Conference back40::soapbox

    All I can say is PAR FOR THE COURSE. This is the sort of thing Newt
    should make hay over.

    Absolutely disgusting!  The ATF has got to go.  Why should they be
    outside the law?

RE: 375.0 by CANON::HART

> the Grants decided to publish nutritional information on the six-pack 
> carrier carton for Grant's Scottish Ale. 

Did they ever bother to wonder why no other brewers publish such information?


> ATF decreed Grant's Cider isn't cider at all,  but "wine". 

Fermented fruit,  right?  US law makes it the same as grape wine for taxes,  
and taxes wine at a higher rate than beer.  I'd bet that the Grant's knew
this.

Beer is fermented malted barley,  hops and water.  Ok,  can add corn,  rice 
and such what as well.  Can even add SOME honey or fruit.  Must be less than 
5.00% alcohol,  or is malt liqueur,  you owe higher taxes.


Phil

   
   Clueless crooks.
   
   As to the factually correct, ah yes, such factually correct terms
   as "Waco Wackos," "SS officer," "scary eyes and pockmarked face,"
   and "epidermally challanged".  That's just in the lead in.
   
   
|  An obscure 1950s ATF regulation....
   
   It's not obscure.  It's well known.
   
   Moral of the story.  If you want free publicity, *don't* go out
   of your way to *KNOWINGLY* break rules and regulations, don't hype
   it up the trade press, don't hire a publicist to get your story
   into the maintream media, and for god's sake don't get caught
   stealing tax revenue by lieing about the alcohol content of
   your "cider".
   
   								-mr. bill

    
    
    
    RE: .3
    
    >> the Grants decided to publish nutritional information on the six-pack
    >> carrier carton for Grant's Scottish Ale.
    
    >Did they ever bother to wonder why no other brewers publish such
    >information?
    
    Oh, I see. Big brother is saving us from ourselves again. Heaven forbid
    we know the full caloric & nutritional content of a glass of beer. I
    can see the stampedes into the local packy now...for the previously
    informationally deprived hordes of mindless sheep who must get their 
    full RDA of Vitamin C. And by the way, I'm glad the full nutrition 
    label appears on packs of Twinkies and other junk food. You see, I only
    get my RDA of Vitamin C from Twinkies.
    
    
    >> ATF decreed Grant's Cider isn't cider at all,  but "wine".
    
    >Fermented fruit,  right?  US law makes it the same as grape wine for
    >taxes,
    >and taxes wine at a higher rate than beer.  I'd bet that the Grant's
    >knew
    >this.
    
    Funny, the BATF called it Cider for 10 years...
    
                                                      Bob H.

RE: 375.5 by CANON::HART

> Funny, the BATF called it Cider for 10 years...

Funny,  Congress called it wine in 1936,  and never changed the law.


Phil

|  This is the sort of thing Newt should make hay over.
   
   Odd thing.  Nobody has.  Not a single Representative has attempted
   to score points by trumpeting the plight of the Grants.  Not a single
   Senator has attempted to expose the evil waffen ATF by reporting
   this seige against the Grants.
   
   *NOT* *ONE*.
   
   What conclusion might one draw from this?
   
   								-mr. bill

    
    RE: .7
    
    >|This is the sort of thing Newt should make hay over.
    
    > Odd thing.  Nobody has.  Not a single Representative has attempted
    > to score points by trumpeting the plight of the Grants.  Not a single
    > Senator has attempted to expose the evil waffen ATF by reporting
    > this seige against the Grants.
    
    > *NOT* *ONE*.
    
    > What conclusion might one draw from this?
    
    That even Congressmen fear retribution from the BATF?
    
                                       Bob H.

It's a conspiracy!  It's a conspiracy!

    It is nothing short of what I expect from several bureaucratic agencies
    that operate enforcement under the cover of "we know what is best for
    you."  the IRS being one of my non-favorites.
    
    meg

    This is really something. I wonder if the BATF isn't being paid by the
    big breweries to pick on the micros.

RE           <<< Note 375.1 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>>

>    All I can say is PAR FOR THE COURSE. This is the sort of thing Newt
>    should make hay over.

  Political hey, no doubt. Only problem is that the Republicans tend to support
justices like Robert Bork who feel that citizens have no constitution right
to privacy while it's the Democrats who are the ones that are strong on 4th
amendment protections.

  Yes Newt will make hay, but that hay will be used to feed a horse that will
take away a lot more Bill of Rights protections and empower agencies like the
BATF at the expense of our civil liberties.

  George

    re -2
    
    No kidding, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see that members of the
    atf were also beholden to certain megabrewers.
    
    meg

    .4
    
     A case of blame the victim? I need your decoder ring for when blaming
    the victim is ok, and when it's not. We never seem to align on that
    issue.

re: Note 375.7 by PERFOM::LICEA_KANE
       
>   Odd thing.  Nobody has.  Not a single Representative has attempted
>   to score points by trumpeting the plight of the Grants.  Not a single
>   Senator has attempted to expose the evil waffen ATF by reporting
>   this seige against the Grants.
      
>   What conclusion might one draw from this?

That the Republicans are almost as big a prick as the Democrats?

MadMike

      re: .3,.4
    
      Totally pathetic replies.  Unbelievable.
    
      What good are eyes when you won't see with them???

    It is interesting that we act even one bit surprised at this. All
    government agencies get their power and authority by the use of
    coersion and force. They need to justify their bogus, unneeded, jobs by
    harasssment and making of problems where none exist, until they enter
    with their guns, fists and usurped power. What does surprise me is that
    the American people continue to support these destructive agencies with
    their vote, time and money, all the while knowing what they really are.
    
    ...Tom

>>      re: .3,.4
>>      Totally pathetic replies.  Unbelievable.

	.3 and .4 both make good points.

Come on, you BATF haters.  Isn't the base note the teeniest bit strident?

>teeniest bit strident?

Yes, but I believe it contains more than just the
tiniest scintilla of truth.

    re: .19
    
    Yes, it is a bit 'colorful', but that does not make it completely
    inaccurate.  If it holds any truth at all, then outrage is the proper
    response.
    
    -steve

|   If it holds any truth at all, then outrage is the proper
|   response.    
    
    Well, by that metric, go for all the outraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayge you
    can gather.  .0 is factual on a couple of points.  People's names.
    State's names.  Those sort of things.
    
    
    And for those who think for a moment, there are BATF haters in Congress
    who have not hesitated to slam BATF at every opportunity.  There are
    gummint regulation haters in Congress who have not hesitated to slam
    any stupid bureaucrat at every opportunity.
    
    The reason this has not become a hot political issue in Congress is
    quite simple.  The picture painted by .0 is *NOT* accurate - AT ALL.
    
    
    Now, you want stupid, I'll give you stupid.  New Balance and the FTC
    is stupid.  But then you can't work in Nazis too easily on that one,
    so the Liberterrier geeks leave that one alone.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    >The reason this has not become a hot political issue in Congress is
    >quite simple.  The picture painted by .0 is *NOT* accurate - AT ALL.
    
    So I take it you know what the truth is?  Please share it, or point us
    to where we can find it ourselves.  I'm interested in the truth.

     And lose his superior position as the one with the real knowledge?
    Shirley, ewe geste.

    
    unbelievable!!
    
    some people should be put in a jar and studied by science 

    
    <-----
    
    Take it to the abortion note...
    

<grin>

    
    Gee, what would you do if you wanted to check out the facts of this
    case?  You are bright, what would you do?
    
    Do you even know if Yakima Brewing and Malting Company has gone belly
    up in the past 18 months from the facsist BATF?  (A clue, they haven't.)
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    Well, being that my free time is extremely limited, the first thing I
    would do is to ask someone who says the basenote is false to point me
    towards where HE found information to the contrary 8^).

	.29 <applause>  by golly, he's right - you are a bright one!  8^)

      I just basically think this is a case where the 'spirit' of
      what it means to abide by the law is basically blasphemed.
    
      I don't care if everything the ATF did was legitemate (though
      I'm not saying it is).  From what I've read, my main concern
      is MOTIVE.  It reads like they want to DESTROY this company.
      They don't seem to be trying to preserve something or to protect
      the people, they seem to be hellbent on destroying.
    
      For example, take the cider/wine thing.  Lets assume it really 
      is wine.  Can't they cut them some slack?  I mean if THEY said
      it was cider for 8 (or so) years, can't they give this place a
      couple years to get things in order?
    
      Or take the color green thing.  COME ON.
    
      All I'm going by is what I read.  The reason I called those two
      replies PATHETIC (which I still believe they are) is because of
      what I consider a colossal distortion of perspective.  I guess
      a rough analogy would be if a parent hit a kid with a baseball
      bat because the kid didn't make his bed.  One person might say,
      this is absurd!  Another might say, "But, he didn't make his bed!"
    
      As far as I'm concerned, this country's government would more 
      accurately reflect what it is supposed to stand for if the ATF
      ceased to exist.
    
    						Tony

    
    My message, over and over and over and over and over and over again....
    
    DON'T TAKE CRAP YOU READ IN NEWSGROUPS ON FACE VALUE.  IF YOU HEAR
    SOMETHING IN A NEWSGROUP THAT MAKES YOU WANT TO POP A VEIN IN ANGER,
    TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO CHECK OUT THE FACTS FIRST.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
>>    DON'T TAKE CRAP YOU READ IN NEWSGROUPS ON FACE VALUE.

	Gee, now there's a real bit of insightful advice, eh?  
	Phew.  Thank _goodness_ mr. bill is around to save us from
	ourselves.

re: .32

If one was looking for a different view on the situation, where would one look?

Thanks,

Bob

    
    I hate to say it, but I think Mark was spot on with his .24 8^(.
    
    Bill, why won't you share what you know?  I learned to do that in 
    Kindergarten.

      re: .32
    
      I think with all of us, our perspectives are filtered by who
      we are.  Part of my 'filtering' has included taking in more than
      a few accounts of BATF activities (such as WACO and Randy Weaver)
      from more than a few sources.  The sources often being quite independent
      and with various political and other persuasions.
    
      I did not come to a conclusion based solely on that story.  My 
      perspective is based on other things as well.
    
      I could be way off the mark, but your perspective (filters if you
      will) seem to be such that many independent accounts of certain 
      events that have taken place (i.e. Waco, Weaver) are such that 
      your filters give them little, if any, credibility.
    
      If I am right, we are perceiving things very differently.  And I
      think you are VERY wrong as to your perception of the overall 
      collective mentality of the BATF.
    
      						Tony
                                                           

    re: .22
    
    Since you have all the bottom line information on this one,
    perhaps you would like to share it with the rest of us?
    
    
    -steve

    
    <-- hey, I asked first 8^).

    Yes, you did.  Unfortunately, I didn't read that far before responding. 
    8^)
    
    One extra request can't hurt any, though.  He's still not sharing with
    us.  8^)

Don't worry about Mr. Bill, he can't substantiate anything he's said in this
note.  He's just jerking our chains.

Bob

    
    
    RE: .6
    
    >> Funny, the BATF called it Cider for 10 years...
    
    >Funny,  Congress called it wine in 1936,  and never changed the law.
    
    You're probably right. What would the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
    Firearms know about alcohol...
    
    So, to review the Grant's egregious crimes against humanity:
    
        - They put an accurate label showing calories, minerals, vitamins,
          etc... on their carton
    
        - The shade of green on the Celtic Ale bottles varied very
          slightly from the reference
    
        - They continued brewing the same Cider that had been BATF-approved
          for the last 10 years
    
        I won't sleep well at night until the BATF runs these crooked
        scumbags out of business.
    
                                                    Bob H.

      re: -1
    
      I knew Mr Bill's impeccable wisdom would get through to someone!!
    
      ;-)
    
    							Tony

RE: 375.41 by CANON::HART

> - They put an accurate label showing calories, minerals, vitamins,
>   etc... on their carton

While knowing that to do so,  was to advertise the health benefits of 
alcoholic beverages,  which is against the law.  Don't you think that wine 
producers would love to put a big sticker on their bottles saying that a 
glass a day lowers your risk of heart attacks?  Or have you completely missed 
out on that debate?  Don't you think that Budwiser could start a "More B-12!" 
to go with the "Tastes Great!"  "Less Filling!" of Miller?

The main reason why "Less Filling" was approved,  BTW,  is that the reason why
Miller Lite is less filling is that it has less alcohol...  

Notice the defense that Grant's put up:  The BTAF are Nazi Scum Ducking
Pigs!  Try that the next time a cop stops you to tell you your tail light is
burned out.  So much for getting a warning,  I'll bet that the cop remembers 
that you were going a little fast,  and next he wills say that you best step 
out and take a field sobriety test,  or maybe come down to the station and 
blow into a tube,  and let's see if your tires have enough tread to be legal,  
and would you mind if the cop searches your car?  Or do we get a warrant?  
Put the label being the wrong shade of green into this situation.


> - They continued brewing the same Cider that had been BATF-approved
>   for the last 10 years

They had been cheating on taxes.  


Phil

    > While knowing that to do so,  was to advertise the health benefits of 
    > alcoholic beverages,  which is against the law.
    
    You mean its important to consumers to know the "health benefits" on a
    pack of twinkies but not on a sixpack?
    
    > Don't you think that wine  producers would love to put a big sticker
    > on their bottles saying that a  glass a day lowers your risk of heart
    > attacks?  
    
    Sure they would.  and many have tried something similar; but the Waffen
    BATF have forbidden even such inocuous statements as "wine can be a
    part of a healthy lifestyle."  I visit lots of wineries and their own
    literature is verbose with the stories of problems they have with
    honestly advertising thier side of the story. because they're under
    threat of closure if they step out of line.
    
    > Notice the defense that Grant's put up:  The BTAF are Nazi Scum
    > Ducking Pigs!
    
    Thats not their first defense, of course.  They're only saying that now
    because they've got an agent onsite harassing their day-to-day business
    operations; in other words, because its true...
    
    BATF misconduct is a big issue in the idustry.  And since those people
    pay their lobbyists a lot to buy congress people, I expect the BATF
    will have to justify its conduct on these matters as on many others in
    the near future.  I would be prefectly happy to see it; and if you see
    BATF shut down anytime soon it'll be for this type of harassment of
    legitimate businesspeople who have gotten *no* cooperation from BATF as
    the medical research has begun to indicate health benefits in moderate 
    consumption of alcohol, when these busenesses sought to use that
    research.  Grants is not the first nor the only company to run afoul of
    BATF; and so they put themselves on the line and are raising publicity
    now.  Risky- with the rogue agency known to shoot people- but certainly
    not as abusive as you make out.
    
    DougO

    BATF rules are incredibly arbitrary and are administered by people who
    confuse civil servants with petty tyrants, and behave as if the latter
    were their title.

I attended a comminity meeting with Representative Bass this weekend.
Among other things he indicated that the goings on at the BATF will be
receiving considerable scrutiny byt the 104'th ...

Doug.

RE: 375.44 by SX4GTO::OLSON "Doug Olson, ISVETS Palo Alto"

>> While knowing that to do so,  was to advertise the health benefits of 
>> alcoholic beverages,  which is against the law.
    
> You mean its important to consumers to know the "health benefits" on a
> pack of twinkies but not on a sixpack?

Twinkies do not contain an addictive drug that,  among other things,  causes
birth defects.  Don't you know about FAS?  

Twinkies don't cause roughly half of the auto accidents in the US. 
Alcohol,  on the other hand,  does.

Twinkies don't cause mouth cancer.  Alcohol does.

Be honest about alcohol:  it's an addictive drug,  with very deep roots 
in our culture,  values and lifestyles,  with both large health benefits 
and large dangers,  both health and otherwise.
    

>> Notice the defense that Grant's put up:  The BTAF are Nazi Scum
>> Ducking Pigs!
    
> Thats not their first defense, of course.  

You have evidence of this,  perhaps?  How about posting it?


> I would be prefectly happy to see it; and if you see BATF shut down 
> anytime soon it'll be for this type of harassment of legitimate 
> businesspeople who have gotten *no* cooperation from BATF as the medical 
> research has begun to indicate health benefits in moderate consumption 
> of alcohol, when these busenesses sought to use that research.  

Shut down the BTAF,  stop taxing alcohol,  perhaps?  How much deregulation
of alcohol do you want?


Phil

    
    ...alcohol causes mouth cancer?

    It does if you don't swallow.

Like Bill Clinton?

RE: 375.45 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice"

> BATF rules are incredibly arbitrary 

Like "pay your taxes",  perhaps?

> and are administered by people who confuse civil servants with petty 
> tyrants, and behave as if the latter were their title.

All of them,  eh?  Tell me,  have you ever talked with someone,  anyone,  
that worked for the BATF?


Phil

    Bill Clinton doesn't swallow?

<----- OHHH MY GOD!!!!

    >Like "pay your taxes",  perhaps?
    
     Like, you can't have that label because we don't like its artistic
    value. Like, you can call you wine "chablis" even though it's not from
    france and it's not even made with the same type of grapes as chablis,
    but you can't label your wine as having come from a recognizable place
    in the US unless we say so.
    
    >All of them,  eh?
    
     Enough of them. You don't have to spoil every individual apple to say
    that the barrel is spoiled.

    Seems to me Twinkies have been implicated in at least one murder.
    
    I don't know, there are a lot of additives in twinkies that could also
    be mutagenic.  

                                "Twinkie, Twinkie,
                    Little suet-filled sponge cake crisco log,
                         Now I know just what you are."
 
                      "Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, or Food?"
 
        In an effort to clarify questions about the purported durability and
unusual physical characteristics of Twinkies, we subjected the Hostess snack
logs to the following experiments:
 
EXPOSURE:
         Twinkie was left on a ... window ledge for four days, during which
time an inch and a half of rain fell.  Many flies were observed crawling across
the Twinkie's surface, but contrary to hypothesis, birds -- even pigeons --
avoided this potential source of sustenance.
        Despite the rain and prolonged exposure to the sun, the Twinkie
retained its original color and form.  When removed ... the Twinkie was found
to be substantially dehydrated.  Cracked open, it was observed to have taken on
the consistency of industrial foam insulation; the filling, however, retained
its adverstised "creaminess."
 
RADIATION:
        A Twinkie was placed in a conventional microwave oven, which was set
for precisely 4 minutes -- the approximate cooking time of bacon.  After 20
seconds, the oven began to emit the Twinkie's rich, characteristic aroma of
artificial butter.  After 1 minute, this aroma began to resemble the acrid
smell of burning rubber.  The experiment was aborted after 2 minutes, 10
seconds, when thick, foul smoke began billowing from the top of the oven ... a
second Twinkie was subjected to the same experiment ... this Twinkie leaked
molten white filling ... when cooled, this now epoxylike filling bonded the
Twinkie to its plate, defying gravity; it was removed only upon application of
a butter knife.
 
EXTREME FORCE:
        A Twinkie was dropped from a ninth-floor window, a fall of
approximately 120 feet.  It landed right side up ... then bounced onto its
back.  The expected "splatter" effect was not observed.  Indeed, the only
discernible damage to the Twinkie was a narrow fissure on its underside ...
otherwise, the Twinkie remained structurally intact.
 
EXTREME COLD:
        A Twinkie was placed in a conventional freezer for 24 hours.  Upon
removal, the Twinkie was not found to be frozen solid, but its physical
properties had noticeably "slowed" .. the filling was found to be the
approximate consistency of acrylic paint, while exhibiting the mercurylike
property of not adhering to practically any surface.  It was noticed that the
Twinkie had generously absorbed freezer odors.
 
EXTREME HEAT:
        A Twinkie was exposed to a gas flame for 2 minutes.  While the
Twinkie smoked and blackened and the filling in one of its "cream holes"
boiled, the Twinkie did not catch fire.  It did, however, produce the same
"burning rubber" aroma noticed during the irradiation experiment.
 
IMMERSION:
        A Twinkie was dropped into a large beaker filled with tap water.  The
Twinkie floated momentarily, began to list and sink ... viscous yelow tendrils
ran off its lower half, possibly consisting of a water-soluable artifical
coloring.  After 2 hours, the Twinkie had bloated substantially.  Its
coloring was now a very pale tan -- in contrast to the yellow, urine-like water
that surrounded it.  The Twinkie bobbed when touched, and had a gelatinous
texture.  After 72 hours, the Twinkie was found to have bloated to roughly 200
percent of its original size ... the water had turned opaque, and a small,
fan-shaped spray of filling had leaked from one of the "cream holes."
        Unfortunately, efforts to remove the Twinkie for further analysis were
abandoned when, under light pressure  ... the Twinkie disintegrated into an
amorphous cloud of debris. A distinctly sour odor was noted.
 
SUMMERY OF RESULTS
        ... the Twinkie's survival of a 120-foot drop, along with some of the
unusual phenomena associated with the "creamy filling" and artificial coloring,
should give pause to those observers who would unequivocally categorize the
Twinkie as "food."  Further clinical inquiry is required before any definite
conclusions can be drawn.
 
Reprinted from SPY magazine, July 1989.

    I think I'm going to:
    
abdominal voorheaves
barf
bark at ants
bark at the moon
bark like a seal
bark'n up breakfast
barking at the ants
bending and sending
blow
blow a gasket
blow beets
blow breakfast
blow chow
blow chum
blow chunks
blow din-din
blow doughnuts
blow foam
blow groceries
blow lunch
blow your biscuits
boke
boot
boot camp			
bow down before the porcelain god
bowing before the porcelain throne
bowing to the porcelain buddha
bowing to the yuke of earl
brack
bring flourescent Christmas cheer
bring it up for a vote
brown-nose it
buick				
burpin' solid
buy my buick
call buicks
call dinosaurs
call for huey
call to the seals (arrrrrr aaarrrrrrrrrr)
call uncle ralph
catch it on the rebound
chortle up the wrong tree
chowder chunder
chuck a pizza
chuck my cheerios
chumming the fish
chumming the porcelain sea
chumming the water (when on a boat or scuba diving)
chunder
chunderspew
clam chowder revisited
clean house
commode hugging
cough chunks
coughing up your colon
decorate pavement
deliver street pizza
disgorge
divulge dinner
doing the toilet tango
drain the main
dribble phlegm
drive the porcelain bus
drown the ants
earl				
emergency stomach evacuation
feed the fish
feed the houseplants
feed your young
fertilize the sidewalk
fertilize the carpet
flash your hash
food fountain
gack
gag
gargling gravy
gastric overpressure relief
give an oral sacrifice at the altar of the porcelain god
go to europe with ralph and earl in a buick
growling at the grass
gutdumping
hag
heave
hork
huey
hug the porcelain wishing well
hurl
hurl your mung
I gotta chew my fries more
impromptu protein party
induce antiperistalsis 
insult your shoes
inverse gut
inverse intake
involuntary personal protein spill
jump shot (when you jump up to run to the bathroom, you only add velocity to 
           your extract)
kneel before the porcelain throne
lateral cookie toss
laugh at the carpet
laugh at the lawn
launch lunch
leave lunch
leave a pavement pizza
leggo my eggo
lipshits
liquid belch
liquid laugh
liquid scream
liquidate your assets
look for o'rourke
lose flourescent christmas cheer
lose some chopped carrots
lose weight
lose your lunch
make a (technicolor) tribute to disney
make an offering to the porcelain god
make food offerings to the china gods
making the chunky puddle
meal to go
meet my friends ralph and earl
motion discomfort (Airline Barf-bags)
my dinner is coming to say hello
negative chug
offer a sacrifice to ralph, the porcelain god
oral turbo blowby
order buicks over the big white phone
organic output
overweight burp
parbreake
perform the liquid cough
peristaltic chain reaction (when one person lets loose, causing others to 
                            get sick as well)
pitch a slider
plant beets
playing the rumination game
power barf (when you can't believe how much and how fast it pours out)
power boot
power chuck
pray at the porcelain altar
pray to the porcelain goddess
pray to the porcelain gods
protein spill
psychadelic spit
puke
put your best food forward
ralph
read the toilet
regurgitate
retch
retroshitting
reverse  peristalsis
reverse diarrhea
reverse drink
reverse gears
reverse gut
reverse peristalsis
ride the regurgitron
round-trip meal ticket
scream at the carpet
scream chunks
scream cookies
sell a buick
sell cars (fooooorrrrd!!! buuuuuuiiiccccckkkk! hyuuuundai!!!!)
shout at your shoes
shout europe at the sink
shouting at your shoes
sing lunch
sing psychedelic praises to the depths of the china bowl
sing to the sink
singing solo in the porcelain amphitheater
slam barf (when it comes out so hard it splashes the water everywhere)
sneeze cheeze
sneeze chunks
solid sneeze
spew
spew chips
spew chunks
spew snacks
spew soup
spew spuds
spew supper
spewing your guts up
spill the groceries
stomach snot
street pizza
talk to god on the big white telephone
talk to huey down the big white telephone
talk to john on the porcelain telephone
talk to ralph on the big white telephone
talk to ralph on the commode-a-phone
talk to the carpet
taste dinner
technicolor yawn
technicolor yodel
the brooklyn mating call
the jersey yodel
throw dinner
throw up
thunder-chunder chowder blow
thunder-chunder pavement pizza
thunder-chunder rainbow parfait
tonsil toss for distance
toss your cookies
toss your tacos
un-eat
upchuck
vector-spew
vomediate
vomit
wax the floor
whistle beef
whistlin' a solid tune
wolf
woof				
worship at the porcelain altar
worship the porcelain god
wretch
wretching liquid vowel
yak
yeech
yell at the ground
yell for hughie
york
yuke
yurk
    

    
    <------ Yeah...that oughta about cover it!  :^)
    

    > Twinkies do not contain an addictive drug that,  among other things, 
    > causes birth defects.  Don't you know about FAS?  
    >
    > Twinkies don't cause roughly half of the auto accidents in the US. 
    > Alcohol,  on the other hand,  does.
    >
    > Twinkies don't cause mouth cancer.  Alcohol does.
    
    There are warning labels on every packagae of alcohol indicating the
    dangers to pregnant consumers and their fetuses, Phil.  Far more than
    upon twinkies.  But I was explicitly comparing the "nutritional
    content" labbels, not the health warnings, and you know that.  The fact
    remains that the FDA has mandated nutritional informiation on all food
    products, and the BATF has at the same time forbidden those same labels
    from going on the subclass of foods over which it controls labeling. 
    Is it good for consumers to be able to make fully informed choices
    about the products they purchase, or is it not?
    
    Alcohol doesn't cause the accidents, Phil.  Irresponsible consumers do.
    
    > Be honest about alcohol:  it's an addictive drug,  with very deep
    > roots  in our culture,  values and lifestyles,  with both large health
    > benefits  and large dangers,  both health and otherwise.
    
    I am.  I want full information about the products offered me for
    purchase.  I want to know which producers are adding nitrates and
    sulphur compounds, which are fermenting with rice and corn syrups
    instead of barley malt, and how many calories are there.  Producers
    want to provide me this information.  Why is it forbidden?
    
    >>> Notice the defense that Grant's put up:  The BTAF are Nazi Scum
    >>> Ducking Pigs!
    >>
    >> Thats not their first defense, of course.  
    >
    > You have evidence of this,  perhaps?  How about posting it?
    
    The original article says that the Grants informed the media of the
    crackdown on their business, and documents some of the content that
    filled the airwaves and print media.  None of those original quotes
    indicate any 'nazi' comments; themedia basically called them "dorks"
    and "oafs".  Not until four months after the crackdown did the agents
    come to harass the business; and this article was written even after
    that.  It is the first time we have any evidence that the 'hitlerian'
    epithets were used.  There's good reason to believe that the Grants
    thought that since it makes perfect sense to provide nutritional
    content labeling on their product that the firestorm of publication
    would induce a quick rule change at BATF.  That's the way democracy is 
    can work, after all; citizen uproar gets results.  But no- that's not
    what happened.  The BATF decided to raise the level of the confrontation,
    not lower it, and sent their agent in to harass the business.  One can
    well imagine the 'nazi' epithets after that.  Before?  Not credible.
    
    > Shut down the BTAF,  stop taxing alcohol,  perhaps?
    
    Nah, sin taxes are far too convenient.  No, I've read of too many cases
    where the BATF prevented a label from being used because they frankly
    wanted to censor it.  Nudes on labels, for example- the premier
    Cabernet Sauvignon from Kenwood is called their "Artists' Series" and
    they commission a painting to go with the label every year.  The art
    was not allowed on the label the year it happened to include a sketch
    of a nude.  Kenwood documented its point by replacing the nude with a
    skeleton; that was fine with BATF.  Some bureaucratic maroon at BATF
    has a big fat rulebook and a big fat head and they should get their big
    fat butt kicked out of their comfy chair and stay out of the way.  Such
    incidents make them look like government tyrants.
    
    I don't want alcohol production and distribution deregulated.  I want
    the BATF to be reined in.  There's a world of difference.
    
    DougO

RE: 375.59 by SX4GTO::OLSON "Doug Olson, ISVETS Palo Alto"

> But I was explicitly comparing the "nutritional content" labbels,  not 
> the health warnings, and you know that.  

And you know that the point of putting "nutritional content" labels on beer
was to make a "This is healthy for you" claim.  Alcohol gets a lot of hype:
does it really need more?


> Is it good for consumers to be able to make fully informed choices
> about the products they purchase, or is it not?

Ok,  then perhaps we need a statement that "this beverage contain xx * the
USDA requirement of vitamin B-12,  and this beverage contains alcohol.  
Alcohol interferes with the normal metabolism of vitamin B-12,  so the above
number is more or less meaningless."  Like that better?  It's more
accurate.  The health impacts of alcohol are complex:  just putting the 
good parts on the label would surely please the brewers and wineries.  Is 
that what _you_ think is best to do?

    
> Alcohol doesn't cause the accidents, Phil.  Irresponsible consumers do.

Addicts are,  by definition,  "irresponsible",  and "consumers".  While
only a minority of drinkers become alcoholics,  understand that alcohol
_causes_ a lot of pain.  

    
>>> Notice the defense that Grant's put up:  The BTAF are Nazi Scum
>>> Ducking Pigs!


> One can well imagine the 'nazi' epithets after that.  Before?  Not credible.

Credible?  Perhaps,  perhaps not,  but good marketing.  All of this stuff
sells beer up in Ayran Nation Country.  Why do you think it happened? 
This happened to help the Grants sell beer.  I'm sure it's had that effect.  
Do you doubt it?  The Grants are NOT in the business of educating
consumers:  they are the business of selling beer.
    

> No, I've read of too many cases where the BATF prevented a label from 
> being used because they frankly wanted to censor it.  

Sex sells alcohol,  now doesn't it?  Alcohol gets a lot of hype:  does it
really need more?


> I don't want alcohol production and distribution deregulated.  I want
> the BATF to be reined in.  There's a world of difference.
    
Unlimited hype?


Phil

    
    
    Re .60
    
    	I add my voice to the claim that "alcohol doesn't cause the pain",
    its the people who drink it. And all people that "abuse" alcohol are
    not addicts.
    
    If a product is legal, then all advertising should be allowed as long
    as its truthful. Therefor saying that there is B12 in something, as
    long as there really is, should be ok. 
    
    
    ed

>Sex sells alcohol,  now doesn't it?  Alcohol gets a lot of hype:  does it
really need more?

	IMHO no.  But, that's my opinion.  Were I to be in the business of
dealing alcohol, I would probably feel differently.
  
	Do you feel you or anyone in government has the wisdom to decide when
alcohol, or any other product/service has sufficient hype?  What if the product
were something other than alcohol.  Would it's level of 'sufficient hype' differ
from alcohol's?  If so who determines what is sufficient?  What criteria should
be used?  Who is to determine the criteria?  

	When a free people take it upon themselves to limit the freedom of
others, then there are some serious problems.  Do we follow majority rule?  If
so why are lynch mobs illegal.  They are democracy in it's purest form.  What if
the majority is Jerry Falwell and his crowd?  

Just a few thoughts that went through my mind as I read your paragraph.

:-} Mikey

    Phil obviously has an emotional response to the subject of alcohol.

On a related note (if this was covered, I haven't seen it), how come
they are allowed/required to list the caloric content on beer? How
come they are NOT allowed to list the alcoholic content?

Why do I get the idea that Phil's apparent crusade against alcohol is blinding
him to the possible retaliation by the BATF?

Bob

>    Phil obviously has an emotional response to the subject of alcohol.

And some people have an emotional response to the subject of the BATF.

    Why can't I mqake decisions about buying my poison of choice with all
    teh information, including nutritional content beyond calories?  is it
    that some companies with their watered down poor excuse for beer are
    afraid of what may happen to their share of the market if they put
    their "non"nutritional information down?  
    
    I see nothing wrong with adding in this information, as well as alcohol
    content, calories, and the total list of ingredients for wine, as well
    as beer.
    
    meg

RE: 375.63 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice"

> Phil obviously has an emotional response to the subject of alcohol.

Herr Doctah,  you might know me better than this.  I so have an emotional
response to the kind of name calling crap found in 375.0.  I also home brew
beer,  did you forget?


Phil

    Oh my, I agree with Meg.  8^)  

    Steve,
    
    You do occawisionally show flashes of potential for intellegent thought
    ;-)
    
    meg

    > And you know that the point of putting "nutritional content" labels on
    > beer was to make a "This is healthy for you" claim. 
    
    Oh, right, that explains the twinkie labels.  C'mon, Phil.  They have a
    label so they're good for you?
    
    > just putting the  good parts on the label would surely please the
    > brewers and wineries.  Is  that what _you_ think is best to do?
    
    Fat, calories, and sodium are the good parts?
    
    As for what I think best, if the label is good enough to inform
    consumers about twinkies, then its good enough for beer (given that all
    the other warning labels explicitly ALREADY ATTACHED about alcohol
    remain, of course.  You ignore those, with your cracks about FAS and
    the like; why?  Not good enogh, yet?  Not enough negative hype, yet?)
    
    >Alcohol gets a lot of hype: does it really need more?
    
    >Alcohol gets a lot of hype:  does it really need more?
    
    You're repeating yourself, you know.  Its that that gives Mark reason
    to infer you have an emotional response to the topic.
    
    DougO

    Obviously Mr Hayes has a stash of full automatic assault Twinkies
    and someone should call the Bureau Against Toxic Food....
    
    (sorry, your neighbor down the hallway).
    
    Now we wouldn't want all those fine upstanding BATF angels of mercy to
    risk personal injury by going after armed gangsters, it's much more
    prudent for them to hassle a few small breweries, where the worst risk
    is a paper cut or dropping a bottle of beer on their little
    tootsies....
    
    yeah, right....

RE: 375.72 by CSSREG::BROWN "Just Visiting This Planet"

> Now we wouldn't want all those fine upstanding BATF angels of mercy to
> risk personal injury by going after armed gangsters, 

Or religious cultists intent on causing the Judgment Day.  Does the BATF
get worry about nerve gas as well as full-automatic machine guns?


Phil

    
    <---------
    
    >full-automatic machine guns?
    
    
    Redundancy Dept. of Redundancy????
    

    >Redundancy Dept. of Redundancy????
    
    
     When all else fails, string together as many buzzwords as possible so
    as to fool most of the people most of the time.

  .75
	...but preferably such that they at least make sense.

RE: 375.75 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice"

> When all else fails, string together as many buzzwords as possible so
> as to fool most of the people most of the time.

I went to say assault rifle,  and replaced it with machine guns,  knowing
such has HCI have defined my 22 semi-automatic plinker as being an 
"assault rifle."  Evil me.

Why does every topic in soapbox sooner or later turn into a gun control
topic???

Phil

>Why does every topic in soapbox sooner or later turn into a gun control
>topic???

Because of all the gunnuts.

    Phil,
    
    when you deal with an agency called the Bureau of Alcohol, tobacco, and
    FIREARMS, why wouldn't gun control come into play?  Particularly give
    the excesses of the ATF re private citizens and weaponry?
    
    meg

>    when you deal with an agency called the Bureau of Alcohol, tobacco, and
>    FIREARMS, why wouldn't gun control come into play?

Using that logic, why is there no tobacco rathole?

    for wqhatever reason the ATF hasn't decided to go after private
    citizens or small start-up tobacco companies for possession and use of
    Tobacco............
    
    
    
    
    Yet!
    
    With all the neo-prohibitionists out in the world, I can forsee this
    coming in the future, but rest assured, the large corporate tobacco
    firms will be left alone.
    
    meg

    
    RE: .77
    
    Then why did you start your rathole in .73???
    

> why is there no tobacco rathole

Having seen enough of their kind decimated in laboratory experiments,
the rats will have nothing to do with Tobacco.

    The BATF doesn't consdider nerve gas under their jurisprudence. 
    
    Unless it's caused by eating too many of those assault twinkies.
    
    Though the Bureau Against Terminal Flatulence may take notice.
    
    

re:  Note 375.51 by BOXORN::HAYS
    
>All of them,  eh?  Tell me,  have you ever talked with someone,  anyone,  
>that worked for the BATF?

As a matter of fact I have.  The FBI were the most reasonable folks
I've dealt with, then came the IRS, finally, came the ATF.  Of course,
I try to not make a habit of dealing with ANY of these people...

MadMike

    There was a funny BATF skit on SNL a long time ago.  "Agents" were
    yelling, downing whiskey straight from the bottle, smoking like chimneys 
    and firing weapons into the air.  It was quite funny.
    
    -steve

>Using that logic, why is there no tobacco rathole?
 
Good question, since tobacco is responsible for more deaths per year 
than firearms (400,000 deaths a year according to todays radio gibberish).

Doug.

Note how that got turned into a gun rathole.

    The Constitution guarantees every American his or her own gun note
    rathole.
    
    

    Actually, one of the few real surprises of the Clintoon
    Admanglestration is that they haven't gone after the tobacco
    users and industry bigtime, given the health issues, the
    "political incorrectness" of smoking in general, and all
    the usual hoo-hah surrounding the topic.  I really expected
    them to try to eliminate "smoking as we know it".
    
    What *is* he doing lately, anyway?  Down in the gameroom
    playing Sonic & Knuckles?
    
    Chris

    
    Maybe he's just an inhaler who doesn't smoke.
    
    -b

    Bwah-hah-hah... speaking of inhalers, another entry on my Clinton
    Countdown calendar says that he'd told radio mouth Don Imus that
    he'd chosen the saxophone as his musical instrument because "you
    don't have to inhale.  You blow out."
    
    Chris

I went to college with a Turk who had lived in France.  He claimed that
"playing the saxophone" was French slang for fellatio.

    
    
    Thanks Gerald, now I have to go find my dictionary....
    
    
    
    Terrie
    

    
    
    Ok, fellatio is not in the dictionary, so I assume
    I do NOT want to know what it is....
    
    
    
    Terrie
    

And that after 11.3634?

?!?!?!?!?

    
    
    Well, it's all been cleared up.  Didn't know they were 
    one in the same....
    
    
    
    Terrie
    :*)
    

From:	US4RMC::"[email protected]" "arcadio" 12-APR-1995 01:39:59.90
Subj:	Brunswick, OH Siege (fwd)

(note: an APC is an Armored Personnel Carrier)

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:38:30 -0400
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Brunswick, OH Siege

From: E Pluribus Unum <[email protected]>

Subject: Brunswick Siege

This is a preliminary investigative report, concerning the events of a
police action that took place between the dates of March 31 to April 3,
1995, in Brunswick, Ohio. Information contained within this report, was
obtained from (1) eyewitness accounts, (2) media accounts, (3) law
enforcement personnel, (4) testimony of public officials at the Brunswick
Safety Meeting of April 5, 1995 (5) Pictures we took of the remains of Mr.
Lekan's home (6) Transmissions on police scanners. 

  *** Background Information ***

John M. Lekan (pronounced 'lay-ken), 54 lived at 4095 Rolling Hills Dr.
with his wife Beverly, 49 and their son John Jr. aged 9. John Sr. was a
disabled chemical engineer. Beverly Lekan is suffering from Multiple
Sclerosis. The Lekans lived at this address for at least nine years. 

All accounts indicate that John Lekan was an eccentric, a Veteran, an NRA
member, a gun owner, a political activist, and a Patriotic American who
had a strong dislike and fear of the government. There is also a
consensus, hat while in his home, he carried a loaded firearm for personal
protection. 

Beverly Lekan received care by home health aides employed by the Medina
County Human Services Department. John Lekan, Jr. attended Kidder
Elementary School in Brunswick, Ohio. He was a quiet, well behaved
student, he excelled in math, and interacted well with neighborhood
friends. 

  *** Thursday - March 30 ***

John Lekan became angry when his wife advised him that the health care
aides had filed a complaint concerning his firearms habits with a young
child in the house, and told her that the police would probably be
accompanying them upon their next visit. One report said that Lekan 
described how he could kill the health aide with just the butt of a gun,
however, there are no reports that Lekan actually threatened to kill or do
harm to anyone. According to Mrs. Lekan, her husband loaded all of his
three firearms that night, and was prepared to fight.

  *** Friday - March 31 ***

* 3:00 pm: Brunswick police officer Sam Puzella, accompanied by an unnamed
  Brunswick detective arrived at the Lekan home.

* Puzella knocked on the door.

* When Lekan refused them entry, Puzella kicked the door in.

* Lekan shot Puzella in the chest.

* 3:30 pm: A MetroHealth helicopter airlifted Puzella from Lekan's      
  property.

* 8:30 pm:  Police attempted to rush the home.

* Lekan shot two more police. 

* The neighborhood was evacuated within a one-half mile radius.

* Gas, electric, telephone and water service was shut off to the Lekan    
  home. 

* Fiber-optic cameras were installed on light poles and the interior of   
 the Lekan home became visible to the police.

* Street lights were knocked out by police.

* Firehoses were run into the basement, where Lekan and his son had      
  retreated, and water was pumped in at approximately 1,000 gallons per  
  minute.

* Later that day, four SWAT teams, 300 law enforcement personnel, 200 fire
  fighters, and two Armored Personnel Carriers converged at the Lekan    
  home. (*)confirmed by Police Chief Beyer at Brunswick Safety Meeting on
  April 5, 1995

  *** Saturday - April 1, 1995 ***

* 11:00 am: APC breached the garage door, tear gas was inserted.

* APC breached the east wall of the house, tear gas was inserted.

* APC breached the backyard patio doors, tear gas was inserted.

* Later police reports indicated that Lekan and his son died during this  
  period.

  *** Sunday - April 2, 1995 ***

* 10:15 am: Police fired tear gas through broken windows and drove an APC
  up to the front bedroom window, which they then entered (located at the
  south-east corner of the house) and emerged moments later with Mrs.    
  Lekan.

* Mrs. Lekan's bedroom, is located at the north-east corner of the house, 
 separated from the front of the house by two interior walls.

* Brunswick police chief Patrick Beyer later said, "SWAT team members    
  reached in and grabbed Beverly Lekan, who was confined to a bed in the  
  first-floor bedroom."
  
* Approximately twelve SWAT team members entered the Lekan home and some  
  four hours later emerged with the bodies of Lekan and his son.

* Police chief Beyer stated that the bodies of Mr. Lekan and his son were
  found in the bathroom, partially within the shower stall.

* Medina County coroner Dr. Neil Grabenstetter said both died of single  
  gunshot wounds to the head.

* A gas mask and two acetylene tanks of oxygen were said to be found in   
  the bathroom.

* A 10-gauge shotgun, a .27 caliber rifle and ammunition for both were    
  also said to be found in the bathroom.

* The deaths have been ruled a murder / suicide.


  Additional Information and Observations:
     Reports heard over police scanners

* Between 8:30 pm Friday and 6:00 am Saturday:  Water was being pumped    
  into the basement at over 1,000 gallons per minute to force Lekan and
  his son back up stairs. We walked around the perimeter of the house        
  four days later - the ground near the house was still drenched.

* Snipers were given orders to shoot Lekan on sight. One sniper was heard 
  saying he had him in his sight and requested permission to shoot, but  
  permission was declined, saying "no, not yet".

* "We got the flag, does that mean we won ?"

  *** Wednesday - April 5, 1995: ***

* A Brunswick Safety Meeting was conducted by police chief Beyer.

* J.J. Johnson & Rick Huffman attended the meeting.

* Police chief Beyer stated that the otime-lineoe as reported by the      
  Cleveland Plain Dealer, was an accurate representation of the facts    
  surrounding the incident.

* Jim Polzner, of Alternative Paths (a contracted service of the Medina  
  County Board of Health), stated that  there may have been some          
  mis-quoting by the press. 

* Polzner said the police action was "awesome". 

* Polzner assisted in the negotiations with Lekan and stated that Mr.     
  Lekan was babbling, rambling, jumping from one subject to another, and  
  sounded very confused. 

* Claiming respect for the family, Polzner declined to reveal the content
  of their conversations.

* Our witnesses in Brunswick, who are acquainted with an officer who was  
  at the scene of the Lekan siege, say the officer told them that Lekan's
  "rantings" included such phrases as:  "you don't have a warrant" and  "My
  Constitutional rights are being violated". 

* The officer also stated that Lekan's unreported request to speak with  
  family members was denied.

* J.J. went to the Lekan home with Rick and our Brunswick witnesses after
  the Safety Meeting.

* The house has been moved off of its frame.

* The front door, which we have pictures of, has 24 bullet holes in it -  
  they are clearly all entry holes.

* The front door has also been fire damaged from the bottom edge, to about
  6" or 8" up.

* There are no less than 39 bullet holes in the exterior of the house -   
  all entry holes.

* There is no evidence of any shots being fired from the interior of the  
  home, unless they were shot through the windows, none of which have any
  glass left in them. 

* Mr. Lekan's "arsenal" consisted of a shotgun, a rifle with folding    
  stock, a handgun, and a gas mask.

* Mr. Lekan's flag pole stands bare on the railing of his front porch.


  Additional Observations and Opinions

* The Safety Meeting of April 5th was attended by about 150 neighborhood  
  residents and other concerned citizens.

* Comments overheard were:  "Murderers" - "Another Waco" - "Lekan's only  
  mistake was having bad aim". Some demanded the resignation of Chief    
  Beyer and J.J. overheard two of Lekan's neighbors saying they had      
  received threatening phone calls to keep their mouths shut about what  
  they saw.

* After the meeting, J.J. walked up to Chief Beyer, shook his hand,      
  introduced himself as a member of the unorganized militia, and asked him
  if there was a warrant to enter Lekan's home.

* Chief Beyer withdrew his hand, said "No Comment" and walked away.

* Tony Gilbert, who has previously prosecuted police for Constitutional   
  violations, was quoted as saying: "There was no circumstance that      
  required an immediate response. No threats were made, no hostages were  
  taken, no injuries were received." and "You just can't bust in a door  
  because you think somebody may be in danger. You need some probable    
  cause."

    Questions

* Why was Lekan found with a gas mask and two oxygen tanks if he intended
  to commit murder and suicide ?

* The Lekan home is a single-story house with a simple floor plan. Why did
  it take the SWAT team nearly four hours after entering the house to    
  locate the bodies ?

* One officer stated that sometime around 11:00 am Saturday, after the    
  multiple APC assaults upon the home, he heard "muffled gun shots" and  
  believes that is when Lekan killed his son and himself.

* At that time, there was no glass left in any window, including the      
  sliding patio doors. There was no garage door and the east side of the  
  house (which is where the bodies were found) was torn completely open.  
  If Lekan used a shotgun to kill his son and himself, the shots would    
  have been extremely loud, not "muffled".

* Why did the SWAT team enter the front bedroom window to retrieve Mrs.  
  Lekan, when her bedroom is located at the back of the house and        
  separated from the front by two interior walls ?

* Why did Chief Beyer say the SWAT team members reached into the bedroom  
  window and pulled her out , when the bedroom she was in is not inside  
  the window that she is pictured being extracted from ?

* Why wouldn't Chief Beyer comment on the issue of a search warrant ? 

   Concluding Remarks:

While everyone we spoke with said Mr. Lekan was an "eccentric", an
"odd-ball", and even a "flake",  no one that we have spoken with is of the
opinion that he was a danger to himself or others. 

We will never know if Mr. Lekan made the statements to the health care
aide that he was accused of. Assuming he did -  while definitely
inappropriate and even menacing, those statements do not construe a threat
of physical harm. It has not been shown that Lekan _threatened to kill_
her nor has it been demonstrated that Lekan _intended to kill_ her,
therefore there was no probable cause for the multiple violations of his
civil rights.


     *** April 5, 1995 ***

At Beverly Lekan's request, her husband was burried with his arms around
John, Jr., who cradled a teddy bear in his arms.


      One Final Observation

John Lekan, Jr. will never again play on the swing set that stands waiting
for him in his backyard

    *********

E Pluribus Unum ( One Out of Many ) is a Patriot group in central Ohio,
dedicated to restoring the Integrity of the United States Constitution and
the preservation of  Our Bill of Rights


 ... It is towards that end that this report was written ...



%%% overflow headers %%%
To: The List <[email protected]>, [email protected],
        [email protected], [email protected],
        drcnet <[email protected]>, [email protected],
        [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
        [email protected], The Daily Aztec <[email protected]>,
        [email protected], SDSU Profesores <[email protected]>,
        [email protected], [email protected],
        [email protected], [email protected],
        Mighty Morphin Power Rangers!!! <[email protected]>,
        [email protected], [email protected],
        [email protected], SanDiegoLibertarians <[email protected]>,
        new york times <[email protected]>
%%% end overflow headers %%%

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from mail1.digital.com by us4rmc.pko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA23920; Wed, 12 Apr 95 01:35:45 -040
% Received: from nova.unix.portal.com by mail1.digital.com; (5.65 EXP 2/22/95 for V3.2/1.0/WV) id AA22258; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 22:25:13 -070
% Received: from jobe.shell.portal.com (jobe.shell.portal.com [156.151.3.4]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA07670; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 22:19:34 -0700
% Received: (chan@localhost) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) id UAA02286 for firearms-alert-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:49:18 -0700
% Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA01921; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:47:15 -0700
% Received: from rohan.sdsu.edu (rohan.sdsu.edu [130.191.1.100]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA01914; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:47:14 -0700
% Received: (mcdonoug@localhost) by rohan.sdsu.edu (8.6.10/8.6.7) id UAA13556; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:41:46 -0700
% Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 20:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
% From: arcadio <[email protected]>
% Subject: Brunswick, OH Siege (fwd)
% To: distribution:;@us4rmc.pko.dec.com (see end of body)
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Mime-Version: 1.0
% Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk
% Reply-To: arcadio <[email protected]>
% Followup-To: [email protected]

    
    So...what IS the proper ettiquette for welcoming BATF (or FBI or DEA)
    agents into your home?
    
    - Assume that they are there illegally, and open fire?
    
    - Determine whether or not they have a valid warrant or court order, and
      if not, open fire?
    
    - Co-operate, and sort it out later?
                                  
    

    
    Groveling prolly helps.  bb
    

    
    
    If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, I'm going
    to assume that they are there to do harm to me and/or my family.  
    
    
    Mike

    >So...what IS the proper ettiquette for welcoming BATF (or FBI or DEA)
    >agents into your home?
    
     Throw yourself at their mercy and hope that they deem you suitable to
    live.

    
    So...that's two votes for "co-operate", and one for "open fire"?
    

    It depends on how they present themselves. If they knock on the
    door and present a valid warrant, listing specifically what
    they are there to look for,  I will let them in. However I will
    not allow myself or my family to be restrained in any way.

    If they bash the door down... all bets are off.

    -b

    >So...that's two votes for "co-operate", and one for "open fire"?
    
     Perhaps my sarcasm wasn't obvious.

    
    .107:
    
    Apparently, neither was mine.  I would have included a smiley, but
    I think the topic is more serious than that.
    
    I am reminded of a scenario in which a pedestrian, crossing legally
    in an intersection, is suddenly faced with an automobile that is
    running a red light.  It's all very well and good to be angry and to
    be "in the right", but if the car hits the pedestrian, the pedestrian
    will lose.
    
    Similarly, when an armed squad comes through the door, it seems likely
    to me that resistance, whether right or wrong, with have an equally
    predictable effect.  One is not likely to be in legal possession of 
    anything that will prevent them from either arresting you or killing
    you.
    

>    			One is not likely to be in legal possession of 
>    anything that will prevent them from either arresting you or killing
>    you.

I can see the slogan now -

     "Wow! This is a good place for a tactical nuke!"

    >tactical nuke
    
    Anagram: tu tinkle caca

    
    If they barge in, make sure your cats are safely tucked away...
    
    
    If it's the middle of the night, and I hear the front/back door caving
    in, I know I have a few seconds to react as my bedroom's upstairs...
    
     If no one announces themselves and/or yells police!, then all bets are
    off... the stairs are narrow and they have to come up one at a time...
    Head shots are easy from my vantage point...
    

    >So...what IS the proper ettiquette for welcoming BATF (or FBI or DEA)
    >agents into your home?
    
    Bend over! :-0
    
    ...Tom

    >> So...what IS the proper ettiquette for welcoming BATF (or FBI or DEA)
    >> agents into your home?
    
    Due to the fact that it's difficult for agents to see properly
    in your dark, unfamiliar home, please have the consideration to
    increase the visibility of the room by allowing them to adjust
    your torso so as to allow more light to pass through.
    
    Chris

>     <<< Note 375.108 by TROOA::COLLINS "Opposed to that sort of thing!" >>>

    
>    One is not likely to be in legal possession of 
>    anything that will prevent them from either arresting you or killing
>    you.
    
Do not be so sure of that statement. Everything I own is 100% legal/registered
but their numbers would need to be fairly high and their assault team
split in multiple entries for them to be sure of neutralizing me.

Amos

    
    Amos (or Andy),
    
    Do you really think that the result will be anything other than your
    arrest or your death?
    
    I mean...at least if you're alive, you can take them to court.  If you
    aren't alive, you'll have to hope that someone else will represent your
    interests in the matter.
    

Did not koresh agree to give himself up to the local/state authorities 
but refused to give up to the feds fairly early on in the engagement?
Did not the FBI/BATF refuse this option and enforce their juristiction?

Seems to be a vague memory that just popped to the surface ...

Doug.

    
    re: .115
    
    It will give them pause to think....
    
    maybe come up with a warrant?? I'm a reasonable man... if after the
    first volley, they want to talk.. that's fine with me. Anyway... it's a
    small town and sorta populated, so it'd be hard to keep the onlookers
    away...
    
      They'd have to do things sorta "normal" and not the Waco cowboy
    way....  
    
      BTW... if they don't announce themselves, they have absolutely no
    right to be in the house... none! 
    
     Take them to court???  Hah!! I doubt it.... How would I identify any
    of them... they go around looking like Ninjas! (and they think the
    militias are play-acting!)
    

    Omigosh, here I am agreeing with Joe twice in one day :-)
    

    
    .119:
    
    I know how you feel.  I've considered changing my position!
    
    
    ...just kidding, Joe!    ;^)
    

    
    NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!   NO FRIES, PLEEEEASE!!!
    

>    <<< Note 375.115 by TROOA::COLLINS "Would you like fries with that?" >>>

    
>    Amos (or Andy),
Mostly folks who have passed the maturity level of third grade have stopped
with that old "joke".
 
   
>    Do you really think that the result will be anything other than your
>    arrest or your death?

Do you think that matters to me? Have you ever heard of Patrick Henry?
Thomas Paine? or others with a belief in an uncompromising approach to
FREEDOM? 
Read the history of those who signed "The Declaration of Independance".
    
>    I mean...at least if you're alive, you can take them to court.  If you
>    aren't alive, you'll have to hope that someone else will represent your
>    interests in the matter.

Taking the gov't to court in their own courts is not always productive.    

    Amos, I recognize your right to paranoia.

    Those who carry out the force backed policies of all government
    agencies are lazy, unthinking subhumans who use force and the stealing
    of peoples happiness to increase their own self-esteem. These people
    are easily defeated with conscious, rational thought. However, this
    thought can not happen if one is dead. Killing you is the ultimate
    pleasure of these destroyers. When physically attacked by them you have
    to give in and be submissive. Later you can use their animalistic
    dstruction against them. The secret is to never acknowledge there false
    power over you. If they want something, these neanderthals will
    forcefully take it because of their criminal type minds. Make sure they
    take it, never give it to them. Eventually the conscious mind wins out 
    over the unconscious subhuman mind every time.
    
    ...Tom

    >	Koresh was stupid in his handling of the incident -- if his
    >	intention was to survive it.  He put himself in harm's way,
    >	and reaped the fruits of it.

    Excuse me, but I thought the BATF and FBI brought harms way to Koresh.
    
    I seem to remember a report where the BATF were after an associate of
    koresh, and was suspected of being in the home of an elderly woman in a town
    not to far from Waco. The feds wanted to raid the house Waco style, but the
    local chief of police would not stand for it. After taking a stand and 
    putting himself between the feds and the house, the feds agreed that one 
    agent (not the samll army they brought) would accompany the chief to the 
    door and the chief would do all the talking.

    He knocked, she answered, he introduced the agent, they looked around, 
    they left (he wasn't there).

    To bad the locals in Waco didn't have such backbone.

    Koresh may have been a fruit, and his behavior wasn't lawful after the fact,
    but none of that excuses the behaviour of the feds, acting on our behalf, in 
    this incident.


    Doug.

    
    Note 375.124

>Mostly folks who have passed the maturity level of third grade have stopped
>with that old "joke".
    
    No joke was intended.  As you can readily see from the string, both
    youself and Andy had posted notes which my reply was addressing.
    However, insults typify your style, so I should expect no different.
 
>Do you think that matters to me?
    
    What, your death?  Apparently not.  How about the lives of your family,
    who may be killed because you just HAVE to make a stand?

>Taking the gov't to court in their own courts is not always productive.
    
    You still refuse to answer the question...do you seriously believe 
    that your resistance will result in anything other than your arrest
    (and probable prosecution) or your death.  If so, on what basis?  If 
    not, then why not decide IN ADVANCE to take a more practical approach, 
    so that you don't have to decide this life-or-death issue on the spur 
    of the moment?    

    Would you *rather* die in a hail of bullets?  Has past experience taught
    you that your wrongful death is likely to be vigorously prosecuted by
    the state?  Or would you prefer to be around to *see* justice done (or
    fail to be done)?
    
    And try to relax a bit.
    
    jc
    

    Thanks again Joe, I was beginning to feel like the Lone Ranger :-0
    
    

    Joe,
    
    mr Weaver's arsenal isn't/wasn't much for a group of people who live in
    the woods, and hunt.  Hell, it probably isn't/wasn't much of one
    compared to some that some digi's might have, and don't advertise.  
    
    Should it be against the law to live apart from a society you don't
    like and to own a few guns?  In any case, should it have been a capital
    offense?
    
    meg

    Joe,
    
    is/was it necessary to send more than two people plus maybe a backup to
    serve  bench warrant?  Is/Was it necessary to shoot the dog, starting
    the entire standoff?  Is/was it a reasonable response when someone is
    shooting in your general direction to defend yourself and family?  for
    all the ID many of these people issue when they do a raid, they could
    be a batch of urban gangsters, hellbent on creating terror, murder,
    rape and mayhem.
    
    Is/was it necessary to have more than 10 people to serve a search
    warrant on a commune?  Is/was it necessary to hide dozens of black
    masked/black jacketed people in cattle trucks to race across a field
    with guns drawn, if not blazing?  
    
    Is/was it necessary to lie to get said search warrant?  
    
    is/was this a country with constitutional guarantees around religions,
    speech and freedom from this sort of search and seizure, or is this
    now the Police State of Amerika where you have about the same real
    rights as Stalinist Russia?
    
    Have people really bought into the "security from enemies withing" so
    much that they are actually willing to put up with this?
    
    meg

    Joe,
    
    did you read either account.  In the case of RW it looks like a
    clear-cut case of entrapment, then government sanctioned murder of
    people for being different.  
    
    while I don't buy all of the information on the Koresh i have read, it
    also looks like a case of C.O.P.S.  gone bad.  A media set up to make
    certain people look like their jobs are important.  Since the door was
    lost we will never know exactly who fired first.  The witnesses are for
    the most part dead, and can't speak for themselves, and the buildings
    so completely destroyed there is little to know physical evidence.  
    
    Joe, it may look like only a few kooks get this treatment to you at
    this time.  I see it escalating and becoming worse.  
    
    DEA no-knock busts don't get much publicity, but they also abuse the
    first 10 ammendments to our constitution.  remember it was illustrius
    members of the quasi-police unit that threatened a bar owner in CO with
    death for refusing to serve them more alcohol.  Are you saying the
    owner should have violated his liquor license and state laws regarding
    serving intoxicated people to avoid confrontations with thugs who
    possess badges?  Had the owner been shot, or his property destroyed, or
    his children harrassed and murdered, would you also say he brought
    it on himself?  
    
    
    I really don't understand you here.
    
    meg
    

    >is/was this a country with constitutional guarantees around religions,
    >speech and freedom from this sort of search and seizure, or is this
    >now the Police State of Amerika where you have about the same real
    >rights as Stalinist Russia?
    
    This may be where we are heading, contract with America or no. The only
    objective crime in the Waco case was committed by the BATF and the FBI.
    They committed assult and murder. Koresh and his people did nothing
    that could be considered an objective crime. They had weapons which is
    against a political policy law only. Political policy laws only destroy
    freedom, by giving power to government to force their will onto the
    populas.
    
    The verdict here should be guilty on all counts of rights
    violations, assult with intent to do harm, and murder. The defendent
    is the BATF and the FBI, along with any government leader or politician
    who contributed to the slaughter.
    
    
    ...Tom

    Joe,

    I've spent a while looking for it and can't find it in my
    archives, but somewhere Janet Reno talks about the people
    who she feels are dangerous. And guess what Joe, in Janet's
    eyes you're dangerous, because you believe in and read the
    Bible. I wish I could locate the quote, originally from the
    television program "60 Minutes" I believe... boy would _your_
    tune change!

    -b

    Meg,
    
    You don't KNOW that it was government sanctioned murder, that's your
    opinion.
    
    You're entitled to your opinion, just as there are some of us who
    don't buy it.
    
    You haven't heard any of us stating that we thought the government
    didn't make gross errors and that those in positions of authority
    shouldn't have paid dearly. But it's going to take more than
    postings off the net that might as well have been put there by
    "Conspiracies R Us" before some of us buy the concept that ATF and
    FBI agents sat down and said "let's take care of that trouble-maker
    Weaver.  Oh yeah, after we take care of him we'll go down to Waco
    and do Koresh".
    

Karen, when you have the Attorney General of the US of A, a personal
appointee of the resident, granting a promotion to an FBI officer who
was complicit in what went on with Weaver and at Waco, how much more
proof do you need thatit was government sanctioned?

(Make that "president" ^ up there. I'm too tired to TECO the correction.)

    Karen,

    It is not entirely a matter of believing it or not. There is
    _factual_ evidence.

    The factual evidence includes the use of military assets against
    civilians (helicopters and armored vehicles). This is not
    speculation, it is fact, and it is, in fact, illegal for the
    government to do so.

    The factual evidence includes the willful destruction of potential
    evidence by bulldozing the site.

    The factual evidence includes firing volatile liquids into the
    compound which were known to be dangerous when used in that
    way.

    The factual evidence includes the contamination of the firearms
    evidence by intermingling it with the firearms confiscated
    at the scene, and yet this evidence was allowed to stand in
    court.

    There is much more factual evidence. And it was much more than
    an "honest mistake". Much, much more.

    What level of intent this all implies is unknown, but to continue
    to roll your eyes and twist your finger around your ear like
    we're all crazy misses the point... what most people know about
    Waco is what the media told them, who were spoon fed it all
    from the government... who potentially have a lot of lose if
    the truth becomes known. What is the truth? I don't know, but
    I have serious doubts the truth resembles what the media told
    me. Serious doubts.

    Convincing you, or Phil Hays, or Joe Oppelt isn't the point...
    pressuring Congress to get to the bottom of it is the point.
    And we will keep beating the drum until it happens. If we're
    wrong, we look like shmucks. Seems to me that's a relatively
    minor outcome compared to the case where you're wrong...

    -b

    >it's going to take more than postings off the net that might as well have 
    >been put there by "Conspiracies R Us" before some of us buy the concept 
    >that ATF and FBI agents sat down and said "let's take care of that 
    >trouble-maker Weaver.  Oh yeah, after we take care of him we'll go down 
    >to Waco and do Koresh".
    
    OK, so it wasn't premeditated murder. What is the penalty for murder in
    the second degree. For this case it seems that the penalty is a raise
    and a promotion. Of course murder is of little consequence to a
    politician or bureaucrat. Whatever it take to get ahead is fair game.
    
    ...Tom
    
    ...Tom

    .414
    
    Oh NO!  Now I'm seeing double Toms...

    --->Note 375.142                The BATF "Strikes" Again                
    |
    |
    ---> .414
    
    HUH??
    
    ...Tom

    
    I think she meant .141, Tom Tom.   :^)
    

    re: .145, Joe
    
    >Until then it remains limited to kooks in my eyes.
    
    Here in lies the problem. The government can make a rule or a law to
    label whomever they want as kooks, in their eyes of course. Then they 
    have political justification for eliminating them. Dangerous to us all.
    
    ...Tom 

    Yes she was! :-)  So I'm dyslexic.

    
    I HAVE noticed that Nancy tends to get a little flustered when Tom is
    around 8^).

    
"A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the Second Coming 
of Christ; who frequently attends Bible studies; who has a high level of 
financial giving to a Christian cause; who home schools for their children; 
who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belief in the Second 
Amendment; and who distrusts big government. Any of these may qualify (a 
person as a cultist) but certainly more than one would cause us to strongly 
look at this person as a threat, and his family as being in a risk 
situtation that qualified for government interference. Waco was one of those 
situations that qualified under our definition of people being at risk that 
necessitates government action to save them."

    	Janet Reno on "60 Minutes"....
    
    

 Thud...

Joe,

Looks like you're one of Janet Reno's kooks/cultists...watch your back.

Bob

    Is that from the transcripts?  A direct quote?  Oh my.  <

Heard on the early AM news today that someone somewhere in MA was
busted in on by police for suspicion of drug  dealing, and that
the police found a quantity of "possibly illegal weapons and
anti-government literature". I always thought I lived in a country
where you were allowed to posess any type of literature you liked
without having anyone pass judgement on it that way. Don't be so
sure that the government is being rational in their kook-labeling
activities, Joe.

>Heard on the early AM news today that someone somewhere in MA was
>busted in on by police for suspicion of drug  dealing, and that
>the police found a quantity of "possibly illegal weapons and
>anti-government literature". I always thought I lived in a country
>where you were allowed to posess any type of literature you liked
>without having anyone pass judgement on it that way. Don't be so
>sure that the government is being rational in their kook-labeling
>activities, Joe.

As Paul Harvey would say, here's the rest of the story.  Police found
bomb-making instructions, fetilizer, etc.  They said that he will not
face any charges related to explosives.  He's being held on several
motor vehicle charges and possession of an unlicensed handgun.
The Globe article doesn't mention drugs, just a traffic stop that
showed he had some outstanding warrants on motor vehicle charges.

    
    
    	I just received information that the Justice Department is claiming
    that Janet Reno's supposed quote from 60 minutes is a hoax. I haven't
    obtained the actual transcripts from 60 minutes, but I will try to so I
    can confirm this on my own.
    
    jim

    A hoax I can believe.  Even if she did harbor those thoughts, even an
    admittedly uninformed individual as myself would surely have heard
    about it.  The outrage from mainstream, organized religion would have
    been hard to miss let alone the other groups she allegedly trampled.   
    
    Brian

>> Heard on the early AM news today that someone somewhere in MA was
>> busted in on by police for suspicion of drug  dealing, and that
>> the police found a quantity of "possibly illegal weapons and
>> anti-government literature".
    
    Did they find any drugs?  Or was that just the excuse for the
    break-in raid?
    
    Chris

Chris, did you read .156?

    re: Reno quote
    
    I'd seen the General Reno quote on the Usenet a week or so ago,
    but I thought it was so totally impossible for a Real Government
    Official to say something so outrageous on a highly-watched
    network quasi-news program, that I immediately dismissed it as
    being non-credible.  But maybe I was wrong?
    
    If she really does feel that way, and if Clinton supports her by
    keeping her around, then they're even scarier than I thought.
    
    By the way, it's almost amusing how the media is tripping all over
    themselves recalling how the evil government under Richard Nixon
    gunned down those four Kent State students 25 years ago today,
    whilst ignoring the obvious comparison one must make with the evil
    government under Bill Clinton murdering twenty times that many
    people at Waco.
    
    The Kent State tragedy was one of the defining moments in my life,
    and yet it pales almost into insignificance when compared with Waco
    and the subsequent jutted-jaw defiance of the perpetrators, all the
    way to the top.
    
    Chris

>    <<< Note 375.128 by TROOA::COLLINS "Would you like fries with that?" >>>

    
>    Note 375.124

 
>>Do you think that matters to me?
    
>    What, your death?  Apparently not.  How about the lives of your family,
>    who may be killed because you just HAVE to make a stand?

Perhaps my family feels as patriotic and concerned about gov't abuses as I.
It may be hard for you to grasp that there are more than one who are willing
to sacrifice for what is right.
The real question is; Are YOU willing to fight and die to take away my rights 
or are you going to take the cowardly way out and hire armed thugs to do your 
dirty work?


>    You still refuse to answer the question...do you seriously believe 
>    that your resistance will result in anything other than your arrest
>    (and probable prosecution) or your death.  If so, on what basis?  If 
Why do you think that matters to ME? Is your life so empty of values
that there is nothing worth dying for? or are you ready to trade 
anything/everything for "security"? 6 million followed this approach
50 years ago.

>    not, then why not decide IN ADVANCE to take a more practical approach, 
>    so that you don't have to decide this life-or-death issue on the spur 
>    of the moment?    

You obviously have no concept of combat. nothing is decided on the spur of the 
moment. plans must be made in advance.


>    Would you *rather* die in a hail of bullets?  Has past experience taught
NO! I want the gov't to leave people alone.

>    you that your wrongful death is likely to be vigorously prosecuted by
>    the state?  Or would you prefer to be around to *see* justice done (or
>    fail to be done)?
I am working toward those ends at the voting booth and by lobbying
Just as the colonists petitioned George III over and over and were ignored
sometimes the gov't just doesn't get it. witness the promotion by Reno of
the FBI agent Potts(?) to #2 slot. Janet flipped us the bird bigtime, talk 
about arrogance of power.
    
>    And try to relax a bit.
I am relaxed but I will not be lulled    
    

>> Chris, did you read .156?
    
    Okay, I see... it doesn't mention drugs.  So, I'm still wondering
    why they suspected him of drug dealing...
    
    Chris

As I said, the Globe article doesn't mention drugs.  It says "The incident
began shortly after 5 p.m. Saturday, when police ran a check on the 1982
Ford Econoline van he was driving and found it had outstanding traffic
warrants...  When they told him to get out of the car, however, Boran
tried to drive away."  The police blocked his path, and he ran away.
They followed him to his apartment.  He didn't answer the door or the
phone.  The police decided not to break in when they found a gun in the
van.  Boran eventually answered the phone and agreed to surrender.

       <<< Note 375.157 by SUBPAC::SADIN "One if by LAN, two if by C" >>>

>    	I just received information that the Justice Department is claiming
>    that Janet Reno's supposed quote from 60 minutes is a hoax. I haven't

Gee, no kidding.

The fact that anyone believes that quote to be real just shows how far from 
reality their enthusiasm for ...er...shall we say...caricature of government 
officials/agencies....has taken them.

Come on, folks. There *are* some real problems with government; always have
been, always will be. Talk about them. Tell us what you'd do to fix it. Be
part of the solution. But as long as you keep shoveling this transparent,
unthinking propoganda into the box, you're part of the problem. 

    Okay, thanks... I was trying to reconcile Jack's version of the
    story (which stated that the "raid" was for suspicion of being
    a drug dealer) with the Globe's version of the story.
    
    So, after he surrendered, he agreed to a search of his premises,
    then, when they discovered all of the other stuff?
    
    Chris

    
    
    And the problem, as we see it, is that government is too big and
    intrusive.
    
    
    Mike

    Note 375.162, Amos:

>Perhaps my family feels as patriotic and concerned about gov't abuses as I.

    One would hope so, since you appear ready to put their lives in
    jeapordy in your vain, egotistical determination to have your name
    penned alongside those of Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, Randy Weaver
    and David Koresh.

>It may be hard for you to grasp that there are more than one who are willing
>to sacrifice for what is right.

    Yes, it is hard for me to grasp why you are prepared to sacrifice your 
    life and those of your family just to be remembered as another Randy
    Weaver.  What is RIGHT, Amos, as opposed to what is IMPORTANT?

>The real question is; Are YOU willing to fight and die to take away my rights 
>or are you going to take the cowardly way out and hire armed thugs to do your 
>dirty work?

    You are absolutely wasted on mind-altering chemicals, Amos.  This isn't
    what I've been talking about AT ALL!

>Why do you think that matters to ME? Is your life so empty of values
>that there is nothing worth dying for?

    If Metro Toronto Police's Emergency Task Force comes through my door at
    4 in the morning, for ANY reason, I will kiss their butts and call it ice
    cream if that's what they want.  There is a court system here that OUR
    police have NOT proven to be immune to, in either criminal OR civil
    action.  Sorry that your system's so broken that you feel your only 
    logical recourse in such a situation is to get yourself killed and take
    as many people with you as possible.

>or are you ready to trade anything/everything for "security"?

    Once again you have achieved escape velocity with your bogus assumptions.
    I was talking about ONE issue, Amos, ONE ISSUE ONLY.

>plans must be made in advance.

    Good for you, Amos.  I wish you luck, 'cause it's all you'd have going
    for you.  And when the smoke cleared, you'd be just another right-wing,
    militaristic survivalist nutcase that the media would ignore.

>NO! I want the gov't to leave people alone.

    We're talking here about what to do when they DON'T leave you alone.
    Not such a fantastic scenario, from what I hear.

    And to think *you* accused Canadians of being suicidal...

    jc    

>    So, after he surrendered, he agreed to a search of his premises,
>    then, when they discovered all of the other stuff?

His wife agreed.

   >	I'm not making excuses for the BATF.  I'm just saying that Koresh
   > 	certainly shares the blame for what happened. 
   
   Joe, Noone in here is holding koresh blameless. But they are more concerned
   with the behaviour of government officials acting on our behalf. In the
   Waco case, Koreshes actions or the situation did not warrant the behavioural
   choices made by the BATF and FBI. It was this enflamatory behaviour exhibited
   from the get-go that lead to all of this. The trend of inappropriate decisions
   by the BATF is clear and continuous and needs to be corrected. The democratic
   leadership whitewashed Waco, which is why some many people are upset and the
   likely reason used by the OC bombers to justify their actions.

   Meg Evans  .133 pretty much put the issue in perspective.

   We can't control the koreshes of the world but we can influence and control
   the behavior of our government.

  > Should it be against the law to live apart from a society you don't
  > like and to own a few guns?  
  >  No.  Was the BATF trying to say it was?  You mis-characterize the
  > 	situation with your allegation.

  And what was the BATFs position Joe? May take is "If Weaver won't be a snich, 
  we'll  screw him! And that is what they did quite purposefully.
  
   Doug.
  

 Who's Noone?

    Re: Reno quote
    
    that basically describes all 40M Christians in the U.S.

    what's ironic about the Reno quote too is that Clinton is a
    self-confessed Baptist (who happen to be Christians).  Does that mean
    our President is a cult member?
    
    btw - anyone hear why the BATF people weren't in the OKC building when
    the bomb went off?  It was after 9am so you think they would've been at
    work by then.
    
    Mike

    RE: The Reno Quote

    Once informed of the possibility that this was a hoax, I
    decided to check into it myself. I will go on record here
    as saying that I am convinced it was a hoax.

    The reason that I was concerned that it was _not_ a hoax,
    is that the text of the quote was taken from a letter to
    Janet Reno from Congressman James Hansen (R-Utah). In
    the letter, Mr. Hansen mentions that "several dozen" of
    his constituents called him to express their outrage
    upon hearing the quote on television. Mr. Hansen wrote
    Janet Reno to verify whether she was responsible for the
    quote or not.

    I called Congressman Hansen's office and spoke with his
    aide. She confirmed that Congressman Hansen did, in fact,
    write the letter in question, as it was posted to Internet.

    She has promised to fax me a copies of the responses the
    Congressman received from the BATF and the Attorney General.
    I should have the full text by the close of business today
    (they are being sent to my private fax machine, I'm not
    using Digital resources for this).

    But to summarize, Janet Reno denies making the remark. She
    says that she has never been on 60 minutes. Further, she
    claims that the quote has been traced to a woman in Florida
    who "had it in for the attorney General".

    I may enter all or portions of the faxes when I have time.
    However, I want to reiterate that I have personally confirmed
    that this story is not true.

    -b

    (And thanks to Jim Sadin for setting me in the right direction...)

    .175
    
    I haven't read/heard anything that indicates *no* BATF agents were
    present.  The FBI had 13 agents assigned; seven escaped with minor
    injuries, last report 6 agents were among the missing.  At least
    one Secret Service agent was killed.  
    
    The fact remains the BATF, FBI and other agencies made up the
    minority of government employees in that building; Social Security
    employees comprised the bulk + innocent citizens who just happened
    to be in the SS office.
    
    Oh I get it, now ya'll will try to convince us that the BATF organized
    this, set up McVeigh and others JUST to point the finger at the
    militias.
    
    
    

re: Chris

I have no doubt that Gerald's treatment of the story is more accurate
than mine since he read it, and I only barely caught what was apparently
the end of the story as I switched the teevee on this AM (prolly while
still half asleep :^). There's every likelihood that I was mistaken
about the drug matter. I think both rendidtions agree on the presence
of "the anti-government literature", which was the key issue to me -
not it's presence, but the evaluation of it as being worth mention.
It indicated to me that either the law enforcement personnel involved
or the media people to whom they reported it, had some desire to make
that detail prominent.

     >It was after 9am so you think they would've been at work by then.
    
    9am is their daily tee time. 
    
    ...Tom

    >    9am is their daily tee time. 
    
    yeah, there going to do a new beer commercial now for Building_Golf (tm)

    AP 10 May 95 1:03 EDT V0663
 
    Copyright 1995 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
  
    WASHINGTON (AP) -- What do you want first, the good news or the bad
    news?  That's the choice drinkers might face under a proposal to tout
    the benefits of a few drinks on beverage labels that already warn of
    the dangers of alcohol.

    The Competitive Enterprise Institute, which advocates reducing
    government restrictions on business, said Tuesday it is petitioning the
    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to permit health claims on the
    labels of beer, wine and liquor. 

    In recent years several scientific studies have indicated health
    benefits from moderate alcohol consumption, but government rules
    prevent industry from passing that news on to consumers, said Sam
    Kazman, counsel for the institute. He defined moderate as "one to two,
    possibly two to three," drinks per day. 

    At a news conference, Kazman distributed small wine bottles with sample
    labels containing the statement: "There is significant evidence that
    moderate consumption of alcoholic beverages may reduce the risk of
    heart disease." 

    ATF, a Treasury Department agency that regulates alcohol sales,
    advertising and labeling, began collecting comments on the possibility
    of health claims on labels in 1993, but no action has been taken. 

    A bureau statement said health claims, "even if backed up by medical
    evidence, may have an overall misleading effect if such statement is
    not properly qualified (and) does not give all sides of the issue ...." 

    Adding a health-benefit claim to a label that already has a warning
    that alcohol can be hazardous could be misleading and confusing to
    consumers, ATF said. 

    George Hacker of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a
    consumer advocacy group, termed the proposal to add health claims to
    labels "a simplistic, vague and entirely misleading claim that wouldn't
    stand a chance if it were put to the standard for health claims ...." 

    Kazman termed the issue a question of freedom of speech and noted that
    the Supreme Court recently overturned a law banning beer labels from
    stating the product's alcohol content. 

    "We have no problem with restrictions on shouting 'fire' in a crowded
    theater," said Kazman, "but what BATF is doing is saying you can't
    shout 'l'chaim -- to life,' in a liquor store." 

    
    	You mean a beer label has more information than the manufacturer's
    	name and the volume of the contents?  Never noticed.
    
    	How many people actually read beer labels?
    

>      <<< Note 375.182 by BUSY::SLABOUNTY "Trouble with a capital 'T'" >>>
>    	How many people actually read beer labels?

	( I got this in the mail this morning )


     The following article first appeared in _The Gun Owner_,
Volume 13, Number 6, December 1994 and is reproduced here with
the kind permission of the publisher:  Gun Owners of America.

W. K. (Bill) Gorman


                    BATF THUGS STRIKE AGAIN!

The lives of Harry and Theresa Lamplugh were turned upside down
on the morning of may 25, 1994.  Early that day, 15 to 20 armed
men and women burst into their rural Pennsylvania home. Under the threat of
violence, the Lamplughs cooperated completely with the
intruders as they opened safes, locks and cabinets. In spite of
their compliance, however, Harry and Theresa were treated with
contempt. Throughout the ordeal, a fully automatic machine gun
was intermittently thrust in both their faces.
 
          The Lamplughs watched in horror as the thugs literally
trashed their home. Furniture was overturned or smashed and
papers were scattered everywhere. Three pet cats were ruthlessly
killed--one literally stomped to death. The gang ransacked their
home for more than six hours. When they finally left, Harry and
Theresa stood confused and angry in the midst of their demolished
home.

          The brutal and inhumane events that you have just read
about are not fiction. They were taken from the testimony of
Harry and Theresa Lamplugh. Only the intruders were not some
violent street gang members or foreign terrorists; they were
agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) and
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

    Are they in the process of a lawsuit?
    
    -Jack

    
    
    	I don't know.  That's all the info that was sent to me.
    
    	Pretty (bleeping) scary if you ask me....
    

>         <<< Note 375.186 by GOOEY::JUDY "That's Ms. Bitch to you!" >>>

    
    
    
>    	Pretty (bleeping) scary if you ask me....
    
Now you know what we've been complaining about. :-(
     ^             ^
  generic         gun-owners



Amos

    BATF seized 75million rounds of ammo a few weeks back, from a warehouse
    in San Jose.  They claimed it was illegally imported.  The owners
    protested at the time that they had all their import permissions and
    everything was legal.
    
    Turns out they were right.  BATF has more egg on its face, has to give
    it all back.
    
    SJMN spin was bizarre; totally didn't mention "BATF" in the recent
    articles, just mentioning 'federal agents' who had to give the ammo
    back.  BATF got all the prominence three weeks ago during the seizure.
    
    DougO

    That seizure made the news here in Atlanta.  Wonder if the news droids
    will report the return of the ammo, along with film footage?
    
    Dan

Uh, the BATF aren't the "jack-booted thugs" (I think that was the phrase) that
the NRA claims that they are, aren't they?

ME

Can you imagine Hitler recalling Jews from concentration camps and giving 
them back their property "Sorry, we just realized we took your stuff 
illegally."

Jack-booted thugs, my arse. Have there been mistakes? Have there been 
abuses? Of course. There are abuses everywhere, in the public and private 
sector. But to draw hyperbolic imagery like that discredits both the 
speaker and the cause.

Here's a Haagian prediction for you: The NRA membership, which has been 
climbing, will start to shrink. The NRA will say it's because of lies and
distortions in the press. But in fact it will be because the radicals 
that have taken over the reins have alienated a sizable chunk of 
their constituency who joined, not because of some political 2nd-amendment 
cause, but because they liked the programs the NRA has helped develop to 
train and use guns skillfully and responsibly.

    >But to draw hyperbolic imagery like that discredits both the
    >speaker and the cause.
    
     Well, that's the fervent hope of the left, anyway. While nobody, not
    even the hated and evil NRA has claimed that all BATF, FBI, DEA agents
    are "jack-booted thugs," there is growing evidence of a real problem.
    And the behavior of at least some of the agents in question has been
    indisputably thuggish.
    
     President Clinton, in a naked attempt to undermine the political clout
    of the NRA, has attempted to make the NRA fund raising letter into a
    broad brush attack on all federal agents. It wasn't. It did, however,
    point out a number of incidents which illustrate agencies spinning
    dangerously out of control and trampling the civil rights of american
    citizens. The imagery used to make the political statements was quite
    typical, particularly of one is allowed to recall statements made by
    leftists in the late 60s and 70s.
    
     Indeed, some of the harshest NRA critics used the same words against
    the same agencies in the near past. Not that I expect the media's
    convenient memory to bring up these unpleasant truths...

>                      <<< Note 375.191 by SHRCTR::DAVIS >>>

>Here's a Haagian prediction for you: The NRA membership, which has been 
>climbing, will start to shrink. The NRA will say it's because of lies and
>distortions in the press. But in fact it will be because the radicals 
>that have taken over the reins have alienated a sizable chunk of 
>their constituency who joined, not because of some political 2nd-amendment 
>cause, but because they liked the programs the NRA has helped develop to 
>train and use guns skillfully and responsibly.

Don't give up your day job. both contributions and membership applications are
up in the last two weeks. I talk to Tanya Metaksa regularly mail is running
9 to 1 in favor of what they are doing.

BTW the reason they had to "give back" the ammo was not because they are good 
hearted souls who realized the error of their ways but because a court ordered 
the ATF and Customs to return property illegally siezed.

Amos

          <<< Note 375.192 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>>

>     Well, that's the fervent hope of the left, anyway. While nobody, not
>    even the hated and evil NRA has claimed that all BATF, FBI, DEA agents
>    are "jack-booted thugs," there is growing evidence of a real problem.
>    And the behavior of at least some of the agents in question has been
>    indisputably thuggish.
 
	We should also note that the Radical Right Wing organization known
	as the American Civil Liberties Union JOINED with the NRA in calling
	for both Presidential and Congressional investigations of these	
	incidents.

Jim

          <<< Note 375.192 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>>

>   President Clinton, in a naked attempt to undermine the political clout
>   of the NRA, has attempted to make the NRA fund raising letter into a
>   broad brush attack on all federal agents.

You're being kind.  President Clinton mentioned the NRA letter and then 
referred to attacks on police officers in general.  The implication was that
all of the state and local police officers at the memorial were behind the
President and that the NRA letter attacked police everywhere.

          <<< Note 375.192 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>
    
>     Well, that's the fervent hope of the left, anyway. While nobody, not
>    even the hated and evil NRA has claimed that all BATF, FBI, DEA agents
	      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
		!___Says who? Talk about distortion. And it's 
not a left-vs-right issue. There are lots of gun-toting lefties. That's 
the problem. As long as the NRA stuck with its core competency (as we like 
to say around here) - gun safety, sporting sponsorship, advocacy for 
gun-owners rights - they've got a broad constituency. Now that they're 
being driven by ideologues with a distinctly right-winged flavor, they're 
going to narrow their base. It may be music to your ears, Doctah, but it's 
going to sound a sour note to anyone in the center, let alone the left.

I'll tell you what. Why don't you publish their fund-raising letter here, 
so we can all judge for ourselves.



>    citizens. The imagery used to make the political statements was quite
>    typical, particularly of one is allowed to recall statements made by
>    leftists in the late 60s and 70s.

And we all know the success the SDS has enjoyed ever since...
    
Remember, as you turn up the volume to the point of distortion, you are 
what you bleat.

                      <<< Note 375.196 by SHRCTR::DAVIS >>>

>Now that they're 
>being driven by ideologues with a distinctly right-winged flavor, they're 
>going to narrow their base. It may be music to your ears, Doctah, but it's 
>going to sound a sour note to anyone in the center, let alone the left.

	We should note that 4 years ago the membership of the NRA
	was about 1.8 million. Since the "hardliners" have been voted
	into office, the membership has grown to 3.2 million.

	Also not that until 1974 the NRA did not even have a lobbying
	arm. But folks woke up and realized that all those "core
	compentencies" were going to be pretty useless unless there
	were guns in the hands of private citizens.

Jim

    <<< Note 375.197 by SEAPIG::PERCIVAL "I'm the NRA,USPSA/IPSC,NROI-RO" >>>

>	We should note that 4 years ago the membership of the NRA
>	was about 1.8 million. Since the "hardliners" have been voted
>	into office, the membership has grown to 3.2 million.
>

Another factor for the huge increase in membership is the Clinton 
Administration and the push for new gun control laws.

I was not a member of the NRA until quite recently.  I could not believe 
that the HCI nuts would ever get to square one with their ludicrous agenda.
Now we have a President who says:

    And so there's a lot of irresponsibility.  And so a lot of people 
    say there's too much personal freedom.  When personal freedom's 
    being abused, you have to move to limit it.  That's what we did in 
    the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects,
    about how we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that
    to try to make people safer in their communities.  

And his administration has demonstrated a disregard for Constitutional
limits on government.

Clearly I was wrong.  I joined the NRA. 

Note 375.197  SEAPIG::PERCIVAL "I'm the NRA,USPSA/IPSC,NROI-RO"    

>	We should note that 4 years ago the membership of the NRA
>	was about 1.8 million. Since the "hardliners" have been voted
>	into office, the membership has grown to 3.2 million.

>	Also not that until 1974 the NRA did not even have a lobbying
>	arm. But folks woke up and realized that all those "core
>	compentencies" were going to be pretty useless unless there
>	were guns in the hands of private citizens.

That's what I love about the 'box. You learn something every day.

I honestly thought the NRA was an organization representing the interests 
of gun owners, sorta like the USGA is for golfers. I even included among 
its core competencies lobbying in government to protest it's members' 
interests -- in gun ownership.

I didn't realize that as long ago as 4 years ago, they had broadened their 
agenda to political causes having little if anything to do with guns.

It might indeed explain the rapid growth of the organization. After all, 
the Republican party hardly provides a satisfying association for the 
ever-hardening, ever more belligerent right. If you're not a thumper so you 
can't jump on the CC train, where do you turn? I guess it's now the NRA.

As Kevin O'Kelley pointed out in the very next note:

> And his administration has demonstrated a disregard for Constitutional
> limits on government.
>
> Clearly I was wrong.  I joined the NRA. 

All along, I thought you, haag, wannamaker, etc were a radical fringe. It's 
taken me as long as it took GHWB to discover that you guys are typical. I
just wish you'd change the name to the Constitutional Party, or some such
thing, instead of masquerading as a sporting affiliation. 

Tom

SNARF!

ME

    re .197
    "We should note that four years ago the membership of the
    NRA was about 1.8m"
    
    Bzzt... wrong.  Membership four years ago is about where it is
    now (3.5m); the NRA was losing members in the early 90's;
    started back up 2 yrs ago.

                      <<< Note 375.199 by SHRCTR::DAVIS >>>

> I honestly thought the NRA was an organization representing the interests 
> of gun owners, sorta like the USGA is for golfers. I even included among 
> its core competencies lobbying in government to protest it's members' 
> interests -- in gun ownership.

If you meant "to protect", yes, you are on the right track.


> I didn't realize that as long ago as 4 years ago, they had broadened their 
> agenda to political causes having little if anything to do with guns.
>
> It might indeed explain the rapid growth of the organization. After all, 
> the Republican party hardly provides a satisfying association for the 
> ever-hardening, ever more belligerent right. If you're not a thumper so you 
> can't jump on the CC train, where do you turn? I guess it's now the NRA.

No, the goal is still to retain 2nd Amendment rights.  Many people inside
and outside the NRA are concerned about the loss of Constitutional rights
in general.  The NRA's focus is the same.  The fact that they are drawing 
support from people who are concerned about Constitutional issues has 
nothing to do with it.  If the 94 elections hadn't pulled President Clinton's
fangs, I would have probably joined the ACLU as a way to combat the erosion
of 1st amendment rights and privacy rights.  (I still might.)  Does that make
the ACLU a hot-bed of (in your words) the "belligerent right"?  Hardly.

Furthermore, being a Republican is very "satisfying" right now.

Finally, I would point out that the majority of Americans are concerned 
about Constitutional rights.  This is not a product of the far right.  This
is part of main-stream American thought.  In a recent polls, a majority of 
Americans say that Government intrusion into people's lives is a real danger.
It was a critical factor when the majority of Americans indicated in the 
polls that they didn't want the President's health care proposal.  In the 
94 elections, getting the Federal behemoth under control was the key issue.

We should all thank the Clinton Administration for making this possible.
The Administration has often be criticized for not setting goals and following
through.  This is not the case when it comes to civil rights: they simply 
don't care about Constitutional law.  It is not a conspiracy; it is either
ignorance or apathy.

In note 393.586 I briefly outlined some of this Adminstration's proposals 
that undermine our civil liberties.  In an earlier note I included one of 
my favorite quotes from the President about reigning-in our rights.  I'll
leave you with this little jewel from the official White House spokes-droid
when asked about whether the Federal government had the right to enforce 
the school gun ban (as the test case went to the Supreme Court):

    Of course we do, schools are businesses, and we have the right to
    control businesses.

  <<< Note 375.202 by STAR::OKELLEY "Kevin O'Kelley, OpenVMS DCE Security" >>>

> If you meant "to protect", yes, you are on the right track.
 Yes, that's what I meant. And i was on the same track as my previous note.

> in general.  The NRA's focus is the same.  The fact that they are drawing 

No, it's not. The NRA's focus used to be on the responsible and skillful 
use of guns for self-protection and sport. Now it's political. The 2nd 
amendment may be the springboard, but it's hardly the end of the story.

> nothing to do with it.  If the 94 elections hadn't pulled President Clinton's
> fangs, I would have probably joined the ACLU as a way to combat the erosion
>of 1st amendment rights and privacy rights.  (I still might.)  Does that make
>the ACLU a hot-bed of (in your words) the "belligerent right"?  Hardly.

First of all, the ACLU is a political organization - always has been and 
always will be. Even its name declares itself as such. Not so with the NRA. 
Of course, a growing mood in this country to regulate firearms has 
compelled the NRA into a role of political advocacy as well as its original 
charter, but it's gone overboard now. You log into the NRA homepage, and 
you're hard pressed to find anything having to do with training programs, 
etc. It's virtually all politics. 

As for the ACLU, only the libertarian sect of the right care a wit about 
the 1st, privacy, etc. Which is why ACLU is usually associated with lefties. 
If you're libertarian, good for you. We probably agree 80% of the time :').

                      <<< Note 375.199 by SHRCTR::DAVIS >>>

>All along, I thought you, haag, wannamaker, etc were a radical fringe. It's 
>taken me as long as it took GHWB to discover that you guys are typical. I
>just wish you'd change the name to the Constitutional Party, or some such
>thing, instead of masquerading as a sporting affiliation. 

	The NRA's annual budget is roughly $90 million dollars. The NRA-ILA
	(the lobbying arm of the Association) spends about $2.5 Million
	each year. The difference between those two numbers is spent on
	promoting the shooting sports, education (from toddlers to advanced
	SWAT training for police officers), running competitions, etc.

	The political activity is what is seen most in the media, but it
	is a small fraction of what the Association is about.

Jim

                      <<< Note 375.203 by SHRCTR::DAVIS >>>

> No, it's not. The NRA's focus used to be on the responsible and skillful 
> use of guns for self-protection and sport. Now it's political. The 2nd 
> amendment may be the springboard, but it's hardly the end of the story.

The information I get from the NRA deals with safety, history, organizational
announcements, and hardware.  The NRA still has its training programs and
contests.  Now, I also get information from the NRA Institute for Legislative
Action (ILA).  That is the lobbying organization.


RE: ACLU as a political organization

    The ACLU does some lobbying, but that is not their forte.  The ACLU's best
    work is done through the court system.

In any case my point still holds.  Many are concerned about keeping our 
civil rights and with good reason.  Some have joined the NRA to preserve 
2nd Amendment rights, but that doesn't mean that the NRA is turning into a
political party for the "belligerent right".


RE: Libertarians

Yes, my political views are Libertarian.


These attacks on the NRA are getting old.  
From Jeffrey Snyder's "A Nation of Cowards":

    Gun owners are routinely
    portrayed as uneducated, paranoid rednecks fascinated by and
    prone to violence, i.e., exactly the type of person who opposes
    the liberal agenda and whose moral and social "re-education"
    is the object of liberal social policies. Typical of such bigotry
    is New York Gov. Mario Cuomo's famous characterization of
    gun-owners as "hunters who drink beer, don't vote, and lie to
    their wives about where they were all weekend." Similar
    vituperation is rained upon the NRA, characterized by Sen.
    Edward Kennedy as the "pusher's best friend," lampooned in
    political cartoons as standing for the right of children to carry
    firearms to school and, in general, portrayed as standing for an
    individual's God-given right to blow people away at will.

    The stereotype is, of course, false. As criminologist and
    constitutional lawyer Don B. Kates, Jr. and former HCI
    contributor Dr. Patricia Harris have pointed out, "[s]tudies
    consistently show that, on the average, gun owners are better
    educated and have more prestigious jobs than non-owners....
    Later studies show that gun owners are less likely than
    non-owners to approve of police brutality, violence against
    dissenters, etc."

  <<< Note 375.205 by STAR::OKELLEY "Kevin O'Kelley, OpenVMS DCE Security" >>>


> These attacks on the NRA are getting old.  
> From Jeffrey Snyder's "A Nation of Cowards":

And Snyder is doing the same demonizing that he accuses the left of. Only 
worse. Nobody I've ever known or heard has described gun owners in terms 
remotrely like those he used. I imagine Cuomo's comment is taken out of 
context as well. But if it helps to solidify your constituency, what the 
hell, right?

If I may borrow from the movie industry practice of selective quotation, I 
could describe what the NRA is becoming as:

"...paranoid type of person who opposes
    the liberal agenda and [who would like nothing better than
    to bring about the ] ...moral and social "re-education" [of America]."

    there's a lot of media hype down here about some adverts that are
    apparently being screened in the U.S. at the moment trying to get
    shooters to visit OZ for a  hunting holiday.
    they are being portrayed in our media as rednecks who will come down
     here and shoot anything that moves and anything that doesn't.
    I find it disapoimting that very few listen to what the original idea
    was instead of jumping on the bandwagon.
    
    the main intent was to allow overseas shooters to come out and shoot
    feral/introduced species like wild pigs/goats/foxes etc which would be
    a good thing for our native wildlife which have few defences against
    introduced animals.
    

                      <<< Note 375.206 by SHRCTR::DAVIS >>>

  <<< Note 375.205 by STAR::OKELLEY "Kevin O'Kelley, OpenVMS DCE Security" >>>

> And Snyder is doing the same demonizing that he accuses the left of. Only 
> worse. Nobody I've ever known or heard has described gun owners in terms 
> remotrely like those he used. I imagine Cuomo's comment is taken out of 
> context as well. But if it helps to solidify your constituency, what the 
> hell, right?

Saying that you don't anyone who tries to paint a picture like that is a 
cute dodge.  Look at TIME magazine's and the Boston Globe's editorial 
cartoons.  These publications -- and others -- have pictured fat, stupid-
looking characters labeled "NRA" aiding the OKC terrorists.  Their written
editorials and articles aren't much better.  

You "imagine" that Cuomo's comment was taken out of context?  Well, the 
Kennedy quote certainly isn't, but I confess that I did not hear the Cuomo 
quote.  However, since Snyder's article has been reviewed and widely 
distributed I am more inclined to believe Snyder's article.  Furthermore, 
the Cuomo quote is very complete.  The obvious ways to take this out of 
context are for Cuomo to have said something about gun owners in general
(which is not much better) or for Cuomo to have said that the NRA is not
like this (which is highly unlikely to say the least).


> If I may borrow from the movie industry practice of selective quotation, I 
> could describe what the NRA is becoming as:

> "...paranoid type of person who opposes
>     the liberal agenda and [who would like nothing better than
>    to bring about the ] ...moral and social "re-education" [of America]."

If this is supposed to be some kind of proof about how to take things out 
of context, it is a very poor example.  Notice that in order to twist the 
meaning of the sentence you had to insert lots of text in quare brackets and
add elipsis marks.  That's a dead give-away.  Also, this would never pass an 
editor or peer review for publication.  The purpose of square brackets is to 
convey the author's intent where the meaning is unclear because space did 
not allow a full quotation.  And finally, you forgot the elipsis marks to 
hide the fact that you turned "paranoid rednecks fascinated by and prone to 
violence, i.e., exactly the type of person" into "paranoid type of person".

    
    re: editorial cartoons
    
    	Saw a real winner in the Telegram and Gazette this past sunday. It
    was the artists interpretation of an NRA run gun shop. A poster on the
    wall read "Support the Timothy McVeigh defense fund". To say I was
    offended would be a huge understatement. The audacity is incredible...
    
    
    jim

    
    RACIST WAYS DIE HARD AT LAWMEN"S RETREAT
    
    Annual "Good O'Boys Roundup" cited as evidence of 'klan attitude' at
    ATF
    
    
    by Jerry Seper
    
    
    	They're trying to tone down the "Good O'Boys Roundup" here in the
    Tennessee hills east of Chattanooga, where hundreds of federal, state
    and local law enforcement officers gather every spring to let off
    steam.
    	There was a lot to tone down.  Gone, for example, are many of the
    crude signs that once greeted officers, like this one: "Nigger check
    point".
    	The "Good O'Boys Roundup" is organized by agents of the Bureau of
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and it was held this year on May 18-20.
    	Also gone this year was the traditional skit high-lighting the "Good
    O'Boys steak dinner."  In one skit, an officer in fake Ku Klux Klan
    garb pulled a dildo from his robe and pretended to sodomize another
    officer, who was in blackface.
    	But according to law enforcement officers who attended this year's
    and other events, a whites only policy remains in effect.  
    	Still on sale were T-shirts with Martin Luther King's face behind a
    target, O.J. Simpson in a hangman's noose and white D.C. police
    officers with a black man sprawled across the hood of their car under
    the words "Boyz on the hood".
    	"Nigger hunting licenses" also were available throughout the
    compound, consisting of motor homes, trailers, tents and pickups
    gathered around a large beer truck.
    	At this year's event, some black officers-including ATF agents
    -attempted to crash the party and were turned away after having "bitter
    words" with some of the white officers in attendance, the source said.
    	An attempt by roundup organizers to tone down the event's racist
    activities comes at a time when black agents have charged ATF with
    discrimination.  In a lawsuit pending in US District Court in
    Washington, they claim ATF supervisors have done little to address
    complaints of racial slurs, harassment and other job discrimination.
    	Brought by 15 plaintiffs, the suit alleges that such incidents as
    "nigger hunting licenses" seen in ATF offices, a Ku Klux Klan card
    posted in ATF's Oklahoma City office and use of the word "nigger" by
    white ATF officials have gone unpunished.  There are about 200 blacks
    among the 2000 agents within ATF, a law enforcement arm of the Treasury
    Department.
    	Representing the black agents is lawyer David J. Shaffer of
    Washington.  He said that his clients were aware of the Good O'Boys
    Roundup and that discovery in the case found that announcements
    concerning it had been circulated exclusively by and to white agents.
    	"THis is what the lawsuit is about: a Ku Klux Klan attitude among
    some of the white agents that seriously affects black agents on a
    day-to-day basis," Mr. Shaffer said.
    	Trial in the case has been tenatively set for next year before US
    District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth.
    	The roundup, according to invitations sent out last year, has been
    coordintated unofficially for the past several years through the ATF
    office in Greenville SC and is open to "any good o' boys invited to
    attend."  Non-law-enforcement attendees must be sponsored and
    accompanied by law enforcement officers, and participants wear
    wristbands to verify they were invited.
    	The event coordinator is Gene  Rightmyer, a retired ATF agent who
    previously was assigned to field offices in Tennessee and South
    Carolina.  Mr. Rightmyer did not return telephone messages left for him
    with ATF for comment.
    	Roundup invitations show that participants were asked to send their
    registration fees-ranging from $70 to $90-to the Greenville ATF office,
    and the office's telephone number was listed as the number for any
    questions concerning the event.
    	Todd Lockhart, acting agent in charge of the Greenville office,
    declined comment, referring inquiries to the ATF regional office in
    Charlotte NC. 	Several ATF agents in Greenville, however, were
    aware of the roundup, and during interviews they expressed concern and
    dismay over the annual event.
    	"I have never attended, nor would I", said one agent, adding that
    he and others knew about the racist activities and felt the event
    reflected poorly on the agency.
    	"I am not surprised about the signs or the other activities, and
    whether the racism is overt or subtle, it is wrong," said another ATF
    official.  "I cringe on behalf of the agency."
    	None of the several Greenville agents interviewed volunteered that
    they had ever attended the event.
    	Earl Woodman, ATF spokesman in Charlotte, said he was aware of the
    anual roundup and had been invited on one occasion to attend but
    declined.  He noted that the event was not sanctioned or aouthorized by
    the ATF. 
    	"The ATF does not and will not tolerate any kind of
    discrimination," he said,  "But what people do on their own time is
    their business; we cannot control internal morality."
    	Mr. Woodham said, however, that Mr. Rightmyer used "poor judgement"
    in using the ATF address and telephone number in his invitation.  He
    said that if Mr. Rightmyer was still employed by the agency, he would
    be subject to "a full review and possible sanctions."
    	He also suggested that ATF officials who attend this annual event
    were "a lot of the older agents, spinoffs from the days of revenuers
    and moonshine chasers."  "The younger agents just don't have time for
    this type of activity," he said.
    	ATF spokesman Jack Killorin in Washington did not return calls or
    comment.
    	The roundup was organized in 1980 by ATF agents in Chattanooga and
    Knoxville.  It began with 58 persons, mostly ATF agents, form Alabama,
    Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky and North Carolina.  Roundup attendance
    jumped to 341 last year.
    	According to Mr. Rightmyer's invitation, there are a few rules. 
    Among those listed were no fighting, no fireworks and what goes on at
    the roundup stays there.
    	Jeff Randall, a former Atalla, Ala. policeman who attended this
    years event, said that while he would not "condemn" the entire group,
    there was "an obvious racist overtone" by many of those in attendance.
    	"People can gather and have fun, and there was a lot of good clean
    fun available," he said.  "But the obviously racist stuff was just not
    acceptable."
    	Mr. Randall also confirmed seeing black agents at this year's event
    being turned away, saying that some of the program participants were
    "real mad" that they had tried to get into the compound.
    	A former Alabama police official who asked not to be identified
    said entreance to the roundup has in the past been tightly controlled
    along the one-lane dirt road.  He said he personally saw and
    photographed racially inflammatory signs along that road.
    	The former police official, who said he attended three of the
    roundups, said the majority of participants identified themselves as
    ATF agents.  "The roundup has been a place for law enforcement
    personnel to go and let their hair down," he said.  "But some of the
    overt racism is just inappropriate, plain and simple". 
    	J.T. Lemons, owner of Grompy's Whitewater rafting here, whose
    company sponsored rafting trips at the roundup, said the organizers
    have "done what they cann over the past few years to clean up the
    racism" and that some overt signs were ordered taken down.
    	Mr. Lemons confirmed, however, that racially sensitive T-shirts
    "and other stuff" remained on sale.
    	Other business owners in this Polk County, Tenn., community-east of
    Chattanooga, adjacent to the Cherokee National Forest-also confirmed
    they had seen the signs, T-shirts and other racist trappings but
    declined to be quoted on the record.
    
    from today's Washington Times-all typos are mine.     
    

    Whassamatta with these fine officers (who put their lives on the line
    for us EVERY SINGLE DAY) having a little fun and letting their stubble
    down? So what if it's at their coworkers' expense, if not as if they're 
    real people with rights and everything. 
    
     If you axe me, the people who staged or attended the event are not fit
    for duty. Sick puppies.

    Do I understand this right?  This racist event was held by the very
    same BATF who alledgedly persecuted Randy Weaver because Weaver is
    a white supremicist?  What's wrong with this picture?
    
    
    He who moved hurricane has a program called "The FEDS" tonight.
    Should be interesting propaganda.
    
    								-mr. bill

Um...is it just me, or does there seem to be some sort of logic disconnect 
going on here? Did the ATF feel free to *murder* Weaver because he's racist 
trash, or are the ATF a bunch of KKK'ers?

Or is it just that logic has no place in the propaganda mill?

    >This racist event was held by the very
    >    same BATF who alledgedly persecuted Randy Weaver because Weaver is
    >    a white supremicist?
    
     You figger that Chattanooga is close to Idaho, or is it just that the
    bureau uses a cookie cutter and all BATFers are the same regardless of
    where they come from? I don't think it was Weaver's politics that were
    at issue; he was just uncooperative when they tried to use him as a
    lever to infiltrate the Aryan Nations and got downright ornery when
    they tried to bring him up on charges. Once he was involved in the
    shootout with the marshalls, it was the cowboys' time in the sun.

    
    This may be an unpopular point of view, but...all law-abiding citizens
    have the freedom to associate with whom they choose and to hold
    whatever opinions they choose.  As long as these attitudes are not 
    displayed while they are on the job, they should be allowed to 
    do what they want.  Freedom is ugly sometimes, but it is better than
    the alternatives.
    
    From the number of racial problems reported within the agency, however,
    it does not seem as though these attitudes are being left outside the
    workplace.  Where this has happened, those men (and only those men)
    should be disciplined or prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
    
    I would rather see these attitudes challenged out in the light of day
    than driven underground where they can fester and grow even more
    warped.
    

    Very good Mark.  Very good note !
    
    Dan

    re: Mark
    
|   is it just that the bureau uses a cookie cutter and all BATFers are the
|   same regardless of where they come from?
    
    No, I think each agent is a human.  This is in contrast with some out
    there who intentionally dehumanize all government employees to further
    their own agenda.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    Mr. "The Emperor has a fine set of new clothes" bill,
    
    Yup, everythings just peachy in the BATF, no problems there.  People
    who would go on an outing like this are beyond doing anything suspect
    and deserve to be trusted without a second thought....

    re: MKOTS3::CASHMON
    
|   This may be an unpopular point of view, but...all law-abiding citizens
|   have the freedom to associate with whom they choose and to hold
|   whatever opinions they choose.  As long as these attitudes are not 
|   displayed while they are on the job, they should be allowed to 
|   do what they want. 
    
    Uuuuh huuuuh.  You think people are superhuman, don't you?
    
    I think people are human.  I don't believe humans check part
    of themselves at the work door.  I don't think they should even try.
    
    If the local sheriff is hanging around with the local felons during his
    off time, I think that means it's time for a new sheriff.  The sheriff
    is *perfectly* *free* do hang with the local felons.  Just expect that
    I won't be supporting many sheriff's who do.
    
    								-mr. bill

|   Yup, everythings just peachy in the BATF, no problems there.  People
|   who would go on an outing like this are beyond doing anything suspect
|   and deserve to be trusted without a second thought....
    
    Everything is *not* peachy at BATF, but you all really ought to decide
    if BATF is PC run amok or a KKK club.
    
    
    The individual agents who attended this "gathering" should face
    scrutiny.
    
    
    But pardon me if I don't join you and the rest of your crowd in piling
    on every agent every where for every reason under the sun.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    
    Perhaps you can't understand the difference between wanting the agency
    investigated then cleaned up and attacking every single agent
    personally, but there is a difference.
    
    Mike

    
    Perhaps you can find all the replies in this topic calling for
    investigation and clean up.  Then find all the replies that call
    for ATF got to go, they should shut it down, unbelieveable bunch
    of thugs, etc etc etc etc....
    
    (I will pause to note that in what has to be the first time in his
    'boxing history, Jim Sadin felt the need to *verify* that something
    that was clearly a hoax was clearly a hoax.)
    
    								-mr. bill

    

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. 
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus

RUBIN, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY v. COORS
BREWING CO.
certiorari to the united states court of appeals for
the tenth circuit
No. 93-1631.   Argued November 30, 1994-Decided April 19, 1995

Because 5(e)(2) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (FAAA or
 Act) prohibits beer labels from displaying alcohol content, the federal
 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) rejected respond-
 ent brewer's application for approval of proposed labels that dis-
 closed such content.  Respondent filed suit for relief on the ground
 that the relevant provisions of the Act violated the First Amend-
 ment's protection of commercial speech.  The Government argued
 that the labeling ban was necessary to suppress the threat of
 ``strength wars'' among brewers, who, without the regulation, would
 seek to compete in the marketplace based on the potency of their
 beer.  The District Court invalidated the labeling ban, and the
 Court of Appeals affirmed.  Although the latter court found that the
 Government's interest in suppressing ``strength wars'' was ``substan-
 tial'' under the test set out in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp.
 v. Public Serv. Comm'n of N. Y., 447 U. S. 557, the court held that
 the ban violates the First Amendment because it fails to advance
 that interest in a direct and material way.   
Held:  Section 5(e)(2) violates the First Amendment's protection of
 commercial speech.  Pp. 3-15.
  (a)  In scrutinizing a regulation of commercial speech that con-
cerns lawful activity and is not misleading, a court must consider
whether the governmental interest asserted to support the regula-
tion is ``substantial.''  If that is the case, the court must also deter-
mine whether the regulation directly advances the asserted interest
and is no more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest. 
Central Hudson, supra, at 566.  Here, respondent seeks to disclose
only truthful, verifiable, and nonmisleading factual information
concerning alcohol content.  Pp. 3-6.
  (b)  The interest in curbing ``strength wars'' is sufficiently ``sub-
stantial'' to satisfy Central Hudson.  The Government has a signifi-
cant interest in protecting the health, safety, and welfare of its
citizens by preventing brewers from competing on the basis of
alcohol strength, which could lead to greater alcoholism and its
attendant social costs.  Cf. Posadas de Puerto Rico Associates v.
Tourism Co. of Puerto Rico, 478 U. S. 328, 341.  There is no reason
to think that strength wars, if they were to occur, would not pro-
duce the type of social harm that the Government hopes to prevent. 
However, the additional asserted interest in ``facilitat[ing]'' state
efforts to regulate alcohol under the Twenty-first Amendment is not
sufficiently substantial to meet Central Hudson's requirement.  Even
if the Government possessed the authority to facilitate state powers,
the Government has offered nothing to suggest that States are in
need of federal assistance in this regard.  United States v. Edge
Broadcasting Co., ___ U. S. ___, ___, distinguished.  Pp. 7-9.
  (c)  Section 205(e)(2) fails Central Hudson's requirement that the
measure directly advance the asserted government interest.  The
labeling ban cannot be said to advance the governmental interest in
suppressing strength wars because other provisions of the FAAA
and implementing regulations prevent 205(e)(2) from furthering
that interest in a direct and material fashion.  Although beer
advertising would seem to constitute a more influential weapon in
any strength war than labels, the BATF regulations governing such
advertising prohibit statements of alcohol content only in States that
affirmatively ban such advertisements.  Government regulations also
permit the identification of certain beers with high alcohol content
as ``malt liquors,'' and they require disclosure of content on the
labels of wines and spirits.  There is little chance that 205(e)(2)
can directly and materially advance its aim, while other provisions
of the same Act directly undermine and counteract its effects. 
Pp. 9-13.
  (d)  Section 205(e)(2) is more extensive than necessary, since
available alternatives to the labeling ban-including directly limiting
the alcohol content of beers, prohibiting marketing efforts emphasiz-
ing high alcohol strength, and limiting the ban to malt liquors, the
segment of the beer market that allegedly is threatened with a
strength war-would prove less intrusive to the First Amendment's
protections for commercial speech.  Pp. 14-15.
2 F. 3d 355, affirmed.
 Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Rehnquist,
C. J., and O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and
Breyer, JJ., joined.  Stevens, J., filed an opinion concurring in the
judgment.
    

    Strength wars?  What do they think all this ice-brewing nonsense is all
    about?
    
    In any case, so what?  Folks can always run out and get a bottle of
    booze if they want strength.
    
    
    -steve

    
    
    Steve,
    
    Just thank the government for protecting you and shut up.....
    
    
    TYVM,

    .212
    
    >Do I understand this right?  This racist event was held by the very
    >same BATF who alledgedly persecuted Randy Weaver because Weaver is
    >a white supremicist?
    
    
    	Randy Weaver is not a white supremecist. He is a white separatist.
    Difference ? He believes in segregation of the races, but not the
    supremecy of one race over another.

    Why is this distinction important?
    
    -Stephen

    
    Because the media uses the terms interchangeably. Neither term is my
    belief anyway, but I suppose it's best to be a stickler for details.
    
    I suppose the difference is that supremecists are dangerous, while
    separatists are merely here-nor-there.

    It seems to me that they are related forms of racism.  I'm not sure why
    one kind of racist would be more dangerous than another, unless the
    idea is that a "supremacist" would want to oppress non-whites while a
    "separatist" would want to make them go away.  
    
    Of course, the old regime in South Africa (which claimed to follow a
    policy of racial separation, not white supremacy) apparently also
    thought the distinction was important.
    
    -Stephen

    
    re: .219 by Mr. Bill, 
    
    Bill, you and I are probably closer on this than you might think
    (I don't know whether you'll consider this a good sign or not. ;-))
    Let's see if I can express myself a little better.
    
    I don't believe that people are superhuman, but I have learned that
    in the absence of other information, I've got to give them the
    benefit of a doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty, and all that rot.
    In other words, it's not enough for me to know that the local sheriff
    has been hanging around with felons.  What were they doing, and has
    the sheriff used his power to do anything for them?  Perhaps these
    particular felons have had enough of crime, and are trying to go 
    straight.  In that case, who better for them to be hanging out with
    than the sheriff?
    
    With regards to the Good Ol' Boys affair, I am sure that some of the
    agents there were hard-core KKK black-bashing bastards.  But some
    of the agents may have only wanted to drink a few beers with the boys,
    and be guilty of nothing more than bad judgement.  Some of them may
    have been genuinely shocked and dismayed at the racist attitudes on 
    display at that gathering.
    
    Actually, I am more cynical than this naive opinion makes me out to be.
    But in a free society, people have the right to hold whatever beliefs
    they choose, no matter how odious.  They do not have the right to 
    infringe on other people's freedoms in the expression of those 
    beliefs.  Until I have evidence that has taken place, I would rather
    see guilty racists go unpunished than have innocent men get sacked
    for nothing.
    
    
    
    
    Rob
    

    
    re: .229

    Stephen, quick question for you.  What is your background knowledge of
    the Republic of South Africa?

    Dan

    SCAPAS::63620::MOORE
    
    >>I suppose the difference is that supremecists are dangerous, while
    >>separatists are merely here-nor-there.
    
     The fact that people can say white seperatists "are merely
    here-nor-there" appalls me. If you were on the other side of the fence
    I am sure you would not consider them so benign.
    
    							Derek.

    
    I am quite sorry, but you are absolutely right.
    Randy Weaver is a white separatist.
    
    A white separatist who just happened to speak at a white supremicist
    conference (Aryan Nation summer conference in Haden Lake, Idaho).
    
    A white separatist who just happens to be now representated by lawyers
    from CAUSE (a "white civil rights" legal defense organization) in his
    frivolous lawsuit.
    
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    And what does whether he's a white seperatist or white supremist have
    to do with the price of eggs in Japan?
    
    IT DOES NOT MATTER!!!!!!!!!  with regards to the subject at hand. 
    People have the right to believe as they wish whether you or I agree
    with them or not.  
    
    This is one of the subtleties that is being used by the government to
    make the sheep believe that what they did was jsutified.  Demonize the
    other side.  With Weaver it was his affiliation with the Aryan Nation
    and in Waco it was "concern for the kids and suspected abuse".  
    
    
    Who will be around when they come for you and the people who believe as
    you do? 

    
|   With regards to the Good Ol' Boys affair, I am sure that some of the
|   agents there were hard-core KKK black-bashing bastards.
    
    On the face of it, that's the least you can say.
    
|   But some of the agents may have only wanted to drink a few beers with
|   the boys, and be guilty of nothing more than bad judgement.  Some of
|   them may have been genuinely shocked and dismayed at the racist
|   attitudes on display at that gathering.
    
    I'd suspect more of them were shocked at the pig flying races.
    
|   Until I have evidence that has taken place, I would rather see guilty
|   racists go unpunished than have innocent men get sacked for nothing.
    
    Evidence, we don't need no stinking evidence!
    This is BATF we're talking about, where everyone is a jack booted
    stormtrooper until proven innocent.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    Another mr. bill fantasy......

    
|   And what does whether he's a white seperatist or white supremist have
|   to do with the price of eggs in Japan?
    
    He's a white separatist.  Do I have to be explicit?
    
    I'm sorry I lied and called Randy Weaver a supremicist.
    
    Mea culpa mea culpa mea culpa.
    
    I am explicitly correcting my massive error.
    Randy Weaver is a white separatist.
    
|   with regards to the subject at hand. 
|   People have the right to believe as they wish whether you or I agree
|   with them or not.  
    
    What subject at hand?  Randy Weaver?  Or the waffen BATF KKK neo-nazi
    good ol boys?
    
|   This is one of the subtleties that is being used by the government to
|   make the sheep believe that what they did was jsutified.  Demonize the
|   other side.  With Weaver it was his affiliation with the Aryan Nation
    
    Uh, Weaver wasn't persecuted for his "beliefs."
    
|   Who will be around when they come for you and the people who believe as
|   you do? 
    
    You won't.  You've already tried and convicted BATF.  (Front page.)
    
    
    BTW, on he who moved hurricanes.  He actually blamed Janet Reno for that
    "Ruby thing".  A free clue for Pat.  Ruby Ridge took place in August
    1992.  The election took place in November 1992.  Bill Clinton took
    office in January 1993.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    Trying to be the victim again, eh Bill?  I said it doesn't matter what
    he was, it really is insignificant.
    
    He was persecuted for his beliefs.  Do you really think he wasn't
    targeted as a way to infiltrate Aryan Nation?  Come on, Bill, you are
    brighter than that.
    
    You like to put words in people's mouths.  I am looking for an
    investigation, I feel there is enough evidence to warrant one.  If 
    everything comes out on the level, then fine.  I am not going to take
    the agency's word for it when they investigate themselves.
    
    Mike

    
|   He was persecuted for his beliefs.
    
    That statement is not factual.  (That's the polite way of putting it.)
    
    "We have found no evidence to support the claim that BATF targeted
    Weaver because of his religious or political beliefs."
    
    
|   Come on, Bill, you are brighter than that.
    
    I am.  Not sure about you.
    
    It's real simple like.
    
    WHEN PEOPLE MAKE THINGS GO BOOM BATF GIVES A DAMN!
    
    They don't give a damn about the hateful ZOG crap some people spew.
    
    								-mr. bill

    >But in a free society, people have the right to hold whatever beliefs
    >they choose, no matter how odious.  They do not have the right to
    >infringe on other people's freedoms in the expression of those
    >beliefs.
    
    My only reply can be a resounding....YES!! It is to bad that in the
    greatest country in the world, the USA, the self-proclaimed bastian of
    freedom, that this is violated to such a great extent.
    
    ...Tom

>    Evidence, we don't need no stinking evidence!
>    This is BATF we're talking about, where everyone is a jack booted
>    stormtrooper until proven innocent.
>    
>    								-mr. bill
    
    The appearance of excessive use of force by federal law enforcement
    agencies on apparently non-violent citizenry, the the appearance of 
    the lack of will by their upper management for a full and open 
    investigation into these allegations or to take measures to correct 
    the alledged abuses, is why many have defaulted to the 'guilty until 
    proven innocent' tact.
    
    The BATF is just the most visible organization in this regard, likely
    because of all the publicity around firearms. Here we have an
    organization whos functions can easily be covered by other
    federal departments, which leads to the question of why we even have
    an organization specific to, among all things, alcohol, tobaco and
    firearms.
    
    The people have legitimate concerns.
    
    Doug.
    

 ><<< Note 375.231 by DEVLPR::DKILLORAN "Jack Martin - Wanted Dead or Alive" >>>

    
 >   re: .229

 >   Stephen, quick question for you.  What is your background knowledge of
 >   the Republic of South Africa?

 >   Dan
    
    
    Dan, a quick answer:  I have no special knoweledge of South Africa,
    just that of a reader of newspapers & other media.  
    
    I believe South African racial policy was called "Separate Development"
    and involved setting up nominally sovereign "homelands" for the black
    Africans, while denying them citizenship in most of the country.  Is
    this incorrect?
    
    In any case, my point was that the distinction between "white
    supremacists" and "white separatists" seems to me to be hair-splitting
    over an insignificant difference between 2 varieties of racist nuts. 
    And that to the extent that the label "white separatist" seems less
    threatening, it may be used by racists in preference to the other for
    public relations reasons.
    
    -Stephen
    

    I, for one, believe that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between
    white supremacists and white separatists.
    
    Yes, there may exist supremacists who call themselves separatists, but
    that's not the point of distinction.
    
    Yes, they are both racists. (They make distinctions and decisions based
    solely on the race of a person.) But I think there is an important line
    to be drawn between the two.
    
    A supremacist believes that his/her race is superior and elimination
    of other races is called for.
    
    A separatist would, if left alone, choose not to associate with members
    of another race.

    A separatist's position is basically "ship 'em all back where they came
    from."  Which conveniently overlooks the fact that a white separatist,
    under that umbrella, should be shipped back to Europe.

    To split hairs over exactly what kind of nut Randy Weaver et al
    are takes the focus off of the real questions about Ruby Ridge
    and who was at fault. I think it is a serious mistake for the
    right to try to draw this distinction. The correct approach is
    to say that Randy Weaver is a generic a__hole, but nonetheless,
    a Constitutionally protected one.

    -b

|   The appearance of excessive use of force by federal law enforcement
|   agencies on apparently non-violent citizenry, the the appearance of 
|   the lack of will by their upper management for a full and open 
|   investigation into these allegations or to take measures to correct 
|   the alledged abuses, is why many have defaulted to the 'guilty until 
|   proven innocent' tact.
    
    Begin translation....
    
    They are guilty, don't confuse us with facts, they are guilty.
    
    A full and open investigation into the matter would find them guilty.
    Why?  They are guilty.
    
    Any investigations that don't conclude they are guilty are by
    definition not full and open investigations.  Because they are guilty.
    
    Get used to hearing the calls for a free and open investigation.
    Because they are guilty.
    
    DO YOU HEAR ME?  CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION THAT FINDS BATF GUILTY
    ALREADY!  WHY?  BECAUSE THEY ARE GUILTY!
    
    End translation....
    
    
    You all don't care about a free and open investigation.  You want
    a kangaroo court at best, just a lynch mob at worst.
    
|   The BATF is just the most visible organization in this regard, likely
|   because of all the publicity around firearms.
    
    Gosh, did you figure that out all by yourself that all this venom
    directed at BATF might have something to do with guns?
    
|   The people have legitimate concerns.
    
    Which is precisely why all these illegitimate concerns are so harmful.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    Anyone else around here glad that we have Bill to translate for us? 
    He's oh so superior.......

    
    RE: Distinctions.
    
        Randy Weaver IS NOT the South African government.  Randy Weaver
    	didn't attempt to force his opinion down other people's throats.
    	Randy Weaver did not run amuck, attempting to lynch all those
    	he considered less-than-acceptable.
    
    	Randy Weaver JUST WANTED TO BE LEFT ALONE.  
    
    	Considering the history of the Mormon church in this country, I
    	figured that maybe some of you could figure that out. The Mormons
    	continually moved farther west because THEY WANTED TO BE LEFT 
    	ALONE.  While you may not hold the beliefs of the LDS, do you
    	consider LDS members to be religious bigots ?
    
    	Consider Protestantism versus Catholicism. They each have their
    	own "weekend retreats".  Do you consider Catholics and Protestants
    	to be religious bigots ?
    
    	As I said earlier, I do not hold the beliefs of a "supremecist" OR
    	a "separatist".  People can believe whatever they want to believe 
    	UNTIL they initiate force upon another in those beliefs. Then,
    	AND ONLY THEN, is it the government's responsibility to intercede.

What's the word on the BATF raid in Dorchester over this last weekend?
Haven't heard anything much other a quick blurb on the toob and a quick
note in FIREARMS...

    OK, this RON's comin' out of the "view-only" closet for this one, due
    to my feelings on the BATF and my friend's personal experience with
    them covering the Waco debacle.
    
    Randy Weaver, a white separatist (more later), committed the heinous
    crime of sawing off a double-barreled shotgun one quarter inch less
    than the legal limit.  This was done at the direction of an undercover
    Federal agent.  For this, his wife and son were shot.  BATF agents
    broadcast loudspeaker messages for the next several days, while his
    wife's body lay in the doorway such as "Are we having a nice morning
    Mrs. Weaver?  Are you going to get up and fix breakfast or not, Mrs.
    Weaver?"  Lovely group, that, especially in light of their most recent
    little festival.  "Nigger hunting licenses"?  And these are the folk
    protecting us from dangerous elements?  With large-caliber automatic
    weapons?  Makes me comfy.
    
    Mr. Weaver is a white separatist.  I don't personally agree with his
    viewpoints, but respect his right to hold 'em.  Brigham Young, whom I
    also don't agree with in most respects, was a Mormon separatist.  We've
    got Southern Baptist church camps, Gay Men's Chorale, artist's colonies,
    Moonies and a ton of separatist groups out there, all of whose basic
    tenet is "We believe this and have decided to go believe it somewhere
    else".  They may try to recruit, but so does the Army, and I've got the
    option of saying "Nope".  Doesn't hurt me in the least.
    
    Tom Metzger is a white supremacist.  The basic tenet of a white
    supremacist, as shown graphically at the last BATF get-together, is "We
    believe this, we're right, all people like us should believe the same,
    and all the rest should die".  This violates the basic tenets of our
    Constitution and Bill of Rights.  It's also the basic battle cry of
    several of the noters in here who are apparently intent on ensuring
    "correct thought" is upheld at any cost...as long as it's their correct
    thought and the cost isn't to them.  I call this the "Hermann Goerring
    School of Intellectual Freedom".
    
    Currently we're seeing tons of media coverage on the militia and fringe
    groups.  A recent article in the Dallas Boring Snooze had a multi-pager
    on such groups over the years, including Aryan Nation, the White
    Socialist Workers Party, the Klan, Posse Comitatus, etc.  Conspicuously
    absent were the Underground Weathermen, the Symbionese Liberation Army,
    the Black Panthers, and more of a left-wing bent.  I think some people
    have their opinions pre-digested for them instead of doing the research
    to form their own.  Seeing these opinions then regurgitated isn't very
    attractive, although the hurler usually feels better.
    
    We've got the right of peacable assembly here (it's even in writing),
    and if Mr. Weaver felt like peacably assembling with his family in the
    middle of the woods in Idaho, he should have that right without
    government approval of his thoughts or feelings.
    
    The Weaver case makes extremely interesting reading, if anyone's been
    following the actual details instead of the headlines.  In addition,
    I'd recommend a quick peek at the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to
    provide a backdrop.  Mr. Moore has done both and much, much more.
    
    Then again, there are certain noters who apparently think Mr. Moore
    needs "re-educated".  They would be happier researching "The Cultural
    Revolution" on China, "After the Fall" on Vietnam, and a few other
    books that might give them the tools and techniques some Thought
    Supremacists (not Separatists, if you'll notice) over the years have
    found work best.
    
    								Tex
    

    re: Mike Wannamacher
    
    Perhaps you can help me out here a bit, because I'm trying to
    understand just what it is that you all *do* consider a full and
    independent investigation.
    
    In 1994 a Deparment of Justice task force was created by AG Janet Reno
    to investigate what took place on Ruby Ridge on and before August 1992.
    
    Now here's the part I'm having trouble understanding.  If you believe
    that organizations can't investigate themselves, then I could
    understand how you just completely ignore the DOJ report regarding
    US Marshall's Service and FBI.  You'd be wrong to do so, but I can
    understand.
    
    But BATF works for Treasury.  In fact, the BATF that made a mess of
    things on Ruby Ridge worked for a Secretary of Treasury who was
    appointed by George Bush.  (I'll leave the effort of opening your
    wallet to more than likely figure out who that was to you.) 
    
    You might think it would be in DOJ's best interest to blame BATF
    for Ruby Ridge.  Yet they did not.  They correctly faulted the
    FBI (which *IS* part of DOJ) for the criminal rules of engagement.
    
    
    So when (not if, *WHEN*) Specter's hearings also find BATF acted properly
    and did not persecute Randy Weaver for his religious beliefs and did
    not entrap Randy Weaver...
    
    ...will you accept Specter's hearings as independent?  (We've already
    had several 'boxers *including* *you* say that they are going into
    these hearings having to be convinced that Specter's hearings are
    independent.)
    
    
    So I'm faced with concluding on this question.  Just what investigation
    that finds the BATF not guilty on Ruby Ridge *WILL* you all accept
    as open and independent?  You already haven't accepted one.  You
    probably won't accept another.
    
    Just what will it take for you all to believe that BATF wasn't waffen
    stormtrooper fascist anti-religious anti-christ ZOG evil enemy number
    1 on Ruby Ridge?
    
    (The answer I keep reading from you all over and over again is
    *nothing* will persuade you.  You have your prejudices, and you want
    them confirmed, damnit.)
    
    								-mr. bill
                           

   <<< Note 375.252 by PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left" >>>
>                                     -< ? >-

	I don't know about Mike, but personally I would be more
	comfortable with an independent prosecutor doing the 
	investigating.

	You question concerning the DOJ investigating a branch of
	the Treasury Department has little value. After all, we
	don't trust them to investigate suspected wrongdoing
	at Commerce, Transportation, etc. What's so special
	about Treasury that we think that they can be objective
	there?

Jim

    
    re: Tex
    
|   OK, this RON's comin' out of the "view-only" closet for this one, due
|   to my feelings on the BATF and my friend's personal experience with
|   them covering the Waco debacle.
    
    Waco is in Texas.  Ruby Ridge is in Idaho.
    
|   Randy Weaver, a white separatist (more later), committed the heinous
|   crime of sawing off a double-barreled shotgun one quarter inch less
|   than the legal limit.
    
    Two short barreled shotguns, far shorter than 1/4" less than the legal
    limit.  This is myth number 1.
    
|   This was done at the direction of an undercover Federal agent.
    
    Randy was all by himself up on that mountain with the hacksaw that day.
    He was not entrapped.
    
|   For this, his wife and son were shot. 
    
    What, you skipped resisting arrest.  You skipped all the good stuff
    about being told to show up on the wrong day and Randy showed up the
    wrong day.  (That's not true either, but it's part of the myth.)
    Than you skipped all the fugitive from the law stuff.
    
    No, you just jump right from hacksaw to shoot wife and son.
    
    His son was shot during a shootout.  His wife was shot after Weaver,
    his daugther, and Kevin Harris threatened to shoot a helicopter.
    
    That's why they were shot.
    
    They were *NOT* shot because Randy Weaver had shotguns and
    Randy Weaver had hacksaw and Randy Weaver put two and two together
    and saw $$$$$.
    
|   BATF agents broadcast loudspeaker messages for the next several days,
|   while his wife's body lay in the doorway such as "Are we having a nice
|   morning Mrs. Weaver?  Are you going to get up and fix breakfast or not,
|   Mrs. Weaver?"
    
    BATF agents were not involved with the shootout at the Y in August 1992,
    nor involved with the standoff at the cabin.  (The FBI did not know
    Mrs. Weaver was dead.)
    
|   Lovely group, that, especially in light of their most recent little
|   festival.  "Nigger hunting licenses"?  And these are the folk
|   protecting us from dangerous elements?  With large-caliber automatic
|   weapons?  Makes me comfy.
    
    Still trying to understand how it comes to pass that BATF agents
    are simultaneously racists incarnate yet also would persecute
    a white separatist (no more on that later).
    
|   The Weaver case makes extremely interesting reading, if anyone's been
|   following the actual details instead of the headlines.
    
    Well, help me out here.  Because your retelling of the "facts"
    are consistent with various newsgroupies "reporting," Playboy
    and Stormfront.
    
    I am insterested in interesting reading.  Can you point me to some
    good material?  Something not found in the "fiction" section of my
    local bookstore.
    
    								-mr. bill
    

|    	You question concerning the DOJ investigating a branch of
|	the Treasury Department has little value. After all, we
|	don't trust them to investigate suspected wrongdoing
|	at Commerce, Transportation, etc. What's so special
|	about Treasury that we think that they can be objective
|	there?
    
    You are quite mistaken.
    
    DOJ commonly investigates Commerce, Transportation, even Congress,
    Judges, etc etc etc etc....  Independent council act is triggered
    under very very rare circumstances where it appears there *might* be
    a conflict if DOJ investigated.  You all take that as since there
    *might* be a conflict in investigation Ron Brown there *is* a
    conflict in investigating everything and anything.
    
    
    Just get to the bottom line.
    
    DOJ is gummint and you don't believe gummint.
    
    PERIOD.
    
    
    You haven't directly answered my question about the congressional
    hearings, but since you are calling for a independent council,
    I think you have answered my question.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    Bill,
    
    
    	A congressional investiongation is a good start.  
    
    Perhaps it would be easier to resond to you if you were to quit being
    so antagonistic and confrontational.  We can discuss this without you 
    having to call people names.
    
    With a congressional investigation, there are some folks in congress
    who want to get to the truth (by what they've said in correspondence).
    Am I going to be totally convinced after this is done?  How can I
    answer that now if I don't know what will come to light.  I will not
    commit an answer to that question until the hearings are over.  You
    see, I wait until I get the information and THEN I make a decision.
    
    The investigation that you referred to which was already done came out
    with several flaws in the way things were conducted and left many
    questions still open.  And that was from an agency which is friendly
    with the BATF.  The brotherhood among officers exists and it transcends
    what agency one is from.  I've seen it.  I'd be happy if the investigation
    was done by an independent group.
    
    When the BATF was withholding evidence and lying after the event just
    like when Waco was dozed a few short days after the fire, it leads me to 
    be suspicious that someone is covering up something.
    
    
    
    Mike

|    	A congressional investiongation is a good start.  
    
    A good start?  A good finish.  If the congressional investigation
    correctly concludes that BATF was not the problem at Ruby Ridge,
    isn't that a FINISH?
    
|   You see, I wait until I get the information and THEN I make a decision.
    
    Bahahahahaha.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    Bill, 
    
    I've tried to be reasonable, but there is no reasoning with you.  Have
    fun with your little tirades, hope they make you feel good about
    yourself.  I feel pretty sorry for you......
    
    Cheers,
    
    Mike

   <<< Note 375.255 by PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left" >>>

>    Just get to the bottom line.
    
>    DOJ is gummint and you don't believe gummint.
    
>    PERIOD.
 
	Bill, it becomes nearly impossible to carry on any sort of
	reasonable discussion with you. I stated quite clearly that
	I would be more comfortable with special prosecutor (please
	note that there no longer is an independent counSEl law).

	That means exactly what it says and nothing more. Congressional
	hearings are better than nothing, but I have suspicions about
	hearings held by politicians because in many cases their motives
	may be less than pure. Note that this works BOTH ways. It is
	just as likely that a Member or Senator will pander to the
	right wing as not.

	On your point about potential for conflict of interest. It would 
	appear that the possibility certainly exists.

	At both Ruby Ridge and Waco we have the BATF initiating (rightly
	or wrongly) the hostilities and then the FBI is called in to clean
	up the mess. You will note that the FBI is a branch of the DOJ.
	You should also note that the ONLY justification for FBI involvement
	was the mis-handling of the situation by the BATF. It wouldn't
	be too hard to imagine a DOJ bureaucrat coming to the realization
	that unless the BATF actions were found to be valid, the FBI
	involvement could not be considered valid. That would appear
	to show some potential for conflict of interest.

>    I think you have answered my question.
 
	You are, of course, free to think anything you like. You are also
	free to be wrong.

Jim

    Dear Mr. Bill;
    
    I'm aware that Waco is in Texas and Ruby Ridge is in Idaho.  I'm not
    currently aware which end of your anatomy I am addressing, as your
    writing gives no indication.  My friend's experiences with the BATF
    *were* at Waco, not Ruby Ridge.
    
    I'm coming to understand why people feel such glee in spreading
    Preparation H on your literary efforts.  I don't feel much further need
    for comment.
    
    Back to RONness.
    
    								Tex

    re: Tex
    
    Since you are back to read only, I'll give you a few read only
    pointers...
    
    First, the "trial transcript"....  These are summaries posted
    during the trial on various bbs and usenet newsgroups.  Oh,
    the person that posted these messages?  Was from the Idaho
    Survivalist....
    
    ftp://aphrodite.nectar.cs.cmu.edu/pub/firearms/politics/rkba/weaver-trial
    http://www.ccrkba.org/pub/rkba/mirror/aphrodite/weaver-trial.Z
    
    	(If you insist on the actual trial transcripts, you want
    	"Transcript of proceedings in United States v. Randall C. Weaver
    	and Kevin L. Harris, CR 92-080-N-EJL"  But since the source
    	of these is the US Government....)
    
    For the more popular info:
    
    http://www.pathfinder.com/@@jdSUOwAAAAAAAKrh/time/magazine/domestic
    /1995/950529/950529.guncontrol.weaver.html
    
    http://www.playboy.com/expose/overkill.html
    
    From the militia side of the web....
    
    http://www.tezcat.com/patriot/Waco_Weaver/
    
    If you aren't offended by white supremicists, (not separatists,
    SUPREMICISTS) then seek out Stormfront, which is an excellent
    source of misinformation on Ruby Ridge, Waco, and various other
    lovely topics.
    
    
    For the DOJ report, seek out:
    
    http://www.counsel.com/ruby/ruby1.htm
    
    
    You see, an odd thing happens.  When you take a look at the various
    sources, you consistently find there is a disagreement to the facts.
    
    The odd things is, the reports from the Idaho Survivalist and the
    DOJ report consistently agree on the significant facts.  (Such as
    the size of the shotguns.)
    
    								-mr. bill

    
> |   OK, this RON's comin' out of the "view-only" closet for this one, due
> |   to my feelings on the BATF and my friend's personal experience with
> |   them covering the Waco debacle.
>     
>     Waco is in Texas.  Ruby Ridge is in Idaho.

    billy, what on God's great green earth were you trying to prove with
    that asinine statement? 

    :-|
    Dan

    RE: .264
    
    Oh no. I'm about to defend Mr. Bilge.

    He went back, read through all the stuff that clearly is not
    his particular brand of politics, digested it, understood
    it and now is kind enough to point others toward it.

    You can argue with his conclusions, but Hayzeus Marimba, at
    least give the man some credit for doing his homework,
    especially if you're unwilling to do the same legwork to
    defend your conclusions.

    -b

 .265  hear, hear

|   Either mr bill has no life, or he is completely obsessed by the fact
|   that HIS GOVERNMENT MIGHT have done something ..... <dare we say it>  
|   wrong !
    
    Yup.  And you know what?  I found that they *DID*!
    
    But I also discovered that vast quantities of misinformation which
    have been put forward out there that are nothing but lies, lies, and
    more lies.
    
    HEAR ME CLEARLY!
    
    The rules of engagement were criminal.
    
    SO WHY LIE?
    								-mr. bill

    > The rules of engagement were criminal.
    
    > SO WHY LIE?

    I think you will find that amongst those who put the majority
    of the blame on the government, that the rules of engagement
    are the central issue, in that many of the other events
    (the shooting of Vicki Weaver, for instance) may not have
    happened had the correct rules of engagement been applied.

    On the other hand, I have come to agree with you to the extent
    that I wonder what all the other miscellaneous noise is all
    about. Personally, I'd like to see Ruby Ridge result in as
    many limits upon federal police as we can possibly leverage
    out of it... virtually impotent federal police is not something
    that I find particularly disheartening. But all the other
    misinformation harms the chances of those of us whose agenda
    is to disembowel the federal government from making as much
    hay out of this as we'd like to... (not that I think you
    agree with my political goals, only that I agree with you
    that we should stick with the provably bad stuff...)

    -b

    
    I deleted the note that was here.  Markey is correct in that it was a
    cheap slam of mr bill.  I should have been above that.  Some times I
    let people with an obnoxious attitude get under my skin.  I apologize
    for the cheap slam to mr bill, and to any of the 'boxers who were
    exposed to my slip up.

    Again I'm sorry....
    
    And now back to our regularly scheduled insanity, inanity, etc....

    :-)
    Dan

	NBC News reported this morning that the FBI Agent in charge
	at Ruby Ridge (Halloran?) has been suspended.

Jim

    The senior FBI Agent in Charge at Ruby Ridge was Eugene Glenn.
    
    Richard Rogers was the commander of the HRT at Ruby Ridge was
    responsible for creating the rules of engagement.
    
    I don't know who "(Halloran?)" is.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    > Richard Rogers was the commander of the HRT at Ruby Ridge was
    > responsible for creating the rules of engagement.
                      ^^^^^^^^
    Honest question: Did he really "create" the rules?  Please specify for
    my educational purposes....

    :-)
    Dan

    FBI-DISCIPLINE 

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI has reportedly suspended a senior official
    after an investigation into allegations of a cover-up involving a
    deadly 1992 standoff in Idaho. Authorities declined to identify the
    official who was suspended. But The Washington Post quoted sources as
    identifying him as E. Michael Kahoe, who heads the agency's office in
    Jacksonville, Fla. Kahoe, sources say, is alleged to have destroyed a
    document that could have altered the account of the standoff with white
    separatist Randy Weaver. Weaver's unarmed wife, Vicki, was shot and
    killed by an FBI sniper. 
   
    AP NewsBrief by MARIS PERLOW 

    And in other news....
    
    NPR reporting this morning that 6-12 present or former BATF agents
    attended the Good Ol' Boys Roundup.  Present BATF agents who attended
    the events have been investigated.  According to a spokesperson for
    BATF, agents are on duty 24 hours a day, and agree to conduct
    themselves accordingly.
    
    
    Read .210 again, keeping in mind the very broad brush that was
    used in this painting.
    
    								-mr. bill

    >supremicists, SUPREMICISTS
    
     supremacists. NNTTM

    >> Authorities declined to identify the
    >> official who was suspended.
    
    Why?  Is this some kind of Secret Police?  If a police officer
    were to be suspended in our town, his name would be in the paper.
    What makes this any different?  Because it's the... F B I ?
    
    Chris

    Saw that good ole boy party the BATF agents had...couldn't believe it.  
    
    They had a sign up at the entrance that said "Nigger Check Point". 
    That's our government folks...not lilly white (No pun intended) as some
    of you think!
    
    -Jack

    
    The `Nigger Hunting License' was a nice touch.
    

       
       To set the record straight, the Good Ole Boys party was not
       organized by the BATF.  According to the reports I've read/seen,
       the GOB party is an annual (virulently racist) event open to
       anyone as long as they're white and male.  Again according to the
       reports, about 10 of the ~200 gentlemen at the GOB party were BATF
       thugs. 
       
       --Mr Topaz

    
    
    No, it wasn't BATF sanctioned, you only called that office if you
    wanted to attend.

       
       I make no effort to exonerate the BATF or the people who run it
       (and the people who run it might or might not be the people who
       are supposed to run it).  However, the previous note implied that
       the event was a BATF-only and/or BATF-organized event ("that good
       ole boy party the BATF agents had"); there's ample evidence to
       castigate the BATF without introducing bogus "facts".

    Correct.  I was just mentioning what they said on CNN!

   <<< Note 375.270 by PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left" >>>
>                     -< On NBC news, please followup.... >-

	I caught it in passing. The guy they were describing apparently
	wrote a report that turned up "missing".

	I'll check the paper and see if it has anything.

Jim

           <<< BACK40::BACK40$DKA500:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SOAPBOX.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< Soapbox.  Just Soapbox. >-
================================================================================
Note 375.247                The BATF "Strikes" Again                  247 of 281
>PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left"  40 lines  12-JUL-1995 12:28
>                  -< What the BATF bashing is all about.... >-
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>|   The appearance of excessive use of force by federal law enforcement
>|   agencies on apparently non-violent citizenry, the the appearance of 
>|   the lack of will by their upper management for a full and open 
>|   investigation into these allegations or to take measures to correct 
>|   the alledged abuses, is why many have defaulted to the 'guilty until 
>|   proven innocent' tact.
>    
>    Begin translation....
>    
>    They are guilty, don't confuse us with facts, they are guilty.

    In a later note you acknowleged that the rules of engagement were
    criminal (as everyone here would agree).
    
    What we want are changes that insure that these kinds of abuses stop.
    
    Further, we want the behaviour of individual agents made public and
    the apropriate responses taken (no whitewash).
    
    But if the only answer we get from their management is - the victim is
    lying, then we can certainly say that we think the management is lying.
    
    Full investigation does not stop with Ruby Ridge or Waco.
    
    Think of it as an audit and management reorganization rather than 
    point of blame.
    
    Doug.

    re: Brite::Fyfe
    
|   In a later note you acknowleged that the rules of engagement were
|   criminal (as everyone here would agree).
    
    No, in an earlier note I stated that the rules of engagement were
    criminal.  [362.367]  And in an earlier note I highlighted a judges
    concern with the rules of engagement.  [362.449] And in an earlier
    note I highlighted the DOJ conclusion on the rules of engagement. 
    [399.154]  And in an earlier note I stated that the rules of engagement
    were criminal.  [399.179]  And in an earlier note I stated that the
    rules of engagment were criminal.  [399.223]  And in an earlier note
    I stated that the rules of engagement were criminal.  [375.252]
    
|   What we want are changes that insure that these kinds of abuses stop.
    
    Changes have already been made which almost certainly prevent such
    rules of engagement in the future.
    
|   Further, we want the behaviour of individual agents made public and
|   the apropriate responses taken (no whitewash).
    
    The behaviour of individual agents has been made public.
    
    Some of the demands of "appropriate responses" have been to say
    the least, innappropriate.  (Nutters publishing the home address
    of one agent with maybe somebody in the area should stop on
    their way home from the shooting range to his house, wink wink
    nudge nudge ha ha ha ha blah.)  But if you agree with some boxers
    with the demands are that individual agents should be tried for
    homicide then no, I don't think you will ever get the "appropriate
    response" because the facts don't warrant such a response.
    
    Then there are all the misplaced demands, such as demands about
    BATF based on the actions of members of FBI.  Demands about BATF
    based on the actions of members of the US Marshalls.  And about
    BATF based on the internment camps during world war II.
    
|   But if the only answer we get from their management is - the victim is
|   lying, then we can certainly say that we think the management is lying.
    
    You start with the premise that you are being lied to.
    
    Facts that *SHOW* that you are being told the truth and the people
    who claim you are being lied to are the ones who are lying appears
    just to fuel the conspiraratti.
    
    And the only answer from "managemenet" has not been "the victim is
    lying".
    
|   Full investigation does not stop with Ruby Ridge or Waco.
    
    No it doesn't.  But there ought to be a modicum of facts to prompt an
    investigation, rather than just a spew of lies about jack-booted this
    and waffen that.
    
|   Think of it as an audit and management reorganization rather than 
|   point of blame.
    
    "Management reorganization?"  And all this time I thought it was
    a dilbert premise that to make it look like there is change without
    making actual change all you had to do is reorganize.
    
    And for an audit, I think you need to start with *facts* not *fiction*.
    You seem to disagree.
    
    								-mr. bill

>|   Further, we want the behaviour of individual agents made public and
>|   the apropriate responses taken (no whitewash).
>    
>    The behaviour of individual agents has been made public.
 
    Seems like the more press attention, the more gets out to the public.
    Now, they're admitting they've investigated a coverup.  This just in.
    
    DougO
    -----
    AP 13 Jul 95 1:00 EDT V0475
 
    Copyright 1995 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 
    AP Top News At 1 a.m. EDT
    [...]

    FBI-DISCIPLINE 

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI has reportedly suspended a senior official
    after an investigation into allegations of a cover-up involving a
    deadly 1992 standoff in Idaho. Authorities declined to identify the
    official who was suspended. But The Washington Post quoted sources as
    identifying him as E. Michael Kahoe, who heads the agency's office in
    Jacksonville, Fla. Kahoe, sources say, is alleged to have destroyed a
    document that could have altered the account of the standoff with white
    separatist Randy Weaver. Weaver's unarmed wife, Vicki, was shot and
    killed by an FBI sniper.   

    see .272

    sorry.  some nimnul editted one of yesterday's entries resetting my
    current-note pointer to notes I'd already read, so I next unseen'd a
    big chunk...and missed your note (and others, I see.)  My mistake. 
    It still seems worthwhile to include at least a pointer as a rebuttal 
    to certain statements that all the agents' actions are public.
    
    DougO

    NBD

    <<< Note 375.282 by SEAPIG::PERCIVAL "I'm the NRA,USPSA/IPSC,NROI-RO" >>>

>	I caught it in passing. The guy they were describing apparently
>	wrote a report that turned up "missing".

	Turns out that the agent in question was in charge of the
	investigation in Idaho, not in charge of the operations.

Jim

PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left"  67 lines  13-JUL-1995 12:50
                                     -< ? >-

>    You start with the premise that you are being lied to.
 
    I start from knowing that we haven't heard the whole story, just the 
    bits and pieces they want us to see. Do you disagree?
   
     
>    And for an audit, I think you need to start with *facts* not *fiction*.
>    You seem to disagree.
>    
>    								-mr. bill

     It is clear you have no understanding of my position on these matter.
     But please continue to include me in the conspiracy crwod if it works
     for you.

Doug.

Senate hearings set on ATF's whites-only 'Roundup'


(c) 1995 Copyright the News & Observer Publishing Co.

(c) 1995 Reuter Information Service

WASHINGTON (Jul 14, 1995 - 19:54 EDT) - The Senate Judiciary
Committee will hold a hearing July 21 on the participation of some
federal law enforcement agents in a whites-only "Good Old Boys
Roundup" in Tennessee, Sen. Orrin Hatch said Friday.

The annual event attracted several hundred state, local and federal law
enforcement officers, according to news reports this week.

Signs and T-shirts with racial epithets were on display and blacks
were not welcome, according to those who attended.

Hatch said he had information that some agents from the FBI, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the Drug Enforcement
Agency attended the event, which has taken place each year since
1980. It was started by an ATF agent.

"These events, if true, disgraced federal law enforcement in the United
States," Hatch, R-Utah, the committee chairman, said in announcing
the hearings. "I condemn this conduct. The Senate condemns this
conduct."

He said he wanted to question Attorney General Janet Reno, Treasury
Secretary Robert Rubin, FBI Director Louis Freeh and ATF Director
John McGaw about what steps they were taking to find out who was
involved and discipline them.

McGaw said he had launched an internal investigation into ATF
involvement in the event. He said he believed no more than six active
ATF agents attended this year, along with several retired agents.

However, "CBS Evening News" reported Friday night that
investigators have determined at least seven active-duty ATF agents
were at the gathering.

In addition to ATF, the Justice Department, FBI, Secret Service, U.S.
Marshals Service and Drug Enforcement Administration have all begun
internal investigations regarding the event, according to CBS.

CBS said Treasury and Justice Department investigators were
examining federal agent membership on a board of directors that
oversaw the event and were trying to determine whether government
vehicles or expense accounts were used by agents attending.

The retired ATF agent who organised the event defended it Friday.

"The main purpose we got together again was for fellowship," retired
agent Gene Rightmyer said. "We played golf, went whitewater rafting,
camped out. And we drank beer."

The ATF is already under fire by more than a dozen black ATF agents
who are suing the agency for race discrimination.

"Everyone in the ATF learns about the Good Old Boys Roundup when
they come on the job," said David Shaffer, the attorney representing the
black agents.

CBS said officials also had to determine what to do about agents who
didn't attend the event but knew about it and said nothing.

The Senate hearing will take place two days after two House
subcommittees open what is expected to be a critical hearing on the
actions of the ATF and FBI at the 1993 siege at the Branch Davidian
compound near Waco, Texas.

ATF gets 22 planes to aid surveillance
Weapons-capable aircraft repainted

by Jerry Seper

	The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has obtained 22
counterinsurgency, heavy weapons-capable military aircraft.
	The 300-mph OV-10D planes-one of several designations used by
the Marine Corps during the Vietnam War for gunfire and missle support 
of ground troops, and by the Air Force during Operation Desert Storm 
for night observation-have been transferred from the Department of Defense
to the ATF.
	The turboprop aircraft, which will be used for day and night 
surveillance support, were designed to locate people on the ground 
through their body heat.
	When used by the military services, the planes were equipped
with infrared tracking systems, ground mapping radar, laser range-finders,
gun sights and 20mm cannons.
	ATF spokeswoman Susan McCarron confirmed yesterday that the agency
had obtained the aircraft but noted they had been stripped of their armament.
She said that nine of the OV-10Ds were operational and that the remaining 13
were being used for spare parts.
	Ms. McCarron said the aircraft were obtained by ATF from the Defense 
Department "when DOD was getting rid of them" and that other agencies also
Department "when DOD was getting rid of them" and that other agencies also
	General Services Administration records show that some of the unarmed 
aircraft also were transferred to the Bureau of Land Management for use in
survey work, while others went to the California Forestry Department for use
in spotting fires and in directing ground and aerial crews in combatting them.
	Other models of the OV-10 also are being used by officials in 
Washington state for nighttime surveillance of fishing vessels suspected of
overfishing the coastal waters.
	The transfer of the aircraft to ATF comes at a time of heightened 
public skepticism and congressional scrutiny of the agency's ability to 
enforce the law without trampling on the rights of citizens.
	The ATF's image suffered mightily in the aftermath of its 1993 raid
and subsequent shootout at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas 
during which four agents and six Davidians were killed.  It sustained another
public relations blow after it was revealed that ATF agents helped 
organize a whites-only "good O' Boys Roundup" in the TEnnessee hills.
	Hearings of the Waco matter begin tomorrow in the House.  A Senate
Judiciary Committee hearing on the racist trappings of the Roundup is 
scheduled for Friday.
	One Senate staffer yesterday said there was some "real interest"
in the ATF's acquisition of the aircraft, and that questions "probably
will be asked very soon of the agency" about the specifics of their 
use and locations where they have been assigned.
	According to federal law enforcement sources and others, 
including two airline pilots who have seen and photographed the ATF 
planes, two of the combat capable aircraft-known as "Broncos"-have 
been routed to Shawnee, Okla., where they were painted dark blue over 
the past month at an aircraft maintenance firm known as Business Jet 
Designs Inc.
	Michale Pruitt, foreman at Business Jeet Designs, confirmed 
yesterday that two of the ATF aircraft had been painted at the Shawnee 
site and that at least one more of the OV-10D's was on the way.  Mr. 
Pruitt said the aircraft were painted dark blue with red and white 
trim.  The sources said the paint job cost the ATF about $20,000 each.
	The firms owner, Johnny Patterson, told associates last month 
he expected to be painting at least 12 of the ATF aircraft but was 
unsure whether he could move all of them fast enough through his shop.
Mr. Patterson was out of town yesterday and unavailable for comment.
	According to the source, the ATF's OV-10Ds recently were 
overhauled under the government's Service Life Extension Program and 
were equipped with a state-of-the art forward-looking infrared system 
that allows the pilot to locate and identify targets at night-similar 
to the tracking system used on the Apache advanced attack helicopter.
	Designed by Rockwell International, the OV-10D originally was 
outfitted with two 7.62mm M-60C machine guns, each with 500 rounds of 
ammunition.  It also was modified to carry one sidewinder missle under 
each wing, Snakeye bombs, fire bombs, rocket packages and cluster 
bombs.  The OV-10D can carry a 20mm gun turret with 1500 rounds of 
ammunition.
	During the Vietnam War, two OV-10Ds were used for a variety of 
missions during a six week period and flew more than 200 missions in 
which they were credited with killing 300 enemy troops and saving 
beleaguered outposts from being overrun by the communists.


From The Washington Times 7-18-95   
    
    All typos are mine
    

Just what we need, BATF agents bombing the wrong house:-(

Let me guess, the hard points on those aircraft have NOT been removed.

Bob

    
    > The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has obtained 22
    > counterinsurgency, heavy weapons-capable military aircraft.

    Why does this scare the bejezzes outta me?  Maybe the BATFAG's track
    record of (im)properly utilizing equipment?
    
    :-(
    Dan

    >stripped of all armaments
    
    
    Yeah, but how long would it  take to put them back in?  
    
    Why does this worry me?
    
    
    -steve

    Why aren't all the "white good ole boys" being fired?  The "right
    to do what they want on their own time" falls a little thin here.
    I'd hate to be a black BATF agent going on assignment with one
    of the "good ole boys" knowing I had to rely on a racist to cover
    my back.
    
    

    
    Why isn't the whole damn BATF being dismantled?
    There are plently of other law enforcement agencies that can do their
    job.

 Bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and snarfs

    
    
    I agree 100%, Hank.
    

            <<< Note 375.294 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "NRA member" >>>

    Add my voice to the previous replies.

    The US has a huge problem of criminals illegally buying and selling 
    firearms.  It is the responsibility of the BATF to investigate and 
    make arrests for these crimes.  This requires good old-fashioned 
    police work.  It does not require aircraft with M-60 machine guns 
    or 20mm cannon.

    If you dismantled this particular bureau, would it be necessary to
    mantle another bureau?

You'd have to Mantle the Bureau of Alcohol.

    .299> Why isn't the whole damn BATF being dismantled? There are plently
        >of other law enforcement agencies that can do their job.
        
    They're part of the Treasury department.  If you try to get them
    dismantled, you will probably be Audited up the Ying-Yang (and other
    more painful locations).
    
    	Skip

    
    ...The Bureau of Stinkin' and Drinkin'... ;^)
    
    

    Ironically, the old Rockwell turboprops are favorite drug running
    planes due to their long range, short takeoff distance from rough
    runways, and good ground clearance with their high wings.

    Going to play devils advocate once again due to the lack of consistenct
    in our society dealing with privacy issues.
    
    Let's assume that here we have 20 BATF personnel attending a good ole
    boys party.  Now I have no use for people like this.  I see them as
    racist, divisive, and ignorant.  Nevertheless, even though they are
    BATF agents, they are also guarenteed the same rights as any other
    wackos out there.
    
    I guess what I'm saying is I find any talk of investigation of these
    people Politically Correct and disingenuous.
    
    -Jack

    
    re:.308

    I'm torn on this issue Jack.  There is the concept of holding these
    people to a higher standard.  I believe that we should hold police to a
    higher standard specifically because we have loaned them power, which
    if they abuse, will cause us as a people great pain and suffering.

    Dan

    Higher standard...perhaps; however, they are still entitled to the same
    constitutional rights as the next bigot!!!
    
    -Jack

    
    Agreed Jack.
    
    Dan

    
    I would agree that they have the same rights to privacy (I'm a huge
    advocate of individual rights).  If some of them want to be the Grand
    PooBaa of some racist group - that's their business.  But, if the
    agency, through its actions, sanctions such an organisation, the agency
    needs to be fixed.  The article indicated BATF knew what was going on
    and did not discourage it (although they could not prove it encouraged
    the practice).
    
    I have been following the exploits of BATF for a while, and there is
    more than enough cause to disband the group.  This just adds fuel to a
    blazing inferno.
    
    	Skip

    Of course, the press got something wrong again. The OV-10 can't come
    close to 300mph. It's a low-and-slow observation plane. One of it's
    primary advanatages as such is it's ability to be very stable at about
    55 mph. It originally was designed and entered service as a spotter
    plane for artillery.

    The point isn't that the BATF personnel should have equal
    Constitutional rights. The point is that BATF and most of the alphabet
    soup agencies routinely deny these same rights to the people they
    are supposed to be serving.  The problem is their hypocricy.
    
    

    I still think they should be held to a higher level of personal
    conduct.  I feel the scenario I used earlier in this string could
    have a strong impact on morale and running a cohesive unit.  I
    would NOT want to be a minority involved in a field operation wondering
    if the slug that hits me will come from the perp in front of me or
    in my back from "one of the good ole boys".
    
    Trust plays a major part in people surviving dangerous situations.
    
    Some of you have used a pretty broad brush to paint all members of
    these groups as abusers of human rights; I do believe there needs to
    be a clean up, but I don't believe they are all bad apples.
    
    

    Well if that's the case, then they should be under the auspices of the
    military since they have their own code of conduct.
    
    -Jack

    .316  Well if that's the case, then they should be under the auspices
    .316  of the military since they have their own code of conduct.
        
    The thing is the military is not supposed to do overt and covert
    operations in the U.S. of A. unless it is against some foreign group.
    (Of course, that never stopped the CIA.)
    
    BATF was supposed to enforce treasury laws (tax on alcohol and tobacco
    for example), which are strictly domestic.  Their role has expanded,
    though to include firearms and drugs, and it would appear, religion.
    
    	Skip

    re .313
    
    The OV-10 "Bronco" is basically what the news article describes, 
    the low and slow "observation aircraft" you describe is another
    aircraft altogether (I don't immediately recall the maker/model, 
    but it's the one they used in the movie Bat 21 to find and rescue the
    downed pilot). That's the one with one pusher and one puller prop
    on th rear and front of the fuselage.  The OV-10 "Bronco" is a 
    twin-engine turbo-prop, designed as a recon and ground attack platform.
    I'll look up and post the real specs of both monday or tuesday when 
    I get back from a long weekend.

    re .318
    
    Cessna Skymaster?

    Yes, .318 is referring to the Cessna Skymaster (or mixmaster.) In the
    army, it was know as the OV-2. In civilian life, it's the C-337.
    
    The OV-10 is also a low-and-slow...but with two turboprops pulling over
    400 horses each instead of two piston engines doing 200hp each, it can
    carry some weapons as well. The OV-2 could only carry smoke rockets to
    mark an enemy position for strike aircraft. I'm pretty sure the
    original mission design of the OV-10 was spotting for artillery, with
    the light attack capability added. The OV-10 can actually go slowr than
    the OV-2.
    
    Trivia: the OV-2/C-337 is the only civilian design ever adopted by the
    army with no modifications.

    Another trivium:  The OV-2/C-337 gets 60% of its power from the pusher
    engine.

    Which is why, when the rear engine fails on takeoff, they tend to
    crash. Of course, it's always labelled "pilot error."

    There was another "low and slow" plane in use in VietNam, called the
    YO-3 made by Hughes, it was basically a glider with an extremely
    quiet engine turning a 6 bladed prop at a very slow RPM. I once saw
    one fly by at a distance of under 100 yds, and it was vitrually silent, 
    just heard a very low "whoosh whoosh whoosh" and no engine sound.
    It was used for forward observation and looking for VC or NVA hiding
    in the brush. Typically, it led a formation of helicopters, a couple
    of OH-6 LOHs, and followed distantly by a couple of Cobra AH-1
    gunships. The YO-3 carried no armamants, but could carry a couple of
    small smoke marker rockets to pinpoint a target for the Cobras.

    Hank asks...
    
|   Why isn't the whole damn BATF being dismantled?
    
    Mike replies...
    
|   I agree 100%, Hank.
    
    So much for waiting for the facts before you decide.
    How are the hearings going for you?
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    The Katona family is a poster family for Middle America.  Louie's
    wife is a  devoted mother.  Louie himself owns a real estate agency.
    He was a part-time  police officer and a full-time community
    contributor.  But he is also a gun  collector.
    
    Based on a trumped-up charge that he falsified certain BATF forms,
    BATF entered  his home.  During the raid, his wife, Kimberly, became
    understandably agitated  and upset.  An overzealous agent pushed his
    wife against a wall.  Within hours,  Kimberly, then several months
    pregnant, began bleeding.   She soon miscarried.
    
    Did BATF apologize to this family?  No.  Instead, BATF pressed
    criminal charges  against Katona.  This past April, a judge threw the
    charges out of court.  The  Katona family has civil action pending
    against ATF.
    
    The reasons for the Constitution are many, but one primary reason is
    to limit raw government power that we have seen nearly destroy the
    Katona family....

TIME Magazine

July 24, 1995 Volume 146, No. 4


Return to Contents page 


COVER BOX

LEGEND IN THE MAKING: THE RAID THAT
WASN'T

BY ERIK LARSON/BUCYRUS 

It has become the quickest way to fame in America's gun culture. And
one morning in May 1992 it happened to Louis Katona III, a Bucyrus,
Ohio, real estate salesman and part-time police officer. He got to tell all
about it when the National Rifle Association flew him to its annual
meeting in Phoenix last spring--how agents of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms, the "jackbooted fascists" of N.R.A. lore, had
raided his home and seized his machine-gun collection. At the time, he
estimated the guns' value at about $300,000 and kept them locked inside a
walk-in vault in his basement, expecting them one day to pay for the
college educations of his son and his second child, whose birth he
expected in seven months. One version of what happened next appeared in
a recent full-page N.R.A. advertisement: "When shouting and cursing
ATF agents rushed into his home to seize his firearms collection, they
grabbed his pregnant wife Kim and shoved her into a wall. Within days
she suffered a miscarriage." The Katona episode is one of the most vivid
horror stories the N.R.A. has been telling lately in its campaign to pillory
the ATF. In a lawsuit now pending in Cleveland federal court, the
Katonas are charging the ATF with the death of their unborn child and
other offenses. But there's much more, or ultimately less, to this story
than the N.R.A. would have people understand. 

What prompted the "raid" was Katona's arsenal of machine guns. Under
the National Firearms Act of 1934, anyone hoping to buy a machine gun
must first fill out a federal authorization and have it signed by the chief
law-enforcement officer of the community. Until September 1988
Katona was an auxiliary Bucyrus police officer and took his forms to his
boss, Chief Joseph Beran--an immense, bearded man with a shaved head
and a passion for Harley-Davidson motorcycles. At one point, Katona
claims, the chief presigned a large stack of forms. Beran denies it. 

During the summer of 1988, their relationship decayed. The department
demanded that Katona turn in an old Bucyrus police chief's badge that his
father had bought for him at a gun show. The department claimed it had
been stolen long ago from another collector. When Katona refused, he
was forced to resign. Meanwhile, Crawford County sheriff Ronny
Shawber had persuaded almost all the county's police chiefs to agree to a
moratorium on authorizing machine-gun purchases. Beran agreed. In
August 1989 he wrote to Katona: "Dear Louis, I'm sorry, but I am not
signing these forms any longer." Over the next two years, however,
Katona kept buying machine guns and submitting the required forms to
ATF, all apparently bearing the chief's signature. 

In choosing the targets of its investigations, the ATF relies heavily on tips
from local police. In March 1991 the Cleveland office of ATF got a call
from Sheriff Shawber, who had come to suspect, erroneously, that
out-of-towners were buying machine guns from Louis Katona's father,
Louis Katona Jr., a licensed dealer, and then listing false local addresses
on their registration forms. 

The ATF waited almost a year before dispatching compliance inspector
Thomas Scoufis to check the elder Katona's records. In the process he
stumbled across records of the son's purchases and quickly became
suspicious, according to an ATF affidavit. He showed Beran a form with
the chief's own signature, but Beran said he could not have signed it; he
had honored the moratorium. 

Scoufis alerted ATF's Cleveland office. Soon afterward, special agent
Lance Kimmell met with Beran and showed him more forms bearing his
signature but dated after his letter to Katona. The chief denied signing
them. In a deposition, Kimmell said, "I had all the probable cause in the
world to believe that the firearms had been transferred illegally, and there
had been a mass forgery of documents that took place." 

A federal magistrate agreed and on May 7, 1992, authorized a search
warrant. In contrast with a recent N.R.A. ad that showed a photograph of
ATF agents in battle gear rushing toward the reader, the raiding party that
stormed Bucyrus the next morning consisted of three ATF agents, one in a
suit, the rest casually dressed. No one brandished any weapons. As a
matter of protocol, they invited Bucyrus police officer Jerry Agee to
come along. 

While Agee and special agent Stephen Wells waited outside Katona's
house, agent Kimmell and group supervisor Stephen St. Pierre went to
Katona's office and waited for him to return from an errand. They told
him they had a warrant to search his house. As the search began,
according to Officer Agee, Katona offered the raiders "coffee and pop." 

Katona charges that Kimmell handled the guns roughly. "He started
holding the guns one at a time up to his belt level and turning [to] me and
giving me a little sneer and dropping them one at a time on the concrete,"
Katona stated in a deposition. Officer Agee told ATF Internal Affairs
investigators the height was more like three to six inches. Agent Wells
said he and his colleagues took good care of the guns. 

But the most infamous moment came midway through the search when
Katona's pregnant wife Kimberly arrived, furious at the intrusion and
embarrassed that the agents would see her laundry room. Seconds later,
the Katonas say, ATF supervisor St. Pierre grabbed Kimberly and
"slammed" her against a wall, shouting, "Get this woman the hell out of
here." But agent Agee and lawyer James Pry both said the agents did not
handle Mrs. Katona roughly. 

She began bleeding that night, the Katonas charge, the beginning of a
miscarriage. Ten days later she underwent a pelvic ultrasound
examination, but medical records obtained by Time show this exam
yielded an unexpected discovery: an "intrauterine gestational sac without
embryonic echoes, suggesting a blighted ovum." Three specialists, asked
by Time to review Kimberly Katona's records, agree in their conclusion:
she had lost her baby well before the raid even began. The sac was empty,
but her body had continued to develop as if the pregnancy were viable.
Says Ilan Timor, head of Columbia University's obstetrics-gynecology
ultrasound unit: "That bleeding would have come sooner or later anyway,
whether there had been a raid or not." 

ATF won an indictment against Katona, but handwriting experts for both
sides agreed they had found no conclusive evidence linking the alleged
forgeries to Katona or anyone else. As a result, the judge dismissed the
case. 

Kimberly Katona, in a tear-filled deposition, said the agents didn't have
to raid the house but could simply have asked Katona to explain how he
got the signatures on the forms. ATF director John Magaw agrees, saying
the agents should have asked themselves some questions first: "What is
this we're trying to enforce? What is the danger to the public here?" He
adds, "We're going to work a case like this differently in the future." 

But Sheriff Shawber wonders why the case got tagged as an example of
federal abuse in the first place. "It just baffles me," he says. "Because it
would appear to me that there was something going on there. There were
forged documents." 

Copyright 1995 Time Inc. All rights reserved. 




Text Only 



[email protected]

    

    
    
>   <<< Note 375.325 by PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left" >>>
>                    -< The "I'm the NRA" strikes again.... >-
    
    
    	anyone else go "huh?" after reading this note? The title implies a
    bash at the NRA, but the note speaks of the BATF abusing the Katona
    family. Did I miss something here?
    
    jim

    
    billy, we missed you.....:-)  It's nice to have such an easy target
    back in the 'box.....

    TIME.... Now THERE is a reliable source... 
    That's almost laughable.... 

    Dan

>     Did I miss something here?

	yeah. .326   ;-)

    
    	thanks Jols! :)
    
    	re; TIME
    
    	yep, real unbiased source there.
    
    jim

    
    Well, fine.  So `Time' is biased.  Are you saying that the NRA spin
    *isn't* biased?  
    

    
    John, are you trying to tell me that you actually BELIEVE the things
    that TIME publishes ! ! ! ! !

    And I used to think you were fairly intelligent..... Sorry, my mistake!

    Dan

    
    .332
    
    >And I used to think you were fairly intelligent...
    
    You LIE!  Why do you lie!    :^)
    
    >John, are you trying to tell me that you actually BELIEVE the things
    >that TIME publishes ! ! ! ! !

    Dan, I never said that I doubt TIME's bias.  I just don't see the
    NRA as a particularly unbiased source, either.
    
    Call me wacky.
    
    jc
    

    
    No, Jim, you missed nothing.
    
    								-mr. bill

    The Time piece attempts to expose all parties concerned.  It shows that
    Katona is not the mistargeted law abiding gun collector the NRA would
    lead you to believe he is.  It exposes a potential fraud on the part of
    Katona and wife for potentially incorrectly blaming the BATF for
    causing physical harm to Mrs. K.  It shows that Katona was not
    necessarily the citizen in good standing, part time police officer the
    NRA would have us believe.  It shows that the BATF has admitted
    there may have been some mishandling of the case by not investigating
    more fully what the issues were.  
    
    Brian

    
    
    
    Good one, William.  So an agent signs a deposition denying he did
    something to save his own hide and you buy it....
    
    Guns were dropped from six inches and the guy is doing it out of spite
    (by the sneer on the face, so that's okay.  
    
    If time did really acquire an ultrasound, the magazine is scum as well
    as the person who gave them the photos (assuming that they are really
    the right photos).  
    
    You're a laugh riot, William, in a sad sort of way.
    
    

    
    New slogan:
    
    TIME - The Official Publisher for HCI !
    
    :-)
    Dan

    Why is TIME scum for acquiring an ultrasound?
    
    Aren't they (regardless of any bias claims by one side or another) only
    finding actual facts that exist in this case and bringing the facts to
    light?
    Their comments on said facts might reflect bias, but not the facts
    themselves.

    
    You are assuming that they are reporting all the facts that they
    uncover.  This is not a safe assumption.
    
    Dan
    

     <<< Note 375.338 by SPSEG::COVINGTON "When the going gets weird..." >>>

>    Why is TIME scum for acquiring an ultrasound?
 
	Medical records are not public records. 

Jim

    Should we assume the NRA is providing the whole story as well?  Is the
    NRA not trying to hone an agenda?  Is the NRA going to throw light on
    certain facts that may damage the credibility of their new poster child
    for government abuse?  I don't think so.
    
    Brian
    

    
    
    Doctor/Patient confidentiality is why I consider TIME to be below
    board with regards to this article.
    

    Re: .339
    
    No such assumption made.
    
    I agree, selective reporting of available facts is bias, but I
    still think it's better than not reporting any facts.
    
    Re: Medical records are private
    
    Yes, but she is suing the BATF based on a medical condition. The facts
    of said conditon should be known, as she is suing a public agency.
                                   

    
    It would be interesting to find out if the BATF returned the
    weapons.  There were many cases of ATF agents confiscating weapons
    and not returning them after the accused was aquitted.  They
    had even defied court orders to return weapons.
    
    Since nothing was said by the NRA, I would assume the weapons
    were returned.
    
    	Skip

     <<< Note 375.343 by SPSEG::COVINGTON "When the going gets weird..." >>>

>    Yes, but she is suing the BATF based on a medical condition. The facts
>    of said conditon should be known, as she is suing a public agency.
 

	Then that would become part of the court documents during the
	presentation of the case. Prior to that they should still be
	confidential.

Jim

    re: .345
    
    Agreed.
    
    However, blame should be laid on the medical worker who provided them
    to TIME. 
    
    I have a very tough time attacking any member of the media who reports
    facts. It's what the press is there for. (<-- preposition)

    
    re: -3

    Last I heard, the stolen weapons had not been returned.

    re: -2

    > > Yes, but she is suing the BATF based on a medical condition. The facts
    > > of said condition should be known, as she is suing a public agency.
    > 
    > Then that would become part of the court documents during the
    > presentation of the case. Prior to that they should still be
    > confidential.

    Even then they can remain confidential.  The woman has a case against
    the hospital and TIME.  I hope she sues their butts off !

    Dan

    
    .346
    

    .348
    
    That's a lot of nonsense up with which Sir Winston Churchill declined
    to put.

    Debra, where are you coming from?

    Certainly not somewhere she's been to.

    .351
    
    ooh er missus!

    
    I'm going to bite each and every one of you.
    
    

    
    Zounds!!
    

    			Insert Dan ending a sentence with a prep here --->

    re: .354
    
    Does that mean you're gonna show up at the Dallas boxbash?  8^)

    .354
    
    ooh er MISSUS!

    
    Ah now, don't be so quick to assume that you're gonna LIKE it 8^).
    
    

    
    	Deb, you couldn't bite me anywhere I wouldn't like it....;*)
    
    
    

    That is a challenge that I, for one, would be loath to make, even
    protected by a smiley!!  (-: Have you seen that woman's teef??? :-)
    
     (said he, hoping for & trusting in the efficacy of double-smileys)
    

    
    	I've seen Mz_deb's rather lovely teeth when she smiled at me at the
    last box-fest/bash/frisbee championship. The thought of those teeth
    nibbling at my little bod just sends me into spasms of joy...;*)
    
    
    jim

    
    I concur Jim, however "joy" is not the first thing that came to my
    mind.... heh heh ;->
    
    Especially where {ahem} "SPASMS" were concerned..... :-))))))))

    Dan

    Didja say that there was FRISBEE played at the last 'BoxBash?   By
    crikey, I've been playing frisbee regular-like since (get this) 1957,
    when they wuz invented.  Leave us remember to include Frisbee in the
    agenda of future 'BoxRevels.
    
    I kin do thinks wiv a Frisbee that are guaranteed to put Killoran into
    spasms.  If I ain't lost my aim, that is...  |-{:-)
    

     <<< Note 375.346 by SPSEG::COVINGTON "When the going gets weird..." >>>

>    However, blame should be laid on the medical worker who provided them
>    to TIME. 
 
	THe medical worker is also scum, but that does not reduce
	Time's culpability.

>    I have a very tough time attacking any member of the media who reports
>    facts. It's what the press is there for. (<-- preposition)


	Let's assume that your 12 year old daughter is raped. The local
	paper prints her name and address. How tough would it be for
	you then?

Jim

    well, Sir Kalikow, I look forward to tossing 1 or 200 with you.

    180 gram frisbee?

    Re: .365
    
    As I don't have a daughter yet, I reserve the right to change this
    answer once I go down to my local Kids-'backwardsR'-Us and buy me one.
    
    I didn't say I couldn't blame the media - I said I'd have a hard time.
    I also think that if my daughter's rape had national significance, it
    would change things.
    
    To sum my reponse: 
    I dunno, I ain't been there yet.

	The following is excerpted from "The Air War over Vietnam"
	by Bernard C. Naity, George M. Watson and Jacob Neufeld.

	North American OV-10A "Bronco"

	Origin:	North American Rockwell.

	Type:	Two-seat counterinsurgency aircraft.	

	Engines: Two 715 HP AiResearch T76-G-12 Turboprops.

	Dimensions: Span 40 ft, length 41 ft 7 in, height 15 ft 2 in.

	Weight:	Empty 6,969 lb, normal take-off 9,908 lb.

	Performance: Max speed at sea level w/o armament 281 mph,
                     Combat Radius w/ max weapons load 228 miles.

	Armament: Four attachment points on sponsons extending from
		  either side of the fuselage, each accomodating 600 lb.
		  a fifth attachment point, under the crew pod, capable
		  of carrying 1,200 lb. Two .30 cal machine guns on each
		  sponson. Max weapons load 3,600 lb. The crew compartment
		  is armored. 

	Note: The OV-10D has new higher powered engines, capable of higher
	      performance and increased range.
    
    
    	
    	The aforementioned "low and slow" forward observation a/c as used
    	in the film "Bat 21" is the Cessna O-2A. The one with the 'push-me
    	pull-you' engine arrangement. 

    
    > I dunno, I ain't been there yet.
    
    I pray that you never will be there.... :-|
    
    Dan

    .371
    Tanx. Hope I never am.

    I hear the BATF field agents are being issued new head gear.
    
    Pointy white hoods.  Only medical personel will have a red cross
    on their robes.

    From yesterday's New York Times....
    
    But now, it turns out, the most damning accounts of the "Good Ol' Boys
    Roundup" - including a 90-second videotape showing the banner [Nigger
    check point] and tales of agents selling "nigger-hunting licenses" -
    were made by a fomer Fort Lauderdale polic officer [Richard Hayward]
    after he was prevented by the Roundups' oraganizer from distributing
    David Duke campaing literature and from expressing "white power"
    sentiments at the gathering.
    
    The tape - now widely considered suspect - and stories were, in turn,
    appearently fed to [The Washington Times reporter Jerry Seper] by an
    official [Corbin or Twist] of the [NRA].
    
    ...
    
    Mr. Powers, the NRA spokesman, said the decision [not to do anything
    with Mr. Hayward's account] was made because, after senior officers
    viewed the videotape, "there was something not quite right about it."
    
    -----
    
    What was not quite right about it, you see, is it is probably Mr.
    Hayward who put up the sign.
    
    So, what we have here is senior officials correctly deciding that
    spreading lies about the BATF was something the NRA has done quite
    enough of lately.  But one or more senior officials decided to launder
    the lies through The Washington Times.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    mr swill's got it all figured out....

    That Mr. Bill is certainly an astute chum.  I'll bet if we stick around
    long enough, we'll be given "proof" that the NRA is behind Kennedy's 
    assassination.  Move over Oliver Stone, we gots Mr. Bill.

    
    The New York Times: All the news that fits.

    Mr. Bill, the Dept of "Justice" wanted the origonal tape to see if
    it was fake or not.  The persons who had the tape told the DoJ that
    they would be willing to have a neutral party verify the tapes
    authenticity.  That way the origonal (and only "proof") wouldn't
    be destroyed, or lost).  The DoJ said no, they tried to subpeona the
    origonal.  They didn't get it.  So, the DoJ does the next best thing.
    Attack & destroy their credibility.

    Spin all you want.  It won't change that fact that a bunch of so
    called "militia" spent the night in the 'bama woods "locked and loaded"
    and ready for "WACO Two".
    
    How are you going to spin the fact that good ol boy Richard Hayward
    says David Duke *ain't* a racist, but the feds are?
    
    How are you going to spin the fact that good ol boy Richard Hayward,
    head of the Michigan Chapter of the National Association for the
    Advancement of White People, says that the NAAWP is *not* racist, but
    the feds are.
    
    How are you going to spin the fact that good ol boy Richard Hayward,
    two years ago was turned away from the Roundup with a car covered with
    "white power" stickers, says he ain't a racist, but the feds are.
    
    How are you going to spin the fact that good ol boy Richard Hayward,
    in 1991 and 1993 was refused permission to campaign for David Duke
    at the roundup, who of course, ain't a racist, but the feds are.
    
    
    Nah, such a man couldn't make up a fact or two along the way.  Nah.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    And by the way, spin all you want, when an NRA spokesperson says that
    they don't believe the guy either....
    
    								-mr. bill

    All I'm saying is the DoJ is slamming these folks because they 
    won't release the original tape to them.  The people who posses
    the tape knew this was going to happen.
    
    I don't believe anyone anymore.

             <<< Note 375.376 by CSOA1::LEECH "Dia do bheatha." >>>

If you read the post, you'd see that Mr. Bill isn't pointing the finger at 
the NRA, but at rogue members - guys so caught up in the spirit of the 
NRA's political objectives, they've gotten a bit carried away. Sorta like 
North and Poindexter, Halderman and Erlichman, ...and I'm sure you can 
think of a few lib administration overzealots. 

Date sent:        28 Aug 95 10:41:19 EDT
From:             "KAY M. SHEIL" <[email protected]>
Subject:          ALERT - PLEASE POST WIDELY


Subject: ALERT - PLEASE POST WIDELY

ALERT....PLEASE POST WIDELY.

CALL ORRIN HATCH  (202) 224-5251  WASHINGTON, D.C.
                                 (802) 524-4380  in Utah
                                 (202) 224) 6331 FAX in D.C.

Department of Justice Officials have made good on their threat 
against the Gadsden Minutemen of Alabama, Jeff Randall and Mike 
Kemp, and have given the national media an UNTRUE, FALSE, and 
LIBELOUS story about the EVIDENCE collected by them in a showdown 
last month.

ABC-TV NEWS on Sunday Night announced that the evidence given to 
the Justice Dept. was FAKE and that the men, which also includes 
Rich Hayward, were white supremacists themselves and KKK members.  

Those not familiar with the "history" of this saga, the men of 
the Gadsden militia were able to "visit" the Good Old Boys Round 
Up in 1995 held in Ocoee, Tennessee, every Spring.  The Roundup 
consists of BATF agents, but also include feds from the FBI, DEA, 
and others, and is for recreation and "fun".  It seems that 
another "visit" had been made in 1990 to the BATF Roundup in 
which much footage was taken of the BATF men engaging in racists 
activities (all of which has been highly publicized on national 
TV and the newspapers).  In order to prove that the BATF were 
thugs and racists, the men decided that ONE more visit was 
needed, so in the Spring of 1995 another visit was made to the 
Roundup.  This time photographs, voice recordings, and materials 
were collected that collaborated and backed up the first video - 
that this type of activity was still going on today - and the 
video was indeed factual.  

This evidence was protected by these men - and systematically 
turned over to the media (Washington Times) who printed the story 
in June 95 - and to federal officials - and to Congress.

A Congressional Investigation was held in which many BATF, FBI, 
and other federal officials testified - most all of whom knew 
about the roundup - and who agreed that this type of activity was 
"inappropriate" for federal law enforcement to participate in - 
and were supposed to take appropriate steps to identify and 
"discipline" the guilty parties.

In fact, Jeff Randall stated that (approx) 92 men had been 
identified by name who were in the videos, pictures, and in the 
recordings.  

Last month, the DOJ decided that they would FORCE the Alabama 
boys to give them the original VIDEO - and tried to subpoena it.  
The "boys" refused - and told the DOJ they would give them a 
copy.  The DOJ threatened them and said that they would just come 
a take it.  The Alabama boys said, "Come on", and men from 
several states came to Alabama and stood by their fellow 
Americans.  The DOJ then...decided to take the copy, BUT 
THREATENED that they would tell the media that the video was a 
FAKE.

The DOJ made good on their threat.   

What kind of justice is this?  They have not only discredited 
themselves but have committed libel and slander against these men 
who were trying to expose FILTH in our government.

CALL NOW.   CALL ORRIN HATCH.

CALL YOUR OWN CONGRESSMAN.  Post on FAX Trees,  FAX Networks, 
Phone Trees, and Computer Networks.   This kind of JUSTICE has 
got to stop.

These same men got away with this kind of action at WACO, so they 
think they can continue to bad mouth people and put in the press 
- and that makes it the truth.

NO WAY.

Dot Bibee
(904) 453-3656  PH/FAX

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from crl.dec.com by us3rmc.pa.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA09872; Mon, 28 Aug 95 19:53:27 -070
% Received: by crl.dec.com; id AA19502; Mon, 28 Aug 95 15:56:37 -0400
% Received: (from daemon@localhost) by xmission.xmission.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA01633 for roc-outgng; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 12:45:53 -0600
% Received: from sky.net ([email protected] [198.70.175.2]) by xmission.xmission.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA01620 for <[email protected]>; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 12:45:50 -0600
% Received: from ip006.sky.net (ip006.sky.net [205.242.50.6]) by sky.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA26752 for <[email protected]>; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 13:44:15 -0500
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Comments: Authenticated sender is <[email protected]>
% From: "Brad" <[email protected]>
% Organization:  MARC
% To: [email protected]
% Date:          Mon, 28 Aug 1995 14:20:01 +5
% Subject:        
% Reply-To: [email protected]
% Priority: normal
% X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.01)
% Sender: [email protected]
% Precedence: bulk

    
    FWIW, the DOJ has stated that there is plenty of other evidence
    that racist activities took place at the Good Ol' Boys affair.
    Only the videotape is suspected of being fraudulent.
    
    As an amusing (to me, anyway) aside:
    
    I had thought of putting David Duke in the "Whatever happened to..."
    topic last week, since he seemed to have dropped off the face of the
    earth (if we were only so lucky) after the '92 elections.  It seems
    his supporters are still busy little bees, I wonder what the Grand
    Wizard is up to these days?
    
    Scrubbing toilets at a gas station somewhere, I hope.
    
    
    
    Rob
    

    >My god, the NRA is part of the conspiracy!
    
     Why just yesterday you were accusing the NRA of being in on it...

    
    
    So William, how about the lib icon Senatah Byrd?  Hmmmmm?  Democrat in
    good standing, reformed member of the KKK, you saying someone can't
    change or is it only if they are coservative?
    
    
    And you talk about the NAAWP being racist, are you also willing to
    apply the same label to the NAACP?  Hmmmmmmm?
    
    
    

   > The tape - now widely considered suspect - and stories were, in turn,
   > appearently fed to [The Washington Times reporter Jerry Seper] by an
   > official [Corbin or Twist] of the [NRA].
    
   NBC reported that the tapes were first made available to the media through
   an Alabama militia group. The provider of the tape was brought to NRA 
   headquaters (paid by the NRA), his tapes reviewed, and the NRA decided
   not to pursue.

   Of course, they spent the next 30 seconds ellaborating on the "NRA connection".

   On another note:

    if you like conspiracies, you'll love NowhereMan on UPN   :-)
   

   Doug.

>Return-path: <[email protected]>
>Received: from europe.std.com by DBV (PMDF V4.3-13 #6313)
>From: pomi <[email protected]>
>Subject: FW: Good O' Boys saga (the other side) (fwd)
>Sender: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>
>Here is some interestng and timely info:
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Rest of story:
>
>There was a video tape made in 1990 by Richard Hayward of the Good Ol' Boys
>Roundup held in the hills of Tennessee. Hayward indeed was a David Duke 
>supporter. He went to the round-up because it was a theme event that 
>his personal views were comfortable with. As an attendee he just went 
>around with his video camera taking footage of the goings-on. His video 
>footage was not a covert effort nor driven by any agenda to embarrass 
>any federal agencies, etc. (The date is important to note here so as to 
>emphasize this sufficiently: the video in question is of the 1990 
>round-up event!)
>
>[Don Black Productions in Montgomery, Alabama is an independent lab 
>that has verified that the Hayward 1990 round-up video tape is not a 
>contrived "montage" by way of video splicing or other forms of video editing.]
>
>Now in 1995, Jeff Randall of the Gadsden Minutemen of Alabama went to 
>the round-up and covertly posed as a fellow law officer attendee. He 
>took a camera, made lots of still photos that show other attendees and 
>the various racist paraphernalia of the event. His group has other 
>still-photos of the event made in other years going back to 1989. The 
>racist paraphernalia and themes of the event appear consistently from 
>year to year -- all corroborating the footage on the video. Photos made 
>in different years of the event can be matched with respective year by 
>the color of wrist bands and hats that attendees were issued for that 
>year of the event -- the color coding or theme was different each year. 
>Jeff also conducted interviews of attendees and from doing that came 
>away with the estimate that roughly 25% of folks were baldly espousing 
>racist sentiments in their language.
>
>NRA people initially liked the story as they looked into it but as it 
>worked its way up the NRA chain of command, it eventually got to Wayne 
>LaPierre, and he rejected it -- not wanting to get the NRA involved in 
>the controversy that was sure to be stirred up by this. Is easy to see 
>as NRA has already gotten  a lot of flack with their "jack booted thug" 
>fund raising letter (truthful though it is) and probably did not want 
>to get involved in situations that could be used to further perpetuate 
>a spin that NRA is anti-law enforcement, etc., by that organization's 
>political enemies.
>
>Jeff Randall is a self-described libertarian. He decries racism and 
>says he has as much problem with some of the militias as he does 
>various abuses by the federal govt. and its agencies, i.e., those who 
>have exaggerated this incident beyond what is documented on video and 
>still photos. He lives in northeast Alabama -- about an hours drive 
>south of Huntsville. Mr. Randall denied that Hayward has any "close 
>ties", as reported, to Gadsden Minutemen -- that he is not a member 
>(the Gadsden Minutemen reports that it has black American members -- 
>which would put it at odds with Mr. Hayward's views). Nor has Hayward, 
>as reported, been involved over the controversy of the Gadsden 
>Minutemen refusing to surrender the original video tape into the 
>complete custody of the DoJ. As Mr. Randall has publicly made known, 
>they fear that the DoJ might tamper with the video and destroy its 
>usefulness as evidence in a court of law -- but nothing to do with 
>alleged personal family sequences of Mr. Hayward's family on the video, 
>contrary to what has been reported.
>
>The attorney for the Gadsden Minutemen does not have any legal actions 
>underway  at the moment but is basically sitting back and letting the 
>DoJ do its thing with this media blitz -- or put its foot squarely in 
>its mouth. The group claims to still have some portions of their 
>evidence that has not been publicly revealed as of yet and which are 
>still more damaging in nature than that seen so far. They of course 
>also claim to have an audio tape of DoJ threats to simply go out and 
>publicly lie about their evidences and attempt to discredit them -- 
>which they claim is a threat now being made good on (the threat 
>resulting over their refusal to not surrender the master video tape 
>evidence to a DoJ administrative subpoena [not a court-ordered subpoena]).
>
>Carl Stern, DoJ spokesman remarks:
>
>"Stern denied that the Justice Department had given an ultimatum to Hayward
>or Kemp, and he pointed out that the order was only an administrative
>subpoena signed by the inspector general of the Justice Department, rather
>than a court-ordered subpoena.
>
>'The inference is, if they refuse to provide it, they are trying to conceal
>something,' Stern said. 'If they refuse to provide it,' he added, 'then
>those who do the final reporting will have to discard it' as evidence."
>
>
>Perhaps instead of spouting such self-serving remarks on behalf of the 
>DoJ, Mr. Stern might look to see to it that members of the Gadsden 
>Minutemen and federal agents are both put under lie detector test as to 
>the facts of the Good Ol' Boys
>Roundup event. The Gadsden Minutemen claim they stand ready to undergo 
>such lie detector test. Perhaps also, DoJ could seek to contract 
>multiple independent labs to examine the 1990 Hayward video, with the 
>provision of the personal witness attendance of representatives of the 
>Gadsden Minutemen and their attorney to the lab process, and then the 
>allegation of an edited and purposely contrived video "montage" could 
>be either substantiated or else put to rest. Or does DoJ fear letting 
>the chips fall where they may?
>
>
>This account prepared by Roger Voss,
>Maple Valley, State of Washington,
>an admitted sympathizer to the concept of a
>constitutional republic of the United States.
>
>
>
>
>
>
                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                      The REAL question is:
    What will you do when they come for your NEIGHBORS guns?

          For God, Family, Country   -   Helen Johnson
           E Pluribus Unum & Ohio Unorganized Militia
           ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>[Don Black Productions in Montgomery, Alabama is an independent lab 
>that has verified that the Hayward 1990 round-up video tape is not a 
>contrived "montage" by way of video splicing or other forms of video editing.]
    
    Oh, for god's sake, you nitwits.
    
    Don Black is Stormfront.
    Don Black is Klan.
    Don Black would verify for you all that the holocaust did not take place.
    
    
    
    You all can't even keep your white supremacists straight.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    DO you have proof that the video was tampered with, Bill?

            <<< Note 375.390 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "NRA member" >>>

>    DO you have proof that the video was tampered with, Bill?


	Of course not. Bill is has now become what he most hates,
	a conspiricy theorist.

Jim

    
    For evidence that Don Black lies, see 87.330.
    
    Don Black Productions is an "independent lab".  Right.
    
    A twisty little maze of white supremacists, all alike.
    
    								-mr. bill

    Re .392:
    
    > For evidence that Don Black lies, see 87.330.
    
    For evidence that Bill Licea-Kane lies, see 362.566.
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.

       re .393, edp:
       
       It is either total ignorance or total amorality to compare Bill
       Licea Kane to Don Black.  I don't think you are ignorant, edp.
       
       Bill Licea Kane is outspoken, opinionated, and he often finds
       himself defending unpopular causes. 
       
       Don Black demonstrates some of the same qualities, and he does so
       as an open Neo-Nazi.  His Stormfront organization prides itself on
       promoting White Power, on denigrating blacks, Jews, and many other
       minorities.  Don Black also tells us that the Holocaust never
       happened.
       
       And edp sees fit to compare Bill Licea Kane and Don Black.
       
       Your soul, edp, may be far darker than anyone dared to imagine.
       
       --Mr Topaz

    Ah, my imagination's pretty strong, Don.
    
    DougO

    
    Anyone watch the Ruby Ridge hearings?  Feinstien is indeed an idiot. 
    If I was Spence, I would have reminded her that Weaver wasn't on trial,
    that he was already acquitted of most of the charges.  
    
    I also wonder why the media has waited almost 3 years to cover this
    story.  Actually, I have my suspicions why.  Sam Donaldson is one of
    the biggest gaping anal orifices in the world.  Asking a 14 year old
    girl if it was worth having her Mother and Brother killed for the
    $1,000,000,000 she received.  The old media dinosaurs should be retired
    and put out to pasture.  They spent much of their time looking very
    foolish.
    
    
    Mike

    -1 agreed Mike. he truely appears to have delusions of adequacy.

    
    >Sam Donaldson is one of
    >the biggest gaping anal orifices in the world.  Asking a 14 year
    >old girl if it was worth having her Mother and Brother killed for the
    >$1,000,000,000 she received.
    
    You CANNOT be serious.  Tell me you're not serious about this question
    being asked, please.
    
    

    
    
    It wasn't that direct, Deb.  It was something like.  Well, what of the
    money, I mean you've got a million dollars.
    
    
    

    Of course sympathetic Sam asked them how they felt about trading $1M
    for their mom. It makes for good ratings.

    Re .394:
    
    > It is either total ignorance or total amorality to compare Bill
    > Licea Kane to Don Black.
    
    > Don Black demonstrates some of the same qualities [as Bill
    Licea-Kane] ...
    
    'nuff said.
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.

    
    Shameful.  Absolutely shameful to even SUGGEST it indirectly.

    
    Day One was a home run day for the nutters.
    
    Damn the facts, there's conspiracy theories to weave.
    
    For those who missed it, the Gospel according to Saint Randy....
    
    	1 - Roderick shot Striker
    	2 - Cooper shot Samuel Weaver
    	3 - Cooper shot Degan (and poor old Kevin, mistakenly thought he
    	    bagged a ZOG agent)
    	4 - Horiuchi shot Randy Weaver
    	5 - Horiuchi intentionally shot Vicki Weaver, and he craftily
    	    waited until Kevin Harris was running through the door so
    	    he could get more than one of them with one bullet.
    
    Anyone who saw the door now understands how a crouching Vicki Weaver
    would not have been seen by Horiuchi.
                              
    
    In the if Randy Weaver's name had been Furhman....
    
    On Striker and the commotion....
    
    "I didn't have any idea what they were chasing, but I was hoping for a
    deer."
    
    Yesterday, Randy Weaver said the dog had never made such a commotion
    before, he new he was on to something.  It wasn't a deer, they didn't
    spook the dogs much, might have been a bear or a cougar.
    
    Uh huh.  Tell the truth, Randy.  You were hoping to bag a ZOG.  (But
    your lawyer told you that saying so would not be a good idea.)
    
    								-mr. bill

    You didn't expect to see the truth presented by the fourth estate,
    didja?

    
    
    See mr bill whine.
    
    Whine mr bill whine.
    
    
    You are a good government subject, mr bill.  Do as they tell you, it is
    for your own good.
    

    
    > For those who missed it, the Gospel according to Saint Randy....
    
    Of course you know better having been there at the time and all....
    

       The depth of Eric Postpischil's self-importance and amorality
       seems to know no bound.  Eric Postpischil is apparently wounded
       that Bill Licea Kane may have misquoted or misstated Eric
       Postpischil's words.  Words that must surely be so important that
       Eric Postpischil compares, then compares again, Bill Licea Kane to
       Mr Don Black, one of the most recognizable and virulent racists in
       the country.

       Don Black hosts Stormfront, "a white nationalist resource" that
       offers enough anti-black and anti-Jew propaganda to satisfy all
       the Mark Fuhrmans out there, and then some.  Don Black provides
       articles and pointers that tell us of the laziness and sloth of
       blacks and that the Holocaust never took place.  Don Black
       provides a lovely graphics library of Nazi symbols.  Don Black
       provides a letters column where readers share gems such as "All
       white people need to band together or our children have no
       future", "If your black, personaly, im tired of hearing you whine
       about slavery", or "Does the media always do whatever it can (lie,
       etc.) to glorify American minorities (Negroes, Latin Americans,
       Jews) and their cultures, etc., but only villifies Aryans?".   Don
       Black gives David Duke -- remember him? -- a column in which Duke
       concludes after a trip to India (where he is disgusted by
       "bug-eyed children," among other things) that he must recommit
       himself "to the struggle for my race's survival".  This is Don
       Black, to which Eric Postpischil, petulant and self-important to
       the core, compares Bill Licea Kane.

       Eric Postpischil, the self-styled "libertarian", all of your
       so-called logic, all of your words, all of your notes are corrupt
       so long as you cannot understand the fundamental wrong, the
       fundamental amorality, the fundamental loss of scale and
       perspective in your notes.  Postpischil, your notes are a sham and
       a disgrace; it is disgusting to see them.

       --Don Topaz
       

Did EDP strike a nerve about a whiney liberal?

When one person points to another as a liar and the same can be said about him 
it should be. The only comparison I saw was their (in)ability to tell the 
truth. hth

    .408
    
    Amos Hamburger, have you ever told a lie?  Ever?  Even once?
    
    If you cannot answer that question negatively, you are an admitted
    liar.  But I would never compare you to Don Black.  Comparing Bill
    Licea-Kane to Don Black and implying therefrom that the former is no
    better than the latter is a vicious, inexcusable act of libel.  Eric
    Postpischil deserves to be slapped with a suit.  And not one made of
    seersucker.

    Oh, yes, let's sue someone!
    
    Get a grip.

    No- doubleknit polyester, in lime green.

    
    
    Aaahhhh, the ole lime green leisure suit......  Geesh they were nasty.

    re: .409
    
|   Eric Postpischil deserves to be slapped with a suit.
    
    Nah, not my style to compose a letter starting with "Any future
    references..."
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    Hmmm...anyone think that maybe Eric is just rattling Mr. Bill's cage ?
    
    Nah, can't be.  Eric truly wants to compare Mr. Bill to a Nazi.

    well, edp doesn't typically go in for rattlin' cages...it may be the
    end result, but imo, it's not his goal....................

    Re .403:
    
    > 	5 - Horiuchi intentionally shot Vicki Weaver, and he craftily
    >	    waited until Kevin Harris was running through the door so
    >	    he could get more than one of them with one bullet.

    Weaver did not say that.  (See 362.566; this is not the first time
    Licea-Kane has said people said things when in fact they did not.)
    
    > Anyone who saw the door now understands how a crouching Vicki Weaver
    > would not have been seen by Horiuchi.

    Anybody who saw the diagram Horiuchi drew of what he claims he saw
    understands how, even if he is telling the truth, he shot at the top of
    a head without identifying it properly.
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.            

    Re .407:
    
    I see.  Lying is okay as long as you are on the good side.
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.

    Re .409:
    
    > Comparing Bill Licea-Kane to Don Black and implying therefrom that
    > the former is no better than the latter . . .
    
    I made no such implication.  I hold lying (when not under duress, et
    cetera) to be wrong, no matter who does it.  Wrong is wrong; I don't
    forgive Licea-Kane merely because he hasn't lied as much as somebody
    else.
    
    The reason I pointed out Licea-Kane's untrustworthiness is because it
    needs to be understood that you cannot rely on his words when seeking
    the truth; he has written false statements before and he argues almost
    exclusively with bald assertions, void of any reference to fact.  The
    fact that he is not as bad a person as some other does not in any way
    enhance his credibility.  Moreover, he has not acknowledged his error
    nor made any apparent attempt to admit his lack and provide evidence
    instead of assertion.
    
    > Amos Hamburger, have you ever told a lie?  Ever?  Even once?
    >
    > If you cannot answer that question negatively, you are an admitted
    > liar.  But I would never compare you to Don Black.
    
    Do you judge people by the moral ground on which they stand?  I am not
    usually so severe; everybody is human.  But if that is the data you
    need, then let me ask you why you ask -- if the answer is that a person
    has never lied as an adult and remains scrupulous of lying, do you then
    grant they have the high ground to criticize liars?
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.

    Oh, for god's sake....
    
    
    Did you write:
    
|   You [Binder] have the facts wrong.
    
    By golly, you did.
    
    
    Did you write:
    
|   Weaver didn't 'walk in' guns blazing; he was at home, not walking
|   anywhere.
    
    By golly, you did.
    
    
    Did you write:
    
|   The FBI went in, guns blazing.
    
    By golly, you did.
    
    
    Did you write:
    
|   The FBI shot first.
    
    By golly, you did.
    
    
    Did you write:
    
|   The FBI killed first.
    
    By golly, you did.
    
    
    Did you write:
    
|   The FBI killed a dog, a friend of Weaver, and an unarmed woman holding
|   a baby.
    
    By golly, you did.
    
    
    Were any of these bald assertions, void of any reference to fact, true?
    
    No, they were not.
    
    								-mr. bill

    re: .416
    
|   > 	5 - Horiuchi intentionally shot Vicki Weaver, and he craftily
|   >	    waited until Kevin Harris was running through the door so
|   >	    he could get more than one of them with one bullet.
|
|   Weaver did not say that.
    
    One - the absense of quotes in my reply would indicate to most readers
    that I was not quoting Weaver.
    
    But you are correct, I made a *major* blunder.
    
    5 - Horiuchi intentionally shot Vicki Weaver, and he craftily
	waited until Randy Weaver, Sara Weaver and Kevin Harris were
	running through the door so he could get more than one of them
    	with one bullet.
    
    
    Thank you for pointing out my error.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    And I will admit my blood boiled as Weaver did his speculative dance
    to demonstrate how it was that Cooper shot Degan.  And how Spence,
    learning from history, knows how to turn an exit hole into an entrance
    hole.
    
    
    At least Harris has the courage admit he shot the deputy.
    
    
    								-mr. bill

    Re .420:
                                                                     
    > One - the absense of quotes in my reply would indicate to most readers
    > that I was not quoting Weaver.

    Nobody said you were quoting Weaver.  You certainly were not quoting
    Weaver.  You were not even paraphrasing Weaver.  I'd happily agree that
    what you wrote bears no resemblance to anything Weaver ever said.
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.

    Re .419:
    
    It's amazing you have the gall to criticize what anybody else writes
    after your stupendous world-record blunder.  You should take a moment
    to acknowledge your glass house before you throw more stones.  Admit
    your error.
    
    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To find PGP, read note 2688.4 in Humane::IBMPC_Shareware.

    { Sound of cage being rattled repeatedly }

    
    
    From today's Washington Times
    
    
    Senators say ATF trumped up Weaver case
    
    Agents fabricated white seperatists criminal background panelists
    assert

    
    
    Can anyone say....
    
    ***** $3.4 million *****???
    
    Another question...
    
    How many of those people would be alive today if the there weren't so
    many "cowboy" mentalities???

 * Originally By: Bert Paul
 * Originally Re: Woodbridge Article part
 * Original Date: 25 Jan 96  20:44:00
 * Original Area: RTKBA
 * Forwarded by : Blue Wave/386 v2.21

From the Northwest Shooting News.

NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION: REMEMBER THE PLIGHT OF AL WOODBRIDGE

        It all began in the weeks before a fateful September day in
1989.  U.S. Customs authorities became suspicious of a package in the
mail from Canada to Washington state and called the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) to look into the matter.  Enter
BATF Special Agent Ben Silva.
        Silva examined the contents of a package and said that they
were gun parts but not machine gun parts as the Customs officials had
suspected.  Nothing in the box, silva said, violated either state or
federal laws.  To this fact, Agent Silva testified in a sworn
statement.
        The package, addressed to Allen Woodbridge of Big Al's Guns
located at 3202 East Valley Highway in Sumner, Washington, had been
temporarily shortstopped.  Woodbridge, a licensed gun dealer,
wouldn't have missed it because its contents were nothing he had ever
ordered from Canada or anywhere else.  But while the package was
still in federal hands, Silva approached the Pierce County,
Washington Sheriff's Department, where Woodbridge's shop was located,
and indicated to them that a raid on Woodbridge's business might
yield illegal machine guns.
        With the Sheriff's Department thus enticed, a search warrant
was obtained-despite the fact that no probable cause existed.
        The warrant was, oddly enough, issued for a box of legal
parts that the authorities already had in their possession.  The
warrant was issued for September 21, 1989, but the combined law
enforcement agancies of the BATF and the Pierce County Sheriff's
Department set up a "controlled delivery of the box on September
25-four days later than the warrant was issued.
        On that fateful day, Al Woodbridge was not on the property-his
home and his business occupying separate buildings on the same
property.  His wife, Lori Tkaczak, was home and met the delivery
person in the driveway, signed for the package, and took it back to
the shop where she left it before returning to the house.
       Within five minutes, BATF and Sheriffs descended upon the
house-not the shop, presented the warrant, and began to tear through
everything in every room in the house.  They never even asked about
(or even appeared to search for) the box, but when they came upon two
legal semi-automatic rifles-AR15s-which are designed to look like
fully-automatic military M-16s, the authorities obtained a second
warrant and searched both the house and the shop.
        They came away with four AR-15s, five "receiver tubes" from
legal kits for making semi-automatic versions of the World War II
British Sten gun, and three Thompson submachine gun receivers which
had been cut in halves to make them unusable. They also seized four
legal "auto sears," parts which, properly used, could make some
AR-15s fire in fully automatic mode.  None of these were inside the
guns, but were separated and apart from them.
        Al Woodbridge was also in possession of the proper federal
licenses to permit him to legally possess and manufacture
fully-automatic machine guns.
        But state laws in Washington prohibit possession of those
guns even with the federal licenses unless the licensee has current
contracts for manufacture and/or repair of machine funs with either
the federal government or a state law enforcement agency. Then, only
the machine guns being repaired would be in the licensee's possession.
        Charges were brought under Washington state law of illegal
possession of guns.  After a trial, and before the defense could even
begin its case, the judge ordered a "directed verdict" of not guilty
from the jury due to lack of evidence shown by the state.
        The legal wrangling, however was long and costly for
Woodbridge, and he knew, from the testimony in the state court case,
that the BATF and Agent Silva were at the center of the trouble.  He
thought that Silva must have lied and told the judge who issued the
warrant that the box DID contain machine gun parts.  No one had ever
identified who had sent the package in the first place, so it was
possible that even that had been a set-up.  So Woodbridge filed suit
against the federal agency and the agent responsible.
        Just days before the trial on the civil suit began - four
years after the ransacking of Woodbridge's home - a federal grand
jury handed down a 12-count indictment against Woodbridge charging
him with-again-possession of machine guns.  This time, though it was
in federal court.

        At first, the case went before U.S. District Court Judge
Robert Bryan, but was inexplicably turned over to Judge Jack Tanner-a
notorious gun control advocate.
        Before Bryan the defense tried to argue that the warrants
were "tainted" and that the evidence should be excluded.  Bryan
denied the motion, then passed the case off to Judge Tanner.
        From the outset, the transcripts show that Tanner showed
incredible contempt for Woodbridge and his attorneys while treating
the government's lawyers and witnesses with deference.
        By the time the federal trial began, two of the AR-15s-which
had been held by the Pierce County Sheriff's Department property room
since their seizure-were unaccountably missing.  They had last been
checked out of the property room by the BATF's Agent Ben Silva for a
firing test for evidence purposes.
        The prosecution presented the testimony of several experts on
firearms and that of Agent Silva and other law enforcemnet officers
who were present for the raid.  Include in the evidence were video
tapes of Agent Silva firing each of the AR-15s, the agent said fired
only in a fully automatic fashion.
        One of the experts claimed to have clamped two of the Thompson
submachine gun receiver parts together long emough to fire a couple
of two-round "bursts."
        The "auto sears" were entered into evidence before the
jury-even though Woodbridge was not charged with any crime concerning
their possession and the BATF  witness admited that "auto sears" made
before 1981 [as these were] were perfectly legal. Tanner allowed them
in, despite the possibility that the jury might infer guilt from
their presence.
        But when the defense attempted to introduce the federal
licenses that permitted Woodbridge to possess and manufacture machine
guns (OK according to federal law; and this was a federal trial!),
Tanner refused to allow the evidence.
        Once the prosecution rested, Judge Tanner demanded that
Woodbridge's attorneys give him a verbal synopsis of all that the
defense witnesses were going to say.
        In turn, Tanner denied them all saying: "If you can't
reproduce what the government agents have done that support these
charges, then I'm not going to let them testify."
        One, an officer from the Pierce County property room, would
testify about the "lost" firearms.  Denied.
        Another, a National Guard armorer, was to show how
semi-automatic AR-15s could be made to appear to fire automatically
by holding them the way Agent Silva was holding them in the video
tape-a method known as "slamfiring."  Denied.
        The same witness would also testify how the BATF's own
rulings allowed possession of the firearms in question.  Denied
        ...and how the cut up Thompson parts had been properly
brought into this country and were so cut up that the law no longer
regarded them as "machine guns."  Denied
        ...and how drop-in "auto sears" were legal.  Denied.  (Two
corroborating witnesses who would have said that they saw Woodbridge
legally manufacture those parts in a gunsmithing class prior to
1981-making them legal-were also denied.
        ...and his opinion about the "lost" AR-15s having been
destroyed because someone tried to get them to fire fully-automatic.
Denied.  (One government witness testified that he saw Agent Silva
put an auto sear in the AR-15 ahile he was test-firing it at the
range.  Tanner would not allow the defense to pursue that line of
questioning either.
        ...and how the Sten gun tubes were a part of commercially
available kits for assembling legal, semi-auto versions of the World
War II gun.  (Allowed, but cut off in mid testimony!)
        ...and how Woodbridge's licenses permited him to possess and
manufacture machine guns.  Denied.
        Another witness was going to challenge the BATF expert's
testimony about the practice of "slamfiring." Denied.
        Another witness was to testify that he had overheard Agent
Silva brag that he had convicted "more than 20 people" by
"slamfiring."  Denied.
        And another was to testify that he had checked the weapon
that Agent Silva had said fired ONLY fully-automatic, and he (the
witness) had fired it in semi-automatic mode.  Denied.
        In the end, in this second trial, Woodbridge was DENIED
putting on a defense!

        While the jury deliberated, Judge Tanner said to
Woodbridge-with the courtroom full of people and the media-"There is
no question in this court's mind after hearing this testimony-and I
have never heard of you before-that you are guilty as charged.  There
is no question about it."
        From there, Tanner launched into a diatribe about how
Woodbridge sold machine guns to criminals (there was NO evidence of
sales of any kind) who would shoot police officers.  And how nobody
should have machine guns.  And how it was "for the money" that
Woodbridge was involved with machine guns (a charge that Tanner
regularly injected even before the trial).
        Tanner's quote about Woodbridge's guilt was front page
news-the jurors were not sequestered.
        The defense moved for a mistrial on the basis that the jurors
may have been exposed to the media coverage (both on local TV and in
newspapers)-Tanner denied the motion.  After the denial, Tanner again
flew into a tantrum-accusing Woodbridge of being responsible for the
missing guns and how they would be used to kill police officers.
        On January 27, 1994, the jury returned the predictable
verdict.  Guilty on all 12 counts.
        But the travesty did not end there.  Woodbridge was denied
release pending appeal despite the fact that the Lewis County Sheriff,
William A. Logan, a Washington State representative, Tom Campbell, a
Washington State senator, Tim Erwin, a 25-year veteran of the Seattle
Police Department, Dale E. Gibbons, a Congressional Medal of Honor
winner and former Washington State senator, and U.S. Senate candidate
Leo Thorsness and others sent in letters and affidavits to the court
saying Woodbridge was trustworthy and not a flight risk. One even
offered to have Woodbridge live with him during the time until
sentencing.
        Of them Tanner stated bluntly: "Their judgement was bad."
        Tanner then began to contort sentencing guidelines so as to
give Woodbridge the maximum possible sentence.  He ignored the fact
that Woodbridge had no criminal record of any kind and even added to
the sentence because one ot the firearms had a legal, federally
registered and papered suppressor attached. Woodbridge had not even
been charged with any crime in relation to the supressor.
        Again Tanner carried on about the "greed" involved and how
police officers were being killed because of Woodbridge.  He compared
the gun dealer to Al Capone and finally sentenced him to 57 months in
federal prison.
        The case is on appeal, but Alan Woodbridge may very well
serve all of his time before his appeals are through.
        ALLAN WOODBRIDGE'S TRIAL WAS HELD IN A FORMER RAILROAD
STATION.
        REMEMBER: If it could happen to Al...it could happen to you
too.

        For further or current information contact:
        (in Portland, Oregon):
        Augi Enriquez, (503)283-4368
        (in Sumner, Washington):
        Lori Tkaczac (Al's wife), (206)863-4867
        (Or the man himself):
        Allan Woodbridge
        Unit 5-#23582-086
        P.O. Box 6000
        Sheridan, OR  97378-6000


The preceding article appeared in the January 1996 issue of Northwest
Shooting News.  The monthly paper is available for $10 per year.  It
is published by Manning Publishing, 760 Lynch Lane, Yakima, WA 98903.
Back issue price is $1.

    un-freaking-believable!

    Just don't say "jack-booted government thugs" or you'll be branded a
    radical reich winger NRA stooge dittohead and they'll raze your home
    (with you and your wife and children in it, of course- and they'll
    claim they did it to "save the children from abuse".)

    Glad we don't have a BATF in Canada. No wonder you guys are so
    paranoid.

    The only reason we're paranoid is because everyone is out to get us.

    Someone should put this "judge" in prison.  He should be sentenced to
    57 months (no parole), and banned from ever sitting on the bench or
    practicing law again.
    
    If the synops of the trial is accurate...

    yeah, in a Greek prison and dress him like Maria Callas. that'll fix
    his anal retentive conservative buttocks.