From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #111 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Monday, April 13 1998 Volume 02 : Number 111 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Apr 98 16:14:22 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: [Fwd: IP: NY: Pour It On] (fwd) On Apr 11, JVS wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 07:23:14 -0400 From: Gun Owners of America To: ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com Subject: IP: NY: Pour It On "Lock Up Your Safety" Bill Hits Grassroots Roadblock Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org New York State Legislative Alert - Time to Double Down! April 11, 1998 Your pressure has thrown the anti-gunners for a tumble. They were going to pass A 651-F this past Monday. It would be wise to target upstate Democrats in the New York Assembly as they may be more sensitive to grassroots pressure than some had previously thought. Reports indicate that A 651-F, the "Lock Up Your Safety", bill by Assemblyman Weisenberg, has lost three co-sponsors: Ravitz (D-73, New York Co.) , Seminario (D-38, Queens), and Townsend (R-115, Oneida). A 651-F is clearly intended to make it difficult, if not impossible, for honest citizens to defend themselves, their families and their homes from violent intruders. The vote could come anytime. Please continue to contact your Assemblyman. Do it repeatedly because as soon as they think the pressure is off, they'll try again. Thanks to Jacob J. Rieper [ 73377.1220@compuserve.com (NY RKBA) http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1976/lrn.htm ] for the following analysis and update: "The Assembly is feeling a TREMENDOUS amount of pressure on bill A 651F. This bill redefines a loaded firearm to include possession of a shotgun or rifle and possession of the ammunition. The gun doesn't have to be loaded to be considered a loaded firearm. This bill would add 2 new sections to the penal law: "LOADED RIFLE MEANS ANY RIFLE LOADED WITH AMMUNITION OR ANY RIFLE WHICH IS POSSESSED BY ONE WHO, AT THE SAME TIME, POSSESSES A QUANTITY OF AMMUNITION WHICH MAY BE USED TO DISCHARGE SUCH RIFLE." and "LOADED SHOTGUN MEANS ANY SHOTGUN LOADED WITH AMMUNITION OR ANY SHOTGUN WHICH IS POSSESSED BY ONE WHO, AT THE SAME TIME, POSSESSES A QUANTITY OF AMMUNITION WHICH MAY BE USED TO DISCHARGE SUCH SHOTGUN." "What this means is if you put your empty gun in your car to go hunting or trap shooting and you have ammunition in the car with you then the gun is considered loaded!" Thanks also to Dave Warshaw, Duchess County S.C.O.P.E., Tim Callery, Legislative Director S.C.O.P.E. and Mark Truscott for helping us to help you. To get a roster of Assemblymen and the pre-written message opposing A 651-F, visit the GOA website or e-mail a request. Any ?s Call GOA / Guns Save Lives *********************************************************** Are you receiving this as a cross-post? To be certain of getting up-to-the-minute information, please consider joining the GOA E-mail Alert Network directly. The service is free, your address remains confidential, and the volume is quite low: five messages a week would be a busy week indeed. To subscribe, simply send a message (or forward this notice) to goamail@gunowners.org and include your state of residence in either the subject line or the body. ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the message: subscribe ignition-point email@address or unsubscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Apr 98 13:53:50 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #80 (fwd) On Apr 12, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Heads Up A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia April 12, 1998 #80 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net - ------------------------------------------------------------------ Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------ POLITICAL POLLS AND DONATIONS Anyone notice that they are conducting=20 government by polls nowadays? Yet, we voters out here in=20 fly-over country never seem to get polled. Nor do most of=20 us know anyone who has ever been polled. And, what is=20 government by opinion poll anyway, if not government by a=20 smaller version of mob rule. Actually, pollsters can make a poll come out=20 any way they wish. And they do. Regularly. There's a=20 lot more to it than just asking questions. Once the=20 pollster knows the demographics of the people to be=20 called, the desired answers can be obtained by tailoring=20 the questions properly. That's why, when we see a "poll"=20 on the Internet, where all Americans can reply and the=20 demographics are not a factor, the results are usually=20 significantly different than polls announced by the press. These Internet "polls" are not reported by the=20 national media because they do not fit in with the=20 national media's agenda. Were honest polls related to the=20 American public, some in government would not be=20 intimidated into passing socialist laws. "Clinton is helping his party [raise campaign=20 funds] more than the Republican national leaders are=20 helping theirs," the Pew Research Center for the People &=20 the Press reported last week. And, accordingly, the Pew=20 poll was related to the American public with glee by the=20 leftist major media. On April 3 [missed by two days] the Associated=20 Press reported: "President Clinton's lofty performance=20 rating accounts for some of his party's new-found support=20 and is brightening election prospects for the Democrats in=20 upcoming congressional elections, a poll suggests." So, when the national media tries to tell us=20 that Clinton's problems are actually helping fundraising=20 for the Democratic Party, that brings to mind a few=20 interesting questions. For instance: Is the whole=20 country corrupt now? I mean, are we actually rewarding=20 corruption in government with even more campaign donations? =20 Or, perhaps because the Democratic Party was able to take=20 those millions of illegally laundered campaigns donations=20 with impunity the last time, they now feel confident that=20 they can get away with it anytime. Anyone studying our history soon realizes=20 that the Democratic Party is directly responsible for most=20 of the problems the average citizen has with government=20 today. The FDR administration gave us all those=20 oppressive (and unconstitutional) federal regulatory=20 agencies. The Johnson administration gave us the so=20 called "Great Society," which ruined our major cities and=20 created a huge American underclass. Meanwhile, a=20 Democratic controlled Congress gave us a civil rights=20 program that turned Black against White and women against=20 men. Now it seems as though they're working on turning=20 children against parents too. The spin-offs of the new Socialist-Democratic=20 Party brought us a host of silly environmental laws,=20 pitted the Army (corps of engineers) against the American=20 public, allowed animals and fish to become more important=20 under American law than the welfare of humans, and used=20 the heavy hand of the central government to completely=20 regulate everything in our lives from womb to tomb. And,=20 to pay for all that, the Democrats placed stiff taxes on=20 everything they could think of. So, who could possibly benefit from donating=20 to the Democratic Party? Well, the trial lawyers made=20 more than a billion dollars with the help of the Clinton=20 administration. The communist Chinese made out like the=20 bandits they are, too. Ditto for Mexico. Indonesia, and=20 a host of other Asian countries will soon be spending=20 billions of our hard earned tax dollars. So will Israel=20 and Egypt. And, kids out in the jungles of Africa will=20 soon be cluttering the Internet instead of studying, paid=20 for by tax dollars taken from hard working factory workers=20 and small business owners in the United States. Probably, it must be the constituency and=20 supporters of the above named groups who are donating to=20 the Democratic Party this year. Because, for any average=20 American citizen to do so, they would have to be either an=20 avowed socialist or truly out of their cotton-picken minds. Early on as President, Bill Clinton freely told=20 America exactly how he felt about our Constitution and the=20 American rule of law. For instance, on the March 22, 1994=20 MTV program 'Enough is Enough,' Clinton brazenly said: =20 "When we got organized as a country we wrote a fairly=20 radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving=20 a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans . . .=20 and so a lot of people say there's too much personal=20 freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have=20 to move to limit it. That's what we did in the=20 announcement I made last weekend on the public housing=20 projects, about how we're going to have weapon sweeps and=20 more things like that to try to make people safer in their=20 communities." Even before that, on March 11, 1993, Clinton=20 told USA Today, "We can't be so fixated on our desire to=20 preserve the rights of ordinary Americans." No matter,=20 evidently, that his oath of office requires exactly=20 that. . . . And so it goes with the Democratic Party. As=20 a political party, they have developed into a group that=20 is diametrically opposed to nearly every single thing=20 supported by our Founding Fathers. THE GUN NUTS STRIKE -- AGAIN The very first sentence of Article I, Section 1=20 in our United States Constitution clearly states: "All=20 legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a=20 Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a=20 Senate and a House of Representatives." Anyone not=20 understanding English well enough to understand the exact=20 meaning of those words is respectfully referred to the=20 Federalist Papers and numerous U.S. Supreme Court opinions=20 for clarification. In the text of the Federalist papers, and the=20 opinions of the Supreme Court, one will quickly notice=20 that Congress is the branch of government charged with=20 making all law. Because Congress does not wish to be=20 bothered, and hence delegates much of its legislative=20 authority to the administrative branch, is immaterial. =20 According to the U.S. Supreme Court, (most recently in New=20 York and Printz) Congress may not delegate any of its=20 legislative authority because that would upset the balance=20 of power between the three branches of government (and the=20 States). So, simply put, under our Constitution, the=20 administration has no authority to make law. That=20 includes the President. Because, if Congress continues to=20 allow the administrative branch to make law ad lib, what=20 the hell do we need a Congress for? We can just have a=20 four year elected dictatorship (which we almost have). On April 6, the White House announced: =20 "Today, in response to a previously issued memorandum, the=20 President announced that the Treasury Department has=20 concluded that more than 50 kinds of modified assault=20 weapons are generally not importable because they accept=20 large capacity military magazines. Up to 1.5 million=20 rifles whose importation had been temporarily suspended=20 may be affected by this decision." . . . "The more than 50 models of firearms affected=20 by today's decision are modified versions of military=20 assault weapons that were banned by the Bush=20 Administration in 1989, or by the Assault Weapons Ban of=20 1994. Most of these models are based on the AK 47 assault=20 rifle, but some are variants of the Uzi, FN-FAL, HK 91 and=20 93, and SIG SG550." Find more information on this at: =20 http://www.atf.treas.gov/pub/assault_rifles/index.htm =20 Herein, we see two violations of the Constitution. =20 First, the President has no power to make law. Second,=20 the law is retroactive, and no branch of government has=20 the authority to pass an ex post facto law. The American people have both the right and=20 the duty to keep personal arms equal to those light arms=20 used by any police department or military force in the=20 world. We also have the right and the duty to become=20 proficient in the use of these personal arms for the=20 protection of self, family, home, State and nation. Because, as Thomas Jefferson admonished: "The=20 strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep=20 and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves=20 against tyranny in government." Recent reports indicate that at least a dozen=20 foreign governments are demanding that the American public=20 be disarmed. Furthermore, there are even suggestions=20 within some crazy factions at the United Nations that=20 foreign military forces enter the United States and disarm=20 the American people by force. Admittedly, today these are=20 classed as lunatic factions within the UN. But, based on=20 previous actions of the UN, things that are originally=20 called crackpot ideas have a strange habit of later=20 becoming treaty. It is the considered opinion of many people=20 out here in the foothills of Appalachia that the entering=20 of armed foreign troops into our country to act as police=20 would be recognized as an act of war against the American=20 people. And it is, incidentally, because so many millions=20 of American people are proficient with their personal arms=20 that the UN fears even considering any such action at this=20 time. Apparently, though, the Clinton administration is=20 attempting to aide the lunatic faction within the UN by=20 removing some of our protection. Also, as R.J. Rummel, Professor (Emeritus)=20 of Political Science at the University of Hawaii reports: =20 "Nearly 170 million people have been murdered by=20 governments in this century; over four-times the number=20 killed in combat in all the international and domestic=20 wars." A breakdown of that data can be found at: =20 http://www2.hawaii.edu/~rummel/, We might also add that most of these 170 million=20 people were easily slaughtered by their government because=20 they were unarmed. Furthermore, many millions of these=20 killings happened while the murdering government was a=20 member of the United Nations. Congress must take quick and decisive action=20 to countermand the administration's action. Our job is to=20 insure that they do. There is only a window of a few=20 weeks available for Congress to act. So, tell them your=20 opinion quickly. GUNS, POLITICIANS AND AIRCRAFT Way back when, in the days when most=20 commercial aircraft had propellers and a ride that would=20 usually vibrate your dinner off of the tray if you weren't=20 careful, it was very common for us to board a plane=20 armed. In those days, many of us carried a 357 magnum=20 which, because of its size, I always referred to as a=20 "semi" canceled weapon. Nothing was ever said about guns=20 on aircraft until some idiot calling himself D.B. Cooper=20 managed to successfully hijack one. Just after a couple Cooper copycats tried=20 something similar, the frequent flyers of the Congressional=20 class got interested. Because, if a plane they were on was=20 hijacked, they could actually be late for a fund-raiser=20 luncheon, a lobbyist funded vacation, or something. Can't=20 have that. So suddenly, most Americans could no longer=20 carry a gun on a commercial aircraft. Gun-toting on=20 busses and trains was fine, because Members of Congress=20 do not normally use them. Packing heat on commercial=20 aircraft became verboten. Ditto for bombs. No one knows of any=20 American (except police officers) ever actually trying to=20 board a commercial aircraft carrying a bomb. But, heck,=20 better to be safe than sorry said the frequent flyers in=20 the Congressional class. So, nowadays even the baggage=20 that is checked is checked. Many airports, like the Cincinnati and Northern=20 Kentucky Airport, carry that trend one step further. They=20 have money police there too. That is, if any of the=20 airport employees see an aircraft passenger or airport=20 visitor with a roll of cash, they call the special airport=20 cops and the nice officers relieve that person of the=20 burden of carrying so much cash. Then, they share part of=20 the illicit cash with the airport employee who fingered=20 the beleaguered person. It's all quite legal, too -- so they try to say. =20 You see, they're looking for illegal drugs. And money,=20 of course, may be used to purchase illegal drugs someday. =20 So, they take the cash. The current drug cops at the=20 Cincinnati Airport must really be doing a great job, too. =20 They haven't found a lot of drugs, but they have relieved=20 a whole lot of people of large stashes of personal cash. Apparently, the Cincinnati airport cops are not=20 very good at finding guns, though. Kentucky State Rep.=20 Pete Worthington (D-Ewing) tested that last week. =20 Worthington caught a flight to the Dallas-Fort Worth=20 Airport with a .22-caliber handgun in his carry-on baggage. =20 He made it to Dallas just fine. But when he tried to come=20 back they noticed the gun. And not knowing that he was=20 a member of the protected class, they stopped him. Worthington says he carries that handgun=20 (without a permit) with him everywhere, and just "forgot"=20 it was in the bag. Also, he didn't like being stopped and=20 bothered. So, he called his buddy Kentucky House Speaker=20 Jody Richards. Jody Richards, also a Democrat, then=20 called his counterpart in Texas. The good old boy system=20 worked, and Worthington came home. As the story goes, the Kentucky prosecutor=20 responsible for charging Worthington (the Cincinnati=20 Airport is in Kentucky) said he can not charge Worthington=20 cause no one saw him with a gun here -- no matter that=20 Worthington admits he had it with him while boarding the=20 aircraft. And, of course, the Texas prosecutor is not=20 interested in pressing charges, either. Now . . . we do not really believe that=20 Worthington, or anyone else for that matter, should be=20 prosecuted for something as silly as taking a little=20 handgun on a commercial aircraft. However, because he is=20 a legislator -- a lawmaker -- and that is the law, we feel=20 that the State House should censure him. And, as part of=20 his punishment, he should be required to spend a year=20 working to have many of these stupid laws repealed. Maybe=20 he could do something to stop that crew with badges and=20 guns from stealing people's money, too. Meanwhile, let this be just another example=20 that there is no "equal justice" under the law. Congress=20 gave us a class system. There's the elected ones and=20 their friends, the bureaucrats, and then the normal=20 citizens. And as we are seeing -- over and over again,=20 and in all levels of government from the White House on=20 down -- only the citizens are required to obey all laws. Yes, we still have something referred to as the=20 "Rule of Law." It's just that the Lords and Ladies of the=20 Hill rearranged it to fit their own personal needs more=20 adequately. EQUAL JUSTICE Vs. NATIONAL SECURITY We've learned a lot about the law from the=20 Clinton administration. Gore's "no controlling legal=20 authority" teaches us that a law may not be enforced until=20 there is a court opinion on it. So, all new laws must be=20 moot because they cannot get to court if they are not=20 enforced. Actually, we kind of like that concept, what=20 with all the very oppressive laws lately. And this Justice Department has got to be=20 the crowning jewel of the Rule of Law. Reno's Just-Us=20 Department recently informed us that those accused of=20 major felonies now have the option of investigating=20 themselves. No matter, either, if it was a huge ongoing=20 criminal enterprise spanning over a decade. The=20 perpetrators can conduct the investigation. And, so they=20 did. Remember Gary Webb and his recently=20 discredited series of articles in the San Jose Mercury=20 News? He outlined what many of us have believed for years: =20 Agents of the federal government -- the very same federal=20 government out there arresting Americans for selling the=20 stuff -- are among the largest illegal drug importers in=20 this country. Reporter Gary Webb weaved a tale describing=20 how federal officials regularly allowed a dubious=20 "national security" program top priority over "citizen=20 security." He told a story of an officially sanctioned=20 crime -- a crime that was (is?) in progress for many years. =20 This is a crime against society that has devastated=20 hundreds of American neighborhoods and tens of thousands=20 of American citizens, by the introduction of tons of cheap=20 cocaine. The San Jose Mercury News series described=20 part of how CIA agents encouraged, used and protected=20 drug kingpins for years on end. It told how the DEA, FBI,=20 IRS, and even federal prosecutors and judges, aided and=20 abetted the CIA and their network of protected drug=20 runners in flooding American neighborhoods with cheap=20 cocaine. And, as those of us who studied the background=20 material provided know, Webb backed up his accusations=20 rather well. The lesson, clearly understood by anyone=20 reading that series, is that this "national security"=20 farce touted by agents of the United States government=20 clearly has absolutely no relation to the everyday=20 security of the citizens of the United States. Rather, it=20 functioned to the detriment of millions of American=20 citizens. Webb showed that federal judges aided=20 federal prosecutors in releasing federally "protected"=20 drug runners. The FBI, DEA, and even Customs, helped the=20 CIA insure that they would profit from selling illegal=20 drugs in American neighborhoods. It almost appears as if=20 members of all these federal agencies joined together to=20 keep the competition down so the "protected" drug sellers=20 would have a ready market. Of course, that was not a new story. The=20 Wall Street Journal reported that CIA operatives were=20 importing cocaine into the United States as far back as=20 1987. And at least fourteen other major publications ran=20 similarly enlightening articles since then. The Senate=20 even held a hearing on the subject in 1986. Back then, Senator Kerry's report stated: "The=20 Subcommittee found that the Contra drug links included: =20 Involvement in narcotics trafficking by individuals=20 associated with the Contra movement." And hence, the CIA. =20 Yet, no action was ever taken to stop the flow of illegal=20 drugs into our neighborhoods. Now, the CIA and Justice Department says=20 none of it was true. And the CIA's investigation of=20 itself proved that there was no truth to the accusations. =20 Anyone believe that? Can anyone honestly say they=20 expected anything else from them? The problem is,=20 government (again) lied. We know that because, this=20 time, we have information from a 25 year drug enforcement=20 insider and yet another report to a Congressional=20 committee. Read on: We should note that, in nearly every country=20 of the world, the major drug kingpins are readily=20 identifiable. Not in the United States, though. Here,=20 any time investigators get too close to the top drug=20 kingpins, they run into a very large wall. National=20 Security, it's called. Over the last decade or so, a number of=20 House committees investigating illegal drug running gave=20 up in frustration because the Department of Justice=20 withheld all pertinent information and fought every=20 committee investigation tooth and nail. So too with the=20 Kerry Senate Committee. The Kerry Senate Committee=20 actually identified some of the CIA connections and named=20 a few names. Then suddenly, evidently, Kerry was told to=20 go sit down and shut up about things that do not concern=20 him. He did, and the Department of Justice dropped the=20 whole deal. Nothing was done. As always, everything was=20 covered up under the guise of national security. Now comes an op-ed piece in last week's=20 "Washington Weekly" by Michael Levine, now retired, but a=20 25 year veteran of federal drug enforcement. And now we=20 learn that there is, in fact, and has been for at least 15=20 years, a secret deal between the CIA and the Justice=20 Department allowing tons of illegal drugs to enter the=20 United States with impunity. So, again we learn a serious lesson in=20 American law. The law does not apply to all people=20 equally. Some government employees may, with impunity,=20 import as much illegal drugs for distribution within the=20 United States as they wish. They may also personally=20 profit from this endeavor. Government will then arrest=20 and imprison American citizens who are small time dealers=20 and users of these very same illegal drugs. National Security, it's called. How's that for=20 equality under the law? - ----------------------------- CIA ADMITS TO DEAL WITH DOJ TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE An Op-Ed by Michael Levine, with Laura Kavanau=20 Levine, from the April 6 edition of "The Washington=20 Weekly." As an ex-DEA agent I found the complete=20 lack of coverage by mainstream media of what I saw during=20 last month's congressional hearings into CIA Drug=20 Trafficking both depressing and frightening. I sat gape-mouthed as I heard the CIA Inspector=20 General testify that there has existed a secret agreement=20 between CIA and the Justice Department, wherein "during=20 the years 1982 to 1995, CIA did not have to report the=20 drug trafficking by its assets to the Justice Department." To a trained DEA agent this literally means=20 that the CIA had been granted a license to obstruct=20 justice in our so-called war on drugs; a license that=20 lasted, so the CIA claims, from 1982 to 1995, a time=20 during which Americans paid almost $150 billion in taxes=20 to "fight" drugs. Of course the evidence indicates that=20 they did not stop obstructing justice in 1995 either, but=20 that I suppose is going to be another congressional=20 hearing. As far as the current hearings go, this Catch 22=20 "revelation" means that all the present hearings are for=20 nothing; that if they are caught violating the drug laws=20 they have been given "secret" license to do so by our=20 Justice Department. This might also explain Janet Reno's=20 recent and unprecedented move in blocking the release of=20 a Justice Department investigation into CIA drug=20 trafficking. God, with friends like these, who needs enemies? It is now clear that this agreement began with=20 the events described in THE BIG WHITE LIE; that the top=20 drug traffickers in Bolivia, then supplying virtually all=20 the world's cocaine (including Sonia Atala) were CIA=20 assets that had to be protected from our deep cover probe. Those watching the hearings cannot have=20 helped but notice the snickering on the part of Chairman=20 Porter Goss, an ex-CIA officer, as congresswoman Maxine=20 Waters spoke. Now here's the reason why: Sources of=20 mine, who speak to me from inside this veil of secrecy out=20 of conscience and because I am cheaper and more reliable=20 than a psychiatrist, have told me the following: 1. There is secret communication between CIA=20 and members of the Congressional staff indicating that the=20 whole hearing is just a smoke and mirror show so that the=20 American people -- particularly the Black community -- can=20 "blow off some steam" without doing any damage to CIA. =20 The CIA has been assured that nothing real will be done,=20 other than some embarrassing questions being asked. 2. That the hearings will result in the CIA=20 receiving an even larger budget than the current $26=20 billion that they admit to. One of the most distressing things for me=20 as a 25-year-veteran of this business to listen to was=20 when Congresswoman Waters said that the hearings were not=20 about CIA officers being indicted and going to jail. =20 "That is not going to happen," she said. Almost in the same breath she spoke of a=20 recent case in Miami wherein a Venezuelan National Guard=20 general was caught by Customs agents smuggling more than=20 a ton of cocaine into the US. Despite named CIA officers=20 being involved in the plot, as Congresswoman Waters=20 stated, the Justice Department will not tell her anything=20 about the case because of "secrecy laws." No wonder chairman Goss was snickering. She=20 could not have played more neatly into CIA hands than to=20 surrender before the battle was engaged. - ----------------------------- [Michael Levine is the author of "The Big=20 White Lie" and "Deep Cover" and is the host of THE=20 EXPERT WITNESS radio show WBAI, New York City, 99.5 FM,=20 Tuesdays, 7-8 pm] Published in the Apr. 6, 1998 issue of The=20 Washington Weekly. Copyright =A9 1998 The Washington Weekly=20 (http://www.federal.com). Reposting permitted with this=20 message intact. -- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Apr 98 14:16:47 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Have you called your congresscritter yet? (fwd) On Apr 12, Doug Spittler wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >From another list; - --------------------- >Executive powers raising questions > Clinton's order on gun restrictions meets bipartisan criticism > President Bill Clinton is receiving criticism on a bipartisan basis for his > use of executive powers. Congressmen on both sides of the gun issue > and from both political parties have united their efforts with gun rights > supporters to reverse a recent executive order banning certain guns from > import. WorldNetDaily 4/9/98 > >http://www.worldnetdaily.com/exclusiv/980409.ex.clinton.gun_restrictions.op >posed.html > > > Clinton's latest gun grab > In the United States, they came first for the > Uzis, but I didn't speak up because I didn't own > an Uzi. Then they came for the AK-47s, and I > didn't speak up because I didn't own an AK-47. > Then they came for all the semiautomatic > weapons, and I didn't speak up because I didn't > own a semiautomatic weapon. Then they came > for the handguns, but I didn't speak up because > I owned a shotgun. Then they came for my gun, > and by that time no one was left to speak up. > WorldNetDaily 4/9/98 > >http://www.worldnetdaily.com/btlines/980409.btl.clinton.gun-grab.html > >Vinnie Moscaritolo >------------------ >http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ >DSS/DH: 3F903472C3AF622D5D918D9BD8B100090B3EF042 > >"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude >greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. >We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that >feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget >that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 08:37:58 -0500 (CDT) From: Subject: President Clinton's executive order on gun imports (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 13:13:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Workman To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: President Clinton's executive order on gun imports >Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 09:33:20 -0500 >To:DUNN@HR.HOUSE.GOV, repwhite@mail.house.gov, >ASKLINDA@HR.HOUSE.GOV,GRNWA05@HR.HOUSE.GOV >From:handgnr@nwlink.com (Dave Workman) >Subject:President Clinton's executive order on gun imports >Cc:GEORGIA6@HR.HOUSE.GOV (Newt Gingrich) > >Hon. Jennifer Dunn, >Hon. Rick White, >Hon. Linda Smith, >Hon. George Nethercutt: > > I am writing to urge you all to join your colleague, Utah Rep. >Chris Cannon, and some 40 others in a planned action to nullify President >Clinton's recent "executive order" banning the import of several >foreign-made firearms. > > The firearms community is not simply alarmed at this move by the >President to capitalize on the Jonesboro, Ark. tragedy. The firearms >community is angry, and they are asking themselves why they should bother >sending back a Republican majority this fall if that majority - which has >enjoyed strong support from firearms owners since the sweeping >Congressional sea change in 1994 - turns a deaf ear and blind eye to its >concerns. > > As a spokesman for over 80,000 members of the National Rifle >Association here in Washington state (make that, 80,000 voters) I am >obliged to tell you that the members I represent are demanding swift, >decisive action when Congress returns April 22. They have had quite enough >vilification from the Clinton Administration, and far too much neglect for >their concerns from the Republican majority, of which you are all members. > > One would think that if the ACLU can fight for the First Amendment >rights of Nazis to parade through the streets of Skokie, Ill., than the >Republican majority that gun owners sent to Congress in 1994, and kept >there in 1996 - in response to Clinton's passage of the Brady Law, and the >semi-auto and high-capacity magazine bans - should be able to find the >courage to speak out and take action on behalf of the Second Amendment. > > There's been considerable discussion lately in the media that >Republicans may lose control of the House this fall. No more certain >guarantee of that would be for this nation's firearms owners to "sit this >one out" as they did in 1992 when they lost all confidence in President >George Bush because of his import ban order. > > I urge you to join your fellow congressional representatives and >do the right thing, rather than the "politically correct" thing. Regain >the spirit you showed in 1995, when the nation watched and waited to see >whether your party really would change the direction of government. > >Sincerely, >Dave Workman >Board member >National Rifle Association >P.O. Box 1638 >North Bend, WA 98045 > - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:39:27 -0500 (CDT) From: Subject: Univ. of Texas site against world government http://www.engr.utexas.edu/cofe/governance - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- =20 Foreward =20 When the Chair of Free Enterprise was originally endowed in 1976, the Board of Regents expressed its mandate to the Chair in explicit terms: =20 =20 =20 =93The teaching and research activities of this Chair shall include an examination of the relationships between business management, governmental affairs, social sciences, engineering, secondary education and the free enterprise system.=94=20 =20 =20 =20 Moreover, the Chair was directed to enhance the development of scholarly relationships between this academic program of The University and appropriate aspects of government, industry and other educational units.=20 =20 During the past two decades, the Chair has amplified its efforts to fulfill the Regents=92 mandate. Regulatory ratcheting by government agencies wielding enormous power in environmental matters has severely impacted private enterprise during the recent past. Unsubstantiated claims have been made about environmental degradation caused by =93industrialization=94 and =93free enterpri Such claims haunderscored t= he necessity of pursuing scholarly research to explain not only the reasons for an emergence of a series of =93globalenvironmental crises =94 -- global warming, ozone depletion, acid rain,endangered species and the like -- but also their putative relationship to a developing strategy for =93the rise of globa governance.=94 =20 This publication sets forth in factual detail a sequence of events indicating that latent geopolitical powers have been shaping an agenda for global governance which includes a coercive system of global taxation, supranational police powers, and the enforcement of stringent environmental standards designed to reverse if not coercively eliminate uncontrolled industrial development and its custodian, =93national sovereignty.=94 =20 Moreover, Third Wave Politics, as Alvin and Heidi Toffler tell us, has already begun to supplant Second Wave mass-industrial society. It is to be expected, they say, that =93Creating a New Civilization=94 inevitably entails deep conflicts as Second Wave brute-force economies symbolized by the assembly line become supplanted by Third Wave brain-force economies symbolized by the computer. In proposing their clairvoyant vision of the future, the Tofflers leave unexplored the vacuum into which the geopolitical powers behind global governance intend to insert themselves in implementing their plans to supersede the powers of sovereign nations. =20 This publication presents research conducted by Henry Lamb, Chairman of Sovereignty International Incorporated. It is an initial phase in the Chair=92s endeavor to elevate public understanding of imminent threats to our Constitutional liberties, as well as an erosion of the freedom for innovation embodied in a private enterprise system. =20 M. N. Maxey, Ph.D., Director =20 C. W. Murchison Sr. Chair of Free Enterprise =20 Winter 1997 =20 _________________________________________________________________ =20 12 February 1998 The University of Texas at Austin cofe@www.utexas.edu - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #111 *************************