On last month's Fix;
the answer to last month's Fix,
"Given that individual liberty and private militias must be eliminated to assure peace in Amerika, what are the best means to purge them?"is
The inverse Bill of Rights, presented at the end of last month's issue, is a good place to start, and indeed, progress is being made. FBI head Louis Freah and US Attorney General Jan Reno have cajoled Congress into crafting bills to ban PGP and all other software encryption methods. They'd prefer adoption of a chip based encryption scheme that the Feds would have the backdoor to. HR 1544, also presented last month, would make it a Federal offense to belong to private militias. Recent applications of environmental laws have shown that the supreme Court supports the Constitutionality of denying use of property to the owner without fair market compensation. And the people can no longer drive past the People's House, because the stretch of Pennsylvania Ave. that goes past the White House has been closed for the first time in the nation's history.
Progress is being made in the land of the free.
Last month a reader commented that he'd be proud of me if I could find it in myself to comment on examples of conservative lunacy. I responded that for that, all he needed to do was pick up any common news magazine. I have. >From the May 8, 1995 issue of Time:
Time continues its journalistic excellence in an article describing the background of suspect Timothy McVeigh's relatives,
Some of McVeigh's views are apparently shared by his younger sister, Jennifer, 21, who wrote a letter to the town paper last month raging about Waco. Authorities are now questioning Jennifer, a student at Niagra County Community College and a former barmaid at the Crazy Horse Saloon in Buffalo, New York, where women, dressed in shorts and a top, wrestle male customers in a vat of gelatin.
Somehow, Time reporter Nancy Harbert, neglected to mention what Jennifer's current job is. Perhaps the causal link between her current job and being a right wing fanatic is not as obvious as the known causal link between jello-wrestling and fanaticism. But then, neither was it obvious to those of us not in the media how a bombing justifies further gun control. But in a sidebar with the completely unbiased and unstigmatizing title of Psst! Calling All Paranoids, reporter Christine Gorman ends with the words of Bryn Mawr Psych Prof. Clark McCauley,
If you think these people are crazy, you have to ask yourself if there is anything the Federal govt. could do that would make you take up arms against it. If you answer no, then you're entitled to think these people are crazy. But if you say yes, you have to admit they are human beings, just like you."
On basic blasting physics;
Ok. I'll admit straight off that I'm not a demolitions expert, but as a physicist, thinking person, and one whose blasted some duck ponds with fertilizer for Duck's Unlimited, I have some questions:
On a New Computer;
You may notice that this issue appears a bit shorter than usual. This is due to a convulsive realignment in my computing environment. For the past 2 years, I was writing this rag on a DOS laptop. On June 6 I sold that machine and put through an order to SWT of Texas. For two weeks (gak) I had no machine of my own. Finally, this past Friday (June 24) my new machine arrived. It is a custom collection;
To further complicate my computing life, the university UNIX machine which I use to mail the Rag was upgraded to OSF/1 this month. This would have been fine, except the mailer which I use did not get taken along for the ride, hence none of my distribution lists worked. This has now (hopefully) been fixed and next month you should all have more notice for writing letters to the Ed.
On the pulse of the nation;
OK, the results of the Time (May 8, 1995) poll on right wing wackos.
Question Yes No ------------------------------------------------------------------- Does the US govt. pose a threat to 52% 44% your freedoms? Should US govt. get more power to 33 61 investigate citizens ? Did radio talk shows create an 33 53 environment that led to bombing? Are Militias Dangerous? 80 11 Threat to your way of life? 63 26 Crazy ? 55 33 Well intentioned? 30 58 Patriots? 21 55 Should US govt. spy on 68 26 militias? -------------------------------------------------------------------What can we conclude from this? Well, as usual, the average American is a bit hypocritical, not wanting increased surveillance if it may affect him,"But dang nabbit Martha, they better watch them weirdos." Sort of like Congress, "They're all asses except our guy. He's real good at bringing home the bacon. We better reelect him for a 32'nd term while we're voting for term limits."
On a Public Service Announcement;
For those of you who would like an inside the beltway newspaper that is not the Washington Post you can get the weekly edition of the Washington Times by calling
If I still had a sense of humor, I might laugh at those radio ads that describe retired federal workers as deserving of their fat pensions because they have "served their country." Are we really supposed to believe that, say, garnishing checks for the IRS is a form of altruism akin to dying in the fight to repel an invading army?
Rep. James Traficant (D, OHIO), introduced a bill that would require the IRS to bear the burden of proof when it seizes assets from tax payers. He has this idea that Americans should get due process, as in France and Italy, where the govt. at least has to convict you before it can rob you. That's the sort of notion that gets into people's heads when they read the Bill of Rights.
Instantly a team of IRS agents leapt up to explain that such a law would require that the IRS become even more intrusive. But, if Traficant's bill had any support, it would strike a bigger blow for freedom than the entire Contract with America. Many things today would shock our ancestors, but few would appall thm as much as the spectacle of govt. turning its guns on its own citizens and deploying an army of tax agents to keep the entire population under financial surveillance. Every tax payer is a potential defendant if he is suspected of keeping too much of his own wealth.
What drives the system is that so many other citizens are not defendants, but dependants - relying on the Federal govt. for income that must be extorted from others. The IRS is the chief channel of redistribution. It's unjust to force one citizen to support another, and it's dangerous to give govt. the powers of compulsion that such a system requires. Believe it or not, this wasn't the original idea at all. James Madison assured everyone in Federalist Paper 45 that the federal govt. would be chiefly devoted to foriegn policy, treaties and war. The everyday job of running govt. would be left to the states, as under the Articles of Confederation.
The Federal govt. ceased being federal after the Civil War, when it occupied the South and began treating citizens as subjects. But is was 50 years later, under the income tax and Prohibition that by degrees, the entire country, not just the South, has come to be "occupied." Federal courts have upheld Federal power consistently. They may expand the definition of free speech to cover pornography, or interpret interstate commerce clauses to authorize more Federal intrusion, but you'll notice they don't expand the definition of "involuntary servitude" to cover the taxpayer. Nor do they interpret "due process" to mean a trial before seizing someone's assets.
In sum, the whole system has been converted into a conspiracy against the taxpayer. It operates for the benefit of the dependants, providing representation without taxation. The Federal govt. violates the principle of the "general welfare" in favor of special welfare for some and oppression of the rest.
>From ApogeeTom@aol.com Thu May 25 14:13:15 1995 >Ed: Of course, Clinton neglects to mention that Michigan Dem. Congressman >John Dingell, who is also a lifetime member of the NRA, appeared in an NRA >promo video in 1981. In the video, Dingell called the BATF, "jack booted >storm troopers ...". Curiously, Dingell has not been labelled an unpatriotic, >right wing, radical. Stevie, I don't like how Clinton wishy-washy and often disagree with his choices, but I don't think it's his job to retro-label everyone who's said something like this within the last 15 years. If some prominent person had said a similar thing within the last year, maybe. Only someone trying to attack a statement by a leader they don't like would go back that far. Like someone had a database of stupid sayings by politicians and searched for the string "jack boot". I don't think that was remotely fair to say that. In fact, it was kind of silly. Clinton's a boob, but I don't expect him to search history for "jack boot" sayings or government bashers. I'm sure he doesn't pick on a lot of Democrats (or possibly any), but he's picking on comments now. He wasn't President 14 years ago. --Tom P.S. Remind me about bitmaps later, when I'm moved in. Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 14:29:19 -0400 From: LANGER STEVEN CEd: First off, I'd like to remind you that Clinton made his first tax increase retroactive to before he was President, so clearly, retroactivity per se does not bother him.
To: email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org@ri-exp.beaumont.edu, email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org@email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org@email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org@cebaf.gov.scripter., email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org@email@example.com@firstname.lastname@example.org
However, my point was not to beat up on Clinton (any 5'th grader could do that), but to once again point out the convenient memory lapses of the press. Look, Clinton gives a speech in the aftermath of an NRA ad which in turn came after the OK City bombing. NRA Veep Wayne Lapierre says there may be more bombings because the public is getting pissed about things like WACO where civilians are killed by "jack booted thugs" of the BATF. Wayne did not pick this phrase lightly. He used it because in a 1981 NRA promo video Dem. Dingell used the exact same phrase when he decried Reagan's use of BATF and DEA agents during the War on Drugs. I agreed with Dingle, then and now, that these Fed agents are out of control. But Bill sees a chance to make political hay at the expense of the gun lobby and says,
"No one has a right to denigrate the law enforcement officers who put their live's in harm's way, least of all radical right wing groups."
In the same speech Bill calls on the NRA to give back the money which was donated after the ad. Well gee, neglecting for a moment this trifling thing called the 1'st Amendment, does anyone recall the language used by Bill when he sent Jan Reno to investigate the LA cops who were aquitted in the Rodney King beating? Or does the phrase, "No one has the right ..." have a loophole for Dem Presidents?
The take home point is, when Dem Congressmen call Federal law enforcement working at the behest of Ronald Reagen "thugs", the media oblige with hour long news shows showing the impoundment of yachts for having a single marijauna seed on board. But let a group that is widely regarded as conservative dare use _exactly_ the same language against Fed agents working for a Dem Pres. and the media join Clinton in demanding more gun control to somehow save us from fertilizer.
Tom, in all seriousness, doesn't this hypocrisy scare you a little?
And it was only a year ago, not 15, when the Congress was debating hearings on Waco and Dingall again called the BATF "jack-booted storm troopers." I don't usually find myself agreeing with Dingall, but when the guy is right - he's right. Only conservatives who say the same thing are unpatriotic.
Ah well, perhaps the Press can be allowed one lapse. Ooh, but wait, didn't they also accuse G. Bush of creating those nasty videos of Willie Horton when Bush ran against Dukakis even though it was Al Gore who first created the spots during the Dem primary? And wasn't it Hillary and Donna Schalala who, as heads of the Children's Defense Fund, said that kids have the right to sue abusive parents for divorce and live in safe govt. controlled "homes", long before the Evil Gingrich mentioned orphanages? Ah well, one certainly cannot expect the media to have access to the gargantuan data bases which I have, me being a full time journalist and all.
Interesting though, how Jeff claims I have insufficient historical perspective, and you think I have too much. Darn, but you're a tough bunch to please.
2. Rooster from MSU, in the aftermath of last month's comment on the need for a police state, expresses his concern for my mental health;
>From MCCONVILLE@pa.msu.edu Thu May 25 12:33:49 1995 Steve, Have you fallen and bumped your head recently? Rooster
3. As another Public Service I'm posting this note for Los Alamos John in case I may reach some folks that he does not. I'm including the To: list for a convenient archive of msu email addresses.
>From email@example.com Thu Jun 29 10:04:53 1995 To: firstname.lastname@example.org.Lanl.GOV, GBENNIS@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (John Johnson (505)665-4054) Subject: *** PPSA Update!!! *** PPPPPPP PPPPPPP SSS AAA PP PP PP PP SSS SSS AAA AAA PP PP PP PP SSS AAA AAA PPPPP PPPPP SSSSSS AAAAAAAAAAA PP PP SSS AAA AAA PP PP SSS SSS AAA AAA PP PP SSS AAA AAA ============================================= Hi there fellow PPSA'ers, God Emperors and Minor Deities! I hope you get this message, because I haven't updated email address in awhile. If this gets bounced to you at a new address, please email me with your new one, even if you don't have anything to say. Well, it's been awhile since the last newsletter in print now. This last Winter I decided to go electronic - after all, PPSA should be a leader in new technologies and not wait around. We have an official PPSA web site at: http://ppsa.lanl.gov/index.html however this site may soon be moving. There are two reasons for that, first off they will be putting up firewalls at LANL one day soon... Second, I don't think I will have easy access to a LANL account when I am LIVING IN A CARDBOARD BOX come this December when my postdoc ends for good. On that note, I'd like to hear from you guys. Have any luck in finding jobs, postdocs? Changing careers in order to avoid the bill collector? I want to find out for myself, and I'm sure that everyone wants to know what you are up to. If it's not all that positive, just let me know and I won't pass it on to the rest of the world. So if ANYTHING at all is happening, or if you are just curious and haven't visited the web site yet... WRITE ME! Articles would be great, and photos are encouraged. My own articles have been a bit depressing and bitter lately, so if anyone has anything mildly exciting or upbeat - we'd all like to hear it! I would especially like addresses and info on LOST PPSA MEMBERS! If you know anything about college friends that haven't been heard from in awhile, or who have kept a low profile -- pass it along to me! I hope you are doing well, and I hope to hear from you soon. Best wishes to you and your families for a great 4th of July! (I'll try not to blow anything up this year!) Take care, John --- --------------------------------------------------------------------- John D. Johnson
Home: 505 Oppenheimer Drive #516, Los Alamos, NM 87544 800/863-7772 Work: Adv. Nuc. Tech., J562, LANL, Los Alamos, NM 87545 505/665-4054
These United States needs one grand national Vigilance Commitee, composed of the body of the people, to watch over the govt. in Washington." - Walt Whitman, 1856 in the aftermath of a Vigilance Commitee taking over the corrupt San Francisco city govt.
"If you were Clinton's campaign advisor for '96, how would you win? "
2. St Paul, June 20; The state courts have decided that someone who kill's a pregnant women can be sentenced to _consecutive_ life terms. In other words, to kill a fetus in the mother is considered murder. Hmmmm.
Ed: And didn't you want to spend more on your long distance bill to help Gates anyway?
>From email@example.com Thu Jun 8 05:28:16 1995 From: "Guillermo J. Rozas"
>From the San Jose Mercury News, Monday June 5th, 1995 >From an opinion column titled "Elderly are big winners in tax >benefits", by Timothy Taylor, an economics consultant to the Mercury >News editorial board. Generational Accounts The table shows lifetime "net taxes" for people of different ages in 1993. Positive numbers indicate that more taxes will be paid than benefits received; negatives indicate that more benefits will be received than taxes paid. Age in 1993 Men Women 0 $87000 $53000 10 $130000 $77000 20 $189000 $109000 30 $195000 $109000 [ Of course, at the top ] 40 $158000 $76000 50 $68000 0 60 -$57000 -$101000 70 -$108000 -$140000 80 -$86000 -$111000 90 -$68000 -$65000 Selected paragraphs from the article: "In fact, the findings of generational acconting are so provocative that the Clinton administration suddenly decided this year not to publish generationa accounts as part of the budget, even though they had appeared in the special appendices of the budget during the last three years." ... "One response to such striking figures is to quarrel with the calculations. After all, questions can always be raised about the assumptions behind long-term projections. But the three economists most responsible for generational accounting -- Alan Auerbach of the University of California, Jagadeesh Gokhale of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, and Laurence Kotlikoff of Boston University -- have spent years refining these projections and responding to criticisms. Under any plausible assumptions, an enormous generational imbalance remains." [Of course, without seeing the assumptions and alternate computations, this cannot really dispel criticisms and doubts. -- GJR] ... "As a matter of arithmetic, the current level of taxes simply will not collect enough money to cover health and retirement benefits that have been promised. Our society has overpromised what it can afford to provide to its elderly in the future. Something will have to give."
Last Updated 05/29/95.© 1996 PPSA Consulting