Heads Up A Weekly edition of News from around our country April 18, 1997 #31 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net ---------------------------------------------------------- Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html ---------------------------------------------------------- PEACEFUL REVOLUTION Lately, we received nearly a dozen letters from readers wondering where this country is headed. Like many of us, the writers were concerned about the blatant socialism and authoritarianism of many in the federal government, to be sure. But, there's a much more interesting twist to it than just that. You see, these letters were from elected officials and journalists. These letters were from the very people one would think are best situated to help mold public opinion towards demanding a more Constitutional form of central government. So, why would they relate these musings to "Heads Up," we can't help asking ourselves? One well known journalist even mentioned that they almost wished the revolution would come, just so we could get back to the government we should have. "Sometimes I think maybe we should just get it over with," was the comment. We disagree. While it is true that the government seems to be readying to launch a full force attack against the American people; to date, they have not. However, we know that the Treasury and Justice Departments have both more than doubled their special operation teams over the past three years. We know that FEMA has its own large police force (or is it an army?). We also know that the President's National Security Council controls a rogue contingent of the Army that is running live-fire exercises (at least 21 to date) on our American cities. Not one of these are a Constitutionally authorized activity of the federal government. Therefore, they are illegal activities. Why aren't we telling them? We also note the liberal, and grossly inappropriate, use of SWAT teams around the country. Whereas, in the past, an arrest was made or a search warrant served, by an officer and his partner, nowadays they act like an occupying army and bring in a full military SWAT team brandishing automatic weapons. Why? Stupid men doing stupid things, is all that can be correctly said about that. The real shame of the situation is that these stupid men showing off with automatic weapons also have badges. To the peaceful citizens of the United States, it is the members of the SWAT teams, and that rogue Army unit attacking our cities, that belong in prison! Then there are those many hundreds of thousands of regulators attempting to run everything in our lives from womb to tomb. Lately, most of them are also armed as well as oppressive. "Forfeiture Fever -- Catch it," is a sign many of them now have displayed on their office walls. Taking their lead from the antics of the IRS, they rip-off everything they can get from unsuspecting American citizens. Legal thievery, is what that is! And, when you add in the FBI wanting to bug two-million Americans telephones simultaneously, an out of control BATF, a total tax rate exceeding 50%, and a court system that refuses to uphold the Constitution, well. . . . Is it any wonder that most Americans want as little to do with the federal government as possible? Is it any wonder that the federal government is only tolerated by the people, that most wish it would somehow just go away? Is it any wonder that the federal government lost the consent of the governed years ago, that American citizens only put up with this craziness because they FEAR their government? Well? Doesn't that about sum it up? Yeah, almost. So, what are we going to do about it? It would be silly to start a revolution. The problem is systemic, not individual. They actually believe they are supposed to act like that. They, with their convoluted federal government logic, actually think they are doing the people's work by oppressing the people! In other words, many of them simply no longer know any better. However, we are also part of the problem. We've been occupied going to work, taking care of the kids, playing with computers, watching sports, and the like. Meanwhile, we forgot to keep watch on those we elected. Now look! There's still time to jerk their chains, though. We do not need guns to get the government back. Not yet, anyway. Part of the Constitution is still in effect. And, as James Madison planned, it works in our favor. But, you can't be dilly-dallying around about it. If we want to do something, it will have to be soon. And, right now is a very good time to start. Some have started by advertising with the small size bumper-sticker sporting a large "LIBERTY" in white letters on a blue background. They say that they are also checking on similar yard signs. One elderly woman reports that she sold (at cost) 15 of the stickers in a parking lot in just a few minutes. Many of us have also started flying the Betsy Ross thirteen star Flag. We have never displayed that Flag without people asking why. Our answer: "We fly the Flag of the Founding Fathers as a reminder that our government has forgotten those ideals which originally made this country so great." And, "If it was good enough for George Washington, it is very acceptable for us." Note: We ordered our flag from Flaggs U.S.A. in Cincinnati, 1 (513) 533-0330, for about thirty bucks. They have a very nice catalog, and delivery was fast. But, that's all we know about them. The Flag and the bumper-stickers attract the attention of our like-minded neighbors, but they do little to get government changed. To do that, we must get rid of the incumbents. And, now is the time to start. One thing is certain, most people are very interested in their own personal liberty. Any candidate promising to fight that good fight in Washington should do very well. One only need look to the campaign of Congressman Ron Paul to see the truth in that. All of the professional politicians, and much of the press, were against him running for office. But, Paul preached Liberty and a Constitutional form of government, and he won. And so too can your favorite candidate, with your help. Else, there may well be that revolution of which so many now speak. And that, folks, would be a very unfortunate situation for many thousands of Americans. INVESTIGATING THE FBI Someone thinks the FBI did something wrong? Gee, that should be about as newsworthy as Slick Willie lying! Growing up in a big city, we regularly saw the FBI pull "black bag jobs" on businesses and private dwellings. The Fourth Amendment was part of the Constitution even back then in the 50's, but they never had a warrant. In our strong Polish/Russian neighborhood, "The Suits" were always watching for Communists. There weren't any, because we would run them off as soon as they were discovered. But, the way the feds usually acted, we were all a bunch of pinko Commies. As kids, some of us had a job "prepping" new cars after they were sold at a dealership. It was always great fun to watch the FBI attempt to conceal their radio transmitters in the new cars of certain customers. You see, they were installing tube-type equipment, which was rather large, and those of us prepping the car always found it immediately. We would tell the dealership owner, and get slipped an extra five bucks to dummy-up about it. Certain FBI agents, we noticed back then, were very chummy with the area's organized crime boss. They would be at the boss' restaurant once or twice a week, having a little dinner conference with him and two or three of his lieutenants and/or local union leaders. The safest jobs in the neighborhood back then were running numbers and working for the bookies. We knew why. It was well known, even 40 years ago, that if you got on the wrong side of these feds they would set you up, and have you imprisoned. Sometimes they would just shoot the person, and have it over with right away. Not much has changed today. Sure, it's a little better now. But not much. Today's news is the FBI crime lab. Big deal! Does anyone question for a second who these laboratory people work for, what they are, and to whom they owe their allegiance? Is there any person out there who thinks these guys cannot be a scientist and a cop too? Let's get real here: They work for the prosecution! The FBI crime laboratory is not the American citizen's crime laboratory. It is the FBI's -- a bureau of the Department of Justice, the prosecutors who will do anything to win a case -- crime laboratory. Their job, their only job, is to make the case for the prosecution. Anyone believing that one of the FBI lab personnel is going to come into court and say that he or she has evidence that the defendant could not have committed the crime is delusional. Any FBI laboratory personnel presenting exculpatory evidence would be out of a job that same afternoon. They are FBI agents. Scientists, yes. But FBI agents first. Do they also make the evidence better -- you know, fudge the results in favor of the prosecution? Of course! OK. Let's be nice and say (we hope) that not every scientist working at the FBI crime laboratory would do that. Then, let's be practical: Most would. You see, the pressure put on these people in a big case can be awesome. And when the lab people are part of a large team working an important case it's even worse. The crime laboratory scientist goes to the morning meeting, sees the big board with all the evidence listed, hears all the assurances from the street cops, and figures "what the heck." All the lab guy has to do is change some doodad a little, maybe trash whatever does not fit the scenario perfectly, and there you have it. It's then conclusive. The scumbag goes to prison. Another FBI investigation wrapped up. So? What's the problem? The foot-soldiers have the data to convict. Why confuse the issue with science? Oh . . . honesty, integrity, the law, and stuff like that. . . . Yeah. Well, how are they supposed to catch anyone then? It's teamwork, you know. Everyone has to do their part to make the case. That is their job, too; in case you did not catch it. "Make the case!" Most scientists are rather honorable people. Once in a while, too, you find a completely honest cop. Put those two attributes together in the FBI laboratory and you have today's problem. All this will blow over in a while. Never fear. Things will be back to normal soon. "Testilying" is an art perfected by the Hoover FBI. And, look how fast it caught on with police departments around the country. Testilying is ingrained in the brain of many of today's law enforcement officers. It's not going anyplace. DRUGS AND POLITICIANS This week, the United States Supreme Court told the State of Georgia that states cannot force political candidates to take drug tests merely to demonstrate the government's commitment to the war on drugs. In an 8-1 decision, the Court said that when there is no evidence of a drug-abuse problem, Georgia's drug- testing law violates the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches. "However well-meant, the candidate drug test Georgia has devised diminishes personal privacy for a symbol's sake," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court. "The Fourth Amendment shields society against that state action." Georgia Attorney General Michael J. Bowers, however, didn't seem to completely understand the concept behind The Bill of Rights: "I find it difficult to believe that drug-testing candidates for high office violates the Fourth Amendment. It's just inconceivable that people who are going to head up the government of this state . . . cannot be checked at least this one time." Perhaps we should all mail this jerk a cup? We have to agree with that part of the Court's opinion, of course. But really though, this is somewhat of a slap in the face of Americans who are not politicians. Because, on three previous occasions the Court upheld mandatory or random drug testing without any individual suspicion of wrongdoing. In a 1989 decision, the Court let stand drug tests for railroad workers whose jobs affect public safety. It also agreed to drug testing of U.S. Customs agents who enforce anti-drug laws. Then, in 1995, the Court upheld drug testing of student athletes in public schools. Therefore, it seems clear that, at least in the eyes of the Supreme Court, politicians are a cut above the average citizen in the rights department. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia carried that thought a few steps further this week. That court approved testing of people who hold permanent passes granting them daily access to the Old Executive Office Building, just west of the White House. The reasoning behind that opinion was that President Clinton regularly walks across a private street to the building for meetings, ceremonies and news conferences. Also, Vice President Al Gore has his office there. It seems that the Appeals Court feels that some executive branch employee might take drugs, and while crazed by the influence of drugs, might wish to harm Slick Willie or Ozone Head. The problem is, as was pointed out in court, only some executive branch workers will be tested. The hundreds of interns, visitors and reporters who enter the building will not be tested. Nor will the 25 drug abusers working in the White House, or Slick and the Misses, we bettcha! Anyway, now you know, officially, what politicians and judges think the Bill of Rights is for. Them. IMPEACHMENT LOOMS Well, Attorney General Janet Reno said "no" to an independent counsel to probe illegal White House and DNC fund raising again. Anybody surprised? Worse, the Senate had her in for a hearing and decided not to ask her about it. We saw her laughing there for a while. Was that 'at' them or 'with' them? It might be wise of Congress to lay off of her, at least publicly, on any important issue. They try to hide it, but her Parkinson's is progressing rather fast. Some say she may have Alzheimer's, too. Consequently, if they get her too aggravated, she'll start shaking, and probably sputtering words incorrectly. From then on, any committee questioning her will come off looking like a bunch of mean, obnoxious fools. In her letter to Congress, Reno said no evidence exists that an official covered by the independent counsel statute broke the law. "I can assure you that we have no information that any covered person has committed any crime in this regard," she wrote. Huh? No information? Apparently, Ozone Head Al standing up on national TV and admitting that he illegally made calls to campaign contributors from the White House is not "evidence" to Reno. Nor is the fact that both Slick Willie and his co-president admitted that they "may have." Then there's the $3-million+ in improper campaign contributions that the DNC is (someday) returning. Slick's election campaign committee got a lot of that illegally laundered money too. We have not heard a word about that yet, but we will. In truth, we prefer that Reno does not appoint a special council. That will only cover up most information. And if that independent council is as slow as Starr, the Clintons might be in their seventies before they go to trial! This way, both the House and Senate committees will be releasing information weekly. Plus, we'll get to watch the proceedings on CSPAN. Also, if there is no special council, the only remedy for administrative wrongdoings available to Congress is a Constitutional remedy: Impeachment. And, this impeachment would include both Clinton and Gore. That will be a real joy to watch. BUYING POLITICAL INFLUENCE Who was it recently that said campaign contributions do not buy political influence? All we have to say about that is that person is either a damn liar or a stupid fool! Documents subpoenaed from the DNC and the White House by Congress show that the DNC provided the new administration with a "must consider" list of names of major campaign contributors for posts in the incoming administration. Yeah, you read that correctly. Major campaign contributors actually put their names on a "wish list" for the position of power each contributor sought within the administration. A memo the Democratic Party sent to the White House in December 1992 described the job candidates as "leading national fund-raisers." And, the new administration was expected to "pay off" with a cushy position of influence. And folks, the list contains "dozens" of names, most of whom did, in fact, get rewarded with positions of authority (over you) within the administration. For instance, Huang (remember him?) was recommended by the DNC for a sub-Cabinet level job at the Commerce Department. Arthur Levitt, wanted to be rewarded as ambassador to Germany or Mexico or a potential member of the National Economic Council, but ended up chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Erskine Bowles bought a position as administrator of the Small Business Administration -- now he's White House chief of staff. Kenneth Brody bought appointment as president of the Export-Import Bank. A few others bought ambassador positions. And so on. To these people, campaign contributions are an investment. Either they personally get in a position to "help" themselves and their friends make money, or they "buy" the influence of someone in a position to do it for them. Contributing to Congress can only influence a few votes. Buying influence in the administrative branch can provide a whole host of immediately profitable advantages over business competitors. The cold hard fact is that the administrative branch can change and/or ignore any and all rules or regulations with only the stroke of a pen. We citizens do not have the bucks to pay to have that done. Business executives, however, do. Of course, politicians euphemistically call these payments "campaign contributions." In practice, though, it is the direct purchase of political influence. In reality, contributors can actually "buy" laws, or positions, to control American citizens. That might sound a bit preposterous in the United States. But the fact is that the practice has been going on behind closed doors for years. This money exchange is the driving force behind many hundreds of the rules and regulations affecting our lives. From food processing to the Freon ban, regulations were all intentionally influenced by corporations purchasing political influence for monetary gain. The Clinton Administration, however, perfected that type of bribery to a political art form. So, where does that leave us working stiffs? Re-read the section on Drugs and Politicians. Then check out the section on Peaceful Revolution. IMMIGRANT WELFARE Do you know that your tax dollars are going to pay for immigrant welfare? Worse, do you know that these welfare immigrants are actually protesting the loss of benefits? "We will play electoral hard ball in November 1998 with those in Congress who are trying to throw our parents and our grandparents and our neighbors into the streets," Yosef Abramowitz, president of the Union of Councils for Soviet Jews, told a large crowd gathered outside the Capitol last Monday. Hey Yosef, old buddy, shut up! You're a real embarrassment to all who came before you. Take your "Soviet" socialist ideals back to Russia if you can't conform to American life. That is the place for Communism. Here, you are the one required to care for your family, your parents and your grandparents. American citizens paid $10-Billion (almost $90 per each American taxpayer) to Israel a few years ago to house Russian Jews. If we do not put a stop to groups like the Councils for Soviet Jews, we'll end up spending another $10-Billion just because some of them changed their minds and came here instead of Israel. Folks, this is a terrible situation! Unconscionable, would be a better word. This is not supposed to happen. How in hell did "immigrants" ever get on welfare? Growing up in an "immigrant" neighborhood gives this writer a little different perspective than most on this situation. First, we were never allowed to "sponsor" someone (and I was a sponsor for two people) unless we guaranteed their welfare. That is, we had to certify that, were they to find themselves destitute for whatever reason, we would step in and provide for them. Second, we always had this little ditty about being an American. Back then, every person from the "neighborhood" could speak at least one other language. However, to speak anything other than English in public could very well get a person slapped up-side the head back then. We all grew up as proud Americans, no matter where we, our parents or grandparents were from. Any other language we wished to learn was acceptable. Proper English, however, was demanded. And no person in that immigrant neighborhood ever took a cent of government money. Some could surely have used some help, especially during one memorable recession. Instead, privately and through the churches, everyone helped each other. Now we read of well off immigrant professionals bringing their parents over and putting them on SSI. Whatever happened to the law? What has America become, a free retirement community for anyone who can find someone to pay their way here? Press reports say that there are over ten-million people in the United States who cannot speak English. That is a disgrace! The language of the United States is English. Therefore, to participate as an American citizen, one must speak English. To come here, and not immediately strive to learn our language is a shame. Years ago, when Americans worked in other countries and neglected to learn the language, they were called "ugly Americans." European and South American people, especially, thought them less than honorable visitors. We Americans should feel the same. We must accept the language difficulty of new arrivals and visitors. But we should never, ever accept a permanent resident in the United States who cannot speak English. Many of us can still return to the "neighborhood" and carry on a conversation in another language. That's fine, but it will never put food on the table. A good command of the English language is what is important to prosper here. EVENTS AT KNOB CREEK by Lance R. Crowe The Knob Creek KY, bi-annual Machine Gun Shoot was held last weekend, April 11-13. Knob Creek's machine gun shoot is the largest of its kind held in the United States and takes place 10 miles west of Shepardville, KY on Highway 44 near West Point, Kentucky. This year's shoot was as impressive as those held in past years and attracted shooters and firearm enthusiasts from more than thirty states. Some of the attractions included a fully automatic gun range, sporting 30, 50 and 60 caliber machine guns, 50 caliber and 20 millimeter anti tank weapons, mini-guns and various small arms such as the AK 47s, SKS and Macs. Many of the weapons could be fired by any individual attending -- for a price, of course. The "Pole Barn", which is an incredible favorite for many shooting enthusiasts, offered vendors selling all types of legal firearms, parts for firearms, ammo, t-shirts, camouflaged clothing and other assorted items of interest. It is estimated that as many as 20,000 people attended the events at Knob Creek over a three day period. In this reporter's opinion, the camp area is the best place to be if you enjoy being around people with the same interests in firearms and freedom. It is my estimate that there were close to 800 campers who spent the weekend meeting others, sharing ideas and making lasting friendships. This year, the three major militia groups from Kentucky camped in the same area and discussed the major problems facing the militia movement in the days to come. Highlights of the discussions included improving communications between different groups in and outside the Commonwealth of Kentucky, increased intelligence concerning movement of United States military and United Nations forces in the state and the continued use of media and citizen efforts to achieve the desired results involving the disposition of the Land Between the Lakes by the Tennessee Valley Authority. There will be another Machine Gun shoot held at Knob Creek during the second weekend of October. When people tell you that we no longer live in a free country, remind them that we live in the only country on the face of the earth that still allows you to attend and participate in this type of event. -- End --