Heads Up

A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia


June 28 , 1998 #91


by: Doug Fiedor


E-mail to: fiedor19@eos.net

Copyright © 1998 by Doug Fiedor, all rights reserved

This text may be copied and distributed freely

but only in its entirety, and with no changes

Previous Editions at:





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 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.



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:




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 --