Re: [CTRL] Bill's Pals.
-Caveat Lector- In the past I've always felt sorry for the Palestinians, but after seeing the pictures of them dancing in the streets and celebrating the deaths of many thousands of Americans ... I say let them fend for themselves without any American intervention on their behalf. The PA may have blocked further viewing of the Palestinian Blood Dances but we have already seen how they really feel about the US. May Israel rain death upon them at will. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Education Tax Racket
-Caveat Lector- The Education Tax Racket by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. So thereâs this guy named Ray Simon. Heâs director of the Arkansas Department of Education, and heâs got a complaint about the boom in home schooling. The way he sees it, this trend is a threat to our, or at least his, way of life. A third of our support for [government] schools comes from property taxes, Ray tells the new issue of Time, which features homeschooling on the cover. Ray goes on: if a large number of a communityâs parents do not fully believe in the school system, it gets more difficult to pass those property taxes. And that directly impacts the schoolsâ ability to operate. No surprise there: parents might not want to pay for services they donât use. But are we to presume the reverse is true? That parents with kids in government schools are more likely to back tax increases? Could be, could be. Certainly kids in school are not taught to be suspicious of the powers-that-be; quite the reverse. But at least we have here a bracing look into the heart of American public education. The goal is to keep the kids in school so that they and their parents can be taught the merits of the system (the entire government sector) that keeps them there. In other words, itâs a glorified tax scam, just another racket to extract money from the public so that it can be transferred to the pockets of bureaucrats. No wonder the homeschooling movement â the most momentous educational development of the last few decades and one of the most hopeful signs for the future--is starting to catch on in a big way. This is prompting much grousing from the public-school industry. Just look at the logic of Rayâs comments. Why do schools need higher and higher taxes in order to have the ability to operate? Why canât they operate on the money they have now? Itâs because they are run by the government, which canât do anything as well as the private sector. The per-pupil cost of public schools averages $6,000, compared with $3,100 for private schools. In other words, all else being equal, we could abolish all public schools and the taxes that support them tomorrow, let the market replace them with private schools, and cut the total cost of education by nearly half. Why isnât this done? The short answer is that there are many people on the payroll of the education bureaucracy who would be unhappy. But wouldnât teachers also be unhappy? Not necessarily. Consider this conclusion of a 1997 report from the National Center on Education Statistics (yes, this is the government talking): Despite poorer pay, private school teachers as a group are more satisfied than public school teachers with their jobs. In the aggregate, private schools seem to offer a greater sense of community, greater teacher autonomy in the classroom, and more local influence over curriculum and important school policies. In addition, on average, private schools have a climate that would appear to be more conducive to learning, including greater safety and fewer problems caused by students having poor attitudes toward learning or negative interactions with teachers. Finally, private school students take more advanced courses than do public high school students. They also appear to follow a more rigorous academic program overall Now, itâs bad enough that the public-school lobby demands twice the amount of money to run schools than the private schools do. But itâs even worse that Ray demands ever more money each year through tax increases. Imagine if the computer industry said it always needed to raise prices in order to have the ability to operate. It might like to try, but competition and innovation keep prices falling. In fact, if it werenât for government-instigated inflation, computers would be much cheaper than they are. And despite falling prices, quality improves every day. Ray, meanwhile, is thinking only about how to get more money. It seems that a number of tax-limitation measures have passed in Arkansas in recent years. Panicked legislators have been inching up the sales tax to feed governmentâs voracious appetite, and yet people are starting to catch on to that gimmick too. Not so with schools. Even where taxes grow and grow, the quality falls. And itâs not only the quality of the education that parents have to worry about these days. They must also be concerned for their kidsâ safety. Itâs interesting, for example, to consider that little incident in Jonesboro, Arkansas, three years ago. Two boys tripped the fire alarm at a middle school and went on a bloody rampage. When it was over, a teacher and four girls were dead; 11 more children were wounded. Does Ray believe that homeschoolers and their anti-tax ways are responsible for that too? Might such violence have something to do with why parents are withdrawing their kids from the schools to educate them at home? As these things go, the Time article on homeschooling wasnât
Re: [CTRL] NM: War with China
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 8/19/01 6:10:26 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This article is pure unadulterated bullshit. It is scare mongering for NMD which has NOTHING to do with defending the citizens of this country, and everything to do with militarily dominating the entire planet from space. And... a monstrously huge welfare package for the military industrial complex. NMD will give the New World Order the ability to sit at the top of Mount Olympus and hurl down lightning bolts at anyone, for any reason, anytime. If you hear ANYONE discussing NMD as defensive, you know you're being lied to. Joshua2, Instead of calling this bullshit, how about some proof that Red China is not being used as an exterminator - to rid our elites of us useless eaters and leave the rich to use this country for their own purposes. Not only did Bush Clinton give/sell missle secrets and communications technology to the Reds, they also gave them a base in California. And, why do we have tens of thousands of German and Russian troops quartered in our country? I do not trust our elite shitheads any farther than I can throw an elephant ... I've lost my job to Mexicans, Malasians and Red Chinese four times in the last nine years. If our elites cannot starve us out by sending our jobs to foreign countries; they just may have an alternate plan to use foreign troops to exterminate us ... we don't need Germans, red chinese or Russians in our country for any reason what-so-ever. People should realize that Fascism and Communism are being used to destroy this country and there is little difference between these two Statist ways of operating, they both result in extermination. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Electricity Fact website
-Caveat Lector- Very interesting article Mike. If all this is true the people of California should prosecute him and put him in jail with the other criminals, then elect another Govenor. Unfortunately most politicians are criminals licensed by the State and the people of the US are too afraid or stupid to do anything about it. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Connect the Dots
-Caveat Lector- Connect the Dots by Patrick O'Hannigan Anyone looking for anecdotal evidence of state ambition can find it by perusing newspapers for a month, but sometimes the truth is obvious enough to make detective work unnecessary. I was reminded of this when the daily paper in my corner of America the Beautiful curtsied to the government last Sunday. Front-page stories on local and national issues were juxtaposed to great effect. Armed with a metaphorical shotgun from the peace-loving but ferocious firm of Rockwell, Dieteman, and De Coster, I scooped the local fish wrap off my driveway that morning to find that I had stumbled into a libertarian skeet-shooting tournament where some newsroom paste-up person or her editor had just yelled, Pull! The result may be amusing to paleoconservatives and Rothbardian anarcho-capitalists everywhere. The fish wrap in question goes by the name of the San Luis Obispo County (California) Tribune. On July 22, 2001, a syndicated story from the Washington Post took pride of place above the fold. The story was headlined, Bush sticks to position on Kyoto. Following a formulaic description of continued American refusal to toe the international line on climate change and what, if anything, to do about it, reporter William Drozidak left Asia behind to describe the New Deal that leaders of eight industrialized countries propose for Africa. This initiative is designed to boost the continentâs living standards, enhance democracy, curtail corruption, expand the use of new technologies, and control the trafficking in small arms that promote regional wars. The bad grammar got me first. Does no one proofread anymore? While I was cringing at the lack of subject-verb agreement, the bad policy crept in like a border collie trying to swipe a peanut butter cracker off the kitchen counter. Criminy! If this initiative for Africa were a business plan rather than a monument to the egos of world leaders, it would be laughed off the table by any self-respecting venture capitalist. Every one of its five stated goals is ambiguous and ambitious. Never mind the unsubstantiated link between small arms trafficking and war (reporters rarely locate the cause of warfare in unreformed human hearts because it is easier to blame and ban bazookas than to take the biblical call for repentance seriously). Thanks to this well-meaning but unworkable initiative, a Jonah Goldberg-style invasion of Africa suddenly sounds less far-fetched. I have a better idea: letâs enhance democracy by suggesting that politicians who hit free speech whenever they aim at campaign finance reform not bestir themselves to observe elections in Africa. We can do that without spending taxpayer money. Halfway through a bowl of the Organic Gorilla Munch that my children like, having read the ecological propaganda for young minds on the back of the cereal box, I turned back to the newspaper and found that it had another nugget on page one. Next to the piece about the Group of Eight meeting in Genoa, Italy, from which sound bites about global warming and African rescue had been extracted, there was a local story. The headline on the homegrown piece said Moving out of the countyâs way, and the accompanying photo showed a woman at a bakery counter serving a doughnut to an unseen customer. Tribune reporter Rick Jackoway profiled small business owners whose popular doughnut shop is being razed to make room for a $40 million government center. The new building will consolidate offices for county employees who currently work in about 24,000 square feet of leased space throughout the downtown area. Unlike the doughnut shop owners, the government workers take scheduled coffee breaks twice a day. Pay no attention to the math behind the curtain, or you might wonder why it takes a 90,000 square-foot building to consolidate employees now working in 24,000 square feet. The doomed doughnut shop sits in a prime location across the street from the county government center and on a high-visibility corner. The shop is owned by Meng (Bob) Gau and his wife Sim, who fled the killing fields of Cambodia in 1978, spent two years in a Thai refugee camp, and came to America in 1981. The Gaus are now negotiating payment and relocation terms with the county, which according to the Tribune story offered to pay them less for their business than the Gaus themselves paid when they bought the shop 12 years ago. County government, meet world government. Is it any wonder that Lew Rockwellâs Thirty-Day Plan and Larry Elderâs Ten Steps to Fix America both envision drastic cuts in government size? Seeing the doughnut shop story next to the Kyoto story was like comparing before and after photographs in a testimonial for weight gain supplements. Yo! Limited government! Tired of having private citizens kick sand in your face just because they studied things like the Bill of Rights? Grow the state payroll enough and you can be the one doing the kicking, at
[CTRL] The State and Illusion
-Caveat Lector- I especially liked the part about schools and the state is equivalent to the country it rules. The State and Illusion by Gene Callahan A theme running through several recent pieces on both this site and other sites is that the state is sustained by illusion. I thought it might be useful to examine the notion of illusion more thoroughly, to deepen our understanding of what is indicated by this theme. What do we mean by illusion? Does this mean that the state is like a dream or a movie, that it is some sort of fantasy? Although this definition of illusion may pass muster in common usage, we need to be more precise. Dreams or fantasies are not inherently illusory. As Michael Oakeshott points out, every experience is real if we do not take it for more or less than it is. A dream is real: it is a real dream. Illusion arises when we take fact for non-fact or non-fact for fact. If I dream that I have sold my next book for a million dollars, I had a real experience. But, if I wake up the next day and try to start spending the money by purchasing things with my credit card, I am under an illusion. The dream money does not exist in the realm of fact, but the bills I subsequently will receive do! I have mistaken a non-fact for a fact. Belief is necessary for illusion to persist. While transitory illusions occur all the time â for instance, when someone mistakes a certain play of light and shadow for an animal â the nature of the world of facts is such that the truth tends to intrude and dispel the illusion. I might easily mistake a moving shadow for an animal. But if I attempt to live by eating these illusions, I will soon find myself very hungry. I can only maintain such an illusion if I adopt a belief that supports it, such as deciding that these shadows are spirit animals that vanish back into the spirit world upon my approach. Belief in illusion will occur when the believer is unwilling or unable to confront the facts of the situation. Someone who is fearful of his own death might find it easier to externalize that fear, seeing ghosts and spirits in the shadows, instead of his own mortality. Or consider a person who doesn't wish to give up some unfortunate practice, such as stealing from his employer. He may adopt a belief that he is owed the money he steals, and that his victim really stole it from him, by exploiting his labor. Illusion cannot be forced on anyone. Social pressure to go along with some illusion may be a powerful motivator, but ultimately a person must buy into the illusion-supporting belief on his own. Thinking is, as Mises points out, an action. All action is undertaken by individuals, and has the goal of replacing what is with what ought to be. Therefore, the person adopting an illusory belief must feel he is better off having done so. All right, all right, you say, what has all this to do with the state? Well, I was getting to that, but since you're rushing me, I'll jump right into it. Here are just a few of the illusions that support the state: Public schools are necessary to socialize children. When my wife and I tell people that we intend to home school our children, this is the most frequent comment we hear. People are willing to believe that we can handle the instructional tasks of the schools, but what about socialization? This is clearly a non-fact taken as a fact. The non-fact seems to originate chiefly from the teacher's unions. A little examination shows how fragile this particular illusion is. Institutional schooling has only been widespread in the last 150 years. Before that, we had three or four million years of human history during which, by some means, children managed to become socialized. Furthermore, we have strong theoretical and empirical reasons to believe that the public schools de-socialize rather than socialize children. Where were the pre-modern Columbines, where adolescents simply go bonkers and wipe out large numbers of people at random? The public schools are so many thousand experiments in duplicating the scenario of The Lord of the Flies. The state must exist in order to provide us with security. But the state has been the main threat to the life of its own citizens, let alone the lives of citizens of other states, during most of the twentieth century. Hans-Hermann Hoppe has brilliantly outlined how security against war and invasion can be better provided privately than by the state. Daniel McCarthy notes that traditional law enforcement often was performed by private citizens. As governments have seized this role, disorder and lack of security have become the rule. The state is equivalent to the country it rules. Recently, in response to a column from Benjamin Kepple in Front Page Magazine, A Real American wrote in that: It is long past due that someone exposed the Libertarians for the traitors that they are. By talking about secession, anarchy, and so on, we are betraying our neighbors, friends, and family â our community and
Re: [CTRL] Global warming?
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/24/01 6:36:35 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The above problem could be easily solved by implementing a sane, rational use of technology and natural resources. The sun is the most plentiful source of energy on this planet. Converting the rays of the sun to heat water to run steam generators could provide the US with enough electricity to free us from the hold the Arabs have on us with their oil as well as the oil industry in the States. We have room for these plants in California, New Mexico, Texas, Nevada, eastern Colorado, North South Dakota, Oklahoma, parts of Iowa, Nebraska, and Wyoming. Sunlight can also be converted directly to electricity. With nearly free energy water can be purified and salt water from the oceans could be used to irrigate farms and cancel drought conditions. How much free energy would we have now if we spent the money on solar energy instead of the oil depletion allowance for the filthy rich oilmen? What if we spent the money on solar energy instead of War ... we would all be receiving nearly free electricity and water right now. Pollution would be cut by a hell of a lot, not to mention that with abundant cheap energy we could also run vehicles with oxygen and hydrogen as the fuel which has no pollution. This can happen if everyone fights the oil interests. NOT one based on a wasteful economic system like Capitalist Free Markets. Free markets do not exist today because of government. Government created corporations. Capitalism and free markets cannot exist with government created controls such as NAFTA and GATT as well as thousands of laws and regulations that cancel any chance at a free market. The blame lies with government, not capitalism. Communism will be the same except that the communists will have government completely own and control corporations making you a slave with almost no hope of getting out from under the iron boot of government. Or one based on carbon fuels which only benefit the scumbags who currently ' OWN ' profit producing shares in the fossil fuel industry. SCUMBAGS is too nice of a description for those who currently hold us hostage and have an inordinate voice in government. If government was smaller they would have less control over our lives. The power of government should be kept at a local and State level rather than the Federal government stealing power from the people and disregarding the tenth amendment. Regards, Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Heading the World
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/20/01 7:16:37 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: something real bad is going to happen in the political and social arena in the near future. The day when people were willing to politely and silently starve to death while their betters gorged themselves inside fortified compounds is gone. Unless we address this imbalance, we're likely to find ourselves in the middle of something that will make the French Revolution look like a pacifists convention. Surely the government already knows this and they don't want to pay the price of their meddling in our lives both socially and economically. It worries me that all presidents have moved closer to the UN and that the government is constantly growing. It bothers me that government is demonizing gun owners and slowly chipping away at the second amendment as well as massively overstepping boundaries set by the tenth amendment. I also wonder why the Red Chinese have been given a port at Long Beach and why there are so many Russian and German soldiers in Texas. Perhaps the government has already figured how to stop something bigger than the French Revolution. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Liberty Committee
-Caveat Lector- Meet the Liberty Committee Current, former members of Congress, citizens join forces -- -- By Julie Foster © 2001 WorldNetDaily.com A group dedicated to the Declaration of Independence clause that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, has grown to include more than 60,000 citizen activists in its two short years of existence. Based in Falls Church, Va., the Liberty Committee brings together members of Congress and American citizens in a grass-roots effort to reduce the size and scope of government. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, is honorary chair of the group, which partners with the congressional Liberty Caucus. The latter boasts both current and former congressional representatives as its members, while the former is made of ordinary citizens. The Liberty Committee has seen tremendous growth since it was founded concurrently with the congressional Liberty Caucus. During the last two years, Liberty Committee activists and Liberty Caucus members joined forces to defend and advance liberty by being actively involved in our national legislative process. Executive orders, national sovereignty, and privacy were the issues that called for our greatest efforts during these last two years. I am pleased to tell you that our efforts met with success, wrote Paul in an open letter to current and prospective Liberty Committee members. From the Liberty Committee's website, members have the opportunity to keep abreast of current legislative proposals key to the cause of liberty. They can also electronically sign and send letters to representatives, lobbying their causes. This year, those causes included the repeal of the 16th Amendment, which authorized income taxes in 1913. Members are also advocating a repeal of withholdings taxes. If successful, employers will no longer be required to confiscate taxes from employees' paychecks and route the funds to the IRS. Citizens would have to pay their total tax liability without intervention by employers â a move that would create renewed awareness of dollar amounts individuals pay to their government, proponents say. Liberty Committee members are also asking President George W. Bush to rescind the signature of the United States of America to the International Criminal Court Treaty that former President Clinton authorized on December 31, 2000. The ICC has been ratified by 36 countries so far. Once 60 countries have ratified the treaty creating the court, the new judicial body will formally be established. Clinton claimed he signed the treaty to ensure the United States is included in formation of the court's procedures. But Republican leadership in Congress has vowed not to ratify the treaty, however, should Bush submit the proposal for legislators' consideration. In response to growing worldwide support for the ICC â Canada ratified the treaty last July â and to the increasing role of the United Nations in American policy, Liberty Committee members have banded together to support H.R. 1146, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. The bill would withdraw the United States from the United Nations and prohibit U.S. armed forces from serving under U.N. command. Liberty Committee Executive Director Kent Snyder summed up the phenomenon that drives the group in a letter he wrote Wednesday. One thing politicians will fight to keep is power, whether that power is stolen from the people or not. As long as the people are asleep, politicians get away with their illicit power grabs. One power grab leads to another, and too soon, the people are without liberty because piece by piece, they let their political power slip away, he wrote Wednesday. The letter continues with an explanation of the constitutional limits of campaign-finance reform measures. Paul believes opponents to proposals such as the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform measure are correct when they say such measures are unconstitutional. The bills violate the First Amendment, says Snyder, making them illegal. The Constitution specifically does not give to representatives and senators the power to make laws affecting campaigns so they cannot control the outcome of their own re-elections (and for good reason!). But how many Washington politicians will stand on the floor of the House or Senate and admit the truth ... that the only power they have is that limited, specific power granted by the Constitution? he wrote. In addition to the Liberty Committee's congressional membership, the group's senior legal adviser is attorney Herb Titus, who holds a Harvard law degree. Titus taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for nearly 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also served as the founding dean of the College of Law and Government at Regent University in Virginia.
[CTRL] Fwd: AFL-CIO and Sierra Agree: ALL CALL TOMORROW
Forwarded Message: Subj: AFL-CIO and Sierra Agree: ALL CALL TOMORROW Date: 7/16/01 1:33:13 PM Mountain Daylight Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Dolan) Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Action-LA List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (BA-FairTrade List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FT-Labor List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FTAA List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ftaacollab LIST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Labor2K List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Org List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stop-FTAA List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tradefield List), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (TW List) The AFL-CIO paid for your toll-free call to your congress member. 1-800-393-1082 It works! It's easy! July 17th: all-call day to STOP Fast Track *** July 17th: all-call day to STOP Fast Track ** July 17th: all-call day to STOP Fast Track ** July 17th: all-call day to STOP Fast TrackMake sure YOUR Member of Congress hears the message loud clear: trade deals like NAFTA and the WTO have hurt workers, the environment, consumers, family farmers and must be stopped! On Tuesday July 17th call Congress at 1800-393-1082 and tell your Representative to oppose Fast Track. Then get all your friends and family to do the same. If everybody does this one simple thing, we can beat Fast Track.=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=The AFL-CIO and their various international unions are part of a massive campaign against Fast Track all over the U.S., united with environmentalists, consumer advocates, family farmers and students to name a few. This is the coalition that defeated Fast Track in 1997, the Multilateral Agreement on Investment in 1998 and the launch of a new round of multilateral trade talks at the World Trade Organization's Ministerial meeting in Seattle in 1999. Now it's time to gear up for another win in 2001 - we must kill Fast Track! Fast Track could come up for a vote before August Recess. The GOP House leadership has introduced H.R. 2149, a Fast Track which does not address the need to include strong enforceable provisions on labor or the environment in trade and investment agreements. They have teamed up with the corporate lobby group US Trade and are actively lobbying Members of Congress on Capitol Hill and around the country. Of course they have lots of money to spend, something we do not - BUT we have the workers, family farmers, environmentalists, consumers, fair trade activists, students, people of faith and YOU to help us defeat this retrograde trade legislation.We are happy to join the AFL-CIO in their call for a national all-call day on Congress on July 17th, and urge you to mark your calendar for this important opportunity to tell your Member of Congress to stand up for working families and the environment by saying NO to Fast Track. Tell your Representative that labor and environmental provisions MUST be included in the core text of any trade agreement, and have the same kind of enforcement mechanisms as commercial provisions.You can find more information ways to take action against Fast Track on our web-page: http://www.tradewatch.org/FastTrack/fastrac.htm, as well as on the AFL-CIO's Fast Track: http://www.aflcio.org/globaleconomy/index.htm Share this alert with friends family!=-=-=-=-=-! =-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Working Families e-Activist Network-- www.aflcio.org Stop Fast Track---Don't Export More Jobs!Your action is needed now to derail Fast Track. President George W. Bush and giant corporations want a special bill that will let them rush trade agreements through Congress with no changes and minimal review.If Congress gives Bush Fast Track, we'll see:+ More and faster trade deals like NAFTA,+ More U.S. job losses and smaller wages,+ More attacks on workers' rights across the globe,+ And more devastating pollution of our air and water.You can help stop Fast Track in its tracks. Congress is expected to decide in July on giving President Bush Fast Track trade negotiating authority.Here is what you can do.Call your members of Congress on Tuesday, July 17---the Fast Tracke-Activist National Call-in Day.Call them toll-free at 1-800-393-1082.Tell your members of Congress: Working families need fair and balancedtrade that protects people and the environment---NOT Fast Track.Forward this message to friends, family and co-workers who might beinterested. You can start calling Congress today, but remember to call on Tuesday, July 17.*** Stop Fast Track Call-In Day,this Tuesday, July 17Urgent Action AlertSierra Club's Responsible Trade ProgramPresident Bush wants Congress to give him fast track trade authority toexpand environmentally destructive trade deals such as NAFTA to morecountries. The Sierra Club is joining with the AFL-CIO to declare Tuesday,July 17 a Stop Fast Track Call-In Day to the US House of Representatives.Fast Track
[CTRL] Fwd: How to Stop Bush Amnesty of 3 Million Illegal Aliens
This is a waste of taxpayer money and I'm a taxpayer. I'm tired of paying for their welfare, for their hospitalization, for their children's education etc. These people are criminals entering this country illegally why should they be rewarded for their lack of respect for our laws? If they have another amnesty it will encourage more Mexicans to cross the border illegally and they will expect another amnesty. Tito Forwarded Message: Subj: How to Stop Bush Amnesty of 3 Million Illegal Aliens Date: 7/17/01 8:13:15 AM Mountain Daylight Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CitizensLobby.com) == AN URGENT MESSAGE from www.CitizensLobby.com http://www.CitizensLobby.com July 17, 2001 == (Washington, DC) President Bush is about to grant amnesty to over 3 million illegal criminal aliens. A recent report by Mr. Bush's own officials at the State and Justice Departments has recommended that he approve eventual citizenship to millions of mostly Mexican illegal immigrants. Where is the compassionate conservatism for American citizens whose tax dollars line the pockets of these border-runners, lawbreakers and thieves? After 8 years of Clintonism, Bush may seem right on many issues, but he is wrong on immigration! Our President is about to squash our dignity and rights as American citizens in order to pander to the anti-American agenda of Mexican President Vicente Fox, and to the liberal Democrats in Congress. Did the President and his strategists forget that Al Gore's and Bill Clinton's Citizenship USA program in 1996, which registered over 1.2 million illegal aliens to vote, allowed the vast majority of their fraudulent ballots in 2000 to be cast for liberal Democrats? Help stop this amnesty, and help President Bush understand the virtues of American citizenship. Please join CitizensLobby.com in taking the following grass-roots action: #1 Tell President Bush to reject this illegal alien scheme. Call (800) 303-8332 or (202) 456-1414; Fax: (202) 456-2461; Write: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can also call Timothy Goeglein, WH Public Liaison, at (202) 456-2930, and Karl Rove, chief strategist, at (202) 456-5587. These gentlemen give Bush pillow talk on this issue. #2 Tell Congress to oppose this measure. The Bush plan may eventually encompass an even more radical amnesty proposed by Rep. Luis Gutierrez (H.R. 500), which could grant amnesty to as many as 10 million illegal aliens! Contact your Congressman and tell him to oppose the Bush plan and H.R. 500. Call the congressional switchboard at (800) 648-3516 or (877) 762-8762 or go to http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html . In the Senate, lackey Phil Gramm is pushing for an expansion of a guest worker program, an equally miserable measure that will still grant amnesty to millions of illegal criminal aliens. Contact your Senators at http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm . #3 Visit http://www.CitizensLobby.com and sign our Petition on immigration http://www.citizenslobby.com/petitions.htm#immigration . We will make your voice heard on Capitol Hill and deliver your petition to the House and Senate Judiciary subcommittees on immigration. Help take America back. This is our country. Our rights should not be trampled and demeaned by illegal aliens. Our tax dollars should not fund criminal lawbreaking. If an amnesty does take hold, this will only lead to a greater invasion of illegal immigrants. Please take a stand today. I thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Scott A. Lauf Executive Director, CitizensLobby.com # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # == AN URGENT MESSAGE from www.CitizensLobby.com http://www.CitizensLobby.com July 17, 2001 == (Washington, DC) President Bush is about to grant amnesty to over 3 million illegal criminal aliens. A recent report by Mr. Bushs own officials at the State and Justice Departments has recommended that he approve eventual citizenship to millions of mostly Mexican illegal immigrants. Where is the compassionate conservatism for American citizens whose tax dollars line the pockets of these border-runners, lawbreakers and thieves? After 8 years of Clintonism, Bush may seem right on many issues, but he is wrong on immigration! Our President is about to squash our dignity and rights as American citizens in order to pander to the anti-American agenda of Mexican President Vicente Fox, and to the liberal Democrats in Congress. Did the President and his strategists forget that Al Gores and Bill Clintons Citizenship USA program in 1996, which registered over 1.2 million illegal aliens to vote, allowed the vast majority of their fraudulent ballots in 2000 to be cast for liberal Democrats?
Re: [CTRL] CNN Time Warner AOL Conspiracy
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/16/01 4:17:32 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Something smells fishy, or perhaps AOHellishly-sulfurous. (They never report alternatives such as WinMx a very viable peer to peer exchange network which I have personally used many times and which in my experience works better than Napster ever did, even though this would no doubt be of interest to AOLers as well as others on the Internet. But that would not be $ufficiently profitable.) I downloaded WinMx the other day, but haven't had time to use it much. I've been using AudioGalaxy.com which worked really good a couple of months ago, but now is much slower since many members have joined. A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] ACLU
-Caveat Lector- In the Name of Civil Liberties by Joseph Sobran The American Civil Liberties Union has been in business so long that itâs a miracle that we have any civil liberties left. Though revered by the media as the watchdog of the Bill of Rights, the ACLU has always been devoted to the destruction of the Constitution. And still is. Just the other day, the ACLUâs Hawaii branch scrapped plans to invite Justice Clarence Thomas to speak. One ACLU board member compared Thomas to Hitler and called him an anti-Christ. Such vilification recalls the ACLUâs origins as a fellow-traveling pro-Soviet organization, when ideological enemies were slandered in the roundest terms, fascist being a favorite epithet. Itâs telling that Thomas is likened to Hitler rather than Stalin: during the 1930s, the ACLU was full of Stalinists, even on its national board. It reluctantly removed some of them when Stalin made his shocking pact with Hitler in 1939. It later apologized for purging itself of such flagrant apostles of totalitarianism, but it has never explained how men like William Z. Foster, Americaâs leading Communist, could be working for Joe Stalin and the Bill of Rights at the same time. Cynics like Foster were prating about constitutional rights in America, knowing that in Russia, meanwhile, Stalin was torturing and murdering millions who enjoyed no civil liberties or legal protections whatsoever. As Eugene Lyons wrote in his 1941 book The Red Decade: The presence of Stalinâs henchmen on an American organization of this type was an irony that no amount of sophistry could erase. Itâs only ironic if youâre naive enough to assume that the ACLU has anything to do with liberty. But the Reds and their fellow-travelers specialized in appropriating venerable words for their causes and front groups, which were always liberal, progressive, democratic, and the like. One outfit of American volunteers who fought for Stalin in the Spanish Civil War was called the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. The old words and symbols were used to fool the public, while the leftists were fighting for the very opposite of their professed aims. Today the ACLU is laboring to force the Boy Scouts of America to accept homosexual scoutmasters. What happened to the freedom of association, which the ACLU has always claimed for Communists? Isnât Scouting a valid alternative lifestyle? Arenât private organizations allowed to set their own standards and live by their own rules? And shouldnât a group devoted to civil liberties be fighting against state coercion, rather than for it? Communism as we once knew it is gone, but not the sort of people who supported it while it lasted. And they still use the same old semantic tricks, such as using phrases like civil liberties and civil rights while fighting for abridgments of liberty and individual rights. Though its name appeals to our desire for limited government, the ACLU really stands for enlarged government power. Always has, and always will. It hates Clarence Thomas because he sincerely favors what the ACLU itself only pretends to favor: strictly constitutional government. The hypocrite recognizes the honest man as his deadly enemy. And leftists have always used the coarsest smear tactics against their enemies. Even though Stalin is no longer around to supervise the vilification campaigns, that hasnât changed either. Political libel is an abiding legacy of the Red Decade. Of course the ACLU has no obligation to welcome Thomas, but then the Boy Scouts have no obligation to welcome homosexuals. This is so basic you wonder why thereâs any argument about it. But the Stalinist impulse to subjugate every free institution remains; it neither began nor died with Stalin. We can be grateful that the crudity of the Red Decade is long past, with its brutal one-man tyranny backed by adulating hordes of willing servitors. But today we face a more bland, refined, and subtle version of the desire for an all-powerful state, in which every institution is politicized. Using lawyers rather than firing squads, leftist groups like the ACLU have perfected their techniques. The size and scope of government power are still increasing, under both Republican and Democratic rule. If the Scouts can be forced to take on homosexual scoutmasters, why shouldnât churches and synagogues be told what kind of clergy they may have? Will the ACLU draw the line at imposing civil liberties on religious institutions? Why should it? July 13, 2001 Joe Sobran is a nationally syndicated columnist. He also writes Washington Watch for The Wanderer, a weekly Catholic newspaper, and edits SOBRAN'S, a monthly newsletter of his essays and columns. Get a free copy of Joe Sobran's lecture, How Tyranny Came to America by subscribing to SOBRAN'S. See www.sobran.com for details. For a free sample of SOBRAN'S or for more information, call 800-513-5053. A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER
[CTRL] Check out Social Security
-Caveat Lector- A HREF=http://www.justfacts.com/socialsecurity.htm;Click here: Social Security/A From justfacts.com Interesting reading A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] [Fwd: re: UTAH town says, No to U.N.!]
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/5/01 6:36:00 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Real Americans don't wear U.N. blue! Pass it on. Daniel New (Texas) __ Let's hope and work to make this spark become a forest fire. Nakano (Texas) Count me in. My coucilman will receive some info on this by Tuesday morning. TitoColorado A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Fwd: Poor United Nations! Gunowners get under the UN's skin!
Forwarded Message: Subj: Poor United Nations! Gunowners get under the UN's skin! Date: 7/5/01 7:15:16 PM Mountain Daylight Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas) Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas) To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gun_Owners_Alliance_Alert) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE !!ALERT!! Chris W. Stark - Director P.O. Box 1924 Crosby, Texas 77532-1924 Ph. 1-281-328-3305 Fax 1-810-283-7459 http://www.GOA-Texas.org email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05 July 2001 ++ Poor United Nations! Gunowners get under the UN's skin! Copyright © 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas). Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original state. + Poor United Nations. Those terrible American Gun Owners should NEVER tell the UN the truth as they have, of late! After you read the article below my comments, BE SURE to e-mail the UN at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Let them know that IF the United Nations was serious about preventing and stopping genocide, they would certainly advocate the unrestricted private ownership of firearms for the law abiding. The evil downside of gun control is GENOCIDE! Let them read: http://www.goa-texas.org/kopel.htm http://www.goa-texas.org/racism.htm FLOOD THEIR E-MAIL BOX! FLOOD THEIR E-MAIL BOX! With Respect, Gun Owners Alliance Chris W. Stark - Director *** http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAFR56XSOC.html U.N. Investigating Whether E-Mails From U.S. Gun Enthusiasts a Security Threat By Edith M. Lederer Associated Press Writer Published: Jul 5, 2001 UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The United Nations is investigating whether irate letters and e-mails it has received from American gun enthusiasts protesting an upcoming conference on the illicit trade in small arms constitutes a security threat. The world body has received about 100 complaints from Americans who erroneously believe the conference seeks to infringe on their right to bear arms, U.N. Undersecretary-General for Disarmament Jayantha Dhanapala said Thursday. The gun-rights enthusiasts did not threaten physical harm to any U.N. official but their protests were strongly worded and were turned over to U.N. security experts, Dhanapala said. What concerned me was that there was a widespread campaign, he said. It's essentially a U.S.-based phenomenon. The letters and e-mails started arriving in recent weeks, some signed and some anonymous, alleging that the U.N. is attempting to take away guns from people, in conflict with the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens, Dhanapala told a news conference. I did not get the impression that they have been orchestrated. They are differently worded, but clearly they all labor under the same misapprehension about the conference, he said. Dhanapala's office released a pamphlet called Setting the Record Straight to address the misconceptions they contained and explain what the conference hopes to achieve. The focus of the conference is on illicit trade in small arms, not the legal trade, manufacture or ownership of weapons, the pamphlet stressed. The U.N. conference will have no effect on the rights of civilians to legally own and bear arms. Delegates are expected to adopt a program of action, which is not legally binding, to curb and ultimately eliminate illegal trafficking in assault rifles and other small arms and light weapons that have become the weapons of choice in many internal conflicts around the world. About a dozen gun-rights groups, including the U.S. National Rifle Association, are among the 177 non-governmental organizations accredited to attend the two-week conference which begins Monday. Dhanapala said these groups will be able to attend all public meetings and will choose several representatives to make statements at one official conference session. U.N. conventional arms expert Joao Honwana, a top conference official, said it wasn't up to the U.N. Department for Disarmament Affairs to judge whether the e-mails and letters constituted a threat. The objective of turning these e-mail and communications to the U.N. security was precisely to allow them to assess them from a perspective of threat to the organization of the conference and take whatever necessary measures they found appropriate, which is what they are doing, he said. They analyze those communications, and I'm sure that they will contact with the appropriate institutions in this country
[CTRL] Fwd: NRA - Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!)
Many people have begun to catch on to the idea that the NRA is not protecting the rights of gun owners ... they merely give that impression to the uninformed by compromising our gun owning rights. Compromise is what the fabian socialists want, a little bit of your rights at a time until you have no rights at all. Let us not forget there are fabian fascists also, they are both on the same team: the Republicans and the Democrats. Tito Forwarded Message: Subj: NRA - Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!) Date: 6/25/01 8:49:24 PM Mountain Daylight Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas) Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas) To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gun_Owners_Alliance_Alert) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE !!ALERT!! Chris W. Stark - Director P.O. Box 1924 Crosby, Texas 77532-1924 Ph. 1-281-328-3305 Fax 1-810-283-7459 http://www.GOA-Texas.org email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 25 June 2001 ++ NRA - Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!) Copyright © 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas). Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original state. + According to Vol. 5, No. 40, NRA-ILA FAX ALERT of 10/9/98: On Thursday, Mr. LaPierre, announced the appointment of James Jay Baker to the position of Executive Director of NRA-ILA, effective immediately. Jim Baker is a staunch defender of Second Amendment freedoms with a strong NRA background, LaPierre said. He has served NRA in the past as an expert in federal elections law, as Director of our Federal Affairs Division, and, until 1994, as Executive Director of the Institute for Legislative Action. NRA members know Jim Baker, and they know the fight for their rights is in capable hands. The appointment marks a return for Baker to the position he held from 1991 to 1994. Jim Baker returns to the NRA with an incredible wealth of experience and expertise as an aggressive defender of our Second Amendment freedoms. He has an exemplary reputation on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures, and Jim is highly regarded by the nearly three million NRA members and the nation's firearms owning community. Jim Baker is a hunter, a firearms expert and a skilled legislative strategist. Our members have full confidence that the fight for their rights is in capable hands. Jim Baker is not the friend of Gun Owners, THAT IS, if you believe that the Brady Bill and the Instant Check is the Trojan Horse of the Pro-Gun Community. Read on: As the noted writer and attorney David Kopel has written in an Independence Institute monograph on waiting periods: Significantly, the instant check is subject to the same problem of creating a gun and gun-owner registration system as is a waiting period. As the [1989 Justice Department] Task Force observes, Any system that requires a criminal history record check prior to purchase of a firearm creates the potential for the automated tracking of individuals who seek to purchase firearms. Go to http://www.goa-texas.org/Horse.htm for more on the dangers of the Instant Check system. Even now, the FBI illegally maintains a LIST of firearms owner purchasers for several months, if not indefinite. But who passed this Trojan Horse through? In part, we can thank Mr. Jim Baker, which now is the NRA-ILA's Executive Director and Chief Lobbyist. Read on: Starting in 1989, the NRA, under Warren Cassidy, has chosen to fight gun control with . . . national computerized gun control. Jim Baker of the NRA was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 (P. 7A) as saying: We already support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which is what we want. And even before the voting started, Jim Baker was conceding defeat. Readers of the Tuesday, November 16 issue of USA Today learned this: It doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference whether the Brady bill is voted on separately or as part of the crime package, says NRA lobbyist Jim Baker. Whether it's before Thanksgiving or when they get back in January (the Brady bill) is going to happen. Imagine getting ready for a championship game and your coach tells you your side is beaten before you've taken the field. Would you give your best effort? The NRA through Jim Baker, was publicly conceding defeat even before the first vote was taken on
[CTRL] The Seven Myths of Gun Control Part 1
-Caveat Lector- The Seven Myths of Gun Control By Richard Poe Introduction The March Toward Gun Abolition The Seven Myths of Gun Control | July 2001 FOR FOURTEEN-YEAR-OLD JESSICA CARPENTER, the morning of August 23, 2000 began like any other. Her father had left for work. Her mother had taken the car to get the brakes checked. Jessica had been left in charge, to look after the four other children, Anna, 13; Vanessa, 11; Ashley, 9; and John, 7. Although the day started normally, it was not destined to end that way. It would turn out to be the most terrifying day of Jessicaâs life. Shortly after her mother left, Jessica heard noises from the livingroom. It sounded as if someone were moving furniture around. Still half asleep, Jessica assumed that it must be her mother. But it wasnât. She heard the phone ring down the hall and someone answered it. I wonder what time it is, thought Jessica sleepily. Her grandmother was coming at nine to pick them up. She rose from bed and went to the kitchen, where the clock on the range showed that it was already after 9. Better wake up the others, Jessica thought. Then she noticed something strange. The sliding glass door in the livingroom had been blocked with furniture. The shades were shut, leaving the house in gloom. Why would her mother do that? Jessica froze. A sudden chill gripped her stomach. At first, she did not want to believe what she was seeing. But she could not deny the evidence of her own eyes. There was a man in the livingroom. A strange man. He was stark naked, and appeared to be trying to pull on his shorts. Something Dreadful Hey! the man shouted. Startled and embarrassed, Jessica fled back to her bedroom and locked the door. Her mind raced, seeking a reasonable explanation for what she had seen. Perhaps the man was a friend whom her father had invited over to the house to change clothes, she thought. But then why had he been moving furniture around, blocking the door? Jessicaâs heart sank as she slowly came to grips with the fact that something dreadful was happening. A knock came at her bedroom door. Who is it? said Jessica. No one answered. The knock came again. And again. Jessica, knowing that her mother had a cell phone, picked up the phone to try to call her. But there was no dial tone. When Jessicaâs grandmother had called earlier, the intruder had lifted the receiver and left it off the hook. Safe Storage Cold terror began to seep into Jessicaâs bones. She wished that she had a gun. Her father had taught Jessica and the other children to shoot. Jessica had passed her hunter safety course and received her certificate at age 12. She knew that her Dad always kept a .357 Magnum in his bedroom. In deference to Californiaâs safe storage laws, however, Mr. Carpenter kept the pistol high up on a closet shelf, unloaded and out of reach of the children. Even if she could somehow get to the other end of the house to retrieve it, Jessica knew she would have to climb up on something to reach the gun, scramble around for the bullets and then load them. The man would be on her before she had a chance. Mr. Carpenter had always taught the children that if there were an emergency, such as a fire in the house, they should open a window, push out the screen and climb outside. She proceeded to do that. From another part of the house, Jessica heard a cry that sounded like one of her sisters. But she put it out of her mind. I knew I shouldn't go to investigate and I should go and get the police, Jessica later told reporters. She slipped out the window and set off barefoot across an open field, cutting her feet as she ran. A Spooky Man The intruder was 27-year-old Jonathon David Bruce. The Carpenter family did not know him, but he lived in their small town of Merced, California, where he worked as a part-time telemarketer. Bruceâs strange behavior had long worried his neighbors. He slept all day, emerging only at night. He was spooky, said neighbor Dawn Carter. He would walk up and down the sidewalks talking to himself. Talking to the trees. He did a lot of wandering. Bruce hated children. Neighbors had begun keeping their kids indoors when he was around. He yelled about the children mostly, recalls Ray Adams, a neighbor. He didnât like kids. And any little noise bothered him. The police were frequent visitors to Bruceâs house. He had spent a week in jail for resisting arrest, assaulting an officer and being under the influence of methamphetamine. Bruceâs live-in girlfriend had left him several months before, with her two sons, ages 4 and 5. After that, he just sort of went downhill, said Adams. Bruce was evicted from his duplex apartment in August, just before he broke into the Carpenter home. To this day, no one knows why he picked on the Carpenters. We only know that, on the morning of August 23, Bruce armed himself with a pitchfork and entered their home, barricading himself inside with the five Carpenter
[CTRL] The Seven Myths of Gun Control Part 2
-Caveat Lector- Covered with blood and growing weaker by the moment, the wounded Anna pleaded with Fuentes to get his gun and take care of this guy. But he declined. Instead, he allowed them to use his phone to call 911. The sheriffâs deputies came quickly, but they arrived too late. John and Ashley were already dead. Seven-year-old John had been killed while he slept. When the deputies entered the house, the intruder charged them with his pitchfork. Whatever had made the man slow and awkward as he chased the girls down the hallway, it no longer seemed to affect him. Bruce sprang at the deputies, as swift and limber as a wild predator. They shot him 13 times, killing him on the spot. Censored Most people reading this book will never have heard of the Carpenter family or their ordeal. Unlike the school massacres and office shootings that seem to saturate network news coverage these days, the Carpenter tragedy received little national attention. I first learned of the event months after it occurred. Like most Americans, I did not see it on the evening news or read about it in my daily newspaper. Instead, I heard Professor John Lott, the Yale economist who wrote the book More Guns, Less Crime, discussing the case on the Sean Hannity radio show on WABC in New York. Prof. Lott argued that the case revealed the fallacy of safe storage laws. By forcing people to keep their guns unloaded and out of childrenâs reach, he said, the law prevents both children and adults from using firearms to defend themselves. The Carpenter story made this clear. But most Americans never heard the message, said Lott, because all mention of guns and gun laws had been surgically removed from the story by the newswires. Lott says that an early account of the bloodbath distributed by one news service mentioned that there were guns in the house, that the children were trained and ready to use them, and that the guns had been put out of reach, in order to comply with the law. But subsequent accounts failed to include this information. As a journalist, I was intrigued by Prof. Lottâs observation. I ran a Nexis search and discovered that, with the exception of two local news stories in the Fresno Bee and two opinion columns â one by well-known gun rights advocate Vyn Suprynowicz and another by Prof. Lott himself â no accounts of the incident remained in the public record that so much as mentioned the gun angle. No Heroes Allowed John Carpenterâs children are probably dead because John obeyed the laws of the state of California, says Reverend John Hilton, the great-uncle of the Carpenter children. In Hiltonâs view, the tragedy could have been prevented had the children been provided with easy access to a loaded gun. Many of Hiltonâs friends and neighbors quietly agree. Hilton â who is pastor of a pentecostal church in Merced â recalls that, when he was growing up, his father always kept a loaded Colt .45 in a holster fastened to the pantry wall. He was away a lot of the time, working on construction jobs, says Hilton. But he made sure that gun was available to us, if we needed it. Without even looking, you could reach over and get hold of the handle. In those days, it was common to let children use firearms. They learned to use them early, safely and responsibly. And there were no school shootings. Ever. Hilton, who is now 66 years old, says that he shot his first deer at age 7. By the time he was 10, he was proficient with the Colt .45 and capable of defending his family with it. Nowadays, Hiltonâs father would be putting himself at risk of imprisonment by giving children access to a loaded gun. California law imposes criminal penalties on gun owners if children are injured or injure others while using their guns. Technically, if Jessica or any of the other Carpenter children had managed to get hold of their fatherâs .357 Magnum and gun down the killer, their father could have faced criminal charges. It was for fear of the law that John Carpenter kept his gun unloaded and hidden on a high closet shelf. He's more afraid of the law than of somebody coming in for his family, Hilton told the Fresno Bee. Likewise, the neighbor who refused to intervene may well have hesitated out of fear or uncertainty about the law. In todayâs legal environment, heroism is not encouraged. The way to stay out of trouble is to sit back and wait for the police â even if innocent children are being slaughtered right next door. No Moral According to their mother, all of the surviving Carpenter children have vowed that they would have shot the killer if only they had had a gun handy. In fact, the wounded girl Anna told her father that, when she saw the man go after her sister Ashley, I could have shot him right in the back of the head. The childrenâs bravery and fighting spirit were not considered newsworthy. These elements were left out of the story by the wire services. Instead, the Carpentersâ ordeal was reduced
[CTRL] The Seven Myths of Gun Control Part 3
-Caveat Lector- Donât Blame Liberal Journalists Many are quick to blame liberal journalists for the anti-gun slant they see in the media. Perhaps they are too quick. It is undeniable that most journalists hold left-of-center views. A 1996 survey of working journalists by the Roper Center and the Freedom Forum showed that 89 percent had voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 (compared to only 43 percent of Americans overall who voted for Clinton). Only 4 percent of the journalists surveyed identified themselves as Republicans and only 2 percent as conservatives. Journalists clearly favor the left. Yet, their liberal opinions probably have less impact on the mediaâs gun coverage than most people assume. Rank-and-file journalists in large news organizations actually have little control over the political slant of their stories. It is management that decides how a network or newspaper will spin a particular issue. Ordinary journalists have little opportunity to vent their personal views. The New York Post, for example, is generally recognized to be a conservative paper. Yet, when I worked there in the mid-1980s, I found the newsroom filled with liberals. They grumbled constantly about the paperâs conservative slant. But they did as they were told, because it was company policy. Liberal news organizations are no different. Political bias comes from the top. Rank-and-file reporters simply follow orders. The anti-gun bias permeating our mass media comes, not from individual journalists, but from the owners and senior managers of multibillion-dollar media conglomerates. Donât Blame Liberal Politicians Either Liberal politicians are another favorite scapegoat of gun-rights advocates. But, in government, as in media, the forces promoting gun control appear to be larger than any party or faction. It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of assault weapons in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for sporting purposes. It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who, in 1967, signed the Mulford Act, which prohibited the carrying of firearms in public or in a vehicle. The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners. Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. I support the Brady Bill, he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay. One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration filed suit against 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000. In March of that same year, New York City police commissioner Howard Safir â presumably with Giulianiâs encouragement â put forth a nationwide plan for gun licensing, which would require owners to bring in their weapons once a year for safety inspections. The real purpose of the inspection, Safir admitted, was to keep tabs on guns and monitor whether or not they had been sold. Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called the nationâs strictest gun controls, a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and ballistic fingerprinting of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21, and imposed a ban on assault weapons, the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison. ''This is something the rest of the nation should take a look at,'' said Pataki. I hope this serves as a model. George W. Bush has kept a low profile regarding Patakiâs gun crackdown. But when the program was first announced in March 2000, a Bush spokesman said, The governor . . . wants to review it, but his initial response was positive. Journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon, back in 1969, what he thought about gun control. Guns are an abomination, Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles. Gun Abolition â The Real Goal Todayâs gun-control promoters seem to share a view of gun rights every bit as restrictive as that of Richard Nixon. The ongoing case of United States of America v. Timothy Joe Emerson has helped make this clear. In the midst of a bitter divorce fight, Dr. Emerson â a Texas physician â was hit with a restraining order from his wife. Unbeknownst to Dr. Emerson, federal law prohibits anyone under a restraining order from keeping a gun. He was arrested for unlawful possession of a firearm â even though he had legally owned the firearm in question for years. A federal judge dismissed the charges, partly on the grounds that they violated Emersonâs Second Amendment rights. But the U.S. Justice Department appealed. Arguing before a three-judge panel on June 13, 2000, Justice Department attorney William B.
[CTRL] Fwd: Thomas Jefferson Forever
Forwarded Message: Subj: Thomas Jefferson Forever Date: 7/3/01 9:40:27 PM Mountain Daylight Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas) Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas) To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gun_Owners_Alliance_Alert) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE !!ALERT!! Chris W. Stark - Director P.O. Box 1924 Crosby, Texas 77532-1924 Ph. 1-281-328-3305 Fax 1-810-283-7459 http://www.GOA-Texas.org email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03 July 2001 ++ Thomas Jefferson Forever Copyright © 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas). Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original state. + http://www.goa-texas.org/cgi-bin/alerts/mb.pl?PN=18 By Dave Kopel The greatest writer of the early American republic, and the greatest exponent of natural rights and the dangers of government power was Thomas Jefferson. It is no wonder then, that Jefferson has been so aggressively vilified by the partisans of political correctness. Jefferson was likewise disdained by many in the 19th and early 20th century who, quite correctly, saw his ideas as an obstacle to the large national regime they wished to build. How sad it is to that the current occupant of the White House bears the middle name Jefferson -- even though the real Jefferson taught his nephew Peter Carr: Nothing is so mistaken as the supposition that a person is to extricate himself from a difficulty, by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming an untruth, by an injustice. It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. Thomas Jefferson would not be surprised at the degenerate character of the childish man who currently disgraces the Jefferson name. For There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual, he tells lies without attending to it. This falsehood of tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions. But this column is about another Jeffersonian virtue which William Jefferson Clinton has attempted to destroy: the virtue of arms, and all that it entails about the relationship between the people and their government. In the same 1785 letter to nephew Peter Carr (who was also Jefferson's ward), Jefferson advised the fifteen-year-old about building character through the shooting sports: A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore by the constant companion of your walks. Jefferson's views on the importance of arms for youth remained strong two decades later, as expressed in his 1818 Report of the Commissioners of the University of Virginia: the manual exercise, military maneuvers, and tactics generally, should be the frequent exercise of the students, in their hours of recreation. It might not have surprised Jefferson to learn that a people who never learned to hunt while growing up, and whose main connection with sports was watching them as passive spectators through a passive medium (television), might not develop the boldness and independence of mind to want real independence and responsibility in their own lives. Instead, they would prefer the comfortable servitude of a nanny state run by people like the Clintons. Of course the benefits of early training in arms extended to more than good character. As Jefferson pointed out to Giovanni Fabbroni in 1778, the Americans had a lower casualty rate than the Redcoats. This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy. Even so, Americans were not as well-armed as Jefferson wished. The only book Jefferson ever wrote was Notes on the State of Virginia (1782), in which he explained the arms shortage that had developed during the Revolutionary War: The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with arms usual in the regular service. But this injunction was always indifferently complied with, and the arms they had have been so frequently called to arm the regulars, that in the lower parts of the country they are entirely
[CTRL] Independence Day in Perspective
-Caveat Lector- Independence Day in Perspective by Thomas J. DiLorenzo To many Americans the Fourth of July is just another day off, a picnic, and some fireworks. It is my favorite holiday because, unlike so many Americans, I havenât forgotten what weâre celebrating: independence from tyrannical government. The July 4, 1776 Declaration of Independence, one of the defining documents of our nationâs existence, is better thought of as a Declaration of Secession, since the Revolutionary War that it started was a war of secession from the government of England. America was born with an act of secession which, until 1865, was considered to be one our most cherished freedoms. Perhaps the most famous section of the Declaration, authored by Thomas Jefferson, is the list of the train of abuses perpetrated by King George III on the colonists. This very same train of abuse was heaped upon the citizens of the Southern states from 1861 until the end of Reconstruction in 1877, and applies to some degree more or less universally today. Consider the words of the Declaration: He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected. Lincoln imposed military rule on those parts of the South that were conquered territory during the war, and the Southern states were governed by Republican party-appointed military dictatorships for twelve years after the war. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone. By suspending the writ of habeas corpus, ignoring U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taneyâs ruling that only Congress could constitutionally suspend habeas corpus, and threatening to prosecute state judges who permitted criminal prosecutions of federal government officials to go forward, Lincoln effectively trumped the judiciary. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. Myriad new bureaucracies were created to run the militarily-occupied states during and after the War for Southern Independence. General Benjamin Butler famously harassed the people of New Orleans by hanging a man for merely taking down a U.S. flag and declaring that any woman who did not display proper respect for federal soldiers would be considered a prostitute. Other military officers were just as harassing. Federal armies pillaged, plundered, and sacked their way through the southern states for four years, and Lincoln supported several confiscation bills that allowed them to plunder private property (but not slaves). He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures. The federal army occupied Maryland in 1861 so that the legislature (most of which was thrown into military prison) could not meet to discuss secession. The other border states were under military occupation for the duration of the war, as was the entire South for twelve years after the war. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power. By suspending habeas corpus, Lincoln ordered the military to arrest and imprison virtually all opposition newspaper editors, supported an indemnity act that prohibited state judges from allowing the prosecution of military officers for criminal acts, and effectively nationalized the judiciary at gunpoint. 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. Lincoln suspended constitutional liberty in the North for the duration of his presidency. He launched a military invasion without congressional consent; declared martial law; blockaded the Southern ports; suspended habeas corpus; imprisoned without trial thousands of Northern citizens for favoring peace over war; imprisoned newspaper publishers and editors who criticized him; censored all telegraph communication; nationalized the railroads; created several new states without the consent of the citizens of those states; ordered federal troops to interfere in elections by intimidating Democratic voters; deported an opposition member of Congress, Clement L. Vallandigham of Ohio; confiscated private property, including firearms; and essentially gutted the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. This was all indeed foreign to Thomas Jeffersonâs constitution. For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us. Federal troops were quartered in the border states and in various parts of the South during the war and the twelve years of Reconstruction. For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world. The Constitution prohibits blockades except for in wartime and against a foreign power. But Lincoln never conceded that the Southern states were a foreign power or the war as anything but a rebellion. For imposing
[CTRL] Bowdlerizing C.S.Lewis
-Caveat Lector- Bowdlerizing C.S. Lewis by Joseph Sobran During the Victorian era, the prevailing delicacy of the age inspired Dr. Thomas Bowdler and his sister to edit Shakespeareâs plays to make them suitable for family reading. All off-color jokes and sexual matter were removed. The word bowdlerize entered the language as a synonym for militant prudery. Today it appears that a new species of bowdlerization is afoot. It seems that HarperCollins has acquired the right to republish C.S. Lewisâs seven classic childrenâs books about the land of Narnia â and to edit out their Christian content. Apparently the idea is to reshape the stories on the model of the hugely successful (non-Christian) Harry Potter stories, and to market toys based on the Narnia characters, also on the Potter model. In a leaked HarperCollins memo, a corporation executive offers emphatic assurances that no attempt will be made to correlate the stories to Christian imagery/theology. Itâs almost unbelievable. De-Christianizing the works of one of the greatest Christian authors of the twentieth century? The Narnia stories owe their artistry and power to Lewisâs way of infusing the Christian message into simple tales about children and a lion named Aslan. The lion, an awesome and thrilling character, represents Christ. How Aslan can be suitably watered down for secularized family reading remains to be seen. Any such attempt is bound to destroy the point and energy of the Narnia books. You might as well try to edit God and Satan out of Paradise Lost. Usually we revere a great authorâs intentions and artistic integrity; but when it comes to Christianity, such considerations may be sacrificed to higher values, such as multiculturalism and â oh yes â money. Lewis would be outraged and sickened by this compromise of his work. Are the keepers of his estate willing to sell him out to the very secularist forces he fought with all his genius? Can they betray his trust so shamelessly? Maybe editing Aslan down to modern scale is a job for the Jesus Seminar, which is devoted to editing the Gospels by deleting any sayings that sound too Christian. One excellent reason for believing in Christ is that after 2,000 years he is still as troubling to the conscience as he was in his own time. If he can be reduced to a bland moral teacher, whose doctrine is indistinguishable from modern political platforms, he becomes much safer and easier to sell. Whole denominations are based on adapting Jesus to the Latest Thinking. Lewisâs fictional adaptation of Christ is another matter. Aslan is not a watered-down substitute for Christ, but a spiritually challenging figure who conveys, even to adult readers, some of the wonder of the Original. He seems to be more than the flesh of HarperCollins can bear. Lewis always insisted that a good childrenâs story canât be just a dumbed-down version of a story for adults. It has to be a good read for adults too. He liked the analogy of a string quartet, which uses fewer of the orchestraâs resources than the symphony, but is just as demanding in its own way. Children, in fact, are more apt than adults to stop reading a story when they find it dull. This respect for children made Lewis a great childrenâs author, as well as a great author for adults. I never read the Narnia stories until I was in my 20s, and I was overwhelmed by their inherent power. I still reread them, as I reread Lewisâs other works. They are all of a piece. The notion that any editor can improve Lewisâs works is a presumption worthy of the Bowdlers. But in an age that regards nothing as obscene, the energies of censorship are turned against unseemly expressions of Christianity. One wonders whether the unexpurgated Narnia stories will remain available. Perhaps there will be an adults-only edition? Aslanâs message to children (and adults) is a stern but loving one: You must change. This sets the Narnia stories apart from all the childrenâs books that are merely adventures, with merely external foes and monsters, however dangerous or malevolent or spooky. In Narnia, no enemy can truly threaten a child without the childâs spiritual cooperation. Has this profoundly Christian message been lost on the Lewis estate? July 4, 2001 Joe Sobran is a nationally syndicated columnist. He also writes Washington Watch for The Wanderer, a weekly Catholic newspaper, and edits SOBRAN'S, a monthly newsletter of his essays and columns. Get a free copy of Joe Sobran's lecture, How Tyranny Came to America by subscribing to SOBRAN'S. See www.sobran.com for details. For a free sample of SOBRAN'S or for more information, call 800-513-5053. Copyright (c) 2001 by Griffin Internet Syndicate. All rights reserved. Joseph Sobran Archives Back to LewRockwell.com Home Page A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are
[CTRL] Toward Real Federalism
-Caveat Lector- The Free Market August 1995 Volume 13, Number 8 Toward Real Federalism Clyde N. Wilson Just a few years ago we had a bicentennial celebration of the Constitution. Republicanism and federalism, the two most salient features of the Constitution, were never mentioned. Instead we had a glorification of multiculturalism and the central state. Federalism is one of the least understood, both theoretically and practically, of all political forms. Today we hear talk of restoring federalism and decentralized government. But we must beware of phony forms of top-down federalism that will be invented by cornered politicians. Federalism is not when the central government graciously allows the states to do this or that. That is just another form of administration. True federalism is when the people of the states set limits to the central government. Fundamentally, federalism means states rights. The cause of states rights is the cause of liberty. They rise or fall together. If we had been able to maintain the real union of sovereign states founded by our forefathers, then there would not be, could not be, the imperial central state that we suffer under today. The loss of states rights is coterminous with the rise of the American empire, where a vast proportion of the citizens' wealth is engrossed by bureaucracy; where our personal and local affairs are ever more minutely and inflexibly managed by a remote power; where our resources are squandered meddling in the affairs of distant peoples. That happy old Union was a friendly contract--the states managing their own affairs, joined together in matters of defense, and enjoying free trade among themselves. Indeed, enjoying free trade with the world, because the Constitution, as is sometimes forgotten, required all taxes to be uniform throughout the Union and absolutely forbade taxation of the exports of any state. The federal government was empowered to lay a modest customs duty to raise revenue for its limited tasks, but otherwise had no power to restrict or assist enterprises. That is what the States United meant to our Founders, a union of mutual consent and support. It did not mean a government that dictated the arrangement of every parking lot in every public and private building in every town, and the kind of grass that a citizen must plant around his boat dock. It did not mean the incineration of women and children who might have aroused the ire of a rogue federal police force, unknown to the Constitution and armed as for a foreign enemy. It did not mean that billions would be spent restoring oriental despots to their thrones in distant lands. Had George Washington been confronted with any of these things, he would have reached for his sword. We know the problems. Where should we look for solutions? Thomas Jefferson gives us the answer: our most ancient and best tradition, states rights. In his first inaugural Jefferson remarked that in most ways Americans were very happily situated, and then asked, What more is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens---a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits. This government shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread that it has earned. This is the sum of good government. But how to preserve this form of government? What should we do, or not do? Jefferson answered: preserve elections (not the party system), maintain equal justice under the law, rely on the militia, avoid debt, maintain the freedom of speech, religion, and trial by jury, avoid entangling alliances. And most important: the support of the state governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-republican tendencies. There is a large sophistical literature which tells us that states rights was for Jefferson just a temporary expedient for other goals. This is false. For his own generation and several following, it was understood that the state sovereignty of the Kentucky resolutions was Jefferson's primary platform as an American leader. John C. Calhoun, speaking in exactly the same tradition a generation later, said: We contend, that the great conservative principle of our system is in the people of the States, as parties to the Constitutional compact. Without a full practical recognition of the rights and sovereignty of the States, our union and liberty must perish. Why are states rights the last best bulwark of our liberties? It is a question of the sovereignty of the people---in which we all profess to believe. Every political community has a sovereign, an ultimate authority. The sovereign may delegate functions (as the states did to the federal government) though not alienate authority. It may not always rule from day to day, but it is that place in the society that has the last word
[CTRL] Did You Know That...
-Caveat Lector- Did You Know That⦠⢠Americans use guns in self-defense up to 3.6 million times each year? ⢠In 98 percent of those cases, the criminal flees at the mere sight of the gun? ⢠The criminal succeeds in taking the gun from his intended victim in only one percent of those cases? ⢠Studies have shown that the more guns honest citizens own, the lower the crime rate â with violent crime dropping about 4 percent for each 1 percent rise in gun ownership? ⢠The most dramatic reductions in crime have occurred in states passing laws that allow honest citizens to carry concealed weapons? ⢠You are far more likely to get mugged, raped, burglarized or shot in Americaâs big cities today â where gun laws are strict â than on the old western frontier, where virtually everyone carried a gun? ⢠During the frontier era, the combined murder rate in Dodge City, Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, and Caldwell â all wide-open cattle towns â was less than two murders per year for all five towns combined? ⢠Violent crime today is concentrated overwhelmingly among inner-city minorities â with African-Americans committing murder at 8 times the rate of whites? ⢠The rate of gun murders among white U.S. teenagers is roughly the same as among teenagers in Canada? ⢠The most heavily armed nation in the world, per capita, is Switzerland? ⢠Switzerland also has one of the lowest crime rates in the world? ⢠England and Australia both experienced dramatic increases in violent crime after confiscating guns from honest citizens? ⢠Australia and England were ranked the first and second worst countries in the industrialized world â in that order â in terms of violent crime, according to the February 2001 International Crime Victims Survey, released by Leiden University in Holland? ⢠The United States did not even make the top 10 list of Leiden Universityâs International Crime Victims Survey? Of course you didnât know these things. How could you? A recent study by the Media Research Center shows that television news stories calling for stricter gun laws outnumber those opposing such laws by a ratio of ten to one. When it comes to guns and gun laws, we are hearing only one side of the story. To hear the other side, read The Seven Myths of Gun Control by Richard Poe. Richard Poe is editor of David Horowitzâs Web site FrontPageMagazine.com and SlapHillary.com. Copyright © 2001 FrontPageMagazine.com A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Contradictions of Capitalism
-Caveat Lector- The Contradictions of Capitalism The Dearth of Rational Discussion by Jim Peron We canât win. We advocates of individual rights, free markets and limited government simply canât win the intellectual debate with the Left. And the reason for it is that there is no intellectual debate with them. And there canât be such a debate since the Left is simply not open to rational discussion. They know that capitalism is inherently evil and nothing that is said, no evidence that is presented, no facts that are marshaled will convince them otherwise. Fabians Consider this example. The Fabian socialists were founded in 1883, the same year that Karl Marx died, when a small group of âintellectualsâ gathered at 17 Osnaburgh Street in London to hear some lectures on the promised new world order of socialism. From this meeting was formed the Fabian Society, dedicated to the willfully slow evolution of a socialist society in England. The Society was named after the Roman general and dictator Quintus Fabius Maximus who fought, and laid the groundwork for the defeat of, Hannibal. In Fabian Tract No.1 the Society explained its strategy: âFor the right moment you must wait, as Fabius did most patiently when warring against Hannibal, though many censured his delays; but when the time comes you must strike hard, as Fabius did, or your waiting will be in vain and fruitless.â The credo of the Fabians said that the society âconsists of Socialistsâ who will work to destroy private property, free markets and individualism. Fabians were a strong, if not the strongest, influence on the British Labour Party and used the likes of George Bernard Shaw and Sidney and Beatrice Webb to spout its propaganda on the virtues of Stalinism and Soviet Communism. Its list of members read like the Whoâs Who of British intellectualism and included RH Tawney, GDH Cole, Harold Wilson, Harold Laski, Oswald Mosley (the founder of British fascism), Bertrand Russell, Clement Attlee, John Strachey, Stephen Spender, George Orwell, and others. For over a century the Fabian Society has continued to promote a Marxist agenda for the various countries of the world. At the turn of the last century the Fabians would wax eloquently on the virtues of socialism and the vices of capitalism. They never tired of telling anyone who would listen how capitalism would lead to poverty and misery for the bulk of England's workers. They promised that only a socialist, centrally planned society, could achieve wealth and prosperity. The workers, noted the socialists, could never find happiness and self-satisfaction as long as they were entrenched in the poverty of a capitalist economy. One hundred years later the Fabian Society stills exists. And not long ago, on BBC World, I watched a documentary series entitled âBig Ideasâ. It was billed as an antidote to the pessimism of the politically correct. In truth it was hardly that at all. Instead the entire show concentrated on an âeconomistâ who represents the Fabian Society. So what do the Fabians have to say 100 years later? Will they continue with their rhetoric of the last century and castigate capitalism for leading millions into poverty? Of course not. The laughter from the millions of âworkersâ viewing the show on their color televisions would drown out their rhetoric. Capitalism Causes Too Much Prosperity Instead this Fabian went on about how the wealth of capitalism doesnât lead to happiness. This âeconomistâ lamented the luxuries of the average worker. He ridiculed those who work hard to get ahead in the world. And he said that this problem was clearly the fault of capitalism. It seems that capitalism leads to prosperity. In fact it leads to too much prosperity. People start seeking out luxuries, and status symbol consumer goods, as a result. When it was pointed out to him that individuals who didnât want to work hard didnât have to do so, he was unpersuaded. The problem with the wealth of consumer capitalism is that the system itself forces people to compete. The individual who wants to drop out, perhaps to read the works of Marx, canât do so because of the structure of the system. He is a victim of capitalism. People should, instead, be free to concentrate on the âimportantâ things, by which he means things which he thinks are important. And, of course, the solution to this structural problem was the âsocial ownershipâ of the means of production. He wanted regulations and laws to prevent rampant competition and wealth-gathering. Now just about one century ago his forerunners in the Fabian Society were saying that capitalism leads to poverty and that only socialism can create wealth for the workers. Turning a blind eye to a century of rhetoric, todayâs Fabians are attacking capitalism for creating too much wealth. A century ago the worker, living in poverty, would never find happiness. Today the Fabians argue that happiness is illusive because
Re: [CTRL] Did You Know That...
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/4/01 9:04:22 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ââ¬Â¢ Studies have shown that the more guns honest citizens own, the lower the crime rate ââ¬â with violent crime dropping about 4 percent for each 1 percent rise in gun ownership? Who is an honest citizen? And who gets to make that judgment? No one. Instead, guns are available to all. Honest or not. Guns should not be legally available to known criminals. Known criminals are not honest citizens. ââ¬Â¢ The most dramatic reductions in crime have occurred in states passing laws that allow honest citizens to carry concealed weapons? Maybe yes, maybe no. Look at the facts, I'm sure they have been posted to this list before, but you as a gun confiscator do not believe facts, only the myths that say guns are bad. Do you live in a big city? Surely you were not raised in a less populated area where guns are more common. ââ¬Â¢ You are far more likely to get mugged, raped, burglarized or shot in Americaââ¬â¢s big cities today ââ¬â where gun laws are strict ââ¬â than on the old western frontier, where virtually everyone carried a gun? This is pure bullshit. It has nothing to do with gun laws and everything to do with population and density. If what you have stated is true, then gun deaths in smaller populated areas should be proportional to larger populated areas. Explain and provide proof that population and density are as you say. ââ¬Â¢ During the frontier era, the combined murder rate in Dodge City, Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, and Caldwell ââ¬â all wide-open cattle towns ââ¬â was less than two murders per year for all five towns combined? So? So, there is less gun violence when everyone is armed ... the wild west wasn't so wild, just free. ââ¬Â¢ Violent crime today is concentrated overwhelmingly among inner-city minorities ââ¬â with African-Americans committing murder at 8 times the rate of whites? So everyone should be allowed to own guns but Blacks? No, foolish one. Law abiding black citizens should be allowed their Constitutional right to own a weapon to protect themselves. If more law abiding blacks owned guns in the ghettos of America the ghettos would be a safer place for everyone except the criminals. ââ¬Â¢ The rate of gun murders among white U.S. teenagers is roughly the same as among teenagers in Canada? ââ¬Â¢ The most heavily armed nation in the world, per capita, is Switzerland? ââ¬Â¢ Switzerland also has one of the lowest crime rates in the world? Americans are not sane and civilized and cohesive as are the Swiss. You are comparing apples and oranges. Please explain and provide proof that Americans are not sane-civilized-and cohesive as the Swiss. Please only the facts and not the false thinking of a gun confiscator. ââ¬Â¢ England and Australia both experienced dramatic increases in violent crime after confiscating guns from honest citizens? That was stupid. They should have confiscated the guns from the dishonest citizen too. Duh! The criminals are not going to willingly give up their weapons. Have you devised a method to remove guns from the criminal element? That is exactly what the gun confiscators want to do in America ... disarm the American public and you have people who have to be slaves. 'Tis not the left or the right that wants gun confiscation, but the rich and powerful elite. The elite want to own you and are doing everything in their power to confiscate your weapons so you cannot resist the takeover by the UN. ââ¬Â¢ Australia and England were ranked the first and second worst countries in the industrialized world ââ¬â in that order ââ¬â in terms of violent crime, according to the February 2001 International Crime Victims Survey, released by Leiden University in Holland? ââ¬Â¢ The United States did not even make the top 10 list of Leiden Universityââ¬â¢s International Crime Victims Survey? Ergo, the US doesn't have a crime/gun problem. Can you not read? Do we have a disability? Australia and England confiscated guns from honest citizens, now the criminals have nothing to fear for they hold the upper hand, they have guns. If guns are confiscated from the American public, then we shall be as defenseless as people in Australia and England. A recent study by the Media Research Center shows that television news stories calling for stricter gun laws outnumber those opposing such laws by a ratio of ten to one. When it comes to guns and gun laws, we are hearing only one side of the story. To hear the other side, read The Seven Myths of Gun Control by Richard Poe. If it's more bullshit like this... No thanks. Spoken like a true gun confiscator. Never listen to facts, ignore them. Always follow the religion of the gun confiscating elite, always be a lackey, never have an
Re: [CTRL] Classic
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/1/01 1:01:39 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe it, but what would happen if we moved to abolish the government? Martial law. Tienneman Square. The Holocaust. We don't need to abolish government, just hold it to the Constitution, especially the tenth amendment. Thankyou for posting this Prudy. It's obvious that most Americans no longer believe in, or are even familiar with, these principles. The public schools (government indoctrination centers) and the mass media have done a thorough job of erasing these beliefs from the public mind. There is a story about old Ben Franklin emerging from the Constitutional Convention after the signing. A woman called out to him: What form of government have you given us? He answered: A Republicif you can keep it. We haven't. It's gone. Question is...what comes next? What is the segue going to be? I wonder if we're heading to a time of a major abolishment of the few remaining freedoms we have. I'm thinking we are. I'm thinking the very same thing. It's one of those rock bottom things, kind of like alcoholics having to hit rock bottom before they can see the light and turn things around. Probably society will have to hit rock bottom before the cat is cornered and it starts hissing and fighting. It's just a matter of compromises. There is a power in place that wants more and more control, so lawyers battle it out in court and a compromise takes place. Later there is another compromise as someone, somewhere wants more control, so we compromise again, each time giving up a little more freedom. Somehow, we need to turn that compromising around and head it in the opposite direction. How you do that I don't know. I tend to doubt that it can be turned. Perhaps the only way to regain our Republic is to do it the way the founding fathers did it ... maybe that's why this government is hell bent on abolishing weapons for common people. The sad part is that there is little I can do about it by myself. There is little we can do, even collectively, as members of this mailing list because we're really not mainstreamers. Mainstreamers are so strapped for cash that mom and dad have to work, the kids are in daycare and everyone is so exhausted by the time they come home that all they can manage to do is plop down in front of the TV to absorb a few hours of propaganda before falling asleep and repeating the same thing until the weekend when some of the people get drunk, some of the people have sex and the rest just lay around and recuperate from the hell of the weekdays. I'm one of those mainstreamers you are talking about. I joined this list because a friend of mine signed off after being here four years. He posted many interesting articles from this list at work and got a couple dozen of us interested in politics. He didn't have any answers, nor did he find any one complete answer on this list, but he did get many people (at work) interested. After being here a couple of weeks now, I can see why he got so frustrated. Obviously all the thirty or so people on this list care about what is happening in this country and to the world, but even these thirty people can't seem to be unified in their thinking, so how do you get tens of millions of people to unify against the government/powerful corporations? There seems to be too much pettiness rather than serious discussion and no conclusions. Too much right-left, rich-poor, straight-gay, black-white-brown-etc, liberal-conservative, gun rights Vs gun confiscation, and a thousand other means of dividing people so they won't organize a united front and members of this list are just as susceptible to these same divisions. What are the answers? Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
Re: [CTRL] Clintons' hit squad
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 6/29/01 12:14:29 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 29 Jun 01, at 1:39, Tito Hammond wrote: Bush even set up the economy for Clinton so that those who are ignorant would believe the booming economy was created by Clinton. I seriously doubt this is true. Bush created a mini recession that continued into the early Clinton years. Steve What is your source for this recession? http://www.gserc.usm.edu/united_states_economy.htm The United States Economy Growth in Output The decade of the 90âs has been one of unprecedented growth and prosperity for the United States economy. Since the most recent recession that ended in the first quarter of 1991, real GDP (inflation-adjusted value of the nation's output) has grown constantly at an average rate of more than 3% per year. Since the end of 1995 real GDP growth has been above 4% per year consistently. Reflecting similar strength in the nationâs output of products and services, the index of industrial production has risen at an average annual rate of approximately 3.7% since 1990. Growth in output has generated robust growth in personal income, which has grown at an average annualized rate of 5.28% during the decade. Growth in demand for products at the retail level has kept pace with total retail sales increasing at more than 5.5% per year since 1990. Labor Markets With such vigorous growth in the nationâs production of output during the 1990s, it is not surprising that employment growth was similarly strong. While the labor force grew at an average rate of 1.14% per year, actual employment grew by more than 1.3% per year for the same period. That resulted in persistent declines in the unemployment rate from a high of 7.5% in 1992 to 4.2% for 1999. Historical perspective has taught expert and casual observers alike that periods of high GDP growth and low unemployment cannot be sustained without abnormally high (and accelerating) inflation rates. Price Stability Inflationary pressures that were expected, especially during the latter half of the '90s did not materialize. Using percentage changes in the GDP price deflator, the broadest measure of inflation, the rate fell from almost 4% in 1990 to less than 3% through 1995, and under 2% for the remaining years of the decade. Inflation in consumer prices was similarly low, also falling below 2% during 1997-98. Nearly a decade of sustained high growth in output and employment combined with stable prices and full employment represents a rare occurrence in our nation's economic history. How does one explain the phenomenal performance ? Productivity Growth Using the benefit of hindsight, the answer to that question is reasonably clear. For the production of goods and services, the supply side, the key to growth has been increasing productivity, enhanced by accelerating technological advancement. Analysis of figures in Table 1, shows productivity growth measured by the percentage change in output per hour of work was positive throughout the '90s. During the final four years of the decade, productivity grew at an average rate of almost 3% per year. The ability to produce increasing levels of output per hour of work at home and the availability of products produced at low cost abroad helped to relieve inflationary pressures that otherwise would have been present. Consumer Demand Demand for products and services remained strong , buoyed by spending by consumers who made purchases out of rising incomes and even more rapidly rising stores of wealth. As cited above, personal income rose at more than 5.25% per year, and gains in wealth were even more impressive. The SP 500 Index, for example rose from approximately 267 at the end of 1989 to 1469 by the end of 1999, an average increase of more than 21% per year for the entire period. That exponential rise in the value of equity shares affected both the demand for products and the ability to produce them more inexpensively. Additional household wealth not only stimulated additional spending for big ticket items such as housing and SUVs, but also it made financing readily available to firms, allowing them to introduce new technologies to the marketplace. Summary For the U.S. economy, the 1990s was a decade of robust growth in output supported by equally robust productivity growth based on technological advancement and spending based on the wealth effect. From the macroeconomic perspective, it was a period during which most of the economic news was very good. A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout
Re: [CTRL] Clintons' hit squad
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 6/28/01 9:21:09 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This article, about five years too late, was just published in (of all places) the Weekly World News. Trying to discredit the story, or reaching the mass media the only way possible? This article, or dozens just like it have been on the web for several years, however nothing will be seriously investigated. Clinton is sleeping with the Bushes. Bush sat back and didn't put up a fight in 1992 so Clinton could win and maybe Baby Bush taking office 8 years later was part of the deal. Bush even set up the economy for Clinton so that those who are ignorant would believe the booming economy was created by Clinton. Big Bush said nary a word during the 8 years Clinton was in office when he could have raked him over the coals, especially concerning Ron Brown and Vince Foster. Have you noticed That Clinton is also keeping quiet about the Florida voting fiasco when he could have damn near started a revolution over it. There is a Clinton in the Bush family ... Clinton isn't smart enough and doesn't have the CIA connections to pull it off by himself. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] FDR Unmasked
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 6/26/01 7:21:46 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So what is new about this? This fact is common knowledge. Heck FDR allowed British spies to assassinate German spies in the US. A clear violation of the constitution. Grow up for Pete sake. I am not an FDR fan in general. But, what he did vis a vis W.W.II was necessary. None of us can say whether it was necessary for the United States to enter WWII. The Germans probably never would have defeated the Russians, then they may have turned to the US. One could speculate that the Germans may have been capable of winning the war since they were well on their way to developing an atomic bomb and had produced jet fighters before the end of the war, not to mention V2 rockets. The point is that FDR was a liar and railroaded the US into the war that no one wanted (or at least very few). The historical truth needs to be known that FDR murdered the people at Pearl Harbor and every other person that died as a result of WWII. WWII had a profound effect on the US in many ways. It increased the power of the military/industrial complex. It was the start of the breakdown in family values, in that women were doing the same work as men and leaving the children to be raised by baby-sitters instead of their Mothers. The government grew much more powerful and has been in a power-grab course ever since. Corporations also gained more power during this time and became more politically active, thus eroding our right to vote. FDR was no hero, he was more of a mafia-type figure. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] FDR Unmasked
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 6/26/01 8:09:20 PM Mountain Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The trouble with the scorpions in a bottle metaphor is that they would not have killed each other. One would have killed the other. Then the world would have had to deal with a totalitarian state that reached from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Could one country have controlled that much territory? The country that won would have been very weak after the war and would not have long survived had another country contested the victory. Another thought is that even Hitler's henchmen tried to kill him when the going got tough. Tito A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html A HREF=http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html;Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/;ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
