-Caveat Lector-
WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peace at any cost is a prelude to war!
A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia
November 28, 1999 #160
by: Doug Fiedor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous Editions at:
http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/list-hu.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
CONGRESSIONAL CLASS MISTAKES
The nation's premiere criminal class, Congress,
is on break yet again. Anybody know what they accomplished
this past year? Anyone care?
As usual, the budget was not done on time.
It was another last minute montage of "bipartisan"
agreements, whipped together in the last days of the
session so they could get out of town as soon as possible.
We'll see what type of unconstitutional and oppressive
riders got attached to the budget bills in a few months.
Right now, no one knows because hardly anyone on the Hill
ever reads the full budget bills. Anything could have been
attached.
One thing Congress did not do was to repeal
some archaic and unconstitutional laws. Nor did Congress
do anything to protect the people from an overactive
federal regulatory bureaucracy. Ditto for all those
unilateral laws passed by Presidential directives called
executive orders. No action.
A good part of the government is not Y2K
compliant, but those with oversight duties went home
anyway. Apparently, many in Congress do not care if
welfare checks will not be delivered on time. If there are
inner-city riots, they will authorize the Army to intervene.
Better that than miss a vacation day.
Once upon a time there were some rumblings
about a Waco hearing, but nothing happened. There is a
great body of proof that federal officials -- possibly
joined by foreign military people and certainly accompanied
by our military -- out and out gassed, burned and murdered
those poor people at Waco. But many in Congress (especially
Democrats) do not want to embarrass the government by
making all that public. Therefore, no one will be charged
with any of the crimes.
Same with the Danforth "investigation." It has
been months. What have they accomplished -- other than
trying to stop others from looking over the evidence, that
is? Nothing, would be a good answer.
Those tax breaks are looking good, though,
huh? Yeah, sure! The results on that legislation are
about the same as the results on the China campaign money
laundering and Waco investigations. Nada. No changes.
Nothing.
Yet, both the administrative and the legislative
branches say there is a tax "surplus." No reasons given,
though, why the national debt keeps increasing at the same
rate. How can there be a surplus and a national debt
increase at the same time? Government needs accounting
lessons, apparently.
Obviously, the federal government needs a
Mom. There needs to be a housewife -- someone who has
made a budget and paid the bills on time for a few years --
to take charge. Because, anyone wanting to refute that "no
inflation" myth need only speak with the person who does
the shopping for a family.
Congress also violated an amendment to the
Constitution they think no one knows about yet. The
Twenty-seventh Amendment to the Constitution states clearly
that: "No law varying the compensation for the services of
the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until
an election of Representatives shall have intervened."
That's the law of the land, folks.
But Congress gave themselves a hefty "cost
of living" pay increase to make up for that inflation they
say we do not have. According to the 27th Amendment, that
pay increase should not take effect until after the next
election. But, it did anyway. That's stealing.
Another blatant Constitutional violation was
identified to Members of Congress but also received no
action. That was the matter of Echelon, the National
Security Agency's system for listening to all of our
(except local) telephone calls and reading all of our
e-mail. The Fourth Amendment requires that a government
agent first get a warrant before spying on an American
citizen. NSA, however, has been tapping many of our
telephones for about fifty years.
One would think that those entrusted with
protecting and defending the Constitution would be
interested in looking into that little matter. But, other
than Rep. Bob Barr, apparently no one is.
We don't count, in other words. The
Constitution does not mean what it says, we can safely
believe. The NSA, CIA and FBI (all share in the
information) trump our Constitutional rights, Congress
tells us by its silence.
This Echelon matter begs for a class action lawsuit.
Actually, what we need is a "public prosecutor;"
one with the authority to prosecute any public official
violating his or her oath of office or a citizen's common
or Constitutional rights. Government officials have been
getting a free ride and doing exactly as they please for
way too long. When they violate the law, they should go
to prison.
THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT A MENU
Liberal law professors supporting the
Constitution? Shades of misunderstanding! What the hell
is going on nowadays? But, such are the rumblings in the
liberal media.
Actually, it's mostly just Laurence Tribe of
Harvard. Evidently, someone pointed out to him that
Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, and other Founders had
opinions that were 180 degrees out of phase with his on the
right to keep and bear arms. So was James Madison's, the
man who actually wrote the bill of rights and would
probably know what was intended.
George Washington said that: "Firearms stand
next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are
the American people's Liberty teeth and keystone under
independence." Washington instructed that "the rifle and
pistol are equally indispensable. ... The very atmosphere
of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference -- they
deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
Thomas Jefferson inserted into the Virginia
Constitution: "No Free man shall ever be debarred the use
of arms." Jefferson had good reason, as he later stated in
a 1787 letter to William S. Smith: "And what country can
preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from
time to time that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. ... The tree of liberty
must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of
patriots and tyrants."
Jefferson was also a firm believer in the right
of self defense: "A strong body makes the mind strong.
As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While
this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives
boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games
played with the ball and others of that nature, are too
violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind.
Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your
walks."
As George Washington can be called the "Father
of our Country," so then may Professor St. George Tucker
justly be called the most important legal scholar of the
early American republic. St. George Tucker taught law at
William and Mary from 1790 until President James Madison
appointed him to the federal court for Virginia, a post
which he held until 1827.
Some like to quote Tucker as writing: "In
America we may reasonably hope that the people will never
cease to regard the right of keeping and bearing arms as
the surest pledge of their liberty." That is a true quote.
However, there is a great deal more from this great
Professor of Law:
"If, for example, Congress were to pass a
law prohibiting any person from bearing arms, as a means
of preventing insurrections, the judicial courts, under the
construction of the words necessary and proper, here
contended for, would be able to pronounce decidedly upon
the constitutionality of these means."
It is not "proper" for Congress "to pass a law
prohibiting any person from bearing arms," even "as a means
of preventing insurrections."
According to the Annals of Congress 434
(June 8, 1789) St. George Tucker's friend, James Madison,
originally wrote what is now the Second Amendment to read:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body
of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural
defense of a free country."
Someone down the line reversed what
Madison wrote so as to put the preamble sentence first.
Nevertheless, the meaning is the same. The right of the
people to keep and bear arms "shall not" be infringed.
In fact, there's really nothing else for us to
know. Because, even if the Second Amendment was removed
from the Constitution today, there still would be no
authority for the federal government to regulate personal
firearms. The power, then, would belong to the States
alone.
Noah Webster warned that our personal arms
protect our country, our personal liberty, from a military
uprising: "Before a standing army can rule, the people
must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of
Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust
laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are
armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of
regular troop."
Webster's opinion is pervasive throughout
the writings of all Founding Fathers. Clearly, they wove
the personal right to keep and bear arms into our
Constitution because a well armed citizenry was seen as a
bulwark against oppressive government. And so it still
seems today -- what with the sudden appearance of over
65,000 armed federal officials and the military practicing
sneak attacks on our cities.
Yet, even though all the above -- and hundreds
of lines more -- of conclusive information is available to
any legal scholar who wishes to read, liberal academics
like Laurence Tribe still believe the right to bear arms is
limited, subject to "reasonable regulation in the interest
of public safety."
If Tribe is correct, then the right to teach
and practice law may also be limited "in the interest of
public safety." So can the freedom of the (liberal) press.
Our Constitution is the law of the land. That
being true, any person in authority must support all of it
equally. Else, they are breaking the law and should be
treated as such.
-----------------------------
For legal background material on our right to
keep and bear arms, see: the "Second Amendment Law
Library" at: http://www.2ndlawlib.org and "Sources on
the Second Amendment and Rights to Keep and Bear Arms in
State Constitutions" by UCLA Professor of Law Eugene Volokh
at: http://www.law.ucla.edu/faculty/volokh/2amteach/sources.htm
and http://www.gunscholar.org
CHOOSING A PRESIDENT -- McCAIN
We know them by the company they keep. So,
when we have a presidential candidate who is Republican in
Name Only (RINO), it's no wonder that the press love him.
Far left scribbler Lars Erik-Nelson wrote in
the NY Daily News that "McCain is different; he is a
warrior, not a hired-gun lawyer. He says what he believes,
and he cares about the causes he champions."
Yeah. But perhaps if McCain knew a little
about law he wouldn't have gotten in trouble participating
in the Keating Five fund-raising scandal.
This past month, McCain has made the cover of
nearly every major news magazine, and even some political
journals like The Weekly Standard. Even Carl Bernstein is
profiling him in Vanity Fair and he's a topic on Larry King
Live.
"I'm a journalist who is for a politician.
You're not supposed to do that," Michael Lewis admitted to
The Hartford Courant while finishing up a story for The New
York Times Magazine. "But after I write this piece, I'm
going to send money to his campaign. I just like being
around him. He's resisted the enormous pressure to be a
phony. There's great pressure to succumb to the phoniness
of politicians, and he hates it."
"McCain is so much fun to be around it almost
shouldn't be legal," said Robert Timberg, who told about
McCain's POW days in his book "The Nightingale's Song."
"He's perhaps the funniest man I've ever met. He has great
stories."
Great stories? Too bad none of them have
anything to do with honoring his oath of office in the
Senate. Showing up for work would be a start. McCain has
one of the worst absentee records on the Hill. In the
Senate, McCain has no legislative victories but he does
have a lot of enemies among his Republican colleagues.
Then, there's an off the record whispering campaign about
his hot-temper. Politically and personally, McCain is said
to be a loose cannon. Even McCain's hometown paper
questions whether he has the proper presidential
temperament.
Worse, many of the bills McCain champions
are totally and completely unconstitutional. For instance,
the anti-tobacco legislation attacks a legal industry that
is actually older than our country.
But, it's McCain's campaign finance bill that
makes him the darling of the liberal media. If the bill
ever became law, it would shut down the political speech of
citizen's groups from coast to coast and make the media
king of all political speech other than that paid for by a
campaign committee. Certainly, the media like that.
And it is many of the very same Washington
media people who supported Bill Clinton over George Bush,
simply because they thought Bush was "no fun," who now
support John McCain. This time, their reason is that
McCain is willing to go out and have a drink with them from
time to time. McCain is "fun" at the bar, in other words.
That's their justification for supporting him.
"Spinning is lying," McCain is quoted as saying.
That being true, McCain lied continuously about his tobacco
and campaign finance bills. Because, what he said was to
benefit the American people was not backed up by what was
written in the legislation.
There's a lot more, of course. Other
unconstitutional legislation pushed by McCain includes a so
called HMO bill of rights, more gun control, merit pay for
teachers and even "voluntary" teacher testing by state and
local education authorities.
McCain also supports the overbearing federal
regulatory bureaucracy's control of everything in our lives
from womb to tomb. For instance, on the ever expanding
EPA: "I support the strong national environmental
protection goals and the initiatives embodied in these
vital laws." And: "I believe we should continuously
examine the implementation of environmental statutes to
ensure that national anti-pollution goals are being met."
McCain claims he has integrity, yet what we
see is hypocrisy. He takes every opportunity to play to
the media -- and then trash other Republicans. He says he
wants campaign finance reform, then collects campaign
funds the old fashioned way -- from anyone with a checkbook.
And he uses corporate jets for campaigning, paying only the
first-class fares required by law, when the actual cost is
much higher.
He also chaired the Senate Commerce Committee
that should have passed a "bill of rights" for airline
passengers. However, as usual, it was all talk and no
substance. The lobbyists "talked" with him. McCain needed
a lift around the country for the campaign. That's all it
took.
CLINTON AND THE THIRD WAY, AGAIN
At "The Third Way: Progressive Governance
for the 21st Century," April 25, 1999 at the National Press
Club in Washington, DC, Bill Clinton joked around a little
about world socialism with his Third Way socialists friends
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder, Dutch Prime Minister Wim Kok, and
Italian Prime Minister Massimo D'Alema. (See the May 9
issue)
Last month, Clinton again talked of global
socialism to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) Annual
Conference Leadership Dinner. Generally speaking, Clinton's
speech was little more than a bunch of mean spirited
political baloney. However, he wound up his speech by
saying: "But we're going to globalize one way or the
other, and we'll be at the front of the line, or the back,
or somewhere in the middle. And I believe it is profoundly
in our interest and in the interests of the world for
America to be leading the pack."
Last week, at a dinner in honor of the
Conference on Progressive Governance for the 21st Century,
in Florence, Italy, Clinton clarified some of his Third Way
socialist ideas.
The word "Progressive," of course is the Third
Way's chosen word for socialism. In reality, today's Third
Way is little more than an extension of Cecil Rhodes and
the socialist training of the Rhodes Scholar program at
Oxford University. Which is also closely aligned with the
Fabian Society, a radical socialist group in England.
http://www.fabian-society.org.uk
Anyway, the Clintons were there to explain
the elements of progressive governance in the 21st century
to the less informed socialists. In his prepared text,
Clinton went on to clarify that "we have the Internet, the
global economy, exploding diversity within and across
national lines, the simultaneous emergence of global
cultural movements." So, the problem at hand will be how
to completely control everything, worldwide. He stated
that there are "profound problems among and within nations.
Making the most of our possibilities, giving all people a
chance to seize them, minimizing the dangers to our dreams,
requires us to go beyond the competing models of Industrial
Age politics; that's why we're here. We think ideas matter.
We think it's a great challenge to marry our conceptions of
social justice and equal opportunity with our commitment to
globalization."
That's when Clinton's speech started getting
interesting:
"We think we will have to find what has often
been called a Third Way -- a way that requires governments
to empower people with tools and conditions necessary for
individuals, families, communities and nations to make the
most of their human potential. In the United States, we
have proceeded for the last seven years under a rubric of
opportunity for all, responsibility from all, and a
community of all Americans."
Perhaps he got a little too close to his
personal life in that last paragraph with the "responsibility
from all" remark, but whatever. Anyway, Clinton thinks
that government should "empower people with tools and
conditions" to progress. Next thing you know he'll be
telling us how to go to the doctor, too.
"We have also recognized something that I
think is implicit in the whole concept of the European
Union, which is that it is no longer possible, easily, to
divide domestic from global political concerns. There is
no longer a clear dividing line between foreign and
domestic policy. And, therefore, it is important that
every nation and that all like-minded people have a vision
of the kind of world we're trying to build in the 21st
century and what it will take to build that world."
Which means, of course, a world controlled
by a central government delegating some "equal rights" and
equal means to all. Well, all except the chosen few
controlling everything, of course. They get rich.
In fact, he almost says that a couple paragraphs
later: "On social questions, I think there is an emerging
consensus that we should favor equal opportunity, inclusion
of all citizens in our community, and an insistence upon
personal responsibility."
"Personal responsibility," coming from him,
is a joke and a half by itself. However, in the lexicon of
the Third Way, it means that the serf-citizens are to
behave and do as they are told by their betters. And, of
course, the Clintons want desperately to become our betters.
Clinton also mused: "I think virtually every
European country has done a better job than the United
States in providing adequate family leave polices, adequate
child care policies, adequate supports." No matter that
the socialist countries do that by heavily taxing business
and the few people willing to work.
Apparently, though, Clinton thinks he has
the Third Way well established here: "So we have to
acknowledge while we, who say we are developing a Third
Way -- and in our case, we've been able to do it with the
smallest federal government in 37 years -- we have to
acknowledge the fact that some countries need more
government."
Yeah, yet another lie: "the smallest federal
government in 37 years."
Everything about that Third Way is lies and
propaganda. That is, everything except for the oppressive
laws and regulations they are putting in place. Those are
real. Watch for enforcement of these unconstitutional laws
and regulations in your neighborhood very soon.
~ End ~
**COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational
purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
