGS ON YOUR PHONE BILL! * Extremely low rates with all of our providers * We recommend:=20 US domestic calls: Telco - http://ld.net/telco/?sm.org Calling Cards: RoadTel at 15.9 cents a minute - http://ld.net/roadtel/?sm.org Prepaid Calling Cards: Just 14 cents a minute - http://moneysaver.net/?sm.org MCI for an overall savings package - http://www.sm.org/extel Whichever service you'd like to use, you'll find more information and a sign up form on our web page at http://www.sm.org/extel ___________________________________________________ And if you'd like your own home-based business,=20 you'll find the answer at Partners in Prosperity http://www.sm.org/pp Now in Maryland, Michigan, Texas, Virginia,Washington DC, and expanding all the time. ___________________________________________________=20 =A9 Exegesis 1998 Post Office Box 789, McLean, Virginia 22101, USA ______________________________________ To subscribe, please send an email to: requests@talklist.com with SUBSCRIBE EXEGESIS in the BODY of the message. To unsubscribe please send an email to: requests@talklist.com with UNSUBSCRIBE EXEGESIS in the BODY of the message. Letters to the Editor should be addressed to: editor@sm.org For more information about Exegesis, please visit http://www.sm.org/exegesis [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] -- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- -