info/mirror-textfiles.com
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/opsxcq/mirror-textfiles.com.git synced 2025-08-06 20:16:52 +02:00
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity

update

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
OPSXCQ
2018-02-19 06:15:56 -03:00
parent 334b42bdf9
commit 4e17bfaa15
408 changed files with 368688 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

91
textfiles.com/politics/minute92.7 Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
To: eff-austin@tic.com
Reply-To: eff-austin@tic.com
Subject: minutes of EFF-Austin board of directors meeting of 14 July 1992
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 10:37:28 -0500
From: jsq@tic.com
MINUTES OF EFF-AUSTIN DIRECTORS' MEETING - July 14, 1992
Prepared by Ed Cavazos.
Board members present: John Quarterman, Ed Cavazos, Smoot Carl-Mitchell
Observing: Bruce Sterling, Susan Cisco, Dave Smith.
- --- Meeting convened @ 8:08
DISCUSSION OF INCORPORATION, CHARTER & BY-LAWS
In light of Mitch Kapor's encouraging news concerning the
future of EFF chapters, Ed Cavazos moved to proceed with with
incorporation as soon as possible. The motion was seconded by John
Quarterman, and unamnimously approved. The final blanks on the
Articles (version 1.01) were filled in with the proper names and
addresses. The official name of the organization will be:
"EFF-Austin." The current by-laws (version 1.00) will be reviewed by
Ed Cavazos and revised/updated to reflect any recent Board
decisions. The by-laws shall refer to the organization as "The
Electronic Frontier Foundation, Austin Chapter." They will be
presented at the next meeting for approval by the board and formal
adoption. Incorporation papers should be filed the week of July
20-27.
CYBERTEX
It was decided that the board is still very interested in
the Cybertex idea, though no formal proposal has been received in
response to a request for Cybertex proposals distributed last
month. There has been some interest expressed by various
individuals, and discussions with them should continue.
MAILING LISTS/NEWGROUPS
New names for the mailing lists were discussed. In order
to clarify the mailing list names for those who might be confused
by them, new names (which will work as well as the old were) were
decided upon. The "eff-a@tic.com" mailing list, which is the
general discussion and announcement list for EFF-Austin, has been
renamed to "eff-austin@tic.com". "Eff-abod@tic.com" which was the
mailing list for the board of directors and those working closely
with them has also been renamed to "Eff-Austin-Directors@tic.com."
The previous names of the mailing lists will still
work.
Prentiss Riddle will be offered the job of newsgroup
moderator. Prentiss volunteered to take on this task, and seems to
be dedicated and qualified.
OFFICERS/DIRECTORS
Ed Cavazos was elected to serve as Vice President, the
poisition left vacant when Jon Lebkowsky left the board. The Board
will consider new board members in the coming weeks.
UPCOMING MEETINGS/EVENTS
The previously discussed "Sysop Issues" meeting will be
held at a date in late July. A location is still needed, but an
effort to find a suitable meeting place soon will be undertaken.
Bruce Sterling will be contacting law enforcement officials about
possibly attending/participating in the meeting.
Dave Smith will organize the August Cyberdawg, preferrably
on a weekend to facilitate some out of town attendance.
John Quarterman will organize and conduct the September
29th meeting on the Matrix and accessing the net, as was previously
decided.
Susan Cisco will be organizing the October meeting,
which will be a book release/discussion of Hacker Crackdown by
Bruce Sterling. The date for this meeting will be picked in
September.
MISCELLANEOUS OTHER NOTES
In late 1992 or early 1993, The Review of Litigation will
publish a law review article by Ed Cavazos on Sysop Liability for
defamation posted on BBS's. The article argues for limited
liability based on the inherent right of reply which exists in the
BBS medium.
Steve Jackson was unable to be at the meeting as he was
attending DoverCon in Dover, NH.
- --- The meeting was adjourned at 9:40.
The next meeting will take place on August 11, 1992.

247
textfiles.com/politics/minute92.8 Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,247 @@
Minutes of the EFF-Austin Board of Directors Meeting
August 11, 1992
Meeting convened at 7:55 at Martin Brothers Cafe, 2815 Guadalupe.
DIRECTORS PRESENT: John Quarterman, Ed Cavazos, Smoot
Carl-Mitchell, Matt Lawrence
OTHERS PRESENT: Donna McLaughlin, David Smith, Susan Cisco
The minutes of the July meeting were unanimously approved.
CHANGES TO THE AUGUST AGENDA:
Ed Cavazos' addendum regarding the volunteer coordinator
and the EFF-Newsletter is to be discussed after the Charter, Bylaws
and Incorporation. Committee reports are to be given after program
planning discussion.
ROLL CALL
Steve Jackson, having missed two consecutive meetings,
needs to be reappointed to the board b/c of absences. Steve was at
DoverCon last month, and is in Japan this month. It was unanimously
approved that he be reinstated as a Board member and Secretary.
OFFICERS REPORT:
Pres: Nothing to report
VP: Discussion of Incorporation (see below)
Secretary: Absent
Treasurer: Nothing to report
ARTICLES, BYLAWS, INCORPORATION
The Articles of Incorporation were filed with the Secretary
of State on the week of August 3rd. The $25 filing fee was paid
by Ed Cavazos, since the creation of the bank account is pending
until official incorporation.
The Secretary of State's office returned them with a
request for correction. The problem stemmed from the discrepancy
between the number of board position listed (9) and the number of
current directors (5). After discussion, it was agreed that Ed
Cavazos would work with the Sec of State 's office to resolve the
confusion on this. If needed, the problem Article (art. 6) could
be modified to read: "initial number of directors constituting the
board is 5" and in the bylaws, it can be indicated that the board
can be expanded to 9 (section 2).
Version 2.0 of the bylaws were presented. All changes from
the previous version were unanimously adopted.
Matt Lawrence proposed a change to Bylaw II (A) section 11
("Presumption of Assent") to clarify some confusing language. It
was unanimously agreed that the last sentence of the section
(beginning with "Such a right..") be removed, and the remaining
language be modified to read as follows:
"A director of the Corporation who is present at a meeting of
the Board at which action on any matter is taken, shall be presumed
to have assented to the action unless his dissent is entered in
the minutes of the meeting or unless he shall file his written
dissent to such action with the person acting as the Secretary of
the meeting before the approval of the minutes thereof."
Also, the language of Bylaw I ("Introduction") was revised so
that the second paragraph reads:
"EFF-Austin shall from time to time informally conduct
activities and correspond with others under the name "Electronic
Frontier Foundation -- Austin Chapter" to signify its relationship
with its parent national organization: The Electronic Frontier
Foundation."
The Board unanimously agreed to adopt these changes pursuant
to Bylaw VII and to incorporate them into version 2.1 of the
Bylaws.
Matt Lawrence also expressed his approval of Bylaw II (B)
("Officers") and reemphasized the Board's original decision
regarding the underlying policy of this bylaw.
Due to the pending official word from the Secretary of State,
the issuance of a press release announcing the formal incorporation
of EFF-Austin as a non-profit Texas corporation was postponed until
next month by unanimous agreement.
ACCURACY IN THE MINUTES
Matt Lawrence raised the issue of the accuracy of the minutes.
It was officially and unanimously resolved that everyone involved
should have an increased sensitivity to insuring that the minute's
reflect all significant occurrences of the Board meeting. It was
agreed that, in light of EFF-Austin's pending official corporate
status, this is an important goal.
The procedure for insuring this increased accuracy was re-
emphasized: The minutes are to be taken by the Secretary, posted
for review on the EFF-Austin-Directors mailing list, and then
approved at the next meeting. Extra care should be taken to review
the minutes in the mailing list stage.
LEGAL ISSUES RELATING TO TEXAS NON-PROFIT CORPORATE STATUS
Ed Cavazos outlined and explained some legal duties which are
imposed on Texas Non-Profit Corporations by the Texas law. These
specifically relate to the keeping of accurate records and books,
and are embodied in the guideline set out in Bylaw V. It was also
noted that EFF-Austin cannot legally loan money to directors or
officers.
The issue of acquiring a State Sales Tax permit was raised.
The board discussed applying for a sales tax exemption as well.
Matt Lawrence moved for EFF-Austin to acquire a sales tax license
from the State Comptroller and to not address the issue of sales tax
exemption at this time. The motion was approved
unanimously. Ed Cavazos will work on getting the permit.
Ed Cavazos raised the issue of making sure the format of the
minutes was legally sufficient (signatures, etc.) It was agreed
that this should be researched and Ed should report back to the
board with suggestions/forms.
DISCUSSION OF THE AGENDA ADDENDA POSTED BY ED CAVAZOS
David Smith explained his conception of the position of
"volunteer coordinator." The volunteer coordinator is the official
individual figure to whom EFF members who wish to help the
organization with volunteer work can offer their services.
Likewise, directors, committees or other project managers can turn
to the volunteer coordinator for help in procuring volunteers for
their projects. It was with this role in mind that David invited
Donna McLaughlin to the Board meeting. Smoot Carl-Mitchell moved
that Donna be named Volunteer Coordinator, Matt Lawrence seconded
the motion, and the Board unanimously approved.
Donna's email address is donna@well.sf.ca.us. One of her
first projects will be to centralize EFF-Austin promotional
materials and facilitate their distribution to Board members or
others who may wish to make them available at conferences, speaking
engagements, etc. Donna will report to the Board on the progress
of her various activities, and will communicate to the membership
via the eff-austin@tic.com mailing list.
In a related discussion, Matt Lawrence reported on his
progress in programming an EFF-Austin membership database. Matt
will work with Donna on this in the future. The mailing list will
be stored in a central location, so that it is available to Matt,
Donna and others who may need to contact members.
David Smith presented his proposal for the EFF-Austin
Newsletter. He reported that there has been significant interest
in the project, and several individuals have come forward as
volunteers to help put the newsletter together. The Board
unanimously agreed that (1) work should begin immediately on an
electronic version of the newsletter, with David as editor; and
(2) that the option to allow the newsletter to evolve into a
printed version should remain open. The printed version was
discussed as possibly being distributed less frequently, and
containing highlights of the on-line version.
The Board further unanimously agreed that (1) the newsletter
should be distributed monthly on the first Monday after the Board
meeting; and (2) it should be mailed to the EFF-Austin-Directors
mailing list 3 days before distribution for comments, corrections
and review by the Board.
CYBERTEX
Ed Cavazos reported that there have been no submissions
regarding the request for proposals which was made public last
month. The Cybertex project, while not dead, is at this time
"dormant."
PROGRAM PLANNING
The Board unanimously approved a general program planning
policy which encourages the date and location of an event to be
announced at the Board meeting of the month before the month in
which the program is scheduled, or at the absolute latest, the
Board meeting prior to the event itself.
July: The previously scheduled meeting on Sysop Issues has
been rescheduled for January of 1993. Ed Cavazos will remain in
charge of the planning and organization of this meeting.
August: David Smith has announced a date and location for the
August Cyberdawg. It will be from 6:00-9:00 p.m. at Europa Books
(2300 block of Guadalupe - next to Tower Records) on August 22nd.
Formal announcement to the EFF-Austin mailing list, the media and
local BBS's is in progress. Promotional cards similar to those
prepared for the June Cyberdawg will be looked into.
September: John Quarterman and Smoot Carl-Mitchell report
that the program for his presentation on the Net is prepared, but a
location is still being sought. Anna Couey from San Francisco will
be on hand to talk about the use of the nets bby artists. John and
Smoot will report to the Board on developments.
October: Donna McLaughlin will begin looking for a volunteer
to organize the October Cyberdawg.
November: Susan Cisco reports that the "Hacker Crackdown"
meeting (which coincides with the release of Bruce Sterling's book
of the same name) will be scheduled for a date between November
3 and November 26th. After some discussion of whether the meeting
should occur on a week night, or during the weekend, the Board
agreed that Susan shall make the final decision. She will report
to the Board on developments. Matt Lawrence will work with Susan
on preparing a mail-out promotion for the meeting.
December: Donna will look for an organizer for the December
Cyberdawg.
January: As noted above, Ed Cavazos will organize the meeting
on Sysop Legal Issues. He will report to the Board on developments.
"AGIT-PROP" DISK PROJECT
Ed Cavazos and David Smith are working on a project which will
be an as yet unnamed compilation of EFF and EFF-A related text
files to be sold at a small cost during EFF-Austin events. A list
of the text files to appear will be posted to the EFF-Austin-
directors mailing list for discussion and Board review. Also, the
possibility of allowing the disk to be sold retail by consignment
was left open. Ed and David will prepare a simple project financial
summary for the Treasurer and Board review, as well.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
A new committee, the "BBS Activity Committee" consisting of
David Smith and Donna McLaughlin was created by the Board. This
committee shall explore ways of getting the private BBS part of the
Austin electronic community involved in EFF-Austin.
The Network Committee: John Quarterman proposed that the
address "EFF-ABOD@tic.com" be done away with to avoid confusion,
and that "EFF-Austin-Directors@tic.com" be the sole name of the
official Board mailing list. This was unanimously approved by the
Board. Also, it was unanimously approved that the EFF-Austin
newsgroup shall be created, to be moderated by Prentiss Riddle. The
name of the newsgroup is eff.austin. The newsgroup will be
gatewayed bidirectionally with the existing eff-austin@tic.com
mailing list. John will post a note on the relevant mailing lists
and USENET newsgroups announcing eff.austin.
There were no other committee reports.
AGENDA ITEMS NOT DISCUSSED
Several items in the agenda's "New Business" section were not
discussed due to (1) the absence of the individuals involved in the
particular business, (2) timeliness, or other reasons. All relevant
items should be transferred to the agenda for the September
meeting.
NEXT MEETING
John Quarterman made a motion that in the future, the Board
should be required to set the meeting place for the next board
meeting. This was unanimously passed. Pursuant to this vote, the
Secretary shall confirm that the Board meeting scheduled for
September 8, 1992 can be held at Martin Brother's restaurant again
next month.
ADJOURNMENT
The Meeting was adjourned at 9:46.
These minutes prepared by Ed Cavazos.

5108
textfiles.com/politics/miscella Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

57
textfiles.com/politics/mnewedi9.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
Dear Readers,
As this is being written, around the nation telephone workers
from several companies are presently on strike. This in
itself is not so terrible. Strikes, work stoppages and
job actions happen frequently in our day and age, and some are
necessary. But there is something attatched to this one that
makes me, and many others very angry. Intentional vandalism.
Telephone lines and switch boxes have been cut, torched and
smashed causing thousands of telephone users to loose service.
Some people must have their telephones in proper working order
for medical purposes, others for business. To a lesser extent
we ALL need those phones working. They have become a
necessary instrument of our modern daily lives.
Phone company employees deny they are responsible for these
actions. Yet, the way the vandalism was perpetrated signals
an inside knowledge of how the telephone system works. Do you
know where the major trunk lines are located? Do you know
which switching stations would cause the most disruption of
service if damaged? I believe the answer is no. But, those
who work with these systems day in and day out know.
I don't know what these people think they will achieve by
these actions. If they are out to win public support for
their causes they have surely failed. The public has lost
respect for these men and women, even if their grievences are
just. They will not be able to win back public support unless
they themselves turn in the guilty parties.
Coal miners shoot people and damage property and consider it a
justifiable method to win contract agreements. Truckers tie
up traffic on our busiest highways for the same reason.
Perhaps we should all follow their examples and do the same
each time we have a problem with our employers. Forget
enemies foreign, we have domestic enemies and that is a much
closer, and more dangerous threat.
These acts of vandalism and violence wherever they occur and
for whatever reason must stop.
It is not in the interest of the striking parties to allow or
condone these actions. Moreover, the public must take a stand
to let these forces know that we will not stand for it either.
It is a fact not to be forgotten that without Union pressure
we might not have our 40 hour work week, nor most of the
benefits that each and every one of us enjoys on the job
today. There was, and still is a need for unionized labor,
but not when that labor force feels it is necessary to allow
acts of violence and vandalism. We suffer. They do not.
This is not fair.
Jeff Green, Editor

48
textfiles.com/politics/mom&dad.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
The following anonymous poem says something about love and feelings.
Dear Mom and Dad,
The War is done, my task is through.
But Mom there is something great
I must ask of you.
I have a friend - oh such a friend
He has no home you see.
And so Mom, I would really
like to bring him home with me.
Dear Son,
We don't mind if someone
comes home with you.
I'm sure he can stay with us,
perhaps a week or two.
Dear Mom and Dad,
There is something you must know,
now please don't be alarmed.
My friend in a battle recently,
was hurt and lost an arm.
Dear Son,
Don't be ashamed to bring
him home with you.
Perhaps he can stay and visit
for a day or two.
Dear Mom and Dad,
Before you give your answer, Mom,
I really don't want to beg.
But my friend fought in a battle
in which he lost a leg.
Dear Son,
It hurts to say
my answer must be no.
For Dad and I have no time
for a boy who is crippled so.
So the months go by, a letter comes, it says
your son has died. And when they read the cause
of death, the shock was suicide.
Days later when the casket comes,
draped in our country's flag,
they saw their son lying there
without an arm or leg.

100
textfiles.com/politics/mondo2k.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
ASCII NO QUESTIONS, TELL YE NO SPIES by Norman French
From MONDO 2000 #5
What if you saw Congress trying to pass some invasive,
repressive laws? And what if, single handedly, you could nullify
these laws, forever?
Would you do it?
Senate bills S266 and S618 posed just those questions to
Philip Zimmerman, a Boulder software engineer. Because Philip
specializes in privacy protection for his clients, he was acutely
aware of the implications they posed.
MONDO readers will recognize these bills before Congress as
designed to fight "terrorism" and "violent crime." They both have
language, however, requiring government-accessible 'Back doors" in
all encryption software produced or sold in the United States. What
that means, in practical terms, is that the government could read
your private, encrypted messages and files at will. Or anyone else
with the necessary know-how. Sort of like requiring you to give
copies of your house keys to the cops. Theoretically, court
authority would be required, but the actual potential for abuse is
obvious.
So how did Philip choose to challenge the power structure's
brazen attempt to invade our privacy? Bid he complain to his
representatives in Washington? Organize a protest march? Send a
letter to the editor of The New York Times? Grouse volubly on the
BBSs? Nope-Philip Zimmerman took direct action. Taking several
months off from his regular paying customers, he wrote the
definitive encryption program for the masses.
PGP-Pretty Good Privacy-it's called. It's a textbook example
of guerrilla activism based on the Rivest-Shamir-Adelman public key
cryptosystem. Currently, RSA-based systems are the most advanced
cryptographic technology available. Though it's extremely
sophisticated technically, it's quick and convenient to use. And,
barring some unlikely breakthrough in the mathematics of factoring
very large numbers, they are the ultimate in unbreakable codes. How
unbreakable? With PGP and your personal computer, you could create
a code that would take a Cray super computer centuries to break.
Now, that's Pretty Good Privacy!
The U.S. and other governments have paid millions to achieve
similar levels of encryption security. So how much will you have to
pay to get a copy of Pretty Good Privacy? Approximately nothing.
Philip decided the best way to counter legislative threats to
privacy was to give his program away. By releasing PGP as freeware,
he made sure it would have the widest possible distribution-too
wide for the FBI, MI5, MI6, DIA, NSA, KGB, or any other alphabet
agencies to suppress.
PGP was released on June 5 (D-Day minus 1) onto scores of
networks and BBSs. Since then, it has been copied onto countless
systems in North America and around the world. Now, even if S266,
S618 or similar laws are passed, it's too late. The secret is out.
The PGP genie can never be put back in the bottle. With PGP, you
and your friends can have Mil Spec quality encryption for your
messages and records. Affordable privacy is at your command,
without back doors and without permission from Uncle Sam or anyone
else.
Being a techno-activist isn't all fun and games, however. As
mentioned, Philip Zimmerman took time away from his business to get
PGP out the door. The income lost during that period has been a
real financial hardship for him and his family. In addition, a
company called Public Key Partners (PKP) has threatened to sue
Philip. PKP controls licensing of the RSA algorithm he incorporated
into the PGP program. Whether he will be sued has not been
determined as of this writing. Nevertheless, that very real threat
hangs over Mr. Zimmerman's head.
Though Philip hasn't asked to be rewarded for his labors, you
might consider sending an appropriate donation if you find PGP to
be of value to you. $50 sounds like a reasonable number, but you
might revise that up or down depending on how much you value your
privacy.
To get your own copy of Pretty Good Privacy from an anonymous
FTP site on Internet or elsewhere, you will need two files:
pgpl0.zip for the binary executable and the user documentation, and
pgp10scr.zip for the source files. These files are compressed, but
you can decompress them using the MS-DOS shareware archive utility,
PKUNZIP.EXE. Be sure to print out the "PGP User's Guide" in
pgp10.zip. (Remember to set mode to binary or image when doing an
FTP transfer.)
In the U.S. or Canada, PGP files are available on Internet at
FTP sites uunet. uu. net in the /tmp directory and at host
gatekeeper. dec. com, directory /pub/micro/msdos/pgp. They are also
available in North America and overseas on Fidonet and innumerable
BBSs. One such BBS is in Boulder, Colorado at (303) 443-8292.
If you would like to contact Philip Zimmerman, his address is:
Boulder Software Engineering,
3021 Eleventh St. Boulder, CO 80304;
phone: (303) 444-4541;
Internet:prz@sage. cgd. ucar.edu.
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X
Another file downloaded from: The NIRVANAnet(tm) Seven
& the Temple of the Screaming Electron Taipan Enigma 510/935-5845
Burn This Flag Zardoz 408/363-9766
realitycheck Poindexter Fortran 510/527-1662
Lies Unlimited Mick Freen 801/278-2699
The New Dork Sublime Biffnix 415/864-DORK
The Shrine Rif Raf 206/794-6674
Planet Mirth Simon Jester 510/786-6560
"Raw Data for Raw Nerves"
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X

792
textfiles.com/politics/money.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,792 @@
MONEY
MONEY
A guide to the economy
by Ian Green
Copyright 1989 by
Ian Green
Box 973
Vancouver, BC
CANADA V6C 2P1
All rights reserved.
Permission is granted to distribute this document in
unmodified form on a not for profit basis. All others must obtain
prior written permission from the author.
Money by Ian Green Page 2
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Do you own your own home? If you do you are almost certainly
one of those so-called baby boomers or their parents. Consider
yourself extremely lucky, because if you tried to go buy a house
today you probably couldn't afford it, even if you made twice
what you currently do. The reason is simple, the cost of
borrowing money has risen so high that it has completely
outstripped the earning power of the average young family. The
real question is how did this situation come to be? Sit back and
read on, I will tell you exactly what is going on. Some of the
things I will present are likely to shock you, but everything
contained in this essay is THE TRUTH!
There are two major components driving the economy of today.
The first and most influential is the supply of dollars. Contrary
to popular belief, the supply of dollars has grown dramatically
over the decades since the FIRST WORLD WAR. Prior to the war, the
number of dollars was solidly controlled by international
agreement. This was the last period of the gold standard. Gold
has, along with silver, remained the 'official' money of all
nations. Dollars, yen, marks, pounds, etc. are all nothing more
than money substitutes. Unlike the dollar, the supply of gold has
risen only modestly over the centuries.
The second major force driving the economies of the world
today is debt. The United States of America has emerged as the
leading debtor nation, far outstripping the total debt of all
the 'third' world nations combined. It continues to grow by
hundreds of billions of dollars each year.
Combined, the two factors of debt and inflation operate
synergistically to erode the purchasing power of the average
family. Now you may ask, confronted with these forces against us
is there a way out? I would be an out and out liar if I said
there was. There is hope but time is quickly running out.
Money by Ian Green Page 3
THE RECENT PAST
THE RECENT PAST
One of the leading themes of the numerous financial reports,
that sum up the '80s, is the 'unparalleled' growth in the
economy. What they don't tell you though, is that the expansion
is due entirely to inflation; the fact is that real earnings have
declined considerably. In 1984 for example the Dow Jones
Industrial Average was around 850. Today, five years later, it
has broken 2700 or more than triple it's 1984 value. Other stock
exchange indices reflect similar performances. I can not help
wondering if your earnings did as well.
In 1984, when I still smoked cigarettes, a package of twenty
cigarettes was around $1.60. Now prices of around $4.00 and even
more are common-place. Other products tell similar stories.
Unfortunately the official 'consumer price index' doesn't reflect
realistic levels of inflation.
In 1978 the start of the major downturn in the economy was
well established. Inflation was rising to unprecedented levels.
In 1979 a major increase in the price of oil was to finally push
the world economy over the edge of the abyss. Paper dollars
reached all time lows nearly reaching 1000 to the ounce gold.
Interest rates exceeded 21% and inflation was out of control.
Only the collapse of 1929 exceeded the extremely high levels of
unemployment that resulted from unprecedented numbers of
corporate bankruptcies. Things finally reached a crescendo in
late 1981. That Christmas was the bleakest I had ever seen; a
five dollar toy was the big 'hit'. You remember the Rubic's cube.
If we look back a few more years we find a situation that
is almost as bad. It was around 1972 that President Richard Nixon
(America) instituted wage and price controls in an attempt to
control double digit inflation. Many other leaders around the
world followed suit. It was market conditions (in 1973 the first
of a series of huge increases in the price of oil shocked the
world) more than anything else that controlled increasing
inflation, although President Nixon took credit for the improved
situation (a reduction in the increasing inflation). Almost
immediately after controls were abolished inflation resumed
reaching double digit levels. Many reacted by immediately raising
prices (or demanding large wage settlements) largely out of fear
that controls would be re-imposed shortly.
I could go on and on and on, citing examples of inflation,
financial panic and more. What I have yet to reveal is why there
is inflation and all this other crap. All of the so-called
reasons that are offer to explain inflation are in reality simply
symptoms of a deeper underlying problem. What we need is to do is
get to the root of the problem. First though we need to learn a
bit about the evolution of our economic system.
Money by Ian Green Page 4
EARLIER INFLATIONS
EARLIER INFLATIONS
For as long as there have been rulers there has been
inflation. In archaic times it took the form of coins of slightly
reduced purity or weight. Because early coins were not exactly
uniform in shape, these inflated coins could circulate side by
side with one of full weight and fineness. Other reasons for
their success was that the difference was very slight; the coins
were officially certified to be of full weight and purity, i.e.
the guy in charge decreed they be accepted without question. It
was also reasonable that the recipient could pass them on at par
with full weigh/purity coins.
As time moved on, coins would go through a cycle of
replacement until some time later they were ultimately and
intrinsically worthless. All the time however the value of the
coins would erode and eventually no one would accept them in
exchange at all. It was about this time that a change in
management would occur.
In medieval timers, it was customary for the goldsmiths to
act as depositories for the safe-keeping of money (gold). When a
client wanted his money he had to go down and get it, or at least
take the guy he was doing business with down to witness the
transfer of accounts.
Once paper finally became readily available, it didn't take
long for the goldsmiths to begin providing receipts for gold
deposited. These could then be endorsed (not unlike today's
checks) over to a third person to complete a transaction. This
third person could then go and redeem the receipts and get the
gold. Ultimately goldsmiths began offering 'bearer' receipts
which were the earliest bank-notes (in the West anyway, the
Chinese were way ahead of us by several centuries).
Money by Ian Green Page 5
FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING
FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING
Goldsmiths, in issuing their receipts, came into direct
competition with the guy in charge over the supply of money.
Rather than abolish these receipts, some monarchs became
intrigued by the fact that the masses preferred their goldsmith's
paper over his often underweight and impure metal coins. It was
also readily apparent that it was far easier to make counterfeit
paper receipts for gold that could circulate along side
legitimate receipts.
Naturally under even the simplest of legals system, conning
thine neighbor is not allowed, unless of course you are the one
who makes the rules. Details are scarce but it is clear that some
greedy king, along with the cooperation of a dishonest goldsmith,
started the system of fractional reserve banking. The guy in
charge would protect the goldsmith from anyone who complained in
return for the goldsmith's financial backing.
Using the old standby propaganda, both the goldsmith and the
guy in charge would continually reassure the public that it was
all right to have more receipts outstanding than there was gold
because there would always be more than enough gold on hand to
meet redemption demands. As long as those responsible didn't get
too greedy, the erosion of value of the receipts was barely
noticed (although people did eventually catch on).
When things did get out of hand a 'run on the bank' would
occur. Sometimes the goldsmith became 'bankrupt'; he could only
pay out the 'fractional reserve'. The rest of the outstanding
receipts were worthless (at last the counterfeits were flushed
out, usually along with the counterfeiter). Sometimes the guy in
charge foresaw the run and closed the goldsmith's shop before
disaster struck. Needless to say that remaining receipts would
decline in value rather precipitously. If he had 'connections',
sometimes the king could borrow some money (gold) and re-open the
goldsmith's shop and meet the rush head-first! Eventually people
would see that the notes were being redeemed and would eventually
refrain from redeeming their holdings. In fact these people would
start bringing their gold back to the goldsmith's to get the
newly acceptable receipts. A fool and his money are soon parted.
I guess you can see the obvious. Once the situation cooled
off it didn't take long for the guy in charge to start the old
game again, all the while eroding the value of the receipts more
and more. Eventually the whole thing would fall apart and once
again a change in management usually occurred.
Money by Ian Green Page 6
CROOKED CREDIT
CROOKED CREDIT
Not long after the abuse of paper receipts started, the
practice moved over to the loans business. In earlier times the
goldsmith 'loaned' money (gold) to certain customers for a small
payment. Certain other customers provided gold on long term
deposit for which they were paid a small amount. In the beginning
it worked out well. Loans outstanding never exceeded deposits.
A new method of book-keeping, known as the 'double entry'
ledger system emerged. It was fair and accurate and it kept track
of the goldsmith's business and everybody was happy.
Later though goldsmiths would loan money that was in excess
of the amount on deposit. In order to cover the discrepancy, a
dishonest goldsmith would 'depositing' an equivalent amount to
keep the books balanced. Needless to say such practices are
completely and utterly fraudulent, but with the protection of the
king what could be done?
Although this kind of abuse is not readily visible, it did
have an effect on the money supply and inflation continued to
gnaw away the purchasing power of the receipts.
Combined with counterfeit receipts, these fraudulent loans
combined to destroy more economies that you can shake a stick at.
It kind of makes you wonder what is next. What can be worse than
counterfeit money?

1866
textfiles.com/politics/money_laundering_1.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

1355
textfiles.com/politics/money_laundering_2.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

111
textfiles.com/politics/monroe_d.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
THE MONROE DOCTRINE:
The Monroe Doctrine was expressed during President Monroe's
seventh annual message to Congress, December 2, 1823:
. . . At the proposal of the Russian Imperial Government, made
through the minister of the Emperor residing here, a full power
and instructions have been transmitted to the minister of the
United States at St. Petersburg to arrange by amicable negotiation
the respective rights and interests of the two nations on the
northwest coast of this continent. A similar proposal has been
made by His Imperial Majesty to the Government of Great Britain,
which has likewise been acceded to. The Government of the United
States has been desirous by this friendly proceeding of manifesting
the great value which they have invariably attached to the
friendship of the Emperor and their solicitude to cultivate the
best understanding with his Government. In the discussions to
which this interest has given rise and in the arrangements by
which they may terminate the occasion has been judged proper for
asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of
the United States are involved, that the American continents, by
the free and independent condition which they have assumed and
maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for
future colonization by any European powers. . .
It was stated at the commencement of the last session that a great
effort was then making in Spain and Portugal to improve the
condition of the people of those countries, and that it appeared
to be conducted with extraordinary moderation. It need scarcely
be remarked that the results have been so far very different from
what was then anticipated. Of events in that quarter of the globe,
with which we have so much intercourse and from which we derive
our origin, we have always been anxious and interested spectators.
The citizens of the United States cherish sentiments the most
friendly in favor of the liberty and happiness of their fellow-men
on that side of the Atlantic. In the wars of the European powers
in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part,
nor does it comport with our policy to do so. It is only when our
rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries
or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this
hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected, and by
causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial
observers. The political system of the allied powers is essentially
different in this respect from that of America. This difference
proceeds from that which exists in their respective Governments;
and to the defense of our own, which has been achieved by the loss
of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their
most enlightened citizens, and under which we have enjoyed unexampled
felicity, this whole nation is devoted. We owe it, therefore,
to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United
States and those powers to declare that we should consider any
attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of
this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the
existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have
not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments
who have declared their independence and maintain it, and whose
independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles,
acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of
oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny,
by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation
of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States. In the war
between those new Governments and Spain we declared our neutrality
at the time of their recognition, and to this we have adhered,
and shall continue to adhere, provided no change shall occur
which, in the judgement of the competent authorities of this
Government, shall make a corresponding change on the part of
the United States indispensable to their security.
The late events in Spain and Portugal shew that Europe is still
unsettled. Of this important fact no stronger proof can be adduced
than that the allied powers should have thought it proper, on
any principle satisfactory to themselves, to have interposed by
force in the internal concerns of Spain. To what extent such
interposition may be carried, on the same principle, is a question
in which all independent powers whose governments differ from
theirs are interested, even those most remote, and surely none
of them more so than the United States. Our policy in regard to
Europe, which was adopted at an early stage of the wars which have
so long agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless remains
the same, which is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of
any of its powers; to consider the government de facto as the
legitimate government for us; to cultivate friendly relations
with it, and to preserve those relations by a frank, firm, and
manly policy, meeting in all instances the just claims of every
power, submitting to injuries from none. But in regard to those
continents circumstances are eminently and conspicuously different.
It is impossible that the allied powers should extend their
political system to any portion of either continent without
endangering our peace and happiness; nor can anyone believe that
our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of
their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we
should behold such interposition in any form with indifference.
If we look to the comparative strength and resources of Spain and
those new Governments, and their distance from each other, it must
be obvious that she can never subdue them. It is still the true
policy of the United States to leave the parties to themselves,
in hope that other powers will pursue the same course. . . .
-------------------------------------
Prepared by Gerald Murphy (The Cleveland Free-Net - aa300)
Distributed by the Cybercasting Services Division of the
National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN).
Permission is hereby granted to download, reprint, and/or otherwise
redistribute this file, provided appropriate point of origin
credit is given to the preparer(s) and the National Public
Telecomputing Network.
V<EFBFBD><EFBFBD>R<EFBFBD><EFBFBD>T


177
textfiles.com/politics/morewaco.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,177 @@
Organization: Alpha Institute, Aurora, CO.
Without permission from the Rocky Mountain News, Oct. 16, 1993.
-!----------------------------------------------------------------
Feds Assume Powers Above and Beyond Law
by Paul Craig Roberts
Have the police powers of our government become too great? The
government's own reports on the assault on the Branch Davidian compound in
Waco, Texas, paint a picture of law authorities running amok and
squandering the lives of scores of men, women and children.
The Treasury Department's report is by far the most critical.
It blames Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms officials for botching
the raid on the compound and then engaging in deception to hide their
mistakes. The bureau's director has resigned, and five officials have been
placed on administrative leave pending further action.
The Justice Department's report contradicts Attorney General Janet
Reno's reasons for ordering the fatal attack, but raises more questions
than it answers by exonerating all high-ranking FBI and Justice Department
officials.
But more is amiss here than a botched raid and possible
conflict of interest. Both reports gloss over many legal irregularities and
the government's hostile attitude toward the Davidians that led to the
disaster.
The Treasury's report notes that despite its shortcomings,
"the raid fit within an historic, well-established and well-defended
government interest in prohibiting and breaking up groups that sought to
arm or fortify themselves." Once the decision was made to bust up the
group, the legal niceties that constrain government behavior became
casualties.
Some of the evidence used to obtain the warrant that launched the
initial raid apparently was false or fabricated. Film footage of the
violent assault and tapes of telephone conversations with Davidian leader
David Koresh do not appear to be consistent with the government's
explanation of events leading to the fiery deaths in the compound.
The government committed more wrongs than merely proceeding with an
attack in full knowledge that the Davidians were expecting them. By not
honestly addressing these wrongs, both reports constitute a whitewash.
Something similar happened in Idaho, where federal marshals killed two
members of Randy Weaver's family after deciding that the family, living in
an isolated cabin in the mountains, constituted a dangerous gang of "white
supremacists."
Having suppressed this armed group residing within its borders, the U.S.
brought Weaver to trial. But the jury sided with Weaver and threw out the
case, and U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge excoriated the FBI for
withholding evidence about what really happened.
Like it or not, federal agents have assumed the power to decide whose
beliefs are permissible and to use deadly force to regulate the behavior of
those deemed to be outcasts. Nothing in our law gives government this
power. If we permit this illegitimate power to be used against fringe
elements, it will gain legitimacy and threaten us all.
In the post-war era, anti-communism and law-and-order issues rallied
many Americans to the defense of the state. In the process we neglected to
note that many of the means we chose also permitted the emergence of
government power that is accountable only to itself.
The Waco disaster offered an opportunity to confront this issue, but
the Treasury and Justice reports have successfully evaded it. As Rep. Don
Edwards, D., Calif., chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil and
Constitutional Rights, observed, the governments report is "very
disappointing."
MORE COVERUP OF MURDEROUS FBI RAID IN WACO, TEXAS
By Gary Wilson
The official report is in on the massacre of the Branch Davidian
sect in Waco, Texas. But the question remains: Why did the
government do it?
The official explanation given at the time by Attorney General
Janet Reno was that the attack was ordered "because of the
children." The Justice Department investigation released Oct. 8
contradicted this, saying "there was no evidence of child abuse at
the compound during the siege or even enough evidence to arrest Mr.
Koresh on such charges before the Feb. 28 raid." (New York Times,
Oct. 9)
So killing all the children in order to "save" them from some
unnamed abuse was not the reason.
The department's report is more a coverup than a revelation. The
only point that comes through is that the investigators--all from
the Justice Department which includes the FBI--concluded that the
FBI did no wrong. Deputy Attorney General Philip B. Heymann, the
supervisor of the investigation, will probably get a bonus this
year for a coverup well done.
The report does not even attempt to answer a new and damning piece
of evidence. According to a CBS Radio news report on Oct. 9, a
videotape of the FBI attack shows a tank crashing through the house
where 75 people were burned to death. On the front of the tank is
a clearly recognizable flame thrower.
This video, CBS said, has been shown on two TV stations. The CBS
report attempted to dismiss it by emphasizing that it is being
distributed by a person sympathetic to the Branch Davidians.
-30-
(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted
if source is cited. For more information contact Workers World,
55 West 17 St., New York, NY 10011; via e-mail: ww@blythe.org.)
The Washington Times
October 23, 1993
page A3
New ATF chief tells panel his bureau
will be ready for Waco-like situations
by Jerry Seper
The newly appointed head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms told a House subcommittee yesterday that ATF will be
ready to handle situations similar to the raid at the Branch
Davidian compound in Texas, in which four agents were killed.
John Magaw, former director of the U.S. Secret Service, said
future actions by the agency will rely heavily on the agency's
intelligence-gathering abilities.
"The raid on the Branch Davidian complex may be a unique event,
but we are aware of similar groups and situations in other
places," Mr. Magaw told the House Appropriations subcommittee
that oversees the Treasury Department.
"The key is to work in concert with our peers to ensure we are
absolutely ready for something like this, should it occur again,"
he said.
Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen named Mr. Magaw to head ATF
Sept. 30, after former ATF Director Stephen E. Higgins was forced
to resign in the wake of the Branch Davidian debacle.
In the deadliest day in ATF history, four agents were killed
and 20 others were injured when 76 agents attempted on Feb. 28 to
serve an arrest warrant on Branch Davidian cult leader David
Koresh and a search warrant for the compound. At least 10 cult
members also died.
The Treasury Department investigated the raid and later removed
five senior ATF officials from their posts.
A 501-page department report, praised by law enforcement
officials and others for its thoroughness, blamed top ATF
commanders for proceeding with the raid despite having been told
by an undercover agent that the cult members knew they were
coming.
The resulting 51-day siege at the compound ended on April 19 in
an FBI assault, during which 85 cult members, including 24
children, were killed in a wind-swept fire that raced through the
facility. A Justice Department investigation of the FBI's
handling of the raid found no departmental blame.
Assistant Treasury Secretary Ronald K. Noble, who heads the
department's enforcement divisions, told the panel that future
actions ** when necessary ** could be curtailed to eliminate or
reduce what he described as "dynamic entries."
"Although we cannot prejudge all future situations, we must be
open to the possibility that a dynamic entry ** exposing agents,
innocent persons and children to gunfire ** may simply not be an
acceptable law enforcement option," Mr. Noble said.
Both Mr. Magaw and Mr. Noble told the subcommittee that the
truth of what happened before and during the raid came out
because rank-and-file agents were willing to tell the truth. They
said many of the public statements by the ATF leadership at the
scene were "inaccurate."
The Treasury Department's report described many of those
comments as "less than truthful" and said some of the field
commanders altered documents after the raid to cover up what they
had done or what they had been told before ordering the agents to
proceed against the cult members.
Mr. Noble characterized some of the statements as "lies."
The report has since been forwarded to the Treasury
Department's inspector general's office, which is reviewing the
actions of many of the agents involved. Department officials have
declined to say, however, what future action might be pending.
Mr. Noble suggested that news media representatives covering
similar events in the future should reconsider their methods.
The presence of reporters and cameras can affect a pending law
enforcement action ** such as the one in Waco ** and journalists
need to work with law enforcement officials to ensure that the
efforts of neither are compromised, he said.

62
textfiles.com/politics/myvi Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
My View: Baseball
Copyright (c) 1994, Thomas Van Hook
All rights reserved
[Each month, a reader/writer is offered the opportunity to give his or
her viewpoint on a particular topic dear to them. If you'd like the
chance to air *Your* views in this forum, please contact Joe DeRouen
via one of the many ways listed in CONTACT POINTS elsewhere in this
issue]
It Ain't Over Till It's Over And It's Over Now
by Thomas Van Hook
I can vaguely remember the first time I saw a Major League Baseball
game. At Riverfront Stadium (Cincinnati, Ohio), I got to watch a
double-header between the Cincinnati Reds and the Montreal Expos. It was
the first time that Tony Perez would play against his former teammates on
the Reds. On that sunny July afternoon in 1978, I got to see some of the
greatest players in the game. Cincinnati had the great Johnny Bench playing
catcher, the infamous Pete Rose playing third base, and a young
superstar-in-the-making in Ken Griffey Sr. in the outfield. Montreal had
Gary Carter behind the plate, and Tony Perez on first base. Of these
players, only Pete Rose will not make the Baseball Hall-Of-Fame, and not
because he wasn't one of the greatest players the game ever saw. It was a
very special time in the life of a 13-year old kid. My eyes were wide open
with the awe of the "greats." There were no "work-stoppages" looming over
the horizon, no "collective bargaining agreements" to ratify. But the times
did change.
Now, instead of watching Major League Baseball players with a
reverent awe, I stare at them with a wide-eyed look of shock. While the
fans have clung to baseball as a cherished part of their lives, the players
dismiss it as nothing more than "a job." The fans have watched game after
game, knowing that they are watching history-in-the-making that they can
pass down to their kids by word of mouth. The players look at each game as
"another day at the office." There is no excitement and love for the game
of baseball in the spirit of the players. Instead, the spirit of the
players is driven by a greedy desire of money. That greed has forced the
cancellation of the World Series for the first time in ninety years. Major
League Baseball is rotting away from the inside.
The question that is frequently asked of me is: "What will become
of baseball?" I am not sure. A prolonged strike by the players will result
in some of the most devastating financial situations for the owners since
the advent of the "Brotherhood War" in the early 1900s. Several teams look
poised for a collapse. There could be as few as three teams bankrupt at the
end of a prolonged strike. There is also the possibility that the next
elected Congress will break the Anti-Trust exemption that was awarded to
Major League Baseball by the Supreme Court. If this does happen, then
there will be a potential for the creation of a new "Player's League."
Saddly, the times are mirroring the attitudes and events in the Brotherhood
War. The loser in that fiasco was ALL of baseball. I just wonder how much
longer the fans are going to put up with the nonsense they are being fed by
the both sides in this "Baseball War." There is one thing that is certain.
Baseball will never be the same once the dust from this fight settles.
Goodnight baseball, you will be missed.

66234
textfiles.com/politics/naftaagree.pol Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

2081
textfiles.com/politics/national.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

693
textfiles.com/politics/nato-sov.air Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,693 @@
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: jfb200@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (joseph.f.baugher)
Subject: NATO Code Names for Soviet Aircraft
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1992 02:12:52 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Dec1.021252.8417@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>
Lines: 685
I've been reading the thread on NATO code names for Soviet block aircraft.
I have had this list of NATO code names lying around for a while. Hope
someone finds this interesting. I would appreciate hearing from anyone who
has any corrections or additions to this list.
The scheme used in coming up with the code names appears to be fairly simple
and straighforward. Names beginning with B refer to bombers, C names refer to
transport aircraft, and names starting with F refer to fighters. Names
beginning with M designate a catch-all of various types, ranging from utility
aircraft and trainers all the way to high-altitude spy planes. Names starting
with H refer to helicopters. For the "M", "F", "B" and "C" categories,
single-syllable names refer to aircraft that are powered by piston or turbo-
prop engines, whereas double-syllable names refer to jet-powered aircraft.
This distinction does not apply to helicopters.
Code Soviet designation Comments
Name
_______ ____________________ _______________________________
Backfin Tupolev Tu-98(?) Supersonic medium bomber. First
appeared in 1957. Did not enter
production.
Backfire Tupolev Tu-26 Medium-range strategic bomber and
maritime strike/reconnaissance aircraft.
Two 50,000 lb. st. (with AB) Kuznetsov
turbofans. Twin-barrel 23-mm cannon
in remotely-controlled tail barbette.
Up to 26,500 lbs of internal stores.
Stand-off missiles can be carried
externally. Entered service in 1972-3.
Badger Tupolev Tu-16 Twin-engine long-range medium bomber.
Two 19,180 lb. st. Mikulin AM-3M
turbojets. Crew of 6, 20,000 lb.
offensive load. 2 23 mm cannon in
each of dorsal, ventral, and tail
positions, one fixed forward firing
23-mm cannon. Many converted to
platforms for stand-off missiles.
Beagle Ilyushin Il-28 Twin-engine light tactical bomber.
Two 6040 lb. st. Klimov VK-1 turbojets.
Entered service in 1949. 2 23 mm cannon
in tail turret, two 20 mm cannon fixed
in nose. 4400 lb bombload.
Bear Tupolev Tu-20 Four-turboprop long-range strategic
bomber and reconnaissance aircraft.
Four 14,795 shp Kuznetsov NK-12
turbprops. Bear A has 2 23 mm cannon
in each of dorsal, ventral, and tail
positions, plus one 23mm cannon fixed
in forward-firing position. Up to
25,000 lb offensive load. Many
converted to reconnaissance and stand-
off missile launching roles.
Beast Ilyushin Il-10 Single-engine ground attack aircraft.
Postwar development of Il-2 heavily-
armored ground attack plane.
Bison Myasishchev Mya-4 Four-engine long-range heavy bomber.
Four 19,180 lb. st. Mikulin AM-3M
turbojets. One fixed, forward firing
23 mm cannon, 2 23 mm cannon in each of
of dorsal, ventral, and tail turrets.
About 150 built. Entered service in
1955/56. Most converted to tanker
and reconnaissance roles.
Blackjack Tupolev Tu-160 Long-range strategic bomber and
maritime strike/reconnaissance aircraft.
Variable-geometry wings. Has a close
physical resemblance to the Rockwell
B-1B Lancer, although the Blackjack is
appreciably larger and more powerful.
Four 55,000 lb. st. (with AB) Soloviev
turbofans. Up to 36,000 lbs. of
weapons can be carried, including
cruise missiles, attack missiles, and
free fall bombs. Entered service in
1988.
Blinder Tupolev Tu-22 Twin-engine long-range medium bomber
and reconnaissance-strike aircraft.
First seen in 1961. Entered service
in 1962. Two 30,000 lb. st. (with AB)
Kolesov VD-7 turbojets mounted side by
side above the rear fuselage.
Blowlamp ??? Supersonic light attack bomber. Did
not enter quantity production.
Bob Ilyushin Il-4 Twin engine medium bomber of World War
2 vintage.
Boot ???? Antisubmarine attack aircraft. One
4000 hp Kuznetsov turboprop. Appeared
in 1956. Did not enter quantity
production.
Bosun Tupolev Tu-14 Twin-engine land-based torpedo-bomber
operated by Soviet naval air arm.
Two 6040 lb. st. Klimov VK-1 turbojets.
Two fixed forward-firing cannon.
Two 23mm cannon in tail turret. Crew 4.
Entered service in 1949.
Bounder Myasishchev M-52 Four-engine supersonic bomber prototype.
Never attained service.
Brawny ??? Twin jet, two seat attack and close
support aircraft. First appeared in
1956. Did not enter quantity
production.
Brewer Yakovlev Yak-28 Two-seat light tactical bomber
adaptation of Yak-28P Firebar. Internal
weapons bay, bombardier position in
glazed nose. Entered service in early
1960s.
Buck Tupolev Tu-2 Twin engine light bomber of World War
2 vintage.
Bull Tupolev Tu-4 Four-engine long range heavy bomber.
Copy of Boeing B-29 Superfortress.
Cab Lisunov Li-2 License-built version of Douglas DC-3
commercial transport.
Camel Tupolev Tu-104 Twin-engine commercial jet transport.
Adapted from Tu-16 bomber. Two
15,000 lb. st. Mikulin RD-3M turbojets.
First entered service in 1956.
Camp Antonov An-8 Twin-engined assault transport.
Did not enter quantity production.
Candid Ilyushin Il-76 Four-engined heavy commercial and
military freighter. Four 26,450 lb. st.
Soloviev D-30-KP turbofans. Generally
similar in concept to Lockheed C-141
Starlifter. Entered service in 1974.
Careless Tupolev Tu-154 Three-engined medium- to long-range
commercial transport. Three 20,950 lb.
st. Kuznetsov NK-8-2 turbofans. Entered
service in 1972.
Cat Antonov An-10 Four-engine turboprop commercial freight
and passenger transport. Four 4015 shp
Ivchenko AI-20 turboprops. Up to 130
passengers. Entered service in 1959.
Charger Tupolev Tu-144 Long-range supersonic commercial
transport. Four 38,580 lb. st. (with
AB) Kuznetsov NK-144 turbofans.
Classic Ilyushin IL-62 Four-engined long-range commercial
transport. Four 23,150 lb. st.
Kutznetsov NK-8 turbofans.
Cleat Tupolev Tu-114 Four-engine turboprop commercial
transport. Wing, undercarriage, and
tail of Tu-20 bomber. Four 14,795 shp
Kuznetsov NK-12 turboprops. Entered
service in 1961.
Cline Antonov An-32 Twin-engined military tactical
transport. Two 4195 ehp Ivchenko
AI-20M or 5112 ehp AI-20DM turboprops.
Derivative of An-26. Entered service
in early 1980s.
Clobber Yakovlev Yak-42 Medium-range commercial transport.
Three 14,330 lb. st. Lotarev D-26
turbofans. Entered service in 1978.
Clod Antonov AN-14 Twin-engined light STOL utility
transport. Two 300 Ivchenko AI-14RF
radial engines.
Coach Ilyushin IL-12 Twin-engine personnel and cargo
transport. Two 1775 shp Shvetsov
ASh-82FNV radials.
Coaler Antonov An-72/74 Twin engined light STOL transport.
Two 14,330 lb. st. Lotarev D-36 or
16,534 lb. st. D-436K turbofans.
An-72 is tactical transport version
which entered service with Soviet
Air Force in 1987. An-74 is dedicated
Arctic survey and support version.
Engines are mounted above the wing,
and use is made of the Coanda effect
to achieve STOL performance.
Cock Antonov An-22 Four-engined heavy military and
commercial freighter. Four 15,000 shp
Kuznetsov NK-12MA turboprops.
Codling Yakovlev Yak-40 Three-engined short-range commercial
feederliner. Three 3307 lb. st.
Ivchenko AI-25 turbofans. Entered
service in 1968.
Coke Antonov An-24 Twin-turboprop short-range commercial
transport. Two 2550 shp Ivchenko AI-24
turboprops. Entered service in 1963.
Colt Antonov An-2 Single-engine biplane utility transport.
One 1000 hp. Shvetsov Ash-62IR radial
engine. First flew in 1947.
Condor Antonov An-124 Heavy strategic freighter. Four
51,590 lb. st. Lotarev D-18T turbofans.
Entered service in 1984.
Cooker Tupolev Tu-110 Four-jet commercial transport. Evolved
from Tu-104 transport. Four Lyulka
AL-5 turbojets, 12,125 lb. st. each.
Cookpot Tupolev Tu-124 Twin-engine commercial jet transport.
Scaled down version of Tu-104.
Two 12,125 lb. st. Solovlev D-20P
turbofans. Entered service in 1962.
Coot Ilyushin Il-18 Four-engine turboprop transport.
Four 4015 shp Ivchenko AI-20 turboprops.
Il-20 is elint version.
Il-22 is airborne control post version.
Cossack Antonov An-225 Six-engined ultra-heavy transport.
6 51,590 lb. st. Lotarev D-18T turbo-
fans. Freighter intended to carry
large outside loads on top of fuselage
in support of Soviet space program.
Crate Ilyushin Il-14 Twin-engine commercial and military
personnel/cargo transport. Progressive
development of IL-12. Two 1900 hp.
Shvetsov ASh-82T-7 radials.
Creek Yakovlev Yak-12 Single engine, four-seat light utility
aircraft. One 240hp Ivchenko AI-14R
radial. Entered production in 1946.
Crusty Tupolev Tu-134 Twin-engine short- to medium-range
commercial transport. Two 14,990 lb.
st. Soloviev D-30-2 turbofans mounted
on rear fuselage. Entered service in
1966.
Cub Antonov An-12 Medium and long-range military
transport. Military version of An-10A
commercial transport. Redesigned rear
fuselage with loading ramp and tail
turret.
Cuff Beriev Be-30 Twin-engined light commercial
feederliner. Two TVD-10 (Turbomeca
Astazou) turboprops, 970 shp each.
Entered service in 1969.
Curl Antonov An-26 Twin-engined short to medium-range
military and commercial freighter.
Two 2820 shp Ivchenko AI-24T turboprops.
Faceplate Mikoyan Ye-2 Code name assigned to swept-wing
version of delta-winged MiG-21 fighter.
First seen in 1956. This version seems
to have lost out to the familiar delta-
winged version for production orders.
However, it was not until 1963 that
people in the West finally became aware
that the delta-winged MiG-21 (Fishbed)
was the version which had entered
service.
Fagot Mikoyan MiG-15 Single-engine interceptor/fighter of
Korean War fame. One 5950 lb. st.
Klimov VK-1 turbojet. Two 23 mm, one
37 mm cannon.
Faithless Mikoyan Ye-230 Single-seat STOL fighter-bomber
prototype. One turbojet plus two
vertically-disposed lift engines.
First demonstrated in 1967, but appears
never to have attained production
status.
Fang Lavochkin La-11 Single-seat, piston-engined fighter.
Was standard equipment for Soviet Air
Force fighter units during immediate
postwar years.
Fantail Lavochkin La-15 Single seat interceptor fighter. One
3500 lb. st. RD-500 turbojet.
Fargo Mikoyan MiG-9 Twin-engined jet-powered fighter. Was
interim jet fighter to fill the gap
until MiG-15 could enter service.
Farmer Mikoyan MiG-19 Twin-engine interceptor/fighter.
Two 5500 lb. st. Klimov RD-9F turbojets
Entered service in 1955.
First Russian production aircraft
capable of supersonic flight in level
flight. 3 30-mm cannon (Farmer C).
Farmer E is all-weather interceptor
version.
Feather Yakovlev Yak-17 Single-seat single-engine jet fighter.
Adapation of Yak-15.
Fencer Sukhoi Su-24 Two-seat deep penetration interdictor
and strike, reconnaissance and
electronic warfare aircraft. Two
25,350 lb. st.(with AB) Tumansky R-29B
turbojets. One 30 mm cannon plus
up to 13,000 lbs of external ordinance.
Entered service in 1974.
Fiddler Tupolev Tu-28 Twin-engined, two seat long-range
all-weather interceptor. Two Lyulka
AL-21F-3 turbojets, 24,250 lb. st. with
AB. Derived from Tu-98 bomber.
Firebar Yakovlev Yak-28P Third-generation development of
Yak-25 Flashlight two-seat all-weather
interceptor. Two 13,670 lb. st. (with
AB) Tumansky R-11 turbojets. No
cannon armament. Can carry two Anab
radar homing missiles plus two Atoll
infrared homers. Entered service in
1964.
Fishbed Mikoyan MiG-21 Single-engine interceptor/fighter.
Entered service in 1960. Most widely-
used Soviet fighter in postwar era.
Many exported to foreign air forces.
Fishpot Suhkoi Su-9/11 Single-engine all-weather fighter.
Su-9 has one 19,840 lb st (with AB)
Lyulka AL-7 turbojet. Su-11 has
one 22,050 lb st (with AB) Lyulka
AL-7F-1 turbojet. No cannon armament.
Su-9 was similar to Su-7 fighter-bomber,
but with a delta wing rather than the
original swept wing. Su-11 is
uprated version with more powerful
engine and more advanced electronics.
Fitter Sukhoi Su-7/17/20/22 Single-engine fighter bomber.
Su-7 is swept wing version, Su-17,20
and 22 are variable geometry versions.
Flashlight Yakovlev Yak-25 Twin-engine, two seat night and all
weather interceptor. Entered service
in 1955. Two 5500 lb. st. Klimov
RD-9 turbojets. 594 mph at 36,000 ft.
PD6 intercept radar in bulbous nose.
Flagon Sukhoi Su-15 Single-seat all-weather interceptor
Two 15,000 lb. st. (with AB) Tumanksy
R-13F-200 turbojets (Flagon E and F).
No cannon armament. Four air to air
missiles under the wings.
Flanker Sukhoi Su-27 Single-seat air superiority fighter.
Two 30,000 lb. st. (with AB) Lyulka
RD-32 turbofans. One 30 mm cannon
plus up to 10 air-to-air missiles.
Entered service in 1986.
Flipper Mikoyan Ye-152A Code name was assigned to an
experimental twin engine interceptor
fighter development of MiG-21 which
was first seen in 1961. Two Tumansky
R-11F turbojets. Was not ordered into
production.
Flogger Mikoyan MiG-23/27 Single-engine variable-sweep fighter
(MiG-23) and fighter-bomber (MiG-27).
One 27,000 lb. st. (with AB) Tumansky
R-29BS-300 turbojet. One twin-barrel
23-mm cannon, plus up to 8 air to air
missiles. MiG-27 version can carry up
to 6600 lbs. of external ordinance.
Flora Yakovlev Yak-23 Single-seat interceptor fighter. One
3500 lb. st. RD-500 turbojet.
Forger Yakovlev Yak-38 Single-seat shipboard air defense and
strike fighter. One 17,985 lb. st.
Lyulks Al-12 lift/cruise turbojet and
two tandem-mounted 7875 lb. st. Koliesov
lift turbojets. Can carry two air to
air missiles or two podded 23-mm twin-
barreled cannon. In strike role, can
carry up to 8000 lbs. of stores.
Foxbat Mikoyan MiG-25 Twin-engine interceptor/fighter.
Two Tumansky R-31 turbojets, 24,250 lb.
st. with AB. No cannon, up to four
externally-mounted AAMs.
Entered service in 1966.
Foxhound Mikoyan MiG-31 Tandem two-seat all-weather interceptor.
Two 30,865 lb. st. (with AB) Tumansky
R-31F turbojets. No cannon armament.
Up to 8 air-to-air missiles. Derived
from MiG-25. Entered service in 1983.
Fred Bell P-63 Kingcobra Lend-lease P-63s remaining in Soviet
service after the end of World War 2.
Freehand Yakovlev Yak-36 Single-seat VTOL research aircraft.
Two vectored-thrust turbofans. First
demonstrated in 1967. Believed
experimental only.
Freestyle Yakovlev Yak-141 Single seat VTOL carrier-based
interceptor/fighter. Believed
experimental only.
Fresco Mikoyan MiG-17 Single-engine interceptor/fighter.
Aerodynamic refinement of MiG-15.
Entered service in 1954. One 6040 lb.
st. Klimov VK-1A turbojet. Two 23mm,
one 37 mm cannon.
Frogfoot Sukhoi Su-25 Single-seat attack and close air support
aircraft. Two 9340 lb. st. Tumansky
R-13-300 turbojets. One 30 mm cannon,
plus up to 8820 lbs. of external
ordinance. Entered service in 1981-2.
Fulcrum Mikoyan MiG-29 Single-seat air superiority fighter.
Two 18,300 lb. st. (with AB) Tumansky
RD-33 turbofans. One 30-mm cannon
plus air to air missiles. Entered
service in 1983.
Halo Mil Mi-26 Military and commercial heavylift
helicopter. Two 11,240 shp Lotarev
D-136 turboshafts. Heaviest and
most powerful helicopter yet flown.
Entered service in 1981.
Hare Mil Mi-1 Three-seat light utility helicopter.
One 575 hp Ivchenko AI-26V radial.
Entered service in 1950.
Harke Mil Mi-10 Military crane-type helicopter evolved
from Mi-6. Two 5500 shp Soloviev D-25
turboshafts. Entered service in 1963.
Harp Kamov Ka-20 Twin-engine antisubmarine helicopter
prototype.
Havoc Mil Mi-28 Tandem two-seat anti-armor and attack
helicopter. Two 200--2500 shp turbo-
shafts of uncertain origin. Dedicated
attack helicopter with no secondary
transport capability. Roughly
comparable to AH-64 Apache. Carries
a single gun in an undernose barbette,
plus external loads carried on pylons
beneath stub wings. Current status
is uncertain.
Haze Mil Mi-14 Evolved from Mi-8 transport helicopter.
Built in antisubmarine, mine counter-
measures, and search and rescue
versions. Two 1950 shp Isotov TV-3-117M
turboshafts. Entered service in 1975.
Helix Kamov Ka-27 Shipboard anti-submarine warfare,
assault transport, and search and rescue
helicopter. Two 2225 shp Isotov TV-117V
turboshafts.
Hen Kamov Ka-15 Two-seat utility helicopter. Used
primarily for bush patrol, agricultural
purposes, and fishery control.
Hermit Mil Mi-34 Two/four seat light instructional and
competition helicopter. One 325 hp
Vedeneyev M-14V-26 radial. Entered
productin in 1989.
Hind Mil Mi-24 Assault and anti-armor helicopter.
Two 2200 shp Isotov TV3-117 turboshafts.
Hip Mil Mi-8 General purpose transport helicopter.
Two 1500 shp Izotov TB-2-117A
turboshafts. Entered production in
1964 for both military and civil
tasks.
Hog Kamov Ka-18 Four-seat utility helicopter. One
Ivchenko AI-14V radial, 255 hp.
Apart from forward fuselage, generally
sililar to Ka-15.
Hokum Kamov Ka-136(?) Side-by-side two-seat combat helicopter.
Designed as air-to-air combat
helicopter, intended to eliminate enemy
frontline helicopters. Current status
is uncertain.
Homer Mil Mi-12 Heavy transport helicopter. Four
6500 shp Soloviev D-25DF turboshafts.
Two engines are mounted side-by-side
at the tips of braced wings. World's
largest helicopter. Entered production
in 1972.
Hoodlum Kamov Ka-26/126 Light utility helicopter. Two 325 hp
Vedeneev M-14V-26 radials (Ka-26).
Entered production in 1966. Ka-126 is
upgraded version with one 720 shp
Kopchenko TVD-100 turboshaft. First
flown in 1988.
Hook Mil Mi-6 Heavy transport helicopter. Two
5500 shp Soloviev D-25V turboshafts.
Crew 5, up to 65 passengers. First
flown in 1957. Built in large numbers
for both military and civil roles.
Hoplite Mil Mi-2 Light general purpose helicopter.
Two 437 shp Izotov GTD-350 turboshafts.
Entered production in Poland in 1966.
Hormone Kamov Ka-25 Shipboard antisubmarine warfare
helicopter. Two 900 shp Glushenkov
GTD-3 turboshafts. Ka-25K is utility
and flying crane version.
Horse Yakovlev Yak-24 Twin-engine, twin rotor military
assault helicopter. Two 1700 hp
Shvetsov ASh-82V radials. Entered
production in 1955.
Hound Mil Mi-4 Transport helicopter. One 1700 hp
Shvetsov ASh-82V radial engine. Serves
in both military and civilian roles
Crew 3, up to 14 passengers.
Entered service in 1952.
Madcap Antonov An-74 Version of An-74A transport for
airborne early warning and control.
Madge Beriev Be-6 Twin-engine long-range maritime
reconnaissance flying boat. Two
2000 hp. Shvetsov ASh-73 radial
engines.
Maestro Yakovlev Yak-28U Trainer version of Yak-28 Brewer
tactical attack aircraft. Two
Tumansky RD-11 turbojets.
Magnum Yakovlev Yak-30 Tandem two-seat jet basic trainer.
One 2315 lb. st. Tumansky TRD-29
turbojet. The Czech L-29 Delfin
was selected by Soviet Air Force in
preference to Yak-30.
Maiden Sukhoi Su-9U Tandem, two-seat conversion trainer
variant of Su-9 interceptor.
Mail Beriev Be-12 Turboprop-powered amphibious development
of the BE-6 flying boat. Two Ivchenko
AI-20M turboprops. Entered service with
Soviet Navy in early 1960s in maritime
patrol role.
Mainstay Ilyushin Il-76 Airborne early warning and control
aircraft. Derived from Il-76TD.
Large radome on twin pylons above the
rear fuselage. Entered service in 1986.
Mallow Beriev Be-10 Long-range maritime reconnaissance
flying boat. Two 14,330 lb. st. Type
AL-7PB turbojets. Two 23 mm cannon in
radar-controlled tail turret. Two
fixed forward firing 20mm or 23mm
cannon.
Mandrake Yakovlev ? Single-seat high-altitude reconnaissance
aircraft. Derivative of basic Yak-25
design, with swept wing replaced by a
high aspect ratio straight wing.
Generally comparable in concept to
Martin RB-57D.
Mantis Yakovlev Yak-32 Single-seat version of Yak-30 basic
trainer.
Mare ?? Tsibin-designed heavy transport glider.
Mascot Ilyushin Il-28U Crew trainer version of IL-28 bomber.
Ventral radome and glazed nose deleted.
Additional pupil cockpit added ahead
of main cockpit. Defensive armament
normally deleted.
Max Yakovlev Yak-18 Tandem two-seat primary trainer.
One 160 hp M-11FR-1 radial. Entered
service in 1946.
May Ilyushin Il-38 Four-engined long-range maritime patrol
aircraft. Four 4250 shp Ivchenko AI-20M
turboprops. Evolved from Il-18
transport.
Maya L-29A Delfin Two-seat basic trainer. Czech-built
aircraft supplied to Soviet Air Force
as standard basic trainer. One
M 701 turbojet, 1918 lb. st.
Mermaid Beriev A-40 Twin-engined amphibian - Two Soloviev
D-30KPV turbofans. Be-42 is search and
rescue version, Be-44 is ASW/
Surveillance/Minelaying version.
Midas Ilyushin Il-78 Four-engined inflight refuelling tanker.
Four 26,455 lb. st. Soloviev D-30KP
turbofans.
Midget Mikoyan MiG-15UTI Tandem two-seat advanced trainer.
Conversion of MiG-15 fighter. One
Klimov RD-45FA turbojet, 5952 lb. st.
2 23-mm cannon.
Mole Yakovlev Yak-14 Heavy transport glider.
Mongol Mikoyan MiG-21UTI Tandem two-seat advanced and combat
proficiency trainer. Conversion of
basic MiG-21 fighter.
Moose Yakovlev Yak-11 Tandem two-seat advanced trainer.
One 730 hp Shvetsov ASh-21 radial
engine. Entered service in 1947.
Moss Tupolev Tu-126 Four-engined airborne warning and
control system aircraft. Four
14,795 shp Kuznetsov NK-12MV turboprops.
Adaptation of Tu-114 commercial
transport to AWACS role.
Moujik Sukhoi Su-7UTI Tandem two-seat ground attack fighter
trainer. Training version of single-
seat Su-7 Fitter fighter bomber.
Entered service in early 1960s.
Mouse Yakovlev Yak-18P Single-seat aerobatic aircraft for
use by flying clubs. Adaptation of
Yak-18 two-seat trainer.
Mule Polikarpov PO-2 Tandem, two-seat utility biplane.
One 125 hp M-11D radial engine.
Mystic Myasischchev M-17 Single-seat high-altitude research
aircraft. Both single and twin-engined
versions built.
References:
. Bill Gunston, Mikoyan MiG-21, Osprey, 1986.
. William Green and Gerald Pollinger, The Aircraft of the World, Doubleday,
1965.
. Norman Polmar, Guide to the Soviet Navy, Arms and Armor Press, 1986.
Joe Baugher **************************************
AT&T Bell Laboratories * "If you're lookin' for trouble, *
200 Park Plaza * I'll accommodate ya!" *
Naperville, Illinois 60566-7050 **************************************
(708) 713 4548
ihlpm!jfb Who, me? Speak for AT&T? Surely you jest!
jfb200@cbnewsd.att.com

10142
textfiles.com/politics/natohandbook.pol Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

209
textfiles.com/politics/natsrvc.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
REFLECTIONS ON NATIONAL SERVICE
By JACOB G. HORNBERGER
National service looms as one of the most dangerous threats to
the American people in our 200-year history. Previously
advocated only by liberals, national service is now also
embraced by many on the conservative side of the political
spectrum, as evidenced by the recent book, Gratitude, by
America's foremost conservative, William F. Buckley, Jr.
The versions of national service are many and varied. Most of
them are directed to the youth of America. They range from
universal conscription to more "benign" forms of coercion
advocated by Mr. Buckley. But all of them have at their core
one essential principle: that the state, rather than being a
servant of the people, is their master; and as their master,
has the power to force the citizenry, either directly or
indirectly, to serve others.
National service violates every principle of individual
liberty and limited government on which this nation was
founded. As John Locke and Thomas Jefferson emphasized, life,
liberty, property, and conscience are not privileges bestowed
on us by governmental officials; they are natural, God-given
rights with which no public official can legitimately
interfere. We are not brought into the world to serve the
state; the state is brought into existence by the people to
serve us through the protection of our natural, God-given
rights.
We should also never forget that the American people of our
time have chosen an economic system which is alien to that
which our American ancestors chose. Although there are those
who honestly believe that the welfare state, planned economy
way of life is simply an evolution of the original principles
on which America was founded, they operate under a severe
delusion. Although there were numerous exceptions (slavery and
tariffs being the most notable), there is no doubt that our
American ancestors clearly and unequivocally rejected the
morality and philosophy of the welfare state, planned economy
way of life.
The advocates of national service, liberals and conservatives
alike, would force Americans to serve a system which our
ancestors knew would be evil, immoral, and tyrannical. The
welfare state, like all other socialist systems, plunders the
wealth and savings of those who have in order to redistribute
the loot, through the political process, to others. It
violates one of the most sacred commandments of our God: Thou
shalt not steal. And the planned economy, through its
thousands of rules and regulations interfering with peaceful
human choices, denigrates one of God's most sacred gifts to
human beings--the great gift of free will.
Recognizing that the ardent wish of the advocates of national
service is to require Americans to join them in the support of
this political evil and immorality, let us examine some of the
opportunities for "service" in our present-day economic
system. Perhaps a youth can "volunteer" his services to the
Internal Revenue Service and thereby help to destroy more
American lives through terror and confiscation. Or perhaps a
better opportunity would be to help run the concentration
centers on the American side of the United States-Mexican
border--where good and honorable people from the Republic of
Mexico are incarcerated for committing the heinous, American
"crime" of trying to sustain and improve their lives through
labor. Or how about simply being an enforcer of minimum-wage
laws, thereby helping to condemn black teenagers in Harlem to
lives of misery and impoverishment. Or perhaps a "volunteer"
can be one of the thousands who are responsible for injecting
the narcotic of welfare into the veins of so many thousands of
our fellow citizens.
One of the standard complaints about our present-day political
system, of course, is that not enough "good" people hold
public office. The suggestion is that if "better" people were
in public office, socialism in America could finally be made
to work well. But lost in all of this is that only a certain
type of person is attracted to participation in a government
which has overwhelming power over the lives and fortunes of
others--the person who has an uncontrollable urge to wield
such power--the person who has yet to learn the final lesson
in the evolution of man: that true power lies not in
controlling the lives of others; true power lies in the
conquest of one's own self.
What about these individuals, then, who have no desire to
govern the lives of others or who have overcome such a desire?
They avoid like the plague any participation in such a
government. Is this a bad thing? On the contrary! When a
government is engaged in evil, immorality, and tyranny, the
only rightful place for the person of conscience is outside of
that government.
But the proponents of national service would require or
"encourage" all Americans, like it or not, to participate in
the evil and immorality of the welfare state, planned economy
way of life.
Perhaps the most tragic aspect of national service is that it
is advocated by many Christians. Christians know that God
loved man so much that He entrusted us with a tremendously
wide ambit of freedom--so much so that we are even able to
deny Him and our neighbor if we so choose. In other words,
while God tells us that the two great commandments are to love
Him and to love our neighbor, never does He force us to comply
with these commandments. He leaves the choices with us but
with the understanding that we must ultimately bear the
consequences of those choices.
But the advocates of national service believe that God made a
mistake when He entrusted man with so much freedom. And so
they wish to correct the "error" by using the coercive power
of Caesar to ensure that man serves his fellow man whether he
wants to or not. They block out of their minds that God
neither needs nor wants this type of "help" and that, in fact,
by interfering with God's peaceful methods--love, charity,
forgiveness, acceptance, the cross--they actually place their
own souls in jeopardy.
Two hundred years ago, our American ancestors instituted the
most unusual political-economic system in the history of man.
With exceptions, government's primary purpose was to protect
the right of each individual to live his life and to dispose
of his wealth as he saw fit. While this strange way of life
guaranteed that people could accumulate unlimited amounts of
wealth, it did not guarantee what people would do with that
wealth. Freedom was more important to these people than the
outcome of freedom. And, ironically, the result was not only
the most prosperous nation in history but also the most
charitable nation in history!
Advocates of national service say that we should be grateful
to our Founding Fathers for establishing a free society. But
they want us to "repay the debt" to these deceased advocates
of liberty by participating in the destruction of the freedom
which they achieved. Apparently, it is not sufficient that my
generation, as well as the next, have been saddled by previous
generations with a very real, financial, political debt that
ultimately must be paid. And apparently, it is not sufficient
that we are currently required to work for the first half of
each year just to maintain the huge, welfare-state bureaucracy
which previous generations foisted on later generations. No,
apparently this is not sufficient. We are told that we must
also deliver now up our children to the state so that they can
prepare for their lives of permanent, partial enslavement
through temporary, total enslavement.
As our Founding Fathers taught us, service to one's country
sometimes entails opposition to one's government. We often
forget that those who signed the Declaration of Independence
were not American citizens. They were as British as any
British citizen today. And they were viewed as unpatriotic by
many of their fellow citizens, even those in the colonies,
because they refused to serve and support their government. In
fact, it has been estimated that one-third of the colonists
sided with their government--the British government--during
the Revolution and that another third stayed neutral during
the conflict.
How many present-day Americans would have signed the
Declaration of Independence? Would you have signed it?
Remember--by signing that document, you would have placed at
risk your life, savings, home, and family. And you would have
been branded a traitor by your own public officials, and by
many of your friends and neighbors, for refusing to support
your government. And if you had lost the struggle, you would
have died a nameless "extremist" rather than as one of the
greatest patriots of all time.
The unhappy truth is that most present-day Americans would not
have served their country by standing against their government
in 1776. Having served the mandatory 12-year sentence in
government-approved schools learning government-approved
doctrine, and having been required to pledge allegiance
thousands upon thousands of times, most Americans today
honestly believe that support of their country is synonymous
with support of their government. And the best proof of this
is their willingness to approve, support, and serve a tax and
regulatory tyranny that makes what King George III was doing
to his citizens look like child's play.
Although ours is a peaceful war of ideas, it is the most
important war ever in the history of man. And no one can avoid
being a part of it. It finds Americans today divided into
three camps: those who wish to expand the welfare state, those
who wish to conserve it, and those who wish to end it. It is
true that those of us who are fighting to end the evil and
immorality are a very small minority who are facing the vast
majority of our fellow citizens who wish either to expand or
conserve it. But we must remain determined and optimistic.
For our American ancestors showed us that minorities who are
in the right can prevail over majorities who are in the wrong.
Time will tell whether those of us who served our nation by
resisting the tyranny of our government will prevail over
those who would have us support the tyranny through national
service and other such schemes.
Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the April 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

159
textfiles.com/politics/naugjk.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
JOHN F. KENNEDY'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS
January 20, 1961
(Department of State Bulletin, February 6, 1961)
Vice-President Johnson, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chief Justice,
President Eisenhower, Vice-President Nixon, President Truman,
Reverend Clergy, Fellow Citizens:
We observe today not a victory of party but a celebration of
freedom -- symbolizing an end as well as a beginning -- signifying
renewal as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty
God the same solemn oath our forbearers prescribed nearly a century
and three-quarters ago.
The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal
hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms
of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our
forbearers fought are still at issue around the globe -- the belief
that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but
from the hand of God.
We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first
revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to
friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new
generation of Americans -- born in this century, tempered by war,
disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage
-- and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human
rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which
we are committed today at home and around the world.
Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that
we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support
any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of
liberty.
This much we pledge -- and more.
To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we
share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is
little we cannot do in a host of co-operative ventures. Divided,
there is little we can do -- for we dare not meet a powerful
challenge at odds and split asunder.
To those new states whom we welcome to the ranks of the free,
we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have
passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We
shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we
shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom
-- and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought
power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.
To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe
struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best
efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required
-- not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek
their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help
the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.
To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special
pledge -- to convert our good words into good deeds -- in a new
alliance for progress -- to assist free men and free governments in
casting off the chains of poverty. But this peaceful revolution of
hope cannot become the prey of hostile powers. Let all our neighbors
know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion
anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know that this
hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house.
To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations,
our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far
outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support --
to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective -- to
strengthen its shield of the new and the weak -- and to enlarge the
area in which its writ may run.
Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our
adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin
anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction
unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental
self-destruction.
We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms
are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they
will never be employed.
But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take
comfort from our present course -- both sides overburdened by the
cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of
the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of
terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.
So let us begin anew -- remembering on both sides that civility
is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof.
Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to
negotiate.
Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of
belaboring those problems which divide us.
Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and
precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms -- and bring
the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute
control of all nations.
Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of
its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts,
eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and
commerce.
Let both sides unite to heed in all corners of the earth the
command of Isaiah -- to "undo the heavy burdens . . . . . [and] let
the oppressed go free."
And if a beachhead of co-operation may push back the jungle of
suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor, not a new
balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just
and the weak secure and the peace preserved.
All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days.
Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the
life of this administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this
planet. But let us begin.
In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest
the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was
founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give
testimony to its national loyalty. The graves of young Americans who
answered the call to service surround the globe.
Now the trumpet summons us again -- not as a call to bear arms,
though arms we need -- not as a call to battle, though embattled we
are -- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle,
year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation" --
a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty,
disease, and war itself.
Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance,
North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life
for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?
In the long history of the world, only a few generations have
been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum
danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it. I
do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other
people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion
which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who
serve it -- and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.
And so my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do
for you -- ask what you can do for your country.
My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do
for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.
Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the
world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and
sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure
reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to
lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing
that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.

117
textfiles.com/politics/nbahfhf.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
Portland, Oregon
Wednesday, April 6, 1994
Neighborhood Blocks A Home For Homeless Families
Apartment plan appeals cite
environmental regulations
By Julie Sterling
This month, the Wilson Neighborhood Association will have
spent three full years working to derail the construction
of a 31-unit apartment building for homeless families.
The avowed defeat of the Turning Point project, which could
have provided short-term housing for at least 375 families since
its might-have-opened date ( December 1991 ), seems to satisfy the
neighbors as a just cause to pursue from their comfortable
residences near Wilson High School.
In fact they will toast their efforts on a winery tour of
Yamhill County April 23. "All proceeds," says the Southwest
Neighborhood News in its March issue, "will be used to pay for
Wilson Neighborhood Association legal fees in our case against
the Housing Authority of Portland." Cost of the tour is $35.
The Turning Point, a first for Portland, would be built and
owned by the housing authority on donated land on the west side
of Southwest Bertha Boulevard at Chestnut Street.
Homelessness among families with children has increased
dramatically in recent years. Of 401 persons denied shelter
because of lack of space one night last November, "the great
majority...were families with children and women with children
escaping domestic violence," wrote Chuck Currie, chairman of the
Multnomah County Community Action Commission, in The Oregonian
February 16 [1994].
The Turning Point project would offer families like those
something more than a night in a shelter or two weeks in a motel.
It would give them a decent living environment - sleeping and
cooking faclities in a secure two-story, landscaped building -
while they receive counseling, job training and help in finding
permanent housing.
Kay Durtschi, who is president of Southwest Neighborhood
Information Association among its 16 members, characterizes the
dispute among its 16 members, characterizes the dispute as a
stand-off between environmentalists and homeless advocates.
Gerry Newhall chairman of the Friends of Turning Point, disagrees:
It's a NIMBY ( Not in My Back Yard ) issue. The Wilson Neighborhood
Associatlon, she contends, underwent an "environmental conversion"
in the early stages of the dispute when it became clear that
fighting the case on a NIMBY platform would not be politically or
socially acceptable.
The May 1991 issue of Southwest Neighborhood News, reporting on
an April 4 meeting of the Wilson group, said residents at the early
meeting "questioned why such a project was being considered for a
largely middle and upper-middle-class neighborhood ... They
expressed fears about increased crime and lowered property values,"
A letter to the editor in the Oregonian April 20, 1991, quoted one
of the Wilson group as saying, "Why are people of lesser means
brought in here, just to see what they can't have?"
Early on, the housing authority successfully countered
NIMBY arguments with assurances that the facility would have
24-hour, on-site management and an average residency of 60 days.
But since then, the Wilson neighbors have tossed so many
environmental grenades at the housing authority that the agency
must be tempted to build a bunker on the thorny site instead of
housing.
There's no question that the site is environmentally sensitive.
Part of it is an easement for storm water detention and part is
a wetland. A small creek runs through its layers of brambles.
And there's no doubt that the neighbor's environmental strategy
has reaped delays and heaped legal fees on lawyers for both sides.
But the housing authority argues that every objection raised is
satisfied in a series of conditions it has accepted, including an
argument to build outside the wetland. As to questions of runoff
disposal, the Turning Point development would not change the
overall capicity of the storm-water detention area, according to
city findings.
If anything, the Turning Point project would enhance the
neighborhood. The housing authority would dedicate 72 percent of
the site - the part that will remain untouched - for a park.
The proposal has survived a minefield of appeals - from the
City Council to the state Land Use Board of Appeals, to the Oregon
Court of Appeals to the Oregon Supreme Court - so the housing
authority had every reason to celebrate October 1, [1993] when the
City Council approved the Turning Point site for conditional use.
But in early February, the Wilson group filed its fifth appeal.
Now the neighborhood challenges the evidence the city and the
housing authority gathered to substantiate three issues singled
out by the Land Use Board of Appeals for further council review.
Chairman Wesley Risher says the Wilson Neighborhood Association
is prepared to go to the federal level in its effort to make sure
that the Turning Point "is built in accordance with federal
requirements and mandates, because it is receiving federal funding."
He believes it does not meet standards set by the National
Historical Preservation Act, the Clean Water Act, the Americans
With Disabilities and the National Environmental Policy Act.
He could well cite one more well-known act: The Turning Point
project was a bright hope for homeless families three years ago;
today it is an endangered species.
- end -

136
textfiles.com/politics/ncsarev.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,136 @@
NCSA POLICY CONCERNING SECURITY PRODUCT REVIEWS
February 17, 1990.
Purpose: NCSA product reviews are intended to present
complete, thorough, useful reviews of security products
to the members of the NCSA. This document's purpose is
to set forth the NCSA policy concerning such reviews.
This policy is open for discussion.
Reviewers: Reviewers may be single individuals or
"review teams." Reviewers should have some knowlege of
the application of the product, and should be capable of
writing detailed reviews. In the case of review teams,
the teams may consist of expert users, as well as novice
users. The role of the novice user is to provide input
on product ease-of-use and quality of documentation.
Conflict of Interest: NCSA reviewers must have no
interest in the product reviewed which would compromise
the integrity or accuracy of the review. All reviews
will be signed by their authors.
Procurement of Products: Products may be solicited
directly from manufacturers/software houses on behalf of
the NCSA. In return for a free evaluation copy, the
product review will become a permanent part of the NCSA
BBS, available for viewing by all members. After
completion of the review, the reviewer shall be granted
the license to the product.
Evaluation Copies: No review will be performed on a
copy which is limited in function. No review will be
performed on a "beta" version of a product, or any
product which is not available to the product.
Limit of Liability: The NCSA shall assume no
liability for, or make claims of, the capabilities or
fitness of any products. All reviews shall be carried
out to the best ability of the reviewer/review team, and
be edited if necessary by the NCSA staff.
Comments/Clarifications/Rebuttals: After a product
has been reviewed, the review shall be posted on the
NCSA BBS, and the manufacturer be allowed to comment on
the review for a period of 60 days. A copy of the
review will also be sent to the manufacturer for their
comment. After such time, the review will be edited if
necessary, based upon the responses of both the
manufacturer and any others who have commented. The
review will then become part of the permanent library of
the NCSA. A summary may be placed in the NCSA
newsletter; the full review will be placed on the NCSA
BBS for downloading by members.
Classifications: A detailed system of classification
shall be developed to assist both reviewers and readers
in their respective efforts. For example, such
categories might include PC Access Control, Data
Encryption, Virus Detection, etc.
Review Outline: The reviewer(s) shall follow the
review outline presented at the end of this document.
In this way, similar products can be compared directly.
Comparative Reviews: Where possible, a single review
will comprise a category of products. As each new
product within that category is reviewed, the new review
will be merged with the existing reviews. Where
possible, tables will be created comparing products.
This will be done to aid members in choosing a product.
Product Classification Overviews: In cases where
there are many products in a single category, a review
team may be assigned to evaluate all the reviews and
pick an "NCSA Choice". This would be the NCSA's
official recommendation, and would be awarded to the
product that best meets the criterion for its category.
Quantitative Ratings: A system of ratings shall be
developed, in order to more easily compare products. At
the time of review, an NCSA security rating will be
assigned. This will consist of a number from 0.0 to
10.0, with 0.0 providing the least security, and 10.0
the most. A scale shall be developed to aid both
reviewers and readers compare scores (i.e. 6.0-8.0
Average 8.0-10.0 Recommended, etc.). The exact form of
these ratings will be developed over time, as the first
reviews are conducted.
Access to Reviews: Reviews shall be placed in a
restricted area of the NCSA BBS, to enable only dues-
paying members to have access. Hard copies of the
reports may be requested for a small fee.
Review for Fee: At a manufacturer's or member's
request, NCSA will review a specified product. A fee may
be charged for such review, but this fee will in no way
affect the nature of the review.
Review Content: Each review will contain the
following information:
* Reviewer(s) name
* Product name
* Version of product reviewed (version number and/or
date)
* Product pricing information
* Manufacturer name, address, phone.
* Product category/function.
* Product description. This description will have a
heavy emphasis on the security offered by the product,
even if security is not the main focus of the product.
* Product capabilities. What specific features the
product offers. Such information may be drawn from
marketing materials, but must be verified by the
reviewer. Such narrative might be presented in bullet
or other narrative format.
* Definition of categories used in the ratings, and
general rating approach. This definition will be
sufficiently explicit that other reviewers will be able
to apply the method and obtain the same results on this
product. Examples of categories likely to be included:
ease of installation, ease of use, degree of protection
offered, adequacy of documentation, support, accuracy of
manufacturer's claims concerning the product, overall
value.
* Category ratings, with justification.
* Summary of ratings, in tabular form.
About this document: The first draft of this document
was prepared by Charles Rutstein, co-sysop of the NCSA
BBS. David Stang revised it. Comments are invited.
Write NCSA, Suite 309, 4401-A Connecticut Ave. NW,
Washington DC 20008. Or call NCSA voice 202-364-8252 or
leave a comment to the SYSOP on the NCSA BBS: 202-364-
1304.


452
textfiles.com/politics/neo-nazi.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,452 @@
Neo-Nazi
A U S D E R A U
brought to you by
PSYCHEDELIC WARLORD
of cDc
The following material is a taped conversation with a Neo-Nazi
we encountered preaching in a park downtown. The interview was conducted
by Apache Dreamsac (Apache Dreamsac is me and Arlo Klahr). The interview
begins a little broken because of some taping dificulties. The interviewers
will be called "AD" and Mr. Auderau will be called "NN".
AD: What did you say about Oral Roberts?
NN: We're with him. We're with him. My wife and I, we're full time ministers
down there. We believe in uh.. well, we're racists. We believe that
hispanics and whites are God's superior race.
AD: What religion are you?
NN: Well, ok. We're Neo-Nazis. We're from Idaho. We believe in the superior
doctrine of the Anglo-Saxon and Hispanic race.
AD: You're against Negroes?
NN: No, we're not against those. We just believe that they're here for a
reason. Everybody's here for a reason.
AD: What's the reason for the Negroes?
NN: I believe that God can save them.
AD: You mean turn their skin a different color?
NN: God created everything different. God created you different; you're
white! You're Anglo and (then pointing to Arlo) he's hispanic.
AD (Arlo): I'm from Canada.
NN: What part of Canada?
AD: I was born in Toronto. I lived in Nova Scotia.
NN: REALLY?!?! You know where Niagra Falls is at?
AD: Yeah... That's a nice place.
NN: But anyhow we're not against that (blacks). See that's what the whole
media has messed around. They said that the Nazis are racist, and that
they are hate mongers. We're not. We're not! We love the world. We
believe in the... You've heard of World Wide Church of God?
AD: Yeah
NN: There ya go.
AD: Do you follow Hitler.
NN: No. No! We follow Christ! Hitler was a man that was used during that
particular time. My grandparents were under his regime. He had some
good ideas, but he was not perfect.
AD: Do you think it was wrong that he (Hitler) commited genocide and killed
six-million Jews?
NN: He didn't. Now (speaking to Arlo) you're from Canada, it's against your
country to publicize anything that stands towards genocide. You've prob-
ably read that book up there called "Six Million Jews"?
AD: No.
NN: Well, ok. You're not old enough to read it. Ok. Hitler did not kill six-
million Jews. There were millions that were killed but they were not all
Jews. We do not believe that Hitler was even the cause of that. We
believe that what it was.. it was a conspiracy. You see, within his
regime.. and the first person it fell on was Hitler because he was diff-
erent. I believe that Hitler was a good man.
AD: Really?
NN: I believe he had a lot of things that were imperfect.. Well, are you
perfect?
AD: No sir.
AD: Can you tell me why you believe this? Did God tell you this?
NN: The Lord gave me a clear consiencious over the whole thing. Have you
ever heard of Oral Roberts.. no.. Jimmy Swaggart.. no not Jimmy
Swaggart.. he's outta Ohio.. but this is what he said, "Who are we
to tell who will be in Heaven." He said "people we don't even imagine
being there." Lemme ask you a question, what is the possibility of
somebody confessing and making himself right (he snaps) for God
'fore he dies?
AD: Uhhh..
NN: Great possibility. I believe if he enters in to God's kingdom, then
everything was clear at the end. Lemme give you an example, you wanna
good bible example?
AD: Yeah.
NN: You remember Saul?
AD: Yeah, I think I remember him.
NN: Ohhhhhh K.. What did God tell him to do? To kill off all the what?
AD: Uhhh..
NN: Amerlites (??) Remember that? And what did he do? He failed to what?..
To do it!
AD: So God uhh... He became like a disciple or something, right?
NN: No, no, no.. That was Sa.. no Paul. Ok. Saul the King. Remember, God told
Saul to kill off all the Amerkites. And he didn't?! And what happened?
AD: I uh....
NN: God stripped him off his power! You remember that? Ok, there ya go!
If God told Saul to do that, then what prevents God from telling Hitler
to do that?
AD: I understand (in disbelief)..
NN: You get that? You gotta be careful! You got some meetings coming to your
school.
AD: Yeah?
NN: We're fighting a Supreme Court battle right now here in Texas. We're gonna
be holding some meetings. In fact, we're members of The Klan.
AD: (pointing to Arlo) He's Jewish. Do you think he can be saved?
NN: Oh yeah! I'm jewish!
AD: You are?
NN: Oh yeah! Sure am! Ok, you heard the name "Schwartz"? What nationality
is that?
AD: Jewish.
NN: That's right! Ok, that's not my name, that's my mother's name.
AD: Ok. What's your name?
NN: A-U-S-D-E-R-A-U. That's German now. I'm Jewish! I believe in keeping
Saturday holy.. Oh! oh oh oh oh .. I believe in keeping the peace in
God (some more Oh! oh oh oh oh).. Huh? Feast of Passover...I have a lot
of good Jewish friends too. Jews are blind, spiritualy now..
AD: Why do you say that?
NN: It's good too. The reason why is 'coz they cannot except Jesus as the
mesiah they believe that the mesiah will come back. HE WILL COME BACK!
AGAIN! This time the shades will come off your eyes. And you'll say
"Hey man! Where've you been all this time?" He will come back to
recieve his people.. Jews.. the House of Judah.
AD: I think Hitler did order the...
NN: No he didn't. No he didn't! Ok.. you want an address (he then proceeded
to give us the address for his church. The address is located at the
bottom of the file). A lot of Jews come to our congregation. We keep
the feasts and everything.
AD: Do you think Hitler was some kind of puppet?
NN: I think Hitler was a good leader, and I think a lot of people misunder-
stood him. Like a lot of people misunderstood in Jews. I know a lot
of Nazis that don't like Jews, because they're misunderstood. I believe
that Germans and Jews are the most misunderstood people in the world
today. Jews misunderstand the TRUE Nazism, which Hitler was of the TRUE
Arian people (??) In fact if you go back in History you'll find out
that Hitler was Jewish. Oh YEAH! He sure was. Your Rabbi doesn't teach
you that does he?
AD (Arlo): I'm like a non-practicing Jew.. I had my Bar-mitzvah but..
NN: Yeah, yeah.. But you need to check out the New Testament. Need to
check out History because Hitler WAS Jewish. He was Jewish by race
and Catholic by religion.
AD: You don't think Hitler was mentaly insane? You know all the stories..
NN: Uhhh.. Stories.. Ok, I could walk around and tell people that you're
criminaly insane, but that don't make it so.
AD: Ok. Thanks. Bye.
|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|.|
This man was a great speaker, rivaling even the popular T.V.
evangelists in his manner. Of course most people of this sort are often
dismissed as crazy, or just unbelieveable. But we weren't really interested
in his stories of Hitler or his nationality, we were trying to see what made
him think the horrible things that he did. If you'd like to get the full taped
interview (on tape) please send $3.00 to cover costs to:
Apache Dreamsac
714 E. University
El Paso, TX 79902
The address for the Arian bible and more information on the Church
of Jesus Christ, right to:
Arian Nation
Church of Jesus Christ
Box 5308
El Paso, TX 79953
(c) 1988 Apache Dreamsac

174
textfiles.com/politics/newhope.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
NEW HOPE FOR FREEDOM: FULLY INFORMED JURORS DON DOIG
America's Founders were worried that the government they
created might someday grow too powerful, and begin to pass laws
which would violate the rights of the very people the government
was supposed to protect: ordinary, peaceful, productive
Americans. But they had an "ace in the hole" which they believed
would suffice to hold the government in check. That was the
right to a trial by a jury of one's peers.
Since when, you might ask, can a jury protect people from
arbitrary and unjust prosecutions, or from bad laws? The
legislature creates laws. Aren't we supposed to obey them, and
lobby our legislatures for any changes that need to be made?
Traditionally, Americans have had more substantial and
direct means by which to protect against governments grown too
ambitious, and by which to resist oppressive laws. America's
Founders realized that the temptations of power were too great to
leave it to the legislature, to the executive, and to the
judicial branches of government to define what the rights of the
citizens of this nation were. Ultimately, citizens at the local
level, acting according to the dictates of individual conscience
were to have the final say, the final check and balance. The
people would need veto power over bad laws.
And they provided just such a veto, a centuries-old
tradition carried over from England to the colonies, which holds
that jurors could judge whether a law was a good law, a law that
did not violate the rights of free men and women. If, according
to the dictates of conscience, jurors did not think a law was
just, or if they thought the law had been misapplied, they could
refuse to convict an otherwise "guilty" defendant. Even a single
juror could prevent a conviction, by voting not guilty.
And if the jury as a whole decided to acquit the defendant,
that decision was and is final. A verdict of innocent cannot be
overturned, nor can the judge harass the jurors for voting for
acquittal. Jurors cannot be punished for voting according to
conscience.
These principles date back to the time of the Magna Carta.
In 1670, Willian Penn was arrested for preaching a Quaker sermon,
and in so doing breaking the law of England, which made the
Church of England the only legal church. The jurors in his
trial, led by Edward Bushell, refused to convict him, and were
themselves held without food, water, tobacco or toilet
facilities. Four were put in prison for nine weeks. When they
were finally released by court order, the decision established
that jurors could no longer be punished for their verdicts. This
case helped establish freedom of religion, and the right to a
trial by a jury of one's peers, a jury free from government
coercion.
The trial of John Peter Zenger, in the American colonies,
was another landmark case. Zenger had been arrested for
publishing materials critical of the Royal Governor of New York
colony and his cronies, accusing them of corruption. While the
charges were true, under the law, truth was no defense. Zenger's
attorney, Andrew Hamilton, argued to the jury that they were
judges of the merits of the law, and should not convict Zenger of
violating such a bad law. The jury agreed. Zenger was
acquitted, and this case helped establish the right to freedom of
speech.
The Founding Fathers were clear about where they stood on
the issue of the rights of jurors:
"The right of the jury to decide questions of law was widely
recognized in the colonies. In 1771, John Adams stated
unequivocally that a juror should ignore a judge's instruction on
the law if it violates fundamental principles:
'It is not only...[the juror's] right, but his duty, in that
case, to find the verdict according to his own best
understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct
opposition to the direction of the court.'
There is much evidence of the general acceptance of this
principle in the period immediately after the Constitution was
adopted." Note (anon.) The Changing Role of the Jury in the
Nineteenth Century, Yale Law Journal, 74, 174, (1964).
Thomas Jefferson said in a letter to Thomas Paine in 1789:
"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by
man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution."
And yet, during the nineteenth century, judges chipped away
at this fundamental right of free citizens, transferring more and
more power to themselves, contending that jury review of law was
no longer necessary, now that democratic elections had replaced
Monarchy. By the end of the century, the Supreme court had
decided to leave it up to the judge to decide if the jury should
be told of its right to judge law as well as fact. Today, jurors
are generally told that they must accept the law as the judge
explains it, and may not decide to acquit the defendant because
their consciences are bothered by what seems to them an unjust
law. Judges falsely tell them that their only role is to decide
if the "facts" are sufficient to convict the defendant. Defense
attorneys are not allowed to encourage jurors to vote to acquit
because they believe the law is unjust or unconstitutional, and
defendants are generally not allowed to even discuss their
motives.
In plain words, in what comes down to a power struggle
between the people and the judicial system, the people have been
losing.
In fact, jurors still, to this day, have the right to
veto, or "nullify" bad laws. They are just not told this by the
courts. And judges and prosecutors exclude people from serving
on juries who indicate a willingness to nullify the law. This
violates the protections jurors were supposed to be able to give
their fellow citizens against unjust prosecutions. A jury is
properly a cross-section of the community as a whole.
What can be done? The Fully Informed Jury Amendment (FIJA)
was designed to return to the people this basic and very
important right.
The idea of the Fully Informed Jury Amendment is to amend
state constitutions, or enact statutory changes, to require
judges to inform jurors that if they think a law is unjust or
unconstitutional--or just misapplied-- they need not convict an
otherwise "guilty" defendant.
FIJA does not give jurors the right to act as a legislature,
since their decisions affect only the case at hand and do not set
precedents for future cases. Nor can jurors create new offenses.
If a jury convicts a defendant unjustly, the judge may set aside
the conviction, and in addition the defendant has the right of
appeal.
People from all walks of life and from across the political
spectrum are organizing to put FIJA on the election ballot, in
states that permit the initiative process. To date FIJA has been
filed as an initiative in Montana, Idaho, Colorado, California,
Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Nebraska, and
Washington, with more states soon to follow. In other states,
FIJA activists are lobbying state legislators to support FIJA
legislation or referendums. FIJA legislation has been submitted
to the legislatures of Alaska, Arizona and Wyoming. And in all
areas of the country, people are spreading the word.
The judges and others within the government's courts
have long been waging a campaign of disinformation, so that
jurors won't even know what their rights are. We think it's past
time that the people themselves begin to demand that their rights
as jurors be respected. It's not just jurors whose rights are
being denied. Defendants, too, have the right to a fair trial by
a jury of their peers, and they have not been getting fair trials
because government judges have been systematically misinforming
jurors. In fact, this campaign to deny juror's rights has been
going on for so long now that many attorneys (and probably some
judges) are not even aware that these rights exist.
We have the opportunity to take back control of this country
and return the ultimate safeguard of the rights of the people
back where it belongs, to the people. Please join us in the
campaign to pass the Fully Informed Jury Amendment.
If a juror accepts as the law that which the judge states
then that juror has accepted the exercise of absolute authority
of a government employee and has surrendered a power and right
that once was the citizen's safeguard of liberty,--For the
saddest epitaph which can be carved in memory of a vanished
liberty is that it was lost because its possessors failed to
stretch forth a saving hand while yet there was time." 2
Elliot's Debates, 94, Bancroft, History of the Constitution, 267,
1788.
Don Doig is National Coordinator for the Fully Informed Jury
Amendment, P.O. Box 59, Helmville, Montana 59843. Phone (406)793-
5550.

426
textfiles.com/politics/nightlin.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,426 @@
NIGHTLINE: FBI, PRIVACY, AND PROPOSED WIRE-TAPPING LEGISLATION
(Friday, May 22, 1992)
Main Participants:
Ted Koppel (TK - Moderator)
Marc Rotenberg (MR - Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility)
William Sessions (WS - Director, FBI)
TK: In these days of encroaching technology, when every transaction,
from the purchase of a tie to the withdrawal of twenty dollars from a
cash machine, is a matter of record, it may be surprising to learn
that technology has given us some added privacy. To find this new
boon, look at your telephone. It used to be fair game for wiretapping.
Done legally, that requires a court order. But that was the hard part.
For the price of a few pieces of wires and clips, human voices were
there for the eavesdropping. That's changing now. The advent of phiber
optics, of digital communication and encryption devices all mean that
what we say, what we transmit over the telephone lines, can't easily
be spied upon. Even if you could single out the one phone call among
thousands passing in a phiber optic cable, what you would hear would
be a hiss. Voices being transmitted in computer code. That's good
news for businesses, who fear industrial spies, and it's welcomed by
telephone users anywhere, who want to think that what they say into a
receiver is protected. But, it's bad news for those whose business it
is sometimes to eavesdrop. That includes law enforcement. As Dave
Marek reports, it's getting tougher to reach out and wiretap someone.
DM: The explosion of new communications technology, e-mail upstaging
airmail, fax machines pushing prose into offices, homes, and even
automobiles, celluar phones that keep us in touch from anywhere to
everywhere, has created a confusing competition of services and
counter-services.
(Unseen female voice answering telephone): Who is this please.
(Heavy breathing unseen male caller): Why don't you guess?
DM: Take that new telephone service called "caller ID." Already most
phone companies now offer a counter-service which blocks caller ID.
This is bad news if you're fighting off creep callers. But it's good
news if you want to block some 900 number service from capturing your
number on their caller ID screen, and the selling it off to some
direct marketing outfit. But today's biggest communications
controversy is about interception services. Tapping telephones used to
be so simple.
(Film clips from commercial for adult 900 number and film clips of
wiretapping from film "Three Days of the Condor") with reporter's
voice-over.
A snooper needed only a couple of alligator clips and a set of
earphones to hear what was being said. Today's telephones digitalize
chatter into computer code. Bundle all those infinitesimal ones and
zeros into flashes of light and don't reconstruct them into sound
again until just before the call reaches your ear. This has made phone
tapping much tougher. But still, according to Bell Atlantic executive
Ken Pitt (??): There's never yet been an FBI surveillance request a
phone company couldn't handle.
KP: We have been able to satisfy every single request that they've
made, not only here at Bell Atlantic, but all across the country.
DM: Still, when the FBI looks into the future, it sees trouble. It
sees criminals like John Gotti becoming able to shield their
incriminating conversations from surveillance and thereby becoming
able to defeat law enforcements best evidence.
Clifford Fishman:: When you're going after organized crime, and the
Gotti case is a perfect example, the traditional techniques, visual
surveillance, the paper trail, trying to turn the people who are on
the inside, trying to infiltrate someone into the, uh, organization,
they all have built-in difficulties. Witnesses can be killed, they can
be bribed, they can be threatened. Ah, the most effective evidence
quite often that a prosecutor can have, the only evidence that can't
be discredited, that can't be frightened off, are tape recordings of
the suspects talking to each other, discussing their crimes together,
planning their crimes together, committing their crimes together.
DM: As FBI Director William Sessions told a Congressional Hearing late
last month:
WS: The technology must allow us access, and it must allow us to stay
even with what we now have. Else, we are denied the ability to carry
out the responsibility which the Congress of the United States has
given us.
KP: One of the solutions they've asked for is the simple software
solution.
DM: This would involve not tapping into individual phone lines, but
planting decoding software into:
KP: ....The central offices where the telephone switching's done,
where the wires are connected to ((bad audio cut)) ...the computers,
and someone, the FBI is saying, "Let's do the switching, let's do the
wiretaps with the software."
DM: This software solution is already in use. But communications
expert Marc Rotenberg says it could lead to future abuses of privacy
by creating a surveillance capability:
Marc Rotenburg: ...which would allow the agent from a remote keyboard,
not in the phone system, not at the target's location, to punch in a
phone number and begin recording the contents of the communication.
That also's never been done in this country before. It's not too
different from what the STAZI (??) attempted to do in East Germany.
But the ((one word garbled)) for abuse there would be very hard.
DM: Protecting the privacy of ordinary conversation isn't the only
issue at stake here.
Janlori Goldman (ACLU): The privacy rights of ordinary citizens will
be put at risk if the FBI's proposal goes forward. Right now, all
kinds of very sensitive information is flowing through the
telecommunications network. A lot of routine banking transactions,
people are sending information over computer lines. ((One word
garbled)) will be communicating more over the network. And what is
happening is that as the private sector is trying to make systems less
vulnerable, to make them more secure, to develop encryption so that
these people don't have to worry about sending information through, if
the FBI's proposal goes forward, those systems will be at great risk.
DM: Encryption, or putting communications into unbreakable code,
frightens the FBI and the super-secret National Security Agency, which
monitors communications of all kinds all around the globe. Like the
FBI, the NSA wants total access. And to assure it, the NSA wants to
limit all American companies to a communications' code system it can
break. Some people call that "turning back the clock."
JG: What we're seeing is an FBI effort to require US industries to
basically reverse progress, and there's no way that international
companies will be following the U.S. trends in this area. If anything,
they will surpass us, they will go beyond us, and we will be out of
competiveness in the information market.
DM: The competition to control and surveil communications spreads
across all the boarders on the planet and squeezes inside the flickers
that activate a computer's brain. But what makes both the big picture
and the little one so hard to focus is that the rules of the
surveillance game are always changing. Every time, a new
technological explosion makes new ways of snooping possible. I'm Dave
Marek for Nightline in Washington.
TK: When we come back, we'll be joined by the Director of the FBI,
William Sessions, and by an expert in privacy law, Marc Rotenburg.
((COMMERCIAL))
TK: As Director of the FBI, William Sessions is the point man in the
lobbying effort to adjust new technologies so that his agency can
continue to use telephone wiretaps. Judge Sessions joins us in our
Washington studios. Also joining us in Washington is Marc Rotenburg,
the Director of the Washington Office of Computer Professionals for
Social Responsibility. Mr. Rotenburg, who teaches privacy law at
Georgetown University, says that the FBI proposal would invite use of
wiretaps.
Judge Sessions, I'd like to begin on a more fundamental point. As you
understand better than most, the very underpinning of our system of
jurisprudence is that it's better to let a hundred guilty men go free
than to wrongfully convict one innocent man, so why should the privacy
of millions of innocents be in anyway jeopardized by your need to have
access to our telephone system?
WS: Ted, I think that that question has been fundamentally answered by
the Congress back in 1968 with the Organized Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act, when it decided that it's absolutely essential for law
enforcement to have court ordered and court authorized access to ((two
words garbled)) privacy information normally private conversations, if
they involve criminal conduct. And the point is that unless you have
that access to criminal conversations, you cannot deal with it in a
law enforcement technique or a law enforcement method. Therefore,
it's essential that you have the ability to tap into those
conversations. So, privacy of that kind is not an issue. Criminality
is.
TK: Although, what is currently the case, is that you would be
required on a case-by-case basis, to get a judge to give you
permission to do that.
WS: That is absolutely correct. The United States District Judge, who
is the person authorized to actually give that consent, must be
convinced that it is absolutely necessary, and that the technique will
be properly used under the law.
TK: If you have, therefore, the centralized capacity to do that, let's
say from FBI headquarters, doesn't that invite abuse?
WS: There has been no suggestion that that would ever be contemplated
under any system. There are necessities of tapping phones that, in
connection with various criminal cases around the country, have many
different jurisdictions, from the east to the west. The point is that
a court would authorize the FBI, or other law enforcement agencies, to
have that access.
TK: All right. Mr. Rotenburg, what then is the problem? What then is
different from the modality that the FBI uses these days?
MR: Well, Mr. Koppel, I think the critical point, that the 1968 law
which Judge Sessions referred to, set down very strict procedures for
the conduct of wire surveillance. And the methods that come from
reading that history, the Congress was very much concerned about this
type of investigative method. They described it as an investigative
method of last resort. And it's for that reason that the wire
surveillance statute creates so many requirements. Now, the FBI has
put forward a proposal that would permit them to engage in a type of
remote surveillance, in other words, to permit an agent, with a
warrant, to presumably type in the telephone number to begin to record
a telephone conversation. That capability has not previously existed
in the United States, and I think that's the reason the proposal is so
troubling.
TK: But, if this happens, still, under control of the judge, the
technical means of doing it may be somewhat changing, but as long as
the legality has not been changed, and the means by which the FBI gets
permission to do this kind of thing, why should that trouble us in
anyway?
MR: Well, the two are closely related. Communications privacy is very
much about network security. It's about sealed pipes, and showing
that information can move through the network and not be intercepted
unlawfully by anyone who shouldn't have access to it. When you talk
about designing the network to facilitate wire surveillance, in a
sense to replace walls with doors that can be opened, you create new
opportunities for abuse, and I see this as a problem.
TK: Judge Sessions, again, there is the argument that is made, and I
guess Mr. Rotenburg is one of the most eloquent proponents of this
argument, that the FBI doesn't want this particular breakthrough in
technology, that the FBI is taking a sort of Luddite philosophy here,
and saying if indeed communications can be so safeguarded against
intrusion, well that's just too darn bad.
WS: Well, of course, as you noted, it is absolutely essential, the
essential ingredient is that there be a court authorization to kick
out that particular conversation that is authorized to be overheard,
authorized to be intercepted. And, so, the spectre that Mr. Rotenburg
raises does not exist in any shape or form in what we're proposing.
All we are proposing is that with the digital telephony capability,
that we be able to maintain the same capability that we've always had
under the Organized Crime Control and Safe Streets Act. That is, to
have access to that particular digital bit, or that particular
conversation, always under a court authorization with (two words
garbled). And as Mr. Rotenburg noted, very, very meticulously and
carefully followed by the courts with an insistence upon total
compliance with the law. That's all we seek. That is, to stay even and
to be able to have that necessary access under the law.
TK: Has the FBI, in the past, Mr. Rotenburg, ever requested any kind
of technological assistance? I mean, they've always had to go to the
telephone company anyway, and say, "Help us get in."
MR: Well, yes. And that's appropriate to an extent. The FBI, when
they're in possession of a lawful warrant, I think, can expect
assistance in execution of the warrant. The difference in the FBI
proposal that's now before the Congress is that the communications
service providers are going to need to design their systems with wire
surveillance in mind. And that's not been previously done. The
Congress of 1968 that Judge Sessions referred to purposely created an
"arms-length" relationship between the Bureau and the telephone
companies, and I don't think they wanted a situation to develop where
this system was being designed to facilitate wiretapping.
TK: All right. We have to take a break, gentlemen, but when we come
back, let's discuss where it is in Congress right now, and where it is
likely to go next. We'll continue our discussion in a moment.
((COMMERCIAL))
TK: And we're back once again with Marc Rotenburg and FBI Director
William Sessions. Judge Sessions, what is it you're asking Congress?
WS: What we want to be able to do is to maintain our capabilities to
actually access the digital bitstream that is in the digital telephony
capability. We're asking the Congress to give us a mechanism whereby
we can actually do that. I believe it will now be proposed that rather
than being through the Federal Communications System, it will be
actually through the Department of Justice, that it will, in fact,
allow that oversight to ensure that those companies that do in fact,
under that guidance, prepare us the capability, or give us the
capability, to access that digital stream in the digital telephonic
process.
TK: Which you could access independently, without turning to the
telephone company.
WS: We would be able to do it under a court order, and always under a
court order.....
TK: ...I understand that. I'm just talking about, technologically
speaking, you would have the capacity to access it on your own without
assistance from the telephone company.
WS: I would think that that would not be so, Mr. Koppel, because what
will happen is that it would be, normally the court would order the
telephone company to provide the access.
TK: Again, Mr. Rotenburg, I don't quite understand what the difference
is. If the telephone company has the capacity to do that, then even
though...under the current law, presumably, the FBI would be able to
go to the telephone company if it has the right court order in hand
and say, "Give us access."
MR: The difference, Mr. Koppel, is that currently agents either go to
the site where the target is and conduct a physical wiretap or they go
to the central exchange office of the telephone company and conduct a
tap there. There are other ways to do it as well, but for the most
part it involves physical access to the networks. The new proposal
speaks specifically about designing a remote surveillance or
monitoring capability. Now, that's a change.
WS: That's because of the nature of the technology. The technology now
allows us simply to do exactly what he says....
MR: ....But that's not maintaining the status quo. That is a new
capability that you would get if the proposal goes forward.
TK: Why should I, as an individual consumer of telephone, fax,
whatever the technology may be, why should I be concerned about that,
Mr. Rotenburg?
MR: As I've said before, I think that this is the type of proposal
that's likely to invite abuse. It makes the network less secure. And
the other aspect of the proposal, which has also raised concerns, is
that it give the Department of Justice new authority to set standards
for communications of all kinds in this country.
TK: May I turn it around for a moment? If I may, I think that what
you're suggesting is not that it makes it less secure, but that the
new technology makes it more secure than it has been in the past, and
the FBI wants to stay even. Would you argue with that?
MR: It may make it more secure in the future. It's not clear what the
outcome will be, frankly, if you go forward with these changes that
the Bureau has proposed.
WS: What I think you must remember is that when you're talking about
illegal access, you're talking about illegal conduct. That is, conduct
for which a crime can be charged. Therefore, if you had illegal
conduct anywhere, now or then, illegal use of the system, improper use
of the system, that is the basis of a criminal charge.
TK: The easier the access, the easier the abuse, and the more
difficult it is to approve that abuse. Would you agree with that,
Director?
WS: Well, the easier the access, it is still a matter of having access
under the law, under court-authorized permission, and that access,
whether it's on digital, or whether it's on, presently, analogue, that
access is what we seek to maintain.
TK: I guess what I'm saying, Judge Sessions, is that there have been
enough instances of abuse over the past 25 or 30 years that people
become concerned about making it too easy for their law enforcement
operatives.
WS: One of the things you see, Mr. Koppel, is when there is abuse or
failure to follow the techniques, it plays out in the courtroom. You
see it in the courtroom with the testimony that goes on that stand,
under oath, that describes a failure, if there is a failure, to carry
out the procedures under Title Three. So it's all in the court
processes. It is not hidden. And if there is an abuse, either the
wiretap evidence would not be allowed, or it would be weakened to that
extent, or, criminal charges would be brought if there's actually
illegal conduct.
TK: Unless, of course, the wiretap evidence is used to acquire other
evidence, and the defense attorneys are not aware of the fact that the
wiretap evidence was used in the first place.
WS: Well, there's always the "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" philosophy.
That is, if you've illegally acquired at some point, done something
illegal, it may thereafter change that, it's not acceptable....
TK: ...I understand the philosophy Judge. What I'm saying is that if
you don't know that that has happened, if you don't know that the
other information has been acquired through the wiretap, and if the
wiretap is too easily controlled by the FBI, with or without, I mean,
if you have the physical capability of doing it, do you at least
concede the potential for abuse is greater than it would have been
before?
WS: No, I really don't concede that at all, because now, if you have
endless numbers of ways that you could actually tap into the analogue,
it will be a much more secure system that you actually have, because
it will require special ways again. A special computer program that
will allow you to do that, that is designed to let you in, that is
court-authorized, court-approved, and specifically for that line,
specifically for that conversation, specifically for that purpose
and no other.
TK: All right. Closing argument again, Mr. Rotenburg.
MR: Well, it is simply the replacement of fixed walls with doors that
can be opened, and while it may be the case that some agents operating
operating with warrants will use that facility as it should be used,
it's clear the opportunities for abuse will increase. And I think all
these new problems for the Bureau as well.
TK: New problems in the sense that, when Judge Sessions says you can't
bring it to court if it hasn't been done through proper procedures,
he's quite right obviously.
MR: But it may not be the Bureau that we would be concerned about. It
may be people acting outside of any type of authority. For the last
several years, we've seen that the telephone network is increasingly
vulnerable, and this vulnerability plays out as new weaknesses are
introduced.
WS: Well, I'd have to interject that with the new systems, with the
new technology, it would be far more secure and far less likely that
could happen, and if it does happen, again, the recourse is the
criminal charge for the improper criminal conduct in accessing that
information.
TK: Judge Sessions. Mr. Rotenburg. Thank you both very much for being
with us.
WS: Thank you Mr. Koppel.
MR: Thank you, Mr. Koppel.
** END **

28
textfiles.com/politics/nixon.fun Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
RICHARD MILHOUS NIXON
RESIGNATION
THURSDAY, AUGUST 8, 1974
Throughout the long and difficult period of Watergate, I have felt it was my
duty to persevere, to make every possible effort to complete the term of office
to which you elected me.
In the past few days, however, it has become evident to me that I no longer
have a strong enough political base in the Congress to justify continuing that
effort....
I would have preferred to carry through to the finish whatever the personal
agony it would have involved....
I have never been a quitter. To leave office before my term is completed is
opposed to every instinct in my body. But as President I must put the
interests of America first. America needs a full-time President and a
full-time Congress....
To continue to fight through the months ahead for my personal vindication would
almost totally absorb the time and attention of both the President and Congress
in a period when our entire focus should be on the great issues of peace abroad
and prosperity without inflation at home.
Therefore, I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow.


254
textfiles.com/politics/no-west.ord Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,254 @@
THE NORTHWEST ORDINANCE
An Ordinance for the government of the Territory of the United States northwest
of the River Ohio.
Be it ordained by the United States in Congress assembled, That the said
territory, for the purposes of temporary government, be one district, subject,
however, to be divided into two districts, as future circumstances may, in the
opinion of Congress, make it expedient.
Be it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That the estates, both of resident
and nonresident proprietors in the said territory, dying intestate, shall
descent to, and be distributed among their children, and the descendants of a
deceased child, in equal parts; the descendants of a deceased child or grand-
child to take the share of their deceased parent in equal parts among them: And
where there shall be no children or descendants, then in equal parts to the next
of kin in equal degree; and among collaterals, the children of a deceased
brother or sister of the intestate shall have, in equal parts among them, their
deceased parents' share; and there shall in no case be a distinction between
kindred of the whole and half blood; saving, in all cases, to the widow of the
intestate her third part of the real estate for life, and one third part of the
personal estate; and this law relative to descents and dower, shall remain in
full force until altered by the legislature of the district. And until the
governor and judges shall adopt laws as hereinafter mentioned, estates in the
said territory may be devised or bequeathed by wills in writing, signed and
sealed by him or her in whom the estate may be (being of full age), and attested
by three witnesses; and real estates may be conveyed by lease and release, or
bargain and sale, signed, sealed and delivered by the person being of full age,
in whom the estate may be, and attested by two witnesses, provided such wills be
duly proved, and such conveyances be acknowledged, or the execution thereof duly
proved, and be recorded within one year after proper magistrates, courts, and
registers shall be appointed for that purpose; and personal property may be
transferred by delivery; saving, however to the French and Canadian inhabitants,
and other settlers of the Kaskaskies, St. Vincents and the neighboring villages
who have heretofore professed themselves citizens of Virginia, their laws and
customs now in force among them, relative to the descent and conveyance, of
property.
Be it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That there shall be appointed from
time to time by Congress, a governor, whose commission shall continue in force
for the term of three years, unless sooner revoked by Congress; he shall reside
in the district, and have a freehold estate therein in 1,000 acres of land,
while in the exercise of his office.
There shall be appointed from time to time by Congress, a secretary, whose
commission shall continue in force for four years unless sooner revoked; he
shall reside in the district, and have a freehold estate therein in 500 acres of
land, while in the exercise of his office. It shall be his duty to keep and
preserve the acts and laws passed by the legislature, and the public records of
the district, and the proceedings of the governor in his executive department,
and transmit authentic copies of such acts and proceedings, every six months, to
the Secretary of Congress: There shall also be appointed a court to consist of
three judges, any two of whom to form a court, who shall have a common law
jurisdiction, and reside in the district, and have each therein a freehold
estate in 500 acres of land while in the exercise of their offices; and their
commissions shall continue in force during good behavior.
The governor and judges, or a majority of them, shall adopt and publish in the
district such laws of the original States, criminal and civil, as may be
necessary and best suited to the ircumstances of the district, and report them
to Congress from time to time: which laws shall be in force in the district
until the organization of the General Assembly therein, unless disapproved of by
Congress; but afterwards the Legislature shall have authority to alter them as
they shall think fit.
The governor, for the time being, shall be commander in chief of the militia,
appoint and commission all officers in the same below the rank of general
officers; all general officers shall be appointed and commissioned by Congress.
Previous to the organization of the general assembly, the governor shall appoint
such magistrates and other civil officers in each county or township, as he
shall find necessary for the preservation of the peace and good order in the
same: After the general assembly shall be organized, the powers and duties of
the magistrates and other civil officers shall be regulated and defined by the
said assembly; but all magistrates and other civil officers not herein otherwise
directed, shall during the continuance of this temporary government, be ap-
pointed by the governor.
For the prevention of crimes and injuries, the laws to be adopted or made shall
have force in all parts of the district, and for the execution of process,
criminal and civil, the governor shall make proper divisions thereof; and he
shall proceed from time to time as circumstances may require, to lay out the
parts of the district in which the Indian titles shall have been extinguished,
into counties and townships, subject, however, to such alterations as may
thereafter be made by the legislature.
So soon as there shall be five thousand free male inhabitants of full age in the
district, upon giving proof thereof to the governor, they shall receive author-
ity, with time and place, to elect a representative from their counties or
townships to represent them in the general assembly: Provided, That, for every
five hundred free male inhabitants, there shall be one representative, and so on
progressively with the number of free male inhabitants shall the right of
representation increase, until the number of representatives shall amount to
twenty five; after which, the number and proportion of representatives shall be
regulated by the legislature: Provided, That no person be eligible or qualified
to act as a representative unless he shall have been a citizen of one of the
United States three years, and be a resident in the district, or unless he shall
have resided in the district three years; and, in either case, shall likewise
hold in his own right, in fee simple, two hundred acres of land within the same;
Provided, also, That a freehold in fifty acres of land in the district, having
been a citizen of one of the states, and being resident in the district, or the
like freehold and two years residence in the district, shall be necessary to
qualify a man as an elector of a representative.
The representatives thus elected, shall serve for the term of two years; and, in
case of the death of a representative, or removal from office, the governor
shall issue a writ to the countto serve for the residue of the term.
The general assembly or legislature shall consist of the governor, legislative
council, and a house of representatives. The Legislative Council shall consist
of five members, to continue in office five years, unless sooner removed by
Congress; any three of whom to be a quorum: and the members of the Council
shall be nominated and appointed in the following manner, to wit: As soon as
representatives shall be elected, the Governor shall appoint a time and place
for them to meet together; and, when met, they shall nominate ten persons,
residents in the district, and each possessed of a freehold in five hundred
acres of land, and return their names to Congress; five of whom Congress shall
appoint and commission to serve as aforesaid; and, whenever a acancy shall
happen in the council, by death or removal from ffice, the house of representa-
tives shall nominate two persons, qualified as aforesaid, for each vacancy, and
return their names to Congress; one of whom congress shall appoint and commis-
sion for the residue of the term. And every five years, four months at least
before the expiration of the time of service of the members of council, the said
house shall nominate ten persons, qualified as aforesaid, and return their names
to Congress; five of whom Congress shall appoint and commission to serve as
members of the council five years, unless sooner removed. And the governor,
legislative council, and house of representatives, shall have authority to make
laws in all cases, for the good government of the district, not repugnant to the
principles and articles in this ordinance established and declared. And all
bills, having passed by a majority in the house, and by a majority in the
council, shall be referred to the governor for his assent; but no bill, or
legislative act whatever, shall be of any force without his assent. The governor
shall have power to convene, prorogue, and dissolve the general assembly, when,
in his opinion, it shall be expedient.
The governor, judges, legislative council, secretary, and such other officers as
Congress shall appoint in the district, shall take an oath or affirmation of
fidelity and of office; the governor before the president of congress, and all
other officers before the Governor. As soon as a legislature shall be formed in
the district, the council and house assembled in one room, shall have authority,
by joint ballot, to elect a delegate to Congress, who shall have a seat in
Congress, with a right of debating but not voting during this temporary govern-
ment.
And, for extending the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty,
which form the basis whereon these republics, their laws and constitutions are
erected; to fix and establish those principles as the basis of all laws,
constitutions, and governments, which forever hereafter shall be formed in the
said territory: to provide also for the establishment of States, and permanent
government therein, and for their admission to a share in the federal councils
on an equal footing with the original States, at as early periods as may be
consistent with the general interest:
It is hereby ordained and declared by the authority aforesaid, That the follow-
ing articles shall be considered as articles of compact between the original
States and the people and States in the said territory and forever remain
unalterable, unless by common consent, to wit:
Art. 1. No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall
ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in
the said territory.
Art. 2. The inhabitants of the said territory shall always be entitled to the
benefits of the writ of habeas corpus, and of the trial by jury; of a propor-
tionate representation of the people in the legislature; and of judicial
proceedings according to the course of the common law. All persons shall be
bailable, unless for capital offenses, where the proof shall be evident or the
presumption great. All fines shall be moderate; and no cruel or unusual
punishments shall be inflicted. No man shall be deprived of his liberty or
property, but by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land; and, should
the public exigencies make it necessary, for the common preservation, to take
any person's property, or to demand his particular services, full compensation
shall be made for the same. And, in the just preservation of rights and proper-
ty, it is understood and declared, that no law ought ever to be made, or have
force in the said territory, that shall, in any manner whatever, interfere with
or affect private contracts or engagements, bona fide, and without fraud,
previously formed.
Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government
and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever
be encouraged. The utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the
Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their
consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they shall never be
invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress; but
laws founded in justice and humanity, shall from time to time be made for
preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace and friendship
with them.
Art. 4. The said territory, and the States which may be formed therein, shall
forever remain a part of this Confederacy of the United States of America,
subject to the Articles of Confederation, and to such alterations therein as
shall be constitutionally made; and to all the acts and ordinances of the United
States in Congress assembled, conformable thereto. The inhabitants and settlers
in the said territory shall be subject to pay a part of the federal debts
contracted or to be contracted, and a proportional part of the expenses of
government, to be apportioned on them by Congress according to the same common
rule and measure by which apportionments thereof shall be made on the other
States; and the taxes for paying their proportion shall be laid and levied by
the authority and direction of the legislatures of the district or districts, or
new States, as in the original States, within the time agreed upon by the United
States in Congress assembled. The legislatures of those districts or new
States, shall never interfere with the primary disposal of the soil by the
United States in Congress assembled, nor with any regulations Congress may find
necessary for securing the title in such soil to the bona fide purchasers. No
tax shall be imposed on lands the property of the United States; and, in no
case, shall nonresident proprietors be taxed higher than residents. The
navigable waters leading into the Mississippi and St. Lawrence, and the carrying
places between the same, shall be common highways and forever free, as well to
the inhabitants of the said territory as to the citizens of the United States,
and those of any other States that may be admitted into the confederacy, without
any tax, impost, or duty therefor.
Art. 5. There shall be formed in the said territory, not less than three nor
more than five States; and the boundaries of the States, as soon as Virginia
shall alter her act of cession, and consent to the same, shall become fixed and
established as follows, to wit: The western State in the said territory, shall
be bounded by the Mississippi, the Ohio, and Wabash Rivers; a direct line drawn
from the Wabash and Post Vincents, due North, to the territorial line between
the United States and Canada; and, by the said territorial line, to the Lake of
the Woods and Mississippi. The middle State shall be bounded by the said direct
line, the Wabash from Post Vincents to the Ohio, by the Ohio, by a direct line,
drawn due north from the mouth of the Great Miami, to the said territorial line,
and by the said territorial line. The eastern State shall be bounded by the last
mentioned direct line, the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the said territorial line:
Provided, however, and it is further understood and declared, that the boun-
daries of these three States shall be subject so far to be altered, that, if
Congress shall hereafter find it expedient, they shall have authority to form
one or two States in that part of the said territory which lies north of an east
and west line drawn through the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan.
And, whenever any of the said States shall have sixty thousand free inhabitants
therein, such State shall be admitted, by its delegates, into the Congress of
the United States, on an equal footing with the original States in all respects
whatever, and shall be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and State
government: Provided, the constitution and government so to be formed, shall be
republican, and in conformity to the principles contained in these articles;
and, so far as it can be consistent with the general interest of the con-
federacy, such admission shall be allowed at an earlier period, and when there
may be a less number of free inhabitants in the State than sixty thousand.
Art. 6. There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said
territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted: Provided, always, That any person escaping into the
same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original
States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person
claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid.
Be it ordained by the authority aforesaid, That the resolutions of the 23rd of
April, 1784, relative to the subject of this ordinance, be, and the same are
hereby repealed and declared null and void.
-------------------------------------
Prepared by Gerald Murphy (The Cleveland Free-Net - aa300)


198
textfiles.com/politics/nofredom.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
WHY AMERICANS WON'T CHOOSE FREEDOM
By JACOB G. HORNBERGER
All across the land there is an unusual stirring among the
American populace. The American people are sensing that
something is severely wrong in our nation. They see the ever-
increasing taxation, regulation, bureaucracies, and police
intrusions. And they are gradually discovering that, despite
their right to vote, they have no effective control over any
of this.
Yet, despite this unease on the eve of America's third century
of existence, the American people refuse to choose the only
possible solution to America's woes: freedom--freedom through
the constitutional elimination of the welfare state/planned
economy way of life.
Why this refusal to choose freedom? One answer lies in the
fact that many Americans do not even realize that they are
unfree. Having served the required twelve-year sentence in
public schools, most Americans believe that income taxation,
subsidies, welfare, protectionism, minimum-wage laws, and all
of the other aspects of the welfare state/planned economy way
of life constitute freedom.
But what about those who have discovered the truth? Are there
not many of these who still will not choose freedom?
Unfortunately, the answer is yes. Although recognizing the
basic immorality of the welfare state/planned economy way of
life, many freedom devotees have chosen to devote their
efforts to reforming it rather than eliminating it. Why? Why
do they insist on defending a way of life which they concede
is immoral as well as a deprivation of the freedom which they
value so highly? Let us examine some of the reasons why these
individuals who know better won't choose freedom.
One reason is the tremendous fear which most Americans have of
their own government. The agency of government which Americans
fear most, of course, is the Internal Revenue Service, the
tax-collecting arm of the United States government. A mere
letter of inquiry from the IRS is enough to cause Americans to
go into a cold sweat. Not that this fear is unjustified. Every
American knows that the agents of the IRS have virtually
unlimited power to extract, from the pockets of the citizenry,
what they consider to be the "rightful" amount owed to the
political authorities. As Professor Ebeling, FFF's vice-
president of academic affairs, once put it on a radio talk
show in which we were jointly participating, "If you want to
know the ways and means of the IRS, simply study the
operations of the KGB."
But the IRS is not the only agency which inspires great fear
in the American citizenry. I have a friend who is the
executive vice-president of a major American bank. He told me
that most bank presidents, although considered by others (and
themselves) to be "high-powered" individuals, will quiver and
quake like an autumn leaf when confronted by a banking
regulator. In fact, the mere mention of an impending visit by
banking regulators will send most bankers into the same
fearful frenzy experienced by an elementary school student who
is being sent to the principal's office.
Why? What is it that causes a grown-up to have such a
paralyzing fear of another grown-up? What causes American
adults to cower like little children in the face of a
bureaucrat?
The answer lies in the strong and powerful government, in both
domestic and foreign affairs, which Americans of this century
have brought into existence. For a strong government will
almost always result in a weak citizenry. And a weak and
terrified citizenry can rarely be relied upon to resist
tyranny by their own government. Instead, they will spend
their time "flexing their muscles" vicariously through the
"toughness" shown by their government, usually in foreign
affairs.
A second reason: Too many freedom devotees have lost hope that
freedom can actually be achieved. And so, having convinced
themselves that slavery in America is inevitable, they devote
their efforts to "working within the system" rather than to
replacing the system with freedom.
A good example of this involves those church officials who
have dedicated themselves to getting prayer into public
schools. Few people will deny the tremendous accomplishment of
the Founding Fathers when they separated church and state
through the First Amendment. They realized that religious
zealots with political power are among the most dangerous
forces to which a society can ever be exposed. And so, the
Founding Fathers fought for and achieved a way of life in
which the majority could not impose, through the coercive
power of government, religious doctrines on the rest of the
populace.
But, as every American knows, it is an entirely different
situation with secular education. Here, as in the olden days
with religion, children are required to be sent to
governmentally approved institutions to learn governmentally
approved doctrines with religious doctrine, by virtue of the
First Amendment, being the only exception.
What is the reaction of many church leaders to religion being
excepted from the teachings in public schools? Having accepted
the legitimacy or inevitability of state involvement in the
field of education, they wish to empower the state authorities
to teach religious doctrine, in addition to secular doctrine,
to the nation's youth. In other words, instead of trying to
place education on the same level as religion . . . instead of
fighting for freedom of education as our Founding Fathers
fought for freedom of religion . . . instead of calling for a
separation of school and state as our American ancestors did
with church and state . . . instead of rendering to God both
religion and education . . . present-day ministers of God,
having "thrown in the towel" with respect to educational
liberty, now wish to render to Caesar not only education but,
through prayer in government schools, religion as well.
A third reason why many freedom devotees won't choose freedom:
they continue to operate under the delusion that the welfare
state/planned economy can be made to work. In fact, an
examination of much of the literature that emanates from
various American freedom think-tanks is absorbed with
correcting the "waste, fraud, and abuse" of the system rather
than replacing the system itself with freedom. Their solution
is always the same: "The system needs reform."
An example is found in the November 2, 1990, issue of The
Backgrounder, a newsletter of The Heritage Foundation, a
renowned, conservative think-tank based in Washington, D.C.
Referring to the budget crisis last fall, Scott A. Hodge, a
member of The Heritage staff, writes, "Members of Congress did
not have the courage to cut one dollar of waste, pork, fraud,
or unnecessary spending from the fiscal 1991 budget." Mr.
Hodge follows up with, "There is no need for Congress to
dismantle the `social safety net'. . ."
Mr. Hodge's argument, then, is that the welfare state--
socialism--not only should be kept intact but also that it is
capable of being made to operate efficiently. The utopian
dream is that if we just elect "better" people to public
office . . . if politicians will just do the "right" thing
. . . if people will just give up the "waste" which they have
been receiving, it is possible to reform and refine the system
so that all of us can live happily ever after in socialist
heaven.
This illusion--this pipe-dream--that holds so many freedom
devotees in its grip is one of the major obstacles to the
achievement of freedom. But unfortunately, not only in
America. In the Soviet Union, the attitude is exactly the
same. If the politicians and bureaucrats will only do the
"right" thing, the Soviet officials argue, the socialist
system can be kept intact and made to work "correctly."
Another reason that freedom devotees are inhibited from
choosing freedom: They believe that by doing so, they will not
have intellectual "respectability" among their fellow
Americans. Although privately acknowledging the fundamental
evil and immorality of the welfare state/planned economy way
of life, they believe that calling for its elimination is too
"extreme." Therefore, they maintain their "respectability" (or
so they think) by advocating the continuation of the evil and
immorality and, even more shameful, by wrapping their
arguments in freedom rhetoric.
It is not difficult, then, to see the stark contrast between
the American Founding Fathers and our present-day freedom
devotees. Our ancestors refused to permit the terrible,
psychological destructiveness of fear to control their
actions. Faced with one of the most powerful monarchs in
history, and his equally powerful regulatory and tax-
collecting minions, they nevertheless chose to pledge their
lives, fortunes, and sacred honor in the defense of freedom--
even though it meant fighting their own government and their
fellow British citizens. Devoted to principle, rather than
expediency, they had no desire to reform the mercantilist
economic system of their own government; recognizing the evil
and immorality of such a system, they strived to eliminate it.
And knowing that the pursuit of right was more important than
popular acceptance, they stood their ground for the whole
world to see!
It is that spirit of liberty which moved our American
ancestors that is so desperately needed in our time. And when
it finally grips the hearts and minds of the American people,
which I am certain it will, freedom at last will be chosen.
Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the March 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

70
textfiles.com/politics/notax.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
SAN DIEGO LIBERTARIANS DEFEAT SALES TAX
On March 23 '89 Judge Burkhart of the Riverside County Superior Court
(due to a change of venue) ruled that the San Diego Cuonty half cent
"jails" sales tax is invalid. The Judge ruled in favor of the three
Libertarian Party members who are plaintiffs against the county of San
Diego and the San Diego County Regional Justice Facility Financing Agency.
Quoting from the COURT'S INTENDED DECISION, "The court finds from the
evidence that Proposition 13 has been purposefully circumvented by
Proposition A and its implementing legislation, and that Agency is a
special District under Proposition 13. The court finds that . . . the
(Regional Justice) Agency was founded solely for the purpose of avoiding
the strictures of Proposition 13."
This ruling will save the taxpayers of San Diego County an estimated
$1,6000,000,000 (1.6 billion dollars) in sales tax over the course of the
next 10 years. Assuming the ruling stands, the tax drops from 7% to 6.5%.
The three Libertarian Party plaintiffs are Dick Rider (the Chairman of
the county Libertarian Party), Pat Wright (the past LP county Chair) and LP
activist Steve Currie. The attorneys for the victorious plaintiffs are
Louis Katz, Tom Homann, Ellen Geis, Gregory Marshall, Lewis Wenzell,
Stephen perrello, and Carol Fabian.
Counsel took up this challenge on a contingency reimbursement basis.
Many other taxpayers contributed funds to pay the filing and copying costs.
More funds will be required if the County files an appeal.
Lead plaintiff Dick Rider commented, "This victory for the victims of
the politicos' regressive and illegal sales tax also refutes the old canard
- 'You can't fight city hall' - we did and we won! Now the County Board of
Supervisors will be forced to do what they should have been doing for the
past 8 years; providing jails and police with existing taxpayer funds
"Government's first priority should be to protect individuals from
those criminals who would use force or fraud against us. It's time for the
local politicians to recognize this fact and reorder their priorities to
fund police, courts and jails FIRST before they even CONSIDER other
services.
"Furthermore, this citizens' victory calls into question the other 1/2
cent sales tax for roads and trolleys 'passed' in 1987 using the same
invalid subterfuge."
For further information from the plaintiffs, contact Dick Rider at
619/276-7166.
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X
Another file downloaded from: NIRVANAnet(tm)
& the Temple of the Screaming Electron Jeff Hunter 510-935-5845
Rat Head Ratsnatcher 510-524-3649
Burn This Flag Zardoz 408-363-9766
realitycheck Poindexter Fortran 415-567-7043
Lies Unlimited Mick Freen 415-583-4102
Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,
arcane knowledge, political extremism, diversive sexuality,
insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS.
Full access for first-time callers. We don't want to know who you are,
where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.
"Raw Data for Raw Nerves"
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X

102
textfiles.com/politics/notaxes.lft Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
LIFE WITHOUT TAXES
A Libertarian Outlook
by Gerald Schneider, Ph.D.
Death and taxes--can we escape them? Well, death is
biological, and I do not know how to avoid it. But taxes are
political. And taxes, at least forced taxation, can be ended
politically!
How? By reforming our country into one where citizens pay
only for wanted and used government services. That, after all,
is the original American dream.
To create such societies without chaos means switching from
taxes to user fees to support government activities. Private
parties would also have to be allowed to compete with government
in providing desired services.
What follows are realistic guidelines on how to achieve a
nation--an America--based on voluntary association:
Freeze New Taxes
First, there must be a freeze on compulsory new taxes of any
kind. Government would have to live within its current income
level. But government employees with no immediate employment
prospects would not be fired. And persons dependent on
government patronage for survival would suffer no cutbacks.
Executive government agencies other than the military and
police needed to protect life and property would be terminated.
Personnel from closed agencies would be asked to fill positions
in remaining agencies vacated by death, retirement, and
resignation. Money derived from closed agency budgets would be
used for necessary retraining. No new government employees would
be hired for agencies due for future extinction.
Agency phase-out would be proportional to dropout rates for
personnel. Forced unemployment is avoided.
Money saved from closed agency budgets would also be offered
as bonuses to spur voluntary exodus from government. Caps on
salaries and promotions in agencies headed for termination could
further stimulate unforced departure. Still another incentive to
freely leave government work could be exemption from all income
taxes.
Phase Out Government Programs
A second major thrust would be phase-out of all government
retirement, entitlement, and subsidy benefit programs. Methods
used would ensure that needy persons benefiting or about to
benefit from such programs are not hurt.
Social security and other government pensioners, or those
near to retiring, could be paid off in a lump sum. Payoff money
would come from sale of government assets, and funds from closed
government agencies. Retirees would be free to invest the large
amounts of money received any way they pleased. Political
uncertainty about retirement would be ended.
Younger persons could arrange for their own retirement,
using money otherwise taken from salaries for social security
payments. There would be no required government social security
system.
Massive tax credits would be offered to individuals and
groups to assume government welfare, education, public works,
environmental protection, and other social services. Those tax
credits would be warranted, given the savings to government by
not supplying those services.
Alternatives to Taxation
The judicial system would be made self-supporting by
requiring convicted felons to pay court and related costs.
Police and fire services could also be paid this way,
supplemented by private subscription.
Military costs, cut by about two thirds, could be funded in
several ways. Donations and a national lottery are among the
possibilities. Many think taxes cannot be averted here, but
alternatives to forced taxation should be tried.
Laws covering how we should behave could be drastically
reduced, thereby limiting the need for elected legislators.
Common law, which often does not require a lawyer, would suffice
in most cases. Salaries and expenses of elected official still
needed, likely to be part-timers, could be funded voluntarily or
through service fees.
Finally, the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the
legal basis of our income tax, could be repealed. Americans need
never again fight taxation without representation!
Reprinted from THE WHEATON NEWS of Wheaton, Maryland, Jan.
21, 1988. For a one year subscription to Mr. Schneider's
biweekly "Libertarian Outlook" column, send $15 to: Gerald
Schneider, 8750 Georgia Ave., Suite 1410-B, Silver Spring, MD
20910. Copyright 1988 Gerald Schneider, Ph.D.
(This is the text of one of a series of eight topical Libertarian
outreach leaflets produced by the Libertarian Party of Skagit
County, WA. The leaflets have a panel with National LP member-
ship information, with a space for other LP groups to stamp their
own address and phone number. Samples and a bulk price list/
order form are available from: Libertarian Party of Skagit
County, P.O. Box 512, Anacortes, WA 98221.)


3056
textfiles.com/politics/nren-rep Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

585
textfiles.com/politics/nren210.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,585 @@
NREN for All:
Insurmountable Opportunity
c. 1993 Jean Armour Polly
Manager of Network Development and User Training
NYSERNet, Inc.
jpolly@nysernet.org
This was originally published in the February 1, 1993 issue of
Library Journal (volume 118, n. 2, pp 38-41).
It may be freely reprinted for educational use, please let me know if you
are redistributing it, I like to know if it's useful and where it's been.
Please do not sell it, and keep this message intact.
When Senator Al Gore was evangelizing support for his visionary
National Research and Education Network bill, he often pointed to
the many benefits of a high-speed, multi-lane, multi-level data
superhighway. Some of these included:
-- collaborating research teams, physically distant from each other,
working on shared projects via high speed computer networks.
Some of these "grand challenges" might model global environmental
change, or new therapeutic drug research, or the design of a new
airplane for inexpensive consumer air travel.
-- a scientist or engineer might design a product, which could be
instantly communicated to a manufacturing plant, whose robotic
machine could turn the drawing-board product into reality. One example
of this is the capability to digitally measure a new recruit for an
army uniform, transmit the information to a clothing manufacturer,
and take delivery of a custom-tailored uniform the next day.
-- access to digital libraries of information, both textual and graphic.
Besides hundreds of online public access catalogs, and full text
documents, color illustrations of photographic quality, full motion
videos and digital audio will also be available over the network.
In his many articles and speeches touting the bill, Gore often used
an example of a little girl, living in a rural area, at work on a school
project. Was she information-poor due to her physical location, far
from the resources of large cities? No-- the National Research and
Education Network would give her the capability to dial into the
Library of Congress-- to collect information on dinosaurs.
Now that the NREN bill has been signed into law (12/91), and
committees are being formed, and policies are being made, I'm still
thinking about that little girl, and her parents, for that matter. In
fact I've got some "Grand Questions" to pose.
1- How will we get access?
The Internet has been called the "Interim NREN", since it's what we
have in place now.
I'm wondering how the family is going to get to the Internet "dial tone",
let alone the NREN, especially since they live in a rural area.
The information superhighway may be miles from their home, and
it may be an expensive long-distance call to the "entrance ramp".
Or, the superhighway may run right through their front yard, but
they can't make use of it because they have no computer, no modem,
and no phone line to make the connection. What good is a superhighway
if all you've got is a tricycle?
2- What will they be able to gain access to,
and will their privacy be protected?
Beyond the infrastructure issues, I'm concerned about what kind of
things will be available for them once they do get connected,
how the resources will be arranged, and how they will learn to use
these tools to advantage. Beyond that, how authoritative is the
information in the digital collection, and how do we know for sure
it came from a legitimate source? How confidential will their
information searches be, and how will it be safeguarded?
3- Who will get access?
I'm concerned that even if the infrastructure and resource problems
are resolved, that little girl still won't be allowed access, because a
lot of folks don't think the Internet is a safe place for
unaccompanied minors.
4- Does the family have any electronic rights?
Electronic responsibilities?
Are dinosaurs and a grade-school project too trivial for NREN?
Some people think the NREN should be reserved for scientists
working on "Grand Challenges", not ordinary ones. Who will
decide what constitutes "acceptable use"?
5- What is the future of the local public library?
Worse yet, I'm worried that the reason they are phoning the Library
of Congress in the first place is that their local public library has
shut its doors, sold off the book stock, and dismissed the librarian.
What can public libraries do to avoid that future?
Brief Background: The Internet Today
Computers all over the world are linked by high speed
telecommunications lines. On the other side of their
screens are people of all races and nationalities who
are able to exchange ideas quickly through this network.
This "brain to brain" interface brings both delight and despair, as
evidenced by the following True Tales from the Internet:
-- Children all over the world participate in class collaborations,
sharing holiday customs, local food prices, proverbs, acid rain
measurements, and surveys such as a recent one from a fifth
grade class in Argentina who wanted to know (among other things)
"Can you wear jeans to school?".
-- During the Soviet coup in the summer of 1991, hundreds read
eyewitness accounts of developments posted to the net by computer
users in Moscow and other Soviet cities with network connectivity.
A literal hush fell over this side of the network after a plea came
across from the Soviet side. We appreciate your messages of
encouragement and offers of help, it said, but please save the
bandwidth for our outgoing reports!
- Proliferation of discussion groups on the Internet means one can
find a niche to discuss everything from cats to Camelot, from
library administration to lovers of mysteries, from Monty Python
to Medieval History.
-- Predictably, Elvis has been sighted on the Internet.
Besides electronic mail, full text resources may be downloaded
from many Internet host computers. Some of these are religious
materials, such as the Bible, and the Koran, others are the complete
works of Shakespeare, Peter Pan, and Far From the Madding Crowd.
Searchable resources include lyrics from popular songs, chord
tablature for guitar, recipes, news articles, government information,
Supreme Court Opinions, census data, current and historical weather
information, dictionaries, thesauri, the CIA World Fact Book,
and much more.
Hundreds of library OPACS may be searched, and those with
accounts set up at CARL may use UnCover to find articles of
interest, which then may be faxed on demand.
The richness of the Internet changes on a daily basis as more data
resources, computer resources, and human resources join those
already active on the net.
But, back to that little girl.
How will she get access?
She'll need a plain old telephone line, a modem, a computer, and
some communications software. Will her family be able to afford it?
If not, will she be able to dial in from her school? Her Post Office?
The local feed store? A kiosk at K-Mart?
At the American Library Association's 1992 convention in San
Francisco, Gloria Steinem said "the public library is the last refuge
of those without modems." I'm sure she meant that the library will
act as information provider for those unable to get their
information using a home computer's telecommunications
connections. But it could be taken another way. Couldn't the public
library act as electronic information access centers, providing public
modems and telecommunications alongside the books and videos?
Why the Public Library is a good place for NREN access
The public library is an institution based on long-standing beliefs in
intellectual freedom and the individual's right to know. Let's revisit
ALA's LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS, Adopted June 18, 1948; amended February
2, 1961, and January 23, 1980, by the ALA Council.
The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are
forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic
policies should guide their services.
1. Books and other library resources should be provided for the
interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the
community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded
because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to
their creation.
No problem here. The Internet's resources are as diverse as their
creators, from nations all over the world. Every community can
find something of interest on the Internet.
2. Libraries should provide materials and information
presenting all points of view on current and historical issues.
Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan
or doctrinal disapproval.
3. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of
their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.
4. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups
concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free
access to ideas.
Again, global electronic communication allows discussion and
debate in an instant electronic forum. There is no better
"reality check" than this.
5. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or
abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.
In a public library, the little girl won't be barred from using the
Internet because of her age. The ALA interpretation of the above
right states:
"Librarians and governing bodies should not resort to age
restrictions on access to library resources in an effort to avoid actual
or anticipated objections from parents or anyone else. The mission,
goals, and objectives of libraries do not authorize librarians or
governing bodies to assume, abrogate, or overrule the rights and
responsibilities of parents or legal guardians. Librarians and
governing bodies should maintain that parents - and only parents
- have the right and the responsibility to restrict the access
of their children - and only their children - to library resources.
Parents or legal guardians who do not want their children to have
access to certain library services, materials or facilities, should so
advise their children. Librarians and governing bodies cannot
assume the role of parents or the functions of parental authority in
the private relationship between parent and child. Librarians and
governing bodies have a public and professional obligation to
provide equal access to all library resources for all library users."
6. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms
available to the public they serve should make such facilities
available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or
affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use."
The Internet provides the equivalent of electronic meeting rooms
and virtual exhibit spaces. Public libraries will offer access to all
comers, regardless of their status.
Further, as part of the Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights,
this statement appears:
"The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that `the right to receive
ideas follows ineluctably from the sender's First Amendment right
to send them. . . . More importantly, the right to receive ideas is a
necessary predicate to the recipient's meaningful exercise of his
own rights such as speech, press, and political freedom' Board of
Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico,
457 U.S. 853, 866-67 (1982) (plurality opinion)."
Clearly, reception and sending of ideas is a First Amendment issue.
Oral, written, and electronic speech must be equally protected so
that democracy may flourish.
Public libraries also provide "free" services, though in fact the costs
are just deferred. Taxes, state aid derived from taxes, federal aid
derived from taxes, and private funds all pay for the "free" services
at public libraries. Public libraries may be thought of as
Information Management Organizations (IMO's), similar to Health
Management Organizations, where patrons/patients contribute
before they need information/health care, so that when they do
need it, librarians/doctors are available to render aid.
Why NREN in the Public Library is a bad idea
On the surface, the public library looks like an excellent place to
drop Internet/NREN connectivity. Libraries are veritable temples
of learning, intellectual freedom, and confidentiality.
However, most public libraries lack what computer experts call
infrastructure. If there are computers, they may be out of date. Staff
may not have had time to learn to operate them, and the computers
may literally be collecting dust.
There may be no modems, no phone line to share, no staff with
time to learn about the Internet and its many resources. Money to
update equipment, hire staff, and buy training is out of the
question. Public libraries face slashed budgets, staff layoffs,
reduced hours, and cutbacks in services.
Many of these drawbacks are noted in the recent study by Dr.
Charles R. McClure, called Public Libraries and the
Internet/NREN: New Challenges, New Opportunities.
Public librarians were surveyed about their attitudes toward NREN
in interviews and focus groups. According to the study, public
librarians thought that the public had a "right" to the Internet, and
its availability in their libraries would provide a safety net for the
electronic-poor.
On the other hand they felt that they could not commit resources to
this initiative until they knew better what the costs were and the
benefits might be. They longed for someone else to create a pilot
project to demonstrate the Internet's usefulness, or lack thereof,
for public library users.
The study describes several scenarios for public libraries as the
NREN evolves. Some may simply choose to ignore the sweeping
technological changes in information transfer. They may continue
to exist by purveying high-demand items and traditional services,
but they may find it increasingly difficult to maintain funding
levels as the rest of the world looks elsewhere for their information
and reference needs. The public library may find itself servicing
only the information disenfranchised, while the rest of the
community finds, and pays for, other solutions.
As the study explains:
"While embracing and exploiting networked information and services,
[successfully transitioned libraries] also maintain high visibility
and high demand traditional services. But resources will be reallocated
from collections and less-visible services to support their involvement
in the network. All services will be more client-centered and demand-based,
and the library will consciously seek opportunities to deliver new types
of information resources and services electronically."
"In this scenario, the public library will develop and mount services
over the NREN, provide for public access to the NREN, and will
compete successfully against other information providers. In its
networked role, the library can serve as a central point of contact as
an electronic navigator and intermediary in linking individuals to
electronic information resources- regardless of type or physical
location. The public library in this second scenario will define a
future for itself in the NREN and develop a strategic plan to insure
its successful participation as an information provider in the
networked environment."
What Should Happen
Senator Gore has proposed what has been variously called Son of
NREN or Gore II, which should help address many of these
infrastructure problems.
Unfortunately, the Bill was not passed and the closing of the last
Congress. There is hope, however, that it will be reintroduced this
Spring.
Specifically, Gore's bill would have ensured that the technology
developed by the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 is
applied widely in K-12 education, libraries, health care and
industry, particularly manufacturing. It would have authorized a
total of $1.15 billion over the next five years.
According to a press release from Senator Gore's office,
"The Information Infrastructure and Technology Act charges the
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) with
coordinating efforts to develop applications for high-performance
computing networking and assigns specific responsibilities to the
National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space
Agency, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and
the National Institutes of Health. It would expand the role of
OSTP in overseeing federal efforts to disseminate scientific and
technical information."
"The bill provides funding to both NSF and NASA to develop
technology for 'digital libraries'-- huge data bases that store text,
imagery, video, and sound and are accessible over computer
networks like NSFNET. The bill also funds development of
prototype 'digital libraries' around the country."
The public needs NREN because 300 baud used to be fast and low-
resolution graphics used to be pretty. Now we get impatient
waiting for fax machines to print out a document from half a
continent away, when a few years ago we would have been
content to wait days or weeks for the same article to arrive by mail.
We are satisfied with technology until it starts to impede our lives
in some way. We wait impatiently, sure that we spend half our
lives waiting for printers, and the other half waiting for disk drives.
Time is a commodity.
I can envision that little girl walking into the public library with the
following request:
"I'm doing a school report on the Challenger disaster. I need a video
clip of the explosion, a sound bite of Richard Feynman explaining
the O-ring problem, some neat graphics from NASA, oh, and
maybe some virtual reality mock-ups of the shuttle interior. Can
you put it all on this floppy disk for me, I know it's only 15 minutes
before you close but, gee, I had band practice." This is why
public libraries need NREN.
We would do well to remember the words of Ranganathan, whose
basic tenets of good librarianship need just a little updating from
1931:
"[Information] is for use."
"Every [bit of information], its user."
"Every user, [his/her bit of information]."
"Save the time of the [user]."
"A [network] is a growing organism."
And so is the public library. A promising future awaits the public
library that can be proactive rather than reactive to technology.
Information technology is driving the future, librarians should be at
the wheel. It is hoped that the new Administration in Washington
will provide the fuel to get us going.
_______________________________
SIDEBAR
-------------------------------------------------------
Excerpts from S.2937 as introduced July 1, 1992
102nd Congress
2nd Session
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Mr. GORE (for himself, Rockefeller (D-WV), Kerry (D-MA),
Prestler (R-SD), Riegle (D-MI), Robb (D-VA), Lieberman (D-CT),
Kerrey (D-NE) and Burns (R-MT)) introduced the following bill;
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce,
Science and Transportation.
A BILL
To expand Federal efforts to develop technologies for applications
of high-performance computing and high-speed networking, to
provide for a coordinated Federal program to accelerate development
and deployment of an advanced information infrastructure,
and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Information Infrastructure and
Technology Act of 1992".
SEC. 7. APPLICATIONS FOR LIBRARIES.
(a) DIGITAL LIBRARIES.--In accordance with the Plan
developed under section 701 of the National Science and
Technology Policy, Organization and Priorities Act of 1976 (42
U.S.C. 6601 et seq.), as added by section 3 of this Act, the National
Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency,
and other appropriate agencies shall develop technologies for
"digital libraries" of electronic information. Development of digital
libraries shall include the following:
(1) Development of advanced data storage systems
capable of storing hundreds of trillions of bits of data
and giving thousands of users nearly instantaneous
access to that information.
(2) Development of high-speed, highly accurate
systems for converting printed text, page images,
graphics, and photographic images into electronic form.
(3) Development of database software capable of
quickly searching, filtering, and summarizing large
volumes of text, imagery, data, and sound.
(4) Encouragement of development and adoption of
standards for electronic data.
(5) Development of computer technology to
categorize and organize electronic information in a
variety of formats.
(6) Training of database users and librarians in
the use of and development of electronic databases.
(7) Development of technology for simplifying the
utilization of networked databases distributed around
the Nation and around the world.
(8) Development of visualization technology for
quickly browsing large volumes of imagery.
(b) DEVELOPMENT OF PROTOTYPES.--The National
Science
Foundation, working with the supercomputer centers it
supports, shall develop prototype digital libraries of
scientific data available over the Internet and the National
Research and Education Network.
(c) DEVELOPMENT OF DATABASES OF REMOTE-
SENSING
IMAGES.--The National Aeronautics and Space Administration
shall develop databases of software and remote-sensing images
to be made available over computer networks like the
Internet.
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--
(1) There are authorized to be appropriated to the National
Science
Foundation for the purposes of this section, $10,000,000 for fiscal
year 1993, $20,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, $30,000,000 for fiscal year
1995, $40,000,000 for fiscal year 1996, and $50,000,000 for fiscal year
1997.
(2) There are authorized to be appropriated to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration for the purposes of this
section, $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1993, $20,000,000 for fiscal year
1994, $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1995, $40,000,000 for fiscal year
1996, and $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1997.
________________________
SIDEBAR
Resources
___________________________
McClure, Charles R., Joe Ryan, Diana Lauterbach and William E. Moen
Public Libraries and the INTERNET/NREN: New Challenges, New Opportunities.
1992. Copies of this 38-page study may be ordered at $15 each from
the Publication Office, School of Information Studies, Syracuse
University, Syracuse, NY 13244-4100 315/443-2911.
The U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information
Science (NCLIS) has issued a Report to the Office of Science and
Technology Policy on Library and Information Services' Roles in
the National Research and Education Network. The 25-page
document, released in late November, 1992, summarizes the results
of an open forum held in Washington during the previous summer.
Topics addressed include funding NREN, charging for use,
commercial access, protection of intellectual property, and security
and privacy. The report "focuses on fulfilling the potential for
extending the services and effectiveness of libraries and
information services for all Americans through high-speed
networks and electronic databases." A limited number of copies are
available from NCLIS at 111 18th St., NW, Suite 310, Washington,
D.C. 20036 202/254-3100.
Grand Challenges 1993: High Performance Computing and
Communications. The "Teal Book" (because of its color) "provides a
far-sighted vision for investment in technology but also recognizes
the importance of human resources and applications that serve
major national needs. This <20> investment will bring both economic
and social dividends, including advances in education,
productivity, basic science, and technological innovation."
Requests for copies of this 68-page document should go to: Federal
Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering and Technology,
Committee on Physical, Mathematical, and Engineering Sciences
c/o National Science Foundation, Computer and Information Science
and Engineering Directorate, 1800 G St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20550
Carl Kadie operates an excellent electronic resource of documents
pertaining to academic freedom, the Library Bill of Rights, and
similar policy statements. Those with Internet access may use File
Transfer Protocol (FTP) to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) Login as
anonymous, use your network address as the password. The documents
are in the /pub/academic directory.
Further Reading
Kehoe, Brendan. (1993). Zen and the Art of the Internet: a
Beginner's Guide (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
The first edition is available for free from many FTP sites. (see
below) This version has about 30 pages of new material and
corrects various minor errors in the first edition. Includes the story
of the Coke Machine on the Internet. For much of late
1991 and the first half of 1992, this was the document of choice for
learning about the Internet. ISBN 0-13-010778-6. Index. $22.00
To ftp Zen: ftp.uu.net [137.39.1.9] in /inet/doc ftp.cs.toronto.edu
[128.100.3.6] in pub/zen ftp.cs.widener.edu [147.31.254.132] in
pub/zen as zen-1.0.tar.Z, zen-1.0.dvi, and zen-1.0.PS ftp.sura.net
[128.167.254.179] in pub/nic as zen-1.0.PS
Krol, Ed. (1992). The Whole Internet User's Guide & Catalog.
Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly & Associates.
Comprehensive guide to how the network works, the domain name
system, acceptable use, security, and other issues. Chapters on
telnet/remote login, File Transfer Protocol, and electronic mail
explain error messages, special situations, and
other arcana. Archie, Gopher, NetNews, WAIS, WWW, and
troubleshooting each enjoy a chapter in this well-written book.
Appendices contain info on how to get connected in addition to a
glossary. ISBN 1-56592-025-2. $24.95
LaQuey, Tracy, & Ryer, J. C. (1993). The Internet Companion: a
Beginner's Guide to Global Networking. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Beginning with a foreword by Vice-President Elect Al Gore, this
book provides an often- humorous explanation of the origins of the
Internet, acceptable use, basics of electronic mail, netiquette, online
resources, transferring information, and finding email addresses.
The In the Know guide provides background on Internet legends (Elvis
sightings is one), organizations, security issues, and how to get connected.
Bibliography. Index. ISBN 0-201-62224-6 $10.95
Polly, Jean Armour. Surfing the Internet 2.0. An enthusiastic tour of
selected Internet resources, electronic serials, listserv discussion
groups, service providers, manuals and guides and more. Available
via anonymous FTP from NYSERNET.org (192.77.173.2) in the
directory /pub/resources/guides surfing.2.0.txt.
Tennant, Roy, Ober, J., & Lipow, A. G. (1993). Crossing the Internet
Threshold: An Instructional Handbook. Berkeley, CA: Library
Solutions Press.
A cookbook to run your own Internet training sessions. Real-world examples.
Foreword by Cliff Lynch. Library Solutions Institute and Press
2137 Oregon Street Berkeley, CA 94705
Phone:(510) 841-2636 Fax: (510) 841-2926
ISBN: 1-882208-01-3 $45.00


1053
textfiles.com/politics/nsa.hnd Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

63
textfiles.com/politics/nsa_surv.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
From: c3q@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: the NSA KNOWS...
Date: 6 Dec 91 15:54:13 GMT
Organization: Cornell University
I've been doing some research on data encryption lately, and was led inevitably
to the Data Encryption Standard (DES). As originally proposed in the '70's (I
think) the DES had a 128 bit key, and 8 code boxes. The NSA did IBM (the
originators of the algorithm) a favor by rewriting the code boxes to make them
"better" (slight cynicism on my part) and then said "might as well reduce the
key to 64 bits, now that the boxes are so strong". Researchers at Stanford
have noted mysterious patterns within the code boxes that might be a
mathematical back-door into breaking the code. In the DES standard there is
also the proviso that highly classified military, etc. data may/should be
classified in some other way.
Point 2: In a study of the NSA it was revealed that the NSA owns land next to
every major microwave relay route and down-link inside the US. With the
scattering inherent in micro-links, this gives them access to 90+% of all data
traffic.
Point 3: The NSA measures its computing power in acres (no joke). They are the
leading purchaser of latest generation Crays.
Conclusion: The NSA can and does read our mail, encrypted or not.
Caveat: There is so much data flow, that even with filters that pull out only
those messages encluding certain key words, any human operators would still be
incapable of reading any realistic proportion of our mail. Just hope that
expert systems designed for mail reading aren't developed soon (or haven't been
developed).
Books to read: The Digital Encryption Standard
Cipher Systems
Inside the Puzzle Palace
Just thought I'd bring home some of the cyberpunk aspects of the world we
currently live in.
Travis J.I. Corcoran
Cornell '92/'92 (??)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: ebrandt@jarthur.claremont.edu (Eli Brandt)
Subject: Re: the NSA KNOWS...
Organization: Cult of Loud Loud Sibelius
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1991 08:41:46 GMT
In article <164CCD625.M14661@mwvm.mitre.org> M14661@mwvm.mitre.org writes:
>Good points, but does anyone know how the RSA public key algorithm is
>holding up? It's slow, but fine for precoding email messages, at least
It seems to be secure as long as you pick big enough primes -- remembering
that the NSA has CPU we can only dream of. I strongly suspect that the NSA
can crack DES. If they can break RSA with considered-secure primes, it
almost certainly takes them much compute, and they would not be expending
this kind of effort on *our* messages. I believe PGP, a PC RSA
implementation, is still available from garbo.uwasa.fi; US users are kindly
requested to refrain from downloading except for research purposes. It
uses math owned by PKP, you see.
Eli ebrandt@jarthur.claremont.edu

462
textfiles.com/politics/nsdd145.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,462 @@
THE NATIONAL GUARDS
(C) 1987 OMNI MAGAZINE MAY 1987
By Donald Goldberg
The mountains bend as the fjord and the sea beyond stretch
out before the viewer's eyes. First over the water, then a sharp
left turn, then a bank to the right between the peaks, and the
secret naval base unfolds upon the screen.
The scene is of a Soviet military installation on the Kola
Peninsula in the icy Barents Sea, a place usually off-limits to
the gaze of the Western world. It was captured by a small French
satellite called SPOT Image, orbiting at an altitude of 517 miles
above the hidden Russian outpost. On each of several passes --
made over a two-week period last fall -- the satellite's high-
resolution lens took its pictures at a different angle; the
images were then blended into a three-dimensional, computer-
generated video. Buildings, docks, vessels, and details of the
Artic landscape are all clearly visible.
Half a world away and thousands of feet under the sea,
sparkling-clear images are being made of the ocean floor. Using
the latest bathymetric technology and state-of-the-art systems
known as Seam Beam and Hydrochart, researchers are for the first
time assembling detailed underwater maps of the continental
shelves and the depths of the world's oceans. These scenes of
the sea are as sophisticated as the photographs taken from the
satellite.
From the three-dimensional images taken far above the earth
to the charts of the bottom of the oceans, these photographic
systems have three things in common: They both rely on the
latest technology to create accurate pictures never dreamed of
even 25 years ago; they are being made widely available by
commerical, nongovernmental enterprises; and the Pentagon is
trying desperately to keep them from the general public.
In 1985 the Navy classified the underwater charts, making
them available only to approved researchers whose needs are
evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Under a 1984 law the military
has been given a say in what cameras can be licensed to be used
on American satellites; and officials have already announced they
plan to limit the quality and resolution of photos made
available. The National Security Agency (NSA) -- the secret arm
of the Pentagon in charge of gathering electronic intelligence as
well as protecting sensitive U.S. communications -- has defeated
a move to keep it away from civilian and commercial computers and
databases.
That attitude has outraged those concerned with the
military's increasing efforts to keep information not only from
the public but from industry experts, scientists, and even other
government officials as well. "That's like classifying a road
map for fear of invasion," says Paul Wolff, assistant
administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, of the attempted restrictions.
These attempts to keep unclassified data out of the hands of
scientists, researchers, the news media, and the public at large
are a part of an alarming trend that has seen the military take
an ever-increasing role in controlling the flow of information
and communications through American society, a role traditionally
-- and almost exclusively -- left to civilians. Under the
approving gaze of the Reagan administration, Department of
Defense (DoD) officials have quietly implemented a number of
policies, decisions, and orders that give the military
unprecedented control over both the content and public use of
data and communications. For example:
**The Pentagon has created a new category of "sensitive" but
unclassified information that allows it to keep from public
access huge quantities of data that were once widely accessible.
**Defense Department officials have attempted to rewrite key laws
that spell out when the president can and cannot appropriate
private communications facilities.
**The Pentagon has installed a system that enables it to seize
control of the nation's entire communications network -- the
phone system, data transmissions, and satellite transmissions of
all kinds -- in the event of what it deems a "national
emergency." As yet there is no single, universally agreed-upon
definition of what constitutes such a state. Usually such an
emergency is restricted to times of natural disaster, war, or
when national security is specifically threatened. Now the
military has attempted to redefine emergency.
The point man in the Pentagon's onslaught on communications
is Assistant Defense Secretary Donald C. Latham, a former NSA
deputy chief. Latham now heads up an interagency committee in
charge of writing and implementing many of the policies that have
put the military in charge of the flow of civilian information
and communication. He is also the architect of National Security
Decision Directive 145 (NSDD 145), signed by Defense Secretary
Caspar Weinberger in 1984, which sets out the national policy on
telecommunications and computer-systems security.
First NSDD 145 set up a steering group of top-level
administration officials. Their job is to recommend ways to
protect information that is unclassified but has been designated
sensitive. Such information is held not only by government
agencies but by private companies as well. And last October the
steering group issued a memorandum that defined sensitive
information and gave federal agencies broad new powers to keep it
from the public.
According to Latham, this new category includes such data as
all medical records on government databases -- from the files of
the National Cancer Institute to information on every veteran who
has ever applied for medical aid from the Veterans Administration
-- and all the information on corporate and personal taxpayers in
the Internal Revenue Service's computers. Even agricultural
statistics, he argues, can be used by a foreign power against the
United States.
In his oversize yet Spartan Pentagon office, Latham cuts
anything but an intimidating figure. Articulate and friendly, he
could pass for a network anchorman or a television game show
host. When asked how the government's new definition of
sensitive information will be used, he defends the necessity for
it and tries to put to rest concerns about a new restrictiveness.
"The debate that somehow the DoD and NSA are going to
monitor or get into private databases isn't the case at all,"
Latham insists. "The definition is just a guideline, just an
advisory. It does not give the DoD the right to go into private
records."
Yet the Defense Department invoked the NSDD 145 guidelines
when it told the information industry it intends to restrict the
sale of data that are now unclassified and publicly available
from privately owned computer systems. The excuse if offered was
that these data often include technical information that might be
valuable to a foreign adversary like the Soviet Union.
Mead Data Central -- which runs some of the nation's largest
computer databases, such as Lexis and Nexis, and has nearly
200,000 users -- says it has already been approached by a team of
agents from the Air Force and officials from the CIA and the FBI
who asked for the names of subscribers and inquired what Mead
officials might do if information restrictions were imposed. In
response to government pressure, Mead Data Central in effect
censured itself. It purged all unclassified government-supplied
technical data from its system and completely dropped the
National Technical Information System from its database rather
than risk a confrontation.
Representative Jack Brooks, a Texas Democrat who chairs the
House Government Operations Committee, is an outspoken critic of
the NSA's role in restricting civilian information. He notes
that in 1985 the NSA -- under the authority granted by NSDD 145
-- investigated a computer program that was widely used in both
local and federal elections in 1984. The computer system was
used to count more than one third of all votes cast in the United
States. While probing the system's vulnerability to outside
manipulation, the NSA obtained a detailed knowledge of that
computer program. "In my view," Brooks says, "this is an
unprecedented and ill-advised expansion of the military's
influence in our society."
There are other NSA critics. "The computer systems used by
counties to collect and process votes have nothing to do with
national security, and I'm really concerned about the NSA's
involvement," says Democratic congressman Dan Glickman of Kansas,
chairman of the House science and technology subcommittee
concerned with computer security.
Also, under NSDD 145 the Pentagon has issued an order,
virtually unknown to all but a few industry executives, that
affects commercial communications satellites. The policy was
made official by Defense Secretary Weinberger in June of 1985 and
requires that all commercial satellite operators that carry such
unclassified government data traffic as routine Pentagon supply
information and payroll data (and that compete for lucrative
government contracts) install costly protective systems on all
satellites launched after 1990. The policy does not directly
affect the data over satellite channels, but it does make the NSA
privy to vital information about the essential signals needed to
operate a satellite. With this information it could take control
of any satellite it chooses.
Latham insists this, too, is a voluntary policy and that
only companies that wish to install protection will have their
systems evaluated by the NSA. He also says industry officials
are wholly behind the move, and argues that the protective
systems are necessary. With just a few thousand dollars' worth
of equipment, a disgruntled employee could interfere with a
satellite's control signals and disable or even wipe out a
hundred-million-dollar satellite carrying government information.
At best, his comments are misleading. First, the policy is
not voluntary. The NSA can cut off lucrative government
contracts to companies that do not comply with the plan. The
Pentagon alone spent more than a billion dollars leasing
commercial satellite channels last year; that's a powerful
incentive for business to cooperate.
Second, the industry's support is anything but total.
According to the minutes of one closed-door meeting between NSA
officials -- along with representatives of other federal agencies
-- and executives from AT&T, Comsat, GTE Sprint, and MCI, the
executives neither supported the move nor believed it was
necessary. The NSA defended the policy by arguing that a
satellite could be held for ransom if the command and control
links weren't protected. But experts at the meeting were
skeptical.
"Why is the threat limited to accessing the satellite rather
than destroying it with lasers or high-powered signals?" one
industry executive wanted to know.
Most of the officials present objected to the high cost of
protecting the satellites. According to a 1983 study made at the
request of the Pentagon, the protection demanded by the NSA could
add as much as $3 million to the price of a satellite and $1
million more to annual operating costs. Costs like these, they
argue, could cripple a company competing against less expensive
communications networks.
Americans get much of their information through forms of
electronic communications, from the telephone, television and
radio, and information printed in many newspapers. Banks send
important financial data, businesses their spreadsheets, and
stockbrokers their investment portfolios, all over the same
channels, from satellite signals to computer hookups carried on
long distance telephone lines. To make sure that the federal
government helped to promote and protect the efficient use of
this advancing technology, Congress passed the massive
Communications Act of of 1934. It outlined the role and laws of
the communications structure in the United States.
The powers of the president are set out in Section 606 of
that law; basically it states that he has the authority to take
control of any communications facilities that he believes
"essential to the national defense." In the language of the
trade this is known as a 606 emergency.
There have been a number of attempts in recent years by
Defense Department officials to redefine what qualifies as a 606
emergency and make it easier for the military to take over
national communications.
In 1981 the Senate considered amendments to the 1934 act
that would allow the president, on Defense Department
recommendation, to require any communications company to provide
services, facilities, or equipment "to promote the national
defense and security or the emergency preparedness of the
nation," even in peacetime and without a declared state of
emergency. The general language had been drafted by Defense
Department officials. (The bill failed to pass the House for
unrelated reasons.)
"I think it is quite clear that they have snuck in there
some powers that are dangerous for us as a company and for the
public at large," said MCI vice president Kenneth Cox before the
Senate vote.
Since President Reagan took office, the Pentagon has stepped
up its efforts to rewrite the definition of national emergency
and give the military expanded powers in the United States. "The
declaration of 'emergency' has always been vague," says one
former administration official who left the government in 1982
after ten years in top policy posts. "Different presidents have
invoked it differently. This administration would declare a
convenient 'emergency.'" In other words, what is a nuisance to
one administration might qualify as a burgeoning crisis to
another. For example, the Reagan administration might decide
that a series of protests on or near military bases constituted a
national emergency.
Should the Pentagon ever be given the green light, its base
for taking over the nation's communications system would be a
nondescript yellow brick building within the maze of high rises,
government buildings, and apartment complexes that make up the
Washington suburb of Arlington, Virginia. Headquartered in a
dusty and aging structure surrounded by a barbed-wire fence is an
obscure branch of the military known as the Defense
Communications Agency (DCA). It does not have the spit and
polish of the National Security Agency or the dozens of other
government facilities that make up the nation's capital. But its
lack of shine belies its critical mission: to make sure all of
America's far-flung military units can communicate with one
another. It is in certain ways the nerve center of our nation's
defense system.
On the second floor of the DCA's four-story headquarters is
a new addition called the National Coordinating Center (NCC).
Operated by the Pentagon, it is virtually unknown outside of a
handful of industry and government officials. The NCC is staffed
around the clock by representatives of a dozen of the nation's
largest commercial communications companies -- the so-called
"common carriers" -- including AT&T, MCI, GTE, Comsat, and ITT.
Also on hand are officials from the State Department, the CIA,
the Federal Aviation Administration, and a number of other
federal agencies. During a 606 emergency the Pentagon can order
the companies that make up the National Coordinating Center to
turn over their satellite, fiberoptic, and land-line facilities
to the government.
On a long corridor in the front of the building is a series
of offices, each outfitted with a private phone, a telex machine,
and a combination safe. It's known as "logo row" because each
office is occupied by an employee from one of the companies that
staff the NCC and because their corporate logos hang on the wall
outside. Each employee is on permanent standby, ready to
activate his company's system should the Pentagon require it.
The National Coordinating Center's mission is as grand as
its title is obscure: to make available to the Defense
Department all the facilities of the civilian communications
network in this country -- the phone lines, the long-distance
satellite hookups, the data transmission lines -- in times of
national emergency. If war breaks out and communications to a
key military base are cut, the Pentagon wants to make sure that
an alternate link can be set up as fast as possible. Company
employees assigned to the center are on call 24 hours a day; they
wear beepers outside the office, and when on vacation they must
be replaced by qualified colleagues.
The center formally opened on New Year's Day, 1984, the same
day Ma Bell's monopoly over the telephone network of the entire
United States was finally broken. The timing was no coincidence.
Pentagon officials had argued for years along with AT&T against
the divestiture of Ma Bell, on grounds of national security.
Defense Secretary Weinberger personally urged the attorney
general to block the lawsuit that resulted in the breakup, as had
his predecessor, Harold Brown. The reason was that rather than
construct its own communications network, the Pentagon had come
to rely extensively on the phone company. After the breakup the
dependence continued. The Pentagon still used commercial
companies to carry more than 90 percent of its communications
within the continental United States.
The 1984 divestiture put an end to AT&T's monopoly over the
nation's telephone service and increased the Pentagon's obsession
with having its own nerve center. Now the brass had to contend
with several competing companies to acquire phone lines, and
communications was more than a matter of running a line from one
telephone to another. Satellites, microwave towers, fiberoptics,
and other technological breakthroughs never dreamed of by
Alexander Graham Bell were in extensive use, and not just for
phone conversations. Digital data streams for computers flowed
on the same networks.
These facts were not lost on the Defense Department or the
White House. According to documents obtained by Omni, beginning
on December 14, 1982, a number of secret meetings were held
between high-level administration officials and executives of the
commercial communications companies whose employees would later
staff the National Coordinating Center. The meetings, which
continued over the next three years, were held at the White
House, the State Department, the Strategic Air Command (SAC)
headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, and at the
North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) in Colorado
Springs.
The industry officials attending constituted the National
Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee -- called NSTAC
(pronounced N-stack) -- set up by President Reagan to address
those same problems that worried the Pentagon. It was at these
secret meetings, according to the minutes, that the idea of a
communications watch center for national emergencies -- the NCC
-- was born. Along with it came a whole set of plans that would
allow the military to take over commercial communications
"assets" -- everything from ground stations and satellite dishes
to fiberoptic cables -- across the country.
At a 1983 Federal Communications Commission meeting, a
ranking Defense Department official offered the following
explanation for the founding of the National Coordinating Center:
"We are looking at trying to make communications endurable for a
protracted conflict." The phrase protracted conflict is a
military euphemism for nuclear war.
But could the NCC survive even the first volley in such a
conflict?
Not likely. It's located within a mile of the Pentagon,
itself an obvious early target of a Soviet nuclear barrage (or a
conventional strike, for that matter). And the Kremlin
undoubtedly knows its location and importance, and presumably has
included it on its priority target list. In sum, according to
one Pentagon official, "The NCC itself is not viewed as a
survivable facility."
Furthermore, the NCC's "Implementation Plan," obtained by
Omni, lists four phases of emergencies and how the center should
respond to each. The first, Phase 0, is Peacetime, for which
there would be little to do outside of a handful of routine tasks
and exercises. Phase 1 is Pre Attack, in which alternate NCC
sites are alerted. Phase 2 is Post Attack, in which other NCC
locations are instructed to take over the center's functions.
Phase 3 is known as Last Ditch, and in this phase whatever
facility survives becomes the de facto NCC.
So far there is no alternate National Coordinating Center to
which NCC officials could retreat to survive an attack.
According to NCC deputy director William Belford, no physical
sites have yet been chosen for a substitute NCC, and even whether
the NCC itself will survive a nuclear attack is still under
study.
Of what use is a communications center that is not expected
to outlast even the first shots of a war and has no backup?
The answer appears to be that because of the Pentagon's
concerns about the AT&T divestiture and the disruptive effects it
might have on national security, the NCC was to serve as the
military's peacetime communications center.
The center is a powerful and unprecedented tool to assume
control over the nation's vast communications and information
network. For years the Pentagon has been studying how to take
over the common carriers' facilities. That research was prepared
by NSTAC at the DoD's request and is contained in a series of
internal Pentagon documents obtained by Omni. Collectively this
series is known as the Satellite Survivability Report. Completed
in 1984, it is the only detailed analysis to date of the
vulnerabilities of the commercial satellite network. It was
begun as a way of examining how to protect the network of
communications facilities from attack and how to keep it intact
for the DoD.
A major part of the report also contains an analysis of how
to make commercial satellites "interoperable" with Defense
Department systems. While the report notes that current
technical differences such as varying frequencies make it
difficult for the Pentagon to use commercial satellites, it
recommends ways to resolve those problems. Much of the report is
a veritable blueprint for the government on how to take over
satellites in orbit above the United States. This information,
plus NSDD 145's demand that satellite operators tell the NSA how
their satellites are controlled, guarantees the military ample
knowledge about operating commercial satellites.
The Pentagon now has an unprecedented access to the civilian
communications network: commercial databases, computer networks,
electronic links, telephone lines. All it needs is the legal
authority to use them. Then it could totally dominate the flow
of all information in the United States. As one high-ranking
White House communications official put it: "Whoever controls
communications, controls the country." His remark was made after
our State Department could not communicate directly with our
embassy in Manila during the anti-Marcos revolution last year.
To get through, the State Department had to relay all its
messages through the Philippine government.
Government officials have offered all kinds of scenarios to
justify the National Coordinating Center, the Satellite
Survivability Report, new domains of authority for the Pentagon
and the NSA, and the creation of top-level government steering
groups to think of even more policies for the military. Most can
be reduced to the rationale that inspired NSDD 145: that our
enemies (presumably the Soviets) have to be prevented from
getting too much information from unclassified sources. And the
only way to do that is to step in and take control of those
sources.
Remarkably, the communications industry as a whole has not
been concerned about the overall scope of the Pentagon's threat
to its freedom of operation. Most protests have been to
individual government actions. For example, a media coalition
that includes the Radio-Television Society of Newspaper Editors,
and the Turner Broadcasting System has been lobbying that before
the government can restrict the use of satellites, it must
demonstrate why such restrictions protect against a "threat to
distinct and compelling national security and foreign policy
interests." But the whole policy of restrictiveness has not been
examined. That may change sometime this year, when the Office of
Technology Assessment issues a report on how the Pentagon's
policy will affect communications in the United States. In the
meantime the military keeps trying to encroach on national
communications.
While it may seem unlikely that the Pentagon will ever get
total control of our information and communications systems, the
truth is that it can happen all too easily. The official
mechanisms are already in place; and few barriers remain to
guarantee that what we hear, see, and read will come to us
courtesy of our being members of a free and open society and not
courtesy of the Pentagon.
=================================================================
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X
Another file downloaded from: NIRVANAnet(tm)
& the Temple of the Screaming Electron Jeff Hunter 510-935-5845
Rat Head Ratsnatcher 510-524-3649
Burn This Flag Zardoz 408-363-9766
realitycheck Poindexter Fortran 415-567-7043
Lies Unlimited Mick Freen 415-583-4102
Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,
arcane knowledge, political extremism, diversive sexuality,
insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS.
Full access for first-time callers. We don't want to know who you are,
where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.
"Raw Data for Raw Nerves"
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X

124
textfiles.com/politics/nsfnet-n Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
KAPOR TESTIFIES ON NSFNET POLICIES AND FUTURE OF THE NET
In his capacity as the President of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF) and the Chairman of the Commercial Internet Exchange (CIX),
Mitchell Kapor testified last Thursday before a House Committee on
the current operation and management of NSFNet, and the future
of the NREN and computer-based communications.
The testimony took place in Washington, D.C. before the House
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. The committee was
examining the present and proposed policies of NSFNet, the government
body which currently handles the funding for and sets the operating
policies for much of the Internet.
The key items that Mr. Kapor was asked to address at the hearing were:
To assess the NSF's efforts to provide support to the
communities of science, education, engineering and research.
To comment on the current plan the NSF to resubmit
the award of operation of the NSFNet backbone for competitive
bidding.
How Congress can help ensure a successful evolution of the
Internet into the NREN.
To relate his vision of what the NREN might be and become.
To define the roles of public and private sectors in
realizing such a vision.
To suggest specific steps for Congress and federal agencies
that would help the goals of the NREN to be achieved.
A full text of his testimony will be available in comp.org.eff.news
sometime this weekend as well as available thereafter via ftp from
eff.org.
===================
NOTES ON TESTIMONY BY M.KAPOR TO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE
AND TECNOLOGY RE:NSFNET AND FUTURE OF THE NREN (3/12/92)
Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify. I am here today in 2
capacities: As President of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a public
interest advocacy organization promoting the democratic potential of new
computer and communications technologies, and as Chairman as the commercial
Internet Exchange, or CIX, a trade association of commercial
internetworking carriers, which represents one-third of the several million
user Internet -- or interim NREN as it is becoming known. As you may know,
I am also the founder of Lotus Development Corporation and the designer of
Lotus 1-2-3, which has played a seminal role in the emergence of the 100
billion dollar personal computer industry.
To frame my remarks, let me begin by saying that we fully support the NREN
legislation which is designed to develop computer networks which will link
research and education institutions,. government, and industry. Among the
chief goals of the NREN are:
expanding the number of users on the network, avoiding the creation
of information have and have-nots
providing enhanced access to electronic information resources
supporting the free flow of ideas
promoting R&D for the purpose of developing commercial data
communications
The Internet, as it evolves into the NREN, serves a vital testbed for the
eventual development of a ubiquitous national public networking. In that
context, the problems I wish to address today should be seen as the normal
growth pains of an experiment which has already succeeded far beyond the
wildest imagination of its creators.
Problem #1:
The NSF-imposed Acceptable Use Policy is hindering the developing of
information services which would serve the R&E community and others.
The AUP attempts to define limitations on the type of traffic which can
flow on the network. However, there is no agreement in practice about how
to apply the AUP. Businesses which might wish to operate on the net to
provide services however are reluctant to do so because they perceive
restriction and uncertainty. User should be able to order technical and
books and journals on-line from publishers and vendors. Users should be
able to consult commercial on-line databases to aid in their research.
Until there is a stable climate in which providers can be secure that they
are not violating policies, they will stay away.
Therefore, the NSF should be directed to modify or drop the AUP to permit
innovation in information services to develop at its maximum course through
the commercial sector.
Problem #2:
The current arrangements between NSF, Merit, and ANS, while
well-intentioned, have created a tilt in the competitive playing field.
ANS enjoys certain exclusive rights through its relationship with NSF to
carry commercial traffic across the NSFNET. This has introduced
significant marketplace distortions in the ability of other competitive
private carriers to compete for business, as you have heard.
The Science Board should therefore be directed to reconsider its decision
to extend the current arrangement by up to 18 months. The arrangement by
which ANS simultaneously provides network services for NSF and operates its
own commercial network over the same facility must be brought to an
orderly, but rapid, close.
Problem #3:
The current basic approaches to funding of network services by NSF and to
network architecture as a whole have ceased to be the most efficient and
most appropriate methodologies. The time has come to move on.
The historical and current funding model has been to subsidize network
providers at the national and regional level. We need to move to a
situation in which individual education and research institutions receive
funds through which they purchase network services from the private sector.
The historical network architecture model has operated through a
centralized, subsidized backbone network. We longer need this for the
day-to-day production network which serves the overwhelming majority of
users of the system. Instead we should move to a system of interconnected
private national carriers.
If industry knows that there is an open and fair opportunity to compete to
provide network connections and services to the research and education
community, it will supply as much T-1 and T-3 connectivity as is needed,
more cheaply and more efficiently than through any other method.
Finally, let me urge that the entire process be kept open. Industry needs
to be more involved in the overall process. Decisions ought to be made in
the market-place, not in Washington.
===============

187
textfiles.com/politics/ntia.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
Suveillance Conference Overview
COPYRIGHT (C) 1991 BY FULL DISCLOSURE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
The National Technical Investigators Association (NATIA) held their 5th
annual conference in San Antonio, Texas, August 26th-31th.
Participation in the conference was 600 attendees up from 500 last year.
However, there was a conspicuous lack of people from the military
intelligence community.
As usual with government related electronic surveillance operations,
techniques, equipment, etc, secrecy prevails. Due to efforts by Full
Disclosure, the San Antonio area media was informed about the show. They,
however, were all turned away at the gate. The result being no local press
coverage occured.
NATIA is an organization of over 2300 supervisory law enforcement officers,
communications and security managers assigned to support technical
investigative activities in the major federal, state and local enforcement
and intelligence agencies.
The NATIA membership is responsible for supplying all of the various
communications, audio, video, photographic, specialized electronic systems
and investigative aids used in support of these sensitive bugging,
wiretapping and intelligence activities.
The annual conference is used by manufactures of spy equipment to introduce
their new wares and sell more of the old stuff and for members to learn all
the newest tricks, scams and techniques.
Consequently, NATIA and its membership has a sigificant role in domestic
spying activities. NATIA's role not only includes the equipment, but
standards, operations, techniques, tricks, and the like. Such activities are
purportely regulated and overseen by the public, through Congress, by the
political process.
Any effective oversight or regulation requires information; information that
NATIA desires to suppress from the American public. The First Amendment,
however, assures that the public will be informed. Full Disclosure was able
to obtain many documents at the show and the essential information content
will be presented in this and future issues. Articles based upon show
information will be indiciated as such.
The desire to suppress this information is so great, that due to Full
Disclosure's publication of the 1989 NATIA conference exhibitors directory,
there was no directory made for 1990. (The essential information content from
the show schedule is presented below).
Not only was NATIA furious over the publication of the exhibitors directory,
but also over the fact that several hundred copies of the issue with the
directory were distributed on the show floor.
What was the atmosphere of show? At night, some members, partied like
motorcycle gang members. During the day, however, it was strictly business.
The following is an overview of the technical and management seminars that
were held. Contact addresses have been provided by Full Disclosure and were
not a part of NATIA literature.
``Future Telephone Technology'' by Bruce Becker, Central Telephone. Telephone
technology is rapidly changing. With new systems, features and technologies
on the way. This class will discuss what's on the horizon in the telephone
industry.
``Law Enforcement and FCC Rules and Regulations'' by Arlan Van Doorn, FCC,
Deputy Chief, Field Operations (202) 632-7200. Find out what the rules are.
What's new, what's changed, what's the same. Is that video transmitter you're
using legal? [Ed note: if not, does the exclusionary rule or fruit of a
poisonous tree doctrine apply?]
``2.4Ghz Video Transmission'' by Michael McDowell, Florida Department of Law
Enforcement. The FCC has recently allocated State and Local Law Enforcement
Agencies frequencies for low power video transmission. Learn what equipment
is available and how to put together a 2.4 Ghz video transmission system with
off the shelf parts.
``Countermeasures: Technical Surveillance Counter Measures'' By Clyde Widrig,
Los Angeles, Police Department. What is being found during TSCM sweeps? Learn
about this, the basics of doing a sweep, and what equipment you will need.
``Telephone Technology Panel'' The panel will discuss the impact on law
enforcement of new technologies (ISDN, CLASS, Etc.), systems and features,
coming soon to a telephone near you. Discussion will include the need for
NATIA to help set standards for intercept equipment.
``Covert Entry Planning'' by Jim Moss, U.S. Customs, 40 S Gay St, #424,
Baltimore, MD 21202. Covert entry planning offers the agent valuable tips on
setting up the mechanics, legal, and security aspects of surreptitious
entries. This class could mean the difference between a successful entry and
a possible tragedy.
``Digital Recording And Audio Processing'' By Attila Mathie, Adaptive Digital
Systems. An audio recorder with no moving parts? See it and get the latest
information on digital recording and audio processing.
``Managing Technical Operations'' by Anthony Bocchiccio, Drug Enforcement
Administration. Aimed at the management, this class is intended to give you
the knowledge of what it takes to run a technical section. Instruction will
include managing resources, personnel, and equipment.
``R-F Spread Spectrum Techniques'' by Stan Causey, DC Metro Police. Spread
Spectrum transmission is an area of rapid development. With many new systems
either in the works or already here, this class will bring you up to date.
``Seizing Personal Computers and Data Recovery'' by Ken Scales, IRS, Criminal
Investigative Division. Everywhere you look today there are PC's (personal
computers). What do you do when you seize one? Just turning it on may cost
you some very valuable data. Learn what to do, not to do, and who to contact
for help.
``Member Equipment and Technique Exchange Forum'' Do you have any new ideas,
tips, techniques, tricks or equipment? This is the place to bring them. Share
all of this valuable information with your fellow members in this open forum.
``Video Operations'' By Jack Tuckish, Naval Investigative Service. How to get
the most from your covert video operations. This class will teach packaging
techniques, camera placements, tips, tricks, etc.
``Night Vision Critique.'' Instruction will be given in interfacing night
vision equipment to 35mm and video cameras. Additionally you will learn about
specifications, uses and limitations of the different types of night vision
equipment. If available slides taken at the night vision demo will be shown.
``Computer Crimes.'' By Frank Milligan, IRS. People are gaining illegal
access to computer data bases, bank accounts, etc. Who are these hackers, how
are they getting in, and what can be done to stop them.
``Asset Seizure And Property Management.'' By Richard Harris, California,
Department of Justice. Is there more to Asset Seizure than property, weapons
and cash? This class will offer an overview on asset seizure and focus on
seizing equipment that can be used to aid law enforcement. Items such as
computers, communications gear and alarm equipment are being seized and used.
The above is reprinted from Full Disclosure Newspaper. Subscribe today and
get interesting articles like the above, plus more... pictures, graphics,
advertisement, and more articles. Full Disclosure is your source for
information on the leading edge of surveillance technology. Print the
following form, or supply the information on a plain piece of paper:
----
Please start my subscription to Full Disclosure for:
[ ] Sample issue, $2.00
[ ] 12 issue subscription, $18.00
[ ] 24 issue subscription, $29.95
With 24 issue susbcription include free one of the following:
[ ] Directory of Electronic Surveillance Equipment Suppliers
[ ] Citizen's Guide on How to Use the Freedom of Info/Privacy Acts
[ ] Maximizing PC Performance
Also available separately:
[ ] Directory of Electronic Surveillance Equipment Suppliers, $6.00
[ ] Citizen's Guide on How to Use the Freedom of Info/Privacy Acts, $5.00
[ ] Maximizing PC Performance, $6.00
Illinois residences, add 6.5% sales tax on above 3 items.
Enclosed is payment in the form of:
[ ] Check/Money order, [ ] Visa, [ ] Mastercard
Card no:___________________________________ Exp date:_______
Signature:__________________________________________________
Phone:______________________________________________________
(required for credit card orders)
My name/address:
Name:_______________________________________________________
Street:_____________________________________________________
City/State/Zip:_____________________________________________
Return to: Full Disclosure, Box 903, Libertyville, Illinois 60048


105
textfiles.com/politics/nuclear.fun Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
Copyright 1983
NPG,Ltd.
NUCLEAR PROTECTION
ISSUE: Does it make sense to invest in extensive civil defense measures in a
time of nuclear capability? (1) Yes. Millions of lives can be saved in event
of a nuclear attack. That is worth spending some money on. Or, (2) No. The
percentage of lives saved in a nuclear attack and the horror and health damage
survivors face afterwards are not worth the kind of investments required. More
important, making these investments misleads the public and officials about the
prospects of surviving at all.
BACKGROUND: A year ago, in the Fall of 1982, the Reagan administration asked
Congress for $4.3 billion for civil defense in this country. Spread over seven
years, the funds would be spent to develop plans and facilities to help
minimize the consequences of a nuclear attack on the civilian population.
Estimates of probable civilian survival after a nuclear attack vary. The
chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Vessey, testified in April
1983: "If we rode out the attack, probably 30 percent would survive today."
General Vessey said that the percentage would decline in coming years, as the
accuracy and power of Soviet missiles increases. Though criticized for
implementing a new notion of "winning" a nuclear war, officials of the Reagan
administration have argued that their position is similiar to that first
announced by President Nixon (a policy reportedly described in National
Security Decision Memorandum 242, signed in January 1974). According to press
reports, President Carter issued a further amplification that was labeled
Presidential Decision Number 59. These documents are all classified, so their
actual contents would be impossible to verify. However, in May 1973 Defense
Secretary Weinberger's five-year guidance to the military services was leaked
to, and published by, the Washington Post and other papers. In that document
Mr. Weinberger reportedly said: "Should deterrence fail and strategic nuclear
war with the U.S.S.R occur, the United States must prevail and be able to force
the Soviet Union to seek earliest termination of hostilities on terms favorable
to the United States."
POINT: Civil defense measures are simple common sense. Nuclear war would be
horrible, but why make it even more so by neglecting to prepare protective
measures? As the Soviets become more beligerant and the world power balance
becomes unstable -- as happens every so often -- a prudent country would
prepare. If our surveillance systems warn us that the Soviet Union is shifting
its civilian population away from the central cities -- which would indicate
that country is preparing for an exchange of nuclear weapons -- we must be able
to respond in kind. Otherwise the Soviets can use our own civilian population
as hostage. The anti-nuclear forces have taken the horror of nuclear war and
blown it completely out of proportion. We know quite a bit about nuclear
effects, and we know that there are definite measures we can take -- now --
which will significantly reduce these effects. We all know that a nuclear war
would be terrible, but if we allow ourselves to become traumatized to the point
of not even thinking about it, and if we do nothing to reduce the possible
problem, we are being very irresponsible. Indeed, if this kind of
"reality-avoidance" gets too strong, it will actually increase the potential
for war; the Soviets will see it as an irresistable opportunity.
COUNTERPOINT: The whole civil defense concept is outmoded and a waste of
taxpayer money. But of far more importance, development of a massive civil
defense program will tend to encourage government officials to continue to be
even more beligerant with their Soviet counterparts. If the program is large
enough, and highly publicized, the public may be -- falsely -- led to believe
that nuclear war is not that bad after all. The civil defense program is so
silly it would be laughable if it were not so serious. One part has the entire
populations of major metropolitan areas departing en mass for the hinterlands.
The traffic problem alone would be almost incomprehensible. But this doesn't
seem to bother the administration -- its officials just say, in effect, "have
faith because we will have it all figured out by the time we need it." Beyond
creating unprecedented waste, the kind of massive civil defense program sought
by the Administration has the potential -- in the not too distant future -- of
turning the country into a police state overnight. All we have to have is some
international tension -- either real, imagined or conjured -- and the military
and their civil defense civilian counterparts will take charge. Of course, it
will be "for our own good."
QUESTIONS:
o Is it worthwhile to invest lots of money for measures to protect the small
portion of the populace which is expected to survive, say 30% or less?
o If we learn the Soviet Union is actively shifting its civilian populations
away from presumed targets, what should we do?
o Do you think that civil defense precautions actually encourage government
officials to become more bold in their relations with the Soviet Union? Do you
think the same way about the Soviet Union's government officials?
o What would happen to our economy if we had a civil defense plan, and it was
accidentally triggered, causing a mass evacuation of the country's major
cities?
REFERENCES:
o Administration's Nuclear War Policy Stance Still Murky,
Michael Getler, The Washington Post, November 10, 1982, p.A22
o Joint Chiefs Back Plan for 100 MX's, Michael Getler, The
Washington Post, April 22, 1983
o McNamara hits protracted nuclear war, George Archibald,
The Washington Times, March 1, 1983
o Thinking About National Security, Harold Brown, Westview
Press, 1983
o The Wizards of Armageddon, Fred Kaplan, Simon & Schuster,
1983
(Note: Please leave your thoughts -- message or uploaded comments -- on this
issue on Tom Mack's RBBS, The Second Ring --- (703) 759-5049. Please address
them to Terry Steichen of New Perspectives Group, Ltd.)


27
textfiles.com/politics/nucleard.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
MORE REASONS NOT TO TRUST THE NUCLEAR AGE:
------------------------------------------
Excerpted without permission from UTNE READER JAN/FEB 1989,
an excerpt from from the BERKLEY ECOLOGY CENTER NEWSLETTER MAY 1988.
MAY 14, 1945 : Plutonium is injected intravenously into a human subject in an experiment carried ut by Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. Eighteen human subjects are injected with plutonium in 1945 nd 1946.
OCT. 10, 1957 : a fire at an English nuclear facility causes radiation
leakage and contaminates milk in a 200 mile radius with iodine-131. The
contaminated milk is dumped into the Irish Sea.
MARCH 1958 : Kyshtym, USSR. Nuclear waste plant explodes, destroying hundreds of square miles of and and causing thousands of people to contract radiation sickness.
JAN. 3, 1961 : Sl-1 Idaho Falls experimental test reactor. Three technicians were killed as they oved fuel rods in a 'routine' preparation for the reactor startup. One technician was blown to the ciling of the containment dome and impaled on a control rod. His body remained there until it was takn down six days later. These men were so heavily exposed to radiation that their hands and heads hadto be buried seperately with other radioactive waste.
MARCH 1968 : In an uniddentified reactor, workers used a basketball to plug a pipe during modifiction to the plant's spent fuel pool cooling system. Further work was in process, and the basketball as blasted through the pipe and out the open end, followed by 14,000 gallons of water filling up theroom.
1971 : The Atomic Energy Commision (AEC) admitted an error in radiation
exposure limits by proposing a hundred-fold reduction in routine emission
standards.
MARCH 1972 : Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska submitted to the Congressional Record facts surrounding aroutine check in a nuclear power plant which indicated abnormal radioactivity in the building's wate system. Radioactivity was confirmed in the plant drinking fountain. Apparently there was an inapprpriate priate cross-connect between a 3,000 gallon radioactive tank and the water system.
SEPT. 21,, 1980 : En route from Pennsylvania to Toronto, two canisters
containing radioactive materials fall off a truck on New Jersey's Rout 17. The driver discovers missng cargo in Albany, New York, when he sees only one of three canisters is still on the truck.
*** And they truly believe they know what their doing with nuclear power! 'Trust us madame, we're nulear scientists!' I don't know about you, but I don't think our technology is ready yet for the nuclar age, all their doing is building Enviromental time-bombs....something you shouldn't do to mother ature! ***

58
textfiles.com/politics/nukeacc.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
SECRET DOCUMENTS REVEAL DANGER OF WORLDWIDE NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS
On March 11, 1987, NBC broadcast a documentary, "Nuclear Power:
In France It Works." It could have passed for a lengthy nuclear power
commercial. Missing from anchorman Tom Brokaw's introduction was the
fact that NBC's owner, General Electric, is America's second largest
nuclear power salesman and third largest producer of nuclear weapons
systems.
One month after the NBC documentary, there were accidents at two
French nuclear installations, injuring seven workers. THE CHRISTIAN
SCIENCE MONITOR wrote of a "potentially explosive debate" in France,
with new polls showing a third of the French public opposing nuclear
power. That story was not reported on NBC News.
NBC's policy which produced the "nuclear power works" commercial
and censored the news about two nuclear accidents is typical of the
international silence about reactor incidents which help explain the
industry's undeserved reputation for safety.
The lid to Pandora's nuclear safety box was partially opened last
year when the West German weekly DER SPIEGEL published 48 of over 250
secret nuclear reactor accdient reports compiled by the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The report of previously secret IAEA
documents was translated into English for the first time and published
in David Brower's EARTH ISLAND JOURNAL.
Some of the "incidents" you never heard about: February 1983 --
Bulgaria's Kozluduj nuclear power plant lost pressure in the primary
cooling system; June 1983 -- three of four pumps failed in Argentina's
Embalse nuclear plant; August 1984 -- the primary cooling system in
West Germany's Bruno Leuschner plant in Greifswald burst; October 1984
-- engineers at the Chooz A reactor on the French-Belgian border
discovered numerous "breaks" and "broken welding seams" on the
critical control rods of the 17-year-old reactor; 1984 --
Czechoslovakia's Jaslovska Bohunice reactor spilled radioactive
coolant into two reactor containment units due to the failure of 72
defective bolts in the circulation system; January 1985 -- at
Pakistan's Kanupp reactor, radioactive heavy water leaked while being
transferred through a rubber hose; February 1985 -- during a fuel rod
experiment in East Germany's Rheinsberg reactor, a measuring device
stuck into the center of the reactor caused a leak of radioactive
water; April 1985 -- radioactive water and sludge swamped two rooms of
an auxiliary building at Belgium's Tihange reactor; December 1985 --
emergency power in Canada's Pickerikng reactor failed in three
separate units for five days.
DER SPIEGEL said that in several of these previously unreported
nuclear slip-ups "a meltdown was a real possibility." Worse yet for
Americans, DER SPIEGEL found that human error "is most advanced in
North America ... sometimes with hair-raising results." A survey of
official records since the Three Mile Island reactor meltdown in 1979
shows there have been more than 23,000 mishaps at U.S. reactors -- and
the number are increasing. In 1986, there were more than 3,000
reported incidents -- up 24 percent over 1984. The chilling
conclusion: "Humanity has been sitting on a powderkeg as a result of
reliance on the 'peaceful' use of the atom."
SOURCES: EARTH ISLAND JOURNAL, Summer, 1987, "Secet Documents
Reveal Nuclear Accidents Worldwide," by Gar Smith with Hans
Hollitscher, pp 21-24; EXTRA, June 1987, "Nuclear Broadcasting
Company," p 5.


55
textfiles.com/politics/nukefood.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
GLOWING OUTLOOK FOR FOOD IRRADIATION BUSINESS
The food industry is going high-tech with a seemingly innocent
procedure called irradiation -- a process that delays ripening by
exposing food to radioactive materials that kill insects, mold, and
bacteria.
Critics point out that irradiation may produce food products that
at best have lower nutritional value; at worst are carcinogenic.
Irradition also poses significant health threats to workers and the
public in transportation, storage, and disposal of radioactive waste.
And there is real concern over the safety of radioactive devices used
in food, beverage, cosmetic, and drug industries.
While spices are the first irradiated edibles marketed in the
U.S., the Food and Drug Admnstration (FDA) also has approved
irradiation for use on produce and some meats. Interestingly, the FDA
regulates irradiation not as a process but as an additive.
The question, of course, is exactly what is "added" to irradiated
food? Irradiated food looks and smells better for an extended time,
but little is known about the chemical changes induced by the process.
One science writer posed the complex issues when he asked "What
do you get when you irradiate an apple with 100,000 rads of gamma
rays. Is that irradiation a process or an additive? Who should
control it? Does it pose a carcinogenic threat to humans? Since it
reduces food spoilage and replaces dangerous pesticides, is it a
blessing for the world's hungry?" And then he asked, "Why are there
no answers to these questions?"
Meanwhile, the track record in irradiation facilities is anything
but reassuring. The Radiation Technology plant in Far Rockaway, New
Jersey, was closed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for
willfully supplying false information about repeated safety
violations; the NRC also shut down International Nutronics in Dover,
New Jersey, after workers reported a coverup of a radioative spill of
a tank of water containing cobalt-60 rods; and workers in Isomedix
Co., Parsippany, New Jersey, were told to clean up leaks by pouring
radioactive water down bathroom toilets and sinks.
Earlier this year, the NRC suspended the use of an industrial
air-purifying device that leaked tiny particles of radioactive
polonium at plants around the nation. The NRC also order 3M to recall
for inspection all 45,000 of the ionizing air guns used to control
static electricty and remove dust from product containers. Of 828
plants inspected so far, contamination was found at 118 sites; of
those, the radiation exceeded the reportable limit of .005 microcuries
in 39 plants. Subsequently, the NRC recalled 2,500 3M units used in
the food, beverage, costmetic and drug industries.
Given the potential problems, one would expect to find the
irradiation issue on the national media agenda; but it isn't.
Meanwhile, as serious questions go unanswered, the government has
proposed federal regulations that would allow more irradiation.
SOURCES: UTNE READER, May/June 1987, "Irradiation Business Gears
Up," by Karin Winegar, pp 29-30; SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER SPECTRA,
2/25/88, "Food Irradiation," by Rick Weiss, pp E1-E2, reprinted from
SCIENCE NEWS; S. F. EXAMINER (AP), 2/19/88, "Ionizing guns recalled
over radiation fear," p A5.


203
textfiles.com/politics/nwo-merc.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,203 @@
A NEW WORLD ORDER: ECONOMIC LIBERALISM OR THE NEW
MERCANTILISM?
By RICHARD M. EBELING
In the days immediately following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait
in August 1990, the Bush Administration declared that a vital
interest of the United States was at stake--American economic
well-being was threatened by Iraqi control of the Kuwaiti oil
fields. However, when a growing number of economists pointed
out that the U.S. economy had the capacity to adjust in a
reasonable amount of time to any rise in the price of oil--or
to a disruption in its supply from the Persian Gulf--the Bush
Administration began shifting its rationale for American
intervention.
The argument was next made that what was actually at stake was
the freedom of the Kuwaiti people. A number of political
analysts, however, pointed out that while Saddam Hussein's
regime in Iraq was undoubtedly a brutal dictatorship, Kuwait
had not exactly been an example of a free, democratic society.
In fact, the royal family of Kuwait had closed the Parliament
a few years earlier and had also imposed various restrictions
on freedom of speech and the press.
The Bush Administration again changed the rationale for
American military intervention. It was now claimed that what
was at stake was the inviolability of international borders
and the continued existence of nation-states. A number of
Middle East experts pointed out, however, that these
supposedly "inviolable" borders and nation-states were
themselves the creations of Britain and France when they
carved up the Turkish Empire at the end of World War I. The
existing boundaries and the legitimacy of the Persian Gulf
states are no less "artificial" than making Kuwait "Province
19" of Iraq.
The Bush Administration finally argued that what was at stake
was the establishment of a "new world order." World peace and
stability could never be secure as long as dictators had the
license to conquer and plunder their neighbors by force of
arms. With the end of the Cold War, it was now necessary to
bring to fruition the noble dreams of Woodrow Wilson and
Franklin D. Roosevelt which called for a consort of nations to
police and guarantee world order for the mutual benefit of
all.
Few people have asked, however, what the ultimate foundations
for any durable world order are. And to ask this question is,
at the same time, to ask: What are the causes of conflict and
war--the causes of world disorder?
In the 18th century, the reigning economic philosophy among
nations was mercantilism. The fundamental premise underlying
mercantilism was expressed by Voltaire in 1764: "It is clear
that a country cannot gain unless another loses and it cannot
prevail without making others miserable." The policy
implications of this societal philosophy were trade wars and
territorial conquests. If your own nation was to be wealthy,
it could only be so by making others poorer. Tariff walls were
needed to protect the prosperity of domestic producers from
the "attacks" of foreign competitors. Subsidies were required
for export producers so that they could "seize" the wealth of
others in foreign markets. Resources in foreign lands had to
be militarily "captured" to keep them out of the hands of
commercial rivals in opposing nation-states who would use them
to defeat "our" nation-state.
Economic activity in every nation was entirely politicized.
Private interests had to be subordinated to the ends of the
state in this global war of all against all.
But in the 19th century, the liberal ideal replaced
mercantilism. The liberal philosophers and economists
explained that trade among nations, like trade among
individuals, was mutually beneficial. All men would gain
through participation in a global division of labor--a way of
life in which they offered to each other the various products
in the production of which they specialized. Market
competition was not conflict, they argued, but rather peaceful
cooperation: each producer helped to improve the quality of
life for all through the production and sale of superior and
less expensive products than the ones offered by his market
rivals.
The liberal ideal required minimizing the role of the state in
economic affairs. The German economist Wilhelm Ropke once
concisely explained that the "genuinely liberal principle"
required "the widest possible separation of the two spheres of
government and economy. . . . This means the largest possible
`depolitisation' of the economic sphere with everything that
goes with it. . . . By aid of this principle of separation, it
was possible to reduce to a minimum the economic coexistence
of sovereign states with their different legal orders, their
frontiers, their systems of administration and separate
citizenships. . . . The result was that it was now possible to
remove the greatest part of the economic issues of conflict
and problems to which the coexistence of sovereign States is
liable to give rise."
Competition and rivalry, the "capturing" of consumer business
and the "conquest" of market share were now private matters of
peaceful exchange and contract. They were no longer affairs of
state--no longer political issues concerning obedience,
command and control.
The privatization of economic life, with government limited to
the protection of life and property and the adjudication of
contractual disputes, was the foundation of this "new world
order" in the predominantly liberal era between the end of the
Napoleonic wars in 1815 and the beginning of the First World
War in 1914. And what did it produce? A century of the
greatest freedom, prosperity and peace that man has ever
known.
In the 20th century, however, we have unfortunately returned
to the mercantilist ideal. Trade and commercial rivalry are
once again seen as the battleground of political combat.
Iraq's motive in invading Kuwait merely took the principle to
its logical conclusion: a nation destroys its economic rival
by seizing its resources (Kuwait's oil fields) and attempts to
enrich itself by plundering its accumulated wealth (Kuwait's
gold and physical assets).
But the United States and its Desert Storm allies in principle
conduct their international economic affairs no differently
than has Saddam Hussein. If some of America's Asian trading
partners "capture" a large share of the American consumer
market, the government responds with a tariff-wall "defense."
If American agriculture cannot earn the profits it considers
"fair," the U.S. government takes the "offensive" by
"attacking" other lands through export price-subsidies. If
other nations will not comply with the wishes of the
Washington social engineers in some international dispute, the
American government influences and persuades them with
government-to-government financial loans, grants and
subsidized credits--all at American taxpayers' expense, of
course.
Nor has the United States government any qualms about military
adventures to secure its economic goals when circumstances
seem to warrant it. When it becomes politically profitable for
the politicians in Washington to oppose the importation of
narcotics into the United States, then American military
forces invade one of the countries--Panama--that is accused of
dealing in the forbidden trade. Or if the occupation of Kuwait
by Iraq might negatively influence the availability and price
of a valued import such as oil, then a military crusade is
launched to guarantee "our" supply of oil. And in the process,
we purchase some allies--Egypt--by "forgiving" tens of
billions of dollars in government loans; and we also punish
others who won't go along with us--Jordan--by withholding
government aid and loans.
In a world of politicized trade and commerce, conflicts among
nations are inevitable, because the economic profits and
losses of private individuals and industries are raised to the
level of affairs of state. And, as a consequence, the problems
and interests of private suppliers and demanders are turned
into issues of national concern and supposed survival. This is
the source of much of our global disorder as well as one of
the fundamental barriers to a truly peaceful "new world
order."
In 1936, the Swiss economist and political scientist William
Rappard delivered a lecture entitled, "The Common Menace of
Economic and Military Armaments." World order, he said, was
threatened not only by military aggression but by economic
warfare as well. The weapons for economic warfare were
"economic armaments"--meaning all of the legislative and
administrative devices governments use to politically
influence imports and exports as well as the allocation of
commodities and their prices within one's own country and in
other parts of the world.
"The primary source of economic and military armaments,"
Rappard said, "we perceive in the doctrine of political
nationalism. Political nationalism is the creed which places
the national State at the top of the scale of human values,
not only above the individual, but above mankind itself."
Rappard argued that a new world order of peace and prosperity
would only be possible when nations undertook a policy of
economic disarmament. But this would only come about when the
creed of political nationalism and mercantilism was again
superseded by the ideals of economic liberalism. And, alas, we
still seem as far away from that transformation as when
William Rappard delivered his lecture more than half a century
ago.
Professor Ebeling is the Ludwig von Mises Professor of
Economics at Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan, and also
serves as vice-president of academic affairs for The Future of
Freedom Foundation.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the July 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

53
textfiles.com/politics/nyc-indi Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+=========+=================================================+===========+
| F.Y.I. |Newsnote from the Electronic Frontier Foundation |July 9,1992|
+=========+=================================================+===========+
FEDERAL HACKING INDICTMENTS ISSUED AGAINST FIVE IN NEW YORK CITY
Yesterday, Federal officials indicted five people in New York City for
computer crime. The indictments name Mark Abene (Phiber Optik), Julio
Fernandez (Outlaw), John Lee (Corrupt), Elias Ladopoulos (Acid Phreak),
and Paul Stria (Scorpion). The indictments charge that the accused used
their computers to access credit bureaus, other computer systems, and
make free long-distance calls.
Prosecutors revealed they relied on court-approved wiretaps to obtain
much of the evidence for their multiple-count indictment for wire fraud,
illegal wiretapping and conspiracy. Each count is punishable by up to 5
years in prison. The defendants are scheduled to be arraigned in
Manhattan Federal Court on July 16. If found guilty on all counts the
defendants could face a maximum term of 50 years in prison and fines of
$2.5 million.
Otto Obermaier, U.S. Attorney, discounted suggestions that the acts
alleged in the indictment were only "pranks" and asserted that they
represented "the crime of the future." He also stated that one purpose
of the indictment was to send a message that "this kind of conduct will
not be tolerated."
Mark Abene, known to the computer community as Phiber Optik, denied any
wrongdoing.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation's staff counsel in Cambridge, Mike
Godwin is carefully reviewing the indictments. Mitchell Kapor, EFF
President, stated today that: "EFF's position on unauthorized access to
computer systems is, and has always been, that it is wrong."
"Nevertheless," Kapor continued, "we have on previous occasions
discovered that allegations contained in Federal indictments can also be
wrong, and that civil liberties can be easily infringed in the
information age. Because of this, we will be examining this case
closely to establish the facts."
+=====+===================================================+=============+
| EFF |155 Second Street, Cambridge MA 02141 (617)864-0665| eff@eff.org |
+=====+===================================================+=============+
:

61
textfiles.com/politics/nzrail.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
Railways in New Zealand. (Hmmmm....!!)
As you probably know, Railways as we know them now are a thing
of the past. The first railway was the Auckland to Hamilton
canal, running al the way from Wellington to Putaruru and back
again. This was a special sort of underwater railway built by
the 'Railway Pioneers', (a sort of South Island cowboys), and
the waterproof tube trains that they used featured in the Rev.
W. Audreys 'Ivor the Engine' books.
The first steam train was invented almost by accident in 1066
when Charles Darwin, the brother of Robert Louis Stephenson,
welded several kettles together by burning his cakes in
Scotland, earning him the nickname "The Flying Dutchman".
However, it is the Wright brothers who are regarded by most as
the fathers of modern railways because of their many 'railway
children'. One of them, Casey Jones, died at the wheel of his
express train after it struck an iceberg on it's maiden voyage
to Japan. Many people lost their lives in this accident,
discovered by Miss Marple in the film "Murder on The Orient
Express". It was disasters like this that prompted the famous
railway engineer Isambard Kipling Burnett to build several
bridges over which trains could travel, the fourth of which is
in Whangarei.
Nowdays accidents are rare as all train drivers are ac-
companied by firemen in case of emergency. Sir Arthur Baden-
Powell, a notorious 'Great Train Robber' of the nineteenth
century, vastly improved railway safety when he invented the
semaphore signal, a kind of railway traffic-light kept in a
cupboard or "signal box".
Faster trains, like Henry Ford's 'Rocket' enabled our railway
network to grow rapidly, linking the many stations between
which people had previously had to walk. Indeed, early
stations were very primitive affairs, one of which, Kings
Cross, was named after the then monarch had become annoyed at
the lack of facilities. Other stations took their names from
famous events, such as Waterloo, named after Cliff Richard's
winning entry in the 1973 Eurovision song contest, and
Wellington Central, home of Paddington the Bear.
Many great advances have been made in railway technology in
recent years. Most trains offer dining facilities (hence the
expression 'fast food') and NZRail's new Advanced Passenger
Express is designed to tilt to one side, making it easier for
old people to get on and off at stations. In future, special
long wires will make it possible for electric trains to go all
the way from Auckland to Wellington without the plug coming
out.
Further information is available to 'Railway Enthusiasts' (or
people who know where the stations are and don't like buses)
from NZRail's new look "radio" stations or from Paul Holmes or
Titiwhai Harawera (who wasn't there that day).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Downloaded from the Infoboard BBS (Auckland, NZ) Thanks to Colin Swabey!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

45
textfiles.com/politics/olw7.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
==============================================================================
Dear Our Lawyer,
In June 1974, a tree root from the garden next door grew through the side
of our new polystyrene pond, causing subsidence to a gnome. My neighbour
refused to compensate me for the disaster, and my solicitor sought counsel's
advice. He recommended that I go to court; the case took five days, mainly
because a number of what my counsel described as fascinating legal points were
involved, and I lost it. Costs ran to five figures.
As I was short of money, I sought time to pay, and took a second job as a
nightwatchman, where, after three days, I was struck on the head with a lead
pipe. The company dismissed me, and counsel insisted that I sue them for
unfair dismissal. During the hearing, it transpired that I had been asleep
when struck on said head; the dismissal was upheld, and costs were given
against me. They were also given against me in the case I was advised to
bring against my other employer who had dismissed me on the grounds that I had
been off work for two weeks to attend a hearing about being unfairly dismissed
from my second job.
Now unemployed, I could not find new work due to shooting pains in head
where it had made contact with lead pipe; my lawyer sought compensation from
the Criminal Injuries Board, unsuccessfully, for which I had to pay him a
considerable fee. I was forced to sell my house, but did not get as much as
I had hoped because of legal fees involved, and since my wife did not fancy
living in two rooms, she left me, and sued for divorce on grounds of cruelty.
My lawyer strongly recommended that I defend the action, which I lost, the
costs being awarded to my wife, and as I left the court I tripped on a broken
paving-stone and dislocated my hip. My barrister, who had seen the incident,
immediately initiated a negligence suit against Westminster Council, who not
only won, but also successfully counterclaimed on the grounds that my hip had
struck a litter-bin as I fell which was damaged beyond repair.
So was my him; but the Medical Defence Union, defending the doctor I had
been advised to sue for malpractice, employed the services of three QC's, and
I had no chance, since I was now heavily overdrawn and could only afford to
defend the action myself. The case ran for three weeks, due to all the time
I spent limping backwards and forwards across the court.
I am about to go bankrupt. What I want to know is, is it possible to sue
a barrister?
==============================================================================
No.

78
textfiles.com/politics/om940324.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
*********************************************************
* Michael R. Burhans - Out Of My Mind *
* A Weekly Electronic Column *
* March 24, 1994 *
*********************************************************
" Let Us Pray "
or
We Must Force Feed The Kids Our Dogma!
Once again the armies of the religious right are one the march.
The very same groups that are spending millions of dollars on banning
books, censoring the media, stopping free speech and legislating
bigotry have suddenly tried a new tactic. It seems they would have us
believe that they suddenly have discovered the first amendment and
are converts. They would have us believe that they are exceptionally
concerned with the rights of free speech for students in the public
schools. One can only wonder how they can have the gall to expect the
rest of the country to believe this in the face of their virtual
assault on the civil rights of so many other groups.
Their ploy is this: The Supreme Court rightfully banned school
prayer on the basis that public schools are an arm of the government;
and prayer as a school policy was nothing less than a government
establishment of that religion as an officially state sanctioned
one. The religious right was therefore left with the quandary of how
to force others to pray to their god without appearing to use the
government to do so. They have seized on the idea that as long as
it is "supposed" to be a student lead prayer it is merely a matter of
free speech. They feel that if they call it "non-sectarian" prayer
(which to them means a non-denominational Christian prayer) then
nobody could possibly object. However, the mere mention in one of
these public school prayers of Buddha, Mohammed, Shiva, or Satan
would no doubt make them apoplectic. You can bet money that they will
feel quite free to mention Jesus in their prayers. The obvious
double standard of their position is yet another glaring example of
the sickening hypocrisy displayed by the right wing religious
fundamentalist movement.
I for one cannot believe they really see this as an issue of
rights. For if the rights really concerned them, why would these
groups spend millions on crusades to remove the rights of
homosexuals? If they are really concerned with rights why are they
advocating book banning? If they are really concerned with rights
why are they working to restrict the rights of non-christian
worshipers? If they are really concerned with rights why do they work
to remove the right to burn the flag? If they are really concerned
with rights, why do they spend so much money to censor art galleries?
If they are really concerned with rights, why do they spend so much
time and effort trying to censor the media? How can they expect us
to suddenly believe they want to be a great force for freedom? Any
citizen or elected official that falls for such an obvious and
cynical ploy almost deserves to live in the theocracy these people
would like to create. Since there is no way to do this without
forcing the rest of us to also live in this freedomless state we must
oppose this policy.
As it stands now, every person has the right to pray in school as
long as they don't force it upon others. That policy is sound and
should not be changed. I find it disingenuous at best when people
claim that they cannot pray properly unless they get to use the
public address system and force everyone else to join in or listen.
That is nothing less then a form of brainwashing by rote repetition.
There is no possible prayer that can accommodate all of our nation's
diverse religious beliefs. Even the mention of "God" would tell
atheists, agnostics, deists, and polytheists that their s is not the
officially state sanctioned system of beliefs. This is blatantly
unconstitutional, and needs to remain illegal. If you want to or
need to pray, do so, but do not try to force me or my children, or
anyone else to join along.
*******************************************************************
* (c)1994 Micheal R. Burhans\24th Century Society Publishing *
* Permission for unaltered reproduction and dissemination is *
* granted as long as it is not for profit & with this notice *
*******************************************************************

98
textfiles.com/politics/om940330.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
*************************************************************
* Michael R. Burhans - Out Of My Mind *
* A Weekly Electronic Column *
* March 30, 1994 *
*************************************************************
The Failure Of A Foreign Policy
Or
"Stop it, or we will make more empty threats."
Secretary of State Warren Christopher's recent trip to the People's
Republic of China was the proverbial straw breaking the back of our
nations foreign policy camel. It seems he has learned little since
his tenure in the administration of President Carter. So far, much
like then, our Foreign Policy under the Clinton Administration has
been marked by grandiose plans, hollow threats, and very little
action. This is unacceptable. Such actions, if continued will lead
to mistrust from our allies, and contempt from our adversaries. Let
us examine the record so far.
Upon taking office the Clinton Foreign policy team was immediately
met with two major crisis: Somalia and Bosnia. In Somalia, with the
best of intentions, he allowed the agenda of United Nations Secretary
General to override the best interests of the United States. What
should have been a simple mission of humanitarian relief, became a
manhunt for a scapegoat. Since he was also the most powerful man in
Somalia, this was very unwise. American troops were asked to perform
military strikes with inadequate intelligence and equipment. When
they ran into a ambush situation, there was no armor to back them up
and safely extract them. Consequently many died needlessly, the
people of the United States were shocked, and we pulled our people
out. This makes us look week and foolish in the eyes of the world.
Such behaviors embolden tyrants and make us lose the respect of our
allies.
One of Clinton's strongest points during the campaign for the
Presidency was that Bush had mishandled the situation in Bosnia, and
that he would take decisive action there. One can only wonder how a
man who laid out exactly what Bush was doing wrong, could possibly
make exactly the same mistakes! He was issued warnings, which proved
empty. Drawn lines that he allowed to be trespass, and in the end,
done almost nothing. The only real action taken so far was the
shooting down of some old Serbian Jets AFTER they had completed a
bombing run in the much touted "No-Fly Zone". Even at this they
allowed several of the planes to run across and imaginary line and
return home. This is far from decisive action. It is nauseate
reminiscent of our nations "Paper Tiger" days of the late 1970's.
Then there was Haiti. After months of loudly proclaiming that we
were dedicated to placing the democratically elected President back
in power, we dropped him like he was plague infected. We threatened
to send in peacekeeping forces, and when a rag tag bunch of armed
thugs appeared at the docks, the United States Military turned around
an sailed away. If we allow a few untrained bandits to run off our
military, how can we reasonably expect any nation to respect us? If
you are unwilling to use troops you should not send them. If you
decide to send them, send them in a level of force that is so
overwhelming that resistance isn't even considered an option by those
you are using force against.
Lastly, there was the travesty of Christopher's trip to the
People's Republic of China. Our nation has not suffered such an
embarrassment on the diplomatic front since the taking of our embassy
in Iran. He went to China blustering threats of trade cut offs, when
the US was clearly not willing to actually do so. The fact is
China's huge market is desperately needed by the United States
economy, and both parties know it. As much as China needs and wants
trade with us, we need it more. Never make threats from a position of
weakness. The Chinese Diplomats held several news conferences where
they told us exactly where we could get off. The last conference was
a virtual de- pantsing of Christopher, and the United States
government. After this, he slunk home in defeat while the world
laughed at our weakness. At a time when we need China's influence to
help in the dangerous situation regarding the North Korean nuclear
program, first alienating and then angering the Chinese is hardly an
intelligent strategy.
President Clinton desperately needs to get new help in his State
Department. Chrisptopher should resign; if he does not, he should be
fired. In a world growing rapidly more intertwined, one cannot
address domestic concerns without equal attention being paid to
international relations. We seem to have gone from a Presidency that
ignored the domestic agenda and was over concerned with the
diplomatic scene, to one that is the exact opposite. Perhaps this
unbalanced approach, swinging from one to the other with each change
in party control is the cause of so much of our nations problems.
The people of our nation need to stand up and demand a rational,
balanced approach to national government. If we do not do it soon,
we may find it is to late to stop our nations decline.
************************************************************
*(c)1994 Michael R. Burhans\24th Century Society Publishing*
*Permission for unaltered reproduction and dissemination is*
*granted as long as it is not for profit & with this notice*
* Internet-michael.burhans@f1004.n239.z1.fidonet.org *
************************************************************

90
textfiles.com/politics/om940405.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
*************************************************************
* Michael R. Burhans - Out Of My Mind *
* A Weekly Electronic Column *
* April 5, 1994 *
*************************************************************
Drug War Collateral Damage
Or
"You have the right to remain silent... forever."
Friday night the twenty-fifth of March the nation's war on drugs
claimed another innocent victim. The Boston Police Department's SWAT
team acting on an informant's tip, raided the apartment of the
elderly Reverend Accelynne Williams. The Reverend, noted for being
quiet and shy in his personal life and for his dedication to helping
people get off of drugs, was understandably shocked when without
warning his front door exploded open and a team of helmeted men in
full body armour armed with military style weapons came screaming
into the room. While for most people such a moment of sheer terror
would only lead to years of nightmares, pain and therapy, for Rev.
Williams it was his last moment. These ninja suited drug warriors
literally scared him to death. We can only imagine what terrified
thoughts ran through his mind in those last moments. His family,
friends, and parishioners are left behind wondering how this could
possibly happen in America. It is a valid question that we should
explore.
The first question that we must ask is just what lead to this bust
in the first place. According to the spokesman from the Boston
Police they got a tip from an informant that cocaine was being sold
from that building and he mixed up the apartment number. They lay
all the blame for this homicide on this unnamed snitch. I beg to
differ; what kind of police department stages a full scale SWAT raid
on a single uncorroborated tip? Doesn't the Boston Police Department
employ detectives? Do they not bother to utilize even a token amount
of investigation or surveillance? Is it standard operating procedure
to stage a full scale raid on each and ever drug tip that they get?
Think of the abuse such a policy is prone to. Say you break up with
your lover and want to make them miserable? Call in an anonymous tip
that they are dealing cocaine and sit back and watch the fun as a
dozen drug warriors destroy their property and piece of mind. Hey,
you might even get lucky and have Officer Rambo-wannabe accidently
shoot them! You just got fired? Call in an anonymous drug tip and
watch your former place of business get torn apart! It may be days,
weeks, or even months before they recover, perhaps even never.
Haven't we lost enough of our rights in the name of this drug war
already? When I was a small boy we were taught that one of the things
that made the United States great was that a person's home was their
castle. In America, we were told, roaming squads of police did not
kick in people's doors and drag them off without a well investigated
legally issued warrant. Now it seems this view is outdated, no
investigation is needed. The police act on the merest scrap of
suspicion, even single uncorroborated tips. Judges turn their back
on the Constitution and what is right, and simply issue any warrants
the police ask for. In this unthinking bureaucratic process all
semblance of justice and rights are lost. Innocents die in their own
homes; victims of Drug War Death Squads who should be more at home in
El Salvador or Communist China than here in America.
It is time for the people of the United States to stand up and
reassert our roles as the rightful rulers in our society. This war
on our rights must stop before the body count rises any higher. The
law enforcement community must be put back into its proper place.
Our Constitutional guarantees of freedom must once again be followed,
or the entire fabric of our society is doomed. So far our leaders
only plan to repair the societal chaos resulting from this usurping
of our rights is to limit, and even remove more of our rights. This
is unacceptable.
Lastly I was struck by the closing comments the Boston Police
Department's spokesman made. In reference to the death of Rev.
Williams he said words to the effect that they would, "...make this
situation right again." We can only be amazed at this level of
hubris. It seems that the Boston Police Department has become so
full of itself that it has decided that not only do the rules of
proper Constitutional law no longer apply to it, but it seems neither
do the rules of natural law! I for one will anxiously await to see
exactly how they plan on resurrecting this good man that they so
cruelly and unjustly killed.
************************************************************
*(c)1994 Michael R. Burhans\24th Century Society Publishing*
*Permission for unaltered reproduction and dissemination is*
*granted as long as it is not for profit & with this notice*
* internet-michael.burhans@f1004.n239.z1.fidonet.org *
************************************************************

521
textfiles.com/politics/ondream.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,521 @@
8 page printout
X.
EXAMINATION OF PROPHECIES.
[NOTE: This was the last work that Paine ever gave to the
press. It appeared in New York in 1807 with the following
title: "An Examination of the Passages in the New Testament,
quoted from the Old and called Prophecies concerning Jesus
Christ. To which is prefixed an Essay on Dream, showing by
what operation of the mind a Dream is produced in sleep, and
applying the same to the account of Dreams in the New
Testament. With an Appendix containing my private thoughts of
a Future State. And Remarks on the Contradictory Doctrine in
the Books of Matthew and Mark. By Thomas Paine, New York:
Printed for the Author." pp. 68.
This work is made up from the unpublished Part III, of the
"Age of Reason," and the answer to the Bishop of Landaff. In
the Introductory chapter, on Dream, he would seem to have
partly utilized an earlier essay, and this is the only part of
the work previously printed. Nearly all of it was printed in
Paris, in English, soon after Paine's departure for America.
This little pamphlet, of which the only copy I have seen or
heard of is in the Bodleian Library, has never been mentioned
by any of Paine's editors, and perhaps he himself was not
aware of its having been printed. Its title is: "Extract from
the M.S. Third Part of Thomas Paine's Age of Reason. Chapter
the Second: Article, Dream. Paris: Printed for M. Chateau,
1803." It is possible that it was printed for private
circulation. I have compared this Paris pamphlet closely with
an original copy of Paine's own edition, (New York, 1807) with
results indicated in footnotes to the Essay,
Dr. Clair J. Grece, of Redhill, has shown me a copy of the
"Examination" which Paine presented to his (Dr. Grece's)
uncle, Daniel Constable, in New York, July 21, 1807, with the
prediction, "It is too much for the priests, and they will not
touch it." It is rudely stitched in brown paper cover, and
without the Preface and the Essay on Dream. It would appear
from a note, which I quote at the beginning of the
"Examination," by an early American editor that Paine detached
that part as the only fragment he wished to be circulated.
This pamphlet, with some omissions, was published in London,
1811, as Part III. of the "Age of Reason," by Daniel Isaacs
Eaton, for which he was sentenced to eighteen months
imprisonment, and to stand in the pillory for one hour in each
month. This punishment drew from Shelley his celebrated letter
to Lord Ellenborough, who had given a scandalously prejudiced
charge to the jury. -- Editor.]
AUTHOR'S PREFACE.
To the Ministers and Preachers of all Denominations of
Religion.
IT is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to
detect and expose delusion and error. But nature has
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
1
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
not given to everyone a talent for the purpose; and among those to
whom such a talent is given, there is often a want of disposition
or of courage to do it.
The world, or more properly speaking, that small part of it
called christendom, or the christian world, has been amused for
more than a thousand years with accounts of Prophecies in the Old-
Testament about the coming of the person called Jesus Christ, and
thousands of sermons have been preached, and volumes written, to
make man believe it.
In the following treatise I have examined all the passages in
the New-Testament, quoted from the Old, and called prophecies
concerning Jesus Christ, and I find no such thing as a prophecy of
any such person, and I deny there are any. The passages all relate
to circumstances the Jewish nation was in at the time they were
written or spoken, and not to anything that was or was not to
happen in the world several hundred years afterwards; and I have
shown what the circumstances were to which the passages apply or
refer. I have given chapter and verse for every thing I have said,
and have not gone out of the books of the Old and New Testament for
evidence that the passages are not prophecies of the person called
Jesus Christ.
The prejudice of unfounded belief, often degenerates into the
prejudice of custom, and becomes at last rank hypocrisy. When men,
from custom or fashion or any worldly motive, profess or pretend to
believe what they do not believe, nor can give any reason for
believing, they unship the helm of their morality, and being no
longer honest to their own minds they feel no moral difficulty in
being unjust to others. It is from the influence of this vice,
hypocrisy, that we see so many church-and-meeting-going professors
and pretenders to religion so full of trick and deceit in their
dealings, and so loose in the performance of their engagements that
they are not to be trusted further than the laws of the country
will bind them. Morality has no hold on their minds, no restraint
on their actions.
One set of preachers make salvation to consist in believing.
They tell their congregations that if they believe in Christ their
sins shall be forgiven. This, in the first place, is an
encouragement to sin, in a similar manner as when a prodigal young
fellow is told his father will pay all his debts, he runs into debt
the faster, and becomes the more extravagant. Daddy, says he, pays
all, and on he goes: just so in the other case, Christ pays all,
and on goes the sinner.
In the next place, the doctrine these men preach is not true.
The New Testament rests itself for credibility and testimony on
what are called prophecies in the Old-Testament of the person
called Jesus Christ; and if there are no such things as prophecies
of any such person in the Old-Testament, the New-Testament is a
forgery of the Councils of Nice and Laodicea, and the faith founded
thereon delusion and falsehood. [NOTE by PAINE: The councils of
Nice and Laodicea were held about 350 years after the time Christ
is said to have lived; and the books that now compose the New
Testament, were then voted for by YEAS and NAYS, as we now vote a
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
2
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
law. A great many that were offered had a majority of nays, and
were rejected. This is the way the New-Testament came into being.
-- Author.]
Another set of preachers tell their congregations that God
predestinated and selected, from all eternity, a certain number to
be saved, and a certain number to be damned eternally. If this were
true, the 'day of Judgment' IS PAST: their preaching is in vain,
and they had better work at some useful calling for their
livelihood.
This doctrine, also, like the former, hath a direct tendency
to demoralize mankind. Can a bad man be reformed by telling him,
that if he is one of those who was decreed to be damned before he
was born his reformation will do him no good; and if he was decreed
to be saved, he will be saved whether he believes it or not? For
this is the result of the doctrine. Such preaching and such
preachers do injury to the moral world. They had better be at the
plough.
As in my political works my motive and object have been to
give man an elevated sense of his own character, and free him from
the slavish and superstitious absurdity of monarchy and hereditary
government, so in my publications on religious subjects my
endeavors have been directed to bring man to a right use of the
reason that God has given him, to impress on him the great
principles of divine morality, justice, mercy, and a benevolent
disposition to all men, and to all creatures, and to inspire in him
a spirit of trust, confidence, and consolation in his creator,
unshackled by the fables of books pretending to be 'the word of
God.'
THOMAS PAINE.
**** ****
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
As a great deal is said in the New Testament about dreams, it
is first necessary to explain the nature of Dream, and to shew by
what operation of the mind a dream is produced during sleep. When
this is understood we shall be the better enabled to judge whether
any reliance can be placed upon them; and consequently, whether the
several matters in the New Testament related of dreams deserve the
credit which the writers of that book and priests and commentators
ascribe to them.
In order to understand the nature of Dream, or of that which
passes in ideal vision during a state of sleep, it is first
necessary to understand the composition and decomposition of the
human mind.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
3
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
The three great faculties of the mind are IMAGINATION,
JUDGMENT, and MEMORY. Every action of the mind comes under one or
the other of these faculties. [NOTE: This sentence is not in Paris
edition. -- Editor.] In a state of wakefulness, as in the day-time,
these three faculties are all active; but that is seldom the case
in sleep, and never perfectly: and this is the cause that our
dreams are not so regular and rational as our waking thoughts.
The seat of that collection of powers or faculties that
constitute what is called the mind, is in the brain. There is not,
and cannot be, any visible demonstration of this anatomically, but
accidents happening to living persons shew it to be so. An injury
done to the brain by a fracture of the skull, will sometimes change
a wise man into a childish idiot, -- a being without a mind. But so
careful has nature been of that Sanctum Sanctorum of man, the
brain, that of all the external accidents to which humanity is
subject, this occurs the most seldom. But we often see it happening
by long and habitual intemperance.
Whether those three faculties occupy distinct apartments of
the brain, is known only to that ALMIGHTY POWER that formed and
organized it. We can see the external effects of muscular motion in
all the members of the body, though its premium mobile, or first
moving cause, is unknown to man. Our external motions are sometimes
the effect of intention, sometimes not. If we are sitting and
intend to rise, or standing and intend to sit or to walk, the limbs
obey that intention as if they heard the order given. But we make
a thousand motions every day, and that as well waking as sleeping,
that have no prior intention to direct them. Each member acts as if
it had a will or mind of its own. Man governs the whole when he
pleases to govern, but in the interim the several parts, like
little suburbs, govern themselves without consulting the sovereign.
And all these motions, whatever be the generating cause, are
external and visible. But with respect to the brain, no ocular
observation can be made upon it. All is mystery; all is darkness in
that womb of thought.
Whether the brain is a mass of matter in continual rest
whether it has a vibrating pulsative motion, or a heaving and
falling motion like matter in fermentation; whether different parts
of the brain have different motions according to the faculty that
is employed, be it the imagination, the judgment, or the memory,
man knows nothing of. He knows not the cause of his own wit. His
own brain conceals it from him.
Comparing invisible by visible things, as metaphysical can
sometimes be compared to physical things, the operations of these
distinct and several faculties have some resemblance to a watch.
The main spring which puts all in motion corresponds to the
imagination; the pendulum which corrects and regulates that motion,
corresponds to the judgment; and the hand and dial, like the
memory, record the operation.
Now in proportion as these several faculties sleep, slumber,
or keep awake, during the continuance of a dream, in that
proportion the dream will be reasonable or frantic, remembered or
forgotten.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
4
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
If there is any faculty in mental man that never sleeps, it is
that volatile thing the imagination. The case is different with the
judgment and memory. The sedate and sober constitution of the
judgment easily disposes it to rest; and as to the memory, it
records in silence and is active only when it is called upon.
That the judgment soon goes to sleep may be perceived by our
sometimes beginning to dream before we are fully asleep ourselves.
Some random thought runs in the mind, and we start, as it were,
into recollection that we are dreaming between sleeping and waking.
[If a pendulum of a watch by any accident becomes displaced, that
it can no longer control and regulate the elastic force of the
spring, the works are instantly thrown into confusion, and continue
so as long as the spring continues to have force. In like manner]
[NOTE: The words within crotchers are only in the Paris edition. In
the New York edition (1807) the next word "If" begins a new
paragraph. -- Editor.] if the judgment sleeps whilst the
imagination keeps awake, the dream will be a riotous assemblage of
misshapen images and ranting ideas, and the more active the
imagination is the wilder the dream will be. The most inconsistent
and the most impossible things will appear right; because that
faculty whose province it is to keep order is in a state of
absence. The master of the school is gone out and the boys are in
an uproar.
If the memory sleeps, we shall have no other knowledge of the
dream than that we have dreamt, without knowing what it was about.
In this case it is sensation rather than recollection that acts.
The dream has given us some sense of pain or trouble, and we feel
it as a hurt, rather than remember it as vision.
If the memory slumbers we shall have a faint remembrance of
the dream, and after a few minutes it will some-times happen that
the principal passages of the dream will occur to us more fully.
The cause of this is that the memory will sometimes continue
slumbering or sleeping after we are awake ourselves, and that so
fully, that it may and sometimes does happen, that we do not
immediately recollect where we are, nor what we have been about, or
have to do. But when the memory starts into wakefulness it brings
the knowledge of these things back upon us like a flood of light,
and sometimes the dream with it.
But the most curious circumstance of the mind in a state of
dream, is the power it has to become the agent of every person,
character and thing of which it dreams. It carries on conversation
with several, asks questions, hears answers, gives and receives
information, and it acts all these parts itself.
Yet however various and eccentric the imagination may be in
the creating of images and ideas, it cannot supply the place of
memory with respect to things that are forgotten when we are awake.
For example, if we have forgotten the name of a person, and dream
of seeing him and asking him his name, he cannot tell it; for it is
ourselves asking ourselves the question.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
5
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
But though the imagination cannot supply the place of real
memory, it has the wild faculty of counterfeiting memory. It dreams
of persons it never knew, and talks to them as if it remembered
them as old acquaintance. It relates circumstances that never
happened, and tells them as if they had happened. It goes to places
that never existed, and knows where all the streets and houses are,
as if we had been there before. The scenes it creates are often as
scenes remembered. It will sometimes act a dream within a dream,
and, in the delusion of dreaming, tell a dream it never dreamed,
and tell it as if it was from memory. It may also be remarked, that
the imagination in a dream has no idea of time, as tune. It counts
only by circumstances; and if a succession of circumstances pass in
a dream that would require a great length of time to accomplish
them, it will appear to the dreamer that a length of time equal
thereto has passed also.
As this is the state of the mind in a dream, it may rationally
be said that every person is mad once in twenty-four hours, for
were he to act in the day as he dreams in the night, he would be
confined for a lunatic. In a state of wakefulness, those three
faculties being all active, and acting in unison, constitute the
rational man. In dream it is otherwise, and, therefore, that state
which is called insanity appears to be no other than a dismission
of those faculties, and a cessation of the judgment during
wakefulness, that we so often experience during sleep; and
idiocity, into which some persons have fallen, is that cessation of
all the faculties of which we can be sensible when we happen to
wake before our memory.
In this view of the mind, how absurd it is to place reliance
upon dreams, and how much more absurd to make them a foundation for
religion; yet the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,
begotten by the Holy Ghost, a being never heard of before, stands
on the foolish story of an old man's dream. "And behold the angel
of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son
of David, fear not thou to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that
which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." -- Matt. 1. 20.
After this we have the childish stories of three or four other
dreams: about Joseph going into Egypt; about his coming back again;
about this, and about that, and this story of dreams has thrown
Europe into a dream for more than a thousand years. All the efforts
that nature, reason, and conscience have made to awaken man from
it, have been ascribed by priestcraft and superstition to the
working of the devil, and had it not been for the American
Revolution, which, by establishing the universal right of
conscience, [NOTE: The words "right of" are not in the Paris
edition. -- Editor.] first opened the way to free discussion, and
for the French Revolution that followed, this Religion of Dreams
had continued to be preached, and that after it had ceased to be
believed. Those who preached it and did not believe it, still
believed the delusion necessary. They were not bold enough to be
honest, nor honest enough to be bold.
[NOTE: The remainder of this essay, down to the last two
paragraphs, though contained in the Paris pamphlet, was struck
out of the essay by Paine when he published it in America; it
was restored by an American editor who got hold of the
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
6
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
original manuscript, with the exception of two sentences which
he supposed caused the author to reserve the nine paragraphs
containing them. It is probable, however, that this part was
omitted as an interruption of the essay on Dream. The present
Editor therefore concludes to insert the passage, without any
omission, in this footnote:
"Every new religion, like a new play, requires a new apparatus
of dresses and machinery, to fit the new characters it creates. The
story of Christ in the New Testament brings a new being upon the
stage, which it calls the Holy Ghost; and the story of Abraham, the
father of the Jews, in the Old Testament, gives existence to a new
order of beings it calls Angels. There was no Holy Ghost before the
time of Christ, nor Angels before the time of Abraham. We hear
nothing of these winged gentlemen, till more than two thousand
years, according to the Bible chronology, from the time they say
the heavens, the earth, and all therein were made. After this, they
hop about as thick as birds in a grove. The first we hear of, pays
his addresses to Hagar in the wilderness; then three of them visit
Sarah; another wrestles a fall with Jacob; and these birds of
passage having found their way to earth and back, are continually
coming and going. They eat and drink, and up again to heaven. What
they do with the food they carry away in their bellies, the Bible
does not tell us. Perhaps they do as the birds do, discharge it as
they fly; for neither the scripture nor the church hath told us
there are necessary houses for them in heaven. One would think that
a system loaded with such gross and vulgar absurdities as scripture
religion is could never have obtained credit; yet we have seen what
priestcraft and fanaticism could do, and credulity believe.
From Angels in the Old Testament we get to prophets, to
witches, to seers of visions, and dreamers of dreams; and sometimes
we are told, as in 1 Sam. ix. 15, that God whispers in the ear. At
other times we are not told how the impulse was given, or whether
sleeping or waking. In 2 Sam. xxiv. 1, it is said, "And again the
anger of the lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David
against them to say, Go number Israel and Judah." And in 1 Chron.
xxi. I, when the same story is again related, it is said, "And
Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel."
Whether this was done sleeping or waking, we are not told, but
it seems that David, whom they call "a man after God's own heart,"
did not know by what spirit he was moved; and as to the men called
inspired penmen, they agree so well about the matter, that in one
book they say that it was God, and in the other that it was the
Devil.
Yet this is trash that the church imposes upon the world as
the WORD OF GOD; this is the collection of lies and contradictions
called the HOLY BIBLE! this is the rubbish called REVEALED
RELIGION!
The idea that writers of the Old Testament had of a God was
boisterous, contemptible, and vulgar. They make him the Mars of the
Jews, the fighting God of Israel, the conjuring God of their
Priests and Prophets. They tell us as many fables of him as the
Greeks told of Hercules. They pit him against Pharaoh, as it were
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
7
AN ESSAY ON DREAM.
to box with him, and Moses carries the challenge. They make their
God to say insultingly, "I will get me honor upon Pharaoh and upon
all his Host, upon his chariots and upon his Horsemen." And that he
may keep his word, they make him set a trap in the Red Sea, in the
dead of the night, for Pharaoh, his host, and his horses, and drown
them as a rat-catcher would do so many rats. Great honor indeed!
the story of Jack the giant-killer is better told!
They match him against the Egyptian magicians to conjure with
them, and after hard conjuring on both sides (for where there is no
great contest there is no great honor) they bring him off
victorious. The first three essays are a dead match: each party
turns his rod into a serpent, the rivers into blood, and creates
frogs: but upon the fourth, the God of the Israelites obtains the
laurel, he covers them all over with lice! The Egyptian magicians
cannot do the same, and this lousy triumph proclaims the victory!
They make their God to rain fire and brimstone upon Sodom and
Gomorrah and belch fire and smoke upon mount Sinai, as if he was
the Pluto of the lower regions. They make him salt up Lot's wife
like pickled pork; they make him pass like Shakespeare's Queen Mab
into the brain of their priests, prophets, and prophetesses, and
tickle them into dreams, [NOTE: "Tickling a parson's nose as 'a
lies asleep, Then dreams he of another benefice." (Rom. and Jul.)
-- Editor.] and after making him play all kinds of tricks they
confound him with Satan, and leave us at a loss to know what God
they meant!
This is the descriptive God of the Old Testament; and as to
the New, though the authors of it have varied the scene, they have
continued the vulgarity.
Is man ever to be the dupe of priestcraft, the slave of
superstition? Is he never to have just ideas of his Creator? It is
better not to believe there is a God, than to believe of him
falsely. When we behold the mighty universe that surrounds us, and
dart our contemplation into the eternity of space, filled with
innumerable orbs revolving in eternal harmony, how paltry must the
tales of the Old and New Testaments, profanely called the word of
God, appear to thoughtful man! The stupendous wisdom and unerring
order that reign and govern throughout this wondrous whole, and
call us to reflection, 'put to shame the Bible!' The God of
eternity and of all that is real, is not the God of passing dreams
and shadows of man's imagination. The God of truth is not the God
of fable; the belief of a God begotten and a God crucified, is a
God blasphemed. It is making a profane use of reason. -- Author.]
I shall conclude this Essay on Dream with the first two verses
of Ecclesiastics xxxiv. one of the books of the Apocrypha. "The
hopes of a man void of understanding are vain and false; and dreams
lift up fools. Whoso regardeth dreams is like him that catcheth at
a shadow, and followeth after the wind."
I now proceed to an examination of the passages in the Bible,
called prophecies of the coming of Christ, and to show there are no
prophecies of any such person; that the passages clandestinely
styled prophecies are not prophecies; and that they refer to
circumstances the Jewish nation was in at the time they were
written or spoken, and not to any distance of future time or
person.
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
8


200
textfiles.com/politics/one.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
NEED FOR PROTECTION
If someone slips and falls in a business, or if a
car taps their car's rear end, they react like they
just won the lottery. If an armed thug breaks into a
home in the dead of night, slips on a child's marbles,
and breaks a leg, he can sue and likely win.
One idiot strapped a refrigerator on his back and
ran in a race. The strap broke and he hurt his back.
He sued the strap manufacturer and collected $1.3
million.
It is impossible to buy an skateboard anywhere
these days. The manufacturers can't get liability
insurance. (So the kids make more dangerous home built
ones instead.)
Once there is a judgment against somebody, the
court swears them in and takes their testimony "in aid
of collection." They have to tell the court everything
-- no matter how unjust the case is. What properties
they own, what savings accounts, what checking
accounts, and what money market funds, and how much is
in each one. What stocks they own, what bonds they
own, where each and every safe deposit box is and what
precisely they have in each.
If one were a rapist or murderer, they'd have more
rights, such as a right to silence. But as a judgment
debtor a person has no rights, as the winner now owns
everything. And heaven help the defendant if he fudges
on his testimony. If he conceals a safe deposit box,
or that stash of 100 Krugerrands he buried ten years
ago in the garden, he's committing perjury, a felony.
With mandatory sentencing guidelines in effect in most
jurisdictions, he will go to prison for the amount of
time specified in the statute -- the judge no longer
has the discretion to set the sentence but must
sentence in accordance with the guidelines created by
the legislature for that crime. The popular concept
of probation for a first offense is no longer true in
many jurisdictions, including the federal court system.
The perjury defendant may even spend more time in
prison than the thug who broke into his house and
slipped on his child's marbles.
While the defendant's lying about his assets will
always be the felony of perjury, if the thug walked
into the house in daylight through an unlocked door,
his crime is likely to be the misdemeanor of trespass,
with a maximum sentence of six months, versus the
perjury felony with a maximum of from five to twenty
years, depending upon the jurisdiction.
It is all too easy to go around saying it won't
happen, but once it happens, it is too late. If money
is transferred after an incident or accident, that is
concealing assets, which can cause both criminal
charges and civil loss of other assets. The law looks
at it as stealing the property of the person who is
suing, or who may sue. The defendant may think it is
his lifetime savings from hard work, but legally he now
holds it in trust for the person who has a pending
claim. Presumed knowledge of the possibility of a
claim is sufficient to invoke these fraudulent transfer
laws. So if somebody moves their money the morning
after an auto accident, it is likely to come back to
haunt them. The only legally valid protection is to
take careful and legal protective steps before there
is even a potential claim against a person or his
assets.
While these concerns with protecting assets
obviously apply mostly to American readers, non-
American readers need to consider the dangers of
keeping bank accounts or other assets in America while
this craze rages on. It also raises serious concerns
about the viability of investments in American
businesses that might be affected by such judgments.
Inadequate insurance
A doctor works all his life to provide competent
and effective care for his patients. A surgery leaves
a patient crippled. No surgeon is 100% successful, but
the jury in the malpractice suit awards the plaintiff
$15,000,000, an amount greater than the policy limits.
Or worse, the insurance company fails and there is no
protection.
Partnerships
A law firm is having its monthly partners meeting.
They send out for lunch. Most want pizza but one wants
a pastrami sandwich. Their secretary decides to go
pick it up. Unknown to the twelve partners this person
has a horrible driving record. On the way back the
secretary runs into a group of pedestrians. The police
arrive. The secretary eats the pastrami and the
partners are sued. A judge decides that they are
liable as the secretary was performing an act for the
partners in her ordinary course of employment. The
jury, sympathetic to the victims and enraged by the
driving record awards $3,000,000 in damages. As
partners all of the lawyers are jointly and severally
liable. In effect, the jury has awarded the plaintiffs
three condos, two sail boats, three houses, nine cars,
and twelve installment notes.
Directorships
It used to be an honor to be a director of a bank,
savings and loan or prominent business concern. Today
there are over 2,243 directors of banks and savings
institutions being sued. One hospital failed and the
IRS sued its community advisory board for unpaid back
taxes.
Simple Ownership
A land speculator bought a parcel for subdivision,
held it for one week and sold it to a developer.
Later, after houses were built, a homeowner who was an
environmental engineer noticed an old buried drum. It
contained a deadly toxin. The Environmental Protection
Agency held the site to be a "superfund" site. The
largest law firm in the world, Uncle Sam, began an
action against the landowners. The suit brought in the
land speculator. Although the total invested was only
$100,000, the inferred liability exceeded $30,000,000.
Under the law this can never be discharged. The
corporate builder and corporate developer collapsed
leaving the individual land speculator to carry forever
his modern scarlet letter.
Joint Ownership
Mom with the best of intention deeded her house to
joint ownership with her son. She intended to avoid
probate, taxes, etc. Unfortunately, a tax shelter that
he participated in resulted in an unfunded tax
liability of $75,000. The son was a little down on his
luck at the time of the tax levy. IRS can seize and
sell the house according to the United States Supreme
Court.
Inferred Liability
A woman answers a knock at the door and lets the
IRS agent into her house. the IRS agent gives her a
bill for over $100,000 of back taxes, penalties, and
interest with her ex-husband's name. Apparently he was
a little creative with his filings, while she simply
signed their joint return.
Inadequate Corporation
Almost everyone knows that you may use a
corporation to shield liability from its shareholders.
Unfortunately most people fail to follow all the rules
about keeping the corporate papers and procedures up to
standard. A good attorney has an excellent chance of
penetrating the "corporate veil" and going directly to
the officers', directors' and shareholders' pockets.
Charitable Adventures
It is a sad but true statement that the prudent
person today should refrain from serving in any
responsible capacity for a charitable organization. One
of the largest items on the national Boy Scouts' annual
budget is their legal expense. Two scoutmasters take a
number of boys camping. Boys will be boys, and not all
scoutmasters are always perfect. The scoutmaster who
was not at the lake while his partner allowed rough
play to cause a drowning may be held equally liable as
he accepted responsibility for all of the children.
Childhood Dreams
You are so proud of your child. She has
progressed well in school and been responsible in all
her habits. For a seventeen year old, she is
remarkable. She does, however, like rock music. While
returning from the grocery with your salad fixings her
favorite new song is played on the radio. She turns up
the volume on your expensive car stereo. Way up. She
does not hear the siren of the rescue vehicle
overtaking her to pass. The ensuing wreck leaves a
trail of havoc that leads right into court. Your
insurance company settles the first case for policy
limits leaving you high and dry on the other cases.
Being responsible for her until emancipated, you are
left holding the bag for her accident judgments.
How many other examples are required? While the
above may seem exceptional, to the affected they
provided financial ruin. This report gives you the
background needed to begin the process of lawsuit and
asset protection. It is not designed as a tool to
prevent one from paying his normal and ordinary debts.
But the extraordinary and unintended financial
calamities that can occur too easily in our litigious
world can be defended against with these techniques.

354
textfiles.com/politics/onoth.hum Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,354 @@
The following article originally appeard in the Conservative Digest (September
1987). It was also reprinted in an ad for the same. This is a great monthly
magazine with a format similar to the Reader's Digest. Subscription prices
vary depending upon the length of the subscription. I think it's worth you
while to check this one out. If you want more information write or call:
Conservative Digest
P.O. Box 2246
Fort Collins, CO 80522
(800) 847-0122
The testimony of Colonel Oliver North before the Iran/Contra Committees exposed
the cruel lengths to which the viciously partisan Democrat liberals were
prepared to go for a mere political advantage. Ollie North gave them all a
lesson in character.
The Testimony of Lieutenant Colonel Oliver L. North
Colonel Oliver North's appearance before the Iran/Contra committees will in
time be regarded as a watershed in the history of American conservatism, one
comparable to the Whittaker Chambers exposure of Alger Hiss. But Chambers,
while a magnificent writer, had even less charisma than does George Shultz. He
also did not have a national television audience.
The only modern televised event that conservatives have reason to compare with
North's testimony is the famous 1964 speech for Barry Goldwater that launched
Ronald Reagan's political career. That speech came too late in the campaign to
do anything significant for Goldwater, but Oliver North's efforts appear to
have salvaged the final months of President Reagan's second term, firmly
putting an end to talk of impeachment.
If the President were a man to go for his opponent's political jugular, he
would now go on television for an address to the nation. He would have Lt.
Colonel North at his side. Colonel North would proceed to show his famous
slide presentation, with whatever classified photographs the President, as
Commander-in-Chief, chooses to authorize. The presentation would stress the
possibility that if the Nicaraguan Communists are successful in their
subversion of Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala, up to ten million
additional refugees will illegally enter the United States from Latin America.
The President would then announce the promotion of Lt. Colonel North to full
colonel, and pin the eagles on his shoulders. That done, President Reagan
would make the following statement: "Ladies and Gentlemen, I know you are as
concerned about what Colonel North has just shown us as I am. To be sure that
the Communists who have invaded our hemisphere understand our resolve, I am
today submitting to the U.S. Senate the name of Oliver North for appointment
to the rank of brigadier general. I am asking for immediate confirmation, and
intend to place General North in charge of liaison activities with the
Nicaraguan freedom fighters. In accordance with that policy, I am asking
Congress firmly to reject the Boland Amendment by approporiating $2 billion
dollars in aid to free Nicaragua and prevent the refugee crisis that is now
looming.
"We must send these signals immediately. I will return next Monday evening to
inform you of the response of Congress. I am asking Senator Byrd and House
Speaker Wright to expedite these matters. Please write to your Senators and
Congressmen and tell them where you stand on the issue of American security.
Thank you, and God bless you."
Presto: instant end of congressional resistance against aid to the freeedom
fighters. "All those Congressmen in favor of denying Ollie North his star,
please stand up and be counted. Smile for the folks back home! You'll be
returning there permanently in 1989!" End of the Boland Amendment. Probable
end of Daniel Ortega.
My fantasy could happen. I doubt that it will, but it could.
The designated sacrificial lamb has already publicly roasted and then dined on
the Joint Congressional Committee. It happened because of Oliver North's
visible decency and refusal to bend his deeply held principles. And it came as
a terrible surprise to Congress. After all, how often does the typical
Congressman come face to face with either visible decency or deeply held
principles? Certainly not when he shaves.
Overnight Turnaround
No one, including me, had even a hint of warning that Ollie North was such a
master of the electronic medium, part St. Bernard and part pit bull, leaving
behind a canteen of hot soup for the freedom fighters and about half a dozen
casualties among the cagiest political operators on Capitol Hill. No one
imagined that he could so brilliantly combine an articulate defense of his
actions with humour, pathos, righteous indignation, deadly verbal resopnses to
the Bronx cheers of a classic Bronx lawyer, and even a verbal presentation of
an invisible slide show.
Most important, and most remarkable, he was on the offensive from the moment he
took the stand. He put Congress on trial. By the end of the first day's
hearing, it was obvious that the Committee was in very deep trouble. A sports
analogy may not fully communicate the confrontation, but the hearings reminded
me of the first fight between Sonny Liston and Cassius Clay. Sonny looked mean
at the weigh-in. He glowered. He seemed unbeatable, talked unbeatable, and
failed to come out for the seventh round. So did the Committee.
At the opening bell, North landed a solid right on the Committee's glass jaw,
and it staggered around in a collective daze the whole week, oblivious to what
was happening. Heads began to clear over the weekend, except for those of
Boland, Rudman, and the Honorable and Decorated Senator from Hawaii. On
Monday, most members started grabbing for a towel to throw in. The fight was
over; the Committee had split, and the new political strategy was to praise
North's courage while trying vainly to hold on to the viewing audience.
The Viewers
The television ratings climbed, day by day. Network revenues fell, hour by
hour. The hottest soap opera in twenty years was not interrupted once by a
warning about static buildup in our socks. Word of mouth took over and
everyone who could get a TV set was watching. Millions and millions of people.
Newspapers meanwhile featured blazing headlines that called attention to the
hearings. So completely out of touch were they with what everyone had seen on
TV that Accuracy In Media should assemble a collection of those headlines as
proofs in point. (Franz Kafka, where are you now that we need you?) The story
of the headlines began with the incomparable classic displayed on the front
page of the Washington Post on the morning of July 17th, just before Colonel
North began his testimony, a headline that deserves to be in the Headline Hall
of Fame, right alongside the Chicago Tribune's 'Dewey Defeats Truman.' Here it
is: "Lacking the Old Luster, North Returns to Testify/Disclosures of his 'Dark
Side' Weaken Credibility of Affair's Most Intriguing Figure."
And then, all heaven broke loose. Day after day, the headline writers did
their best to make it look as though North had confessed to everthing short of
worshipping Allah in a mosque with the Ayatollah, but they created a major
problem for themselves. The headlines kept reminding more and more and more
people that they could watch all the fun for themselves. They could eliminate
the middleman. "Aye, there's the rub."
Millions of viewers tuned in to the hearings, and the discrepancies between
what was hapening in front of the cameras and what was being announced in those
six-word headlines were increasingly obvious to even a child. The traditional
tight little coalition between the newscasters, with their two-minute segments
of electronically spliced videotape, and the newspaper reporters, with their
six-word, bold-faced, selective headlines, was no longer fooling the people.
The people were watching the whole thing, live. "Live-action news!" actually
became live-action news, and the liberal press was exposed as it had never been
before.
The newspaper reporters could not bring themselves to describe the bruising
that North was inflicting on the Committee. It was as if they had announced
the Liston-Clay fight on the radio, round by round; "And Liston leads with his
jaw again, and again. You can almost feel the pain in Clay's fists. Liston is
standing firm, like an immovable object, while Clay bounces desperately around
the ring, hoping to avoid Liston's steady glare. This is terrible, ladies and
gentlemen. Someone should stop this fight before Clay get killed."
You could guess the fighter on whom the reporters had placed their bets before
the fight. This kind of reporting works only when nobody is watching. It only
works if the judges are crooked and the fight goes the full fifteen rounds.
But still they hoped, "Magnetic North is not the same as True North," quipped
one liberal reporter. This sounds good until you get lost without a compass.
The Committee was visibly lost, led only by counsel Liman, who wandered in
verbal circles around North's shredder. And still they hoped. Daniel Schorr
reports that Senator Inouye told him he was undismayed, that it would all look
different in print than it looked on television. What Inouye meant was that it
would all look different when recast by liberal editors who wrote the
headlines. But nobody was paying any attention to the headlines. They were
watching it live!
I called Dan Smoot on the Saturday following the first five days of North's
testimony. Dan Smoot was one of the important personalities in the
conservative revival on the 1950's, is an expert in constitutional law, and
authored The Invisible Government (1962), that first public critique of the
Council on Foreign Relations. Smoot had been the first conservative to have a
nationally syndicated television news program, was driven from the air in the
infamous Democratic Party machinations to support the Reuther memorandum, and
very much understands the power of television. I asked Dan how he evaluated
the hearings. "Colonel North has done more damage to the left in the last five
days," Dan Smoot said, "than anything I can remember in the last twenty years."
Impressions
Television images are powerful, but they last only as recollections. It is
these strong impressions that are at the heart of the left's new problem. What
remains in the public mind are North's good looks, his uniform and medals, his
unwillingness to bend, his handling of every challenge, and (above all) his
obvious integrity. Also remembered are the Vietnam-era flowing locks of
counsel Nields, the whinning voice of the leering counsel Liman, and the
scowling face of the Honorable and Decorated Senator from Hawaii.
Wether Colonel North will remain in the limelight is yet to be seen.
Predicting what will happen to a celebrity is tricky, and he is now a
celebrity. By the end of July, there were pages of pictures and stories on
Colonel North in the supermarket tabloids. The exploiters had his testimony on
the newsstands within two weeks (Taking The Stand, Pocket Books), and it took
only two weeks to produce, release, and market videotapes of the hearings.
Doubtless every major book company in the country has been trying to contact
him for exclusive rights to his autobiography. Reader's Digest will no doubt
run the condensed version. Wether Tom Cruise will star in the movie, I cannot
say. What I can say for sure is that the conservative movement has been given
one summer of delirioius happiness, and a million of Richard Viguerie's
direct-mail appeals with Ollie North's picture on the envelopes were dropped
into the mail within the week.
It is not the celebrity status of Colonel North that is crucial to the
conservative movement. What is crucial is that an honorable man stood up
publicly in front of the whole nation with everything he valued at stake and,
in the name of a higher ideal than political and personal expediency, directly
confronted the congressional poltroons- politicians who are recognized by the
public as weak-willed, opportunistic, blindly partisan, and possessed of no
vision longer than tomorrow's headlines.
The public is well aware that hypocrisy is a way of life in Congress, but
Americans are seldom given an opportunity to see a real man with authentic
integrity, proven courage, and detailed knowledge fight it out with the gutless
frauds and intellectual pygmies and the know- nothings who run Congress. The
media monopoly of the left has therefore failed, giving the right new life, a
new face, and a new ideal of personal style and dedication.
Judge Gerhard Gesell
But after all the cheering has ceased, and the television crews have gone back
to producing footage intended for careful editing, and the network-news
broadcasters return to their preferred calling of systematically misinforming
the American public and selling advertising time- above all, selling
advertising time- the nagging questions still remain: Who was right, North or
Congress? Who has control over American foreign policy, the Executive or
Congress? If Congress refuses to fund an operation, can the President legally
fund it by diverting money from discretionary funds? If every expenditure is
listed in the Budget, have we given the Soviet Union too much information?
The key questions today are these: If Congress is so short-sighted as to allow
the forces of international Communism to surround this nation, and if the
public allows Congress to get away with this retreat from responsibility, isn't
it the constitutional obligation of the President to thwart the intentions of
Congress? Can he do so even when he signs legislation that hampers his
decision-making ability?
Conservatives of long standing remember similar arguments in the late 1930's,
and again in the years immediately following World War II. There is not much
debate among professional historians today concerning President Roosevelt's
determination to take the United States into the European war, even when it
meant covering up naval battles with German submarines in the North Atlantic,
lying to the public during the election campaign of 1940, and misleading
Congress at every opportunity. Almost everyone now agrees that F.D.R. did
these things, though they were denied by professional historians until the
early 1970's. The question today is: Was Roosevelt correct? Was he
constitutionally empowered to thwrart the isolationist impulse of the voters
and Congress after 1936? His supporters argue that he acted deviously but
properly in a just cause.
This legal issue still confronts us today. Sixteen Congressmen and Senator
Helms have gone into federal court to plead that the President abdicated his
constitutional responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces by
signing the legislation known as the Boland Amendment, which in fact has
reappeared in several incarnations over the years.
In perhaps the oddest of ironies in recent years, this question is about to
come before Judge Gerhard Gesell. What the plaintiffs did not know when they
submitted this case for Judge Gesell's consideration is that, years before he
was elevated to the bench, Gerhard Gesell was the birghtest young light in the
law firm of Dean Acheson, before Acheson served as Secretary of State. It was
Gesell who left Acheson's firm to become Democratic counsel for the famous
Pearl Harbor investigations of late 1945 and early 1946. The hearings
investigate these questions: Who was responsible for the debacle at Pearl
Harbor in 1941? Did Roosevelt have advance knowledge that the attack was
coming and refuse to give warning inorder to assure popular support for U.S.
entry into the war? Or was knowledge witheld from the President by General
Marshall? These questions are stirkingly similar to today's": Who was
responsible for setting the terms of the Iran/Contra deal? Did Reagan know
that some sort of deal was being worked out? Did he know any of the details?
But the underlying question in the late 1930's and early 1940's was this: Who
is properly in charge of American military and foreign policy? This is still
the unanswered question.
It is therefore an oddity of history that Gerhard Gesell will decide wether to
hear this case (the decision may already have been made by the time your read
this). If he does hear it, will he begin to sketch out a constitutional
solution? He was a defender of Roosevelt in the hearings of 1945 and 1946.
Will he be a defender of Reagan today? Conservative Republicans denied after
the war that Roosevelt had possessed such constitutional perogatives in
1937-1941. The Democrats said that the President did possess such authority.
Today, the Republicans argue that Reagan does have such constitutional
perogatives. The Democrats deny it. History plays strange tricks.
The Boland Amendment(s)
The original version of the Boland Amendment was signed into law as a rider to
a huge appropriations bill on December 21, 1982. It was part of the funding of
the Department of Defense. This rider specified that no Defense Department
funds or C.I.A. funds could be used to finance the armed forces of any group
seeking to overthrow the Communist tyranny in Nicaragua. The next year, some
money for the freedom fighters was appropriated by Congress despite Boland's
rider, but another Boland rider was added to prohibit any intellignece agency
from aiding the freedom fighters. This included direct and indirect aid.
It is important to note, however, that the President's own staff, which is not
an intelligence agency, cannot be and was not prohibited from acting under
Presidential authority to further the President's foreign policy. In addition,
remember that the various Boland riders contain no criminal penalties or
sanctions of any kind. Without sanctions, Congressman Boland's rider is as
dead a letter as the 1978 law, Public Law 95-435, which absolutely requires the
government to balance its Budget. There are no sanctions attached to that
piece of politically utopian legislation, either. Congress ignores it, the
President ignores it, and the voters ignore it. Yet a Committee filled with
character assassins tried to humiliate Colonel North in front of the American
people by accusing him of breaking the Boland law as if it were the law of
Moses instead of a toothless and goofy political whim.
The Boland rider pretends to limit the spending of U.S. tax dollars. It
limits spending no more effectively than Public Law 95-435. In any case, it
does not affect the spending of Iranian tax dollars. The worst they could do
with Colonel North is to prosecute him on some kind of trumped-up tax charge.
Do you think they want to try that one on national television? Current polls
say Americans oppose such a move by a ratio of four to one.
Congress no more cares about the President's unwillingness to obey the Boland
rider than it believes in balancing the Budget. It cares far less about the
Constitution than it cares about looking good on television. Congressmen care
about television ratings. Colonel North got them the ratings they so deeply
desired, and then beat them to a pulp in full view of millions. They resent
him deeply for that, but there is nothing they can do about it without facing
the vengance of the voters.
What the Committees and their legal counsels, Mr. Nields and Mr. Liman,
apparently believe is that it was the legal obligation of Oliver North to plow
through the legal precedents of all restrictive legislation similar to Boland's
famous riders, and then come to a conclusion regarding the constitutionality of
his assignment. More than this, in their view, Colonel North was supposed to
conclude that Congress's preferred version of the legal issues is in fact
correct, that the riders are fully constitutional, that they do apply to the
National Security Council, and that the financing of the freedom fighters by
that old fighter for freedom, Mr. Khomeini, clearly violated Boland's swarm of
riders. That is laughable.
Conclusion
Congress is a victim of self-inflicted wounds. The daily display of idiocy and
hypocrisy that is transmitted by satellite to possibly a thousand catatonic
viewers by C-SPAN when it telecasts debates of the U.S. House of
Representatives was at long last seen firsthand by millions of viewers on
network television. Congress did itself a real disservice: It went public,
without editing or commercial interruptions. It also created a media hero.
This was not difficult, since Colonel North, unlike most media heroes, happens
to be the real article. A real hero is easy to define: He is one who
volunteers for a righteous but dangerous job that nobody else wants, risks
everything but his highest purpose, and when he is discovered stands up to his
accusers and tells them that his goals were honorable, his methods were
legitimate, and appeals to a jury of his peers- the millions of Americans
watching on television.
See Congress run. Run, run, run. See the commentators fume. Fume, fume,
fume. The Young Republicans sold a hundred thousand "North for President"
bumper stickers in the first week of the hearings. That sounds like a good
idea to me. A vote for North is a vote in the right direction.
Would he settle for the U.S. Senator from New York or Virginia? Neither Pat
Moynihan nor Paul Trible would know what hit them.
Electronic reprint courtesy of Genesis 1.28 (206) 361-0751


1348
textfiles.com/politics/ontrefug.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

1218
textfiles.com/politics/opal.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

1291
textfiles.com/politics/open-roa Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

126
textfiles.com/politics/opinion.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
The Law Versus Computers:
A Confounding Terminal Case
By Lee Dembart, Times Editorial Writer
Los Angeles Times 08/11/85
Technology sometimes advances faster than the law, creating no-
vel problems to challenge social and legal thought. The Xerox ma-
chine, for example, was a new form of printing press that eventu-
ally forced Congress to revise the copyright laws.
The proliferation of electronic bulletin boards - on which mil-
lions of people exchange information using home computers and tel
ephones - has opened a new and powerful mode of communication lar
gely untouched by existing law. The nation's 2,500 computer bull-
etin boards are electronically published newspapers, and their op
erators are, in effect, newspaper publishers. They should have
all the rights of publishers and the responsibilities for accura-
cy that go with them.
This new electronic medium is as powerful as the Xerox machine,
providing nearly instantaneous international communication among
large numbers of people who are physically removed and will prob-
ably never meet. The technology brings back the era of the pamph-
leteer - and goes one step further: It enables publication with-
out a press.
But efforts are underway, in California and elsewhere, to make
the operators of computer bulletin boards criminally liable for
what appears on them. These efforts threaten to clash with the fr
eedoms of speech and the press. They are likely to be unenforcea-
ble to boot. Legislative attempts to restrict communication pose
serious First Amendment problems.
While most material on computer bulletin boards involves the ro
utine exhange of harmless information, thoughts and chatter, leg-
islators are concerned about the occasional entry that is libel-
ous, obscene or illegal. Should the operator of a bulletin board
be criminally liable for such material? For example, computer hac
kers and phone "phreaks" sometumes use electronic bulletin boards
to post the numbers of valid consumer and telephone credit cards.
A Los Angeles television engineer, Thomas G. Tcimpidis, 33, was
threatened with prosecution last year because a bulletin board he
maintained contained the numbers of two stolen phone card num-
bers.
Beyond its legal aspects, the Tcimpidis case illustrates the
scope of the bulletin boards. When word of the place raid on Tcim
pidis's home appeared on a bulletin board, it quickly spread, rea
ching between a half-million and three-quarters of a million
board watchers in 72 hours, according to Chuck Lindner, Tcimpid-
is's lawyer. Replies came from Japan, Australia, England and Can-
ada as well as from most of the United States, Lindner said, and
a legal defense strategy was planned among far-flung lawyers over
the bulletin boards.
The case was eventually dropped, but a bill is now making its
way through the Legislature that would make it a crime for a bul-
letin-board operator to display unauthorized private information
after he has been notified that it is there. In Virginia, a bill
has been introduced that would make it a crime to put or maintain
information on a computer bulletin board that would help promote
the sexual abuse of children, even though there is nothing ob-
scene about the information itself. If two people sent "Lolita"
back and forth over a bulletin board in Virginia, could they be
prosecuted?
These measures suggest prior restraint of publication, which is
unconstitutional. In an attempt to aboid the constitutional is-
sues, the California bill (SB 1012), sponsored by Sen. John T.
Doolittle (R-Citrus Heights), is narrowly drawn. The information
it seeks to keep off bulletin boards is "a telephone number or ad
dress not listed in a public telephone directory, personal ident-
ification number, computer password, access code, credit card num
ber, debit card number or bank account number."
That may sound like a good idea, but no newspaper could be
found criminally liable for publishing such material. It may be
civilly liable - someone who lost money as a result of publica-
tion could sue for damages - but it would not have violated the
penal code. Under Doolittle's bill, passed by the Senate and a-
waiting action in the Assembly, the operator of a computer bulle-
tin board in violation of the law could be sent to jail for a
year and fined $5,000.
It would be extremely difficult to enforce. How much notice
must be given. Does the operator of a bulletin bord have a right
to object to or question the assertion that the material on the
board is unauthorized? If not, credit-card companies, banks and
the like would have the authority to restrain publication simply
by demanding it. Who has the right to demand suppression?
No matter what the answers to these questions, the fact is that
the law affects only California. It's easy enough to set up a bul
letin board in Nevada and avoid the problem completely.
There are more questions. The Federal Communications Act regul-
ates telephone communication. Newspapers are constitutionally pro
tected. Which rules cover computer bulletin boards - in a sense
hybrid forms? Or are they a new form for which new rules must be
written? And why should those rules be stricter than those that
already exist?
Bulletin boards are protected by the First Amendment, and they
should have all the freedoms associated with freedom of the
press. Laws already exist to prosecute the computer crimes that
authorities are properly trying to stop. New laws that restrict
freedom of expression are unnecessary and harmful.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Comments by Ron Bell, DATANET System Manager: Mr. Dembart makes a
good argument, but I'm wary of the analogy. Bulletin boards rese-
mble newspapers some ways; they differ greatly in others. The
discussion of liable is interesting. If someone prints here
that another user is guilty of a crime, can I, as the "publisher"
be sued for liable for holding the skapegoat up to public ridic-
ule? Seems to me, bulletin boards operate more like free speech
than papers. A great deal of prior restraint takes place at est-
ablished publications, mostly by editors. There are no editors
here. Imposing prior restraint, then, would be restricting free-
dom of speech. Of course, if you're a crooked politician, that
may be a good idea.
 then, would be re

649
textfiles.com/politics/oppropo Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,649 @@
THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION'S
OPEN PLATFORM PROPOSAL
(Version 4 / June 1992)
I. Introduction
Until now the nation's telecommunications policy debate has largely been
perceived as a struggle among entrenched commercial interests over who
will control and dominate markets such as information services,
manufacturing, and long distance service. We believe it is time to
refocus the debate by seeking near-term technological, economic,
legislative and regulatory solutions which will encourage the rapid
development of a diverse information services market and help realize
the democratic potential of new information media.
In the Fall of 1991, the Electronic Frontier Foundation was invited by
Representative Edward Markey to testify before the House Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and Finance on the subject of Bell company entry into
the information services market. To address concerns that Bell entry
into this market would reduce the diversity of information through
anti-competitive behavior, EFF proposed the rapid deployment of a
digital information platform, using existing technology and facilities,
which could be made available to all on a ubiquitous, affordable,
equitable basis. Our testimony suggested that narrowband Integrated
Services Digital Network (ISDN) could be such a platform.
Narrowband ISDN, if offered nation-wide, and tariffed at affordable,
mass- market rates, can offer end-to-end digital service without major
infrastructure investments. This narrowband technology can also serve as
a transitional telecommunications platform until national switched
broadband access options become available early in the 21st century.
With an ISDN platform in place, information entrepreneurs will soon be
able to reach an expanded market in which to offer text, video, and
interactive multimedia services. Public agencies, private
communications, computer, and publishing firms, and even individuals
will be able to access an inexpensive, widely available medium in which
to publish and communicate electronically. Other technologies from
outside the public telephone network may also come to play an important
role in providing digital access, but because of the importance of the
public switched telephone network, ISDN has a key role to play.
EFF believes that ISDN deployment and other developments in the public
telecommunications infrastructure should proceed with the following
goals in mind:
# make end-to-end digital service widely available at
affordable rates;
# promote First Amendment free expression by
reaffirming the principles of common carriage;
# ensure competition in local exchange services;
# foster innovations that make networks and
information services easy to use;
# protect personal privacy; and
# preserve and enhance equitable access to
communications media for all segments of society.
A robust, open telecommunications infrastructure is certainly important
for the international competitiveness and economic health of our nation.
But also, as people become more dependent on telecommunications services
in their daily lives, the character of the evolving infrastructure and
the laws which govern its operation will come to have a profound impact
on politics, culture, education, and entertainment. Therefore, the steps
that we take at this critical moment in the development of
telecommunications technologies must be carefully considered.
II. Feasibility and Benefits of Rapid Deployment of ISDN
ISDN is a platform which could stimulate innovation in information
services in a way that will benefit much of the American public that
currently has no access to electronic information services. Lessons from
the personal computer industry can help guide telecommunications policy
makers in the development of an information infrastructure. The desktop
personal computer represented a revolutionary platform for innovation of
the 1980's because it was affordable, and was designed according to the
principle of open architecture, allowing numerous hardware and software
entrepreneurs to enter the computer industry.
To bring the benefits of the information age to the American public in
the 1990's, we need to build an open, ubiquitous digital communications
platform for information services. Just as the personal computer brought
access to computing power beyond large organizations, widely available
ISDN can enable the citizen's access into the Information Age.
A. What is ISDN?
ISDN (Integrated Digital Services Network) is a technology designed for
the public switched telephone network which allows low-cost
communication in data, voice, video, and graphic media over the existing
copper telephone network. ISDN is not an information service, but a
transmission medium -- a platform -- for delivering and receiving
information in a variety of formats. Crude data communication is
possible over standard analog telephone lines now, but the fact that the
existing transmission system was designed for voice, not for data, means
that transmission rates are very slow, error rates are high, and
equipment (modems) are difficult to use. Basic Rate ISDN offers
transmission speeds fifteen to sixty times faster than most data
transmission schemes now used on voice grade lines. More the just the
increased speed, what is important about ISDN is that it offers the
minimum capacity necessary to carry full multi-media -- voice, text,
image, and video -- transmissions.
ISDN is not a "field of dreams" technology. It is a fully-developed
international standard that has been extensively tested in the United
States and has already been implemented in the public switched telephone
networks of other countries. Real applications have been demonstrated
over ISDN lines. Major communications carriers have field-tested
distance learning applications which allow students in classrooms all
across a city to participate in multimedia presentations run by a
teacher in a remote location. Inexpensive desktop and home video
conferencing systems are now being introduced which run over ISDN lines.
These applications have real value, but are only a small sample of what
entrepreneurs will inevitably produce if ISDN were widely available.
Yet, the promise of this service can only be realized if the local phone
companies tariff and deploy the service.
B. Prospects for Near Term ISDN Deployment
EFF's Open Platform proposal for ISDN is a work-in-progress. We have
received valuable comments and support from key players among the
Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs), interexchange carriers,
information providers, and state public service commissions, all of whom
believe that ISDN can play a crucial role in developing the information
arena for the benefit of all today. To date, we have reached the
following conclusions:
1. ISDN deserves a second look because it can meet many of the information
needs of residential and commercial users long before a public, switched
broadband network will be available.
2. ISDN can be made widely available within the next three to five years,
without massive infrastructure investment or new technology development.
3. ISDN can and must be tariffed as a basic service at affordable rates.
4. ISDN is a critical and even necessary transitional technology on the path
toward the future broadband national public network.
5. The benefits of other networks that are already important information
distribution media can be enhanced by interconnection with ISDN.
More investigation of many issues is still required, especially the
regulatory economics of deployment. Still, we are optimistic that ISDN
is an important step along the path to the development of a
telecommunications infrastructure that meets the diverse needs of the
nation.
1. ISDN deserves a "second look" because it can meet many of the
information needs of both residential and commercial users long before a
broadband network could be deployed
ISDN can meet many of the critical information needs of both residential
and commercial users even without broadband capacity. ISDN is the only
switched, digital technology available today in the public switched
network that can be deployed widely in the near term. For text-based
data users and publishers, ISDN offers a dramatic advantage over data
transmission technology currently used by individuals and small
organizations. One of the two 64kbits/sec data channels available in the
ISDN Basic Rate Interface can fax 30 typewritten pages of text in one
minute, and send a 1000-word newspaper article in less than one second.
Dramatic advances in video compression make transmission of
videoconference images possible today, and all indications are that new
compression algorithms will allow real-time transmission of VCR-quality
video images in the near future. The Massachusetts Department of Public
Utilities found, in the course of its recent investigation of ISDN, that
"residential customers will benefit from the availability of significant
enhancements to services such as home banking, library access, work at
home, home health care monitoring, home shopping, and information
access."1
Some telecommunications cognoscenti view the promise of narrowband ISDN
as quite limited, because they are aware that ISDN has languished
unimplemented for over ten years, and because they know that other
copper- based transmission technologies offering much higher bandwidth
are available. We are fully supportive of implementing higher capacity
narrow band and broadband networks in the future, when technology and
user demand make it possible.
The personal computer industry shows that raw power is not all that
matters in a new technology. By about 1980, corporations already had
good access to massive computational facilities at the institutional
level through their mainframes and minicomputers. But individual workers
had no effective direct access to those facilities. In practice, all the
computing power didn't directly help the white-collar worker get her job
done. Personal computers made a difference in the office and in the home
because they were directly under the control of the individual, despite
the fact that they were anemically under- powered. Similarly, there may
be high data capacity at the institutional data network level already,
but if individuals and small organizations can't connect with it, its
value is limited. We must make tapping into the digital, switched
network as easy as ordering a phone line for a fax. Just as PCs enhanced
individual productivity, ISDN can enhance individual connectivity.
In this regard, we are encouraged by the fact that the computer industry
has recently joined the debate on telecommunication infrastructure. With
the growing recognition that the hardware and software they design will
be severely limited by the lack of a nation- wide switched, digital
communications infrastructure, key players in the computer industry have
lent their support to EFF's Open Platform Proposal as a transitional
infrastructure strategy.
2. ISDN can be made widely available in the near future without massive
new infrastructure investment or new technology development
In sharp contrast to fiber optic-based broadband technologies, only
modest infrastructure investment is required. Digital central office
switches are required for ISDN2, but with the Bell companies aggressive
deployment of a fully-digital switching and signaling system (Signaling
System Seven), the bulk of the infrastructure necessary to support ISDN
is already installed or planned.3 Some Bell companies such as Bell
Atlantic and Ameritech plan to have over 70% of their subscriber lines
ISDN-ready by the end of 1994. Other companies, however, project
deployment rates as low as 21%. On a national level, 56% of all lines
are expected to be capable of carrying ISDN calls by 1994.4 (See
Appendix A)
Many segments of the telecommunications industry are engaged in a
concerted effort to make nation-wide ISDN deployment a reality. Problems
that haunted ISDN in the past, such as lack of standard hardware and
software protocols and corresponding gaps in interoperability, are being
addressed by National ISDN-1. This a joint effort by Bell companies,
interexchange carriers, and switch manufactures, and Bellcore, is
solving major outstanding standards problems. By the end of 1992, a
single hardware
standard will make ISDN central office switches and customer premises
equipment interoperable, regardless of which vendor made the equipment.
Following National ISDN- 1, National ISDN-2 will address standards
problems associated with ISDN Primary Rate Interface (PRI), a switched
1.5Mbit/sec service with 23 separate 64kbit/sec data channels and one
64kbit/sec signaling channel.
Led by Bellcore, the communications industry has a nationwide
demonstration of real, off-the-shelf, ISDN services planned for November
1992, called TRIP'92. A variety of local and national ISDN services will
be demonstrated on a working ISDN network covering twenty cities around
the country. TRIP'92 will show that Bell companies, long distance
carriers, and information providers can work together to provide the
kind of ubiquitous, standards-based service that is critical to the
overall success of ISDN.
Additional interconnection problems do remain to be solved before ISDN
is truly ubiquitous. Among other things, business arrangements between
local Bell companies and interexchange carriers must be finalized before
ISDN calls can be passed seamlessly from the local exchange to long
distance networks.
3. ISDN can and must be tariffed as a basic service at affordable,
mass-market rates
If ISDN is to be a platform that spurs growth and innovation in the
information services market, it must be priced affordably for the
average home and small business user. Here, the telephone industry has a
valuable lesson to learn from the computer industry. The most valuable
contribution of the computer industry in the past generation is not a
machine, but an idea--the principle of open architecture. Typically, a
hardware company (an Apple or IBM, for instance) neither designs its own
applications software nor requires licenses of its application vendors.
Both practices were the norm in the mainframe era of computing. Instead,
in the personal computer market, the hardware company creates a
"platform"--a common set of specifications, published openly so that
other, often smaller, independent firms can develop their own products
(like the spreadsheet program) to work with it. In this way, the host
company takes advantage of the smaller companies' ingenuity and
creativity.
Platform services, even if they are ubiquitous, are useless unless they
are also affordable to American consumers. Just as the voice telephone
network would be of little value if only a small fraction of the country
could afford to have a telephone in their home, a national information
platform will only achieve its full potential when a large majority of
Americans can buy access to it. Therefore, the tariffs adopted by state
public utility commissions are critical to the success or failure of
ISDN.
Since few states have adopted single-line business and residential ISDN
tariffs, there is a window of opportunity to establish pricing
principles for ISDN which make it viable as a mass-market service. The
Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) recently completed
proceeding should serve as a valuable example to other states. The
Massachusetts regulators found that ISDN is a "monopoly, basic service
that has a potentially far- reaching and significant role in the
telecommunications infrastructure of the Commonwealth."5 The DPU also
recognized that the "risks of pricing the service too high are of much
greater concern... [because] high rates could discourage the development
of new ISDN-dependent technologies and their applications."6 The final
tariff approved has a monthly access charge of $13.00 for single line
residential service and usage sensitive fees of 2.6 cents for the first
minute and 1.6 cents for each additional minute. After much dispute, New
England Telephone (NET) based the usage sensitive component of the
tariff on measured voice rates already in place in Massachusetts. We
believe that NET's decision to link prices to existing basic voice rates
is an important signal to other LECs and other state commissions that
low-priced ISDN service is indeed possible.
Studies by experts in the field of regulatory economics indicate that
ISDN can be priced affordably. Dr. Lee Selwyn found, based on data from
the Massachusetts proceeding, that the average monthly price for ISDN
service should be approximately $10.7 An analysis of ISDN deployment by
a leading consumer advocate also indicates that ISDN can be offered at a
relatively low cost to consumers. Dr. Mark Cooper, Research Director of
the Consumer Federation of America, found that average ISDN monthly
costs are now at roughly $7.50, and can be expected to decline to $4.50
in the near future.8
To encourage widespread use of ISDN, it must be priced at or near the
price levels already in place for basic voice services. ISDN line
charges will be somewhat higher than analog voice services because there
are some additional one-time capital costs associated with offering ISDN
service, but basing prices on voice telephone rates is possible and
rational from a regulatory standpoint.
The digital switches which carry ISDN calls treat voice and data calls
in exactly the same manner. A five minute data call uses no more or less
switching resources than a five minute voice call, so their pricing
should be equivalent. Some states may chose to tariff ISDN only with
measured (usage sensitive) rates, while others may also want to adopt a
flat rate scheme similar to that which exists for residential voice
services. The economics of this issue need more study, but we believe
that both options have arguments in their favor.9
Current prices for ISDN telephones, data links, and in-home network
terminators are high. An ISDN telephone with voice and data interfaces
costs roughly $1000. If these price levels persist, many small scale
users will never enter the market. However, with increased demand, ISDN
terminal appliance prices can be expected to follow the steep downward
curve of VCRs and PCs prices. When first introduced, VCRs cost well over
$1000, but now sell below $200 for a basic unit.
Ill-considered pricing policy could, alone, cripple ISDN's chances for
success. We are hopeful that Bell companies with more aggressive
deployment plans will file such residential tariffs and set a precedent
for progressive, mass-market pricing that will make ISDN affordable. In
any event, legislative or regulatory action may be necessary to guaranty
affordable rates and widespread availability of ISDN around the country.
4. ISDN is a critical transitional technology on the road to a nation-wide
public broadband network
ISDN is not a permanent substitute for a broadband network, but it is a
necessary transitional technology on the way to public switched
broadband networking. Though some might like to leap directly to a
broadband network, the entire telecommunications and information
industry still has much to learn about designing a broadband digital
network before it can be implemented.10 Though a first generation of
broadband switches are now being introduced, many basic questions still
remain about the most appropriate design for a broadband network that
can replace or be built on top of the analog telephone network. These
questions are impossible to answer without experience in the ways that
people will use a public, digital switched network.
Some are reluctant to make any investment in ISDN because it is
perceived as old technology. But this is not an either/or choice If
implemented at prices that encourage diverse usage, ISDN will provide
important new services to all segments of society, and offer vital
perspectives on how to design the next generation of public, switched
broadband networks.
5. The benefits of other networks that are already important information
distribution media can be enhanced by interconnection with ISDN
The public switched telephone network is a critical, central part of the
nation's telecommunications infrastructure, so ISDN has a vital role to
play in the overall information infrastructure. In addition to being an
information platform itself, ISDN can interconnect with other networks
that offer a variety of information resources. Cable television systems,
which already provide broadband connections to 60% of U.S. homes and
pass by 90%, might evolve to provide a new digital data service. Using
ISDN, cable systems could develop interactive video applications. The
Internet, an international packet network that serves universities,
government organizations, and an increasing number of commercial
enterprise, has over two million users and access to vast archives of
information. Wireless transmission systems such as PCS (Personal
Communications Systems) could also serve as open platforms for
information services.
III. Guiding Communications Policy Principles
The public switched telephone network is just one part of what we call
the National Public Network, a vibrant web of information links that
will come to serve as the main channels for commerce learning,
education, politics, social welfare, and entertainment in the future.
With or without ISDN, the telephone network is undergoing dramatic
changes in structure, scope, and in its growing interrelationship with
other communications media. These changes should be guided by a public
policy vision based on the following principles.
A. Create an Open Platform for Innovation in Information Services by
Speedily Deploying a Nation-wide, Affordable ISDN
To achieve the information diversity currently available in print and
broadcast media in the new digital forum, we must guaranty widespread
accessibility to a platform of basic services necessary for creating
information services of all kinds. Such a platform offers the dual
benefit of helping to creating a level playing field for competition in
the information services market, and stimulating the development of new
services beneficial to consumers. An open platform for information
services will enable individuals and small organizations, as well as
established information distributors, to be electronic publishers on a
local, national, and international level.
B. Promote First Amendment Free Expression by Affirming the Principles of
Common Carriage
In a society which relies more and more on electronic communications
media as its primary conduit for expression, full support for First
Amendment values requires extension of the common carrier principle to
all of these new media. Common carriers are companies which provide
conduit services for the general public. The common carrier's duties
have evolved over hundreds of years in the common law and later in
statutory provisions.
The rules governing their conduct can be roughly distilled in a few basic
principles. Common carriers have a duty to:
# provide services in a non-discriminatory manner at a fair price,
# interconnect with other carriers, and
# provide adequate services.
The public must have access to digital data transport services, such as
ISDN, which are regulated by the principles of common carriage.
Unlike arrangements found in many countries, our communications
infrastructure is owned by private corporations instead of by the
government. Therefore, a legislatively imposed expanded duty of common
carriage on public switched telephone carriers is necessary to protect
free expression effectively. A telecommunications provider under a
common carrier obligation would have to carry any legal message
regardless of its content whether it is voice, data, images, or sound.
For example, if full common- carrier protections were in place for all
of the conduit services offered by the phone company, the terminations
of "controversial" 900 services such as political fundraising would not
be allowed, just as the phone company is now prohibited by the
Communications Act from discriminating in the provision of basic voice
telephone services. As a matter of law and policy, the common carriage
protections should be extended from basic voice service to cover basic
data service as well.
C. Ensure Competition in Local Exchange Services
The divestiture of AT&T in the early 1980s brought with it various
restrictions on the kinds of markets in which the newly created local
Bell companies were allowed to compete. Many consumer and industry
groups are now concerned that as these judicially-imposed restrictions
are lifted (know as the MFJ), the Bell companies will come to dominate
the design of the emerging National Public Network, shaping it more to
accommodate their business goals than the public interest. The
bottleneck that Bell companies have on local exchange services critical
to information providers can be minimized by unbundling these services
and allowing non-Bell company providers to offer them in competition
with Bell companies.
The post-divestiture pattern of providing long distance service offers
us a valuable lesson: a telecommunications network can be managed
effectively by separate companies--even including bitter opponents like
AT&T and MCI--as long as they can connect equitably and seamlessly from
the user's standpoint. Together with the open platform offered by ISDN,
unbundling and expanded competition is a key to ensuring equitable
access to Bell company facilities needed for information service
delivery.
D. Protect Personal Privacy
As the telecommunications infrastructure evolves, there are increasing
threats to both communications privacy and information privacy. Strong
government intervention will, at times, be necessary to protect people's
constitutional right to privacy. Careful thought must also be given to
the appropriate use of search warrants and wiretap authorizations in the
realm of new electronic media. While new technologies may pose some
difficult challenges to law enforcement, we must protect people's
constitutionally- guaranteed right to be free from "unreasonable
searches and seizures." Fundamental civil liberties tenets are at stake
as long-standing constitutional doctrine is applied to new technologies.
The privacy of telephone conversations and electronic mail is already
protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. However,
communications in other media, such a cellular phone conversations, can
be intercepted using readily available technology by private third
parties without the knowledge or consent of the conversants. In addition
to this, however, we believe that technological advances should be used
to help people protect their own privacy and exercise more control over
information about themselves. In general, citizens should be given
greater control over information collected, stored, and disseminated by
telephone companies and information providers. As the public outcry over
Caller ID demonstrates, citizens want and deserve to have adequate
notice about what information is being collected and disseminated by
communications firms and must be able to exercise informed consent
before information collected for one purpose can be used for any other
purpose.
E. Make the Network Simple to Use
One of the great virtues of today's public switched telephone network,
from a user's perspective, is that it operates according to patterns and
principles that are now intuitively obvious to almost everyone. As this
network grows beyond just voice services, information services that
become part of this network should reflect this same ease- of-use and
accessibility. The development of such standards and patterns for
information services is vital, not just because it helps makes the
network easier to use, but also because it ensures an open platform for
information providers. However, standards development will be ad hoc and
even chaotic at first. Numerous standards may be tried and found
inadequate by users before a mature set of standards emerges. Congress
and government regulatory bodies may need to set out the ground rules
for standards planning in order to ensure that all interested parties
have an equal voice, and the resulting standards should be closely
analyzed to make sure that they reflect public needs. But, direct
government involvement in the process should be avoided if possible.
F. Preserve and Enhance Socially Equitable Access to Communications Media
The principle of equitable access to basic services is an integral part
of nation's public switched telephone network. From the early history of
the telephone network, both government and commercial actors have taken
steps to ensure that access to basic voice telephone services is
affordable and accessible to all segments of society. Since the
divestiture of AT&T, many of the constituent parts of the "social
contract" for universal service have fallen away. Re- creation of old
patterns of subsidy may no longer be possible nor necessarily desirable,
but serious thought must be given to sources of funds that will guaranty
that the economically disadvantaged will still have access to basic
communications services.
The universal service guaranty in the Communications Act of 193411 has,
until now, been interpreted to mean access to "plain old telephone
service" (POTS). In the information age, we must extend this guaranty to
include "plain old digital service." Extending this guaranty means
ensuring that new basic digital services are affordable and ubiquitously
available. Equity and the democratic imperative also demand that these
services meet the needs of people with disabilities, the elderly, and
other groups with special needs.
Failure to do so is sure to create a society of "information haves and
havenots."12
IV. Conclusion
The path toward ISDN deployment requires that cooperation of numerous
public and private sector organizations and political constituencies.
National policy direction is needed to ensure that the necessary
ubiquity and interconnection of service providers is achieved. Federal
policy makers in Congress and the Federal Communications Commission will
also have to consider the appropriate regulatory role for guidance of a
new national resource: the information infrastructure. State public
service commissions will be at the forefront of establishing pricing
policy for ISDN service. The success of residential applications for
ISDN will depend heavily on the PUCs' approach to ISDN pricing.
The communications industry -- including the Bell Companies, the
interexchange carriers, equipment manufacturers -- all have cooperative
roles to play in making ubiquitous ISDN a reality. The computer industry
is a new, but critical player in telecommunications policy. Many of the
innovative products and services to take advantage of ISDN will likely
come from the computer community.
In the policy arena and in relations with industry, many public interest
advocacy organizations have a vital role to play in ensuring that new
technologies are implemented and regulated in a way that promotes wide-
spread access to new media and preserves the fundamental guarantees of
affordable, universal service.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is working to solicit comments,
support, and criticism from all of these constituencies. This version of
the Open Platform Proposal has been much improved with the help thoughts
and reactions from many concerned parties. We welcome more comments from
all who are concerned about the development of the telecommunications
infrastructure.
For More Information Please Contact:
Mitchell Kapor Daniel J. Weitzner
President Communications Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation Electronic Frontier Foundation
155 Second St. 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE
Cambridge, MA 02141 Washington, DC 20003
617-864-0665 202-544-9237
mkapor@eff.org djw@eff.org
Appendix A: ISDN Deployment Data
Regional Bell Operating Company ISDN Deployment Plans Through 1994
(Numbers in Thousands)
Regional Bell
Operating Co. Total Lines | Lines Access ISDN %
w/ ISDN access
Ameritech 16,410 11,400 70%
Bell Atlantic 18,600 16,200 87%
BellSouth 20,000 10,500 52%
NYNEX 16,360 5,100 31%
Pac Telesis 15,900 10,900 69%
SW Bell 13,600 2,900 21%
US West 14,100 8,300 59%
TOTAL 114,970 65,300 56%
Source: Bellcore Report SR-NWT-002102, ISDN Deployment Data, Issue 2,
June 1992.
Note: This table does not include deployment data for independent
telephone companies.
NOTES
1 Mass. D.P.U. 91-63-B, p. 86-7. See Appendix B for an overview of the
Massachusetts proceeding.
2 In central offices where digital switches have not yet been installed,
ISDN can still be provided at lower cost than by installation of special
"switch adjuncts."
3 Though the Bell companies are not required to install Signaling System
Seven, it is the only practical way that they can meet new FCC
requirements for 800 number portability. See Memorandum Opinion and
Order on Reconsideration and Second Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, FCC Docket 86-10, Released September 4, 1991.
4 See FCC Docket 89-624 and Bellcore Special Report SR_NWT-002102, ISDN
Deployment Data, Issue 2, June 1992.
5 ISDN Basic Service, Mass. D.P.U. 91-63-B, p. 34 (February 7, 1992).
6 Id. at 86.
7 L. Selwyn, A Migration Plan For Residential ISDN Deployment, April 20,
1992 (Prepared for the Communications Policy Forum and the Electronic
Frontier Foundation).
8 M. Cooper, Developing the Information Age in the 1990s: A Pragmatic
Consumer View, June 8, 1992. See p. 52.
9 Since the average length of a data call may be longer than the average
voice call, the flat rate for ISDN would have to be adjusted upward to
reflect added load on central office switching systems. However, the
mere fact that data lines may remain open longer does not preclude a
flat rate, non-usage- sensitive tariff.
10 The most optimistic BOC estimates on fiber deployment promise
ubiquitous fiber optic cable in roughly 20 years.
11 47 USC 151, et seq.
12 Modified Final Judgment: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and Finance of the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1989) (Opening Statement of Chairman
Markey). Chairman Markey set the following goal for the development of
new information services: to make [information services] available
swiftly to the largest number of Americans at costs which don't divide
the society into information haves and have nots and in a manner which
does not compromise our adherence to the long-cherished principles of
diversity, competition and common carriage.

94
textfiles.com/politics/organs.fun Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
Copyright 1983
NPG,Ltd.
SELLING HUMAN ORGANS
ISSUE: Should we allow human organs, such as kidneys, to be bought and sold
like ordinary commodities? (1) No, we should prohibit anyone from buying or
selling organs. (2) Yes, the introduction of market-based pricing would help
alleviate much human suffering and actually reduce the overall economic burden.
BACKGROUND: The issue of how to procure human organs covers everything from
hearts to bone pieces. But most of the controversy so far centers on the most
"popular" organ transplanted, the kidney. Each year more than 10,000 people
need new kidneys. But only about 5,000 of these people receive new kidneys,
mostly because of the shortage of available organs. In theory, there are
enough organs. Each year there are 20,000 deaths that create potentially
usable organs. When interviewed in ordinary circumstances, nearly 80% of
people say that they are willing to donate the organs of a loved one, should
they die in a fashion which makes them a potential donor. Yet, for reasons
subject to extensive and intense debate, that generalized willingness to donate
does not translate into an adequate supply of organs. To fill the gap,
patients are kept alive by use of expensive dialysis machines. Each year the
public spends $2 billion through Medicare to support dialysis, which comes to
about $30,000 per patient per year. In the near future the demand for
transplant operation likely will skyrocket. The FDA recently approved a new
drug -- cyclosporin -- which doubles the previous success rate. The demand for
transplantable organs thus will soar. To meet that anticipated demand several
firms have proposed establishing a system for locating people willing to donate
their organs for payment. The firms would then pass on that cost plus their
own overhead to the patient. One firm estimates that the cost of an organ such
as a kidney, procured through this system would be about $15,000.
POINT: These proposals for setting up "organs for sale" networks cannot be
tolerated; they must be immediately outlawed. We cannot allow people to sell
their own organs because that is not only repugnant to decency, it will create
gruesome blackmarket operations. Moreover, the proposals would exploit poor
foreigners by encouraging them to sell body parts to rich Americans. We do not
allow people to sell themselves into slavery; we cannot allow them to sell
their vital body parts. This goes beyond morality. Living donors of virtually
any organ increase their risk of death or disease. Moreover, it does not take
much imagination to conjure up horrible images of hard-hearted relatives of a
dead person selling the body for cash. With the vast number of potential but
unused donors, we should redouble our efforts to stimulate voluntary donors,
not set up "bodyshops."
COUNTERPOINT: We should not only permit but encourage private firms to
locate organs for donation. Provided that he does not kill himself, a person's
body is his own to do with it as he wants. As a matter of fundamental
principle, government must not be allowed to tell a person how to use his or
her body. The proposed private donor systems are not fundamentally different
from firms that pay for blood donations. Few would argue that these
profit-making operations do not help to supply vital blood products. And yet
when originally started, the donation-for-pay stimulated intense debate. Now
we can see that the original controversy proved vastly overblown. A careful
examination of the economics will show that the cost to the patient and the
public to purchase organs is far less a burden than that which they bear today.
According to current estimates, the cost of a purchased kidney would be less
than the cost of six months on dialysis machine and subject many patients to
far less agony. And, costs aside, many people today die for lack of donors;
these lives would be saved if we would take steps to increase the supply of
available organs.
QUESTIONS:
o If organ sales are allowed, how would you put a price on the value of a
human organ?
o If organ sales are allowed should there be mechanism, perhaps through
insurance or government assistance, that allows all people to obtain organs
regardless of their financial means?
o Would this issue be less controversial if the organ seller were terminally
ill?
o Would it be immoral for a person to sell his organs for implant in
strangers?
o Is it better to keep a person on an artificial organ than to give them a
transplant from an organ bought from a donor?
REFERENCES:
FDA Approves Drug to Aid Organ Transplants, John Wilke, The
Washington Post, September 3, 1983, p.A1
Va. Doctor Plans Company to Arrange Sale of Human Kidneys,
Margaret Engel, The Washington Post, September 19, 1983, p.A9
Doctors Decry Plan to Buy, Sell Kidneys, Judie Glave,
Associated Press, The Washington Post, September 24, 1983
(Note: Please leave your thoughts -- message or uploaded comments -- on this
issue on Tom Mack's RBBS, The Second Ring --- (703) 759-5049. Please address
them to Terry Steichen of New Perspectives Group, Ltd.)


136
textfiles.com/politics/origmas1.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,136 @@
THE ORIGIN OF MASONRY
I. From Operative To Speculative
By E. Cromwell Mensch
THE NEW AGE - JULY 1948
The most prolific source of Masonic literature is that dealing with the
origin of the Craft. It is a theme which has filled many volumes, and
one which invariably follows the same pattern to the point of monotony.
Practically all research along these lines starts with the stone masons
of Europe, and ends up with the guilds, or associations, of ancient
Rome. The Temple itself as a source of origin is avoided for two
reasons, the first of which is a fear of encroaching upon the secret
work of the Order. The s econd reason is a more logical one, for it is
founded in the fact that very little is known about the Temple. There
were three Temples built at Jerusalem, each of which was to replace an
earlier structure. The last Temple was built by Herod, and is supposedly
described by Josephus, the historian. He was an eyewitness to the
destruction of this last Temple, but his lack of technical knowledge is
painfully evident from his description of its structural details. The
Temple previous to Herod's was built by Zeru bbabel, a very brief
account of which is set forth in the Book of Ezra. The so-called first
Temple was built by Solomon, and a fairly complete description of it is
set forth in the first Book of Kings.
However, Masonry was founded long before the Temple of Solomon was
built. The identification of our Craft with the Temple came about
through the ambition of David. It was he who realized the importance of
the Tabernacle of Moses, and planned the Temple as s substitute
therefor. Through it he sought credit for the establishment of the house
and kingdom of God. This ambition of David is described in the second
Book of Samuel, but more particularly in the words of II Samuel 7:13,
"He shall build an house for m y name, and I will stablish the throne of
his kingdom for ever." These words are supposedly the Lord's, uttered
through the medium of Nathan, the prophet. However, they were prompted
by David, for Nathan was a member of David's court.
What David really sought was a vehicle which would perpetuate the divine
power of the Tabernacle. That this structure was possessed of such power
is quite evident from the fact that, within its confines, Moses
established the word of God among men. The Word has come down to us
practically intact in the form of the Pentateuch, or first five books of
the Bible; and the House still stands today! Its original form is
essentially unchanged, although some of its parts have been destroyed by
the violence of fire a nd the quantity of water, which have been visited
upon it from time to time. This House and this Book were founded at one
and the same time, and both are an integral part of Masonry.
This particular phase of the inquiry into the origin of Masonry deals
with the shift from operative to speculative, for our ritual tells us
that we no longer work in operative, but speculative Masonry only. An
entirely new approach to this subject is to be had through the medium
which has never changed since our Order was founded. That medium is the
Holy Bible, which is placed in the same setting as Moses placed it in
the beginning. Save for the legendary part of our ritual, it contains
all the factual deta ils of our Craft. When these factual details are
worked out to their ultimate conclusion, it will be found that the
legendary part of our ritual comprises but a very small percentage of
the whole. That the operative phase of our Order was in effect during
the time of Moses is stated in Exodus 1:11, "And they built for Pharaoh
treasure cities, Pitham and Raamses." It was from the builders of these
two cities that Moses recruited the founders of our Order. They were the
enslaved workers of Ramses II.
Ramses II reigned over Egypt from 1292 to 1225 B.C. His reign was
singularly marked by a wealth of building activities. He completed
Seti's Temple at Abydos, and added to the Temples at Luxor and Karnak.
He constructed at Thebes the great mortuary Temple of the Rameseum, with
its colossal statues of himself; and he built the rock-cut temple at
Abu-Simble. During the early part of his reign Ramses II engaged in an
important campaign against the Hittites, and fought an indecisive battle
at Kadesh on the Oront es River in Syria. In these forays across
Palestine, and into Syria, the victor found a means to augment his
labour supply in the form of prisoners of war. They were put to work
building such cities as Pithom and Raamses, and it was from their ranks
that Moses recruited the people of his Exodus. It is specifically stated
that some of them worked in brick and mortar (Exodus 1:14). Any attempt
to connect our membership with operative masonry at a later period in
history is an inconsiste ncy, for it was these b uilders of Pithom and
Raamses who established speculative Masonry when they built the
Tabernacle on Mt. Rinai.
The Tabernacle was really the first Temple, for it was, and still is, a
masterpiece of the builder's art. Every part of it has a symbolic
meaning far beyond anything incorporated into the Temple built by
Solomon. The superb engineering employed in the design of the Tabernacle
indicates that several years of study went into this feature alone prior
to its actual building. Since Moses was a royal scribe by calling, he
undoubtedly planned the Tabernacle in collaboration with an architect.
This period of planni ng took place while they were still in Egypt, for
a great many of its features were borrowed from those to be found in the
Temples along the Nile. Its design was too intricate to have been
improvised in the desert of Sinai.
Ramses II died in 1225 B.C., and was succeeded by Merneptah. From all
the evidence available, it is quite plain the Exodus must have taken
place fairly close to this change in the administration of the affairs
of Egypt. In summing up, operative Masonry flourished during the reign
of Ramses II, and the transition to speculative Masonry took place
during the reign of Merneptah.
The transition to the speculative phase is definitely stated in the
words of Exodus 36:8, "And every wise hearted man among them that
wrought the work of the tabernacle made ten curtains of fine twined
linen." This is the first of a long list of specifications, wherein
Moses describes the manner in which the Tabernacle was built. It is
placed first because these ten curtains of fine twined linen symbolized
a pair of hands raised in supplication. Symbolically, they were so
placed that Moses might tell us tha t no man should ever enter upon any
great or important undertaking without first invoking the blessing of
God.
As a protege of the royal household, Moses was raised in the pagan
worship of Osiris, a deified king. The domain of Osiris was centred in
an underground heaven, sealed with the doom of perpetual darkness. This
great king of the spiritual world was flanked with a myriad of lesser
deities, to whom tribute had to be paid before the novitiate could hope
to enter. Associated with this monopoly of the Egyptian hierarchy was
the tyranny and oppression of its rulers.
As Moses grew to manhood he saw that the beneficence of God came from
above, and that it was the Light from the celestial sphere which caused
all nature to blossom forth and prosper. His problem was to present this
new doctrine to a people whose ancestors had been steeped in paganism
for centuries. To this end he endowed his House with the attributes of
the heavens by making every part thereof symbolic of some feature of the
celestial sphere. This master plan, of course, called for the utmost
secrecy, and w as tied in with a key. The plan itself he concealed by
scattering it throughout all five of the books of the Pentateuch, but
the key was left for future ages to discover. Since every one of the
7,625 parts of the Tabernacle played a part in its symbolic meaning, the
'building of this House coincided with the commencement of the
speculative phase of Masonry.

142
textfiles.com/politics/origmas2.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,142 @@
THE ORIGIN OF MASONRY
II. The House Erected to God
by E. Cromwell Mensch 32 degree
THE NEW AGE - AUGUST 1948
The House, which it was decreed in the wisdom and counsels of Deity
aforetime should be built, was the Tabernacle of Moses, and not the
Temple of Solomon. The Tabernacle was the vehicle used by Moses to bring
the word of God to the people he had led out of Egypt. It was the shrine
around which these Israelites gathered after they had migrated into
Palestine. It served that purpose for something like 200 years, but had
fallen into disuse by the time David came into power. Realizing the
importance of the Tabe rnacle, David planned to replace it with the
structure now known to history as Solomon's Temple. In this replacement
an attempt was made to copy the Tabernacle's design, the secrets of
which had been lost ever since the death of Moses. The secrets of this
design were concealed by Moses in the Pentateuch, or the first five
books of the Bible. Therein lies the key to Masonry, for the Temple was
merely an imperfect copy of the Tabernacle.
There are two sets of specifications covering the building of the
Tabernacle in the Book of Exodus. Those in Chapter 26 represent the
command of God that the House should be built. Those set forth in
Chapter 36 are the specifications for the actual building of the House.
Exodus 36:8 is the starting point, and states that every wise hearted
man that wrought the work of the Tabernacle made ten curtains of Fine
Twined Linen. These curtains were 4 cubits wide and 28 cubits long. Five
of them were coupled togeth er, and the other 5 were coupled together.
The result was a pair of curtains, each half of which contained 5
strips. The total width of each set of 5 strips was 20 cubits, for the
individual strips were 4 cubits wide. This 20 cubits coincided with the
width of the House. When assembled, they were raised over the House to
form a gable roof. As there were 10 strips in all, they represented the
digits of a pair of hands raised in supplication.
From this symbolic meaning it will be seen why Moses placed these
curtains as the first item in his list of specifications. It was his
admonition to us that no man should ever enter upon any great or
important undertaking without first invoking the blessing of God. There
were several thousand people engaged in the building of the House, and,
obviously, only a small percentage were actually engaged in the
fabrication of these curtains. And yet the language is clear, for it
says "every wise hearted man that w rought the work of the tabernacle
made ten curtains." Those who chose to engage in the work were first
prepared in their hearts, or became "wise hearted." They all "made" ten
curtains, for this was the sign of a pair of hands raised in
supplication.
The second item in the specifications was the curtains of Goats' Hair.
They were superimposed above those of Fine Twined Linen, and were 4
cubits wide by 30 cubits long. There were 11 of these curtains, and this
fact has stumped the experts for centuries. Ten of them may be arranged
to match the 10 curtains of Fine Twined Linen. Being above the first set
of curtains, those of Goats' Hair represented a pair of hands stretched
forth in benediction. That this is so is gleaned from the fact that this
is the onl y specification in Chapter 36 that needs to be filled in from
the supplemental information contained in Chapter 26 of Exodus. This
Chapter 26 contains the command of God, and this second pair of curtains
symbolized His hands stretched forth in benediction.
Exodus 26:9 and 26:12 dispose of the 11th curtain of Goats' Hair by
stating that it shall be doubled over in the forefront of the
Tabernacle, and the remnant that remaineth, the half curtain that
remaineth, shall hang over the backside of the Tabernacle. In other
words, the 11th curtain of Goats' Hair was cut into 4 strips, each 1
cubit wide, to form the drip for the gable part of the roof. Exodus
26:13 explains how the eaves were formed on the ends, for it states that
the length of these curtains shall han g over a cubit on the one side
and a cubit on the other side.
The length of these Goats' Hair curtains was 30 cubits, which was
symbolic of the 30 days of the solar month. The length of the curtains
of Fine Twined Linen, which were protected from the sun by the upper
curtains, was 28 cubits. They were symbolic of the 28 days of the lunar
month.
The gable roof arrangement of the curtains of Goats' Hair formed an
isosceles triangle, each leg of which was 30 cubits long. The length of
its base is obtained from Exodus 26:13, which states that the curtains
shall hang over a cubit on the one side and a cubit on the other side.
This called for a base of 52 cubits, for the Court which encompassed the
Tabernacle was exactly 50 cubits wide. The actual length of the
Tabernacle was 48 cubits, which left a space of 1 cubit between each of
its ends and the adja cent wall of the court. This space was
approximately 24 inches wide and, no doubt, sheltered the original
eavesdroppers. No such arrangement was possible in the Temple, for it
was encompassed by 3 banks of chambers, which were set into the walls of
the main structure.
These triangular spaces formed in the east and west walls of the
Tabernacle were called pediments. They were covered with the Rams' Skins
dyed red specified in Exodus 36:19. Like the roof curtains, they also
were 4 cubits in width, and 12 of them exactly fitted into the 48 cubits
width of the base of the pediments. There were 12 of these curtains in
the east pediment, and 12 in the west pediment - together they
symbolized the 24 hours of the day.
This Rams' Skins dyed red was a translucent material, and as the sun
rose in the east the interior was filled with a soft, red glow. The sun
at meridian height came down through an aperture in the roof, but only
on occasion. As the sun was in the west at the close of the day, the
soft tones which filtered through the Rams' Skins dyed red again
permeated the interior. Above them were placed the Badgers' Skins, which
were opaque, and were manipulated like window shades to control the
lighting effects. There w as no such arrangement in the Temple, for
neither roof curtains nor rams' skins were employed in its construction.
The lower part of the Tabernacle was sheathed with boards, 20 of them
being specified for the south wall, and a like number for the north
wall. According to Exodus 36:21, these particular boards were each 10
cubits long and 1 1/2 cubits wide. Two of them, placed end to end,
matched the 20 cubits width of the House, which makes it obvious that
the 20 boards in both north and south walls were arranged in two stacks
of 10 boards each. This height of 10 boards in each panel was symbolic
of the "Ten Commandments . Exodus 36:27 specifies 6 boards for the west
wall of the Tabernacle. These 6 boards were laid out end to end, and
formed the bottom course for the 6 panels into which the west wall was
divided. Each board was 8 cubits long, and the total length of the wall
was 48 cubits. Each panel was 10 boards high, or 15 cubits, for each
board was 1 1/2 cubits wide. Actually, the 6 panels of the west wall
were laid out by means of a mathematical formula, which Moses designated
as Jacob's ladder . This fact was unknown t o the builders of the
Temple, for they made the west wall of their structure 60 cubits long.
The interior of the Temple was sheathed with boards, and obviously the 6
boards they used were each 10 cubits long.
The height of the Tabernacle at the apex of its roof was 30 cubits; its
depth, or width, was 20 cubits; and its length, which was across the
breadth of the Court, was 48 cubits. The first two dimensions were
faithfully copied into the design of the Temple, for it was 30 cubits
high by 20 cubits deep. But the length of the Temple, as given in I
Kings 6:2, was 60 cubits. This discrepancy over the 48 cubits length of
the Tabernacle is prima facie evidence that the builders of the Temple
did not possess the sec rets of the design of the original House. In
other words "that which was lost" was the secret design of the
Tabernacle, which had not been discovered at the time Solomon built his
Temple.

137
textfiles.com/politics/origmas3.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
THE ORIGIN OF MASONRY
III The Symbolism of the Father's House
by E. Cromwell Mensch 32 degree
THE NEW AGE - SEPTEMBER 1948
Speculative Masonry was instituted by Moses for the purpose of bringing
the true "word" of God to his followers. These were the people of the
Exodus, most of whom had been engaged in building the treasure cities,
Pithom and Raamses, in Egypt. They were not a literate people, for at
that time the art of writing was confined to the rulers of Egypt and
their official families. Although Moses himself was a loyal scribe, he
knew that the only way he could spread his doctrine among the people was
through the medi um of symbolism. The nucleus of that symbolism was the
Ark of the Covenant, in which was deposited the true word of God. The
setting for this sacred instrument was the Tabernacle, every part of
which symbolized some feature of the Father's house in the celestial.
This symbolism is concealed in the cabalism of the writings of Moses,
and the key to that cabmlism lies in the pattern of our planetary
system. For example, the superstructure of the" House was made up of 7
bents, or frames, for they were symbolic of the 7 days of the week. This
may be picked up from Exodus 36:27, wherein the e boards of the sides
westw@rd are specified. These 6 boards were strung out, end to end,
across the 5 vertical bars, also spe@ified for this west wall in Exodus
36 : 32. Obviously, th e terminal ends of boards No. 1 mnd No. 6 also
were attached to vertical bars, for they were the corner bars in the
north and south walls, rp,spectively. Added to the 5 sper,ified for the
sides westward, these two corner bars brought the number up to 7. Each
of these 7 bars was paired off with a corresponding bar in the east
wall, and, with the other members of the framing, formed the 7 bents.
The symbolism of these 7 bents is to be found in the Second Degree,
wherein it is stated that in 6 days God created the heaven and the
earth, and rested on the 7th day. The total number of structural
numbers with which the Tabernacle was framed is also given in the
Second Degree. However, this symbolism was lost in the Temple of
Solomon, for the stone walls of that structure replaced the function of
the 7 bents used in the Tabernacle. These bents were designed as
trusses, the patern of which is indicated in the specifications for the
north and south walls. Each of these walls contained 5 vertical bars.
They were braced at the corners with the diagonals specified in Exodus
36:28 as corner boards, and were tied together at the top with the
horizontal cross bar specified in Exodus 36:33. An extra cross bar was
used in these walls to form the eaves of the Tabernacle, and was
supported on 5 struts. In all, there were 14 members in each of these
end wall bents, and there were 12 members in each of the 5 intermediate
bents. The bents themselves were held together at the top with a series
of 60 rafters, and were also held together at the ceiling level with a
series of 26 horizontal ties. In all there were 178 structural members
in the Tabernacle proper.
There were also 67 structural members in the Court of the Congregation,
which surrounded the Tabernacle. In the specifications, 20 pillars each
were assigned to the north and south sides of the Court, and 10 to the
west side. The specifications for the east side are quite complicated,
and, when Properly analyzed, only yield 9 pillars for this side of the
Court. To these 59 pillars must be added the 8 corner boards used as
diagonal bracing at the corners of the Court, which makes the total 67.
The lower part of the Tabernacle was sheathed with boards, which were
120 in number. The 178 structural members of the Tabernacle, plus the 67
members of the Court and the 120 boards, bring the grand total up to
365. These 365 members were symbolic of the days of the year, and
correspond to the phenomenon arising from the annual revolution of the
earth around the sun, and its diurnal rotation on its own axis, as set
forth in the monitorial work of the Second Degree. There was no such
symbolism incorporated into the stone walls of the Temple, although the
1,453 columns and 2,906 pilasters used to enclose the court before the
Temple were evidently multiples of 365, less 7, and 14, respectively.
The specifications for the east wall of the Tabernacle are rather brief.
They simply call for a Door, and the 5 pillars of it (Exodus 36:38).
Between the 5 pillars were the 4 archways, which formed the Door. In
addition, there was a panel flanking the Door on either side, making a
total of 6 panels in all. These, of course, matched the panels formed by
the "six" boards in the west wall. These flanking panels in the east
wall contained the corner boards, which served as diagonal wind bracing
to impart stabil ity to the structure. They ran from the tops of the
corner posts down to the adjacent end pillars of the Door. Since these
diagonal braces blanked off the use of these two end panels in the east
wall, it is obvious they must have been sheathed with boards. This
brings the total number of panels up to 12, for there were 6 in the west
wall, 2 each in the north and south walls, and these 2 in the east wall.
This also accounts for the 120 boards, for each panel was 10 boards
high. These 12 pane ls represented th e 12 tribes of Israel.
This arrangement of the panels is confirmed in Genesis 48:13, wherein it
is stated that "Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand, toward
Israel's left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel's right
hand, and brought them near unto him." In other words, the two panels
flanking the Door were named Ephraim and Manasseh. The 5 pillars of the
Door are now represented by the 5 orders of architecture, although these
orders were actually formulated by Vignola, worthy successor to Michel
Angelo.
The parts so far enumermted are all authentic, for they have been worked
out according to the bill of materials Moses left to posterity. Among
other items, this bill lists the fastenings which held the Tabernacle
together. As it was a portable structure, these fastenings were so
designed that the House could be dismantled and reassembled at will. The
structural members were held together by means of rings, but the
specification covering them is very brief, and is only given in
connection with the corner boa rds (Exodus 36:29): "And they were
coupled beneath, and coupled together at the head thereof, to one ring."
The ring in this case was cast with two lugs, and the corner boards had
sockets in their ends, which fitted over the lugs of the ring. To make
the joint secure after assembling, pins were inserted through both lug
and corner boards. This same type of fastening was used wherever two or
more structural members intersected each other. Where more than two
structural members were brought to a common focal point, rings were
supplied with additional lugs. Rings with as high as 4 lugs were used in
some of the complicated portions of the bents.
The boards which formed the sheathing of the Tabernacle were also held
to the framing by means of rings. These rings encircled the vertical
bars and had lugs projecting outward from them in a horizontal plane.
The boards themselves were joined together by means of dowel pins, in
the same manner that extra leaves are joined together in a dining-room
table, except that they were in a vertical plane. The lugs of the rings
fitted in between the edges of two boards, and the dowel pins in the
boards also passed t hrough holes in the lugs. This type of joint is
covered by the specification for the sockets and tenons of the boards in
Exodus 36:24
From the use of these rings and pins it truly may be said of the
Tabernacle that there was neither hammer, nor axe, nor any tool of iron
heard in the House, while it was in building. These lines are to be
found in I Kings 6:7, and are applied to the stone work of Solomon's
Temple. It is hard to conceive of the fabrication of a stone building in
which no tools of iron are employed. The insertion of the word "axe,"
even though it was not used, raises the question as to whether this
passage was not also borrow ed from the Tabernacle along with the
attempt to copy its design. The axe was used to shape the boards and
bars of the Tabernacle during its initial fabrication, but, after that,
no tool of iron was ever required during its subsequent assemblies.

146
textfiles.com/politics/origmas4.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
THE ORIGIN OF MASONRY
IV Mt. Gerizim and the Land of Moriah
by E. Cromwell Mensch 32 degree
THE NEW AGE - OCTOBER 1948
The fame of King Solomon's Temple lies in the reflected glory of the
House of Moses, for it was planned and built with the idea of replacing
the Tabernacle with a more permanent structure. The purpose behind its
building is to be found in the history of David, father of Solomon. The
original Tabernacle was the vehicle which had welded the Israelites into
a united mass, and had kept them united during their successful invasion
of Palestine. The initial breakthrough took place at Jericho, after
which the Isra elites spread out to the north and south, but they did
not succeed in taking Jerusalem.
Their first objective was to locate the "spot" on which to erect the
Tabernacle, which was believed to be at Luz. Moses died just prior to
the invasion, but he had left certain instructions, which were to be
followed out after they reached the promised land. Among other things,
they were instructed to put the blessing upon Mt. Gerizim, and the curse
upon Mt. Ebal. Neither the geographical location of these mounts, nor
the manner in which the blessing was to be bestowed, were specified. It
was decided that t he medium was the altar specified in Exodus 20:24,
which was to be of earth, or of unhewn stone, and without steps. The
allegorical meaning here, of course, is the good earth upon which we
dwell.
The Israelites found Luz ill-favoured as a location for the Tabernacle,
even though it had been specified by Moses as none other but the house
of God and the gate of heaven in Genesis 28:17. They then moved on to
Samara and set up their Tabernacle and their altar between the two peaks
in that country, which are still called Mt. Gerizim and Mt. Ebal to this
day. However, the choice of this "spot" was far from unanimous, and it
was not long before the Tabernacle was moved elsewhere.
About 200 years later, or in 1005 B.C.David succeeded in wresting
Jerusalem away from the native Jebusites. After taking the city; he had
himself declared king over both Israel and Judah. Israel was the common
name applied to the Israelites of the north, for by then they had lost
their tribal distinctions. David himself had risen to power under the
banner of the Tribe of Judah, which had maintained its tribal identity
in the south. At the time David established himself at Jerusalem, the
true location of the mount upon which a blessing was to be put was still
a live issue.
In the meantime the original Tabernacle had vanished and the Ark of the
Covenant had been placed in storage. The lustre of the Ark had been
somewhat dimmed prior to this on account of its failure to stop the
Philistines on the field of battle. Under this combination of
circumstances David saw a splendid opportunity to restore the Ark to its
natural setting, and, at one and the same time, establish a mount of his
own upon which to put a blessing. He accordingly purchased the threshing
floor of Ornan, the Jeb usite, and this is the "spot" upon which the
Temple was subsequently erected.
It was called the Zion, or hill, which is the literal interpretation of
the word Zion. Mount would have served the purpose just as well, for it
was here that he pitched a new tabernacle in order that the Ark might be
brought out of storage. The use of the word Gerizim was probably avoided
because this new shrine was designed to serve Israel as well as Judah,
and these people of the north already had a Mt. Gerizim. We get a vague
hint of this from the use of the word Moriah, which is commonly called
Mt. Mori ah today. The original use of this word is to be found in
Genesis 22:2, which states that the sacrifice of Abraham's son Isaac was
to take place in the land of Moriah, and upon one of the mountains of
which he was to be told. This passage of Scripture was probably cited at
that time as an authority, or precedent, for the establishment of a
second mount at Jerusalem.
It was after David had pitched this new Tabernacle that he made known
his intention of replacing it with a more permanent structure. With this
structure he undertook to create a vehicle, which, in the words of II
Samuel 7:13, he hoped would establish the throne of his kingdom forever.
This hope lay in the belief that he could endow his contemplated Temple
with the powers of the original Tabernacle by duplicating its design.
Hiram of Tyre was called in as a collaborator, because he had previously
built the p alace in which David had set himself up as king over the two
branches of the Israelites. Hiram was a Phoenician, and his city of Tyre
was in a better position to furnish skilled artisans.
However, the basic, design of the Temple was copied from the description
of the Tabernacle, or rather that part of its description which is to
be found in the Book of Exodus. The builders of the Temple apparently
did not understand the true cabalism of the writings of Moses, for the
key to the design of the Tabernacle is concealed in the ladder Jacob
supposedly dreamt about. In the words of Moses, this was none other but
the house of God and the gate to heaven, as set forth in Genesis 28:17.
In the previous verse, Genesis 28:16, Jacob had just awaked out of his
sleep, which refers back to Genesis 28:12, and, "he dreamed, and behold
a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and
behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it."
The essence of the ladder of Jacob was the cubical Holy of Holies of the
Tabernacle. It was projected into a column of 7 cubes on the Trestle
Board, with horizontal coordinates extending out over the centre of the
drawing from the upper levels of the 2nd, 4th, and 6th cubes. Below
these horizontals, and on the base line, another cube was drawn to
represent the Holy of Holies itself. From the centre of this Holy of
Holies a series of ascending "angles" were projected upward to intercept
the horizontals. At t he points of intersection, vertical ordinates were
dropped to the base line, and they exactly prescribed the 48 cubits
length of the Tabernacle. A 7th ordinate was projected upwards into
infinity, from the centre of the base line, and represented the joining
of the celestial with the terrestrial sphere. This 7th ordinate was the
top of the ladder, which reached to heaven. The cubes were 7 in number
because they represented the 7 bodies of our planetary system which are
visible to the n aked eye. Each of the ascending angles were 23 1/2
degrees", because that is the celestial angle at which the earth is
inclined away from the plane of its orbit.
The unit of measurement was obtained by dividing one edge of the cubical
Holy of Holies into 10 equal parts. The Apex of the curtains of Goats'
Hair was equal to the height of 3 cubes, or 30 cubits. Half this
height, or 15 cubits, was equivalent to the combined widths of the 10
boards of the sheathing, and the upper half prescribed the height of
the pediments. The descending "angles" of Genesis 28:12 exactly
subtended the 1 1/2, cubits cross section of the Ark of the Covenant
below the centre of the Holy of Holies". The descending ordinates
exactly laid out the 7 bents, or vertical bars across which the "six"
boards of Exodus 36:27 were spaced out. This is indeed none other but
the House of God, and the House we proclaim was erected to God and
dedicated to His Holy name.
The 7th ordinate came direct from the celestial, and was symbolic of the
path down which Moses had brought the word of God, for it intersected
the mercy seat of the Ark in its exact centre. This was within the
cubical of the Holy of Holies, which was designated as the most Holy
place. The balance of the space within the House was called the Holy
place, and its several parts were symbolic of the several features of
our planetary system.
Outside the House, and far off about the Tabernacle, the 12 tribes were
encamped. As each tribe was encamped under the ensign of his Father's
house, the encampment itself was symbolic of the 12 constellations of
the Zodiac. Hence, the complete layout of Tabernacle and encampment was
copied from the design of the Father's house in the celestial.
Had the builders of the Temple thoroughly understood the implications of
the ladder Jacob supposedly dreamt about, it is highly improbable they
would have built their structure of stone. This ladder truly located the
gateway to heaven, for whenever and wherever the original Tabernacle was
set up, the ladder of Jacob formed an integral part of its design. The
"mount" it blessed was the mother earth on which the Tabernacle rested.

144
textfiles.com/politics/origmas5.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
THE ORIGIN OF MASONRY
V. The Holy of Holies and the Resurrection
by Cromwell Mensch 32 degree
THE NEW AGE - NOVEMBER 1948
The Holy of Holies of King Solomon's Temple was called the Oracle, and
was sometimes entirely different and apart from thee room called the
"middle chamber" of the Temple. The Temple itself was a stone building,
60 cubits long, 20 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high. Around the outside
of the main structure were three chambers, superimposed one above the
other. These three chambers were designated as the nethermost, the
middle, and the third chambers, respectively. They were narrow,
corridor-like rooms, for the nethermost was 5 cubits wide, the middle 6
cubits, and the third, 7 cubits wide. The nethermost was on the ground
floor level, and evidentl y served as a rob ing room, as well as a place
for the storage of implements and vessels used in the ceremonials. The
middle chamber was one flight up, and served as a storage vault, as did
the third chamber above it. Estimates as to the value of gold, silver,
and other valuables stored in these upper chambers of the Temple, run
all the way from five to ten billions of dollars. In short, this middle
chamber of the Temple served as the storage vault for the material
wealth which fou nd its way into the coffers of the priesthoo d. These
chambers were an innovation peculiarly adapted to the Temple, for there
was nothing comparable to them in the original Tabernacle.
The Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle was a perfect cube, formed of the
veil, and the 4 pillars which supported it. This cube was the central
theme of its design, and the unit of measurement by which all parts of
the Tabernacle were apportioned. For practical purposes, one edge of
this cube was divided into 10 equal parts, and each of these parts was
called a cubit. In other words, the Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle was
10 cubits long in each of its three dimensions. The Oracle of the
Temple, on the other hand, measured 20 cubits in each of its three
dimensions. This increase in size destroyed the perfect harmony of
design which had prevailed in the Tabernacle. In the Tabernacle, the
Holy of Holies was placed in the middle of the structure, and the
celestial angle of 23 1/2 degrees was brought down to the center of the
cubical room. This descending angle was the essential ingredient of
Jacob's ladder, and below the center of the cubical it exactly subtended
the 1 1/2 cubits of the Ark of the Covenant in section. It also did the
same for the Ark in longitudinal section. The 7th ordinate of Jacob's
ladder intersected the Arc in its exact center, and joined the celestial
an d terrestrial spheres. It was the axis about which the Tabernacle
formed a symmetrical design. These celestial ingredients set the Holy of
Holies up as a material token that the Tabernacle was indeed none other
but the House of God. This did not hold true of the arrangement in the
Temple, for its Oracle was at the rear of the main room, and its
volumetric displacement was 8 times that of the Tabernacle's Holy of
Holies.
The resurrection, or raising of the body from the dead, was exemplified
as a ritual long before Moses came onto the, scene. The very temples
where he was initiated into the mysteries contain graphic illustrations
of this ceremony. The central figure is Osiris, who was raised from his
bier at the command of Horus. The departed soul of Osiris is shown as a
graven image in the form of a bird, perched in the Erica tree at the
head of the bier. Moses transposed this into a nobler conception , by
coupling the rebirth of nature with the phenomenon of the spring equinox
in the celestial. This position he gave to Reuben the first born, as the
beginning of Israel's strength, the excellency of dignity, and the
excellency of power, Genesis 49:3. But Reuben was unstable as water, and
destined not to excel, because he wentest up to his Father's bed, and
then defiledst he it, Genesis 49:4. The tribe of Reuben corresponded
with the constell ation of Taurus, the bull. This bull was called Apis b
y the Egyptians, and was part of the animal worship and deification
practiced by them. The doctrine of Moses pointed out that the
beneficence of God came from the celestial sphere, and this figure of
Apis the bull in the constellation of Taurus defiled his Father's bed.
Reuben was named as the firstborn because at the time of the Exodus the
spring equinox occurred in the constellation of Taurus. The rebirth is
now symbolized by the Aca cia, instead of the Erica tree.
It was this paganism of the bull in Taurus that caused Moses to shift
the leadership to the tribe of Judah, from whence comes the strong grip
of the Lion's paw. As a matter of fact, the 12 tribes of Israel
originated in the Father's house, for they all correspond with the
characteristics of the 12 constellations of the Zodiac. Every third one
of these constellations contains one of the 4 guardian stars of the
heavens; namely, Aldebaran in Taurus, Regulus in Leo, Antares in
Scorpio, and Fomalhaut in connecti on with Aquarius. Reuben corresponded
with Taurus, who defiled his Father's bed. Judah represented Leo, the
lion, with the guardian star of Regulus. Regulus is described in Genesis
48:10 as the lawgiver, which shall not depart from between his (Leo's)
feet until Shiloh come. The next guardian star is Antares, in the
constellation of Scorpio. It was represented by Dan; for he was to be a
serpent by the way, that biteth the horse heels, Genesis 49:17. This
designation comes from the fact that the scorpion is the only "serpent"
whose striking range is limited to the heel of the horse. The fourth
guardian star is Fomalhaut, actually in the constellation of Pisces
Austrinus; but the stream of water which flows from the jar of Aquarius
is inseparable from Fomalhaut in this mythological presentation.
Aquarius was represented by Ephraim, one of the sons of Joseph, who
Genesis 49:22 says was a fruitful bough by the well. These 4 tribes,
which corresponded with the c onstellations containing the 4 guardian
stars, occupi ed the 4 corners of the encampment about the Tabernacle.
The other eight were interspersed between - these four encamped at the
corners.
The rendition of the so-called Hiramic legend has a great deal more fact
in it than fiction. All that is needed is to replace the Temple with the
Tabernacle. It was Moses who lived under the tyranny of Ramses II, and
it was such a tyrant as he who struck first at the free speech of the
individual. This is the episode that is enacted at the first station. If
this blow at the power of guttural expression failed to quench the fire
of independent thought, sterner measures were taken by striking at the
very hear t of such characters as Moses. Finally, the lash and the
burdens were increased to the point where the workmen literally fell
dead at their feet. The three stations which epitomize these episodes
may be identified with the three stations in the Tabernacle; namely, the
Altar in the east, the Candlestick in the south, and the Table of
Shewbread in the north. The 12 tribes are still preserved in the 12
fellowcraft, who are assigned to the same positions in which the tribes
were encamped about the Tab ernacle. A ccording to Chapter 2 of the Book
of Numbers, 3 of the tribes were encamped in the east, 3 in the south, 3
in the west, and 3 in the north."
It is a common error to confuse that which was lost with the so-called
"lost" word. This word is one of the most peculiar words in the
dictionary, which gives it a prominence no lost word could ever assume.
That which was really lost are the secrets of the Tabernacle's design,
although, in a broader sense, they were merely concealed in the cabalism
of the writings of Moses. As a matter of fact, the layout of the modern
lodge room more closely follows the design of the Tabernacle than it
does that of the Temple. The central feature of that design was the Holy
of Holies, and the Ark of the Covenant, which was subtended below its
center by the angle of the ecliptic. The modern altar is in the
identical position occupied by the Ark in the Tabernacle, which was in
the exact center of the structure. The token of the "Word" is now on top
of the Altar, whereas in the Tabernacle it was deposited inside the Ark.
The Candlestick still stands at the south, although its lights have now
been reduced to 3. The Golden Altar in the east still retains its
position as the station of the master of ceremonies. The Table of the
Shewbread originally was in the north, but this station has now been
shifted to the west. The modern master of ceremonies would be somewhat
at a loss in an attempt to arrange the 10 candlesticks and the 10 tables
specified for the Temple of Solomon, I Kings 7:49. He would be a little
more successful with the "lost" word, for a clue to both it and the
design of the Tabernacle is to be found in the cabalism of Moses, when
he changed the name of Abram to Abraham, and the name of Jacob to
Yisrael.

158
textfiles.com/politics/ozlaw.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
-/- THe LaW iN oZ FoR YouNG aNaRCHiSTS -\-
Well most of us at some stage in our lives will have a brush with the
law, so here's some interesting truths about the law in VIC, OZ. Most of this
stuff applies all throughout OZ though. I'll throw in some general law trivia
as well, just in case you're curious :)
* If you are under 18 and you sign some sort of contract, it is NOT
legally binding. This means that if you're 16 and you sign a contract
agreeing to pay off a computer over some time limit, you can take the
computer, tell the dude you're not going to pay him shit, and there
isn't a damn thing he can do about it. The onlt times you have to stick
to a contract is if you are buying stuff to live on ( food, clothing,
etc.), or if you borrow money from banks, building society, etc., also
if the contract helps with employment or education.
* When you are 17 you can leave home. If you leave home before you are
17, your parents can call the Department of Health & Community services
and get them to find you and bring you home, or take you to court. If
there is bad shit going on at home though, they probably won't force
you to go back.
* BEING TAKEN TO COURT:
By the police- You can be taken to a court for
committing a crime once you are over 10. If you are under 17 you will
be taken to the children's court.
By someone else- You can be sued by someone if
you have hurt them or caused them to lose money. But you will only be
responsible for the damage or loss if at your age you should have
known what the results would be.
* POLICE QUESTIONING (the pigs lie about your rights!):
- If you are under 17, the police should not question you
without a friend, relative, or independent person being
present.
- You DO NOT have to give your name or address to the police.
- You do not have to give your name or address on public
transport if asked by the cops or gumbies.
- You do not have to give your name and address if you are
driving a car/bike or if you are on licensed premises.
- You don't have to go with the police unless you're under
arrest. Always ask them 'Am I under arrest?'.
- You don't have to give your fingerprints or blood samples
unless a court orders it.
- You don't have to have your photo taken, or be in a line-up.
- You don't have to answer any questions. Just say "no comment"
or something equally corny :)
- Anything you say at ANYTIME can be used against you, even if
it is so-called "off the books".
- You don't ahve to sign anything unless you agree with it.
HINTS: If you are being interviewed or busted or anything, try
and piss the cops RIGHT off. Say shit like- "Don't you ever
wonder what your dog and your wife get up to while your away
playing cops and robbers?", if you get them so pissed off that
they will hopefully hit you, all charges will be dropped
against you as it will be an "improper arrest", and you can then
sue the ass of the cops who busted you. When getting hassled by
cops in VIC, they will almost always for your address, name and
phone number, even if you haven't done anything. Try this ploy
it can be really funny:
PIG- "So you say you know nothing about the explosion in the
area?"
YOU- "That's what I said"
PIG- "Do you have any I.D. on you?" (notice how they will always
ASK you for it, they can't demand)
YOU (playing dumb)- "Why? I haven't done anything wrong. Do I
have to give you my details?"
PIG- "It's just routine procedure. If you don't tell me your
I.D. I'll take you down to the station."
YOU- "Your full of shit, you have to officially arrest me first
which you won't do as you will get into deep shit for making a
false arrest. What's YOUR name and details? I'm going to report
you to the IID and the deputy Ombudsman."
PIG- "duhhh..." watch his face drop like a brick.
BTW the phone number for IID (Internal Investigations Department) is
03-418-1888 (24 hour) DOB-A-COP :)
* SEX: heheh thought i better put this in ;)
- No one is allowed to have sex with you if you are under 10
- If you are between 10 and 16 a person is not allowed to have
sex with you if they are more then two years older (yes
Psychosis, that does mean that having sex with your mum is
against the law. BTW Psychosis is a Fed Informer AND a lamer,
so he deserves it :)
- If you are aged 16 or 17 a person is not allowed to have sex
with you if you are under their care, supervision or authority.
* GETTING MARRIED: (why bother?)
- You can marry once you turn 18. If you are 16 or 17 you can
only get married if:
- your parents agree, and
- your boyfriend or girlfriend is at least 18, and
- a Magistrate or Judge is satisfied that there are
special circumstances.
- You can not get married if you are under 16.
* DRINKING ALCOHOL: hehehe
- Until you are 18 you can only drink or buy alcohol if:
- you are at your own or someone else's house; or
- you are in a hotel or restaurant and you are having
a meal with your parents.
- No one is allowed to let you have alcohol unless it is one of
these two situations. Police can take alcohol away from a
person if they "believe" they are under 18 and not in one of
these situations.
- You cannot go into licensed premises unless you are with your
parents or guardian for a meal. If you break the law the police
could charge you and you could go to court.
* DRUGS: hahaha
- No matter how old you are it is a crime to have or take drugs
that are illegal unless they have been prescribed (DOH! :)
* TATTOOS: wierd huh?
- Until you are 18 you are not allowed to be tattooed (so all
you kiddies will have to wait until your 18th before you can
have "=MAIM=" tattooed on your forehead :-)
* BUYING CIGARETTES: to use as fuse delays ;)
- Until you are 18 no-one can sell or give you tobacco.
* CARRYING A WEAPON: the interesting bit...
- You can only have or buy a gun once you are 18, and you must
have a permit for it.
- If you are over 12 and under 18 you are allowed to carry a
gun (but not a pistol) if you have written permission from the
police. This is called a permit. You will only be given a
permit if:
- your parents agree; and
- you are a responsible person (yeah right)
- You will only be allowed to use this gun with a permit if you
are with a person over 18 years of age who has a shooters
permit.
- No matter how old you are allowed to use an air-gun or an
air-rifle at a shooting gallery or amusement centre (yippee!).
- You are not allowed to carry knives such as flick-knives,
daggers, butterfly knives, or knuckle knives.
- You are also not allowed to carry nunchuckas, knuckle dusters,
shanghais, blow guns or catapults.
FINAL NOTE:
If you want other information on any legal stuff, I suggest
calling the Legal Aid Commission on 03-607-0234.
Well this information will probably be pretty useless unless
you live in Victoria so just ignore it if you come from some other place and
read some of the other cool articles.
.\\orbid .\ngel
=MAIM=
aFFiLiaTeD CRiMe Co-SYSoP
[DiE Trial]

293
textfiles.com/politics/park Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,293 @@
NATIONAL PARKS vs. THE AMERICAN VACATION
by Sheri Griebel
While growing up in a South East Los Angeles County ghetto, my
parents couldn't afford much when the time came to taking a vacation.
We would stay only at campgrounds in the National Parks because it was
just a few dollars per night. At the time we didn't have a tent and
the three of us would sleep in the back of our old Rambler station
wagon. I remember the wonderful chats with the forest ranger at the
amphitheaters in every park and enjoyed all the beautiful sights the
parks had to offer.
My parents taught me to, "take only pictures and leave only
footprints." They wanted me to learn respect for the natural wonders
as well as enjoy the parks amenities. Vacation time was one of those
rare times we were together as a family. It has left me with warm
memories that will carry me through the golden years of my life.
Now I live in Snohomish County, Washington with my husband, Rich
and my son, Tim. The three of us started off on a journey to visit some
of the National Parks and teach Tim the same valuable lessons that I had
learned. The week before the journey Rich sat down and called to make
reservations at all of the places we intended to stay over night. We had
a better income base to work with than my parents had. It wasn't a great
deal better, but enough I thought, that we could afford at least the cheap
motels and have private bathrooms.
Yosemite, California was one of those places we wanted to see again.
Unfortunately, reservations had to be made one year in advance for a
cabin or hotel room. Reservations can't be made for campsites as they are
on a first come first serve basis. I had no intentions of camping this
time around which wouldn't have worked anyway because we didn't have
enough space in the car for camping gear. We did manage to get reservations
at all the other places on the list.
It was a very comforting thought to know we had a place to sleep
each night. Sleeping in a rest area on the side of the freeway is not the
best way to spend a family vacation. You don't get very much sleep that
way either with cars and trucks in and out all night long. I would also
have to keep one eye open to watch for anyone approaching the car.
The first National Park we stayed in was Kings Canyon in California.
The only available rooms were housekeeping cabins with kerosene lanterns
for light and a wood stove for heat. There was no running water, toilet,
sink or shower in the one room cabin. It had a single bed, a double bed
and two night stands. The Parks Service did provide towels and washcloths
for use in the public showers. My plan was to stay in motels or hotels
with private bathrooms but, since this was all that was available we had
no choice. The cabin was all right and it was a new experience for Tim
besides, it was kind of cozy and even a little bit romantic.
The first thing I had to do was use the restroom after the long drive.
Rich and I have stayed in housekeeping cabins in the past and I knew what
to expect from the public facilities. But, I was not prepared for what I
was about to walk into, the restrooms were filthy. The floor was covered
with dirt and trash and the sinks had left over toothpaste and goop on
them. The facility was long overdue for a good scrub with cleanser.
To top off matters there wasn't any toilet paper in the stall I
had chosen. After that I decided to go around back and check the public
showers. Again, I was not prepared for what I saw. The floors of the
fiberglass shower stalls were almost black with dirt and muck and there
was trash all over the floors in the dressing areas. It was disgusting to
think about showering while standing in the crud on the floor but, that
was the only shower available to the cabin dwellers. It was either use it
or not shower at all.
I attempted to apply logic to the mess I walked into. My first thought
was that we had arrived before the morning crew had a chance to clean up,
however, it was 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon when we checked in. The second
thought was, it's Saturday and maybe the cleaning crew didn't work on the
weekends. That was quickly dismissed because the cleaning crew lives there
and does work on weekends, the busiest time of the week. I could not think
of any excuse to make up for the uncleanliness of the public facilities.
The three of us were scheduled for two nights in the cabin at Grants
Grove because we wanted to spend one day in Sequoia and one in Kings
Canyon. Grant Grove is in the middle of the two areas making both easily
accessible for our time frame. While on our naturalist walks through
meadows and caves and self guided walks through sequoia trees we did stop
to use facilities at other park villages. In every restroom I found the
same type of mess. It was a shame to see such a beautiful historical park
with such filthy public facilities.
There were also a lot of tour bus groups at Kings Canyon on that
weekend and it was embarrassing to be in the restrooms with women from
another country, who are seeing the park for the first time. I wondered
if they were noticing the uncleanliness until I heard two of the bus tour
guides (who were talking in English), apologizing for the filth in the
restrooms. They were telling their tour guests, "This is not the way
Americans live, and we really are very clean people. It's just the way the
park has been mismanaged."
My parents brought me to Sequoia and Kings Canyon for the first time
when I was only four years old. I've been to the Park many times since
and have never tired of the beauty and the serenity I've felt there. I
wanted to teach my son the same lessons I had learned, "take only pictures
and leave only footprints." What I taught mostly was the inadequacies of
the US Parks Service. I did not realize how much had changed since those
days long ago when Americans enjoyed the parks their taxes paid for. This
was only the first National Park stop on the vacation leaving the family
with an uneasy feeling of what to expect at the next park.
While in Southern California we visited with family and of course,
went to Disneyland. No, it is not a National Park but it is a place of
fond memories. I mention it only because we bumped into another large
group of tourists from another country. While in Kings Canyon I had
noticed how rude some of the tour guests were but I didn't really pay a
lot of attention to it at the time. At Disneyland the rudeness of the tour
groups demanded attention.
Tim went into the Mad Hatter hat store and got in line to make a
purchase. Four women stepped in front of him instead of going to the end
of the line to make their purchase. Tim said, "Excuse me," but, they just
looked at him and said something in their native language. He thought they
just didn't realize that they had taken advantage of him by taking cuts in
the line until the women got to the cashier. They could speak English quite
fluently by then. Without having international travel experience it is
difficult to excuse what appears to be bad manners in the United States
from what might be a custom in another country. When standing in a line
that goes out the door and around the building with temperatures in the
100 degree range, it's just plain bad manners to cut in front of someone
else.
I love the different cultures and the diversity of the American
people as I grew up with a large variety of cultures. It taught me
to accept the differences between us and to learn and respect the way
other cultures live. The one thing we had in common in my neighborhood
was our low incomes and lack of tangibles. In other words, all we had was
each other. It has always been a fascination of mine to watch someone from
a different country see Disneyland for the first time. That first time on
the Bobsleds or Space Mountain brings excitement and surprise to their
voice and facial expressions. It's a contagious, free spirited enthusiasm
that one loses having been to the park so many times before. But, the
groups of people I observed were nothing short of obnoxious and rude. They
would shove others out of the way to get ahead of as many as possible for
a ride or a food line. Disneyland is not the place to be in a hurry to do
anything. In my thirty years worth of experience at Disneyland, I've never
noticed such blatant disregard for common courtesy.
After spending a few days in Southern California we travelled on
and spent one night in Las Vegas, Nevada. One night was all we could
afford. The room and the food were both excellent and cheap, it was the
gambling that was expensive. Actually, Rich and I are not much of gamblers.
We allowed $20.00 for each of us and after we both lost our first $10.00 we
quit. The money was spent on the mezzanine with our son. We had more fun
winning stuffed animals than we did feeding quarters to the slot machines.
The next morning it was on to Bryce Canyon, Utah. Rich had been there
once when he was small, and it was a new adventure for Tim and me. Zion is
supposed to be pretty too. We were not planning on visiting only driving
through it on the state route that leads to Bryce. We had to pay $5.00 at
the Zion Park entrance gate that was right on the state route. This wasn't
a problem and would have been all right except we had to pay another $5.00
when we got to the Bryce Park entrance. The fee is supposed to be good for
7 days in the National Park. It didn't register with me until we had to
pay again that the two parks were separate and not covered by one fee.
That was a pretty rotten trick since you can't get to Bryce without
going down the highway that leads to Zion. This was not a good way to
start out in another National Park after the Kings Canyon ordeal. It
was just another little bit of frustration, and after a time of being
irritated, I decided to drop the subject and try to get on with the spirit
of the vacation. It's too long of a drive in a small car with everyone
having to listen to one person complaining.
The Bryce Lodge is a very nice log cabin style building. The room had
two queen size beds which was nice since Rich is six foot five. It was not
equipped with air conditioning or television. There was a back patio with
a screen door that we kept open but, at 103 degrees and no breeze there
wasn't much air circulation in the room. I was happy with it since it
was just a cheaper type of hotel room without the extras, until I found
out we were charged $72.50 for the room. The cabin in Kings Canyon was
only $35.00 per night and the hotel room in Las Vegas was only $47.00 per
night and it had cable TV with free HBO movies and air conditioning. This
hotel room wasn't anything more than a glorified cabin.
It was late afternoon and I was tired of the heat and hungry.
I wanted to go to the restaurant in the main lodge for dinner as we did
in Kings Canyon, and hopefully, it would be air conditioned. Rich said,
"We have to make reservations to get into the restaurant and while I was
registering for the room I looked over the menu. The cheapest meal was
$12.00." Spending this kind of money was not in the budget. We got back
in the car and went outside of the park to have dinner. At the restaurant
just down the road I had a grilled cheese sandwich, french fries and all
the soda I could drink for only $4.00. It only takes simple math to figure
out the difference in price for one meal was $8.00.
Something interesting to ponder is Kings Canyon rooms are managed by
the U.S. Parks Service and so are the lodges and restaurants. Bryce Canyon
is managed by T W Recreational Services which has a contract with the U.S.
Department of the Interior to operate several National Park lodges. In
other words with the lodges operated by the NPS the prices are cheap and
the service is lousy. With the private industry management company the
prices are outrageous and the service is good. After all, the bathroom was
clean at Bryce Lodge. Las Vegas, with privately owned and operated
establishments, has great prices and service.
All of us wanted this to be the last evening spent at a National
Park so the three of us decided to cancel the next National Park stay
which was in Mesa Verde, Colorado. The National Park experience was not
worth spoiling our whole vacation and it was not one of those memories
that would keep my son warm on a cold night in his latter years. We
revamped our trip to take us up through Utah and into Idaho to the Craters
of the Moon National Park. We could drive the naturalist trail and continue
driving to Oregon where we could stay in a cheap motel. We would eventually
end up at Grand Coulee Dam in Washington to watch the laser show and then
westward home to Snohomish County. With our new plans and reservations made
we went to bed.
Remember the screen doors on the patios? Our next door neighbors, at
least four of them, had to open their screen door about every 30 seconds.
The doors were in dire need of oil because they would shriek and crack
with each opening and slam against the door jam with each closing. Our
neighbors apparently could afford to spend a lot of money on alcohol, and
were having quite the good time. They talked very loud and had very slurred
speech; and they sure did like that shrieking door, all night long. It's
very much an evening I will remember for years to come. Maybe one day I'll
be able to sit back and laugh at this whole experience. Maybe one day Tim
will find it funny too and this trip won't turn out to be a worthless
experience. That wasn't the lesson I wanted to teach, though he may be
able to learn that all things eventually do pass.
The next morning we were all in a bad mood. That should have been
expected after what we had been through. I was reading the room price list
and it showed $67.50 for two adults, $72.50 for three adults. Children 12
years and under stay free in existing beds. I guess that means if house-
keeping doesn't have to bring in a day bed. Tim was 12 years old and we
should not have been charged for his stay, according to the sign. Since I
didn't make the reservations I asked Rich about the charges. He was told
on the phone children 12 and up are charged as an adult. I was furious by
this time but, Rich doesn't like to make waves so I didn't go to the office
to complain. I did fill out the questionnaire and noted the squeaky door.
It's only fair to note that a few weeks after we got home I received a
partial refund check by mail. The management company also stated they would
oil all of the doors.
Before leaving the area we drove to Sunset Canyon and took pictures.
We were standing and looking at Thor's Hammer, a beautiful monolith, and
I heard people talking about the tour group surrounding us. This was a
group of foreign exchange students; and before they go to their host
family they pick which National Parks to visit. The adults with the group
were chaperones and there seemed to be more chaperones than students. I
also noticed a couple of them wearing a forest green fanny pack just like
mine. It had a silk screened logo saying, "National Parks Conservation
Association", a group I joined for the first time this year. I don't know
what their affiliation is with foreign exchange students, and since they
didn't return my phone calls I probably will never find out. I also
probably won't be renewing my membership with them.
Bryce Canyon was beautiful and I hope it is preserved forever as well
as the other National Parks in the United States. We did get to see some
of America's best preserved geological areas and ancient trees. It made me
feel good knowing my son got that chance before any disaster struck. On
our way home from Grand Coulee Dam we had to take a detour route because
of a forest fire in the Wenatchee National Forest that was threatening the
Bavarian village of Leavenworth. There were beautiful mountains loaded with
fir trees, deer, elk, bear and lots of little critters that either perished
or lost their home to the devastation of fire. It gave me the same feeling
as did the mismanagement of the National Parks, they might as well burn it
down, nobody is taking care of it anymore.
I have read articles in various magazines telling how different
groups are trying to limit the amount of people visiting the Parks. The
tourist attractions like Kings Canyon have been vandalized and have had
much destruction to the delicate areas that were fenced off. We were very
sorry to see people had carved names and initials in the base of the
General Sherman tree. Then I saw for myself that the National Parks are
booked months in advance to large tour groups.
It also appears the working class Americans can not afford to visit any
other way than by taking a chance on getting a camping spot. This concerns
me because it is our American Heritage and every American should be able to
view the wonders and pass the experience to each generation. Instead, the
"saving" of the National Parks seems to have become nothing but a commercial
venture. Our generation can not expect the next generation to continue
preservation of our National Parks if they've never seen them and can not
visualize what they are supposed to be preserving.
# # #
Copyright 1994 Sheri Griebel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Griebel is a Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Officer with the
Washington State Patrol and spends her off duty time operating an
electronic bulletin board system (bbs) aimed at writing and photography.
Sheri enjoys writing about life's ups and downs and may be reached
electronically at Writer & Photographer Exchange (206) 659-7102, Fidonet
1:343/305 or by way of the Internet: sheri.griebel@gun&hose.damar.com
=====================================================================


308
textfiles.com/politics/parks.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,308 @@
FEDERAL PARKS
This had been a very long winter and spring for the
entire family. Our reservations to spend a month sight-
seeing in Egypt have been confirmed since last October.
We often talked about special sites we wanted to visit.
Would we see the Great Pyramid at Cheops or the Aswan Dam?
Maybe we would go farther down the Nile to visit some of the
lesser known pyramids at Karnack. We've had discussions on
what it will be like to ride on a camel. We'd heard that
camels smell badly and wondered about that. And we were
looking forward to finding out if Egypt was all sand.
This trip was the talk of the school which my two
children attended. Not only were their classmates inter-
ested, their teachers had became involved.
One day, my son asked if we were going to visit King
Tut's Tomb. I replied, "Yes, it's on our list."
"What about the curse of his tomb? Will we be cursed?"
"I doubt it Billy." I answered. "That was only a
story."
"No it's not!" retorted Susie. "Miss Slone brought a
special book of Egypt from the library. She read us the
part about when they opened the tomb and all the people who
died strangely."
"I don't believe it." I replied. "People were much
more superstitious in those days. It was probably a
coincidence that they all died so soon after they opened the
tomb."
"I wouldn't be too sure of that." my wife joined in.
"Do you remember when the artifacts from his tomb were
displayed in Los Angeles? I saw one of the curators on TV.
When asked that very question, he said they didn't know if
the curse was the reason they died."
"Weird!" said Billy as he looked at his sister. "Do
you think it will hurt us if we go in there?"
Susie shivered a bit as she said, "Wow, I hope not."
During the past few months, strange happenings began to
make the headlines. Terrorists shot and killed people at a
couple of airports we would be going through . . . planes
had been hijacked . . . hostages were taken. Would it be
safe for my family to make the trip?
We finally decided the curse of King Tut didn't scare
us but the possibility of running into terrorists did bother
us. We cancelled our trip and decided to visit a national
park in the northwestern United States. After all, these
were run by our government so we could feel safe there.
Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite National Park,
Grand Canyon National Park, millions of acres of public
range land, national sea shores, and on and on and on . . .
Beautiful parks, scenery, wildlife, hiking trails,
camping sites . . . Just look at all the beautiful places
our federal government is giving to the people. An ideal

place to spend an extended summer vacation with the family.
Let's set the record right now . . . The United States
government is breaking the law. They have NO power to own
those lands. It's illegal as hell!
The ONLY permission for the national government to own
land is spelled out in Art I, Sect 8, cl 17. It specific-
ally limits ownership to 10 square miles for the seat of the
government (Washington, D.C.) and . . .
". . . over all places purchased by the consent of the
legislatures of the state in which the same shall be, for
the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and
other needful buildings."
That's it. Not one word about range land, national
parks, presidential or other official hideaways.
The only other place in our Constitution where the word
property appears is in Article IV, Section 3, clause 2.
This permission to "dispose of and make all needful rules
and regulations respecting the territory or other property
belonging to the United States; . . . "
This gives them the right to sell property which
lawfully belongs to the government. It allows them to
exercise control over territories which may be awarded to
the national government as a result of peace treaties, etc.
Not a word about public lands or parks. In 1891, they
passed the first act establishing National Forests. This
came about because people were careless when they went into
forested areas. They cut down trees and then vacated the
areas. No attempt was made to plant new trees and rain
runoff was ruining the lands. Commendable? No argument.
By act of Congress dated Aug. 25, 1916, they es-
tablished The National Park Service as a bureau of the
United States Department of Interior. Purpose was to
"promote and regulate the use of the federal areas known as
national parks, monuments, and reservations . . . by such
means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of
said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to
conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects
and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment
of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave
them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
(Encyclopedia Americana) This was a laudable undertaking on
the part of the Congress. Makes no matter, it's without
authority in the Constitution.
Ownership by the individual states involved, if
permitted by the state constitution concerned, would be
another story. For the federales to assume such an
undertaking without specific permission from or by an amend-
ment to our Constitution is unlawful.
Back to the naughty word again . . . Deficits! All
monies spent operating the National Park Service is illegal.
Some are really disastrous. They will admit that all the
money collected from overnight lodging does not pay the cost
of maintaining the buildings. Another chunk to move the
figures into the red. After all, it's not their money, it's

YOUR MONEY!
Reports are that the United States government owns half
the territory west of the Mississippi. How come? The
Constitution is specific on land ownership, ". . . for the
erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other
needful buildings." Nothing else!
Alaska has been in a running battle with Congress over
the past decade to decide who owns the property in the
state. How can Congress tell the people of Alaska the
federal government owns anything other than a military base
or dockyard, etc.? Even then, the legislature of Alaska is
mandated to give their permission to purchase the property.
And to compound the problem, you are subject to jail if
you go on the property without permission. The charge is
trespassing. What kind of garbage is this?
The Founding Fathers knew they couldn't foresee the
future. They had no idea what problems would arise, so we
know they included the amendment process. We should never
look the other way when the government assumes a power for
which we have not specifically given our permission. It's
that simple.
The powers we agreed to convey for government are
spelled out in no uncertain terms. The way for the govern-
ment to receive new powers from we the people is also plain.
We have to make them use the proper and legal means to
receive justification for any act they intend to undertake.
Parks, wildlife and historical preserves are desirable.
They are places of beauty and fun to visit. Many serve the
purpose of sustaining the heritage of our country. Yet
allowing politicians to seize power which we have specifi-
cally denied them is far more dangerous to the survival of
our country.
If we are so foolish to allow even the slightest step
past what we have allowed, the next step is simple. Without
looking too intently, we can see the result of permitting
the first step to go unchallenged.
This is an old and favorite trick of the politicos.
When they are hell bent on accomplishing a specified goal,
they take at least two steps toward the goal. If they are
earnestly challenged, they will take one step backwards to
disarm the dispute. Then they are one step ahead in
achieving their intended goal.
The scenario goes this: "When we passed the National
Forest Act, we convinced the people it was for their own
good. They were happy we took the initiative. No one
checked the constitution or challenged us. Now we can do
whatever we want. And as long as we convince them it's for
their own good, they'll thank us." Easy, isn't it?
As George Washington pointed out, ". . . the constitu-
tion which at any time exists till changed by an explicit
and authentic act of the whole people is sacredly obligatory
upon all."
Again it is pointed out that we demanded every official
of government take an oath or affirmation to support the

supremacy of the Constitution. They cannot exceed what we
have allowed. We all must obey the Constitution and this
includes all who work for government at any level!
A thorough search of The Federalist Papers, shows only
No. 43 by James Madison speaking of the ownership of
property by the federal government. One section deals with
the ownership of the property for the seat of the national
government.
Madison says: "The necessity of a like authority over
forts, magazines, etc., established by the general govern-
ment, is not less evident. The public money expended on
such places, and the public property deposited in them,
require that they should be exempt from the authority of the
particular State. Nor would it be proper for the places on
which the security of the entire Union may depend to be in
any degree dependent on a particular member of it. All
objections and scruples are here also obviated by requiring
the concurrence of the States concerned in every such
establishment."
That's certainly clear enough. We did not say it was
okay to own any property other than what was specified.
Now I'm certain many will say the last clause of Art I,
Sect 8 conveys special jurisdiction to the government. They
can own any property they feel necessary, whatever its
classification. This clause is called the "necessary and
proper" clause.
This argument runs into a stone wall immediately. Two
facts in our Constitution kill that reasoning. One is the
supremacy clause.
The other is the "necessary and proper" clause only
authorizes the exercise of listed powers. This includes
other powers vested by this Constitution in the government
of the United States. The document has to show the power.
NOT whatever THEY think necessary and proper.
The ownership of property is specific and limited.
Nowhere in our Constitution can anyone point to as permis-
sion for ownership of other types of property. This
includes Camp David and a high official hideout on Jekyll
Island off the coast of Georgia.
Have you ever checked to see what these clowns are
required to pay for a stay at Jekyll Island? There are many
others, some set aside in 'public parks', exclusive for high
ranking bureaucrats, members of congress and the justices of
the Supreme Court. Though they might think otherwise, there
are no kings or potentiates in our government. They are
responsible to you and me.
The Federalist Papers are crystal clear on this aspect.
In paper No. 34, Hamilton is emphatic that the necessary and
proper clause pertains only to powers specifically granted.
He addresses the points in particular we are making.
"If the federal government should overpass the just
bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its
powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the
standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress

the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may
suggest and prudence justify. The propriety of a law, in a
constitutional light, must always be determined by the
nature of the powers upon which it is founded."
Madison in paper No. 44 puts it this way: "If it be
asked what is to be the consequence, in case the Congress
shall misconstrue this part of the Constitution and exercise
powers not warranted by its true meaning, I answer the same
as if they should misconstrue or enlarge any other power
vested in them; as if the general power had been reduced to
particulars, and any one of these were to be violated; the
same, in short, as if the State legislatures should violate
their respective constitutional authorities. In the first
instance, the success of the usurpation will depend on the
executive and judiciary departments, which are to expound
and give effect to the legislative acts; and in the last
resort a remedy must be obtained from the people, who can,
by the election of more faithful representatives, annul the
acts of the usurpers."
Usurpers are those who seize and hold a power or
position without a legal right. This is exactly what we are
facing in our country today. And how could this occur
except with the acquiescence and, as Madison said, collusion
between the executive and judicial branches?
Remember the Tenth Amendment absolutely prohibits the
federal government from assuming ANY power which we did not
delegate. There are no exceptions.
So how do we straighten out this mess? James Madison
had the answer when he said the remedy must come from the
people.
Hamilton also pointed out the people must take whatever
measures necessary to redress the injury to the Constitu-
tion. Call the local office of your Senator or Congressman.
Ask where they find the authorization to own property beyond
what is specified in our Constitution.
A couple more questions would be pertinent. One, have
you taken an oath to support our Constitution? Second, ask
where Congress finds the specific justification to establish
the National Park Service.
Do not to take their answer at face value. Check their
answer against the Constitution. Ask them for specifics.
Point out the two areas in the Constitution which have to do
with property. You will hear a lot of silence at the other
end of the phone. They have never had a question before
like you're asking them now.
Tell them you are unhappy with the government spending
money on items which are beyond the lawmaking and spending
powers of Congress. Ask further what he/she expects to do
about the problem. Then ask your friends to do the same.
Letters to the Editor of your local newspapers would alert
other people of your area.
Another way to stir the pot would be to send members of
Congress who represent you a "Petition For Redress of
Grievances." To refresh our memory, this was a right

included in the 1st Amendment. It is NOT a privilege as the
hot shots in government keep insisting.
The colonists had a great deal of trouble with the King
of England. They filed these petitions to ask the King to
correct the wrongs and injustices which had occurred. This
was the main reason they included this right in the First
Amendment.
I strongly suggest you write out the complaint in your
own words. It shouldn't sound as though you are following
something out of a book. You don't need a degree in english
to make your demand understood. Write it as though you were
talking to a member of your family and those in Congress
will understand it also.
There has been no form prescribed for a petition for
redress. Nor did our Founding Fathers specify which branch
of government these petitions were restricted to. Any
branch can be petitioned and I recommend ALL branches
receive these petitions! This right has fallen into nearly
complete disuse over the past years. There is an ASCII file
at the end of this book containing a Petition for Redress of
Grievances. It can be printed on any printer, filled out
and mailed.
A wise man once said, "The more corrupt the state, the
more numerous the laws." (Cornelius Tacitus, Roman senator
and historian. A.D. c.56-c.115) It's our sacred duty to
curb this illegal abuse of our Constitution. We must make
the government again responsible to WE THE PEOPLE.
They are making fools of you and me.
PLEASE READ THE 'SALES PITCH' CHAPTER.
REGISTER WITH THE AUTHOR. 

101
textfiles.com/politics/part-sex.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
Shadow Government - By John Jackson (c) 1990-1994
Partisan sex
by John A. Jackson
When I was a child, I heard hints that a certain sexual activity caused
blindness.
Now, in the light of Paula Jones's lawsuit against President Clinton, I
understand that the rumor was correct, but the activity wrong. It's other
people's sexual acts that make us go blind.
Indeed, the ugliest thing about the controversy over Jones's suit is not the
pathetic assault allegedly performed by the President, but the disgusting
hypocrisy and self-interestedness shown by both his critics andhis defenders.
On Clinton's side, feminists who lionized Anita Hill when she took on
Clarence Thomas have fallen all over themselves to label Jones a "kook" and a
"slut" and a mercenary out for a quick profit.
Even Hill herself has gone on TV to deny there is any comparison between
herself and Jones, as if the comparison did not occur at once and to everyone.
Among Clinton's critics, however, a legion of male politicians who had never
shown the slightest interest in stopping the abuse of women in this society
have equally been quick to jump to Jones's defense. In Jones, they are saying,
Bill Clinton has victimized every woman--and he must pay.
Missing in all this fervor has been the slightest trace of intellectual
independence. In every instance of which I am aware, from Rush Limbaugh and Pat
Buchanan on the right to Susan Estrich or Eleanor Clift on the left, the past
political allegiance of the commentator predetermined what he or she has to
say.
People who see Clinton as advancing themselves or their pet policies
universally acquit him of this offense, as if no liberal could molest a woman,
while those who oppose Clinton for partisan reasons incline with few exceptions
to convict.
(Fans of the imperial presidency, who are usually Republicans, havetaken to
asserting that a common worm like Jones lacks the status to sue an exalted
being like the President, while John McLaughlin, himself the target of sexual
harassment suits, has bemoaned the accusation's damage to the office and
predicted Clinton's exoneration.)
For myself, I found both Hill and Jones eminently worth hearing. Jones has a
serious case. The conduct she is alleging was offensive enough to be criminal,
and she asserts she has
corroboration.
I would like to see Jones's charges tested in court and in public,
preferably without the already initiated assassination of her character by
Clinton's hired guns.
I would not like to see the suit dismissed on some flimsy technicality or
because of judicial cowardice. The public interest demands that the case be
heard.
But that solution does not meet all the requirements of the case.
The nation must have a president who is not generally believed to be a sex
fiend and an assaulter of unwilling women.
But it needs even more the unbought and unbiased reflections of its
political intellects, and those it clearly does not now have.
Clinton may and probably should resign, so that the government will still
have an effective head while he spends his time and energy--and otherpeople's
money--defending the remnants of his sorry private character.
But what can be done about the molders of opinion, the members of what I
will call the commentariat? They will not resign. They are permanent. And, as
the Jones case shows, they are endlessly
corrupt. No honest person need consult most of them, and the nation cannot rely
upon their honesty, their disinterest or their intelligence.
The problem is not new, of course. Power always attracts its sycophants.
Even shadow governments have shadow patronage to bestow. Even the GOP has its
think tanks and its foundation
grants.
But a prescription is available.
Back in 1945, in his essay, "Notes on Nationalism," George Orwell observed
that "if one looks back over the past quarter of a century, one finds that
there was hardly a single year when atrocity stories were not being reported
from some quarter of the world; and yet...whether such deeds were
reprehensible, or even whether they happened, was always decided (by the
"intelligentsia") according to political predilection."
Orwell concluded: "It can be argued that no unbiased outlook is possible,
that all creeds and causes involve the same lies, follies and barbarities; and
this is often advanced as a reason for keeping out ofpolitics altogether.
"I do not accept this argument, if only because in the modern world no one
describable as an intellectual can keep out of politics in the sense of not
caring about them....
"Whether it is possible to get rid of (partisan loves and hatreds), I do not
know, but I do believe that it is possible to struggle against them, and that
this is essentially a moral effort." (Emphases in the original.)
A moral effort? Are we capable of it? Oh, Orwell, you grim man. And the real
sin, as he sees it: "indifference to objective truth."
What I will be looking for as the Jones case unfolds is some sign that
somewhere such an effort is being made. And those who make that moral effort to
see beyond their own political benefit,
whether they are right or left in orientation, I will look to as honest men and
women for advice about other things.
I recommend that you do that, too. You and history are the audience.
And commentators you find venal or corrupt in this instance? Well, write
them off ruthlessly.
Because the Jones case, along with the Whitewater scandal, subsumes so much
that is known or suspected to be defective in the character of the president,
it will stand for today's opinion makers as a kind of latter-day Watergate: a
litmus of their and the nation's integrity. We who write about politics may
imagine that in writing about these things we are subjecting the president to
our judgment. But in setting forth our views we are inviting judgment, not only
upon him, but upon ourselves as well.
Whatever the public's questions about Clinton's character, there should be
little doubt about what they think of us commentators.
And what the commentary so far shows is that their disdain for us is well
deserved.

419
textfiles.com/politics/patriot.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,419 @@
PATRIOTISM, A MENACE TO LIBERTY
by Emma Goldman, 1911
WHAT is patriotism? Is it love of one's birthplace, the place of
childhood's recollections and hopes, dreams and aspirations ? Is it the
place where, in childlike naivete, we would watch the fleeting clouds, and
wonder why we, too, could not run so swiftly? The place where we would
count the milliard glittering stars, terror-stricken lest each one "an eye
should be," piercing the very depths of our little souls? Is it the place
where we would listen to the music of the birds, and long to have wings to
fly, even as they, to distant lands? Or the place where we would sit at
mother's knee, enraptured by wonderful tales of great deeds and conquests ?
In short, is it love for the spot, every inch representing dear and
precious recollections of a happy, joyous, and playful childhood?
If that were patriotism, few American men of today could be called
upon to be patriotic, since the place of play has been turned into factory,
mill, and mine, while deafening sounds of machinery have replaced the music
of the birds. Nor can we longer hear the tales of great deeds, for the
stories our mothers tell today are but those of sorrow, tears, and grief.
What, then, is patriotism? "Patriotism, sir, is the last resort of
scoundrels," said Dr. Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-patriot of
our times, defines patriotism as the principle that will justify the
training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better equipment for
the exercise of man-killing than the making of such necessities of life as
shoes, clothing, and houses; a trade that guarantees better returns and
greater glory than that of the average workingman.
Gustave Herve, another great anti-patriot, justly calls patriotism
a superstitionHone far more injurious, brutal, and inhumane than religion.
The superstition of religion originated in man's inability to explain
natural phenomena. That is, when primitive man heard thunder or saw the
lightning, he could not account for either, and therefore concluded that
back of them must be a force greater than himself. Similarly he saw a
supernatural force in the rain, and in the various other changes in nature.
Patriotism, on the other hand, is a superstition artificially created and
maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that
robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and
conceit.
Indeed, conceit, arrogance, and egotism are the essentials of
patriotism. Let me illustrate. Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided
into little spots, each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had
the fortune of being born on some particular spot, consider themselves
better, nobler, grander, more intelligent than the living beings inhabiting
any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone
living on that chosen spot to fight, kill, and die in the attempt to impose
his superiority upon all the others.
The inhabitants of the other spots reason in like manner, of
course, with the result that, from early infancy, the mind of the child is
poisoned with bloodcurdling stories about the Germans, the French, the
Italians, Russians, etc. When the child has reached manhood, he is
thoroughly saturated with the belief that he is chosen by the Lord himself
to defend his country against the attack or invasion of any foreigner. It
is for that purpose that we are clamoring for a greater army and navy, more
battleships and ammunition. It is for that purpose that America has within
a short time spent four hundred million dollars. Just think of itHfour
hundred million dollars taken from the produce of the people. For surely it
is not the rich who contribute to patriotism. They are cosmopolitans,
perfectly at home in every land. We in America know well the truth of this.
Are not our rich Americans Frenchmen in France, Germans in Germany, or
Englishmen in England? And do they not squandor with cosmopolitan grace
fortunes coined by American factory children and cotton slaves? Yes, theirs
is the patriotism that will make it possible to send messages of
condolence to a despot like the Russian Tsar, when any mishap befalls him,
as President Roosevelt did in the name of his people, when Sergius was
punished by the Russian revolutionists.
It is a patriotism that will assist the arch-murderer, Diaz, in
destroying thousands of lives in Mexico, or that will even aid in arresting
Mexican revolutionists on American soil and keep them incarcerated in
American prisons, without the slightest cause or reason.
But, then, patriotism is not for those who represent wealth and
power. It is good enough for the people. It reminds one of the historic
wisdom of Frederick the Great, the bosom friend of Voltaire, who said:
"Religion is a fraud, but it must be maintained for the masses."
That patriotism is rather a costly institution, no one will doubt
after considering the following statistics. The progressive increase of the
expenditures for the leading armies and navies of the world during the last
quarter of a century is a fact of such gravity as to startle every
thoughtful student of economic problems. It may be briefly indicated by
dividing the time from 1881 to 1905 into five-year periods, and noting the
disbursements of several great nations for army and navy purposes during
the first and last of those periods. From the first to the last of the
periods noted the expenditures of Great Britain increased from
$2,101,848,936 to $4,143,226,885, those of France from $3,324,500,000 to
$3,455,109,900, those of Germany from $725,000,200 to $2,700,375,600, those
of the United States from $1,275,500,750 to $2,650,900,450, those of Russia
from $1,900,975,500 to $5,250,445,100, those of Italy from $1,600,975,750
to $1,755,500,100, and those of Japan from $182,900,500 to $700,925,475.
The military expenditures of each of the nations mentioned
increased in each of the five-year periods under review. During the entire
interval from 1881 to 1905 Great Britain's outlay for her army increased
fourfold, that of the United States was tripled, Russia's was doubled, that
of Germany increased 35 per cent., that of France about 15 per cent., and
that of Japan nearly 500 per cent. If we compare the expenditures of these
nations upon their armies with their total expenditures for all the
twenty-five years ending with I905, the proportion rose as follows:
In Great Britain from 20 per cent. to 37; in the United States from
15 to 23; in France from 16 to 18; in Italy from 12 to 15; in Japan from 12
to 14. On the other hand, it is interesting to note that the proportion in
Germany decreased from about 58 per cent. to 25, the decrease being due to
the enormous increase in the imperial expenditures for other purposes, the
fact being that the army expenditures for the period of 190I-5 were higher
than for any five-year period preceding. Statistics show that the countries
in which army expenditures are greatest, in proportion to the total
national revenues, are Great Britain, the United States, Japan, France, and
Italy, in the order named.
The showing as to the cost of great navies is equally impressive.
During the twenty-five years ending with 1905 naval expenditures increased
approximately as follows: Great Britain, 300 per cent.; France 60 per
cent.; Germany 600 per cent.; the United States 525 per cent.; Russia 300
per cent.; Italy 250 per cent.; and Japan, 700 per cent. With the exception
of Great Britain, the United States spends more for naval purposes than any
other nation, and this expenditure bears also a larger proportion to the
entire national disbursements than that of any other power. In the period
1881-5, the expenditure for the United States navy was $6.20 out of each
$100 appropriated for all national purposes; the amount rose to $6.60 for
the next five-year period, to $8.10 for the next, to $11.70 for the next,
and to $16.40 for 1901-5. It is morally certain that the outlay for the
current period of five years will show a still further increase.
The rising cost of militarism may be still further illustrated by
computing it as a per capita tax on population. From the first to the last
of the five-year periods taken as the basis for the comparisons here given,
it has risen as follows: In Great Britain, from $18.47 to $52.50; in
France, from $19.66 to $23.62; in Germany, from $10.17 to $15.51; in the
United States, from $5.62 to $13.64; in Russia, from $6.14 to $8.37; in
Italy, from $9.59 to $11.24, and in Japan from 86 cents to $3.11.
It is in connection with this rough estimate of cost per capita
that the economic burden of militarism is most appreciable. The
irresistible conclusion from available data is that the increase of
expenditure for army and navy purposes is rapidly surpassing the growth of
population in each of the countries considered in the present calculation.
In other words, a continuation of the increased demands of militarism
threatens each of those nations with a progressive exhaustion both of men
and resources.
The awful waste that patriotism necessitates ought to be sufficient
to cure the man of even average intelligence from this disease. Yet
patriotism demands still more. The people are urged to be patriotic and for
that luxury they pay, not only by supporting their "defenders," but even by
sacrificing their own children. Patriotism requires allegiance to the flag,
which means obedience and readiness to kill father, mother, brother,
sister.
The usual contention is that we need a standing army to protect the
country from foreign invasion. Every intelligent man and woman knows,
however, that this is a myth maintained to frighten and coerce the foolish.
The governments of the world, knowing each other's interests, do not invade
each other. They have learned that they can gain much more by international
arbitration of disputes than by war and conquest. Indeed, as Carlyle said,
"War is a quarrel between two thieves too cowardly to fight their own
battle; therefore they take boys from one village and another village,
stick them into uniforms, equip them with guns, and let them loose like
wild beasts against each other."
It does not require much wisdom to trace every war back to a
similar cause. Let us take our own Spanish-American war, supposedly a great
and patriotic event in the history of the United States. How our hearts
burned with indignation against the atrocious Spaniards! True, our
indignation did not flare up spontaneously. It was nurtured by months of
newspaper agitation, and long after Butcher Weyler had killed off many
noble Cubans and outraged many Cuban women. Still, in justice to the
American Nation be it said, it did grow indignant and was willing to fight,
and that it fought bravely. But when the smoke was over, the dead buried,
and the cost of the war came back to the people in an increase in the price
of commodities and rentHthat is, when we sobered up from our patriotic
spree it suddenly dawned on us that the cause of the Spanish-American war
was the consideration of the price of sugar; or, to be more explicit, that
the lives, blood, and money of the American people were used to protect the
interests of American capitalists, which were threatened by the Spanish
government. That this is not an exaggeration, but is based on absolute
facts and figures, is best proven by the attitude of the American
government to Cuban labor. When Cuba was firmly in the clutches of the
United States, the very soldiers sent to liberate Cuba were ordered to
shoot Cuban workingmen during the great cigarmakers' strike, which took
place shortly after the war.
Nor do we stand alone in waging war for such causes. The curtain is
beginning to be lifted on the motives of the terrible Russo-Japanese war,
which cost so much blood and tears. And we see again that back of the
fierce Moloch of war stands the still fiercer god of Commercialism.
Kuropatkin, the Russian Minister of War during the Russo-Japanese struggle,
has revealed the true secret behind the latter. The Tsar and his Grand
Dukes, having invested money in Corean concessions, the war was forced for
the sole purpose of speedily accumulating large fortunes.
The contention that a standing army and navy is the best security
of peace is about as logical as the claim that the most peaceful citizen is
he who goes about heavily armed. The experience of every-day life fully
proves that the armed individual is invariably anxious to try his strength.
The same is historically true of governments. Really peaceful countries do
not waste life and energy in war preparations, With the result that peace
is maintained.
However, the clamor for an increased army and navy is not due to
any foreign danger. It is owing to the dread of the growing discontent of
the masses and of the international spirit among the workers. It is to meet
the internal enemy that the Powers of various countries are preparing
themselves; an enemy, who, once awakened to consciousness, will prove more
dangerous than any foreign invader.
The powers that have for centuries been engaged in enslaving the
masses have made a thorough study of their psychology. They know that the
people at large are like children whose despair, sorrow, and tears can be
turned into joy with a little toy. And the more gorgeously the toy is
dressed, the louder the colors, the more it will appeal to the
million-headed child.
An army and navy represents the people's toys. To make them more
attractive and acceptable, hundreds and thousands of dollars are being
spent for the display of these toys. That was the purpose of the American
government in equipping a fleet and sending it along the Pacific coast,
that every American citizen should be made to feel the pride and glory of
the United States. The city of San Francisco spent one hundred thousand
dollars for the entertainment of the fleet; Los Angeles, sixty thousand;
Seattle and Tacoma, about one hundred thousand. To entertain the fleet, did
I say? To dine and wine a few superior officers, while the "brave boys" had
to mutiny to get sufficient food. Yes, two hundred and sixty thousand
dollars were spent on fireworks, theatre parties, and revelries, at a time
when men, women, and child}en through the breadth and length of the country
were starving in the streets; when thousands of unemployed were ready to
sell their labor at any price.
Two hundred and sixty thousand dollars! What could not have been
accomplished with such an enormous sum ? But instead of bread and shelter,
the children of those cities were taken to see the fleet, that it may
remain, as one of the newspapers said, "a lasting memory for the child."
A wonderful thing to remember, is it not? The implements of
civilized slaughter. If the mind of the child is to be poisoned with such
memories, what hope is there for a true realization of human brotherhood ?
We Americans claim to be a peace-loving people. We hate bloodshed;
we are opposed to violence. Yet we go into spasms of joy over the
possibility of projecting dynamite bombs from flying machines upon helpless
citizens. We are ready to hang, electrocute, or lynch anyone, who, from
economic necessity, will risk his own life in the attempt upon that of some
industrial magnate. Yet our hearts swell with pride at the thought that
America is becoming the most powerful nation on earth, and that it will
eventually plant her iron foot on the necks of all other nations.
Such is the logic of patriotism.
Considering the evil results that patriotism is fraught with for
the average man, it is as nothing compared with the insult and injury that
patriotism heaps upon the soldier himself,Hthat poor, deluded victim of
superstition and ignorance. He, the savior of his country, the protector of
his nation,Hwhat has patriotism in store for him? A life of slavish
submission, vice, and perversion, during peace; a life of danger, exposure,
and death, during war.
While on a recent lecture tour in San Francisco, I visited the
Presidio, the most beautiful spot overlooking the Bay and Golden Gate Park.
Its purpose should have been playgrounds for children, gardens and music
for the recreation of the weary. Instead it is made ugly, dull, and gray by
barracks,Hbarracks wherein the rich would not allow their dogs to dwell. In
these miserable shanties soldiers are herded like cattle; here they waste
their young days, polishing the boots and brass buttons of their superior
officers. Here, too, I saw the distinction of classes: sturdy sons of a
free Republic, drawn up in line like convicts, saluting every passing
shrimp of a lieutenant. American equality, degrading manhood and elevating
the uniform!
Barrack life further tends to develop tendencies of sexual
perversion. It is gradually producing along this line results similar to
European military conditions. Havelock Ellis, the noted writer on sex
psychology, has made a thorough study of the subject. I quote: "Some of the
barracks are great centers of male prostitution.... The number of soldiers
who prostitute themselves is greater than we are willing to believe. It is
no exaggeration to say that in certain regiments the presumption is in
favor of the venality of the majority of the men.... On summer evenings
Hyde Park and the neighborhood of Albert Gate are full of guardsmen and
others plying a lively trade, and with little disguise, in uniform or
out.... In most cases the proceeds form a comfortable addition to Tommy
Atkins' pocket money."
To what extent this perversion has eaten its way into the army and
navy can best be judged from the fact that special houses exist for this
form of prostitution. The practice is not limited to England; it is
universal. "Soldiers are no less sought after in France than in England or
in Germany, and special houses for military prostitution exist both in
Paris and the garrison towns."
Had Mr. Havelock Ellis included America in his investigation of sex
perversion, he would have found that the same conditions prevail in our
army and navy as in those of other countries. The growth of the standing
army inevitably adds to the spread of sex perversion; the barracks are the
incubators.
Aside from the sexual effects of barrack life, it also tends to
unfit the soldier for useful labor after leaving the army. Men, skilled in
a trade, seldom enter the army or navy, but even they, after a military
experience, find themselves totally unfitted for their former occupations.
Having acquired habits of idleness and a taste for excitement and
adventure, no peaceful pursuit can content them. Released from the army,
they can turn to no useful work. But it is usually the social riff-raff,
discharged prisoners and the like, whom either the struggle for life or
their own inclination drives into the ranks. These, their military term
over, again turn to their former life of crime, more brutalized and
degraded than before. It is a well-known fact that in our prisons there is
a goodly number of ex-soldiers; while, on the other hand, the army and navy
are to a great extent plied with ex-convicts.
Of all the evil results I have just described none seems to me so
detrimental to human integrity as the spirit patriotism has produced in the
case of Private William Buwalda. Because he foolishly believed that one can
be a soldier and exercise his rights as a man at the same time, the
military authorities punished him severely. True, he had served his country
fifteen years, during which time his record was unimpeachable. According to
Gen. Funston, who reduced Buwalda's sentence to three years, "the first
duty of an officer or an enlisted man is unquestioned obedience and loyalty
to the government, and it makes no difference whether he approves of that
government or not." Thus Funston stamps the true character of allegiance.
According to him, entrance into the army abrogates the principles of the
Declaration of Independence.
What a strange development of patriotism that turns a thinking
being into a loyal machine !
In justification of this most outrageous sentence of Buwalda, Gen.
Funston tells the American people that the soldier's action was "a serious
crime equal to treason." Now, what did this "terrible crime" really consist
of ? Simply in this: William Buwalda was one of fifteen hundred people who
attended a public meeting in San Francisco; and, oh, horrors, he shook
hands with the speaker, Emma Goldman. A terrible crime, indeed, which the
General calls "a great military offense, infinitely worse than desertion."
Can there be a greater indictment against patriotism than that it
will thus brand a man a criminal, throw him into prison, and rob him of the
results of fifteen years of faithful service?
Buwalda gave to his country the best years of his life and his very
manhood. But all that was as nothing. Patriotism is inexorable and, like
all insatiable monsters, demands all or nothing. It does not admit that a
soldier is also a human being, who has a right to his own feelings and
opinions, his own inclinations and ideas. No, patriotism can not admit of
that. That is the lesson which Buwalda was made to learn; made to learn at
a rather costly, though not at a useless price. When he returned to
freedom, he had lost his position in the army, but he regained his
self-respect. After all, that is worth three years of imprisonment.
A writer on the military conditions of America, in a recent
article, commented on the power of the military man over the civilian in
Germany. He said, among other things, that if our Republic had no other
meaning than to guarantee all citizens equal rights, it would have just
cause for existence. I am convinced that the writer was not in Colorado
during the patriotic regime of General Bell. He probably would have changed
his mind had he seen how, in the name of patriotism and the Republic, men
were thrown into bull-pens, dragged about, driven across the border, and
subjected to all kinds of indignities. Nor is that Colorado incident the
only one in the growth of military power in the United States. There is
hardly a strike where troops and militia do not come to the rescue of those
in power, and where they do not act as arrogantly and brutally as do the
men wearing the Kaiser's uniform. Then, too, we have the Dick military law.
Had the writer forgotten that?
A great misfortune with most of our writers is that they are
absolutely ignorant on current events, or that, lacking honesty, they will
not speak of these matters. And so it has come to pass that the Dick
military law was rushed through Congress with little discussion and still
less publicity,Ha law which gives the President the power to turn a
peaceful citizen into a bloodthirsty man-killer, supposedly for the defense
of the country, in reality for the protection of the interests of that
particular party whose mouthpiece the President happens to be.
Our writer claims that militarism can never become such a power in
America as abroad, since it is voluntary with us, while compulsory in the
Old World. Two very important facts, however, the gentleman forgets to
consider. First, that conscription has created in Europe a deep-seated
hatred of militarism among all classes of society. Thousands of young
recruits enlist under protest and, once in the army, they will use every
possible means to desert. Second, that it is the compulsory feature of
militarism which has created a tremendous anti-militarist movement, feared
by European Powers far more than anything else. After all, the greatest
bulwark of capitalism is militarism. The very moment the latter is
undermined, capitalism will totter. True, we have no conscription; that is,
men are not usually forced to enlist in the army, but we have developed a
far more exacting and rigid forceHnecessity. Is it not a fact that during
industrial depressions there is a tremendous increase in the number of
enlistments ? The trade of militarism may not be either lucrative or
honorable, but it is better than tramping the country in search of work,
standing in the bread line, or sleeping in municipal lodging houses. After
all, it means thirteen dollars per month, three meals a day, and a place to
sleep. Yet even necessity is not sufficiently strong a factor to bring into
the army an element of character and manhood. No wonder our military
authorities complain of the "poor material" enlisting in the army and navy.
This admission is a very encouraging sign. It proves that there is still
enough of the spirit of independence and love of liberty left in the
average American to risk starvation rather than don the uniform.
Thinking men and women the world over are beginning to realize that
patriotism is too narrow and limited a conception to meet the necessities
of our time. The centralization of power has brought into being an
international feeling of solidarity among the oppressed nations of the
world; a solidarity which represents a greater harmony of interests between
the workingman of America and his brothers abroad than between the American
miner and his exploiting compatriot; a solidarity which fears not foreign
invasion, because it is bringing all the workers to the point when they
will say to their masters, "Go and do your own killing. We have done it
long enough for you."
This solidarity is awakening the consciousness of even the soldiers, they,
too, being flesh of the flesh of the great human family. A solidarity that
has proven infallible more than once during past struggles, and which has
been the impetus inducing the Parisian soldiers, during the Commune of
1871, to refuse to obey when ordered to shoot their brothers. It has given
courage to the men who mutinied on Russian warships during recent years. It
will eventually bring about the uprising of all the oppressed and
downtrodden against their international exploiters.
The proletariat of Europe has realized the great force of that
solidarity and has, as a result, inaugurated a war against patriotism and
its bloody spectre, militarism. Thousands of men fill the prisons of
France, Germany, Russia, and the Scandinavian countries, because they dared
to defy the ancient superstition. Nor is the movement limited to the
working class; it has embraced representatives in all stations of life, its
chief exponents being men and women prominent in art, science, and letters.
America will have to follow suit. The spirit of militarism has
already permeated all walks of life. Indeed, I am convinced that militarism
is growing a greater danger here than anywhere else, because of the many
bribes capitalism holds out to those whom it wishes to destroy.
The beginning has already been made in the schools. Evidently the
government holds to the Jesuitical conception, "Give me the child mind, and
I will mould the man." Children are trained in military tactics, the glory
of military achievements extolled in the curriculum, and the youthful minds
perverted to suit the government. Further, the youth of the country is
appealed to in glaring posters to join the army and navy. "A fine chance to
see the world !" cries the governmental huckster. Thus innocent boys are
morally shanghaied into patriotism, and the military Moloch strides
conquering through the Nation.
The American workingman has suffered so much at the hands of the
soldier, State and Federal, that he is quite justified in his disgust with,
and his opposition to, the uniformed parasite. However, mere denunciation
will not solve this great problem. What we need is a propaganda of
education for the soldier: antipatriotic literature that will enlighten him
as to the real horrors of his trade, and that will awaken his consciousness
to his true relation to the man to whose labor he owes his very existence.
It is precisely this that the authorities fear most. It is already high
treason for a soldier to attend a radical meeting. No doubt they will also
stamp it high treason for a soldier to read a radical pamphlet. But, then,
has not authority from time immemorial stamped every step of progress as
treasonable ? Those, however, who earnestly strive for social
reconstruction can well afford to face all that; for it is probably even
more important to carry the truth into the barracks than into the factory.
When we have undermined the patriotic lie, we shall have cleared the path
for that great structure wherein all nationalities shall be united into a
universal brotherhood,Ha truly FREE SOCIETY.

214
textfiles.com/politics/pc1988.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
(EDITOR'S NOTE: A NATIONAL PANEL OF MEDIA EXPERTS ANNUALLY SELECTS
THE TOP TEN UNDER-REPORTED NEWS STORIES OF THE YEAR)
AMERICA'S INFORMATION MONOPOLY
TOPS UNDER-REPORTED NEWS STORIES OF 1987
ROHNERT PARK -- The rapidly increasing concentration of media
ownership in America and its impact on a free society topped the list of 25
overlooked issues of 1987 according to a national panel of media experts.
The second most undercovered story of the year, cited by Project
Censored, concerned the mounting evidence of a large-scale contra/CIA drug
smuggling network.
Now in its 12th year, Project Censored, a national media research
effort conducted annually at Sonoma State University, California, locates
stories about significant issues which are not widely publicized by the
national news media.
Following are the top ten under-reported news stories of 1987 as
announced by project director Carl Jensen, professor of communication
studies at Sonoma State University:
1. The Information Monopoly. Media expert Ben Bagdikian found that
in 1987 just 29 corporations controlled half or more of the media business
in America. Wall Street analysts of the media predict that only half a
dozen giant firms will control most of our media by the 1990s. The impact
of this information cartel on a free society is ignored by the mass media.
2. The U.S. and Its Contra/Drug Connection. An investigation
by the Christic Institute, along with testimony before Congressional
committees last year, revealed a startling picture of large-scale drug
trafficking under the auspices of the U.S. government/contra supply
network. In the midst of Nancy Reagan's well-publicized "Just Say No" to
drugs campaign, the mainstream media failed to expose the contra gun-
running operation that provided a safe conduit for drugs into the U.S.
3. Unreported Worldwide Nuclear Accidents. In 1987, the West German
weekly DER SPIEGEL published secret nuclear reactor accident reports
compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The reports, translated
into English and published in a small circulation U.S. publication, were
ignored by the major media. DER SPIEGEL said that "a meltdown was a real
possibility" in several of the accidents and warned that human error is
most prevalent in North America.
4. Reagan's Mania for Secrecy. Even though President Reagan
proclaimed 1987 the "Year of the Reader," three major reports published in
1987 charged that because of the Reagan administration's penchant for
secrecy, there was less to read last year. The reports detail how a massive
network of executive orders, secret directives, and administrative edicts
institutionalized secrecy throughout the government and put unprecedented
controls on information available to the public.
5. George Bush's Role in the Iran Arms Deal. Evidence surfaced last
year which indicates that Vice President Bush, far more than President
Reagan, promoted the Iran arms initiative, took part in secret
negotiations, and conferred upon Oliver North the secret powers to carry it
out. The evidence suggests that Bush supported the Iran arms sales because
of an economic motive
-- the desire to stabilize dropping oil prices.
6. Biowarfare Research in University Laboratories. Overshadowed by
Star Wars, the push toward biowarfare has been one of the Reagan
administration's best kept secrets. Despite an international agreement
which bans the development of germ-warfare agents, the Pentagon's research
budget for infectious diseases and toxins has increased tenfold since
fiscal '81 and most of the '86 budget of $42 million went to 24 U.S.
university campuses where the world's most deadly organisms are being
cultured in campus labs.
7. Biased Press Coverage of Arias Peace Plan. Two studies monitoring
U.S. press coverage of the Arias peace plan found significant bias in the
coverage. The New York-based Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting group
concluded that the study showed how "Reagan's obsession with Nicaragua has
turned into a media obsession." The other study, by the Media Alliance, a
San Francisco-based group of media professionals, concluded that most of
the newspapers studied followed the Reagan administration's direction as to
what deserved coverage in Central America.
8. Dumping Our Toxic Wastes on the Third World. Exporting hazardous
and toxic wastes to Third World countries is a growth industry. The
exported material includes heavy metal residues and chemical-contaminated
wastes, pharmaceutical refuse, and municipal sewage sludge and incinerator
ash. The risks for countries that accept our wastes range from
contamination of groundwater and crops to birth defects and cancer. Since
we import food from some of these same countries, our exported hazardous
wastes could easily end up on our own dinner tables.
9. The Censored Report of Torture in El Salvador. A 165-page report
smuggled out of the Mariona men's prison in El Salvador by the Human Rights
Commission of El Salvador, documents the "routine" use of at least 40 kinds
of torture on political prisoners. Prisoners are systematically tortured by
Salvadoran police forces who are trained and occasionally supervised by
American military advisers. The use of torture reportedly is part of the
U.S. counterinsurgency program in El Salvador.
10. Project Galileo Shuttle to Carry Lethal Plutonium. Despite dire
scientific warnings of a possible disaster, NASA is pursuing plans to
launch the Project Galileo shuttle space probe with 49 pounds of plutonium
on it. Theoretically, one pound of plutonium, evenly distributed, could
give everyone on the planet a fatal case of lung cancer. Critics of the
plan claim that putting Galileo's plutonium payload into space is both
risky and unnecessary.
The other 15 under-reported stories of 1987 were: U.S. Sends Bullets
to Starving Children in Honduras; Decline in Genetic Diversity: Global
Disaster in the Making; The United States: An International Outlaw; The
Tragedy of Grenada Since October 25, 1983; The FBI Tries To Turn America's
Librarians Into Spies; Reagan's 1980 "October Surprise" -- Arms For
Hostages; Oliver North's Secret Plan to Declare Martial Law; Non-ionizing
Radiation and Public Health/Safety Hazards; Glowing Outlook For Food
Irradiation Business; The Growth of Economic Apartheid in America; OMB
Compiling Nationwide Blacklist of Grant Violators; Roundup: the World's
Most Popular Weed Killer; Puerto Rico: The Revolution at Our Doorstep;
Congressional Conflict of Interest: "Company" Man Probes Contras; Millions
of America's Animals Tested, Maimed, and Killed Annually.
PROJECT CENSORED JUDGES
The panel of jurors who selected the top ten stories were: Dr. Donna
Allen, founding editor of MEDIA REPORT TO WOMEN; Ben Bagdikian, Dean,
Graduate School of Journalism, University of California, Berkeley; Noam
Chomsky, professor, Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology; John Kenneth Galbraith, economist, Harvard University; George
Gerbner, professor, Annenberg School of Communications, University of
Pennsylvania; Nicholas Johnson, professor, College of Law, University of
Iowa; Charles L. Klotzer, editor and publisher, THE ST. LOUIS JOURNALISM
REVIEW; Brad Knickerbocker, national news editor, THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
MONITOR;
Judith Krug, Director, Office for Intellectual Freedom, American
Library Association; Bill Moyers, Executive Editor, Public Affairs
Television; Jack L. Nelson, professor, Graduate School of Education,
Rutgers University; Herbert I. Schiller, Professor of Communication,
University of California, San Diego; George Seldes, America's Emeritus
Journalist and author of THE GREAT THOUGHTS; Sheila Rabb Weidenfeld,
president, D.C. Productions; Mortimer B. Zuckerman, Chairman and Editor-
in-Chief, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT.
Sonoma State University student researchers participating in the
nationwide research effort were Frances Caballo, Carolina Clare, Morley
Cowan, Nana Nash, Mark Pierson, Lance Plaza, Kevin W.Rose, Roxanne
Turnage, and Kelly Wendt.
Jensen, who originated the media research project in 1976, said "The
increasing centralization of information sources, combined with the Reagan
administration's mania for secrecy, significantly reduced the flow of
information to the American people last year. Each of the stories cited
above should have been on the front page of every newspaper and on every
network news program in the country. The fact that they weren't suggests
there is an effective covert form of censorship in America."
Anyone interested in nominating a 1988 story for next year's project
can send a copy of the story to Carl Jensen, Project Censored, Sonoma State
University, Rohnert Park, CA 94928.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: SIDEBAR STORY FOLLOWS)
INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS AND MEDIA
CITED FOR EXPOSING "CENSORED" STORIES
Following are the investigative journalists and media cited by Project
Censored for exploring the top ten issues overlooked or under-reported by
the national news media in 1987:
1. The Information Monopoly -- EXTRA!, 6/87, "The 26 corporations
that own our media," and MULTINATIONAL MONITOR, 9/87, "The Media Brokers,"
both by Ben Bagdikian; UTNE READER, 1/88, Censorship in Publishing," by
Lynette Lamb.
2. The U.S. and Its Contra/Drug Connection -- THE CHRISTIC INSTITUTE
SPECIAL REPORT, 11/87, "The Contra-Drug Connection" by Daniel P. Sheehan;
NEWSDAY, 6/28/87, "Witness: Contras Got Drug Cash," by Knut Royce; THE
NATION, 9/5/87, "How the Drug Czar Got Away," by Martin A. Lee; IN THESE
TIMES, 4/15/87, "CIA, contras hooked on drug money," by Vince Bielski and
Dennis Bernstein.
3. Unreported Worldwide Nuclear Accidents -- EARTH ISLAND JOURNAL,
Summer, 1987, "Secret Documents Reveal Nuclear Accidents Worldwide," by Gar
Smith with Hans Hollitscher; EXTRA!, 6/87, "Nuclear Broadcasting Company."
4. Reagan's Mania for Secrecy -- THE NATION, 5/23/87, "History
Deleted;" GOVERNMENT SECRECY: DECISIONS WITHOUT DEMOCRACY, 12/87, by People
For The American Way; FYI MEDIA ALERT 1987, 3/87, "The Reagan
Administration & The News Media," by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of
the Press; THE AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, Washington Office, "Less
Access to Less Information By and About the U.S. Government: IX," 12/87, by
Anne A. Heanue.
5. George Bush's Role in the Iran Arms Deal -- PACIFIC NEWS SERVICE,
12/21/87, "Bush had oil policy interest in promoting Iran arms deals," by
Peter Dale Scott.
6. Biowarfare Research in University Laboratories -- ISTHMUS,
10/9/87, "Biowarfare and the UW," by Richard Jannaccio; THE PROGRESSIVE,
11/16/87, "Poisons from the Pentagon," by Seth Shulman; WALL STREET
JOURNAL, 9/17/86, "Military Science," by Bill Richards and Tim Carrington.
7. Biased Press Coverage of Arias Peace Plan -- SAN FRANCISCO BAY
GUARDIAN, 1/6/88, "On Central America, U.S. Dailies Parrot Reagan Line," by
Jeff Gillenkirk; EXTRA!, 8/87, "Media Put Reagan Spin on Arias Plan," by
Jeff Cohen and Martin A. Lee.
8. Dumping Our Toxic Wastes on the Third World -- THE NATION,
10/3/87, "The Export of U.S. Toxic Wastes," by Andrew Porterfield and David
Weir.
9. The Censored Report of Torture in El Salvador -- THE NATION,
2/21/87, "After the Press Bus Left," and THE NATION, 11/14/87, "The Press
and the Plan," both by Alexander Cockburn; SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER,
11/14/86, "In Prison, Salvador rights panel works on," by Ron Ridenhour;
MARIN INTERFAITH TASK FORCE ON CENTRAL AMERICA, 7/2/87, by Liz Erringer.
10. Project Galileo Shuttle To Carry Lethal Plutonium -- THE NATION,
1/23/88, "The Space Probe's Lethal Cargo," by Karl Grossman.

1252
textfiles.com/politics/perot.rw5 Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

3027
textfiles.com/politics/pguide.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

67
textfiles.com/politics/ph-1775.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
* Originally By: Steven Springer
* Originally To: All
* Originally Re: Why we do this...
* Original Area: FIDO-AEN_News Service
* Forwarded by : Blue Wave v2.12
"..There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free;
if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges
for which we have been so long contending; if we mean not basely
to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long
engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon,
until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained;
WE MUST FIGHT! I repeat it, sir, we must fight!! An appeal to
arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir... that we are weak, unable to cope with
so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger.
Will it be the next week or the next year? Will it be when we
are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be
stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by
irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of
effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging
the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound
us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use
of those means which the God of nature has placed in our power.
Three millions of people armed in the holy cause of liberty and
in such a country as that which we possess are invincible by any
force which our enemy can send against us.
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a
just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will
raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir,
is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active,
the brave. besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base
enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the
contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our
chains are forged. Their clanking may be heard on the plains of
Boston! The war is inevitable - and let it come!! I repeat it
sir, let it come!!
It is vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry,
peace, peace; but there is no peace. The war is actually begun!
The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears
the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the
field! Why stand we here idle?
What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life
so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of
chains and slavery?
Forbid it, Almighty God - I know not what course others may
take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"
************************************************************
Patrick Henry then took his seat. No murmur of applause was
heard on March 23, 1775 when he gave this speech at a convention
in Richmond assemble after Lord Dunmore suspended the Virginia
Assembly. The effect was too deep. After the trance of a
moment, several members started from their seats. The cry, "To
arms!" seemed to quiver on every lip and gleam from every eye.
... "Liberty is NEVER unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly
... with the blood of patriots or it ALWAYS vanishes. Of all the
... so-called natural human rights the have ever been invented,
... liberty is the least to be cheap and is NEVER free of cost."
... Robert A. Heinlein - Starship Troopers

1283
textfiles.com/politics/pi-me.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

271
textfiles.com/politics/pluton.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,271 @@
From: pierce@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Brad Pierce)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.save.the.earth,alt.individualism
Subject: A plutonium economy vs. a free democracy
Message-ID: <1992Nov20.020820.1559@cs.ucla.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 02:08:20 GMT
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Lines: 269
[From "The Russian Threat, Its Myths and Realities" (c) 1983,
Gateway Books, London, by Jim Garrison and Pyrae Shivpuri, pp 231-236.]
The growing erosion of civil liberties in Western Europe and the
United States is closely linked with the nuclear energy-nuclear
weapons complex, which mandates a psyche all its own. This complex
creates the necessity for secrecy on the one hand and greater
protection of investment on the other. Not only are there high
financial and environmental risks but also potential ramifications
beyond national boundaries. Because of the `plutonium culture'
generated by the nuclear complex, the age old dilemma of striking a
balance between state authority and the rights of the individual is
being forced to opt for increasing state control, and diminishing
individual freedom. The plutonium culture allows for no other
choice.
Each operating nuclear reactor produces between 400 to 600 pounds
of plutonium waste each year. Less than one millionth of a gram, if
ingested, can cause cancer and/or genetic mutation. Twenty pounds,
if properly fashioned, can be made into a nuclear bomb. Because of
this, *the different aspects of the plutonium economy must be as
tightly guarded as nuclear weapons themselves*. Nuclear weapons are
kept at military facilities generally away from population centres
and specifically under guard in a military system predicated upon
discipline, hierarchy and authoritarian leadership. Similar
protection for the `atoms for peace' programme will have a
devastating impact upon the democratic freedoms and civil liberties
of the citizens.
The potential problem with the plutonium economy and its relation
to human freedom has been succinctly expressed by a statement made by
Dr. Bernard Feld, Chairperson of the Atomic and High Energy Physics
Department of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology:
Let me tell you about a nightmare I have. The Mayor of
Boston sends for me for an urgent consultation. He has
received a note from a terrorist group telling him that they
have planted a nuclear bomb somewhere in central Boston. The
Mayor has confirmed that 20 pounds of plutonium is missing
from Government stocks. He shows me the crude diagram and a
set of the terrorists outrageous demands. I know--as one of
those who participated in the assembly of the first atomic
bomb--that the device would work. Not efficiently, but
nevertheless with devastating effect. What should I do?
Surrender to blackmail or risk destroying my home town?[9]
The dangers are real, so real that government planners in every
country with nuclear programmes have undertaken steps to be prepared
for Dr. Feld's scenario. In 1975, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) commissioned a specific study of the problem. One of the
participants, Professor John Barton, Professor of Jurisprudence at
Stanford University Law School, prepared a paper entitled
`Intensified Nuclear Safeguards and Civil Liberties.' The document
began by stating that:
Increased public concern with nuclear terrorism, coupled with
the possibility of greatly increased use of plutonium in
civilian power reactors, are leading the US Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) to consider various forms of
intensified safeguards against theft or loss of nuclear
materials and against *sabotage*. The intensified safeguards
could include expansion of personnel clearance programs, a
nationwide guard force, *greater surveillance of dissenting
political groups,* area searches in the event of a loss of
materials, and creation of *new barriers of secrecy* around
parts of the nuclear program.[10]
It is important to be clear what the above statement implies. The
governments supporting nuclear power are attempting to protect the
plutonium economy from two perceived enemies: first, those who would
use the nuclear materials to terrorise the country through some type
of nuclear sabotage; and second, those who seek to stop nuclear
power, meaning anti-nuclear `dissenting political groups'. This
requires a nationwide guard force to be created specifically to deal
with any terrorism and the erection of new barriers of secrecy around
the nuclear programmes to keep public knowledge and participation at
a minimum. Both sets of enemies would be subject to greater
surveillance through electronic listening devices such as phone taps.
In Britain, for instance, it is accepted as a matter of course
that anyone working for the Atomic Energy Authority be `positively
vetted' before being appointed. The Official Secrets Act, moreover,
allows the government and the atomic industry to keep the nuclear
installations cloaked in secrecy and the employees forbidden to
communicate anything about their work. In 1976, Britain also became
the first country to establish by law a nationwide guard force of
constables under the direct control of the atomic authorities in
order to guard nuclear facilities and specifically the plutonium
stores. This guard force has privileges in relation to carrying
weapons not granted to any other British police unit. Indeed, so
sensitive are these privileges that under the Official Secrets Act,
information about them has not been made available to the public.
This force is mandated not only to guard against possible terrorism
but to keep tabs on `dissenting political groups.'
Jonathan Rosenhead, of the London School of Economics, points out
that this type of political control is very easily overlooked by the
general populace because it is specifically designed and intended to
be used as inconspicuously as possible. In America, political
scientists refer to this technique as the "politics of the iron fist
in the velvet glove." "What the ruling groups prefer", he says,
is to produce a situation in which no one dares oppose their
plans. Their favourite methods are therefore to exploit
people's dependence on consumer goods and on their jobs and
exercising prevention controls by means of intensive
surveillance. In the event of open conflict breaking out in
spite of that, they would hope at least to contain it by
`limited operations.'[11]
What needs to be remembered in assessing this state of affairs is
that plutonium, if it is to be used, must be protected by police
state methods. We just cannot have something that can be used for
nuclear bombs and can damage and mutate human life with the
lethalness of millions of cancer doses per pound floating about in a
free society. *A plutonium economy and a free democracy are a
contradiction in terms.* This is a fact that has been recognised by
leading legal experts and politicians alike. Writing in the "Harvard
Law Review," Russell Ayres states flatly that `plutonium provides the
first rational justification for widespread intelligence gathering
against the civilian population.'[12] The reason for this is that
the threat of nuclear terrorism justifies such encroachments on civil
liberties for `national security' reasons. It is inevitable,
therefore, says Ayres, that "plutonium use would create pressures for
infiltration into civic, political, environmental and professional
groups to a far greater extent than previously encountered and with a
greater impact on speech and associated rights". Sir Brian Flowers,
in Britain, has come to similar conclusions. At the end of his
environmental impact statement for the plutonium economy in the
United Kingdom, known as the Flowers Report, he made it quite clear
that Britain could not have both plutonium and civil liberties.
Rather, he said, to adopt the plutonium economy would make
`inevitable' the erosion of the freedoms that British people had
fought for over the centuries and have come to assume and accept as
inalienable rights.
What is happening to Western Europe and the US should not be seen
as an abnormal occurrence; rather, it should be viewed as the
*logical progression* of what the adoption of the plutonium economy
in any country implies. There are certain psychological implications
inherent in the use and development of nuclear weapons. There are
direct physical results on both workers and public alike from the
nuclear fuel cycle. So, too, the plutonium economy makes inevitable
the erosion of human rights.
Observers in the Netherlands and West Germany refer to the decline
of the "Rechtsstadt" (meaning a state guided by laws which are both
just and accepted) and the rise of the "Machtstadt," where state
authority is based on power equations. In the US, it is sometimes
referred to as a `national security state'. We prefer the term
"totalitarian democracy" to characterise the governments of the US
and Western Europe. It denotes a governmental system of
parliamentary democracy within which the official bureaucracy, the
police, and the legal authorities are vested with almost total power
over the individual.
It has been apparent for some time that the drive in the West for
all-out growth, dictated by the need for capital accumulation and
profits, has been creating problems that existing institutions, be
they national or international, are simply not equipped to handle.
These include:
* the alienation through and ruthlessness of the
multinational corporations;
* the frustrations of an economy where automation and
machinery are replacing human skills and ingenuity;
* the gnawing fears and anxieties aroused by the `diseases
of affluence,' notably cancer, heart disease and stress;
* and the looming threat of environmental destruction, be
it at the local or planetary level, from chemical
pollution, or the plutonium economy.
As long as the boom lasted, and Western affluence was sustained
these pressures could be ignored. But that `boom-balloon' has burst.
The energy crisis is deepening. The economic reality of increased
unemployment and inflation is becoming more and more depressing. The
pressures of burgeoning populations, as also the youth demanding
employment and a piece of the good life, are becoming unbearable.
In order to survive this `crisis of capitalism', the dominant
forces in industry and government are forcing through a ruthless
restructuring and re-grouping of the economic system. In Western
Europe this is reflected in the wholesale writing-off of vast sectors
of traditional industry such as steel and textiles and the resultant
social decline of whole areas. The trend is to form blocs such as
the EEC but this in turn places increased strain on the member states
and does little more than paper over the fundamental problems with
another layer of bureaucracy. Under this weight, the welfare state
that grew up in the decades after World War II is being dismantled,
to squeeze just a bit more money to spend, as often as not, on more
weapon systems. In the process, yet another safety net is removed
for the individual who is the victim of the capitalist system. If it
is any consolation, Marxism hasn't come up with any answers either.
Those in power know they have no way to solve the problems or meet
the demands of their youth, of the millions of unemployed, of the
anti-nuclear movement, of the populations in economically depressed
areas, of the victims of industrial disasters, or of any other
discontented groups. The only valid answers are ones which involve
fundamental changes in our thinking and in our system itself, and
these are ones which those in power are not in a position to offer.
So they placate their constituencies with promises which they know
they cannot fulfil.
This only adds to the frustration of those who can no longer wait.
The next stage after fruitless protest cannot fail to be a challenge
to that part of the system of which the individual has become the
victim. If this challenge is met with either refusal or with
repression, the frustration of those in protest can lead to violent
action. Protest by violence against the system which cannot meet
their demands when peacefully presented is labelled by those in power
as `terrorism.'
Foreseeing this scenario, the reaction of the dominant groups is
to proclaim the necessity to prepare in time to deal effectively with
those who are discontented. When there are violations that cannot be
put right, then freedom to criticise and, in the end, democracy
itself become hostage to `effective governance.' It is an axiom of
history that when the people begin to question the right of their
leaders to govern, the leaders question the right of the people to
question.
The irony of this situation within the conflict of East-West
relations is that although the starting point of their analyses are
different, the conclusions drawn by the Soviet leaders and the
governing groups in the West are the same: both regard effective
governance as being hindered by a genuine democratic government. The
result in the East has been the `dictatorship of the proletariat';
in the West, `totalitarian democracy.'
While it is true that the system of repression in the West is not
as extensive or as brutal as in the East, except in isolated cases,
what is necessary to remember is that the *mentality* of the
oppressor, whether in the Kremlin or in 10 Downing Street or in the
White House, is the same. What is different are the *mechanisms*
which oppress the people below. In both cases what is achieved is
the setting up of a *standard of behaviour* which, because there are
no alternatives allowed, becomes the *pattern of behaviour.* This
creates a dangerous person-into-machine social norm. In the Soviet
Union this has been done with a ruthlessness that needed only the
unity and discipline of the Party; in the West mass control has been
achieved by subtle manipulation that needs either public ignorance or
public apathy to be effective. Social control is justified,
particularly as far as the plutonium economy is concerned, by the
over-riding necessity to avoid the catastrophe which might occur
either through carelessness, disobedience, or `terrorism.' This
cultivated attitude enables the Western technocrats to represent
themselves to the public as the guardians of the society in the
emergency situation they themselves inspired and engineered.
The tragedy of the Russian people is the suffering of individuals
endowed with a passion for personal freedom so profound as to verge
on the anarchic, and yet who have been forced to live under a
despotism resolutely intent upon the suppression of that freedom.
The tragedy unfolding in the West is of a people who achieved
liberty at great cost, but who now, faced with the despotism inherent
in the plutonium economy, are abnegating it. They are rendering
themselves subservient to those few who wish to build a national
security state supplied with nuclear energy and armed with nuclear
weapons. Our leaders are depriving us of the very liberties they
have been entrusted to defend. Moreover, they are manipulating the
`Russian threat' to justify such actions, all the while claiming that
they are protecting democracy. Never before have so few asked so
many for so much for the sake of so little.
[9] In Robert Jungk, "The Nuclear State," trans. Eric Mosbacher,
London, 1979, pp. 118, 19.
[10] "Intensified Nuclear Safeguards and Civil Liberties," Nuclear Reg.
Comm. Cont. No. AT(49-24)-0190, Washington, DC, 31 Oct. 1975, p. 1.
[11] In Jungk, "Nuclear State, op. cit., p. 132.
[12] In Ibid., p. 142

173
textfiles.com/politics/poa.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,173 @@
The Strange Origin of the Pledge of Allegiance
==============================================
Every class day over 60 million public and parochial school teachers
and students in the US recite the Pledge of Allegiance along with
thousands of Americans at official meetings of the Boy Scouts, Girl
Scouts, Elks, Masons, American Legion, and others. During the
televised bicentennial celebration of the US Constitution for the
school children on September 17, 1987, the children as a group did
not recite any part of the Constitution. However, President Reagan did
lead the nation's school children in reciting the Pledge. Yet probably
not one of them knows the history or original meaning of the Pledge.
In the presidential campaign of 1988, George Bush successfully used
the Pledge in his campaign against Mike Dukakis. Ironically, Bush did
not seem to know the words of the Pledge until his campaign manager
told him to memorize it. The teachers and students in the New England
private schools he attended, Greenwich Country Day School and Phillips
Andover Academy, did not recite the pledge. By contrast, Dukakis and
his mother, a public school teacher, recited the Pledge in the public
schools. Yet Bush criticized Dukakis for vetoing a bill in
Massachusetts requiring public school teachers but not private school
teachers to recite the Pledge. Dukakis vetoed the bill on grounds
that it violated the constitutional right of free speech.
[Actually, the case Dukakis *cited* when vetoing (and was subsequently
attacked by Bush for it) was a religious freedom (!) case; see my
upcoming post "The Pledge, part II" a speech by ACLU director Ira
Glassner which contains a lot more information you've probably
not heard. It also happens to be among the best speeches I've ever
heard, and demonstrates devastatingly what many of us already knew;
what a bad job Dukakis did responding to Bush's attacks about being
"liberal" and (God forbid) and being a member of the ACLU.]
How did this Pledge of Allegiance to a flag replace the US
Constitution and Bill of Rights in the affections of many Americans?
Among the nations in the world, only the USA and the Philippines,
imitating the USA, have a pledge to their flag. Who institutionalized
the Pledge as the cornerstone of American patriotic programs and
indoctrination in the public and parochial schools?
In 1892, a socialist named Francis Bellamy created the Pledge of
Allegiance for *Youth's* *Companion*, a national family magazine for
youth published in Boston. The magazine had the largest national
circulation of its day with a circulation around 500 thousand. Two
liberal businessmen, Daniel Ford and James Upham, his nephew, owned
*Youth's* *Companion*.
One hundred years ago the American Flag was rarely seen in the
classroom or in front of the school. Upham changed that. In 1888, the
magazine began a campaign to sell American flags to the public
schools. By 1892, his magazine had sold American flags to about 26
thousand schools(1).
In 1891, Upham had the idea of using the celebration of the 400th
anniversary of Christopher Columbus' discovery of America to promote
the use of the flag in the public schools. The same year, the magazine
hired Daniel Ford's radical young friend, Baptist minister,
Nationalist, and Christian Socialist leader, Francis Bellamy, to help
Upham in his public relations work. Bellamy was the first cousin of
the famous American socialist, Edward Bellamy. Edward Bellamy's
futuristic novel, *Looking* *Backward*, published in 1888, described a
utopian Boston in the year 2000. The book spawned an elitist socialist
movement in Boston known as "Nationalism," whose members wanted the
federal government to nationalize most of the American economy. Francis
Bellamy was a member of this movement and a vice president of its
auxiliary group, the Society of Christian Socialists(2). He was a
baptist minister and he lectured and preached on the virtues of
socialism and the evils of capitalism. He gave a speech on "Jesus the
Socialist" and a series of sermons on "The Socialism of the Primitive
Church." In 1891, he was forced to resign from his Boston church, the
Bethany Baptist church, because of his socialist activities. He then
joined the staff of the *Youth's* *Companion*(3).
By February 1892, Francis Bellamy and Upham had lined up the National
Education Association to support the *Youth's* *Companion* as a
sponsor of the national public schools' observance of Columbus Day
along with the use of the American flag. By June 29, Bellamy and Upham
had arranged for Congress and President Benjamin Harrison to announce
a national proclamation making the public school ceremony the
center of the national Columbus Day celebrations for 1892(4).
Bellamy, under the supervision of Upham, wrote the program for this
celebration, including its flag salute, the Pledge of Allegiance. His
version was,
"I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the Republic for which
it stands -- one nation indivisible -- with liberty and
justice for all."
This program and its pledge appeared in the September 8 issue of
*Youth's* *Companion*(5). He considered putting the words "fraternity"
and "equality" in the Pledge but decided they were too radical and
controversial for public schools(6).
The original Pledge was recited while giving a stiff, uplifted right
hand salute, criticized and discontinued during WWII. The words "my
flag" were changed to "the flag of the United States of America"
because it was feared that the children of immigrants might confuse
"my flag" for the flag of their homeland. The phrase "Under God," was
added by Congress and President Eisenhower in 1954 at the urging of
the Knights of Columbus(7).
The American Legion's constitution includes the following goal: "To
foster and perpetuate a one hundred percent Americanism." One of its
major standing committees was the "Americanism Commission" and its
subsidiary, the "Counter Subversive Activities Committee." To the
fear of immigrants, it added the fear of communism(8).
Over the years the Legion has worked closely with the NEA and with the US
Office of Education. The Legion insisted on "one hundred percent"
Americanism in public school courses in American history, civics,
Geography and English. The Pledge was a part of this Americanism
campaign(9) and, in 1950, the Legion adopted the Pledge as an official
part of its own ritual(10).
In 1922, the Ku Klux Klan, which also had adopted the "one hundred
percent Americanism" theme along with the flag ceremonies and the
Pledge, became a political power in the state of Oregon and arranged
for legislation to be passed requiring all Catholic children to
attend public schools. The US Supreme Court later overturned this
legislation(11).
Perhaps a team of social scientists and historians could explain why
over the last century the Pledge of Allegiance has become a major
centerpiece in American patriotism programs. A pledge or loyalty oath
for children was not built around the Declaration of Independence --
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal..." Or the Gettysburg address -- "a new nation conceived in
liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created
equal..."
Apparently, over the last century, Americans have been uncomfortable
with the word "equality" as a patriotic theme. In 1992 the nation will
begin its second century with the Pledge of Allegiance. Perhaps the
time has come to see that this allegiance should be to the US
constitution and not to a piece of cloth.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
John W. Baer is a professor of economics at Anne Arundel Community
College in Arnold, Maryland.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Notes:
-----
1. Louise Harris, *The Flag Over the Schoolhouse,* C. A. Stephens
Collection, Brown University, Providence, R.I., 1971, p. 69.
2. Margarette S. Miller, *Twenty-three Words,* Printcraft Press,
Portsmouth, VA, 1976, pp 63-65.
3. Ibid, pp. 55-65.
4. Ibid, pp. 105-111.
5. Ibid, p. 123.
6. Ibid, p. 122.
7. Christopher J. Kaufmann, *Knights of Columbus*, Harper & Row, NY,
1982, pp. 385-386.
8. Raymond Moley, *The American Legion Story*, Duell, Sloan, and
Pearce, NY, 1966, p. 7.
9. Ibid, p. 371.
10. Miller, p. 344.
11. *New Catholic Encyclopedia,* Washington, D.C., Catholic University
of America, 1967, Vol. 10, p. 738-740.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The above article is being sent to the Activists Mailing List.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
###################################################################
# Copyright (C) 1990, Harel Barzilai for Activists Mailing-list #
# You may copy freely so long as you do not charge #
# others for it, and include this copyright notice #
###################################################################
[We're obviously not copyrighting Baer's article reproduced here!]
harelb@zaphod. UChicago.EDU
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

498
textfiles.com/politics/pol-pris.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,498 @@
Freedom Now!
Campaign for Amnesty and Human Rights for Political Prisoners
in the United States
POLITICAL PRISONERS IN THE U.S.A.?
The government denies it. Yet, today there are more than 100
people locked up in U.S. prisons because of their political
actions or beliefs.
The United States alone among the world's major
governments maintains the fiction that it holds no political
prisoners. The official position is that all those jailed
here for politically motivated actions are "criminals." Yet
in all other countries, regardless of the politics of the
rulers, it is an accepted truth that dissenters, jailed for
opposing the government, are, in fact, political prisoners.
The United States tries to hide the existence of
political prisoners because they challenge the image that the
U.S. is a truly democratic and humane society. These
prisoners expose the fact that there are political resistance
movements of such political impact that the government is
compelled to use repression against them.
By labelling political prisoners as criminals, the
U.S. government has also been able to shield from serious
view human rights violations against them. These include
prison sentences longer than in most dictatorships,
psychological torture, and brutality including sexual
assault.
The men's federal prison in Marion, Illinois, which
includes several political prisoners among its 400 inmates,
has been condemned by Amnesty International for violating
international standards on the minimum treatment of
prisoners. The men in Marion are under permanent lockdown
and are sometimes chained to their beds for days at a time.
The control unit for women at Lexington, Kentucky, was
an experimental underground political prison that praticed
isolation and sensory deprivation. It was finally closed by
a federal judge after two years of protest by religious and
human rights groups.
HUMAN RIGHTS MUST BEGIN AT HOME!
Who are America's political prisoners? Like the four
women and men pictured on the facing page [pictures not
available in computer text file] -- Alejandrina Torres,
Leonard Peltier, Geronimo Pratt, and Susan Rosenberg -- they
represent many movements for freedom and social justice.
People of color are most often targetted. Black
activists participating in the fight for Black Liberation and
against racism are the largest group represented, with well
over 50 political prisoners. Many of them, like Geronimo
Pratt, have been in jail nearly 20 years.
The movement for Puerto Rican independence has also
been heavily attacked with the imprisonment of many of its
members. These include 14 women and men such as Alejandrina
Torres who consider themselves prisoners of war. They have
taken this position because they believe that as colonized
people they have the right to fight for independence, and
their captor, the United States, has no right to criminalize
them.
Other political prisoners in the United States include
more than thirty white North American activists. These
militants are accused of various actions opposing foreign,
domestic and military policies of the U.S. government. Their
protests have been directed against symbols of U.S. support
for the apartheid regime in South Africa, military
intervention in Central America, and the continued colonial
oppression of Blacks and Puerto Ricans. Among these
prisoners are women and men from the religious peace
community who have received long sentences for direct actions
against U.S. nuclear installations.
Revealing the existence of all these political
prisoners is of extra importance now because greater world
attention is being focused on human rights. Many countries,
including the Soviet Union and Cuba, have released most of
their political prisoners. They have also started to raise
questions about human rights problems here in the U.S.A. Now
is the time to break through the wall of silence that has
surrounded these political prisoners in the United States.
We in the Freedom Now campaign are making information
available on all their cases to the people of the U.S. and
the world. While the government will continue to deny
holding political prisoners, we seek to make their existence
common knowledge in every American community.
At the same time all of us can begin to speak out
against the terrible human rights violations taking place
against political prisoners and all prisoners in the U.S.
Jails and prisons have abandoned all pretenses of
"rehabilitating" inmates, and have become concentration camps
for warehousing the youth from the ghettos and barrios of
America. We must especially denounce the spread of prison
control units which attempt to rob prisoners of their
humanity, sanity and even their lives.
Ultimately we must seek the freedom of all political
prisoners in the U.S. Other countries are now doing it. Why
not here? Freedom Now is initiating a campaign for amnesty
for all the women and men imprisoned in this country as a
consequence of their political actions. Officials of the
U.S. government have signed many international laws and
treaties governing political repression. We must now hold
them to those standards!
The Freedom Now campaign is about real people, women
and men behind bars who care deeply about justice and
humanity. The government has sought to isolate them, not
only from their friends and families but from their ability
to influence and lead political movements.
Our campaign is breaking that isolation. We are
bridging the walls with a common effort that includes the
active participation of the prisoners and their families,
along with political activists, clergy and professionals. We
welcome your participation! Join us in stopping the
continued imprisonment and mistreatment of political
activists in the United States. Human rights must begin at
home.
AMNESTY FOR POLITICAL PRISONERS!
[Photo captions. Actual photos are not available in computer
text file format.]
In 1983, Alejandrina Torres, a longtime Puerto Rican
community and church activist, was arrested in Chicago.
Because of her role in the Puerto Rican independence
movement, she was convicted and sentenced to 35 years for
conspiring to overthrow the U.S. government. Three times in
prison she has been beaten and sexually abused by guards.
For two years, until international pressure forced it to
close, she was held in the infamous Lexington Control Unit.
Today, though she remains imprisoned, Alejandrina is regarded
as a national hero in Puerto Rico.
In 1977, Leonard Peltier, a leader of the American Indian
Movement (AIM) was wrongly convicted of the murder of two FBI
agents on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota.
Hundreds of federal agents had invaded the reservation to
stop Indian people seeking control over their own lives and
land. Ample evidence exists that the FBI withheld documents
to frame Leonard. His appeals for justice have been
supported by 75 members of Congress, Desmond Tutu, and Jesse
Jackson. Despite this, he remains in jail serving two life
sentences.
In 1971, Geronimo ji Jaga Pratt, a leader in the Black
struggle for human rights, was framed on a murder charge in
California. The key witness against him was in the pay of
the police. Government spies infiltrated his defense team.
Many pages of evidence, proving Geronimo's innocence, were
"lost" by government lawyers. It was later revealed that he
was a target of the FBI COINTELPRO program which sought to
destroy the Black movement. Today, nearly 20 years later,
Geronimo is one of the longest held political prisoners in
the world.
In 1984, Susan Rosenberg was arrested and charged with
possession of weapons, explosives, and false ID. A white
North American woman, Susan has been deeply committed since
childhood to struggles for human rights including the
movements for Puerto Rican independence, Black liberation,
and women's liberation. Although she and her co-defendant
Tim Blunk were convicted of possessing the materials, not
using them, they received sentences of 58 years, the longest
ever given on this charge. Susan also endured two years of
psychological torture in the Lexington Control Unit before it
was closed.
Freedom Now Offices:
--------------------
National Office:
5249 N. Kenmore,
Chicago, IL 60640
(312) 278-6706
East Coast:
1560 Broadway Suite 807,
New York, NY 10036
West Coast:
3543 18th St. #17
San Francisco, CA 94110
(Please write or call for more information, if needed.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freedom Now!
Campaign for Amnesty and Human Rights for Political Prisoners
in the U.S.A.
Dear Friend,
A long-time activist is arrested and beaten for hours,
while police scream racial epithets and death threats
in his face. The police shove his face in a flushing
toilet, tear his toenails out, and burn him over and
over with cigarettes. The political prisoner's
pancreas is nearly destroyed in the beating, and he is
hospitalized for three months.
Three women political prisoners are held in isolation
in an underground sensory deprivation unit. The unit
is painted high-gloss white; bright flourescent lights
are on round the clock' there is no way to tell if it
is day or night. The women live under the unblinking
eye of eleven video surveillance cameras monitored by
male guards -- one camera is pointed at the
uncurtained shower area. This special unit -- "the
living tomb" -- is condemned by Amnesty International,
the American Civil Liberties Union, and a number of
church denominations.
CHILLING SCENES FROM SOUTH AFRICA? CHILE? ARGENTINA? NO --
THE UNITED STATES.
Although the government denies it, today there are more than
100 people locked up in U.S. prisons because of their
political actions and beliefs. People like Leonard Peltier,
Geronimo ji Jaga Pratt, Katya Komisaruk, Sekou Odinga, and
the women of the Lexington Control Unit, Alejandrina Torres,
Silvia Baraldini, and Susan Rosenberg. While the government
calls them common criminals, these people are known and
respected for their long activism in movements for Native
American soverignty, Black liberation, Puerto Rican
independence, and against racism, imperialism, women's
oppression, and nuclear weapons. SOme of them have been
framed; others have utilized a variety of forms including
civil disobedience, armed political actions, and grand jury
resistance. Freedom Now considers these activists political
prisoners and, for some of them, prisoners of war. Like
political prisoners from South Africa to El Salvador, they
are among the most courageous and principled people in
movements for social justice.
Human rights violations like the ones described above occur
all too often -- not far away or long ago, but right here,
right now. Some political prisoners in the U.S. have been
imprisoned for 20 years, nearly as long as Nelson Mandela.
Others have received sentences four times as long as those
meted out by Latin American dictatorships. Women have been
held down by male prison staff, disrobed, and assaulted with
vaginal and rectal finger probes. A leader of the Puerto
Rican independence movement was held for over three years in
pre-trial preventive detention.
SO WHY DON'T YOU KNOW THESE SHOCKING FACTS? Because the U.S.
government denies that it holds political prisoners. Their
existence exposes deep injustices in U.S. society. Behind a
screen of secrecy and indifference, the jailers attempt to
break the prisoners' bodies and spirits and strike fear into
the hearts of others who would struggle for justice.
WE CAN CHANGE IT. The Freedom Now Campaign was launched at
the United Nations on the 40th Anniversary of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. This is an important time to be
advocating amnesty and human rights for political prisoners
in the U.S. Throughout the world, there is a groundswell of
concern for human rights. This year alone, hundreds of
political prisoners have received amnesty from the
governments of Mexico, the Soviet Union, Cuba, and even South
Africa.
BUT WE MUST HAVE YOUR HELP TO BREAK THE SILENCE.
On April 27-29, 1990, New York City will be the site of the
International Tribunal on Political Prisoners in the U.S.
Presiding will be an impartial body of ten internationally
known jurists and human rights experts. The judges will be
presented with a Complaint which outlines the conditions
faced by political prisoners in the U.S. Evidence and
testimony to substantiate the Complaint will be given by
family members, expert witnesses, and the prisoners
themselves. The findings of the Tribunal will be published
as a report for presentation at international and national
human rights forums.
WE WANT YOU TO ENDORSE THIS HISTORIC EFFORT BY JOINING US IN
SIGNING ON AS A PETITIONER IN THE COMPLAINT. We are asking
all persons or organizations who want to be a Petitioner to
send $50.00 along with the enclosed form to the Freedom Now
office in New York. If you want to be a Petitioner but are
financially unable to contribute $50.00 or more, we ask that
minimally you send $25.00. Contributions from Petitioners
are the primary way that the Tribunal will be financed.
If you become a Petitioner, the final draft of the complaint
will be sent to you by January 1990. If you prefer to read
the final draft prior to authroizing your name as a
Petitioner, please indicate that on the enclosed form. We
still ask that you make a contribution now, if possible.
Then we will require your signed authorization at the time of
your decision before you will be listed as a Petitioner.
Thank you for your support. We look forward to your
participation in this important effort. Together we can stop
human rights abuses in our own backyard.
For human rights,
(signed)
Adjoa Aiyetoro, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Margaret Randall *
*Freedom Now Advisory Board
Freedom Now Offices:
--------------------
National Office:
5249 N. Kenmore,
Chicago, IL 60640
(312) 278-6706
East Coast:
1560 Broadway Suite 807,
New York, NY 10036
West Coast:
3543 18th St. #17
San Francisco, CA 94110
(Please write or call for more information, if needed.)
National Advisory Board
-----------------------
Adjoa Aiyetoro,
National Conference of Black Lawyers
Ellen M. Barry,
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
Daniel Berrigan,
Peace Activist
Francis Calpotura,
Alliance for Phillipine Concerns
Dr. Ben Chavis,
United Church of Christ
Noam Chomsky,
Author, Peace Activist
Bishop Philip Cousins,
AME
Rep. Ronald V. Dellums
William Kunstler,
Attorney
Julia Matsui-Estrella,
Director, PACTS
Juan Mari Bras,
Attorney, Puerto Rico
Rafael Cancel Miranda
Darlene Nicgarsky,
Sanctuary Defendant
Rev. Tyrone Pitts,
National Council of Churches
Fr. Pedro del Valle Pirado,
Episcopal Church, Puerto Rico
Margret Randall,
Author
Nina Rosenblum,
Director/Producer
Rev. Eunice Santana,
PRISA
Piri Thomas,
Author
Corey Weinstein,
M.D.
(organizations listed for identification purposes only)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorization form
------------------
I authorize my name to be listed as a Petitioner in the Complaint to be
presented to The Tribunal
(signature) -------------------------------------------------------------------
Please print my name and address and zip code
---------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to review the final draft of the Complaint before being
listed
------- -------
(yes) (no)
I enclosed my check or money order in the sum of $25, $50, $100 or more $
------
A check for $100 or more can be tax deductible if it is made out to IFCO.
Please add my name to the Freedom Now mailing list
----------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freedom Now Offices:
--------------------
National Office:
5249 N. Kenmore,
Chicago, IL 60640
(312) 278-6706
East Coast:
1560 Broadway Suite 807,
New York, NY 10036
West Coast:
3543 18th St. #17
San Francisco, CA 94110
(Please write or call for more information, if needed.)
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X
Another file downloaded from: NIRVANAnet(tm)
& the Temple of the Screaming Electron Jeff Hunter 510-935-5845
The Salted Slug Strange 408-454-9368
Burn This Flag Zardoz 408-363-9766
realitycheck Poindexter Fortran 510-527-1662
Lies Unlimited Mick Freen 415-583-4102
Tomorrow's 0rder of Magnitude Finger_Man 415-961-9315
My Dog Bit Jesus Suzanne D'Fault 510-658-8078
New Dork Sublime Demented Pimiento 415-566-0126
Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,
arcane knowledge, political extremism, diverse sexuality,
insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS.
Full access for first-time callers. We don't want to know who you are,
where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.
"Raw Data for Raw Nerves"
X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X

155
textfiles.com/politics/pol-stat.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
The Police State
by MC5 & MC11
The United States ranks number one in the world in highest per
capita imprisonment, according to the Bureau of Justice
Statistics of the U.S. government.
A private research organization called the Sentencing Project
reported in January that the United States imprisons a higher
proportion of its population than does any other country.
Using statistics provided by the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ), the organization reported that more than one million
people are currently incarcerated in the United States. That
means 426 incarcerations per 100,000 residents as of June 30,
1989. South Africa ranked second with 333 and the Soviet Union
came in third with 268. In Europe the figures range from 35 to
120 per 100,000. Asian countries range from 21 to 140. For
Black males the figure is 3,109 per 100,000 in the United
States and 729 per 100,000 for South Africa.(1)
But throwing so many people behind bars hasn't done much to
stop crime. Since 1980 the United States has doubled its
prison population, and overall crime only fell 3.5 percent,
according to the DOJ. The nation's murder rate is seven times
higher than most European countries. Over the last decade, six
times as many robberies and three times as many rapes were
committed in the United States as there were in what used to
be West Germany, the Sentencing Project report said.(1)
Following the release of these statistics, the mainstream
press and a few Democrats vomited up a spate of liberal
editorials and columns, railing against the burden on the law-
abiding tax-payers (about $16 billion a year, according to the
DOJ) that such massive repression creates, and the need to
find a different solution.
"We've got to stop jailing and start rehabilitating," Rep.
John Conyers (D-Michigan) declared.(1)
Prisons don't work
Confronted with such glaring statistics, some liberals come to
the correct conclusion: putting people in prison does not
deter anyone from committing crimes. The problem with the
liberal response is that it fails to recognize both crime and
the criminal justice system as political problems. Amerika's
ruling class defines "crime" as anything that may threaten its
hold on power. Anyone attempting to rectify the vast income
inequalities inherent in the capitalist system (through means
not sanctioned by the bourgeoisie) is locked up. Anyone not
respecting the god-given "right" to private property is locked
up. And certainly, anyone attempting to undermine the very
foundations of the capitalist state is thrown behind bars as
soon as that person becomes a serious threat.
MIM is not attempting to analyze all of the roots of crime in
Amerika in this article. But the fundamental root is that
under capitalism some classes of people cannot meet their
basic needs by abiding by the laws of the system. Reforming
the prison system and turning to more "humane" forms of
"rehabilitation" will not stop crime in Amerika. Only a
revolution will.
Police don't work either
Those who realize that prisons do not deter crime often argue
that instead of more prisons, Amerika should have more police.
But the number of police that a city hires does not affect the
crime rate. If a city hires more police than its neighboring
city, it is just as likely to have a high crime rate as its
neighbor.(2)
Studies comparing different cities, as well as studies of one
city with different size police forces, both demonstrate that
over time, hiring police is not a solution to crime.
As one might suspect, if there were no police or if everyone
were a police officer it would make a difference. But outside
of these extremes it does not matter how many police there
are. In the real world of the wide range of U.S. cities, it
does not matter to the crime rate how many police officers
there are.(2)
Revolution
Amerikans have a very hard time thinking rationally about
crime. Unlike other countries without rugged individualist
frontier pasts and settlers on their own pieces of land, the
Amerikan people have a strong belief in people making it on
their own.
Despite the reality that Euro-Amerikans committed genocide
against Native-Americans to obtain their farmland in the
United States, the myth arose of the rugged frontierperson
"making it" through hard work. That mythology carries forward
in another way today in the United States: the United States
has the largest middle class in the world. This class of
people makes the United States even more individual-minded
than other capitalist countries in the world.
Crime is a political problem. It cannot be solved by the
current political system because politicians have to say and
do what is popular with the middle class and upper class. They
are the firm believers in blaming individuals for their lack
of determination to work hard, uphold good morals, and so on.
These middle and upper class people believe they have achieved
their good position through their individual merits. Hence,
criminals must be people without these merits and should be
locked up.
As the prison population soared over the last decade, the
proportion of citizens who said they believed criminals were
not punished harshly enough increased from more than 70% of
the population to more than 80%.(3) Putting people in prison
makes many middle-class people feel good. But capitalist
attempts to justify their criminal justice system don't solve
the problem.
Some Trotskyist groups uphold the dogma that the working
classes in the imperialist countries like the United States
are most advanced because they live in the most technically
advanced societies. Yet it is the pervasive individualism of
the U.S. working class that made it possible for George Bush
to win his election merely by referring to a Black rapist in
his political advertisements. Far from being advanced, the
Amerikan working class falls prey to fascist anti-crime
politics far more readily than most other working classes with
the possible exception of the South African white working
class.
In other societies the problem is not so bad, especially in
societies without a middle-class of white workers who benefit
from the plunder of the Third World. For more on this subject
read J. Sakai's Settlers: The Mythology of the White
Proletariat and H.W. Edwards's Labor Aristocracy: Mass Base
for Social Democracy. These books explain why white workers as
a group enjoy a different relationship to the means of
production than other working classes. It is the absence of a
white proletariat that partly explains the attitudes of the
U.S. public toward crime.
People who want to go on tolerating murder, rape, teenage
suicide, wife-beating, drug-dealing, alcoholism and property
crimes of the criminally deprived should go on blabbering
about more cops, prisons and death penalties. People who
really want to "get tough" on crime should get tough with
their analysis first. They should join MIM to work against the
causes of crime and all other oppression.
Notes:
1. New York Times 1/7/91, p. A14.
2. John E. Conklin, Criminology, 3rd ed., (New York: MacMillan
Publishing Company, 1989), p. 438.
3. Washington Post National Weekly Edition 3/4/91, p.29.

52
textfiles.com/politics/policepig.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
_______ ___________________________________ _______
/ _|G|_ \ /| | / _|C|_ \
|| A || || Calling A Policemen A Pig! | || H ||
|| B || || A New Concept From | || A ||
|| B || || The Anarchist Cookbook | || I ||
|| A || || | || N ||
|| | || || Brought Forth Unto You By | || S ||
|| H || || The Norwegian Monk | || A ||
||_ E _|| || | ||_ W _||
\__|Y|__/ \|_________________________________| \__|!|__/
'-' '-'
Calling a policeman a "pig" seems silly and must antagonize the very
people the revolutionaries want to win over or to neutralize. But the actual
relationships of power are such that name-calling is the only weapon available
at the moment. Besides, name calling is an emotional outlet (and
revolutionaries also have emotions). "Pig" is an assult, no doubt--an assult
against the uniform which, through a fetish, is in itself a power, an assult
against the whole power stucture. It is an assult and a crime punishable by
law. Here is the strong policeman, heavily armed, with the entire physical and
ideological power of the state behind him, and he is attacked by a word--by a
word only, but it is still an attack.
What will the "pig" do? In the last analysis it is not up to the
policeman, who, though having a loaded gun hand, has in fact no power; it is up
to the state to give the answer. It might not be "smart" of Sid to provoke his
jailers by repeatedly calling them "pigs," therefore getting brutally beaten
and put in isolation. But "pig" is the only means of defense against the
attacks upon his humanity at the moment and gives him the chance to get
recognition for his beliefs and as a human being.
Basically what applies to the silly "pigs" -calling is alos valid for the
often Hollywoodlike hijackings, the taking of hostages, and even for the more
harmful "Anarchist cooking." These methods are not "smart"; they are
aberriations which sometime boarder on insanity. But these methods of the
revolutionary struggle of today are here and existing and real, and in the
philosophical sense, reasonable. They reflect the true stage of the
revolutionary struggle in the whole world.
__________________________________________________________
/| __________ __________ |
/ | | All material has been taken from | |
| | | The Anarchist Cookbook | |
| | | by William Powell | |
| | | Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 71-127797 | |
| | | To attemp to get a copy write: | |
| | | Lyle Stuart. Inc. | |
| | | 120 Enterprise Avenue | |
\ | |_____________Secaucus. New Jersey 07094_____________| |
\|________________________________________________________|

70
textfiles.com/politics/policepr.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
Police and Prisons
by A.M. Rosenthal, _New York Times_ Op-Ed, 1/28/94
More and more billions for prisons to lock up more and more Americans who
never had a decent chance at life. Are we mad? Why not use those billions to
build more schools to give more young people living in poverty the education
to climb out of it? It costs as much to keep a convict in prison as to send
him to Yale, for Heaven's sake.
And despite all the other billions the U.S. spends on the drug war,
narcotics still flood the country, users are still being put into prison,
crowding out violent criminals. Why not legalize drugs and use the anti-drug
money on therapy for addicts and to improve the neighborhoods that create
them?
And why those long sentences for convicts? Every year behind bars makes
them more bitter. They return to the same hard streets. Save money by cutting
sentences. Spend the savings to give released convicts training for decent
jobs.
Those three paragraphs sum up an important belief in American liberal
intellectual life -- the belief that war against crime and drugs is largely
aimed at and hurts the poor and wastes huge amounts of money that could be
used to fight the poverty, discrimination and educational deprivation that are
the root causes of crime.
The argument is false factually. Worse, it is damaging to people it is
supposed to benefit -- Americans, all skin shades, who live in the streets of
poverty and killing.
Economically, the struggle against crime is the biggest bargain the
taxpayer gets. A criminal on the loose costs society twice as much as a
criminal in jail -- in stolen good, smashed property and of course the medical
care for the victims.
The drug war has not yet been won. But it has saved hundreds or thousands
of Americans from lives of addiction that would have cost the country scores
of billions. Nobody knows exactly how much because drug abuse is the cause of
so many other crimes like family violence, robberies and muggings.
Most of the crime takes place in poor neighborhoods. Drug addicts gobble up
hospital space and time that would have gone to the people of those
neighborhoods. Fighting crime and drugs is one tax expenditure that benefits
the poor most of all.
All those crowded jails are not filled with pot smokers caught by cops on
patrol. Prof. John J. DiIulio Jr. of Princeton and Brookins reports that 93
percent of convicts in state prisons are violent criminals, many of them
repeat offenders.
Yes, a lot of Americans are in jail. A lot more should be. If your house
is burgled, there is a 1 in 80 chance the criminal will serve time.
The trouble with long sentences is that they turn out not to be all that
long. Convicts serve about one-third of their sentences. A rapist can expect
to be out in 5 years, a convicted murderer in 10.
President Clinton now recognizes the dreadful importance of crime in
American life. But if he is to lead, as he should, he ought to make sure his
top officers are following on close.
About mandatory sentences, his Attorney General is known to law officers as
Waffle General. His Surgeon General boosts another study of the much-studied
legalization of drugs. Then after he properly says "nothing doing," she boosts
it again. Either she does not believe what the President says or just does not
care very much.
Most of all, he should tell us the hardest truth of all -- how deeply
criminals have hurt the already wounded of America, the poor.
The President should tell us that criminals who have stayed out of jail and
criminals who got out too early have turned large parts of the inner city into
war zones. "Build schools, not prisons" -- that's not a choice now, it is a
hoax.
In war zones the money and energy of government and the people go to
surviving, fighting and winning. Sometimes a little extra money and energy are
spent to keep up spirits. But was there ever a case where in a war zone under
attack there was enough money to make life decent and build for the future?
The criminals have deprived other citizens of the greatest civil liberty --
the right to live in peace. They have also deprived citizens of the treasure
to build for the future.
That is what the President should tell the country, for it is the plain
truth and will be so until the winning starts.

206
textfiles.com/politics/polit-cr.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,206 @@
POLITICALLY CORRECT THINKING AND STATE EDUCATION
By RICHARD M. EBELING
You may recall seeing the December 24, 1990, issue of Newsweek
on the newsstands. The cover had a granite wall with raised
lettering, spelling out the words, "Thought Police." If you
read the article, you learned about something called
"politically correct thinking."
A growing number of institutions of higher learning around the
country have been establishing new and stringent linguistic
and behavioral guidelines for their students and faculties.
All words and actions that may in any way be interpreted to
contain racial, sexist or homosexual slurs carry increasingly
severe penalties. For students, it can mean anything from a
financial fine to expulsion from the school. For faculty, it
can mean grounds for dismissal, denial of tenure or lack of
promotion.
From the Newsweek article, the innocent and uninformed reader
would have gained the impression that this new form of thought
police was merely the temporary, if irritating, excesses of a
few campus administrators, faculty members and students trying
to redress the racist and sexist insensitivities of the past.
Even the discussion in the article about the often dramatic
changes being introduced into core liberal arts curricula at
these institutions was made to seem as merely the movement
towards a more pluralistic view of man, society and culture.
The dominant focus in liberal arts education on Western
culture and tradition will now be modified. Other cultures,
other world philosophies, other conceptions of man and
community will be presented on an equal footing with the
European and American contributions to the human heritage.
And what about the "thought policemen"? Newsweek ended the
topic with an article by a young man who had been a thought
policeman at one of these campuses. He assured the readers
that he and others were merely trying to raise the
consciousness of their fellow students so that they would be
more aware of the "oppressiveness" of traditional language.
What if students were not interested in attending the
"reeducation" programs on campus? The author said, "Attendance
wasn't mandatory, but did we know who wouldn't show? You bet."
Contrary to the general impression that Newsweek conveyed, the
movement for "politically correct thinking" is potentially one
of the most dangerous intellectual currents in American
academia today. Some of the recent books that explain what its
proponents are all about include Destructive Generation by
David Horowitz and Peter Collier, Tenured Radicals by Roger
Kimball, and The Hollow Men by Charles Sykes.
What is the world-view of these advocates of "politically
correct thinking"? In an excellent article entitled, "The
Storm over the University," which appeared in the December 6,
1990, issue of The New York Review of Books, the well-known
philosopher John Searle gave a succinct summary:
"The history of `Western Civilization' is in large
part a history of oppression. Internally, Western
civilization oppressed women, various slave and serf
populations, and ethnic and cultural minorities
generally. In foreign affairs, the history of Western
civilization is one of imperialism and colonialism. The
so-called canon of Western civilization consists in the
official publications of this system of oppression, and
it is no accident that the authors in the `canon' are
almost exclusively Western white males, because the
civilization itself is ruled by a caste consisting almost
entirely of Western white males."
As the authors to whom I have referred demonstrate, many of
the proponents of "politically correct thinking" in American
academia are refugees and exiles from the leftist political
causes of the 1960s--for example, they who resisted American
intervention in Vietnam because they supported socialist
revolution in the Third World. They protested against "the
establishment" at home because they hated capitalism and saw
themselves as the vanguard of a coming "people's democracy"
that would replace the existing "fascist Amerika"; and because
they hated the "commercial society" and resented the
"oppression" of market relationships.
Unable to win their war in the streets or in the political
world, they retreated into the halls of ivy, which they now
increasingly dominate. Everything they dislike is the product
of "white capitalist power." Everything they cherish is found
in the non-market communalism and collectivism of the Third
World.
They use all the standard Marxian ideological and linguistic
tricks. Language has no inherent objective meaning; words are
tools of "class," "race" and "sexual" exploitation. Truth is
not merely difficult to discover; it, in fact, does not exist.
The claim that there are universal truths about man, society
and nature--truths that are valid for all people in all
places at all times--are philosophical tricks used by the
"ruling class" to get the masses to accept their inferior
stations in life and view their oppression and exploitation as
both inevitable and necessary.
Even to think or speak in terms of individuals and individual
rights is considered suspect; any person who does so is either
the victim of or the apologist for the male, capitalist
exploiting class. The rulers wish to deceive us into thinking
about ourselves as "mere individuals" so they can hide from
view the race, sex and class relationships that are the actual
foundations of the existing social order.
The perversity of this view, of course, is that Western
civilization has, in fact, been the most liberating cultural
force in human history. It was ancient Judaism that told
earthly rulers that there is a Higher Law and a Higher
Morality than any man can create; and every man, as a creation
of God, has recourse to that Higher Law and Morality against
the tyranny of worldly rulers. It was Christianity that taught
that every man is unique and precious in the eyes of God; that
no worldly ruler may set himself between the individual and
his relationship to God. Thus, Judaism and Christianity laid
the foundation for our modern principles of individual freedom
of thought and action.
From the ancient Greeks, Western man gained his appreciation
of and confidence in the power of his reason to understand and
master the forces of nature. And from the Romans have come our
tradition of natural law and the rule of law.
It is modern capitalism that has created the moral order of
voluntary and peaceful relationships among men. It is the
market economy that has generated the prosperity and
opportunities that are liberating both the body and spirit of
increasingly larger numbers of human beings of all races and
religions around the globe.
In terms of freedom, prosperity and the promotion of human
dignity, Western civilization wins hands down against every
other civilization in human history. This is precisely why the
proponents of "politically correct thinking" wish to banish
open discourse and cross-cultural ethical and philosophical
comparison. Only by denying that such comparisons are
possible, and only by impugning the motives of those who
oppose them can they win--in other words, a victory through
intellectual sleight of hand.
What about the opponents of "politically correct thinking"?
Their arguments are usually sound and their defense of Western
culture meritorious. But their strategy, in my opinion, is
wrong. They hope to defeat the "cultural leftists" of academia
through appeals to the constitutional right of "freedom of
speech" or through political counterattacks in the university
structure designed to recapture the halls of ivy.
While the ideologues of "politically correct thinking" are not
limited to state-run universities, as Charles Sykes' expose of
Dartmouth College revealingly demonstrates, it is there that
the battle needs to be fought and won.
But the answer is not to capture the state universities for
"the Right." Rather the answer is to defeat the cultural
leftists by denying them the source of their power: the
socialist educational system. State universities dominate
higher education in the United States. And what government
does not control directly, it indirectly controls and
manipulates through the regulations that come with government
grants and scholarships to nominally private schools. (My
employer, Hillsdale College, is practically the only
institution of higher learning in America that takes no
government money in any form and, as a result, is totally
independent of government control.)
Eliminate government-provided and subsidized education, and
these economically privileged and politically protected
islands of philosophical collectivism will be forced to fight
for their financial support in a marketplace of ideas. It
would be a marketplace in which they would have to persuade
the consumers of education that what they have for sale is
actually worth the price of admission. The cultural leftists
would no longer have their ideas subsidized by the general
taxpaying public. They would no longer have a protected corner
of the intellectual market through their special-interest
influence on the socialized educational process.
Parents and students who desired an education inspired and
policed by "politically correct thinking" would be asked to
pay for the opportunity. Those who preferred a traditional
liberal arts education emphasizing the Western heritage would
be asked to do the same. The entire controversy would be
diffused because it would be depoliticized through the
privatization of education. And in a real marketplace of
ideas, I personally have little doubt about which of the
intellectual alternatives would tend to capture the largest
free-market share.
Professor Ebeling is the Ludwig von Mises Professor of
Economics at Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan, and also
serves as vice-president of academic affairs for The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the April 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

483
textfiles.com/politics/politic.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,483 @@
Computer-Related Political Groups
=================================
This document is included in the PGP software release package. PGP
is "Pretty Good Privacy", a public-key encryption program from Philip
Zimmermann.
PGP is a very political piece of software. It seems appropriate to
mention here some computer-related activist groups that are concerned
with issues such as impacts of computers on society, algorithm
patents, etc. Here is some information on these groups, provided by
each group.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
----------------------------------------
Last Updated: 14 June 1993
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) was founded in July, 1990,
to assure freedom of expression in digital media, with a particular
emphasis on applying the principles embodied in the Constitution and
the Bill of Rights to computer-based communication.
From the beginning, EFF was determined to become an organization that
would combine technical, legal and public policy expertise, and would
apply these skills to the myriad issues and concerns that arise
whenever a new communications medium is born.
By remaining faithful to this initial vision, EFF has become an
organized voice for the burgeoning community of nationally and inter-
nationally networked computer users. We perform the multiple roles of
guardian, advocate and innovator, to serve and protect the public
interest in the information age.
GOALS OF THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION, 1993
EFF's mission is to understand the opportunities and challenges of
digital communications, in order to foster openness, individual
freedom and community. We expect to carry out our mission through
activities in the following areas:
POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND ADVOCACY. EFF has been working to
promote an open architecture for telecommunications by various
means, including the Open Platform Initiative, the fight against the
FBI's Digital Telephony wiretap proposal, and efforts to free robust
encryption technologies from NSA control.
FOSTERING COMMUNITY. Much of the work we have done has been directed
at fostering a sense of community in the online world. Because we
realize that we know far less about the conditions conducive to the
formation of virtual communities than is necessary to be effective in
creating them, we will devote a large portion of our R & D resources
to developing better understanding in this area.
LEGAL SERVICES. EFF was born to defend the rights of computer users
against overzealous and uninformed law enforcement officials. This
continues to be an important focus of EFF's work. We provide legal
information to individuals who request it and support for attorneys
who are litigating. We maintain print and online legal archives,
disseminate this information, and make it available for downloading.
Our board and staff are continuously engaged in writing and speaking
about these issues.
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT. We have started many projects over the years
as their need became apparent. Going forward, EFF will allocate
resources to investigate and initiate new projects. To ensure that
our projects have the greatest impact and can reasonably be completed
with the resources available, EFF will sharpen its selection and
review process.
MEMBERSHIP IN THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
If you support our goals and our work, you can show that support by
becoming a member now. Members receive our bi-weekly electronic
newsletter, EFFector Online (if you have an electronic address that
can be reached through the Net), answers to your legal questions,
special releases and other notices on our activities. (Because we
believe that support should be freely given, you can receive these
things even if you do not elect to become a member.) Your membership
dues and other donations are fully tax deductible.
OUR ADDRESSES
Electronic Frontier Foundation
1001 G St., NW
Suite 950 East
Washington, DC 20001
+1 202 347 5400
+1 202 393 5509 FAX
Internet: eff@eff.org
MEMBERSHIP IN THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
=============================================================
Print out and mail to:
Membership Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
1001 G St., NW, Suite 950 East, Washington, DC 20001
I wish to become a member of EFF. I enclose: $_______
$20.00 (student or low income membership) $40.00 (regular membership)
Name:
Organization:
Address:
City or Town:
State: Zip: Phone (optional): ( )
FAX (optional): ( )
Email address:
I enclose a check [ ].
Please charge my membership in the amount of $________ to my
Mastercard [ ] Visa [ ] American Express [ ]
Number:
Expiration date:
Signature: ________________________________________________
Date:
Our privacy policy: The Electronic Frontier Foundation will never sell
any part of our membership list. We will, from time to time, share
this list with other nonprofit organizations whose work we determine
to be in line with our goals. However, you must explicitly grant us
permission to share your name with these other groups. Member privacy
is our default.
I hereby grant permission to EFF to share my name with other
nonprofit groups from time to time as it deems appropriate.
[ ] Initials:___________________________
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
------------------------------------------------
CPSR empowers computer professionals and computer users to advocate
for the responsible use of information technology and empowers all
who use computer technology to participate in the public debate. As
technical experts, CPSR members provide the public and policymakers
with realistic assessments of the power, promise, and limitations of
computer technology. As an organization of concerned citizens, CPSR
directs public attention to critical choices concerning the
applications of computing and how those choices affect society.
By matching unimpeachable technical information with policy
development savvy, CPSR uses minimum dollars to have maximum impact
and encourages broad public participation in the shaping of
technology policy.
Every project we undertake is based on five principles:
* We foster and support public discussion of and public
responsibility for decisions involving the use of computers in
systems critical to society.
* We work to dispel popular myths about the infallibility of
technological systems.
* We challenge the assumption that technology alone can solve
political and social problems.
* We critically examine social and technical issues within
the computer profession, nationally and internationally.
* We encourage the use of computer technology to improve the
quality of life.
Founded in 1981 by a small group of computer scientists concerned
about the use of computers in nuclear weapons systems, CPSR has grown
into a national public-interest alliance of computer industry
professionals dedicated to examining the impact of technology on
society.
Currently, CPSR has 21 chapters in the U.S. and affiliations with
similar groups worldwide. In addition to our National Office in Palo
Alto, CPSR maintains offices in Washington D.C. and Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
CPSR PROJECTS
As computer technology becomes increasingly pervasive, the issues
facing us become more complex. CPSR provides a forum where we can
examine technology's impact on our lives, the lives of our fellow
citizens, and on society as a whole. By sponsoring both national and
local projects, CPSR serves as a catalyst for in-depth discussion and
effective action in key areas:
Civil Liberties and Privacy
The 21st Century Project: Technology Policy and Human Needs
Workplace Issues and Participatory Design
Reliability and Risk
In addition, CPSR's chapter-based projects and national working
groups tackle issues ranging from the development of nanotechnology
and virtual reality to computing and ethics to community computing to
computers and education.
HOW TO BECOME A MEMBER
CPSR is a democratically organized grass roots alliance. Our
accomplishments are the result of the member activism. Many CPSR
members serve as national organizers
Just fill out the membership form, enclose a check and mail it to
CPSR, P.O. Box 717, Palo Alto, CA 94301.
CPSR's cost to provide members with services is covered by the $75
dues. To keep CPSR membership open to a wide range of people, we
offer dues levels of $20 and $50.
MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS
When you become a member of CPSR, you are joining a nationwide
network of computer professionals who are committed to bringing
social responsibility to all aspects of computer technology. CPSR
sponsors, supports, and participates in conferences, roundtables and
meetings on advanced issues in computing, local civic networks,
cryptography, participatory design, and computers and social change.
Every fall the CPSR Annual Meeting brings together the foremost
representatives of the technology industry to explore current topics
in seminars and panel discussions. Our conferences and chapter
meetings provide important opportunities to meet other members and
share ideas and expertise.
OTHER MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS INCLUDE:
* a quarterly newsletter which provides in-depth analysis of key
issues in computing as well as updates on CPSR activities and
action alerts,
* an organized voice for socially responsible computing in
Washington,
* well-researched public testimony and public policy development,
* invitations and discounts to CPSR events,
* discounts on research papers, books, and educational videotapes,
* on-line information and discussion of key issues in computing,
* membership in a local CPSR chapter (where available) and notices
of chapter meetings and activities,
* participation in local and national working groups which allow you
to have effective impact on the issues you care about,
* information and referral about crucial issues in computing.
ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION
CPSR National Office
P.O. Box 717
Palo Alto, CA 94301
415-322-3778
415-322-3798 (FAX)
E-mail: cpsr@csli.stanford.edu
CPSR Cambridge Office
P.O. Box 962
Cambridge, MA 02142
617-625-6985
chapman@lcs.mit.edu
CPSR Washington Office
666 Pennsylvania Ave SE, Suite 303
Washington, D.C. 20003
202-544-9240
202-547-5481 FAX
rotenberg@washofc.cpsr.org
Staff
Managing Director, Evelyn Pine
Assistant to the Director, Nikki Draper
Cambridge Office Director, Gary Chapman
Washington Office Director, Marc Rotenberg
PRIVACY NOTICE: The CPSR membership database is never sold, rented,
lent, exchanged, or used for anything other than official CPSR
activity. CPSR may elect to send members mailings with information
from other groups, but the mailings will always originate with CPSR.
====================== clip and mail ==========================
CPSR MEMBERSHIP FORM
Name _________________________________________________________
Address _________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
City/State/Zip __________________________________________________
Home phone ____________________ Work phone _____________________
Company _________________________________________________________
Type of work ____________________________________________________
E-mail address __________________________________________________
CPSR Chapter
__ Acadiana __ Austin __ Berkeley
__ Boston __ Chicago __ Denver/Boulder
__ Los Angeles __ Madison __ Maine
__ Milwaukee __ Minnesota __ New Haven
__ New York __ Palo Alto __ Philadelphia
__ Pittsburgh __ Portland __ San Diego
__ Santa Cruz __ Seattle __ Washington, DC
__ No chapter in my area
CPSR Membership Categories
__ $ 75 REGULAR MEMBER
__ $ 50 Basic member
__ $ 200 Supporting member
__ $ 500 Sponsoring member
__ $1000 Lifetime member
__ $ 20 Student/low income member
__ $ 50 Foreign subscriber
__ $ 50 Library/institutional subscriber
Additional tax-deductible contribution to support CPSR projects:
__ $50 __ $75 __ $100 __ $250
__ $500 __ $1000 __ Other
Total Enclosed: $ ________
Make check out to CPSR and mail to:
CPSR
P.O. Box 717
Palo Alto, CA 94301
--
The League for Programming Freedom
----------------------------------
Protect Your Freedom to Write Programs
Join the League for Programming Freedom
(Version of January 15, 1993)
Ten years ago, programmers were allowed to write programs using all
the techniques they knew, and providing whatever features they felt
were useful. This is no longer the case. New monopolies, known as
software patents and interface copyrights, have taken away our
freedom of expression and our ability to do a good job.
"Look and feel" lawsuits attempt to monopolize well-known command
languages; some have succeeded. Copyrights on command languages
enforce gratuitous incompatibility, close opportunities for
competition, and stifle incremental improvements.
Software patents are even more dangerous; they make every design
decision in the development of a program carry a risk of a lawsuit,
with draconian pretrial seizure. It is difficult and expensive to
find out whether the techniques you consider using are patented; it
is impossible to find out whether they will be patented in the
future.
The League for Programming Freedom is a grass-roots organization of
professors, students, businessmen, programmers and users dedicated to
bringing back the freedom to write programs. The League is not
opposed to the legal system that Congress intended--copyright on
individual programs. Our aim is to reverse the recent changes made
by judges in response to special interests, often explicitly
rejecting the public interest principles of the Constitution.
The League works to abolish the new monopolies by publishing
articles, talking with public officials, boycotting egregious
offenders, and in the future may intervene in court cases. On May
24, 1989, the League picketed Lotus headquarters on account of their
lawsuits, and then again on August 2, 1990. These marches stimulated
widespread media coverage for the issue. We welcome suggestions for
other activities, as well as help in carrying them out.
Membership dues in the League are $42 per year for programmers,
managers and professionals; $10.50 for students; $21 for others.
Please give more if you can. The League's funds will be used for
filing briefs; for printing handouts, buttons and signs; whatever
will persuade the courts, the legislators, and the people. You may
not get anything personally for your dues--except for the freedom to
write programs. The League is a non-profit corporation, but not
considered a tax-exempt charity. However, for those self-employed in
software, the dues can be a business expense.
The League needs both activist members and members who only pay their
dues. We also greatly need additional corporate members; contact us
for information.
If you have any questions, please write to the League, phone
(617) 433-7071, or send Internet mail to lpf@uunet.uu.net
Jack Larsen, President
Dean Anderson, Secretary
Steve Sisak, Treasurer
Jack Larsen can be contacted at (708) 698-1160; Fax (708) 698-6221.
To join, please send a check and the following information to:
League for Programming Freedom
1 Kendall Square #143
P.O.Box 9171
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
(Outside the US, please send a check in US dollars on a bank having a
US correspondant bank, to save us check cashing fees.)
Your name:
The address for League mailings, a few each year; please indicate
whether it is your home address or your work address:
The company you work for, and your position:
Your phone numbers (home, work or both):
Your email address, so we can contact you for demonstrations or for
writing letters. (If you don't want us to contact you for these
things, please say so, but please give us your email address anyway
so we can save paper and postage by sending you the newsletter by
email.)
Is there anything about you which would enable your endorsement of
the LPF to impress the public? For example, if you are or have been
a professor or an executive, or have written software that has a good
reputation, please tell us.
Would you like to help with LPF activities?
The corporate charter of the League for Programming Freedom states:
The purpose of the corporation is to engage in the following
activities:
1. To determine the existence of, and warn the public about
restrictions and monopolies on classes of computer programs where such
monopolies prevent or restrict the right to develop certain types of
computer programs.
2. To develop countermeasures and initiatives, in the public interest,
effective to block or otherwise prevent or restrain such monopolistic
activities including education, research, publications, public
assembly, legislative testimony, and intervention in court proceedings
involving public interest issues (as a friend of the court).
3. To engage in any business or other activity in service of and
related to the foregoing paragraphs that lawfully may be carried on
by a corporation organized under Chapter 180 of the Massachusetts
General Laws.
The officers and directors of the League will be elected annually by
the members.

603
textfiles.com/politics/pollute.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,603 @@
Why Socialism Causes Pollution
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
A Reprint from
The Freeman
from the March 1992 issue
Copyright (c)1992 by The Foundation for Economic
Education, Inc. Printed in the U.S.A. Permission is
granted to reprint any article in this issue except
"The Illusion That's the Welfare State" and
"Czechoslovakia on the Hudson," provided appropriate
credit is given and two copies of the reprinted
material are sent to The Foundation.
Corporations are often accused of despoiling the
environment in their quest for profit. Free enterprise
is supposedly incompatible with environmental
preservation, so that government regulation is
required.
Such thinking is the basis for current proposals to
expand environmental regulation greatly. So many new
controls have been proposed and enacted that the late
economic journalist Warren Brookes once forecast that
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could
well become "the most powerful government agency on
earth, involved in massive levels of economic, social,
scientific, and political spending and interference.''l
But if the profit motive is the primary cause of
pollution, one would not expect to find much pollution
in socialist countries, such as the former Soviet
Union, China, and in the former Communist countries of
Eastern and Central Europe. That is, in theory. In
reality exactly the opposite is true: The socialist
world suffers from the worst pollution on earth. Could
it be that free enterprise is not so incompatible with
environmental protection after all?
I. SOCIALIST POLLUTION The Soviet Union
In the Soviet Union there was a vast body of
environmental law and regulation that purportedly
protected the public interest, but these constraints
have had no perceivable benefit. The Soviet Union, like
all socialist countries, suffered from a massive
"tragedy of the commons," to borrow the term used by
biologist Garrett Hardin in his classic 1968 article.2
Where property is communally or governmentally owned
and treated as a free resource, resources will
inevitably be overused with little regard for future
consequences.
The Soviet government's imperatives for economic
growth, combined with communal ownership of virtually
all property and resources, caused tremendous
environmental damage. According to economist Marshall
Goldman, who studied and traveled extensively in the
Soviet Union, "The attitude that nature is there to be
exploited by man is the very essence of the Soviet
production ethic."3
A typical example of the environmental damage caused by
the Soviet economic system is the exploitation of the
Black Sea. To comply with five-year plans for housing
and building construction, gravel, sand, and trees
around the beaches were used for decades as
construction materials. Because there is no private
property, "no value is attached to the gravel along the
seashore. Since, in effect, it is free, the contractors
haul it away."4 This practice caused massive beach
erosion which reduced the Black Sea coast by 50 percent
between 1920 and 1960. Eventually, hotels, hospitals,
and, of all things, a military sanitarium collapsed
into the sea as the shoreline gave way. Frequent
landslides--as many as 300 per year-- have been
reported.
Water pollution is catastrophic. Effluent from a
chemical plant killed almost all the fish in the Oka
River in 1965, and similar fish kills have occurred in
the Volga, Ob, Yenesei, Ural, and Northern Dvina
rivers. Most Russian factories discharge their waste
without cleaning it at all. Mines, oil wells, and ships
freely dump waste and ballast into any available body
of water, since it is all one big (and tragic)
"commons."
Only six of the 20 main cities in Moldavia had a sewer
system by the late 1960s, and only two of those cities
made any effort to treat the sewage. Conditions are far
more primitive in the countryside.
The Aral and Caspian seas have been gradually
disappearing as large quantities of their water have
been diverted for irrigation. And since untreated
sewage flows into feeder rivers, they are also heavily
polluted.
Some Soviet authorities expressed fears that by the
turn of the century the Aral Sea will be nothing but a
salt marsh. One paper reported that because of the
rising salt content of the Aral the remaining fish will
rapidly disappear. It was recently revealed that the
Aral Sea has shrunk by about a third. Its shore line
"is arid desert and the wind blows dry deposits of salt
thousands of miles away. The infant mortality rate [in
that region] is four to five times the national
average."5
The declining water level in the Caspian Sea has been
catastrophic for its fish population as spawning areas
have turned into dry land. The sturgeon population has
been so decimated that the Soviets have experimented
with producing artificial caviar.
Hundreds of factories and refineries along the Caspian
Sea dump untreated waste into the sea, and major cities
routinely dump raw sewage. It has been estimated that
one-half of all the discharged effluent is carried in
the Volga River, which flows into the Caspian Sea. The
concentration of oil in the Volga is so great that
steamboats are equipped with signs forbidding
passengers to toss cigarettes overboard. As might be
expected, fish kills along the Volga are a "common
calamity."
Lake Baikal, which is believed to be the oldest
freshwater lake in the world, is also one of the
largest and deepest. It is five times as deep as Lake
Superior and contains twice the volume of water.
According to Marshall Goldman, it was also "the best
known example of the misuse of water resources in the
USSR."6
Factories and pulp mills have been dumping hundreds of
millions of gallons of effluent into Lake Baikal each
year for decades. As a result, animal life in the lake
has been cut by more than 50 percent over the past half
century. Untreated sewage is dumped into virtually all
tributaries to the lake.
Islands of alkaline sewage have been observed floating
on the lake, including one that was 18 miles long and
three miles wide. These "islands" have polluted the air
around the lake as well as the water in it. Thousands
of acres of forest surrounding the lake have been
denuded, causing such erosion that dust storms have
been reported. So much forest land in the Lake Baikal
region has been destroyed that some observers reported
shifting sands that link up with the Gobi Desert; there
are fears that the desert may sweep into Siberia and
destroy the lake.
In other regions the fact that no compensation has to
be paid for land that is flooded by water projects has
made it easy for government engineers to submerge large
areas of land. "As much land has been lost through
flooding and salination as has been added through
irrigation and drainage in the Soviet Union." 7
These examples of environmental degradation in the
Soviet Union are not meant to be exhaustive but to
illustrate the phenomenon of Communist pollution. As
Goldman has observed, the great pollution problems in
Russia stem from the fact that the government
determined that economic growth was to be pursued at
any cost. "Government officials in the USSR generally
have a greater willingness to sacrifice their
environment than government officials in a society with
private enterprise where there is a degree of public
accountability. There is virtually a political as well
as an economic imperative to devour idle resources in
the USSR."8
China
In China, as in Russia, putting the government in
charge of resource allocation has not had desirable
environmental consequences. Information on the state of
China's environment is not encouraging.
According to the Worldwatch Institute, more than 90
percent of the trees in the pine forests in China's
Sichuan province have died because of air pollution. In
Chungking, the biggest city in southwest China, a
4,500-acre forest has been reduced by half. Acid rain
has reportedly caused massive crop losses.
There also have been reports of waterworks and landfill
projects severely hampering fish migration. Fish
breeding was so seriously neglected that fish has
largely vanished from the national diet. Depletion of
government-owned forests has turned them into deserts,
and millions of acres of grazing and farm land have
been devastated. Over eight million acres of land in
the northern Chinese plains were made alkaline and
unproductive during the "Great Leap Forward."
Central and Eastern Europe
With Communism's collapse, word has begun to seep out
about Eastern Europe's environmental disasters.
According to the United Nations Global Environment
Monitoring Program, "pollution in that region is among
the worst on the Earth's surface."9 Jeffrey Leonard of
the World Wildlife Fund concluded that "pollution was
part and parcel of the system that molested the people
[of Eastern Europe] in their daily lives.''10 Evidence
is mounting of "an environmental nightmare," the legacy
of "decades of industrial development with little or no
environmental control.''1l
Poland. According to the Polish Academy of Sciences, "a
third of the nation's 38 million people live in areas
of ecological disaster.''l2 In the heavily
industrialized Katowice region of Poland, the people
suffer 15 percent more circulatory disease, 30 percent
more tumors, and 47 percent more respiratory disease
than other Poles. Physicians and scientists believe
pollution is a major contributor to these health
problems.
Acid rain has so corroded railroad tracks that trains
are not allowed to exceed 24 miles an hour. The air is
so polluted in Katowice that there are underground
"clinics" in uranium mines where the chronically ill
can go to breathe clean air.
Continuous pumping of water from coal mines has caused
so much land to subside that over 300,000 apartments
were destroyed as buildings collapsed. The mine sludge
has been pumped into rivers and streams along with
untreated sewage which has made 95 percent of the water
unfit for human consumption. More than 65 percent of
the nation's water is even unfit for industrial use
because it is so toxic that it would destroy heavy
metals used by industry. In Cracow, Poland's ancient
capital, acid rain "dissolved so much of the gold roof
of the 16th century Sigismund Chapel that it recently
had to be replaced.''13
Industrial dust rains down on towns, depositing
cadmium, lead, zinc, and iron. The dust is so heavy
that huge trucks drive through city streets daily
spraying water to reduce it. By some accounts eight
tons of dust fall on each square mile in and around
Cracow each year. The mayor of Cracow recently stated
that the Vistula River--the largest river in Poland--is
"nothing but a sewage canal.''14 The river has mercury
levels that are three times what researchers say is
safe, while lead levels are 25 times higher than deemed
safe.
Half of Poland's cities, including Warsaw, don't even
treat their wastes, and 41 animal species have
reportedly become extinct in Poland in recent years.
While health statistics are spotty--they were not a
priority of the Communist government--available data
are alarming. A recent study of the Katowice region
found that 21 percent of the children up to 4 years old
are sick almost constantly, while 41 percent of the
children under 6 have serious health problems.
Life expectancy for men is lower than it was 20 years
ago. In Upper Silesia, which is considered one of the
most heavily industrialized regions in the world,
circulatory disease levels are 15 percent higher than
in the general population, cancer rates are 30 percent
higher, respiratory disease is 47 percent higher, and
there has been "an appalling increase in the number of
retarded children," according to the Polish Academy of
Sciences. Although pollution cannot be blamed for all
these health problems, physicians and scientists attach
much of the blame to this source.
Czechoslovakia. In a speech given on New Year's Day of
1990, Czechoslovakian President Vaclav Havel said, "We
have laid waste to our soil and the rivers and the
forests . . . and we have the worst environment in the
whole of Europe today.''15 He was not exaggerating,
although the competition for the title of "worst
environment" is. clearly fierce. Sulfur dioxide
concentrations in Czechoslovakia are eight times higher
than in the United States, and "half the forests are
dead or dying. 16
Because of the overuse of fertilizers, farmland in some
areas of Czechoslovakia is toxic. to more than one foot
in depth. In Bohemia, in northwestern Czechoslovakia,
hills stand bare because their vegetation has died in
air so foul it can be tasted. One report describes the
Czech countryside as a place where "barren plateaus
stretch for miles, studded with the stumps and
skeletons of pine trees. Under the snow lie thousands
of acres of poisoned ground, where for centuries thick
forests had grown.''17 There is a stretch of over 350
miles where more than 300,000 acres of forest have
disappeared and the remaining trees are dying.
A thick, brown haze hangs over much of northern
Czechoslovakia for about eight months of the year.
Sometimes it takes on the sting of tear gas, according
to local officials. There are environmental laws, but
they aren't enforced. Sulfur in the air has been
reported at 20 times the permissible level. Soil in
some regions is so acidic that aluminum trapped in the
clay is released. Scientists discovered that the
aluminum has poisoned groundwater, killing tree and
plant roots and filtering into the drinking water.
Severe erosion in the decimated forests has caused
spring floods in which all the melted snow cascades
down mountainsides in a few weeks, causing further
erosion and leading to water shortages in the summer.
In its search for coal, the Communist government has
used bulldozers on such a massive scale that they have
"turned towns, farms and woodlands into coarse brown
deserts and gaping hollows.''18 Because open-pit mining
is cheaper than underground mining, and has been
practiced extensively, in some areas of Czechoslovakia
"you have total devastation of the land.''19
East Germany. The new German government has claimed
that nearly 40 percent of the East German populace
suffers ill effects from pollutants in the air. In
Leipzig, half the children are treated each year for
illnesses believed to be associated with air pollution.
Eighty percent of eastern Germany's surface waters are
classified as unsuitable for fishing, sports, or
drinking, and one out of three lakes has been declared
biologically dead because of decades of untreated
dumping of chemical waste.
Much of the East German landscape has been devastated.
Fifteen to 20 percent of its forests are dead, and
another 40 percent are said to be dying. Between 1960
and 1980 at least 70 villages were destroyed and their
inhabitants uprooted by the government, which wanted to
mine high-sulfur brown coal. The countryside is now
"pitted with moon-like craters" and "laced with the
remains of what were once spruce and pine trees,
nestled amid clouds of rancid smog."20 The air in some
cities is so polluted that residents use their car
headlights during the day, and visitors have been known
to vomit from breathing the air.
Nearly identical problems exist in Bulgaria, Hungary,
Romania, and Yugoslavia. Visiting scientists have
concluded that pollution in Central and Eastern Europe
"is more dangerous and widespread than anything they
have seen in the Western industrial nations.''21
II. UNITED STATES: PUBLIC SECTOR POLLUTION
The last refuge of those who advocate socialistic
solutions to environmental pollution is the claim that
it is the lack of democratic processes that prevents
the Communist nations from truly serving the public
interest. If this theory is correct, then the public
sector of an established democracy such as the United
States should be one of the best examples of
environmental responsibility. But U.S. government
agencies are among the most cavalier when it comes to
environmental stewardship.
There is much evidence to dispute the theory that only
private businesses pollute. In the United States, we
need look no further than our own government agencies.
These public sector institutions, such as the
Department of Defense (DOD), are among the worst
offenders. DOD now generates more than 400,000 tons of
hazardous waste a year--more than is produced by the
five largest chemical companies combined. To make
matters worse, the Environmental Protection Agency
lacks the enforcement power over the public sector that
it possesses over the private sector.
The lax situation uncovered by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma is
typical of the way in which many Federal agencies
respond to the EPA's directives. "Although DOD policy
calls for the military services to . . . implement
EPA's hazardous waste management regulations, we found
that Tinker has been selling . . . waste oil, fuels,
and solvents rather than recycling," reported the
GAO.22
One of the world's most poisonous spots lies about 10
miles northeast of Denver in the Army's Rocky Mountain
Arsenal. Nerve gas, mustard shells, the anti-crop spray
TX, and incendiary devices have been dumped into pits
there over the past 40 years. Dealing with only one
"basin" of this dump cost $40 million. Six hundred
thousand cubic yards of contaminated soil and sludge
had to be scraped and entombed in a 16-acre, double-
lined waste pile.
There are plenty of other examples of Defense
Department facilities that need major cleanup. In fact,
total costs of a long-term Pentagon cleanup are hard to
get a handle on. Some officials have conceded that the
price tag could eventually exceed $20 billion.
Government-owned power plants are another example of
public-sector pollution. These plants are a large
source of sulfur dioxide emissions.
The federal government's Tennessee Valley Authority
operates 59 coal-fired power plants in the Southeast,
where it has had major legal confrontations with state
governments who want the Federal agency to comply with
state environmental regulations. The TVA has fought the
state governments for years over compliance with their
clean air standards. It won a major Supreme Court
victory when the Court ruled that, as a federal
government enterprise, it could be exempt from
environmental regulations with which private sector and
local governmental power plants must comply.
Federal agricultural policy also has been a large
source of pollution, in the past encouraging over-
utilization of land subject to erosion. Powerful farm
lobbies have protected "non-point" sources of pollution
from the heavy hand of regulation placed on other
private industries.
III. POLICY IMPLICATIONS
These examples of environmental degradation throughout
the world suggest some valuable lessons. First, it is
not free enterprise per se that causes environmental
harm; if so, the socialist world would be
environmentally pristine.
The heart of the problem lies with the failure of our
legal institutions, not the free enterprise system.
Specifically, American laws were weakened more than a
century ago by Progressive Era courts that believed
economic progress was in the public interest and should
therefore supersede individual rights.23
The English common law tradition of the protection of
private property rights--including the right to be free
from pollution--was slowly overturned. In other words,
many environmental problems are not caused by "market
failure" but by government's failure to enforce
property rights. It is a travesty of justice when
downstream residents, for example, cannot hold an
upstream polluter responsible for damaging their
properties. The common law tradition must be revived if
we are to enjoy a healthy market economy and a cleaner
environment. Potential polluters must know in advance
that they will be held responsible for their actions.
The second lesson is that the plundering of the
environment in the socialist world is a grand example
of the tragedy of the commons. Under communal property
ownership, where no one owns or is responsible for a
natural resource, the inclination is for each
individual to abuse or deplete the resource before
someone else does. Common examples of this "tragedy"
are how people litter public streets and parks much
more than their own yards; private housing is much
better maintained than public housing projects; cattle
ranchers overgraze public lands but maintain lush
pastures on their own property; the national forests
are carelessly over-logged, but private forests are
carefully managed and reforested by lumber companies
with "super trees"; and game fish are habitually
overfished in public waterways but thrive in private
lakes and streams. The tragedy of the commons is a
lesson for those who believe that further
nationalization and governmental control of natural
resources is a solution to our environmental problems.
These two pillars of free enterprise--sound liability
laws that hold people responsible for their actions and
the enforcement of private property rights--are
important stepping stones to environmental protection.
FOOTNOTES
[ShareDebate International Editor's Note: this text was
received in electronic form and it was intially scanned
in via an OCR program--it appears as if some uncaught
scanning errors remain in the bibliography. Where they
remain, I have replaced the characters with a '??'. I
did not receive this file direct from The Freeman but
from someone on the Internet who was scanning in their
articles that had blanket reprint permissions attached
to them--unfortunately, I have misplaced his name.]
1. Personal interview with Warren Brookes on April
??, 1990.
2. Garrett Hardin, "The Tragedy of the Commons,"
Science, December 13, 1968, pp. 1244-45.
3. Marshall Goldman, The Spoils of Progress:
Environmental Pollution in the Soviet Union (Cambridge:
MIT Press, 1972), p. 56.
4. Ibid., p. 162.
5. Peter Gumbel, "Soviet Concerns About Pollution Danger
Are Allowed to Emerge from the Closet," The Wall Street
Journal, August 23, 1988.
6. Goldman, p. ??.
7. Ibid. p. 232.
8. Ibid. p. 188.
9. Cited in Larry Tye, "Pollution a Nightmare Behind
Iron Curtain," The Arizona Republic, February 25,1990.
10. Cited in Mike Feinsilber, "Eastern Europe Fighting
Worst Pollution in World," The Chattanooga Times,
January 17,1990.
11. Tye, op. cit.
12. Marlise Simons, "Rising Iron Curtain Exposes
Haunting Veil of Polluted Air," The New York Times,
April 8, 1990
13. Lloyd Timberlake, "Poland--The Most Polluted
Country in the World?" New Scientist, October 22, 1981,
p. 219.
14. Marlise Simmons, "A Green Party Mayor Takes on
Industrial Filth of Old Cracow," The New York Times,
March 25, 1990.
15. Feinsilber, op. cit.
16. Tye, op. cit.
17. Marlise Simons, "Pollution's Toll in Eastern
Europe: Stumps Where Great Trees Once Grew," The New
York Times, March 19, 1990.
18. Marlise Simons, "Central Europe's Grimy Coal Belt:
Progress, Yes, But at What Cost?" The New York Times,
April 1, 1990.
19. Ibid.
20. Jeffrey Gedamn, "Polluted East Germany," Christian
Science Monitor, March 16, I990.
21. Simons, "Rising Iron Curtain."
22. Comptroller General, Wastepaper Recycling: Programs
of Civil Agencies Waned During the 1980s (Washington,
D.C.: General Accounting Office, 1989), p. 13.
23. Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American
Law, 1780-1860 (Cambndge: Harvard University Press,
1977).
***
Dr. DiLorenzo holds the Probasco Chair of Free
Enterprise at the University of Tennessee at
Chattanooga. This article is adapted from a larger
study published by the Center for the Study of American
Business at Washington University in St. Louis and
presented at the Mont Pelerin Society meeting in Big
Sky, Montana, August 22-26, 1991. The Freeman is the
monthly publication of The Foundation for Economic
Education, Inc., Irvington-on-Hudson, NY 10533. FEE,
established in 1946 by Leonard E. Read, is a
nonpolitical educational champion of private property,
the free market, and limited government. FEE is
classified as a 26 USC 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt
organization. Other officers of FEE's Board of Trustees
are: Gregg C. MacDonald, chairman; Lovett C. Peters,
vice chairman; Don L. Foote, treasurer.
The costs of Foundation projects and services are met
through donations. Donations are invited in any amount.
Subscriptions to The Freeman are available to any
interested person in the United States for the asking.
Additional single copies $1.00;10 or more, 50 cents
each. For foreign delivery, a donation of $20.00 a year
is required to cover direct mailing costs.
###

976
textfiles.com/politics/presid2.d Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,976 @@
15 page printout
NOTE: This file is incomplete.
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
This disk, its printout, or copies of either
are to be copied and given away, but NOT sold.
Bank of Wisdom, Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
**** ****
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
CHAPTER II
PRESIDENTS WHO WERE PRESBYTERIANS
ANDREW JACKSON
Born, March 15, 1767. Died, June 8, 1845. President, 1829-1837.
The story of the early religious background of the United
States is of interest 'When we consider the beliefs of its people.
The wilds of America were early settled by representatives of the
then most prominent forms of the Christian faith. While a large
number of them emigrated to find on this western continent
religious liberty, most of them, if strong enough, sought to to
establish, by law, the Church they brought with them.
In New England, with the exception of Rhode Island,
Congregationalism was the State Church. In New York, it was at
first the Dutch Reformed. Later, the English governors sought to
establish the Church of England but the opposition was so strong
that they were not successful except in theory. In New Jersey, the
same attempt was made, though there was not an Episcopal church in
the colony at the time. Pennsylvania granted liberty to all "who
confess and acknowledge the one Almighty and eternal God"; but the
holders of office "shall be such as profess faith in Jesus Christ."
The constitution of Delaware, formed in 1776, declared that all
persons professing the Christian religion "ought forever to enjoy
equal rights and privileges," but to hold office the
acknowledgement of the trinity and the inspiration of the
scriptures was mandatory. Maryland was first settled by Catholics.
Then the Puritans arrived, obtained power and persecuted them.
Later the Church of England was established. The so-called freedom
of conscience law of Maryland is a myth. It granted liberty to
trinitarian Christians only, the Jew, the Unitarian and the
unbeliever being excluded. it punished blasphemy by boring the
tongue with a red-hot iron, The first act favoring absolute
religious liberty passed in America, and, for all we know to the
contrary, in the modern world, was enacted in Rhode Island. There,
20 years before Maryland was settled, Roger Williams proclaimed
freedom to all, Christian, Jew, Pagan and infidel. In 1647, two
years before the Maryland law, which did not provide freedom at
all, these sentiments of Williams were enacted into a statute.
In Virginia, the Church of England was established, and the
penalties for heresy and non-conformity were very severe, even up
to the Revolution. The same establishment was set up in the
Carolinas. Georgia, under the benevolent Oglethorpe, had no
established Church, but Romanists were excluded. When, in 1752, the
colony lost its charter, the Church of England was made the State
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
44
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
Church. [NOTE: For a full and accurate history of religious laws in
the thirteen colonies, see 'The Rise of Religious Liberty in
America' by Sanford H. Cobb. Published by Henry Holt & Co., New
York City.]
Among the early settlers was a large proportion of those
holding the doctrines of John Calvin. The Puritans of New Engrand,
the Dutch settlers of New York, the Scotch and the Ulsterites all
held Presbyterian doctrines, though all did not hold to the
Presbyterian form of church government. Hence, it is natural that
this Church should leave its impress upon the people of the United
States and upon some of its statesmen, as it did upon Andrew
Jackson, the seventh President. His parents emigrated from the
North of Ireland and settled in South Carolina. Although he was not
a communicant until after he retired from the Presidency, he was a
believer in the Christian religion, as taught by John Calvin, and
a fairly regular church attendant.
Andrew Jackson is one of the most picturesque characters in
American history. As a boy, he fought in the Revolution, was taken
prisoner, and had his arm cut to the bone by the sword of a British
officer because he refused to clean the oincer's muddy boots. A
planter, frontier lawyer and judge; a congressman and senator from
Tennessee immedlately after that State's admission to the Union; a
militia general, Indian fighter, hero of the Battle of New Orleans,
he became, after a bitter struggle, President of the United States,
the first "man of the people" to hold this high office. He was so
accustomed, to the wild life of the frontier that he did not feel
at home anywhere else. He has been described, when young, as
"reckless, impetuous, quarrelsome, and passionate in temper;
thoroughly disinclined to learning of any sort, his favorite
pursuits being racing, gamins' and cock-fighting; but he was
Possessed of invincible determination, dauntless courage and
excelled in marksmanship and riding, qualities which later served
him well." He fought during his lifetime two duels, in one of which
he "killed his man," and in the other received a slight wound
himself. His political enemies many times published lists of his
fights and escapades.
John Parton, one of the best of Jackson's biographers,
describes the circumstances under which he joined the Church, as
they were related to him by the Rev. Dr. Edgar, who received the
ex-President into the fold:
"Ere long a 'Protracted meeting, was held in the little
church on the Hermitage farm. Dr. Edgar conducted the
exercises, and the family at the Hermitage were constant in
their attendance. The last day of the meeting arrived, which
was also the last day of the week. General Jackson sat in his
accustomed Seat, and Dr. Edgar preached. The subject of the
sermon was the interposition of Providence in the affairs of
men, a subject congenial with the habitual tone of General
Jackson's mind. The preacher spoke in detail of the perils
which beset the life of man, and how often he is preserved
from sickness and sudden death. Seeing General Jackson
listening with rapt attention to his discourse, the eloquent
preacher sketched the career of a man who, in adidition to the
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
45
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
ordinary dangers of human life, had encountered those of the
wilderness, of war, and of keen political conflict; who had
escaped the tomahawk of the savage, the attaeks of his
country's enemies, the privations and fatigues of border
warfare, and the aim of the assassin. How is it, exclaimed the
preacher, that a man endowed with reason and gifted with
intellioence can pass through such scenes as these unharmed,
and not see the hand of God in his deliverance? While
enlarging upon his theme, Dr. Edgar saw that his words were
sinking into the General's heart, and he spoke with unusual
animation and impressiveness."
We judge from this that Dr. Edgar had learned, his business
well, as those who are familiar with the psychology of conversions
can testify. The biographer continues:
"The services ended, General Jackson got into his
carriage and, was riding homeward. He was overtaken by Dr.
Edgar on horseback. He hailed the Doctor and said he wished
to, speak with him. Both havinog alighted, the general led the
clergyman a little way into the grove. 'Doctor,' said the
general, 'I want You to come home with me tonight.' 'I cannot
come tonight,' was his reply: 'I am engaged elsewhere.' Dr.
Edgar said he had promised to visit that evening a sick lady,
and he felt bound to keep his promise. General Jackson, as
though he had not heard the reply, said a third time and more
pleadingly than before, 'Doctor, I want you to come home with
me tonight. 'General Jackson,' said the clergyman, 'my word is
pledged; I cannot break it; but I will be at the Hermitage
tomorrow morning very early.'
The anxious man was obliged to be contented with this
arrangement, and went home alone. He retired to his apartment.
He passed the evening and the greater part of the night in
meditation, in reading, in conversing with his beloved
daughter and in prayer. He was sorely distressed. Late at
night when his daughter left him, he was still agitated and
sorrowful. What thoughts passed through his mind as he paced
his room in the silence of the night, of what sins he repented
and what actions of his life he wished he had not done, no one
knows or ever will know."
Those who have studied the human mind, in relation to the
emotions will think all of this has a natural interpretation. Many
a man and woman view their past careers, think of their errors and
realize they must be corrected or their lives will be failures.
Many have abandoned their vices and bad habits owing to the fear of
losing their health and the respect of their neighbor's and
friends. Some give up their vices through sheer disgust with them.
Self condemnation is not the exclusive property of supernaturalism.
Thoughtful people are coming to recognize that the facts of
religion can be traced to natural causes. The chief aim of the
religion of General Jackson's day, as represented by Dr. Edgar, was
to save the soul through faith in the supernatural attributes of
Christ. It was the teaching of the Presbyterian Church of that day,
and is yet the teaching of its ereed, that good conduct cannot save
in lieu of faith. Such has been the teaching of all other orthodox
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
46
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
Churches. They have merely followed the teaching of Paul that faith
can be counted for righteousness, Martin Luther said, "If any one
says that the Gospel requires works for salvation, I say flat and
plain, he is a liar."
Jackson's biographer concludes the story of the General's
conversion:
"In the morning the Rev. Dr. Edgar appeared soon after
sunrise. General Jackson told the joyful history of the night
and expressed a desire to be admitted into the Church with his
daughter that very morning. The usual questions respecting
doctrine and experience were satisfactorily answered by the
candidate. Then there was a pause in the conversation. The
clergyman said at length: 'General, there is one more question
it is my duty to ask you. Can you forgive all your enemies?'
The question was evidently unexpected, and the candidate was
silent for a while. 'My political enemies,' said he, 'I can
freely forgive; but as for those who abused me when I was
serving my country in the field, and those who attacked me for
serving my country -- Doctor, that is a different case.
"The Doctor assured him it was not. Christianity, he
said, forbade the indulgence of enmity absolutely and in all
cases. No man could be received into a Christian Church who
did not cast out of his heart every feeling of that nature. It
was a condition that was fundamental and indispensable.
"The Hermitage church was crowded to the utmost of its
small capacity; the very windows were darkened with the eager
faces of the servants. After the usual services the General
rose to make the required public declaration of his
concurrenre with the doetrines, and his resolve to obey the
precepts of the Church. He leaned heavily upon his stick with
both hands; tears rolled down his cheeks. His daughter, the
fair young matron, stood beside him. Amed a silence the most
profound the General answered the questions proposed to him.
When he me was formally pronounced a member of the Church, and
the clergyman was about to continue the service, the long
restrained feelings of the congregation burst forth in sobs
and exclamations which compelled him to pause for several
minutes. The clergyman himself was speechless with emotion,
and abandoned himself to the exaultation of the hour. A
familiar hymn was raised in which the entire assembly joined
with a fervor which at once expressed and relieved their
feelings."
The conversion of General Jackson gives us an idea of the
emotional religion so prevalent a century ago, and which still
linger among us today. Once the question was put to Bishop White,
one of the pastors of George Washington, "What is your opinion of
revivals?' The Bishop answered, "They have one great evil, in that
they cause some to mistake their animal for their spiritual
nature." Those who want evidence of this should read the chapter in
Henry A. Wise' 'Seven Decades of the Union,' in which he tells of
Tangier Island, loceated in Chesapeake Bay, and a part of Virginia,
where revivals were a regular feature of the island's life, After
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
47
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
a visit from a prominent evangelist the ministers of Pittsburgh met
and resolved that they would give no more countenance to traveling
evangelists.
It must be remembered that General Jackson was of a very
emotional nature, and all his life was imbued with strong passions.
In all his career these prevailed. Sometimes he was desperately
right, while at other times he was equally desperately wrong. He
was not a thinker, a student or even a reader, except of the news
though he had been admitted to the bar, it is sald he never read a
law book through. He was emphatically a man of action and in that
sphere he shines in American history. Later he forgot that he had
agreed to forgive his enemies, and shortly before he died he said
the greatest mistake he had ever made was when he did not hang John
C. Calhoun, the leader of the South Carolina nullifiers. To the end
of his life he delighted to show his friends the pistol with which
he had killed Charles Dickinson in a duel.
It must be remembered that those who have led rough, irregular
lives in their youth often become fanatically religious in old age.
"Old Hickory," as he was called owing to his unbending naature,
except for his military exploits, does not stand as well in history
as he stood in the estimation of his contemporaries. Yet in his
commendable qualities many think it would not be an evil to have
men of his stamp in public life today.
JAMES KNOX POLK
Born, November 2, 1795. Died, June 15, 1849.
President, March 4, 1845 -- March 4, 1849.
When James Knox Polk, of Tennessee, was nominated by the
Democratic party for President, in 1844, after he had been in
Congress 14 years, Speaker of the House of Representatives for two
terms and Governor of his own State, he was but little known
outside of it. His selection was a surprise even to his own party.
Governor Letcher, of Virginia, exclaimed, "Polk, great God, what a
nomination!" Stephen A. Douglas remarked, "From henceforth no
private citizen is safe!" The Whigs sang in a campaign song:
"Ha! Ha! Ha! Such a nominee,
As James K. Polk of Tennessee."
He was nominated because the current issues were the
annexation of Texas and the extension of slavery, two things he
could be depended upon to accomplish. From 1840 to 1860 is known in
our history as the era of weak men in the White House. All were
mere politicians and "trimmers," when a real principle was
broached. As was the case with a President in our time, the arduous
duties of his office caused President Polk to break down in health.
He left Washington an incurably sick man and died within a few
months after he had returned to his home in Tennessee.
The Polk family, like most families of Scotch ancestry, was
Presbyterian. Mrs. Polk was of the same faith and prohibited
dancing and card playing in the White House. During the Tyler
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
48
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
administration the Presidential mansion was the scene of gaiety and
grand entertainments; but on the inauouration of President Polk it
was said the reign of the Cavalier ended and that of the Puritan
began. Yet the President was not a member of any Church and had
never been baptized. While he was an habitual attendant of the
Presbyterian Church, with his wife, his own private opinions leaned
toward Methodism. McCormac's 'Life of Polk,' the only one in
existence so far as we know, on page 721, contains the following
statement:
"The Polk family,, as well as Mrs. Polk, were
Presbyterians, but the ex-President was not a member of any
church. He went regularly with his wife to the Church of her
choice, though his preference was for the Methodist
denomination. A few days before his death his aged mother came
from Columbia bringing her own pastor in the hope that her son
might accept baptism and unite with the Presbyterian Church.
But the son recalled a promise once given to the Rev. Mr.
McFerren, of the Methodist Church, that, when he was ready to
join the Church, the Rev. McFerren should baptise him. Having
thus formally embraced Christianity, he felt prepared to meet
the 'great event."'
Theodore Parker says that on his deathbed he acknowledged that
his good works had been as "filthy rags." But he was safely on
board 'the old ship of Zion before she weighed anchor and spread
her sails for the Elysian fields.
JAMES BUCHANAN
Born, April 22, 1791. Died, June 1, 1868.
President, March 4, 1857 -- March 4, 1861.
James Buchanan was the last of the pre-Civil War Presidents.
He had been in the House and Senate for 20 years, had been
Secretary of State and Minister to England. Born in pennsylvania
and descended, from Scotch emiogrants, he was a Presbyterian by
inheritance; but like Presidents Jackson and Polk he never joined
the Church until he retired to private life. All his life, however,
he had been a regular attendant, and a contributor to all Churches,
including the Catholic.
In August, 1860, his last year in the White House, President
Buchanan was stopping at Bedford Springs, a summer resort in
Pennsylvania, where the Rev. Dr. William M. Paxton, pastor of the
First Presbyterian Church of New York City, was also a guest.
Having had some previous acquaintance with the reverend doctor he
one day invited him into his room, where he opened his heart. He
said:
"I think I may say that for 12 years I have 'been in the habit
of reading the Bible and praying daily. I have never had any one
with whom I have felt disposed to converse, and now that I find you
here I have thought you would understand my feelings, and that I
would venture to open my mind to you upon this important subject,
and ask for an explanation of some things I do not clearly
understand."
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
49
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
He then asked Dr. Paxton what a religious experience is, and
wanted to know how a man might know he was a Christian, to which
the doctor gave replies that satisfied him, Thereupon the President
said:
"Well, sir, I thank you. My mind is now made up. I hope I am
a Christian. I think I have had some of the experience which you
describe, and as soon as I retire from my office as Presiclent, I
will unite with the Presbyterian Church."
Dr. PaxtGn here became excited. It is not often a minister has
an opportunity to gather a President of the United States into the
fold. Then he was an old man, and might die, as did President
Harrison, who so sorely disappointed the Rev. Dr. Hawley. Therefore
he exclaimed, "Why not now, Mr. President? God's invitation is now
and you should not say tomorrow." President Buchanan replied with
deep feeling and a strong gesture: "I must delay, for the honor of
religion. If I were to unite with the Church now, they would say
hypocrite. from Maine to Georgia." Here he was different from some
statesmen of today who seem to take no interest in religion until
they get into politics, when "the honor of religion" does not
disturb them.
Shortly after the 4th of March, 1861, President Buchanan kept
his word and was received into the Presbyterian Church of
Lancaster, Pa., his home city. He was fortunate in living 80 years
ago instead of today. Now he would not be permitted to serve his
term in office. He would be compelled to run successfully the
clerical gauntlet before he could be elected.
GROVER CLEVELAND
Born, March 18, 1837. Dired, July 24, 1908.
President, March 4, 1885 -- March 4, 1889.
March 4, 1893 -- March 4, 1897.
The first Democratic President to be elected after the Civil
War was the son of the Rev. Richard Cleveland, a Presbyterian
minister. Like many other mininsters, the Rev. Mr. Cleveland
supported a large family on a small salary. His children were
therefore obliged to work as soon as they were able. Grover worked
in a store in Fayetteville, N.Y., where his father held his last
charge before his death. In this place, we are informed by a living
sister of Mr. Cleveland, he joined the church of which his father
was the pastor.
Later he went to New York City, where he taught for a while in
a school for the blind. Here he became acquainted with Fanny
Crosby, the noted hymn writer. He moved from New York City to
Buffalo, where he studied law, was admitted to the bar, entered
politics and laid the foundation of his later eminence. While in
Buffalo, he kept his name on the roll of his father's old church in
Fayetteville. That he was a member of the Church in Buffalo is
doubtful. While living there, he had the reputation of being a
blunt, honest man of the world, whose attendance at the house of
Bacchus was more regular than his attendance in the house of God.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
50
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
He loved to play pinochle in favorite salgons, and had he not
been a drinking man would perhaps not have been elected Mayor of
Buffalo,' from which office he stepped into the Governor's chair
and afterwards into the Presidency. He happened to be in a saloon
drinking a glass of beer and eating a lunch, when in came a number
of Democratic politicians looking for a candidate for mayor. One of
them in a joking manner said, "Let us nominate Grover." The joke
became serious, He was nominated and elected; then nominated and
elected governor by the greatest majority a governor ever received;
and in less than four years after he stood in front of the saloon
bar, was inaugurated President of the United, States.
Those who, like the present writer, recall the presidential
campaign of 1884 between James G. Blaine and Grover Cleveland,
remember the bitter, abusive, acrid personalities of that year. Mr.
Blaine had a vulnerable public record, and his opponents flaunted
the Mulligan letters" with all their strength. His private life,
however, had been beyond reproach. When he was nominated, Mr.
Cleveland was an almost unknown man outside of his own State, but
his public record as sheriff, mayor and governor commended him to
the people of the United States. His adversaries then launched an
attack upon his private life. one charge was that he had not done
his duty to his country during the Civil War by enlisting in the
army, but had hired a substitute. The fact was that owing to two
brothers having enlisted, he had to remain home as the sole support
of his mother and two sisters. When the draft came, he borrowed
$300 to hire a man to go in his stead.
The second charge was not so easily met. A certain Rev. George
H. Ball, of Buffalo, charged him with seduction and bastardy. This
preacher of that "charity that thinketh no evil" prayed God not to
strike him dead because he had voted for Cleveland for governor.
The friends of Mr. Cleveland prepared to issue a denial, but he
would not, permit them. He said, "It is true. Tell the truth!" He
held that while he was willing to defend all his public acts, his
parivate acts did not concern the public. He was quite justified in
this view. Another minister, the Rev. Mr. Burchard, in his "Rum,
Romanism and Rebellion" speech, quite neutralized the attack of the
Rev. Mr. Ball on the youthful morals of Mr. Cleveland, who was
elected, the first Democratic President in a quarter of a century.
The illegitimate child of which so much was said afterwards became
a prominent professional man and an honored citizen of Buffalo. His
father was twice elected President of the United States, the Rev.
Mr. Ball received much free advertising, and when the smoke cleared
away no one was injured beyond recovery.
After Grover Cleveland entered the White House, he gave more
attention to the Church, as he also did to matrimony, marrying his
ward, Miss Frances Folsom, a young lady of great personal charm. It
was not until his second term, on which he entered March 4, 1993,
that he became prominently religious. A wave of piety swept over
the country during this year of the great panic, as had happened in
the two former periods of financial distress, in 1857 and 1873, The
Churches registered their protests against the inaugural ball,
which, almost from the foundation of the government, had been an
occasion of greatl gaiety. The new President was prompt to unite
with the Churches in voicing his disapproval.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
51
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
This was also the year of the World's Columbian Exposition in
Chicago. The Churches had been organizing for three years to
prevent the doors from opening on Sunday. Religious societies had
met in conventions and pledged themselves not to attend unless the
Sabbath was strictly observed. The question was carried into the
courts. The ministers demanded that Cleveland call out the
military, if necessary, to shut the gates, but while he sympathized
with the Sabbatarians he did not go that far.
In the fall, he recognized Jesus Christ in his Thanksgiving
Proclamation, something no other President had ever done. The pace
for religious legislation having been set during the administration
of President Harrison, President Cleveland was now looked upon as
the patron saint of the "National Reformers" and other theocratic
organizations. During Cleveland's second administration, a Sunday
law was introduced for the District of Columbia, as was also the
"Christian amendment," placing God in the Constitution and making
Christianity the official religion of the State. The late William
Jennings Bryan was preparing to advocate such an amendment when he
died.
Nor can the sincerity of Mr. Cleveland be doubted. while he
had not been a "practical Christian" at all times, he seemed to
revert to the priety, of his youth as he grew older. This happens
to many who have never given the foundation of religion their
attention. On January 7, 1904, after the death of his oldest
daughter Ruth, he wrote to a friend:
"I had a season of great trouble in keeping out of my
mind the idea that Ruth was in the Cold, cheerless grave
instead of in the arms of her Saviour. It seems to me I mourn
our darling Ruth's death more and more. So much of the time I
can only think of her as dead, not joyfully living in heaven.
God has come to my help and I have felt able to adjust my
thought to dear Ruth's death with as much comfort as selfish
humanity will permit. One thing I can Say: not for a moment
since she left us has a rebellious thought entered my mind."
His sister writes that she knew "his boyhood's faith
brightened his dying hours." The grief of a father for the death of
a loved child is not a proper subject for discussion, and we can be
pleased to think that under the circumstances he found consolation.
We could say the same had he been a Buddhist, a Mohammedan, a
Mormon or a Confucian.
Yet President Cleveland was not a Puritan, and if he were
alive today, he would not stand well on the Anti-Saloon League's
card-index. He liked beer, fished on Sunday and kept a store of
good liquor for himself and his friends.
John S. Wise, in his 'Recollections of Thirteen Presidents,'
says there were two men in American history who above all others
were attacked by venomous personal abuse, Grover Cleveland and
Robert G. Ingersoll. This was because of their holding unpopular
ideas. Fifty years ago, to be a Democrat in some sections was
synonymous. with being a traitor, an enemy of your country, its
prosperity and happiness; while to say openly that you did not
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
52
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
accept the orthodox Christian religion was to place yourself
outside the pale of social recognition and to be looked upon as
having hoofs and horns.
Years ago, I knew an old man in a rural community who was an
outspoken "Infidel." A woman who knew him remarked: "I do not
see why some people are so bitter at Mr. ________. He does not
appear to be any different from other men." Since the partisan
prejudices that swayed the minds of his contemporaries have become
extinct, history has been just toward President Cleveland. Now,
regardless of party, he is considered to have been one of our most
efficient Presidents.
BENJAMIN HARRISON
Born, August 20, 1833. Died, March 13, 1901.
President, March 4, 1889 -- March 4, 1893.
Benjamin Harrison, the 23rd President of the United States,
waw a great-grandson of Benjamin Harrison, who signed the
Declaration of Independence, and a grandson of William Henry
Harrison, the ninth President, at whose house he was born, in 1833.
He was a Presbyterian, an elder in the Church, and the first
President who was unquestionably a communicant in an orthodox
Church at the time he was elected. Grover Cleveland was a
communicant in his youth and late in life, but there is no evidence
that he was such when he was first elected.
President Harrison was deeply religious, a believer in divine
providence, and thought himself an object of its particular care.
Knowing this, during his administration the Churches were
successful in introducing bills in Congress to promote religion by
law. On May 21, 1886, Senator Henry W. Blair, of New Hamphire,
introduced a "National Sunday Rest Bill," the preamble of which
read, "A bill to secure to the enjoyment of the first day of the
week, commonly Sunday, as a day of rest, and to promote its
observance as religious worship." A great outcry was raised against
this bill as worded, and on December 9, 1889, Senator Blair re-
introduced it, making the title read, "A bill to secure to the
people the privilege of rest and religious worship, free from the
disturbance of others, on the first day of the week." Except that
it granted exemption from the penalties those "who conscientiously
believe in and observe any other day than Sunday as the Sabbath or
day of religious worship," its provisions were not different from
the first. Not since 1829 had a bill for the enforcement of a
Sunday law been introduced in the national legislature. As the bill
entered into the realm of conscience and the field of religious
controversy, it was not reported from the committee room and died
a natural death. Similar bills have been since introduced and have
met the same fate. Four days after introducing his Sunday bill,
Senator Blair introduced an "Educational Amendment" the
Constitution of the United States, section 2 of which read: "Each
State in this Union shall establish a system of public schools,
adequate for the education of all the children living therein,
between the ages of six and 16 years inclusive, in the common
branches of knowledge and in virtue, morality, and the principles
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
53
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
of the Christian religion." This, like his Sunday bill, was very
deceptive, and, like it, was laid on the table. Senator Blair
having failed, Mr. W.C.P. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, who was later
to acquire an unsavory reputation, introduced, on January 6, 1890,
a Sunday bill for the District of Columbia, which also failed.
President Harrison's well-known orthodox predilection encouraged
the sponsors of these bills. Religious legislation has always been
unpopular, except with the extremists in the Church, yet it is an
ever present danger.
General Harrison had an undistinguished though honorable
record as an officer in the Civil War, and was Senator from Indiana
for one term. He was a splendid platform speaker, and publicly had
a great influence over the masses. In private he had the reputation
of being cold and distant.
WOODROW WILSON
Born, December 28, 1856. Died, February 3, 1924.
President, March 4, 1913 -- March 4, 1921.
Our World War President was Presbyterian through a long line
of Scotch and Irish ancestors on both his father's and mother's
side. His father, the Rev. James Ruggles Wilson, was a Presbyterian
minister who was born in Ohio, of Irish ancestry. His mother's
father, the Rev. Thomas Woodrow, after whom he was named, came from
Scotland, and was a graduate of the University of Glasgow. each
held a high position in the Church, and both are known in its
history.
The father of the future President moved from ohio to Virginia
early in the 50's. Woodrow Wilson was born at Staunton, Va,; later
the Wilson family moved to Augusta, Georgia. While in Ohio the Rev.
Wilson seemed to take no particular interest in the then all-
absorbing question of slavery. But in 1861, he was a delegate to
the National Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, held in
Philadelphia, where a resolution was passed reading out of the
Church all slave-holders. The Rev. Mr. Wilson at once took up the
cudgel for his adopted section, and invited southern Presbyterians
to meet with him in Augusta, where he organized the Southern
Presbyterian Church. He cast his fortunes with the South during the
war and became a chaplain in the Confederate Army, while his
brothers were fighting in the Union Army. After the war, when upon
a visit to Ohio, he was asked if he was a reconstructed rebel, his
reply was, "No, only a whipped one." When his son was first
proposed as a teacher in Princeton University, objection was raised
against him because of his southern antecedents.
The Rev. Joseph Ruggles Wilson was an interesting characte. He
had all the geniality of the Celt, and was far from being
puritanical. He loved a good dinner, enjoyed smgking his pipe, and
sometimes took a nip of "Old Scotch." This, of course, was before
the crusade for Prohibition had captured the Protestant Churches.
His Irish wit, combined with his knowledge and interesting
conversation, made him a social favorite, as those who remember him
when he passed his latter years at the home of his son will recall.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
54
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
The maternal uncle of the World War President also had an
interesting history, which is recorded in the chronicles of his
adopted country. The Rev. James Woodrow was originally a printer
and publisher, and sometimes, to hasten work, it was necessary for
his printers to work nights. He would permit no Sunday work. At
midnight Saturday he compelled his employes to cease their labors,
but promptly at two minutes after 12 on Monday morning they
resumed. In this way the work was accomplished, but the old scotch
custom of Sabbath keeping was not invalidated. Yet while he was a
very religious man, and conformed to the standards of the
Presbyterian Church, he finally got into trouble, and had to leave
the Church. He believed in and preached Evolution. A minority in
the Church defended him, but he was ousted from the Presbyterian
seminary in Columbia, S.C., where he was a teacher of the natural
sciences. Andrew D. White, in 'The Warfare Between Science and
Theology in Christendom,' vol. 1, pp. 317-318, thus speaks of his
case:
"This hostile movement became so strong that, in spite of
the favorable action of the directors of the seminary, and
against the efforts of a broad-minded minority in the
representative bodies having ultimate charge of the
institution, the delegates from the various synods raised a
storm of orthodoxy and drove Dr. Woodrow from his post.
Happily, he was at the same time professor in the University
of South Carolina in the same city of Columbia, and from his
chair in that institution he continued to teach natural
science with the approval of the great majority of thinking
men in that region; hence, the only effect of the attempt to
crush him was, that his position was made higher, respect for
him deeper, and his reputation wider."
Dr. Woodrow was a real man, and would not compromise as many
ministers have done. He finally left the Church and became the
president of a bank. He was a member of a number of learned
scientific societies both in Europe and America. His trial for
heresy, in the 1880's, aroused national attention. Nearly 40 years
later, when his nephew was President of the United States and the
Fundamentalists had renewed the old battle against Evolution, some
one wrote to President Wilson asking whether he believed in
Evolution. He replied: "Of course, like every other man of
education and intelligence I do believe in organic EvolutiGn. It
surpises me that at this late date such questions should be
raised." It is good that while these Scotch Presbyterians are often
very stubborn in maintaining their opinions, when they change them,
they are equally stirbborn in defending their new ones.
It will, at this point, be pertinent to consider President
Wilson's views upon the relation of science to certain problems. He
once said that college instructors could "easily forget that they
were training citizens as well as drilling pupils"; that a college
should be "a school of duty." When he was once attacked for being
hostile to science, he replied:
"I have no indictment against what science has done: I
have only a warning to utter against the atmosphere which has
stolen from laboratories into lecture rooms and into the
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
55
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
general air of the world at large. Science has not changed the
nature of society, has not made history a whit easier to
understand, human nature a whit easier to reform. It has won
for us a great liberty in the physical world, a liberty from
superstitious fear and disease, a freedom to use nature as a
familiar servant, but it has not freed us from ourselves. We
have not given science too big a place in our education; but
we have made a perilous mistake in giving it too great a
Preponderance in method over every other 'branch of study."
on the subject of the relation of science to religion, there
are three sets of opinions: those of the Fundamentalists, who
reject science; of the Rationalists, who reject the claims of
religion; of the modernists, of whom President Wilson was one, who
accept science in the physical world, but will not be bound 'by its
laws in the spiritual.
Mr. Wilson was the first president of Princeton University who
was not a minister. When he moved there, he found two presbyterian
Churches, the First and the Second. He thought but one was needed,
and tried to unite them. He joined the Second and was elected an
elder, but afterwards left it and gave his support to the First.
His entire family attended church services, but the children did
not go to Sunday School. Mrs. Wilson taught them the sunday school
lesson and the Westminster catechism at home. President Wilson
often led the chapel exercises in the college, but his talks took
a practical trend. For instance, he once took as his text a verse
from Paul's address to Agrippa: "Whereupon, O King Agrippa, I was
not disobedient unto the heavenly vision." (Acts, 26:19.) He then
enlarged upon the necessity of all having a vision, or a purpose in
life.
President Wilson was not a Puritan. His daughter says that,
like his father, he was a mixture of dignity and gaiety. He liked
to play whist, euchre and backgammon, was a remarkable mimic and
could tell endless dialect stories. Shortly after his entrance into
the White House, in 1913, his Secretary of State, William Jennings
Bryan, suggested over the telephone that he make his administration
a temperance, or white ribbon, affair, and, conforming to the
custom in President Hayes' day, not serve wine. Mr. Wilson replied
he would not do this for three reasons: first, it had been the
custom to serve wine at public dinners, except in one
administration, since the foundation of the government; second, he
was not a Prohibitionist, and, third, he liked a drink sometimes
himself, The Volstead Act was passed and went into effect without
his signature.
Yet anomalies are associated with both Bryan and Wilson. The
first, an apostle of peace, rests in a military cemetery. The
second, of the sturdiest Presbyterian stock, found his last resting
place in a gorgeous Episcopal cathedral.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
56
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
CHAPTER III.
PRESIDENTS WHO WERE UNITARIANS
In point of numbers the Unitarian Church has always been among
the minor religious bodies. Yet its influence upon the
intellectual, moral and literary forces of the united states has
been far greater Proportionately than its numerical strength. No
other Church has Contributed to this country so many distinguished
men and women in all departments of human activity. A few words
touching the history of this Church, particularly in America, will
enable us better to comprehend the subject.
From the earliest history of the Christian Church there was
controversy over disputed theological questions. Among these none
occupied greater attention than the nature of God. Some held to his
unity, others to the trinity. Those holding the first view were
almost successful in making it the dogma of the whole Church. They
were specially strong in the West. They were called Arians, after
their leader Arius; sometimes Socinians and later Unitarians. The
Council of Nice" the first ecumenical council of the Church, held
in the city of that name in southeastern France, was assembled to
consider two questions: the canon of the Bible, and the "Arian
controversy," as the question of the Godhead was then called. This
council sent Arius into exile and condemned his doctrines.
Afterwards, he died suddenly, and, as his friends maintained,
through the treachery of his enemies.
Wherever Unitarianism penetrated, it was persecuted and
stamped out. The last two heretics burned at the stake in England
(in 1612), Bartholomew Legate and Edward Wightman, were put to
death for denying the trinity. A special law for the punishment of
this offense by death was passed during the Commonwealth. In the
toleration act of, 1689 all dissenters except Unitarians were
granted freedom of worship. In spite of persecution they grew, and
one of the most distinguished writers on Christian evidence, Dr.
Nathaniel Lardner, was a Unitarian, and Unitarian views were held
by John Milton, the poet, Sir Isaac Newton, the scientist, and John
Locke, the philosopher.
In the last quarter of the 18th Century they had two
distinguished advocates in Richard Price and Joseph Priestley, the
latter, the discoverer of oxygen. In Birmingham, a mob attacked the
house of Dr. Priestley, burned it to the ground, destroying all his
valuable scientific apparatus. He was driven out of the city and
took refuge in the United States, where he died in Pennsylvania, in
1804. Some of his descendants are still among us. In 1813
toleration was granted the Unitarian Church.
The invasion of Unitarian thought among the puritanical
churches of New England began in the last quarter of the 18th
Century, There was an intellectual and moral revulsion against the
doctrines of origional sin, predeesteination, hell, and the blood
atonement. King's Chapel, built in 1749, the oldest Episcopal
church in New England, became Unitarian. James Truslow Adams, in
his 'New England in the Republic,' p. 220, quotes from G.W. Cooke's
'Unitarianism in America,' p. 75:
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
57
The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents
"In Boston a visitor wrote in 1791 that the ministers
there were so diverse in their views that they could not agree in
any one point in theology. Ten years later there was but one
minister in that city who accepted the doctrine of the Trinity."
In 1810 the great controversy upon the subject was still on,
and by 1,925 Unitarianism had captured a large number of the New
England
@@@@ book p. 54 on to 65 must be scanned again, print does not scan
well.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
58


1041
textfiles.com/politics/presid3.d Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

66
textfiles.com/politics/prezignr.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
Presidential Ignorance
by
Matt Giwer
The title may sound rude but first we must clearly
understand the term ignorance. It is only a state of a lack of
knowledge. It is a condition that can be repaired. I would hope
to do my civic duty here and alleviate one area of his
ignorance.
I am referring to your staged, duck hunting trip. When
questioned about it you said it was to demonstrate your gun
control efforts were not directed toward hunters. Frankly, Mr.
President, we don't give a damn.
Mr. President, most of us with guns have them for a very
immediate purpose, defense against criminals, the very same
reason your Secret Service guards have guns. And, Mr. President,
we are mad as hell because every proposal we have seen from you
only makes is harder for us to get guns. We do not carry guns on
the street; making it harder for us to gets guns does nothing to
get them off of the street.
We are the people facing armed gangs. Taking "assault
weapons" away from us is not going to do us the least bit of
good, in fact it will kill us.
Mr. President, we are not concerned about the right to
freeze our backsides off in a duck blind early in the morning.
We are concerned about our right to have a chance against house
breakers late at night. I at least have never been attacked by a
duck. I have never heard a report of anyone being attacked by a
duck. I have never heard of a duck robbing a home, raping a
woman, or murdering anyone. Mr. President, I am not afraid of a
duck.
I am afraid for my family and friends being bludgeoned,
stabbed, throttled and shot. I can not find one proposal from
you to alleviate my fear. What I do find from you are proposals
to make my family and friends even more helpless. I find you are
proposing to make things harder on the victims.
Every proposal has been to make self defense more difficult.
Mr. President, I hold I have a god given right to defend myself,
my family, my friends, my property and the political institutions
of this country. I hold I even have a god given right to defend
people I have never met.
I hold all men have these rights. I hold the only way to
exercise these rights is with guns. In my youth I may have
imagined disarming thugs bare handed. With the wisdom that comes
from experience I know I can not call time out to dial 911.
When all you can do is find ways to limit our access to guns
we see you not as the solution but as part of the problem. We
are tired of hearing that the restrictions on us are not all that
bad. We are asking why there are any restrictions at all on us
and none on those we and your Secret Service guard are facing.
Are our lives less than yours? Why can we not have the
submachineguns that protect your life? When will you give up
what we can not have?
You say we do not need submachineguns? Then neither does
your guard. Is your life truly more important than ours?
You do not talk like you understand us at all. Please let
me explain it to you. We do not give a damn about your gun laws.
We will not comply with any law our right to defend what we hold
dear. We are a free people who will not bow to your attempts to
make it harder for us to do so.
Mr. President, you are no longer ignorant. You now know who
we are. What we want from you are measures to reduce crime so we
will not have the absolute necessity of gun ownership. We are
not interested in you making it harder for us and not them. We
do not want you to do something; we want you to do something that
works.

194
textfiles.com/politics/priv.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
THE PRIVATE AND OPEN SOCIETY
BY JOHN GILMORE
A transcript of remarks given by John Gilmore at the First Conference
on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, March 28,1991
My talk concerns two ethics - the belief in an open society and the
belief in privacy. These two ethics are related , and I would like
to say something about how they relate to our conduct in the world.
This society was built as a free and open society. Our ancestors, our
parents, our peers, and ourselves are all making and building this
society in such a way - because we believe such a society outperforms
closed societies - in quality of life, in liberty, and in the pursuit
of happiness.
But I see this free and open society being nibbled to death by ducks,
by small, unheralded changes. It's still legal to exist in our
society without an ID - but just barely. It is still legal to exist
by paying with cash - just barely. It is still legal to associate
with anyone you want - unless they bring a joint onto your boat,
photograph naked children for your museum, or work for you building a
fantasy roleplaying game. And I think conferences like ours run the
risk of being co-opted; we sit here and we work hard and we talk to
people and build our consensus on what are relatively minor points,
while we lose the larger open society.
For example - we have the highest percentage in the world of our own
population in jail. We used to be number two but last year we passed
South Africa. We are number one.
Over the last ten years we've doubled the number of people in jail.
In fact, those extra cells are mostly filled with people on drug
charges, a victimless crime that twenty years ago was accepted
behavior.
But it's no wonder we are concerned about privacy, because we are all
"lawbreakers", We all break the law, but few of us are criminals. The
problem is that simply attracting the attention of the police is
enough to put the best of us at risk, because we break the law all the
time and it's set up to make that happen!
I don't blame the cops for this. They mostly just enforce the bad
laws that the legislatures write. The legislatures aren't completely
at fault either, because in the long run, only educating the whole
population about the benefits of openness has a chance. And I think
I do a little bit of work in this area.
But beyond that, as P. T. Barnum said, "Nobody ever lost money by
underestimating the intelligence of the American public." Where I
hold out the most hope is in a different approach. In the paraphrased
words of Ted Nelson, we probably can't stop this elephant but maybe we
can run between its legs.
In most of Europe, phone companies don't record the phone numbers when
you call, and they don't show up on your bill. They only tick off the
charges on a meter. Now, I was told that this is partly because the
Nazis used the call records that they used to have, to track and
identify the opposition after taking over those countries in World War
II. They don't keep those records any more.
In the U.S., people boycotted the 1990 census in record numbers. I
think that the most shameful story of how Japanese-Americans were
rounded up using census data had a lot to do with that.
Professor Tribe talked about the distrust we must hold for our
government. We have to realize that people who run the government can
and do change. Our society and laws must assume that bad people -
criminals even - will run the government, at least part of the time.
There's been a lot of talk here about privacy ... but we haven't
focused much on why we want it. Privacy is a means; what is the real
end we are looking for here? I submit that what we're looking for
increased tolerance.
Society tolerates all different kinds of behavior - differences in
religion, differences in political opinions, races, etc. But if your
differences aren't accepted by the government or by other parts of
society, you can still be tolerated if they simply don't know that you
are different. Even a repressive government or a regressive
individual can't persecute you if you look the same as everybody else.
And, as George Perry said today, "Diversity is the comparative
advantage of American society". I think that's what privacy is really
protecting.
The whole conference has spent a lot of time talking about ways to
control uses of information and to protect peoples' privacy after the
information was collected. But that only works if you assume a good
government. If we get one seriously bad government, they'll have all
the information they need to make an efficient police state and make
it the last government. It's more than convenient for them - in fact,
it's a temptation for people who want to do that, to try to get into
power and do it. Because we are giving them the means.
What if we could build a society where the information was never
collected? Where you could pay to rent a video without leaving a
credit card number or a bank number? Where you could prove you're
certified to drive without ever giving your name? Where you could
send and receive messages without revealing your physical location,
like an electronic post office box?
That's the kind of society I want to build. I want a guarantee - with
physics and mathematics, not with laws - that we can give ourselves
things like real privacy of personal communications. Encryption
strong enough that even the NSA can't break it. We already know how.
But we're not applying it. We also need better protocols for mobile
communication that can't be tracked.
We also want real privacy of personal records. Our computers are
extensions of our minds. We should build them so that a thought
written in the computer is as private as a thought held in our minds.
We should have real freedom of trade. We must be free to sell what we
make and buy what we want - from anyone and to anyone - to support
ourselves and accomplish what we need to do in this world.
Importantly, we need real financial privacy because the goods and
information cost money. When you buy or sell or communicate, money is
going to change hands. If they can track the money, they can track
the trade and the communication, and we lose the privacy involved.
We also need real control of identification. We need the right to be
anonymous while exercising all other rights. So that even with our
photos, our fingerprints and our DNA profile, they can't link our
communication and trade and financial activities to our person.
Now I'm not talking about lack of accountability here, at all. We
must be accountable to the people we communicate with. We must be
accountable to the people we trade with. And the technology must be
built to enforce that. But we must not be accountable to THE PUBLIC
for who we talk to, or who we buy and sell from.
There's plenty of problems here. I think we need to work on them.
Just laws need to be enforced in such a society. People need to find
like-minded people. And somebody still has to pay the cost of
government, even when they can't spy on our income and our purchases.
I don't know how to solve these problems, but I'm not willing to throw
the baby out with the bath water. I still think that we should shoot
for real privacy and look for solutions to these problems.
How do we create this kind of society? One way is to stop building
and supporting fake protections, like laws that say you can't listen
to cellular phone calls. We should definitely stop building outright
threatening systems like the Thai ID system or the CalTrans vehicle
tracking system.
Another thing to do is, if you know how, start and continue building
real protections into the things you build. Build for the US market
even if the NSA continues to suppress privacy with export controls on
cryptography. It costs more to build two versions, one for us and one
for export, but it's your society you're building for, and I think you
should build for the way you want to live.
If you don't know how to build real protection, buy it. Make a market
for those people who are building it, and protect your own privacy at
the same time by putting it to use. Demand it from the people who
supply you, like computer companies and cellular telephone
manufacturers.
Another thing is to Work to eliminate trade restrictions. We should
be able to import the best from everywhere and we should be able to
export the privacy and the best of our products to the rest of the
world. The NSA is currently holding us hostage; Mainframe
manufacturers, for example, haven't built in security because they
can't export it. IBM put DES into their whole new line of computers,
and they were only going to put it on the U.S. models, but the NSA
threatened to persecute them by stalling even their allowable exports
in red tape. IBM backed down and took it out. We can't allow this to
continue.
We also need to educate everyone about what's possible so we can
choose this kind of freedom rather than assume it's unattainable.
None of these ideas are new. Freedom of association and privacy have
been prized by people everywhere. Cryptography has been used for these
goals for thousands of years. But we owe a special debt to
cryptographer David Chaum for researching how modern cryptography can
enable these goals to be met by everyone in society, on a large scale.
By reading David's work, you can begin to understand the capabilities
of cryptography and how to apply them to provide financial and
personal privacy.
We need to keep cash and anonymity legal. We'll need them as
precedents for untraceable electronic cash and cryptographic
anonymity.
I think with these approaches, we'll do a lot more for our REAL
freedom, our real privacy, and our real security, than passing a few
more laws or scaring a few more kid crackers. Please join me in
building a future we'll be proud to inhabit and happy to leave to our
children. -

1336
textfiles.com/politics/privacy Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

1353
textfiles.com/politics/privacy.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

186
textfiles.com/politics/privsoc Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,186 @@
THE PRIVATE AND OPEN SOCIETY
BY JOHN GILMORE
A transcript of remarks given by John Gilmore at the First Conference on
Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, March 28,1991
My talk concerns two ethics - the belief in an open society and the
belief in privacy. These two ethics are related , and I would like to
say something about how they relate to our conduct in the world.
This society was built as a free and open society. Our ancestors, our
parents, our peers, and ourselves are all making and building this
society in such a way - because we believe such a society outperforms
closed societies - in quality of life, in liberty, and in the pursuit of
happiness.
But I see this free and open society being nibbled to death by ducks, by
small, unheralded changes. It's still legal to exist in our society
without an ID - but just barely. It is still legal to exist by paying
with cash - just barely. It is still legal to associate with anyone you
want - unless they bring a joint onto your boat, photograph naked
children for your museum, or work for you building a fantasy roleplaying
game. And I think conferences like ours run the risk of being co-opted;
we sit here and we work hard and we talk to people and build our
consensus on what are relatively minor points, while we lose the larger
open society.
For example - we have the highest percentage in the world of our own
population in jail. We used to be number two but last year we passed
South Africa. We are number one.
Over the last ten years we've doubled the number of people in jail. In
fact, those extra cells are mostly filled with people on drug charges, a
victimless crime that twenty years ago was accepted behavior.
But it's no wonder we are concerned about privacy, because we are all
"lawbreakers", We all break the law, but few of us are criminals. The
problem is that simply attracting the attention of the police is enough
to put the best of us at risk, because we break the law all the time and
it's set up to make that happen!
I don't blame the cops for this. They mostly just enforce the bad laws
that the legislatures write. The legislatures aren't completely at
fault either, because in the long run, only educating the whole
population about the benefits of openness has a chance. And I think I
do a little bit of work in this area.
But beyond that, as P. T. Barnum said, "Nobody ever lost money by
underestimating the intelligence of the American public." Where I hold
out the most hope is in a different approach. In the paraphrased words
of Ted Nelson, we probably can't stop this elephant but maybe we can run
between its legs.
In most of Europe, phone companies don't record the phone numbers when
you call, and they don't show up on your bill. They only tick off the
charges on a meter. Now, I was told that this is partly because the
Nazis used the call records that they used to have, to track and
identify the opposition after taking over those countries in World War
II. They don't keep those records any more.
In the U.S., people boycotted the 1990 census in record numbers. I
think that the most shameful story of how Japanese-Americans were
rounded up using census data had a lot to do with that.
Professor Tribe talked about the distrust we must hold for our
government. We have to realize that people who run the government can
and do change. Our society and laws must assume that bad people -
criminals even - will run the government, at least part of the time.
There's been a lot of talk here about privacy ... but we haven't focused
much on why we want it. Privacy is a means; what is the real end we are
looking for here? I submit that what we're looking for increased
tolerance.
Society tolerates all different kinds of behavior - differences in
religion, differences in political opinions, races, etc. But if your
differences aren't accepted by the government or by other parts of
society, you can still be tolerated if they simply don't know that you
are different. Even a repressive government or a regressive individual
can't persecute you if you look the same as everybody else. And, as
George Perry said today, "Diversity is the comparative advantage of
American society". I think that's what privacy is really protecting.
The whole conference has spent a lot of time talking about ways to
control uses of information and to protect peoples' privacy after the
information was collected. But that only works if you assume a good
government. If we get one seriously bad government, they'll have all
the information they need to make an efficient police state and make it
the last government. It's more than convenient for them - in fact, it's
a temptation for people who want to do that, to try to get into power
and do it. Because we are giving them the means.
What if we could build a society where the information was never
collected? Where you could pay to rent a video without leaving a credit
card number or a bank number? Where you could prove you're certified to
drive without ever giving your name? Where you could send and receive
messages without revealing your physical location, like an electronic
post office box?
That's the kind of society I want to build. I want a guarantee - with
physics and mathematics, not with laws - that we can give ourselves
things like real privacy of personal communications. Encryption strong
enough that even the NSA can't break it. We already know how. But
we're not applying it. We also need better protocols for mobile
communication that can't be tracked.
We also want real privacy of personal records. Our computers are
extensions of our minds. We should build them so that a thought written
in the computer is as private as a thought held in our minds.
We should have real freedom of trade. We must be free to sell what we
make and buy what we want - from anyone and to anyone - to support
ourselves and accomplish what we need to do in this world.
Importantly, we need real financial privacy because the goods and
information cost money. When you buy or sell or communicate, money is
going to change hands. If they can track the money, they can track the
trade and the communication, and we lose the privacy involved.
We also need real control of identification. We need the right to be
anonymous while exercising all other rights. So that even with our
photos, our fingerprints and our DNA profile, they can't link our
communication and trade and financial activities to our person.
Now I'm not talking about lack of accountability here, at all. We must
be accountable to the people we communicate with. We must be
accountable to the people we trade with. And the technology must be
built to enforce that. But we must not be accountable to THE PUBLIC for
who we talk to, or who we buy and sell from.
There's plenty of problems here. I think we need to work on them. Just
laws need to be enforced in such a society. People need to find
like-minded people. And somebody still has to pay the cost of
government, even when they can't spy on our income and our purchases. I
don't know how to solve these problems, but I'm not willing to throw the
baby out with the bath water. I still think that we should shoot for
real privacy and look for solutions to these problems.
How do we create this kind of society? One way is to stop building and
supporting fake protections, like laws that say you can't listen to
cellular phone calls. We should definitely stop building outright
threatening systems like the Thai ID system or the CalTrans vehicle
tracking system.
Another thing to do is, if you know how, start and continue building
real protections into the things you build. Build for the US market
even if the NSA continues to suppress privacy with export controls on
cryptography. It costs more to build two versions, one for us and one
for export, but it's your society you're building for, and I think you
should build for the way you want to live.
If you don't know how to build real protection, buy it. Make a market
for those people who are building it, and protect your own privacy at
the same time by putting it to use. Demand it from the people who
supply you, like computer companies and cellular telephone
manufacturers.
Another thing is to work to eliminate trade restrictions. We should be
able to import the best from everywhere and we should be able to export
the privacy and the best of our products to the rest of the world. The
NSA is currently holding us hostage; Mainframe manufacturers, for
example, haven't built in security because they can't export it. IBM
put DES into their whole new line of computers, and they were only going
to put it on the U.S. models, but the NSA threatened to persecute them
by stalling even their allowable exports in red tape. IBM backed down
and took it out. We can't allow this to continue.
We also need to educate everyone about what's possible so we can choose
this kind of freedom rather than assume it's unattainable.
None of these ideas are new. Freedom of association and privacy have
been prized by people everywhere. Cryptography has been used for these
goals for thousands of years. But we owe a special debt to cryptographer
David Chaum for researching how modern cryptography can enable these
goals to be met by everyone in society, on a large scale. By reading
David's work, you can begin to understand the capabilities of
cryptography and how to apply them to provide financial and personal
privacy.
We need to keep cash and anonymity legal. We'll need them as precedents
for untraceable electronic cash and cryptographic anonymity.
I think with these approaches, we'll do a lot more for our REAL freedom,
our real privacy, and our real security, than passing a few more laws or
scaring a few more kid crackers. Please join me in building a future
we'll be proud to inhabit and happy to leave to our children.

48
textfiles.com/politics/proclama.tio Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
THE PROCLAMATION OF NEUTRALITY (1793)
by the President of the United States
A PROCLAMATION
Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sar-
dinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands, of the one part, and France on
the other; and the duty and interest of the United States require, that they
should with sincerity and good faith adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and
impartial toward the belligerant Powers;
I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the
United States to observe the conduct aforesaid towards those Powers respectful-
ly; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid
all acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene
such disposition.
And I do hereby also make known, that whatsoever of the
citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or
forfeiture under the law of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hos-
tilities against any of the said Powers, or by carrying to any of them those
articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not
receive the protection of the United States, against such punishment or forfei-
ture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers, to whom it
belongs, to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons, who shall,
within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of
nations, with respect to the Powers at war, or any of them.
In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America to
be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the
city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, one thousand seven hundred
and ninety-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the
seventeenth.
GEORGE WASHINGTON
April 22, 1793
--------------------
France declared war against Great Britain and Holland early in April, 1793.
President Washington called a special cabinet meeting, which resulted in this
declaration of neutrality.
--------------------
Prepared by Gerald Murphy (The Cleveland Free-Net - aa300)


61
textfiles.com/politics/proclama.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
THE PROCLAMATION OF NEUTRALITY (1793):
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
A PROCLAMATION
Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between
Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United
Netherlands, of the one part, and France on the other; and
the duty and interest of the United States require, that they
should with sincerity and good faith adopt and pursue a
conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerant Powers;
I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare
the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct
aforesaid towards those Powers respectfully; and to exhort and
warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all
acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend
to contravene such disposition.
And I do hereby also make known, that whatsoever of the
citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to
punishment or forfeiture under the law of nations, by
committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the
said Powers, or by carrying to any of them those articles which
are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not
receive the protection of the United States, against such
punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given
instructions to those officers, to whom it belongs, to cause
prosecutions to be instituted against all persons, who shall,
within the cognizance of the courts of the United States,
violate the law of nations, with respect to the Powers at war,
or any of them.
In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United
States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed
the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the
twenty-second day of April, one thousand seven hundred and
ninety-three, and of the Independence of the United States of
America the seventeenth.
GEORGE WASHINGTON
April 22, 1793
-------------------------------------
France declared war against Great Britain and Holland
early in April, 1793. President Washington called a special
cabinet meeting, which resulted in this declaration of
neutrality.
-------------------------------------
Prepared by Gerald Murphy (The Cleveland Free-Net - aa300)
Distributed by the Cybercasting Services Division of the
National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN).
Permission is hereby granted to download, reprint, and/or otherwise
redistribute this file, provided appropriate point of origin
credit is given to the preparer(s) and the National Public
Telecomputing Network.
V<EFBFBD><EFBFBD>R<EFBFBD><EFBFBD>T


272
textfiles.com/politics/prodigy Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,272 @@
Prodigy: Where Is It Going?
National Rollout And User Protest Raise Questions
About The Future OfOnline Communications
By Adam Gaffin
The story is bizarre but true, Herb Rothman swears. Prodigy, the
IBM-Sears joint venture, wouldn't let somebody post a message in a
coin-collecting forum that he was looking for a particular Roosevelt
dime for his collection. Curious, the man called ``member services.''
The representative told him the message violated a Prodigy rule against
mentioning another user in a public message. ``What user?'' the man
asked. ``Roosevelt Dime,'' the rep replied. ``That's not a person!''
the man said. ``Yes he is, he's a halfback for the Chicago Bears!'' the
rep shot back.
Rothman, a New Yorker who was one of the first to sign up for
Prodigy when it was introduced in 1988, was one of the first to get
kicked off this past fall as an organizer of a protest against new email
charges that began January 1. Prodigy households now have to pay 25
cents for every message they send over a monthly free quota of 30.
Leaders of the Cooperative Defense Committee--the first
nationwide protest organized largely online--have focused on issues of
censorship and alleged bait-and-switch advertising: even after Prodigy
announced the new charges, it continued to advertise as a flat-rate
service. The Texas state Attorney General's office began an
investigation in November to determine whether the ads were deceptive.
(At presstime Prodigy, while admitting no wrongdoing, had agreed to
refund charges to Texas subscribers who signed up between September 6
and December 7 of last year, reimburse the state of Texas for
investigative costs, and allow Texas users who had signed up during the
period in question to cancel their accounts for full refunds.)
Prodigy: A Different Vision
But the protest has also focused attention on Prodigy's vision of online
communications, which is far different from that seen by other national
online services, let alone local bulletin-board systems.
It's a vision of online communications as computer home-
shopping network.
Where others see a new way for people to communicate and even
create "virtual communities,'' Prodigy sees vast potential profits from
people shopping through their keyboards.
``We are an information service,'' Prodigy spokesman Steve Hein
says. "`We are not an email service.''
Although other national services have "malls'' and advertising,
only Prodigy puts ads on almost every screen a user sees. Advertisers
pay Prodigy between $10,000 and $20,000 to design these ads and their
user interfaces.
In press handouts, Prodigy does not even mention its public
"bulletin boards'' as a feature, pointing instead to things such as
"news and stock quotes, home shopping and banking, airline ticketing,
stock trading and our new encyclopedia, movie guide and travel guide.''
Prodigy says its pricing--$12.95 a month for unlimited non-email
use--is based on the premise that people will use it for shopping.
``Every time you use the service to buy a holiday gift, book an airline
ticket, pay a bill, trade a stock, send flowers or buy stamps, you are
helping to assure the continuation of a flat, unmetered fee,'' because
advertisers pay a fee for each purchase and inquiry, Prodigy said in a
recent message to users.
``Shopping has been growing more than the bulletin boards,''
Hein says. He was unable, however, to provide specific figures showing
how much use each function now gets.
Hein says Prodigy decided to start charging for email because 20
percent of the users were sending 90 percent of the email messages,
costing the company millions of dollars for extra computer equipment and
workers to manage a mail flow growing 20 percent a month. When Prodigy
started, he said, officials figured households would use email like
long-distance phone calls: they would only send several messages a
month.
The Email Explosion
But much of Prodigy's unexpected email traffic is due to the way it runs
its public conferences. Unlike other services, which rely on the
maturity of users and only rarely delete public messages, Prodigy
employs several dozen "editors'' to screen every potential public
message--sometimes delaying their posting by up to 40 hours, when they
are posted at all.
According to the Prodigy user agreement: ``Prodigy reserves the
right to review and edit any material submitted for display or placed on
the Prodigy service, excluding private electronic messages, and may
refuse to display or may remove from the service, any material that it,
in its sole discretion, believes violates this Agreement, is detrimental
to other Members or to the business interests of Prodigy, its Members or
information providers or is otherwise objectionable.''
The agreement also forbids members from attempting to buy or
sell any products without Prodigy's prior written consent. Then it adds,
``Prodigy reserves the right, without liability, to remove and not to
display, any material at the sole discretion of Prodigy. All material
submitted to a public postings area will be automatically deleted
according to criteria established by Prodigy.''
Prodigy has software that scans incoming public messages for
certain objectionable words before it gets to the ``editors,'' but some
members complain this is not always perfect: for example, people with an
interest in botany claim they cannot hold a public discussion about
pussywillows.
Just a few months after Prodigy went online, some users had
turned to email for uncensored discussions.
In December 1989, Prodigy simply eliminated an entire
mental-health bulletin board when gays and fundamentalists got into a
heated debate. Prodigy spokesman Brian Ek compares the network to the
publisher of a family newspaper that has a right to decide what is
appropriate. Prodigy has no restricted areas, and has to be concerned
about what children might see when they log on, he says.
So pet owners were not allowed to use the word "bitch'' in
discussions about dogs. Coin and stamp collectors could not post lists
of items they had for swapping, because Prodigy saw that as commercial
activity.
Yet users complained that even this was done capriciously.
Rothman says that if one of his messages was rejected, he would
re-submit it a few times--and often it would eventually get in.
In October, one member asked in the ``About Prodigy'' bulletin
board why she was not allowed to comment about the use of the phrase
``Queen Bitch'' by a character on L.A. Law. A Prodigy official
responded that Prodigy has different standards for propriety than
television. But he said the subscriber could use asterisks. If she were
to write ``Queen B****,'' then ``adults will get the idea but the actual
words will not appear.''
Rothman says that in late 1988, he had had enough of having his
messages about glass-object collecting rejected, so he asked Kim
Hazlerig, a Prodigy member-services employee, if there were any
alternatives. He says she suggested he set up a ``mailing list'' via
email and that he contact a Los Angeles subscriber who had written
software to send large numbers of email messages at once.
Rothman began sending out a weekly newsletter on collectibles.
By the time he was kicked off the system, he had 1,500 readers.
Solon Owens, a former Berkeley resident now living in Oregon,
was an active participant in Prodigy's mental-health forum, where he and
others discussed their progress in 12-step programs such as Alcoholics
Anonymous. After the conference was eliminated, he started his own
mailing list of 10 people--which eventually grew to 120.
The number of these email lists exploded. Soon dozens of groups
were using email mailing lists, typically sent on a weekly basis.
Hein says he is unaware of anybody at Prodigy actually promoting
email lists or telling people how to start them. For a while, however,
the coordinators of these lists were allowed to advertise them in a
public forum on the service twice a month.
But with the new email charges, all this ended. Besides Owens'
group, a number of handicapped people had set up their own mailing
lists. Owens says he could not afford to send out messages to the 120
people now on his mailing list, so he has moved over to GEnie. ``We
cannot afford to provide free services for the handicapped anymore than
the Post Office can,'' Hein says, adding the handicapped would likely
see many of Prodigy's shopping services as a benefit worth keeping.
Told some users feel Prodigy brought much of the email costs on
itself through censorship, Hein says there was a very small group of
users who sent out as many as 10,000 email messages a month. ``If people
hadn't been sending tens of thousands of messages a month, this wouldn't
be a problem.''
The dissenters claim 20,000 supporting users. But Prodigy claims
that is still just a small percentage of its subscribers. Hein says the
network now has more than 400,000 households online. He acknowledges
that the figure includes people using free signup kits, but said those
people make up only a small percentage. Prodigy, like other online
services, has never had its subscriber numbers audited.
Not all users objected to the email charges or the way Prodigy
runs its public forums. ``If they dislike Prodigy so much, why do they
have it?'' Jan Salamone of Hull, MA asked of the protesters. Salamone
likes Prodigy so much she not only wrote them a congratulatory letter
but let the service reprint it in its member newsletter.
Henry Niman, a University of Pittsburgh researcher who was
kicked offline, said he does like Prodigy--he even persuaded several
friends and colleagues to sign up. He said his motive in protesting the
email rates was to try to keep Prodigy a good system.
Without naming anyone, Prodigy officials have charged that Niman
and the others are really a small band of ``hackers'' who used devious
software to flood the mailboxes of other users and advertisers with
increasingly nasty harangues. In November, it posted new regulations
forbidding the use of "automatic" mail forwarders and barring users from
contacting advertisers online except to make orders or inquire about
orders.
Niman says he compiled a list of about 900 people interested in
the email issue by using Prodigy's own membership-list function, which
lets one search for members by city and state, and that he and others
simply collected the addresses of advertisers from their email
responses.
Penny Hay, a Los Angeles artist whose account was terminated,
says the committee was careful to delete the names of anybody who
objected to the messages.
Impact
Whether the email protest--which has garnered considerable bad press for
Prodigy--has hurt is an open question.
Prodigy's Brian Ek says the service continues to add thousands
of new members monthly. Gary Arlen, who writes a newsletter about online
services, calls the protest a "tempest in a teapot" and says the real
question is whether Prodigy can ever recoup the several hundred million
dollars Sears and IBM reportedly poured into it.
But GEnie, a competing system that introduced a flat rate on
nights and weekends for several dozen services--including email--just as
Prodigy was announcing its price hike, says it has picked up several
thousand disgruntled Prodigy users and now has a "Prodigy Refugees"
forum.-
Advertisers on Prodigy are also mixed.
"RWe've had a very good response in spite of the boycott,"
Jeanine Sek, in charge of the Prodigy account for Hammacher Schlemmer in
Chicago, says, adding she quickly grew annoyed with protest messages
coming into the company's electronic mailbox. Sek says she would come
in some Monday mornings and find 40 protest messages in the company's
mailbox, all of which took time to deal with.
Sek says she agrees with Prodigy that a handful of ``hackers''
were abusing email. ``They know what they're doing, or, at least, I hope
they know what they're doing,'' she says of Prodigy. She adds that she
has been pleased with the response the company has received in its first
year on Prodigy. "We're very happy with it,'' she said.
Chuck Billows, comptroller for H.G. Daniels, an art and drafting
supply store in Los Angeles, agrees that answering protest messages
``has been a tremendous drain on resources'' for his company.
But, he adds, the protest "has cost Prodigy a lot of members and
customers, and possibly us a lot of sales. ... I think Christmas
shopping on Prodigy is under what we had expected.''
Billow says he does not see anything wrong with charging heavy
email users more, but said Prodigy botched the announcement and should
have offered a second, higher flat rate for such people, rather than
refusing all attempts at compromise.
``I think, at best, it wasn't properly presented to their
members,'' he says, adding that both sides quickly hardened into
absolute positions. The protesters demanded ``Unlimited email or else,''
he says, while Prodigy responded with ``Well, the hell with you; this is
our business and we can do what we want.''
``I think there's been a lot of time and money wasted'' by both
sides, he adds.
-----
Copyright 1991 by Adam Gaffin. All rights reserved.
Adam Gaffin is a reporter for the Middlesex News in Framingham, Mass.,
where he writes about personal computing.

101
textfiles.com/politics/prodigy- Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
PRODIGY STUMBLES AS A FORUM ... AGAIN
By Mike Godwin
On some days, Prodigy representatives tell us they're running "the Disney
Channel of online services." On other days the service is touted as a
forum for "the free expression of ideas." But management has missed the
conflict between these two missions. And it is just this unperceived
conflict that has led the B'nai B'rith's Anti-Defamation League to launch
a protest against the online service..
On one level, the controversy stems from Prodigy's decision to censor
messages responding to claims that, among other things, the Holocaust
never took place. These messages--which included such statements as
"Hitler had some valid points" and that "wherever Jews exercise influence
and power, misery, warfare and economic exploitation ... follow"--were the
sort likely to stir up indignant responses among Jews and non-Jews alike.
But some Prodigy members have complained to the ADL that when they tried
to respond to both the overt content of these messages and their implicit
anti-Semitism, their responses were rejected by Prodigy's staff of
censors.
The rationale for the censorship? Prodigy has a policy of barring messages
directed at other members, but allows messages that condemn a group. The
result of this policy, mechanically applied, is that one member can post a
message saying that "pogroms, 'persecutions,' and the mythical holocaust"
are things that Jews "so very richly deserve" (this was an actual
message). But another member might be barred from posting some like
"Member A's comments are viciously anti-Semitic." It is no wonder that the
Anti-Defamation League is upset at what looks very much like unequal
treatment.
But the problem exposed by this controversy is broader than simply a badly
crafted policy. The problem is that Prodigy, while insisting on its Disney
Channel metaphor, also gives lip service to the notion of a public forum.
Henry Heilbrunn, a senior vice president of Prodigy, refers in the Wall
Street Journal to the service's "policy of free expression," while Bruce
Thurlby, Prodigy's manager of editorial business and operations, invokes
in a letter to ADL "the right of individuals to express opinions that are
contrary to personal standards or individual beliefs."
Yet it is impossible for any free-expression policy to explain both the
allowing of those anti-Semitic postings and the barring of responses to
those postings from outraged and offended members. Historically, this
country has embraced the principle that best cure for offensive or
disturbing speech is more speech. No regime of censorship--even of the
most neutral and well-meaning kind--can avoid the kind of result that
appears in this case: some people get to speak while others get no chance
to reply. So long as a board of censors is in place, Prodigy is no public
forum.
Thus, the service is left in a double bind. If Prodigy really means to be
taken as a computer-network version of "the Disney Channel"--with all the
content control that this metaphor implies--then it's taking
responsibility for (and, to some members, even seeming to endorse) the
anti-Semitic messages that were posted. On the other hand, if Prodigy
really regards itself as a forum for free expression, it has no business
refusing to allow members to respond to what they saw as lies,
distortions, and hate. A true free-speech forum would allow not only the
original messages but also the responses to them.
So, what's the fix for Prodigy? The answer may lie in replacing the
service's censors with a system of "conference hosts" of the sort one sees
on CompuServe or on the WELL. As WELL manager Cliff Figallo conceives of
his service, the management is like an apartment manager who normally
allows tenants to do what they want, but who steps in if they do something
outrageously disruptive. Hosts on the WELL normally steer discussions
rather than censoring them, and merely offensive speech is almost never
censored.
But even if Prodigy doesn't adopt a "conference host" system, it
ultimately will satisfy its members better if it does allow a true forum
for free expression. And the service may be moving in that direction
already: Heilbrunn is quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying that
Prodigy has been loosening its content restrictions over the past month.
Good news, but not good enough--merely easing some content restrictions is
likely to be no more successful at solving Prodigy's problems than
Gorbachev's easing market restrictions was at solving the Soviet Union's
problems. The best solution is to allow what Oliver Wendell Holmes called
"the marketplace of ideas" to flourish--to get out of the censorship
business.
--
Rita Marie Rouvalis rita@eff.org
Electronic Frontier Foundation | EFF administrivia to: office@eff.org
155 Second Street | Flames to:
Cambridge, MA 02141 617-864-0665 | women-not-to-be-messed-with@eff.org

716
textfiles.com/politics/protest.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,716 @@
11 page printout
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
**** ****
PROTESTANT MENACE
TO
OUR GOVERNMENT.
A LECTURE
DELIVERED IN INVESTIGATOR HALL, BOSTON, BEFORE
THE INGERSOLL SECULAR SOCIETY,
SUNDAY, JAN. 27, 1889,
BY L.K. WASHBURN.
BOSTON:
PUBLISHED BY J.P. MENDUM, INVESTIGATOR OFFICE,
PAINE MEMORIAL BUILDING, APPLETON STREET.
1889
**** ****
THE BOSTON INVESTIGATOR.
For more than fifty years this paper has maintained the battle
for Liberty against a world of opposition. And these were years
"that tried men's souls." But "the good old Investigator," (as so
many of its readers are pleased to call it,) has never from the
first wavered or faltered for a moment in this long and unequal
combat. It has borne the brunt of the battle. With this half a
century of faithful service behind it, it may well be called "the
tried and true friend of human rights." It has had for its grand
aim the elevation of man through the truth and inspiration of
Mental Liberty and moral education. True to its name it has
investigated all subjects deemed worthy of attention. It has
investigated religions, politics and customs -- investigated the
dreadful superstitions of the past, the wicked shams of the
present, and the seductive delusions regarding the future.
In short the Investigator is the people's paper. Col. R.G.
Ingersoll says of it, "The Investigator is the best of all Liberal
papers." Reader please let us have your subscription.
**** ****
Published every Wednesday at Paine Memorial Building, Boston,
Mass. By J.P. Mendum. Edited by Horace Seaver.
Price, $3.00 per annum, single copies 7 cents, Specimen copies
sent on receipt of a two cent stamp to pay postage.
**** ****
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
1
PROTESTANT MENACE
TO
OUR GOVERNMENT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, LADIES, AND GENTLEMEN: --
It is essential that we understand what our Government stands
for; that we recognize the principles upon which it was founded and
the purposes for which it exists, in order to realize the present
anomalous condition of things, and to see the contradiction between
theory and practice as illustrated in the actual affairs of our
national life. It seems like repeating the familiar knowledge of
the school-room to say that our Government stands for human rights;
that chief among these rights is liberty, and that the very
inspiration of our existence as a people was the demand for
political freedom.
The purposes of our Government is identical with its
principles, to secure to man the freedom which it declares to be
his right. Our Constitution guarantees the citizen of this nation
the blessings of "liberty," and our Government should make good its
word.
our nation was born in a land which had passed through a
religious experience that embraced persecution and toleration,
fanaticism and common sense. The narrow religious spirit of the
Puritan broadened into the philosophic temper of Franklin, and the
rational faith of Jefferson and Paine. The events that immediately
preceded the struggle for independence on this Continent which
commanded the attention of the inhabitants of the Colonies, were of
a political character. Whatever there was of religious or
ecclesiastical interest was either pushed aside or forgotten in the
more important matters of political Government.
The King of Great Britain had oppressed beyond endurance his
American subjects, and the indignation of the Colonists was
ripening into rebellion. The question that appealed to every heart
was one of human rights. The heel of tyranny was on the necks of
the people, and their sufferings had passed the bounds of
submission. Let us understand that among all the alleged grievances
against the King by the Colonists, there was no religious
oppression complained of. Among the causes assigned for separation
by the American people, there was no mention of religious wrongs or
religious injustice. The step taken by the Colonists then was not
to secure any religious reform, but solely to secure a better
political Government.
These are the facts: The question of political independence
from Great Britain was discussed with little or no reference to
religious institutions; the war of the Revolution was fought with
the one idea of political independence as the objective point of
the struggle; the celebration of the victory which the American
army achieved was a rejoicing over the political independence which
the Colonies had won. Our Government was established for no
religious purpose. It is well for this fact to be emphasized at the
present time.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
2
The founders of our Republic, whatever their individual
religious convictions or opinions might have been, imposed no
religion upon the nation. The State was to recognize no church, but
to allow equal religious liberty to all. This principle was
affirmed in the strongest language in the National Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." We may rest
assured, however, that those most interested in ecclesiastical
matters were not indifferent to the fate of religion, but the vast
importance of political success overshadowed and kept in abeyance
any sectarian or religious ambition which might seek gratification.
Perhaps another reason that the assertion of religious liberty was
engrafted on the Constitution, was, that many of the leaders in the
struggle for independence were Freethinkers. Men who had become
emancipated from superstition, and who were familiar with the
history of ecclesiastical persecution, would not willingly see a
new-born nation committed to hands that cared more for the
interests of a church than for the rights of man.
It was fortunate for the human race that the foremost minds
which gave form and direction to our Government were not religious
bigots or fanatics. On no other Continent, and at no other period
in the history of mankind, had there existed circumstances so
favorable to the triumph of human freedom. Liberty was in the air.
It fell to the people as a natural right. If there was manifested
any disposition to shut it out of the National Constitution, it did
not succeed, There were men who had thought deeply, who were
determined that no union of Church and State should be permitted in
this country. We have in the United States no established religion,
no national church. The letter of the Constitution has not been
violated. Congress has made no law prohibiting religious freedom.
For over one hundred years the American people have boasted that in
this land there was no union of Church and State.
In theory we have religious liberty in the United States, but
in fact we have not. While there has been no legislative act that
commits the nation to any form of religion, our Government has kept
up a sort of religious flirtation with Christianity ever since its
foundation, and has shown it favors and granted it immunities which
cannot be reconciled with its principles of Secularism. If our
nation has no religious intentions, every act which relieves the
Christian Church of a just burden is dishonorable and unfair to
those who do not wish to help support this ecclesiastical parasite.
It is said that our Government has never declared itself in
favor of any religion, and yet ecclesiastical property has been
exempted from taxation; ministers have been paid for praying by
State and Nation; money has been granted by City and State for
sectarian purposes; the Bible has been read in our public schools;
the Governors of our States, and the President of the United
States, have appointed days of fasting and prayer, and commanded
the people to pay them the respect of religious observance, and
various laws, having for their object the control of Sunday in the
interest of Christianity, have been enacted and enforced in nearly
all the States and Territories of the United States of America. We
have an illegitimate union of Church and State in this country, and
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
3
it is time that it was broken up. In the face of such facts as we
have mentioned, the Constitution which declares that "Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, needs to
be vindicated.
The National Constitution guarantees religions liberty to
every citizen, and gives every State in the Union the power to take
away this liberty. As a citizen of the United States, I am not
bound by any religion, but as a citizen of Massachusetts I am
compelled to regulate my actions by the faith of Christianity.
Every State can make, and has made, laws abridging religious
liberty. Such laws to-day give the Christian Church the legal right
to take away human freedom, but every such statute is contrary to
the supreme law of the land, and should be abrogated. It is time to
cry "halt!" to the religious power in this country. The march of
events under the flag of freedom takes us into no ecclesiastical
camp. We must decide which is of most value to our people, the
Christian religion or the principles embodied in our National
Constitution; the Protestant Church or a free Government, This
question is being forced upon our attention, and is up for
discussion.
I insist that while every religion is free to propagate its
faith by all the ecclesiastical arts known to priest and minister,
no church has the right to claim the power of the law to shield it
from just criticism, or to enforce its faith upon the people. Our
nation is not a Christian nation. All the legislation in the
interest of the Christian Church is contrary to the declaration of
our principles. Every statute that has for its object the
enforcement of the Christian religion is religious oppression. I
always try to think as well of my fellow beings as I can. I would
like to do justice to those men and women who are trying to have
our Government "stand up for Jesus"; and I will admit that they are
sincere in their efforts, that they honestly believe that we should
be better, more moral and upright as a people, if some
acknowledgment of our national dependence upon the Protestant
religion could be secured from our Government. I will also admit
that Calvin was perfectly sincere in his belief that the doctrines
of Serviettes were dangerous to the soul of man, and that in his
approval of the burning of Serviettes he was perfectly sincere,
I will admit that the Massachusetts Puritans who hung Quakers
on Boston Common were sincere in their cruel and barbarous
persecutions, and that it was with all sincerity that they branded
with hot irons people whom they looked upon as heretics. I will
admit that the Christian prosecution of Abner Kneeland for
blasphemy was sincere, and that this grand man, called "the grey
father of American Free Thought," was sent to jail for an honest
expression of an honest faith in perfect sincerity. I will admit
that the Unitarians were sincere in their fear and hate of Theodore
Parker, when he was a living power in this city, and that sincerity
dictated the tardy repentance which has moved the Unitarian
denomination to pay him the tribute of respect and honor which it
has but lately laid upon the brow crowned with death. I will admit
that all Christians are sincere in their hatred of Freethinkers,
and that the Christian Church hates most sincerely that most-hated
Freethinker whom we to-day have met to honor -- THOMAS PAINE.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
4
Sincerity has been the excuse of one-half the villainy of the
world, and the apology of the other half. It has been the fair face
of too many foul deeds. Thousands of crimes and wrongs and
cruelties have been born from the heart of this word. We cannot
deny sincerity to the Mohammedan in his fiendish barbarities to
Christians, nor equal sincerity to Christians in their equally
barbarous retaliation. We feel that the dupe of religious
excitement is sincere in whatever he says and does, but we cannot
for this reason endorse his flaming rhetoric, or imitate his pious
gymnastics. I presume that every bigot and every fanatic in the
world is sincere.
Let us ask the Protestant Christians of the United States, who
are working to get their religion endorsed by the Government, if
they are suffering from political injustice, if they are victims of
political wrongs? Are they singled out among the inhabitants of
this country for legislative afflictions? Are they compelled to
observe against their convictions any particular day of the week as
sacred above another? Is their property taxed unjustly; taxed to
support a worship which they cannot join and a religion which they
cannot accept? Are their children compelled by the laws of the
State to listen to the reading of religious books which are
obnoxious to them. Do they hear prayers in our legislatures that
are offensive to their ideas of right?
The necessary and just demand is not for the Government to
give further aid to the Protestant Church, but to stop the
immunities which this church now enjoys. In view of the many wrongs
and evils which others have to bear on account of the privileges
granted to this church, every Christian should hang his head in
shame and blush with guilt before the American people. The truth is
this: The Protestant churches of the United States want to control
our Government for the advantage of their religion. They already
have secured enactments in all of our legislatures which give them
power to injure in mind and estate those who do not accept the
Christian faith. Yet in face of this fact, and in face of the
National Constitution, which says that Congress shall not prohibit
the free exercise of religion, there is a movement among the
Protestant party for greater ecclesiastical authority.
We cannot be blind to the efforts being made by Christian
fanatics, nor can we see such attempts to weaken our political
Government and strangle our political liberty without a protest.
That the people who are seeking for religious power in this country
are honest and sincere in their endeavors, is not any reason why
our citizens should stand idly by and see their political
institutions overthrown, and the freedom won by the patriots of the
Revolution destroyed by the bigots of the Christian Church.
The Protestant menace to our Government is much too serious to
be dismissed with the selfsatisfying assurance that there is no
danger in this land from the ecclesiastical power. There is a more
imminent danger than most people are aware of, and there is
apprehension lest it be seen too late. The Christian Church, to
hide its base motives, is proclaiming that the increasing
skepticism in this country threatens the moral foundation of
society, and that its further spread endangers the very existence
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
5
of our Republic. It is seeking to create a sentiment against the
spirit of free inquiry, which has challenged its authority and
exposed its false claims to Divine guidance. The endeavor to foist
its religion upon the nation is for the purpose of getting the
power to stamp out Liberalism in the United States.
Upon any true and faithful representation of the work of Free
Thought in the world, the Christian Church would be unable to
arouse any prejudice against it. It is only by raising the cry of
"Infidelity" that it can succeed. The word "Infidel" is "mad dog"
to the ear of the average Christian. Start this cry and he at once
arms himself with the cudgel of slander and abuse, and is ready to
engage in any crusade that promises the speedy extermination of his
enemy. But we do not purpose to allow Liberalism to be
misrepresented by Christian lips without demanding satisfaction.
Liberalism is the honest result of honest thought. It is the
expression of honest convictions. As Liberals who have outgrown the
influence of the Christian dogmas upon the mind, we take the
position that such growth assigns us. We are outside of the
Christian Church because we do not belong inside. In our criticisms
of the Christian superstitions we have performed what we believed
to be a duty. We hold that Christianity as a religious system is
both false and wrong, and that we do the world a benefit by
exposing its falseness and errors. Liberalism has never lifted a
hand in persecution, never imprisoned science or burned doubt.
Liberalism has sided with the wronged, the oppressed, the enslaved
everywhere. Liberalism has been heroic in its devotion to truth,
sublime in its endurance of wrongs, and self-sacrificing in its
pursuit of what is right and best for man. And yet the Christian
Church has ever treated those who have rejected its faith as
enemies of all that is pure, good, and true.
Christianity has persecuted men in all ages; it has tortured
doubt, burned unbelief, and led science and truth to the stake and
the gallows. It has sided with the oppressor, with the slave-
holder, with the great and powerful everywhere. It has pursued
liberty with the hate of a tyrant and the venom of a priest. It has
treated knowledge as a spy and truth as a traitor. It has made vice
a virtue by putting a premium on a profession of faith, and virtue
a vice by punishing the publication of an honest doubt. And yet
this priestly piety has the audacity to pose as the friend of
science, of knowledge, of truth, of liberty, and of man.
The Protestant Church asks our Government to give it the right
to teach its dogmas to our children, when there is not a Christian
minister on the earth that can defend these dogmas before the court
of common sense. The Protestant Church asks our Government to
compel the people to observe the Christian Sabbath as a day of
religious worship, when it knows that not one-fourth of the people
of the nation look upon Sunday as any holier than Friday.
The truth is that Orthodoxy is regarded as a theological
comedy by the intelligence of the world, and as being played
chiefly for the benefit of the actors' fund." It has been apparent
for several years that Christianity was losing its hold upon the
faith of mankind, and those who get their living out of this
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
6
superstition have exhausted every physical and mental resource to
save Christianity for the purpose of saving themselves. Every
device has been resorted to that promised to postpone the
dissolution of this theological body, and every means tried that
held out the faintest hope that this "arrested development" of
human thought would yield the salaries of those who preached it for
at least another generation.
Various efforts have been made to take away the rights of the
people to save the Christian superstitions, but no more flagrant
violation of the liberty guaranteed the citizens of this Republic
has ever been attempted than is contained in the present endeavor
to have Congress pass what is called a National Sabbath Law. Do our
people realize what this law means? Do they KNOW what the power of
the Protestant Church would be if backed up by the power of our
Government? Let me read enough of the text of this proposed law to
show how far the Christian Church would go to save its
institutions. The bill, which is expected to become a law, was
introduced in the Senate of the United States by Mr. Blair, on the
21st of May, 1888. It was read twice, and referred to the Committee
on Education and Labor. On December 18th, 1888, it was ordered to
be reprinted. This bill is entitled; A bill to secure to the people
the enjoyment of the first day of the week, commonly known as the
Lord's Day, as a day of rest, and to promote its observance as a
day of religious worship." It reads as follows: --
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in, Congress assembled, --
That no person, or corporation, or agent, servant, or
employee of any person or corporation, shall perform or
authorize to be performed, any secular work, labor, or
business to the disturbance of others, works of necessity, and
mercy, and humanity excepted; nor shall any Person engage in
any play, game, or amusement, or recreation to the disturbance
of others, on the first day of the week, commonly known as the
Lord's Day, or during any part thereof, in any territory,
district, vessel, or place subject to the exclusive
jurisdiction of the United States........
See. 2. That no mails or mail matter shall hereafter be
transported in time of peace over any land postal-route, nor
shall any mail matter be collected, assorted, handled, or
delivered during any part of the first day of the week."
There are certain provisos which are not important to our
purpose. Sections 3, 4, and 5 relate to commerce between the States
and with the Indian tribes; drills, musters and parades; and the
payment and receipt of wages. Sec. 6 refers to such labor and
service as are not deemed violations of the act, but says that "the
same shall be construed so far as possible to secure to the whole
people rest from toil during the first day of the week, their
mental and moral culture, and the religious observance of the
Sabbath Day."
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
7
Here is a deadly blow aimed at religious liberty in this
country. Such a bill as this is the attempt of religious despair.
Any endeavor to explain it on the ground of public necessity, or in
the interest of public morals, is the veriest hypocrisy. Who
demands such a law as this bill proposes? What is it demanded for?
Have not the people who wish to go to church on Sunday the liberty
to do so? Does any one deny them this right? Does any one object to
their going or try to stop them?
Here is the truth: This bill is not to secure to those who
wish to observe the Sabbath in a religious manner the right to do
so, but it is for the purpose of preventing those who wish to
observe it differently from so doing. It is an effort to coerce the
conduct and consciences of men. It is compulsion. This act of
desperation on the part of the Protestant Christians of the United
States is a confession that their religion is a failure, that
without the arm of the law to compel people to observe Sunday as a
holy day, the church is powerless to secure such observance.
Has no one but a Christian any rights in this country? Is
there nothing else of importance in this land but the church? Are
the only affairs of great moment those that relate to religion? Has
it become necessary for the Government to sanction Christian
opinions and observances in order to make the people respect them?
Then their usefulness is past; they can only be supported by the
oppression of the people. Let Congress pass this National Sabbath
Law, and it will soon be asked to pass a law for the endowment of
the church and the support of the clergy.
The Protestants of this land are not restrained from teaching
their religious dogmas or observing the ceremonies of their
religion. Worship is free. A clergyman may teach the most absurd
faith, the most ridiculous superstition, and the law protects him.
It is not for liberty of conscience that the Christian Church
demands the passage of this Sabbath bill; it is to kill liberty of
conscience and take away the rights of the people.
We are informed that a petition, signed by fifteen millions of
names, praying for the passage of this bill, has been presented to
Congress. What a spectacle in a free country! Has it come to this?
Have we forgotten the lessons of persecution that we can wish to
re-enact religious tyranny? Has toleration, then, been a failure?
Has Christianity taught its adherents no higher justice than to
deny to others what they wish to enjoy themselves?
This Sabbath bill is an attempt on the part of Christians to
take away the liberty of their neighbors. It is for the purpose of
compelling the people to accept their religious opinions, to oblige
them to attend church and support Christian worship. This proposed
law is a blow at private rights and public blessings. It aims not
only to take away the freedom of the individual, its object is to
stop public benefactions. The United States mails are to be handled
to please Christian ministers. They are to be all locked up
Saturday nights and not opened until Monday morning. The railway
trains, that carry the mails, are to stop Saturday night wherever
they happen to be, when the hand of the clock points on the dial to
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
8
the hour of twelve, and to remain there twenty-four hours. No
letter is to be collected or delivered on Sunday. The only holy
service on the so-called Lord's Day is the service conducted by the
priest or minister in a Christian Church!
The bill to secure the religious observance of the Sabbath is
the measure of Christian intolerance in the nineteenth century. It
reveals how much of bigotry and fanaticism there is yet alive. It
shows us the spirit that animates the Christian Church, and it
shows us moreover the desperate straits to which it is reduced to
save its religion. If Christians had founded this Government there
would have been no freedom in it. Liberty would have been no larger
than the Apostle's creed. We are reminded upon this occasion of
those words of Thomas Paine: -- "Of all the tyrannies that afflict
mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."
Protestants have yet to learn that liberty of conscience is
not the right of a few but of all; that people are not to ask a
church what they shall accept as true, or to regulate their
behavior by what a church says is right. Not only does a Government
"derive its just powers from the consent of the governed," but a
church derives its authority from the acquiescence of man. When
that authority is exercised arbitrarily it is to be resisted. The
powers of all organizations of whatsoever character are conferred
by man. There is no other source of authority. The pretended
derivation of power from God is imposition. Such a claim cannot be
defended before intelligence, and dare not be made except where
fear and cowardice make the mind a slave.
The Protestants of the United States, in their attempt to have
enacted a National Sabbath law, aim to usurp the rights of others.
They propose to play the role of tyrants, to teach their religion
at the point of the bayonet. I think I do not mistake the temper of
the American people when I say that they will not submit to this
tyranny. We must have fair fighting to-day. The spirit of the age
sides with the wronged. There is but one way that people can be
made to observe Sunday as the Lord's Day, and that is by convincing
them that this day belongs to him, and not to the people. The
Protestant churches know that they cannot defend their dogma of the
Sabbath, know that there is no reason, no sense in their ideas of
Sunday. They are not honest enough to acknowledge the truth. They
dare not come out, and let this question be decided by the facts.
They know that there is no warrant in Nature, for their foolish
notion of Sunday. The truth is against them, and so they ask the
Government to come to the assistance of the Lord.
It will take more than the Congress of the United States to
settle this question -- more than the passage of a bill to secure
the observance of Sunday as a day of religious worship, to convince
the intelligence of the nineteenth century that one day is better
than another or to be used for a different purpose, except as
mankind find it convenient or desirable. We are in danger of
meriting the criticism of the Hindoo who remarked that " Christians
want six days set apart for cheating man, and one day for cheating
God."
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
9
I know of no question that engenders more of hypocrisy than
the Sunday question. There is in the action of the Protestants in
this country more than a menace to our liberties on one day of the
week. Let this Sabbath bill before Congress become a law and other
tyrannous measures will follow at its heels. If there is any
expectation that a more rigid religious observance of Sunday will
result in a purer moral atmosphere such expectation is doomed to
disappointment. Tyranny has never yet borne a virtue.
For our Government to endorse any Christian dogma is to exceed
its powers. There would be no religious meaning in such an act. It
would simply be a concession to bigotry which would result in
arousing the people to the real nature of Protestantism and to
their duty towards this pious tyranny. People will not be converted
to Christianity by an act of Congress. The fond faith that a pious
text on our national coin would teach the people to reverence the
divine name did not materialize into the expected piety. A true
life has never yet come from a false education. Instead of
Christians wishing to have placed upon our money the inscription,
"In God we trust," it would have been more consistent for them to
put upon their God: -- In money we trust.
It will do no good to pass a law which is not demanded by the
welfare of the people. An unjust statute has been the mother only
of wrongs. Our Government has nothing to do with the religion of
its people -- no right to interfere in religious matters, only to
see that one party or sect does not oppress another.
Congress would stultify the Government were it to pass the
National Sabbath bill. Were this bill to become a law it would be
unconstitutional. I do not believe that sixty millions of people
should be enslaved to please fifteen million bigots.
**** ****
THE BOSTON INVESTIGATOR.
PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY MORNING.
At Paine Memorial Building, Appleton St.,
BOSTON, MASS.
HORACE SEAVER ............. EDITOR.
JOSIAH P. MENDUM ........... PROPRIETOR.
[ENTERED AS SECOND CLASS MAIL MATTER.]
TERMS:
One copy, one year --------------- $3.00
One copy, six months -------------- 1.50
One copy, three months ------------ .75
Two copies to one address ---------- 5.00
Five copies to five new subscribers 11.25
Single copies -------------------- 8 cts.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
10
All letters should be directed to JOSIAH P. MENDUM,
PAINE MEMORIAL BUILDING, Appleton St., Boston. Mass.
**** ****
Thomas Paine's
Political, Theological, and
Miscellaneous Writings.
COMPLETE WORKS OF THOMAS PAINE -- Three volumes, 8 vo., cloth.
Price, $7,00; postage. 50 cts.
PAINE'S POLITICAL WRITINGS -- TO which is prefixed a brief sketch
of the author's life. Two volumes. Price, $5,00; postage, 35 cts.
PAINE'S THEOLOGICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS WRITINGS. -- 8 vo., cloth.
Price, $2,50; postage, 20 cts.
THE RIGHTS OF MAN. -- An answer to Edmund, Burke's attack on the
French Revolution. 8 vo., cloth. Price, $1,00; postage, 20 cts.
COMMON SENSE AND CRISIS. -- Revolutionary pamphlets addressed to
the inhabitants of America. Price, $1,00; postage, 10 cts.
LIFE OF THOMAS PAINE -- With critical and explanatory observations
on his writings. Price, 1,00; postage, 8 cts.
AGE OF REASON -- With examination of the Prophecies, essay on
dreams, &c. Price, cloth, 75 cts.
COMMON SENSE -- TO which is added a brief sketch of the author's
life. Price, 15 cts.
AGE OF REASON -- Being an investigation of true and fabulous
theology. Price, 20 cts.
FOR SALE AT THE INVESTIGATOR OFFICE.
**** ****
Cosmian Hymn Book,
A COLLECTION OF
ORIGINAL AND SELECTED
HYMNS
FOR
Liberal and Ethical Societies,
for Schools and the Home.
COMPILED BY
L.K. WASHBURN
FOR SALE AT THE INVESTIGATOR OFFICE.
PRICE, $1,50.
**** ****
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
11


194
textfiles.com/politics/prsvbure.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
THE PRESERVATION OF THE BUREAUCRACY
By JACOB G. HORNBERGER
Two hundred years ago, our American ancestors instituted the
most unusual political system in history. The Constitution
called into existence a government whose powers, for the first
time ever, were extremely limited. Thus, unlike other people
throughout history, Americans lived without such things as
income taxation, welfare, licensure, immigration control,
business regulation, drug laws, conscription, and passports.
Generally, and with exceptions (slavery and tariffs being the
most notable), laws were limited to protecting people from the
violence and fraud of others.
What caused these Americans to institute this strange and
novel way of life? The answer lies in the way our American
ancestors perceived the relationship between the individual in
society and his government.
Americans of that time believed that the preservation of the
individual--and the freedom to live his life and dispose of
his wealth as he chose--was the highest political end. Thus,
for them, government's sole purpose was to assist in the
achievement of this end. Government officials were viewed as
servants, and only as servants, to ensure the preservation of
the individual, the freedom to live his life, and the
disposition of his wealth, as he saw fit.
Although Americans of today operate under the delusion that
they subscribe to the same value structure as their ancestors,
the uncomfortable reality is that they have instead rejected
and abandoned it. Although they will rarely admit it to
themselves or others, Americans today honestly believe that
the supreme end in American society is not the preservation of
the individual and his freedom to choose, but rather the
preservation of the political bureaucracy and its unlimited
power to control the lives and wealth of the citizenry.
How do the politicians and bureaucrats, in turn, perceive the
citizenry? Paying lip service to their role as "public
servants," especially at election time, public officials, in
reality, scoff at any such notion. In their eyes, the citizens
are means, not ends, who exist solely to ensure the
preservation of the bureaucracy.
This philosophical perspective--that the citizen is merely a
"cog in the wheel" which can, and will, be sacrificed for the
greater good of the bureaucracy--holds true, of course, with
the civil bureaucracy. Usually under the guise of fighting
some domestic "war," or attacking some "crisis"--poverty,
drugs, illiteracy, racism, or whatever--the civil bureaucracy
exercises ever increasing control over the lives and wealth of
the citizenry.
But the same holds true with the military bureaucracy. No
matter what the conditions are in the world--even if peace
were to break out everywhere--even if democracies were
suddenly found in every nation on earth--even if American
politicians and bureaucrats appointed every ruler in the
world--in the mind of the military bureaucrat, crises and wars
will always be a "potential threat" to "national security."
And so the military bureaucracy also wields ever increasing
control over the lives and wealth of the citizenry.
All money which government has, of course, comes from the
citizenry through the coercive process of taxation.
Government officials understand that, in this sense, they are
parasitic--that is, that they survive and flourish through the
earnings that are sucked out of the pockets of the citizens.
They comprehend, for example, that if the citizenry suddenly
decided to stop paying taxes, the bureaucracy's lifeline
would, at the same time, dry up.
The bureaucracy recognizes that, since it is a parasite, it
must perform a masterful balancing act. On the one hand, it
must ensure that the citizenry continue paying taxes at such a
level that the bureaucracy is preserved, and hopefully
expanded. But it must also ensure that the level of
confiscation and plunder never gets so high that the worst
fear of the bureaucracy--a tax revolt among the citizenry--
materializes.
Now, the intriguing question is: if the American people
decided that their ancestors were right, and that 20th-century
Americans are wrong--that is, that the preservation of the
individual and his freedom to choose, should, in fact, be the
end, and the government simply the means to ensure that end--
would the politicians and bureaucrats comply with the decision
of the citizenry?
The answer is in doubt. Why? Because those in the bureaucracy
honestly believe that they, not the citizenry, are "the
country"; that is, they actually think that the nation, and
the well-being of the nation, depend on their preservation.
The dismantling of the bureaucracy, in their minds, would mean
the destruction of the country. Therefore, it is entirely
possible that, in the midst of what the politicians and
bureaucrats would consider a "national crisis," they would
refuse to comply with a mandate of the citizenry to dismantle
the bureaucracy and end the taxation necessary for its
preservation.
One of these days, the American people will discover, much to
their surprise and dismay, that which the Soviet citizens are
discovering: that the bureaucracy will always tolerate the
citizens' "freedom of speech" to complain about bureaucratic
abuses and inefficiencies; but as soon as the bureaucracy is
threatened by the citizenry with extinction, it will fight
them "tooth and nail" for its "right" to be preserved.
Complaints about governmental inefficiencies and corruption
have become a well-recognized and accepted part of American
life: "We must get rid of waste in government programs"; "We
must get 'better people' into public office." So, attempting
to "correct the system" by gaining political power over their
fellow citizens, Americans expend much time, money, and effort
to get themselves, or their friends, elected or appointed to
public office. And the results? Even when victorious, they
learn that things only get worse: expanded control, greater
plunder, increased waste, and more corruption--only this time
by them and their friends, rather than by others.
Americans must finally come to the painful realization that
their ancestors were philosophically correct: that the taking
of money from one person, through the political process, in
order to give it to another person is evil, immoral, and
destructive; and that political interference with how a person
chooses to peacefully live his life, and dispose of his
wealth, is equally evil, immoral, and destructive.
Moreover, Americans must finally conclude, as painful as it
may be, that waste in government programs (actually somebody's
income), no matter how great an effort is expended, is
impossible to eliminate. Evil and immorality, even if
democratically enshrined, cannot be made to work efficiently.
And they must learn that getting "better people" into public
office is not the solution either. One does not change the
nature of a house of prostitution by voting in a new board of
directors. And that is exactly what the American people of
this century have permitted their government to become--a
house of prostitution in which, for example, the principles
receive "campaign contributions" and "speakers' honoraria" for
"services rendered." Of course, some people, and especially
those who were taught civics in their public schools and who
were required to pledge allegiance every day for twelve long
years, will consider this observation to be highly
unpatriotic. But if it be unpatriotic to oppose a house of
prostitution where once stood a great and glorious edifice,
then make the most of it!
No, the answer is not to engage in a futile quest to eliminate
waste in government programs. The solution is to
constitutionally prohibit the programs themselves. No, the
answer is not to get "better people" into public office. The
solution is to constitutionally prohibit public officials,
whoever they may be, from plundering the citizenry and doling
out money to others. No, the answer is not to reign in the
bureaucrats. The solution is to dismantle the bureaucracy and
return the bureaucrats, kicking and screaming, to rewarding
and productive lives as private citizens. No, the answer is
not tax reform. The solution is the repeal of the Sixteenth
Amendment.
In other words, the solution for America, as we enter the
third century of this nation's existence, lies with the
American people's recapturing the principles on which our
nation was founded and limiting the power of government even
more severely than our ancestors did. Not only would this
restore our political system to a sound moral foundation and
our society to one based on volunteerism rather than coercion,
it would also unleash an economic prosperity unparalleled in
history.
But the heart of the solution is to make the individual in
society once again sovereign over the state. Until the
American people make the preservation of the individual, as
well as his liberty and property, the highest political end,
they will continue living their lives in subserviency to what
has been the highest political end in the 20th century: the
preservation of the bureaucracy . . . and the discord, misery,
impoverishment, and destruction which it has brought in its
wake.
Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the February 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

6253
textfiles.com/politics/public_p Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

186
textfiles.com/politics/pvt-prop.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,186 @@
THE SANCTITY OF PRIVATE PROPERTY
By JACOB G. HORNBERGER
No myth is more pervasive among the people of the United
States than that which claims that the American economic
system is based on the sanctity of private property. The
American people have been taught since the first grade in
their government schools that America is the bastion of
private property while the Soviet Union and China represent
the system of public ownership or control of property.
Myths die hard. But it is important that they be exploded, no
matter how painful the result. Let us do so to this myth of
the American system of "private property" which grips the
minds of most Americans.
The significance of the Declaration of Independence had
nothing to do with the military battles between the colonists
and the British forces. Instead, its importance lay in one of
the most dramatic and revolutionary declarations in the
history of man: that man's rights do not come from government
but instead come from God. With one fell swoop, and for the
first time in history, people unseated public officials as the
source of their rights and replaced them with the Creator!
The result? With many exceptions (slavery being the worst),
the Americans implemented the freest society in history: no
income tax, welfare, social security, licensing, or virtually
any other law which took money from some, through the
political process, and gave it to others, or which regulated
peaceful human behavior. Why? Not because it would result in a
more prosperous society (which it did). But rather because
their lives, liberty, property, and conscience belonged to
God, and it was no business of Caesar how they exercised them
as long as they did not inflict violence or fraud on others.
What about 20th century Americans? Maintaining the illusion
that they are continuing the vision and heritage of their
American ancestors, they have instead resorted to the age-old
idea that Caesar should be permitted to have ultimate control
over these fundamental rights.
Two thousand years ago, the Prime Exemplar told us that we
were to render unto Caesar what was Caesar's and unto God what
is God's. But He did not tell us what belonged to Caesar and
what belonged to God. He left that up to us to figure out.
Let us see how Americans--both past and present--have made
this determination. Let's examine, for example, income and
the ability to earn income.
The Americans who lived from 1787 to 1913 believed that the
fruits of their earnings belonged to God, not Caesar. From
the very beginning, they did not permit their public officials
to levy a tax on their income. When the politicians tried to
do so, the people sued. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of
the people, and against the government, and declared the
income tax in violation of the Constitution which the people
had adopted in 1787.
Public officials complied with the ruling but immediately
began persuading the American people to alter their
Constitution to permit such a tax. The arguments which the
politicians used were evil and seductive. First, they argued
that only the rich would be taxed; the poor and middle class
need never be concerned. It was the perfect embodiment of
violations of God's commandments against covetousness, envy,
and stealing. The politicians also promised that the income
tax would never exceed a minute percentage.
The American people fell for these evil, seductive, and false
promises and amended the Constitution to permit Caesar to do
what their ancestors had fought so hard to prevent Caesar from
doing: gaining control over their earnings. With the adoption
of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913, the American people
rendered unto Caesar that which had previously been rendered
unto God: the fruits of their efforts.
A second example: licensing of occupations, professions, and
businesses. By and large, the 19th century American rejected
licensure. So, American society throughout the 1800s was
highly unusual because, unlike all of the other societies in
history, a person did not have to seek permission from the
political authorities before he began pursuing a living.
Lawyers, doctors, hairdressers, blacksmiths, and so forth
learned their trade and went into business without asking
anyone's permission. But consumers, as the ultimate economic
sovereign, through their decisions to patronize a business or
not, made the final determination on whether a person would
continue in his line of work.
The 20th century American, resorting to the Old World way of
thinking against which his ancestors had rebelled, rejected
this dramatically different way of life. He did not want to
have to make his own decisions on whether people were
competent or not. He also did not want unrestricted
competition in his own trade. So, he turned to Caesar and,
through licensure, rendered unto him the power to regulate the
ability to make a living.
Is the real significance behind these two renderings--
occupation and income--the economic consequences? No! The true
significance is that the American people, who are so ready to
worship God on Sunday, have chosen to reject Him the rest of
the week. They believe that God and government should be
partners with each other with respect to people's economic
activities, blocking out of their minds that, "Thou shalt have
no other gods before me."
The essence of what the 20th century American has done,
despite the myths and illusions under which he chooses to
operate, can be summarized as follows:
"God, we know that You created us. We also know
that our talents and abilities are gifts from You
which we utilize to earn our daily bread--our
property. We also know that our American ancestors
rendered these great gifts to You and would not
permit Caesar to interfere with them.
"But times have changed, Lord. Those principles were fine
for the simple times of the 1800s but they just don't
apply to the more complex way of life in the 20th
century. So, we're placing Caesar--the organized means of
coercion and compulsion--in partnership with You.
"Oh mighty Caesar, we render unto you control of our
talents and abilities and the fruits of our efforts.
We know that you did not give us these but nevertheless
we are placing them under your dominion and control.
Take care of us, mighty Caesar. Decide for us what
line of endeavor is most suitable for each of us.
Determine how much of our earnings we shall be permitted
to keep and how much you need to retain. Provide us our
security--our daily bread--in times of need because our
other God sometimes doesn't do a perfect job in this
regard. We trust you, mighty Caesar, with our lives,
our liberties, our properties, and our consciences. You
shall henceforth be partners with our other God, the God
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. We love you. We adore you.
We worship you. We give you thanks. We are here to serve
you."
Since ancient times, political rulers have hated the existence
of God. Why? Because they know that our's is a jealous God. He
demands absolute and total allegiance. Our God does not accept
partners! Therefore, political rulers, who invariably also
desire to be worshipped, bear terrible resentment against such
competition.
In ancient Rome, the Caesars developed an interesting method
to circumvent this dilemma. They allowed people to engage in
different religions but only on the condition that permission
was given by the State. Most people sought and were given such
permission. So, although people were worshipping another
deity, Caesar did not mind because by permitting them to do
so, Caesar remained the ultimate sovereign.
However, one group of God's worshippers saw through this scam:
the Christians. Refusing to take any act which placed Caesar
above God, they chose not to seek Caesar's permission to
worship Him. And the price they paid? Their lives.
Thank God our American ancestors secured the passage of the
First Amendment which prohibits Caesar from gaining control
over our churches. If only we 20th century Americans had the
same strength of conviction with respect to our lives and
earnings. If only we would truly sanctify private property
rather than just giving it lip service. If only we would
render our lives and property back to God instead of Caesar.
If only we would place God as sovereign over all of our life
rather than just a small part of it.
Myths die hard but if we fail to kill them, we shall continue
to reap what we sow.
Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the August 1990 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1990, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

208
textfiles.com/politics/pvtprop2.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,208 @@
THE SANCTITY OF PRIVATE PROPERTY--PART 2
By JACOB G. HORNBERGER
The last thing which Americans of today wish to face is that
they have abandoned the principles of private property on
which the United States were founded. In last August's Freedom
Daily, I pointed to two examples of where the American people
have permitted their public officials to assume absolute and
total control over private property: income taxation and
licensing of occupations. Let us examine two additional
examples to assist us in destroying the myth of the sanctity
of private property in 20th-century America: international
trade and the oil business.
One of the favorite pastimes of Americans is to look down
their noses at the socialist systems which are now crumbling
all over the world. Americans honestly believe that the
American system of "free enterprise" has prevailed in the
battle of "capitalism" vs. socialism; and they believe that
the world should now simply copy the "private property" system
of the American people.
But what is it about the socialist countries which Americans
find so objectionable? After all, the socialist nations embody
much of that which Americans would never consider abandoning
in the U.S.: free housing and medical care for the poor, the
prohibition of private citizens from gaining significantly
high amounts of wealth, free schooling for all children, and
inexpensive food for everyone.
But one of the most significant characteristics of the
socialist systems is government control over a citizen's
ability to sell goods and services to people in other parts of
the world. In other words, the essence of the socialist
societies in regard to international trade is that the
government reigns supreme over the individual and his
property; that is, all property in the nation, even when legal
title is nominally held in the name of private citizens, is
either owned or controlled by the political authorities.
One of the best examples of this lies ninety miles away from
American shores. In Cuba, a nation guided by the principles of
free public housing, free medical care, free public schooling,
and inexpensive food for the populace, people are not
permitted to sell goods and services to others around the
world without the permission of their government officials.
The government takes the position that all property ultimately
belongs to "the people" and, therefore, subject to political
control.
Americans rightfully object to the Cuban way of life. But they
have a terrible time recognizing that these same principles
are found in 20th-century America. Like his Cuban counterpart,
no American is free to sell, without the permission of his
public officials, what supposedly belongs to him to people
around the world. If an American, for example, decides to sell
a quantity of wheat or penicillin
to the Cuban people, he is prohibited from doing so by his own
politicians and bureaucrats. In fact, if an American even
travels to Cuba without permission of his public officials, he
is incarcerated and fined. This was exemplified last year when
an American fisherman was actually sent to jail by American
authorities for organizing a fishing trip to Cuba.
Now, the American government officials justify this
prohibition on the basis of the Cuban ruler, Fidel Castro,
being a bad communist (as compared to the apparently "good"
communists of Red China with whom Americans are permitted to
trade). But the problem lies not with the American
government's determination of who are good communists and who
are bad ones. The problem lies in the American people
permitting their politicians and bureaucrats to assume and
exercise the same power over their lives and property as that
found in such nations as Cuba and China.
And despite the fact that the American government maintains
ultimate control over the buying and selling decisions of the
American people, Americans continue to believe that when
American government officials have this control, it is a
private property system; and that only when Cuban, Chinese, or
Soviet government officials have it, is it considered a
socialist system.
What would be a true private property system? One in which the
individual is free to buy and sell goods and services anywhere
in the world without the interference of his public officials.
And it would be a way of life in which people were trading not
because the politicians and bureaucrats permitted them to do
so but rather because they have the absolute right to sell
whatever belongs to them to anyone anywhere in the world.
A second example of this myth of private property in America:
oil and gas. Despite their commitment to "free enterprise" and
"private property," the American people believe that whenever
a person owns what other Americans need, the politicians and
bureaucrats must take control over it and redistribute it to
the needy.
The best illustration of this tendency toward the socialist
principle of public ownership or control over the means of
production concerns oil and gas. Whenever the owner of oil or
gas decides to sell his product at a higher price than that
which American consumers decide is "reasonable," the
politicians and bureaucrats, as a result of political pressure
from the American people, threaten not only to prohibit him,
through price controls, from doing so, but also to take away,
through a windfall profits tax, whatever "unjust" profits the
producer has made. In other words, while proclaiming the
superiority of the American "free enterprise" system over
socialist systems in which governments maintain extensive
controls over prices and profits, the American people approve
of these same socialist principles in their own nation. But,
of course, they do so under the rubric of the American
"private property" system rather than under the American
"socialist" system.
One of the ironies is that during depressed economic
conditions, when some oil companies go broke or bankrupt, the
American people take the attitude of, "That's their problem.
They chose to go into the oil business, and they can't cry
when it fails to pan out." But when conditions change, and
demand for the product suddenly increases, Americans take the
same attitude as their counterparts in China, the Soviet
Union, and Cuba: "It's not fair for others to have more when I
have less. I need the oil and gas. He's gouging me. I am
'forced' to pay these high prices. Take his product and his
income away from him and give it to me."
And another irony is that when price controls are instituted,
the problems which arise from those controls are never blamed
on the controls themselves. Instead, just like in other
socialist countries, the problems are always blamed on others,
usually "the evil, greedy, profit-seeking, bourgeoisie swine
of a capitalist pig."
The best example of this was the price controls imposed on the
oil industry by the American government in the 1970s. What was
the result of those controls? The same result found in the
Soviet Union, China, and Cuba when price controls are imposed
there: shortages and long lines. But did the American people
blame them on the political controls themselves? Of course
not. That would have been considered unpatriotic. So, the
shortages and long lines were blamed on American oil-
producers. And how do Americans explain the fact that no
shortages and long lines have developed as a result of the
recent Middle East crisis? They are unable to do so because
they have no idea only political control over prices, and not
private owners and producers of oil and gas, create shortages
and long lines.
The major disaster of price controls and windfall profits, of
course, is the abandonment of the sanctity of private
property. But the secondary disaster is that the economic
situation always becomes worse as a result of the political
intervention. People do not realize that prices are simply the
market's method of providing signals in the same way that a
thermometer uses temperature to provide signals. High prices
are simply the market's way of telling people to produce more
and consume less. But rather than permit the signals to guide
the actions of producers and consumers, the American people
pressure their rulers to break the thermometer. Rather than
cope with the bad news which the messenger has brought, people
instead choose to kill him. And the inevitable result is just
like that found in socialist countries everywhere: shortages,
long lines, and general market chaos.
What Americans of today recognize so well with respect to
other nations, but unfortunately refuse to see in their own
country, is that people can never be free whenever public
officials maintain ultimate control over the disposition of
their property. Like their counterparts in countries all over
the world, unfortunately Americans have a terribly difficult
time "letting go" of the apparent security of political
control over the means of production. Proclaiming the virtues
of freedom and private property for people in other parts of
the world, Americans are terribly fearful of trying it for
themselves. And it is this paralyzing fear of freedom that
causes Americans to continue their deep emotional and
psychological commitment to the 20th-century myth of American
"free enterprise" and "private property."
When will private property truly be sanctified not only in the
U.S. but in other nations as well? Only when the time comes
when people stop believing that they have a right to take away
what belongs to someone else. There are fewer more destructive
forces than the belief that it is acceptable to covet and
steal what belongs to another as long as it is done through
the political process. Whether it involves a person's income,
his occupational pursuits, his goods and services, or his
trading decisions, the succumbing to the urge to take from
those who have more will always result in the impoverishment
or destruction of the people of a nation regardless of whether
they are Romans, British, Soviet, Chinese, Cubans, and, yes,
even Americans. As our American ancestors understood so well,
only those nations which have a political system which
protects free economic activity are those nations in which the
citizenry are blessed with peace, prosperity, and harmony.
Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
------------------------------------------------------------
From the January 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

349
textfiles.com/politics/quayle.doc Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,349 @@
"I AM THE FUTURE"
THE J. DANFORTH QUAYLE PRIMER
1988
AUG. 17 - In addressing a California delegation Quayle remarks "The real
question for 1988 is whether we're going to go forward to tomorrow or past to
the--to the back!"
AUG. 17 - Quayle justifies decision to join National Guard "I did not know in
1969 that I would be in this room today."
AUG. 19 - A reporter is booed by Quayle's hometown crowd for having the
audacity to ask him about the hypocrisy of his loud support of Vietnam War
and subsequent draft avoidance.
AUG. 19 - Quayle justifies decision to ask parents to get him into National
Guard "I do--I do--I do--I do what any normal person would do at that age.
You call home. You call home to mother and father and say, 'I'd like to get
in the National Guard.'"
AUG. 22 - Bush defends Quayle by saying, "He did not go to Canada, he did not
burn his draft card, and he damn sure didn't burn the American flag!"
AUG. 23 - James Quayle says his son "doesn't have the greatest smarts in the
world."
AUG. 23 - Quayle denies involvement with Paula Parkinson saying "I hope
there's some respect and dignity for things I did not do."
AUG. 25 - Quayle says his work on Senate Armed Services Committee involved
getting cruise missiles "more accurate so that we can have precise
precision."
AUG. 27 - Quayle extols virtues of family "I've been very blessed with
wonderful parents and a wonderful family, and I am proud of my family.
Anybody turns to their family. I have a very good family. I'm fortunate to
have a very good family. I believe very strongly in the family. It's one of
the things we have in our platform, is to talk about it."
SEP. 8 - Quayle cites Tom Clancy novel as justification for building anti-
satellite weapon.
SEP. 8 - Quayle says Republicans "understand the importance of bondage
between parent and child."
SEP. 8 - Marilyn Quayle claims her husband "really is the studious sort" who
"tries to read Plato's 'Republic' every year."
SEP. 13 - Quayle demonstrates his sophisticated wit remarking "Want to hear
a sad story about the Dukakis campaign? The governor of Massachusetts, he
lost his top naval advisor last week. His rubber ducky drowned in the bath
tub."
SEP. 15 - Quayle calls the Holocaust "an obscene period in our nations's
history.
SEP. 15 - Quayle claims "I didn't live in this century."
SEP. 21 - Quayle makes the redundant campaign promise "We're going to have
the best-educated American people in the world."
SEP. 21 - Marilyn Quayle says what attracted her to her husband was his
"intellectual curiosity."
SEP. 29 - Quayle says the book "Nicholas and Alexandra' "shows how people
that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a
tremendous impact on history."
OCT. 5 - Quayle asks Ailes's permission regarding debate gesture "Hey, Roger,
does...on, on this, you know, if I'm gonna, if I, if I decide on my gesture
over there...is that all right?...You don't mind?"
OCT. 5 - Quayle tells debate audience he would never have "another Jimmy
Carter grain embargo, Jimmy, Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy
Carter grain embargo."
OCT. 5 - At the same debate Quayle remarks that proof of his commitment to
the environment is "I take my children hiking and fishing, walking in the
woods."
OCT. 6 - Quayle explains inability at debate to say what he'd do if he
suddenly became president by saying "I had not had that question before."
OCT. 9 - Quayle explains why questions about his parent's ties to John Birch
Society aren't relevant by declaring "Because I say it isn't."
OCT. 10 - Quayle insists he really does know what to do if he becomes
president "Certainly I know what to do, and when I am vice-president--and I
will be--there will be contingency plans under different situations. And I'll
tell you what--I'm not going to go out and have a news conference about it,
I'm going to put it in a safe and keep it there! Does that answer the
question?"
OCT. 10 - Quayle tells debate audience his "commitment to the poor" once led
him to visit people at a food bank who were "so glad that I took time out of
my schedule" that they didn't ask him about his votes against programs that
would have helped them.
OCT. 18 - Quayle tells eleven-year-old girl he'd want her to have a baby if
she was raped by her father "You're a very strong woman... Though this would
be a traumatic experience that you would never forget, I think that you would
be very successful in life."
OCT. 20 - Quayle explains why he calls rural America 'real America' "It's
rural America. It's where I come from. We always refer to ourselves as real
American. Rural America, real America, real, real America."
NOV. 6 - Quayle ruminates about upcoming Thanksgiving holiday "I suppose
three important things certainly come to my mind that we want to say thank
you. The first would be our family. Your family, my family--which is
composed of an immediate family of a wife and three children, a larger family
with grandparents and aunts and uncles. We all have our family, whichever
that may be."
NOV. 8 - Quayle elected Vice-President.
NOV. 21 - Nixon meets Quayle, says he's not "an intellectual midget.
NOV. 30 - Quayle says campaign taught him to talk less: "Verbosity leads to
unclear, inarticulate things."
DEC. 26 - Bush embarks on annual quail-hunting trip, says, "I don't think I
could shoot a deer. Quail--that's something else again."
1989
JAN. 20 - Quayle takes oath of office and leaves out a line. Marilyn's hat,
which resembles dogfood dish, blows off.
JAN. 31 - Quayle says U.S. "condones violence in El Salvador."
FEB. 3 - Quayle says U.S. expects Salvadoran officials "to work toward the
elimination of human rights."
MAR. 2 - With the GOP National Committee having censured views of Louisiana
state legislator David Duke, Quayle commends party for its "censorship" of
Duke.
MAR. 13 - Quayle gloats that he now has the upper hand over political
enemies: "I'm the Vice-President. They know it, and they know that I know
it."
MAR. 16 - Quayle says 'The Satanic Verses' is "obviously not only offensive
but, I think most of us would say, in bad taste," though he hasn't read it.
MAR. 31 - Bush establishes President's Council on Competitiveness, agency
dedicated to furtive undoing of environmental and safety regulations that
business finds onerous. Names Quayle chairman.
APR. 5 - USA TODAY reports Quayle's praise of pastime popular with boss:
"Great American sport. Horseshoes is a very great game. I love it."
APR. 24 - Quayle visits Chicago school, exhorts students: "We will move
forward, we will move upward, and yes, we will move onward."
APR. 25 - Quayle visits Hawaii: "Hawaii has always been a very pivotal role
in the Pacific. It is in the Pacific. It is part of the United States that
is an island that is right here." Travels to American Samoa, tells natives,
"You all look like happy campers to me. Happy campers you are, happy campers
you have been, and, as far as I am concerned, happy campers you will always
be." Calls Pago Pago "Pogo Pogo."
MAY 1 - Marilyn Quayle announces her pet project: disasters.
MAY 2 - Quayle plays too long at a Singapore golf course, arrives late for
meeting with prime minister. Aide tells reporter, "You can tell from the way
he plays golf that he's a natural leader."
MAY 4 - Quayle laments, "Every once in a while, you let a word or phrase out
and you want to catch it and bring it back. You can't do that. It's gone,
gone forever."
MAY 9 - Quayle addresses United Negro College Fund luncheon, attempts to
quote slogan 'A mind is a terrible thing to waste.' Says, "What a waste it
is to lose one's mind, or, not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How
true that is."
MAY 19 - Quayle declares, "This administration stands for the future. It
also stands for what's good about this country."
MAY 22 - Quayle declares, "I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward
more freedom and democracy--but that could change."
JUN. 13 - Quayle poses in El Salvador with grenade launcher aimed, unbeknown
to him, at his own elbow.
JUL. 15 - Quayle notes upcoming twentieth anniversary of moonwalk, refers to
astronaut Buzz Aldrin as "Buzz Lukens." (Lukens is an Ohio congressman
recently given thirty days in jail for having sex with a sixteen-year-old
girl.)
JUL. 20 - Quayle addresses twentieth anniversary celebration of moon landing:
"Welcome to President Bush, Mrs. Bush, and my fellow astronauts."
AUG. 11 - Quayle explains why he favors sending men to Mars: "Mars is
essentially in the same orbit. Mars is somewhat the same distance from the
sun, which is very important, We have seen pictures where there are canals,
we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If
oxygen, that means we can breathe." Spokesman David Beckwith rushes forth,
assures public that Quayle "obviously knows there's no water flowing in the
canals now."
AUG. 17 - Quayle tells Sam Donaldson, "I stand by all the misstatements that
I've made."
OCT. 2 - Quayle declares, "Japan is an important ally of ours. Japan and the
United States of the Western industrialized capacity, 60 percent of the GNP,
two countries. That's a statement in and of itself."
OCT. 19 - Quayle inspects quake-ravaged San Francisco. Calls it "a
heartrendering sight." Adds, "The loss of life will be irreplaceable."
DEC. 1 - With Bush en route to Malta summit during Philippines crisis, White
House aide alerts media that Quayle, staying very, very late in situation
room, "ran effective meetings" and "asked the right questions."
DEC. 6 - Quayle says, "One word sums up probably the responsibility of any
vice-president, and that one word is 'to be prepared.'"
DEC. 21 - Media reports that the Quayles sent out thirty thousand Christmas
cards with misspelled message: "May our nation continue to be the beakon of
hope to the world." Quayle gives Bush toilet-paper holder that plays "Hail
to the Chief" when paper is unrolled.
DEC. 30 - Quayle says he spends "a great deal of time" with Bush, and is "not
as they say, a potted plant in these meetings."
1990
MAR. 11 - Quayle stops at Chilean costal village, buys South American Indian
doll with enormous erection. Tells Marilyn, "This is something teenage boys
might find of interest."
MAR. 19 - Quayle boasts that he knows Latin American leaders "by their first
names."
MAR. 23 - Quayle declares, "If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of
failure."
APR. 5 - Michael Jackson drops by Quayle's office. Aide says they "hit it off
famously."
MAY 1 - Quayle warns of danger of asteroids crashing into our planet: "Those
same asteroids which promise material riches can be a threat as well."
SEP. 5 - Quayle delivers morale-boosting speech to NASA employees, declares,
"For NASA, space is still a high priority."
SEP. 18 - Quayle delivers speech on education: "Quite frankly, teachers are
the only profession that teach our children."
SEP. 22 - Quayle says of Mideast situation, "We are ready for any unforeseen
even that may or may not occur."
SEP. 26 - Quayle announces support for efforts "to limit the terms of members
of Congress, especially members of the House and members of the Senate."
OCT. 2 - Quayle explains that there is no parallel between Vietnam and the
Middle East because "Vietnam is a jungle, You had jungle warfare. Kuwait,
Iraq, you have sand." Says there's no need to worry about a protracted war
because "from a historical basis, Middle East conflicts do not last a long
time."
OCT. 9 - Quayle visits elementary school, assures four-year-old girl that he
has access to Bush: "I work with the President almost on a daily basis. I
was with him until 6:30 last night. I'll be with him Thursday morning. We
talk every day."
OCT. 12 - Quayle comments on David Duke's prospects in Louisiana senate race:
"Unfortunately, the people of Louisiana are not racists."
NOV. 5 - Quayle plays self on episode of 'Major Dad.'
DEC. 28 - Quayle golfs at all-white country club in Pebble Beach, claims to
have been unaware of discrimination though club dropped out of PGA tour
rather than accept minority members. Says Chief of Staff Bill Kristol,
"Well, it proves he's not spending time reading the golf pages."
1991
APR. 11 - Quayle hails U.S. triumph in Gulf as "a stirring victory for the
forces of aggression."
JUL. 12 - Bush attacks senators backing off from supporting Robert Gates for
CIA chief: "You hear a rumor and then you run for cover. You get under the
bush like a quail and hope that you don't get flushed out for a while."
AUG. 13 - Lawyer Quayle tells American Bar Association that U.S. has too many
lawyers.
OCT. 8 - Quayle attempts to woo pro-choice GOP voters, offers image of party
as "a big tent." Later explains that "the big tent is a pro-life big tent."
NOV. 15 - Quayle tells Christian group about need for abstinence to avoid
AIDS: "My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will
never surrender to what is right."
DEC. 6 - Quayle says of John Sununu's departure from White House, "This isn't
a man who is leaving with his head between his legs."
DEC. 27 - Bush hunting party kills twenty-nine quail.
1992
JAN. 8 - Bush, in Tokyo, vomits in lap of Japanese prime minister, collapses
to floor, Quayle, asked about his fitness to take over presidency, declares,
"I'm ready."
JAN. 17 - Quayle spots Now Hiring sign in window of Burger King, cites it as
proof that economy is "beginning to turn around." Fact that available jobs
are part-time at minimum wage ($4.25 per hour) doesn't deter his optimism.
FEB. 23 - Quayle denies that Willie Horton ad was example of negative
advertising, denies that he joined National Guard "to avoid going to
Vietnam," and denies that Bush broke his read-my-lips-no-new-taxes campaign
promise by signing tax hike in 1990.
APR. 20 - 'People' reports that Quayle's office turned down National Kidney
Foundation request for contribution of doodle for charity auction, sent
autographed photo with note explaining that "due to his hectic schedule the
Vice-President cannot afford you a doodle." Later the same day Quayle blows
whistle at White House Easter-egg roll.
APR. 30 - Quayle visits New York hospital, asks administrators if AIDS
patients are "taking DDT."
MAY 19 - Quayle cites 'Murphy Brown's' "mocking the importance of fathers" as
example of bad Hollywood values that resulted in L.A. riots.
MAY 20 - Quayle tours South-Central L.A. defends attack on 'Murphy Brown:'
"Illegitimacy is something that we should talk about in terms of not having."
Student says of his visit, "He's not, like, smart. I'm not trying to bag on
him or anything, but he has the same mentality I have--and I'm in the eighth
grade."
JUN. 9 - Quayle brags he wears scorn of the "cultural elite" as "badge of
honor."
JUN. 10 - Quayle brags he knows "exactly who the cultural elite, the media
elite, and the Hollywood elite are." Declines to name names.
JUN. 15 - Quayle urges an elementary school student to misspell the word
"potato."

471
textfiles.com/politics/quayle.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,471 @@
From: goldsman@CC.GATECH.EDU (Mike Goldsman)
Subject: Quote List *** New and Improved ***
Date: 25 May 92 18:42:14 GMT
Due to the recent flurry of activity in our favorite arena, we
have all been supplied with new fodder for our jokes...
Here goes... The new stuff is at the bottom.
I have decided that these quotes lose a lot when you can't hear and
see them on videotape. During Prime Time Live last thurday
yesterday, they showed a bunch of these.
For example,
"Hawaii has always been a very pivotal role in the Pacific. It is IN
the Pacific. It is a part of the United States that is an island that
is right here."
(one of my favorites) becomes funnier 100x over when you can
see Danny struggling to turn what started as a nonsensical comment
into anything other than a nonsensical comment, failing miserably in
the attempt, and then looking ill after he has realized how he sounded.
Remember, I'm always looking for more!
-Mike
============================================================================
Quayle Quotes Last updated May 25, 1992
============================================================================
Thanks to:
James Allenspach jima@buhub.bradley.edu
Ken Tubman dprkmt@arco.com
David K. Poulsen poulsen@csrd.uiuc.edu
Subodh Bapat mailrus!uflorida!rm1!bapat@uunet.uu.net
Tim Dodge dodgeT%moravian.edu@relay.cs.net
David Ruderman ruderman@sbcs.sunysb.edu
Ron Dippold rdippold@drzeus.qualcomm.com
Tim Antonsen antonsen@hpcndaw.CND.HP.COM
Dave Goldsman sman@zomboy.isye.gatech.edu
JV Heiskanen jvh@mits.mdata.fi
Matt Thomas tbirds@atlas.unm.edu
Matthew Wall wall@cc.swarthmore.edu
Stephen C. Miller stcmille@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Yngve Raustein raustein@athena.mit.edu
Forrest Cahoon cahoon@cs.umn.edu
Jeff Frane gummitch@techbook.com
Michael L. Cole mlcole@nevada.edu
Lisa Henn lisa@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu
Eric McCaughrin mccaughe@cad.berkeley.edu
Daniel Ashlock Danwell@iastate.edu
Al Clark clark@netcom.com
Phil Corless apucorle@idbsu.idbsu.edu
Deb Whiteney dwhitney@hamp.hampshire.edu
dstephen@cmsa.gmr.com
and me
Mike Goldsman goldsman@cc.prism.gatech.edu
Please send me any additions/correction to me...
============================================================================
Bobby Knight told me this: 'There is nothing that a good defense
cannot beat a better offense.' In other words a good offense wins.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle comparing the
offensive capabilities of the Warsaw Pact
with the defensive system of NATO
Why wouldn't an enhanced deterrent, a more stable peace, a better
prospect to denying the ones who enter conflict in the first place
to have a reduction of offensive systems and an introduction to
defensive capability. I believe that is the route this country
will eventually go.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Mars is essentially in the same orbit... somewhat the same distance from the
Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals,
we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If
oxygen, that means we can breathe.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Hawaii has always been a very pivotal role in the Pacific. It is IN
the Pacific. It is a part of the United States that is an island that
is right here.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle,
Hawaii, September 1989
What a terrible thing to have lost one's mind. Or not to have a mind
at all. How true that is.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle winning friends while
speaking to the United Negro College Fund
You all look like happy campers to me. Happy campers you are, happy
campers you have been, and, as far as I am concerned, happy campers you
will always be.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the American Samoans,
whose capital Quayle pronounces "Pogo Pogo"
Quayle stumbled in response to a question about his opinion of the
Holocaust. He said it was "an obscene period in our nation's history."
Then, trying to clarify his remark, Quayle said he meant "this century's
history" and added a confusing comment. "We all lived in this century,
I didn't live in this century," he said.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We expect them [Salvadoran officials] to work toward the elimination
of human rights.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
El Salvador is a democracy so it's not surprising that there are many voices
to be heard here. Yet in my conversations with Salvadorans... I have heard a
single voice.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and
democracy - but that could change.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
One word sums up probably the responsibility of any vice president,
and that one word is 'to be prepared'.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the Phoenix Republican
Forum, March 1990
It's rural America. It's where I came from. We always refer to ourselves
as real America. Rural America, real America, real, real, America.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Target prices? How that works? I know quite a bit about farm policy.
I come from Indiana, which is a farm state. Deficiency payments -
which are the key - that is what gets money into the farmer's hands.
We got loan, uh, rates, we got target, uh, prices, uh, I have worked
very closely with my senior colleague, (Indiana Sen.) Richard Lugar,
making sure that the farmers of Indiana are taken care of.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle on being asked to
define the term "target prices."
Quayle's press secretary then cut short the press
conference, after two minutes and 30 seconds.
Why wouldn't an enhanced deterrent, a more stable peace, a better
prospect to denying the ones who enter conflict in the first place
to have a reduction of offensive systems and an introduction to
defensive capability. I believe that is the route this country
will eventually go.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I not going to focus on what I have done in the past
what I stand for, what I articulate to the American people.
The American people will judge me on what I am saying and what I
have done in the last 12 years in the Congress.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I want to be Robin to Bush's Batman.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We should develop anti-satellite weapons because we could not have prevailed
without them in 'Red Storm Rising'.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The US has a vital interest in that area of the country.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle Referring to Latin America.
Japan is an important ally of ours. Japan and the United States of
the Western industrialized capacity, 60 percent of the GNP,
two countries. That's a statement in and of itself.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Who would have predicted... that Dubcek, who brought the tanks in in
Czechoslovakia in 1968 is now being proclaimed a hero in Czechoslovakia.
Unbelievable.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Actually, Dubcek was the leader of the Prague Spring.
May our nation continue to be the beakon of hope to the world.
-- The Quayle's 1989 Christmas card.
[Not a beacon of literacy, though.]
Well, it looks as if the top part fell on the bottom part.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle referring to
the collapsed section of the 880 freeway after
the San Francisco earthquake of 1989.
[this may be a joke; the source is unclear.
but it's still funny]
getting [cruise missles] more accurate so that we can have precise precision.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle referring to his legislative
work dealing with cruise missles
I can identify with steelworkers. I can identify with workers that
have had a difficult time.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle addressing workers at
an Ohio steel plant,1988
[I will never have] another Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy,
Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy Carter grain embargo.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle during the Benson debate
Certainly, I know what to do, and when I am Vice President -- and
I will be -- there will be contingency plans under different sets of
situations and I tell you what, I'm not going to go out and hold a news
conference about it. I'm going to put it in a safe and keep it there! Does
that answer your question?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle when asked what he
would do if he assumed the Presidency,1988
Lookit, I've done it their way this far and now it's my turn. I'm
my own handler. Any questions? Ask me ... There's not going to be any more
handler stories because I'm the handler ... I'm Doctor Spin.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle responding to press reports
his aides having to, in effect, "potty train" him.
I would guess that there's adequate low-income housing in this
country.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The real question for 1988 is whether we're going to go forward to
tomorrow or past to the -- to the back!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We will invest in our people, quality education, job opportunity,
family, neighborhood, and yes, a thing we call America.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
We'll let the sunshine in and shine on us, because today we're
happy and tomorrow we'll be even happier.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
We're going to have the best-educated American people in the
world.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
This election is about who's going to be the next President of the
United States!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
Don't forget about the importance of the family. It begins with
the family. We're not going to redefine the family. Everybody knows the
definition of the family. [Meaningful pause] A child. [Meaningful pause] A
mother. [Meaningful pause] A father. There are other arrangements of the
family, but that is a family and family values.
I've been very blessed with wonderful parents and a wonderful
family, and I am proud of my family. Anybody turns to their family. I have
a very good family. I'm very fortunate to have a very good family. I
believe very strongly in the family. It's one of the things we have in
our platform, is to talk about it.
I suppose three important things certainly come to my mind that we
want to say thank you. The first would be our family. Your family, my
family -- which is composed of an immediate family of a wife and three
children, a larger family with grandparents and aunts and uncles. We all
have our family, whichever that may be ... The very beginnings of
civilization, the very beginnings of this country, goes back to the family.
And time and time again, I'm often reminded, especially in this
Presidential campaign, of the importance of a family, and what a family
means to this country. And so when you pay thanks I suppose the first thing
that would come to mind would be to thank the Lord for the family.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
No, I had no problem communicating with Latin American heads of state -
though now I do wish I had paid more attention to Latin when I was in
high school.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
...Buzz Lukens took that fateful step...
-- Vice President Dan Quayle confusing the sexual
assaulter/congressman with Astronaut Buzz Aldren.
Ok, I won't open it until then
-- Vice President Dan Quayle after having been
presented with an empty box that was to contain
a gift from a sailing team in South America.
He was told that the gift was not ready yet,
but that it would be presented to him when they
arrived in the United States.
During the White House Easter Egg Roll of 1991, Quayle signed autographs
using only his finger. He had prepared pre-signed cards which his aides
handed out while he made signing gestures. This allowed him
to move briskly and efficiently through the crowd, said his spokesman.
Dan Quale, in April 1991, was concerned that his advisors
may be getting out of touch with "Real Americans." In order
to combat this, he suggested that they read People magazine.
People that are really very wierd can get into sensative positions
and have a tremendous impact on history.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I stand by all the misstatements that I've made.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I'm going to be a vice president very much like George Bush was.
He proved to be a very effective vice president, perhaps the most effective
we've had in a couple of hundred years.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The loss of life will be irreplaceable.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
after the San Francisco earthquake
I have made good judgements in the Past.
I have made good judgements in the Future.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Let me tell you something. As we were walking around in the store, Marilyn
and I were just really impressed by all the novelties and the different types
of little things that you could get for Christmas. And all the people that
would help you, they were dressed up in things that said 'I believe in Santa
Claus.' And the only thing that I could think is that I believe in
George Bush.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle at a garden center and
produce store in Baltimore (from the Los Angeles Times,
Douglas Jehl, November 6, 1988)
It's a very valuable function and requirement that you're performing,
so have a great day and keep a stiff upper lip.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
remarks to oil spill clean-up workers at Prince
William Sound, May, 1989
The President is going to benefit from me reporting directly to him
when I arrive.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
remarks to oil spill clean-up workers at Prince
William Sound, May, 1989
It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the
impurities in our air and water that are doing it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a *part* of NATO. We
have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a *part* of Europe.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I would not have married Dan Quayle had I not thought he was an equal to me.
-- Marilyn Quayle
I could take this home, Marilyn. This is something teenage boys might find of
interest.
--Vice President Dan Quayle, when purchasing a South
African Indian Doll that, when lifted, dislpays an erection.
When you make as many speeches and you talk as much as I do and you get away
from the text, it's always a possibility to get a few words tangled here and
there
-- Vice President Dan Quayle defending himself
(LA Herald Examiner 10/3/88)
Public Speaking is very easy.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle to reporters in 10/88
I happen to be a Republican president- ah, the vice president.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle (Newsweek 4/9/90)
I've never professed to be anything but an average student.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle during the
VP debate in Omaha, Nebraska (10/88)
The other day [the President] said, I know you've had some rough times, and I
want to do something that will show the nation what faith that I have in you,
in your maturity and sense of responsibility. (He paused, then said) Would you
like a puppy?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle (LA Times 5/21/89)
In George Bush you get experience, and with me you get- The Future!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle in eastern Illinois
(LA Times 10/19/88)
I've been told to keep my remarks relatively brief. I understand Quayle-hunting
season begins at noon.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle to a crowd in Eau Claire, Wisc.
(LA Times 10/16/88)
The destruction, it is just very heart-rendering.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle attempting to say the
SF earthquake wreckage was heart-rending
(Newsweek 10/30/89)
I spend a great deal of time with the President. We have a very
close, personal,loyal relationship. I'm not, as they say, a potted
plant in these meetings.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle defending himself
(Tampa Tribune-Times 1/7/90)
When I talked to him on the phone yetserday. I called him George rather than
Mr. Vice President. But, in public, it's Mr. Vice President, because that is
who he is.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle shortly after being named
Geo. Bush's running mate (8/28/88 the NY Times).
I'm glad you asked me that. This gives me the perfect
opportunity to talk about the problems with this Congress...
-- Vice President Dan Quayle responding to reporter's
questions about his use of Air force 2 to
go on golf trips at the cost of $26,000/hour
I love California, I practically grew up in Pheonix
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will,
never, never surrender to what is right
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, in a speech
to the Christian Coalition
Maybe you guys will get lucky this year and face the Orioles in the
World Series
-- Vice President Dan Quayle encouraging the Milwaukee
Brewers after throwing out the opening pitch of the
season. (5/3/92 Sunday Detroit News)
Do you treat them with DDT?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle asking doctors at an
AIDS clinic about their treatments of choice.
(Reported on Paul Harvey)
The cause of the riots were the rioters
-- Vice President Dan Quayle giving an intelligent
analysis of the LA riots.
It's immoral to parent irresponsibly... And it doesn't help
matters any when prime time tv, like "Murphy Brown", a character
who is supposed to represent a successful career woman of today,
mocks the importance of the father by bearing a child alone,
and calling it just another "lifestyle choice." Marriage is
probably the best anti-poverty program there is...
Even though our cultural leaders in Hollywood, network TV, the
national newspapers routinely jeer at [such values] I think most of
us in this room know that some things are good, and other things are wrong.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle addressing the
Commonwealth Club of San Francisco and criticizing
Murphy Brown's decision to NOT have an abortion
and to be a single (highly successful) mother.
When told about Quayle's comments, a senior
Bush campaign official replied only "Oh, dear."
I think especially in her position, a highly successful professional
woman, it would be a real exception to have an unwed child.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle to The Chron's Jerry Roberts.
I don't watch it, but I know enough to comment on it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle defending his opinions about
the TV show "Murphy Borwn" [Las Vegas RJ 21 May 92]
The intergenerational poverty that troubles us so much today is
predominantly a poverty of values.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Illegitimacy is something we should talk about in terms of
not having it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle

208
textfiles.com/politics/quayleq.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,208 @@
A list of Quayle quotes.
=========================================================================
Why wouldn't an enhanced deterrent, a more stable peace, a better
prospect to denying the ones who enter conflict in the first place
to have a reduction of offensive systems and an introduction to
defensive capability. I believe that is the route this country
will eventually go.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Mars is essentially in the same orbit... somewhat the same distance from the
Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals,
we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If
oxygen, that means we can breathe.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Hawaii has always been a very pivotal role in the Pacific. It is IN
the Pacific. It is a part of the United States that is an island that
is right here.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle,
Hawaii, September 1989
What a terrible thing to have lost one's mind. Or not to have a mind
at all. How true that is.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle winning friends while
speaking to the United Negro College Fund
You all look like happy campers to me. Happy campers you are, happy
campers you have been, and, as far as I am concerned, happy campers you
will always be.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the American Samoans,
whose capital Quayle pronounces "Pogo Pogo"
Quayle stumbled in response to a question about his opinion of the
Holocaust. He said it was "an obscene period in our nation's history."
Then, trying to clarify his remark, Quayle said he meant "this century's
history" and added a confusing comment. "We all lived in this century,
I didn't live in this century," he said.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We expect them Salvadoran officials to work toward the elimination
of human rights.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
El Salvador is a democracy so it's not surprising that there are many voices
to be heard here. Yet in my conversations with Salvadorans... I have heard a
single voice.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and
democracy - but that could change.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
One word sums up probably the responsibility of any vice president,
and that one word is 'to be prepared'.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the Phoenix Republican
Forum, March 1990
It's rural America. It's where I came from. We always refer to ourselves
as real America. Rural America, real America, real, real, America.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Target prices? How that works? I know quite a bit about farm policy.
I come from Indiana, which is a farm state. Deficiency payments -
which are the key - that is what gets money into the farmer's hands.
We got loan, uh, rates, we got target, uh, prices, uh, I have worked
very closely with my senior colleague, (Indiana Sen.) Richard Lugar,
making sure that the farmers of Indiana are taken care of.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle on being asked to
define the term "target prices."
Quayle's press secretary then cut short the press
conference, after two minutes and 30 seconds.
I not going to focus on what I have done in the past
what I stand for, what I articulate to the American people.
The American people will judge me on what I am saying and what I
have done in the last 12 years in the Congress.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I want to be Robin to Bush's Batman.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We should develop anti-satellite weapons because we could not have prevailed
without them in 'Red Storm Rising'.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The US has a vital interest in that area of the country.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle Referring to Latin America.
Japan is an important ally of ours. Japan and the United States of
the Western industrialized capacity, 60 percent of the GNP,
two countries. That's a statement in and of itself.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Who would have predicted... that Dubcek, who brought the tanks in in
Czechoslovakia in 1968 is now being proclaimed a hero in Czechoslovakia.
Unbelievable.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Actually, Dubcek was the leader of the Prague Spring.
May our nation continue to be the beakon of hope to the world.
-- The Quayles' 1989 Christmas card.
Not a beacon of literacy, though.
Well, it looks as if the top part fell on the bottom part.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle referring to
the collapsed section of the 880 freeway after
the San Francisco earthquake of 1989.
this may be a joke; the source is unclear.
but it's still funny
.. getting cruise missiles more accurate so that we can have precise
precision.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle referring to his legislative
work dealing with cruise missles
I can identify with steelworkers. I can identify with workers that
have had a difficult time.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle addressing workers at
an Ohio steel plant,1988
I will never have another Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy,
Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy Carter grain embargo.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle during the Bentson debate
Certainly, I know what to do, and when I am Vice President -- and
I will be -- there will be contingency plans under different sets of
situations and I tell you what, I'm not going to go out and hold a news
conference about it. I'm going to put it in a safe and keep it there! Does
that answer your question?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle when asked what he
would do if he assumed the Presidency,1988
Lookit, I've done it their way this far and now it's my turn. I'm
my own handler. Any questions? Ask me ... There's not going to be any more
handler stories because I'm the handler ... I'm Doctor Spin.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle responding to press reports
his aides having to, in effect, "potty train" him.
I would guess that there's adequate low-income housing in this
country.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The real question for 1988 is whether we're going to go forward to
tomorrow or past to the -- to the back!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We will invest in our people, quality education, job opportunity,
family, neighborhood, and yes, a thing we call America.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
We'll let the sunshine in and shine on us, because today we're
happy and tomorrow we'll be even happier.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
We're going to have the best-educated American people in the
world.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
This election is about who's going to be the next President of the
United States!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
Don't forget about the importance of the family. It begins with
the family. We're not going to redefine the family. Everybody knows the
definition of the family. [Meaningful pause] A child. [Meaningful
pause] A mother. [Meaningful pause] A father. There are other
arrangements of the family, but that is a family and family values.
I've been very blessed with wonderful parents and a wonderful
family, and I am proud of my family. Anybody turns to their family. I have
a very good family. I'm very fortunate to have a very good family. I
believe very strongly in the family. It's one of the things we have in
our platform, is to talk about it.
I suppose three important things certainly come to my mind that we
want to say thank you. The first would be our family. Your family, my
family -- which is composed of an immediate family of a wife and three
children, a larger family with grandparents and aunts and uncles. We all
have our family, whichever that may be ... The very beginnings of
civilization, the very beginnings of this country, goes back to the family.
And time and time again, I'm often reminded, especially in this
Presidential campaign, of the importance of a family, and what a family
means to this country. And so when you pay thanks I suppose the first thing
that would come to mind would be to thank the Lord for the family.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Newsflash X/X 1992 Newsflash
St. Louis, MO --(UPI)-- Vice President Dan Quayle today visited St.
Lous, MO, which bears a heavy population descended from German
immigrants. In order to show support for the newly-unified country of
Germany, fatherland of many in the audience, he repeated John F.
Kennedy's words of support 30 years earlier, but this time in English,
"I am a Jelly Doughnut!" Political commentators agreed that something
was lost in the translation. Dan Quayle explained his remark by saying
that he had been told that those who lived in central America enjoyed
jelly doughnuts.
tlodba$


672
textfiles.com/politics/quayleqt.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,672 @@
============================================================================
Quayle Quotes Last updated July 24, 1992
============================================================================
Thanks to:
James Allenspach jima@buhub.bradley.edu
Ken Tubman dprkmt@arco.com
David K. Poulsen poulsen@csrd.uiuc.edu
Subodh Bapat mailrus!uflorida!rm1!bapat@uunet.uu.net
Tim Dodge dodgeT%moravian.edu@relay.cs.net
David Ruderman ruderman@sbcs.sunysb.edu
Ron Dippold rdippold@drzeus.qualcomm.com
Tim Antonsen antonsen@hpcndaw.CND.HP.COM
Dave Goldsman sman@zomboy.isye.gatech.edu
JV Heiskanen jvh@mits.mdata.fi
Matt Thomas tbirds@atlas.unm.edu
Matthew Wall wall@cc.swarthmore.edu
Stephen C. Miller stcmille@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Yngve Raustein raustein@athena.mit.edu
Forrest Cahoon cahoon@cs.umn.edu
Jeff Frane gummitch@techbook.com
Michael L. Cole mlcole@nevada.edu
Lisa Henn lisa@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu
Eric McCaughrin mccaughe@cad.berkeley.edu
Daniel Ashlock Danwell@iastate.edu
Al Clark clark@netcom.com
Phil Corless apucorle@idbsu.idbsu.edu
Heather Blair h431@midway.uchicago.edu
dwhitney@hamp.hampshire.edu
Dave Stephenson dstephen@cmsa.gmr.com
Marc Wasserman mwasserm@diana.cair.du.edu
Jim Summers summers@asylum.cs.utah.edu
Brian Curran brian@meaddata.com
D. Alex Neilson neilson@skat.usc.edu
Scott Safier corwin+@cmu.edu
dascoser.bbs@cybernet.cse.fau.edu
Sierra Sponaugle sponaugl@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
John Murray dylan@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
Patricia Bender bender@riscee.pko.dec.com
Marc Andreessen marca@ncsa.uiuc.edu
Jerry Cox sasjec@asimov.unx.sas.com
Jan Peerson peerson@neyman.ucdavis.edu
Japan Info Soc jis@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
Rick Zaccone zaccone@rigel.cs.bucknell.edu
Patrick Pape pape@miller.cs.uwm.edu
pmk@craycos.com (Peter Klausler)
Daniel Hinojosa hinojosa@hpwrc07.hp.com
Julio Vidal vidal@mitvma.mit.edu
Dave Regan regan@jacobs.cs.orst.edu
Jim Puccio puccio@media.mit.edu
Dhanesh Samarasan dks@athena.mit.edu
and me:
Mike Goldsman goldsman@cc.gatech.edu
36004 Gatech Station
Atlanta, GA 30332
(404) 894-7302 (w)
(404) 872-5146 (h)
Please send me any additions/corrections to this list.
It seems to be growing faster than I can keep up !!!
============================================================================
Bobby Knight told me this: 'There is nothing that a good defense
cannot beat a better offense.' In other words a good offense wins.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle comparing the
offensive capabilities of the Warsaw Pact
with the defensive system of NATO
Why wouldn't an enhanced deterrent, a more stable peace, a better
prospect to denying the ones who enter conflict in the first place
to have a reduction of offensive systems and an introduction to
defensive capability. I believe that is the route this country
will eventually go.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Mars is essentially in the same orbit... somewhat the same distance from the
Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals,
we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If
oxygen, that means we can breathe.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Hawaii has always been a very pivotal role in the Pacific. It is IN
the Pacific. It is a part of the United States that is an island that
is right here.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle,
Hawaii, September 1989
What a terrible thing to have lost one's mind. Or not to have a mind
at all. How true that is.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle winning friends while
speaking to the United Negro College Fund
You all look like happy campers to me. Happy campers you are, happy
campers you have been, and, as far as I am concerned, happy campers you
will always be.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the American Samoans,
whose capital Quayle pronounces "Pogo Pogo"
"The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. I mean
in this century's history. But we all lived in this century. I didn't
live in this century."
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
(The New Yorker, October 10, 1988, p.102)
We expect them [Salvadoran officials] to work toward the elimination
of human rights.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
El Salvador is a democracy so it's not surprising that there are many voices
to be heard here. Yet in my conversations with Salvadorans... I have heard a
single voice.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and
democracy - but that could change.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
One word sums up probably the responsibility of any vice president,
and that one word is 'to be prepared'.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the Phoenix Republican
Forum, March 1990
It's rural America. It's where I came from. We always refer to ourselves
as real America. Rural America, real America, real, real, America.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Target prices? How that works? I know quite a bit about farm policy.
I come from Indiana, which is a farm state. Deficiency payments -
which are the key - that is what gets money into the farmer's hands.
We got loan, uh, rates, we got target, uh, prices, uh, I have worked
very closely with my senior colleague, (Indiana Sen.) Richard Lugar,
making sure that the farmers of Indiana are taken care of.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle on being asked to
define the term "target prices."
Quayle's press secretary then cut short the press
conference, after two minutes and 30 seconds.
I'm not going to focus on what I have done in the past
what I stand for, what I articulate to the American people.
The American people will judge me on what I am saying and what I
have done in the last 12 years in the Congress.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I want to be Robin to Bush's Batman.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We should develop anti-satellite weapons because we could not have prevailed
without them in 'Red Storm Rising'.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The US has a vital interest in that area of the country.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle Referring to Latin America.
Japan is an important ally of ours. Japan and the United States of
the Western industrialized capacity, 60 percent of the GNP,
two countries. That's a statement in and of itself.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Who would have predicted... that Dubcek, who brought the tanks in in
Czechoslovakia in 1968 is now being proclaimed a hero in Czechoslovakia.
Unbelievable.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Actually, Dubcek was the leader of the Prague Spring.
May our nation continue to be the beakon of hope to the world.
-- The Quayle's 1989 Christmas card.
[Not a beacon of literacy, though.]
Well, it looks as if the top part fell on the bottom part.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle referring to
the collapsed section of the 880 freeway after
the San Francisco earthquake of 1989.
[this may be a joke; the source is unclear.
but it's still funny]
getting [cruise missiles] more accurate so that we can have precise precision.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle referring to his legislative
work dealing with cruise missiles
I can identify with steelworkers. I can identify with workers that
have had a difficult time.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle addressing workers at
an Ohio steel plant,1988
[I will never have] another Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy,
Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter grain embargo, Jimmy Carter grain embargo.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle during the Bentsen debate
Certainly, I know what to do, and when I am Vice President -- and
I will be -- there will be contingency plans under different sets of
situations and I tell you what, I'm not going to go out and hold a news
conference about it. I'm going to put it in a safe and keep it there! Does
that answer your question?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle when asked what he
would do if he assumed the Presidency (1988)
Lookit, I've done it their way this far and now it's my turn. I'm
my own handler. Any questions? Ask me ... There's not going to be any more
handler stories because I'm the handler ... I'm Doctor Spin.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle responding to press reports
his aides having to, in effect, "potty train" him.
I would guess that there's adequate low-income housing in this
country.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Let me just tell you how thrilling it really is, and how,
what a challange it is, because in 1988 the question is
whether we're going forward to tomorrow or whether we're
going to go past to the -- to the back!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We don't want to go back to tomorrow, we want to go forward.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I have made good judgements in the Past.
I have made good judgements in the Future.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
The future will be better tomorrow.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I have a very strong record on the Environment in the United States Senate.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I was known as the chief grave robber of my state.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We will invest in our people, quality education, job opportunity,
family, neighborhood, and yes, a thing we call America.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
We'll let the sunshine in and shine on us, because today we're
happy and tomorrow we'll be even happier.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
We're going to have the best-educated American people in the
world.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
This election is about who's going to be the next President of the
United States!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 1988
============================================================================
Quayle Quotes - brought to you by Michael Goldsman (goldsman@cc.gatech.edu)
============================================================================
Don't forget about the importance of the family. It begins with
the family. We're not going to redefine the family. Everybody knows the
definition of the family. [Meaningful pause] A child. [Meaningful pause] A
mother. [Meaningful pause] A father. There are other arrangements of the
family, but that is a family and family values.
I've been very blessed with wonderful parents and a wonderful
family, and I am proud of my family. Anybody turns to their family. I have
a very good family. I'm very fortunate to have a very good family. I
believe very strongly in the family. It's one of the things we have in
our platform, is to talk about it.
I suppose three important things certainly come to my mind that we
want to say thank you. The first would be our family. Your family, my
family -- which is composed of an immediate family of a wife and three
children, a larger family with grandparents and aunts and uncles. We all
have our family, whichever that may be ... The very beginnings of
civilization, the very beginnings of this country, goes back to the family.
And time and time again, I'm often reminded, especially in this
Presidential campaign, of the importance of a family, and what a family
means to this country. And so when you pay thanks I suppose the first thing
that would come to mind would be to thank the Lord for the family.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
...Buzz Lukens took that fateful step...
-- Vice President Dan Quayle confusing the sexual
assaulter/congressman with Astronaut Buzz Aldrin.
Okay, I won't open it until then
-- Vice President Dan Quayle after having been
presented with an empty box that was to contain
a gift from a sailing team in South America.
He was told that the gift was not ready yet,
but that it would be presented to him when they
arrived in the United States.
During the White House Easter Egg Roll of 1991, Quayle signed autographs
using only his finger. He had prepared pre-signed cards which his aides
handed out while he made signing gestures. This allowed him
to move briskly and efficiently through the crowd, said his spokesman.
Dan Quayle, in April 1991, was concerned that his advisors
may be getting out of touch with "Real Americans." In order
to combat this, he suggested that they read People magazine.
People that are really very wierd can get into sensative positions
and have a tremendous impact on history.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I stand by all the misstatements that I've made.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I'm going to be a vice president very much like George Bush was.
He proved to be a very effective vice president, perhaps the most effective
we've had in a couple of hundred years.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I would like to express my sympathy to all those impacted by this disaster.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle standing in front
of the collapsed section of highway caused by the
Loma Preta quake. (CNN)
The loss of life will be irreplaceable.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
after the San Francisco earthquake
I couldn't help but be impressed by the magnitude of the earthquake.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, stepping out of
the helicopter upon arrival at Alameda Naval Air
Station.
Let me tell you something. As we were walking around in the store, Marilyn
and I were just really impressed by all the novelties and the different types
of little things that you could get for Christmas. And all the people that
would help you, they were dressed up in things that said 'I believe in Santa
Claus.' And the only thing that I could think is that I believe in
George Bush.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle at a garden center and
produce store in Baltimore (from the Los Angeles Times,
Douglas Jehl, November 6, 1988)
It's a very valuable function and requirement that you're performing,
so have a great day and keep a stiff upper lip.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
remarks to oil spill clean-up workers at Prince
William Sound, May, 1989
The President is going to benefit from me reporting directly to him
when I arrive.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
remarks to oil spill clean-up workers at Prince
William Sound, May, 1989
It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the
impurities in our air and water that are doing it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a *part* of NATO. We
have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a *part* of Europe.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I would not have married Dan Quayle had I not thought he was an equal to me.
-- Marilyn Quayle
I could take this home, Marilyn. This is something teenage boys might find of
interest.
--Vice President Dan Quayle, when purchasing a South
African Indian Doll that, when lifted, displays an erection.
When you make as many speeches and you talk as much as I do and you get away
from the text, it's always a possibility to get a few words tangled here and
there
-- Vice President Dan Quayle defending himself
(LA Herald Examiner 10/3/88)
Public Speaking is very easy.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle to reporters in 10/88
I am not part of the problem. I am a Republican.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I happen to be a Republican president- ah, the vice president.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle (Newsweek 4/9/90)
I've never professed to be anything but an average student.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle during the
VP debate in Omaha, Nebraska (10/88)
The other day [the President] said, I know you've had some rough times, and I
want to do something that will show the nation what faith that I have in you,
in your maturity and sense of responsibility. (He paused, then said) Would you
like a puppy?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle (LA Times 5/21/89)
In George Bush you get experience, and with me you get- The Future!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle in eastern Illinois
(LA Times 10/19/88)
I've been told to keep my remarks relatively brief. I understand Quayle-hunting
season begins at noon.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle to a crowd in Eau Claire, Wisc.
(LA Times 10/16/88)
The destruction, it is just very heart-rendering.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle attempting to say the
SF earthquake wreckage was heart-rending
(Newsweek 10/30/89)
I spend a great deal of time with the President. We have a very
close, personal,loyal relationship. I'm not, as they say, a potted
plant in these meetings.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle defending himself
(Tampa Tribune-Times 1/7/90)
When I talked to him on the phone yetserday. I called him George rather than
Mr. Vice President. But, in public, it's Mr. Vice President, because that is
who he is.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle shortly after being named
Geo. Bush's running mate (8/28/88 the NY Times).
I'm glad you asked me that. This gives me the perfect
opportunity to talk about the problems with this Congress...
-- Vice President Dan Quayle responding to reporter's
questions about his use of Air force 2 to
go on golf trips at the cost of $26,000/hour
I love California, I practically grew up in Phoenix
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will,
never, never surrender to what is right
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, in a speech
to the Christian Coalition
Maybe you guys will get lucky this year and face the Orioles in the
World Series
-- Vice President Dan Quayle encouraging the Milwaukee
Brewers after throwing out the opening pitch of the
season. (5/3/92 Sunday Detroit News)
Are they taking DDT?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle asking doctors at a Manhattan
AIDS clinic about their treatments of choice.
(NY Post, early May 92)
We are leaders of the world of the space program.
We have been the leaders of the world of our... of the space program
and we're not going to continue where we're going to go, not withstanding
the Soviet Union's demise and collapse - the former Soviet Union - we now
have independent republics which used to be called the Soviet Union.
Space is the next frontier to be explored. And we're going to explore.
Think of all the things we rely upon in space today: communications
from... Japan, detection of potential ballistic missle attacks. Ballistic
missles are still here. Other nations do have ballistic missles. How do
you think we were able to detect some of the Scud missles and things like
that? Space, reconnaissance, weather, communications - you name it. We
use space a lot today.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
============================================================================
Quayle Quotes - brought to you by Michael Goldsman (goldsman@cc.gatech.edu)
============================================================================
America is great, because America is free.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Sometimes cameras and television are good to people and sometimes they
aren't. I don't know if its the way you say it, or how you look.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I just don't believe in the basic concept that someone should make their
whole career in public service.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
If you listen to the news, read the news, you'd think we were still
in a recession. Well, we're not in a recession. We've had growth;
people need to know that. They need to be more upbeat, more positive...
-- Vice President Dan Quayle in October 91
Need any help?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle in October 91 addressing
announced 74,000 layoffs
The message of David Duke, is this, basically: Big government, anti-big
government, get out of my pocketbook, cut my taxes, put welfare people
back to work. That's a very popular message. The problem is the messenger.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I do have a political agenda. It's to have as few regulations as possible.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Sam, had a great time this weekend but the golf was lousey.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle in a handwritten note
written to Sam Snead in the summer of 1991,
after they had played a round of golf.
(Herald-Times, Bloomington, IN, July 15, 1992)
Who's responsible for the riots? The rioters!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle giving an intelligent, in-depth
analysis of the LA riots. (Herb Caen, SF Chronicle)
It's immoral to parent irresponsibly... And it doesn't help
matters any when prime time tv, like "Murphy Brown", a character
who is supposed to represent a successful career woman of today,
mocks the importance of the father by bearing a child alone,
and calling it just another "lifestyle choice." Marriage is
probably the best anti-poverty program there is...
Even though our cultural leaders in Hollywood, network TV, the
national newspapers routinely jeer at [such values] I think most of
us in this room know that some things are good, and other things are wrong.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle addressing the
Commonwealth Club of San Francisco and criticizing
Murphy Brown's decision to NOT have an abortion
and to be a single (highly successful) mother.
When told about Quayle's comments, a senior
Bush campaign official replied only "Oh, dear."
Bush's top aid said, "The world is a lot more complex
than Dan would like to believe"
I think especially in her position, a highly successful professional
woman, it would be a real exception to have an unwed child.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle to The Chron's Jerry Roberts.
I don't watch it, but I know enough to comment on it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle defending his opinions about
the TV show "Murphy Brown" [Las Vegas RJ 21 May 92]
The intergenerational poverty that troubles us so much today is
predominantly a poverty of values.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Illegitimacy is something we should talk about in terms of
not having it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Speaking as a man, it's not a woman's issue. Us men are tired
of losing our women
-- Vice President Dan Quayle talking about
breast cancer
I want to show you an optimistic sign that things are beginning
to turn around.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle trying to convince reporters
that the economy was doing better because a
Burger King had a "now hiring" sign in the window.
He was campaigning for reelection in Ontario, CA
in January 1992.
You have a part-time job and that's better to no job at all
-- Vice President Dan Quayle after the manager of the
Burger King had said that the jobs offered were part-time
minimum wage jobs, which didn't pay enough to live on,
and that "It's hard to find people who want to actually
show up for the job."
Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a cure for AIDS in the marketplace
before Magic Johnson gets AIDS?
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, 11/13/91 (CNN)
We're in Florida.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle explaining why he
had just purchased four peaches (and no citrus
fruits -- for which Florida is famous) at a Publix
supermarket in Oakland Park, Florida. Georgia (which
IS famous for peaches) did not gain from the transaction,
however; the peaches were from Chile. (The Sunstenial)
I deserve respect for the things I did not do.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
I feel that this [1981] is my first year, that next year is an
election year, that the third year is the mid point and that the
fourth year is the last chance I'll have to make a record since the
last two years, I'll be a candidate again. Everything I do in those
last two years will be posturing for the election. But right now I
don't have to do that.
-- Senator Dan Quayle
I don't have to experience tragedy to understand it.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle during a photo-op
in LA, responding to criticisms that he didn't
understand what it meant to live in the "inner
city." (WRAL 6/23/92)
My position is that I understand from a medical situation, immediately
after a rape is reported, that a woman normally, in fact, can go to the
hospital and have a D and C. At that time... that is before the forming
of a life. That is not anything to do with abortion
-- Vice President Dan Quayle explaining that Dilatation
and Curettage, a form of abortion which occurs
after fertilization, is not really abortion.
(the Washington post, 11/03/88)
Add one little bit on the end... Think of 'potato,' how's it spelled?
You're right phonetically, but what else...? There ya go...alright!
-- Vice President Dan Quayle correcting a student's
correct spelling of the word "potatoe" during
a spelling bee at an elementary school in Trenton.
I should have caught the mistake on that spelling bee card. But
as Mark Twain once said, "You should never trust a man who has only
one way to spell a word."
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, actually quoting from
President Andrew Jackson.
People who Bowl Vote.
Bowlers are not the cultural elite.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle while at a Las Vegas bowling
alley. the Vice-President bowled 5 times, and knocked
down 19 pins. (6/25/92, San Jose Mercury News)
The American Bowling Congress projected his score for a
full game to be 76. The Detroit average for amateur
players is 163 (USA Today, 7/6/92)
It would be a serious mistake to replace a seasoned statesman with a
tempermental tycoon who has no respect for the constitution.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle giving his opinion about
Ross Perot's presidential campaign (June 1992)
Dan Quayle had a trip planned to Beijing, but was worried because of
Xthe turmoil at that end. His security adviser however informed him that
Xit was pretty safe for D.Q. as, "They are only harassing intellectuals."
And the President put his hand on my shoulder and said: "Dan,
I _knew_ Spiro Agnew. He was a friend of mine. And Dan...
You're no Spiro Agnew!"
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
This president is going to lead us out of this recovery.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle at a campaign stop in
California and and then at CA State University, Fresno
(The Quayle Quarterly, Spring/Summer 1992)
We have to do more than just elect a new president if we truly want to
change this country."
-- Vice President Dan Quayle
We are ready for any unforseen event that may or may not occur
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, September 1990
For NASA, space is still a high priority.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, September 1990
[The U.S. victory in Gulf war was a] stirring victory for the
forces of aggression.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle, April 1991
I hope I never have to deal with it. But obviously I would counsel her
and talk to her and support her on whatever decision she made.
-- Vice President Dan Quayle respondiing to Larry
King's question of how he would react if his 13-year-old
daughter chose to have an abortion. (CNN, July 22, 1992)
Marilyn Quayle later remarked that her daughter would
"take the child to term."
============================================================================
Quayle Quotes - brought to you by Michael Goldsman (goldsman@cc.gatech.edu)
============================================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Goldsman __o o__ o__ o__ o__
36004 Ga Tech Station _ \<,_ _.>/ _ _.>/ _ _.>/ _ _.>/ _
Atlanta, Georgia 30332 (_)/ (_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_) (_) \(_)
begin 600 mikeskey.pub
MF8X ZAA:*@AG;VQD<VUA;MX#Y\YJH.AUL%\6;SRX-DN*(L=DZ6B)L]FK,"W=
M=M*D*SE]!5CAMC<7T Y5ZMO CV_L/*A+P!L"CE>F4E6K1P.[)Z%6I)@$M_I<
M2-L>:-]*PXH 70_R)Z^HD:Q!1LA;$DL6\I3SJZ/%TB& )A]%NL$2UI.R;@'W
*;AEF;KPY+P4 $0_R
end

7257
textfiles.com/politics/radical.txt Normal file
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

Some files were not shown because too many files have changed in this diff Show More