Time: Sat Nov 16 16:29:07 1996
To: Harvey Wysong <hwysong@atl.mindspring.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Heads Up
Cc:
Bcc:
Hillary and Bill were observed on the
same podium during the campaign.
Hillary accidentally stepped on Bill's
foot. So, she said to him, "Oh, Bill,
pardon me." Whereupon the President
said, "I will, honey, just as soon as I can!"
/s/ Paul Mitchell
At 02:42 PM 11/16/96 -0500, you wrote:
>MULTIPLE RECIPIENTS
>
>Dear M R,
> Doug says that Precedent Clinton has finally learned some manners.
>He's been overheard rehearsing the phrase "Pardon me."
> Further remarks at the end.
>
>-- Harvey
> ==================================
> Heads Up
>
> A Weekly edition of News and Views from around our country
>
> November 15, 1996 #9
>
> by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please Distribute Widely
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>REACHING OUT
> The way the establishment press is making it sound, you'd think everyone in
>Washington is ready to bury the hatchets they've been slinging at each other
>these past few months and make nice nice. Not so!
> Slick Willie called for "putting the politics aside" and "working
>together." Yeah; sure! Remember now, they don't call him "Slick" for
>nothing. He knows exactly what Starr has in store for him and the
>co-president. Therefore, he's out front playing the great conciliator role
>for a while -- hoping the public falls for the scam.
> It's the co-president we need to watch. She's the one he has doing all the
>dirty deeds in the back room.
> Newt said that it's "time to reach out to President Clinton and work with
>him." Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott echoed pretty much the same thing.
>Yup, it's getting interesting all right. The Republican leadership is
>reeling out the rope, and the boy from Dogpatch is pulling it all in.
> What Slick does not realize is that there's about to be a political
>lynching. Of course, the Republican leadership hopes Clinton will take in
>enough rope to hang himself publicly. But, just in case he doesn't, they
>will not be against giving him a little help. Either way, the Clintons will
>be left swinging in the proverbial political breeze next year.
> And talk about desperation! Slick even proposes bringing a couple
>Republicans into his cabinet. This, from an Oxford trained Fabian socialist?
> Two questions immediately come to mind: 1.) What kind of Republican would
>chance working in that den of corruption? 2.) How the heck did he ever get
>Hillary to shut up about that? He must have threatened not to pardon her,
>or something.
> The new government didn't even start yet, and already you'll need hip
>waders anywhere around Pennsylvania Avenue, the stuff is getting so deep.
>
>FIRE THE LIBERAL
> Last Sunday on "This Week With David Brinkley," Canadian citizen Sam
>Donaldson spouted off about American politics again. "Conservative is as
>conservative does," he said about Congressional Republicans.
> Hey, Sam, talk about Canadian politics, not ours. You're not a citizen
>here, so dummy up!
> Conservatism means many things to us who are real conservatives, Sam. And
>these are things that you on the far left -- and especially you, as a
>foreigner -- cannot be expected to understand.
> For instance: Conservatives want a much smaller central government, a much
>lower tax rate, at least a 50% reduction in federal regulations (for
>starters), and a corresponding reduction in federal policing personnel.
> The point is, conservatives want a return to a federal government that is
>operated as intended by the Founding Fathers. We want a central government
>that will limit its activities to only those specifically authorized to it
>by the Constitution. The womb to tomb federal control of everything
>affecting human existence must end.
> Also, we conservatives want a court system that will honor and interpret
>our Constitution as written. All rights and liberties not specifically
>denied by the Constitution belong to the people. The central government has
>no business even discussing the limitation of any of our rights. One duty
>of the federal government is to protect all rights of all people equally.
>The Constitution gives it no authority to otherwise tamper with them.
> Go home, Sam. American journalism was once an honorable profession. But
>over the past few years it has evolved into a medium for, and about, the far
>left -- a soapbox for socialism. You are directly responsible for some of
>those changes.
> Ninety percent of today's so called journalists are little more than
>political reactionaries, championing a form of federal government foreign to
>our Constitution. You, and your liberal friends in the media, talk of
>permissions as rights, of oppression and suppression as protection, and of
>socialism as progressively moving forward. Enough of that tripe!
> How can you be called a political journalist, when you never speak of our
>Constitution, or report any of the hundreds of ways it is circumvented by
>the federal government every year? Worse yet, you have the unmitigated
>audacity to publicly label those of us who do actively support our
>Constitution as far right extremists! And this, from someone who is not
>even a citizen of this country. . . .
> No, Sam, you and your ilk have your own agenda, and it is far, far from an
>agenda that would find favor with any of this country's Founding Fathers.
>It is also an agenda that is dangerous to the liberty of American citizens.
> You're a bad act among news actors, Sam, and it's time you got the hook.
>
>TELL THE LIBERALS WHAT YOU THINK
> Today, 75% of the American population live in states with conservative
>governments. So why, day after day, must they suffer a news media with a
>decidedly far left bias -- one which characteristically reports improperly
>on almost everything the conservatives in government try to accomplish?
> It is time that We the People pool our collective efforts to encourage the
>news media to become more conservative in their approach to the news. And
>they will respond. That is, they will if enough of us properly express our
>displeasure with the liberal slant they continually feed us.
> But, our responses to them must be polite, well thought out and accurate.
>We are, after all, contacting them as representatives of the conservative
>camp, requesting change from the liberal-elites. Therefore, we must be
>careful to present ourselves as literate, law-abiding citizens, who are
>honestly concerned with the welfare of our country. Anything less than this
>will be gleefully used against us.
> Many of us would enjoy seeing Constitutional issues addressed in the news.
>For instance. it is time for a series of investigative reports to begin
>publicly addressing the hundreds of ways the federal government circumvents
>the Constitution every year. These public discussions have been woefully
>lacking in the national media for over twenty years.
> Further investigative reports should include the abuse of power by public
>officials. And this series should include federal judges, as well as
>prosecutors, law enforcement personnel and regulatory agencies.
> Yes, there are many important areas sorely in need of investigation and
>publication that the liberal media has intentionally ignored. But, before
>we can get these public inquiries started, we must first actively work to
>have those in the media who do not favor our Constitution dismissed.
> More -- much more -- on this in later editions.
> As the old saying goes: If not us, then who? If not now, then when? If
>enough people complain, the first leftist-liberal on the list -- Sam
>Donaldson -- is history.
> You can write to Roone Arledge, President, ABC News, at 77 W. 66th St. New
>York, NY 10023. The telephone number is (212) 456-7777.
> The e-mail address for "Prime Time Live" is: PTLive@aol.com.
> The e-mail address for the "This Week With David Brinkley" Sunday morning
>news program is: tvabc@abc.com.
>
>CLINTON'S NEW AGENDA
> First and foremost on the Clintons' agenda for the next term is, of course,
>to stay out of prison. Hillary already has more legal talent working on
>their defense than the Rose Law Firm had when she was there. You're paying
>for most of them, too. At least half of Hillary's lawyers are on the
>taxpayer's clock. Perks, it's called!
> Then there's that proverbial "Bridge to the Twenty-first Century" Clinton
>wants to build. Nice metaphor. But read between the lines on that one, folks.
> It'll be a toll bridge. Certain people will get a free pass. And to make
>up for all the free passes, the average taxpayer will pay through the nose.
> By the way, has everyone noticed how this administration has given new
>meaning to the old expression "Pardon me"?
>
>CAMPAIGN FELONIES
> It is unlawful for a foreign national to contribute to any political
>campaign (2 USC 441e). Yet, Al Gore, Ron Brown, Senator Chris Dodd, John
>Huang, and quite a few others at the Democratic National Committee
>headquarters knowingly and actively solicited funds from foreign nationals.
> Whoever promises any contact or other benefit as a consideration, favor, or
>reward for any political activity may be fined, imprisoned, or both (18 USC
>600). That would include Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Senator Chris
>Dodd, and a whole cast of characters in the Commerce Department and the DNC.
> Whoever illegally obtains campaign contributions, or knowingly accepts
>campaign contributions that are laundered in an attempt to conceal the
>nature, source, ownership or control of the funds, may be fined, imprisoned,
>or both (18 USC 1956). That would include Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John
>Huang, most of the leadership at the DNC, and a few Clinton appointed
>ambassadors.
> The list of violations goes on and on, but it doesn't matter. It looks
>like they're all getting a free pass by the Justice Department. Janet Reno
>does not seem to find a problem here.
> You see, Reno suddenly decided that she wants to stay Attorney General for
>four more years. And putting high-ranking Democrats in prison would not be
>looked upon favorably by the Clinton Administration.
> This is just typical Washington-style cover your butt politics.
> Remember that, if you are called to serve on a federal jury: Federal laws
>do not necessarily apply to politicians.
>
>MILITIA NEWS
> Below is a message received from the forming National Leadership Council
>for publication in "Heads Up." These messages will appear in this
>publication from time to time. It must also be noted that selected Members
>of Congress have also been offered the same opportunity, and some have
>stated that they may well wish to reply as subjects and situations warrant.
> It should also be noted that Doug Fiedor, the editor of "Heads Up," is not
>now a member, nor ever has been a member, of a militia. He does, however,
>hold a number of parallel beliefs with many mainstream militia members, such
>as the need to return to a more Constitutional form of central government.
> __________________________________
> -- Begin Message --
> Since the election last Tuesday, rumors have been circulating within the
>Militia Movement of impending raids by the federal government against
>militia members. The latest reliable information received is that federal
>forces will be conducting raids against various groups in Ohio and Michigan
>in the next 60 to 90 days.
> Their plan is simple: Keep the Militia movement fragmented by arresting
>members of various groups piece-meal. Once this is accomplished, who will
>be next? Rest assured they won't stop once they realize that there is not a
>unified effort to oppose their plan.
> The mainstream media will report that our beloved federal government has
>once again saved the general public from those right-wing extremist. Those
>arrested will be portrayed as losers who plan to use terrorism to achieve
>the goals he or she could not achieve through the normal political process.
> Remember the MACON 3? There is no doubt in many people's minds that
>evidence will be planted by federal officers to assure a conviction.
> Many within the Militia Movement have been preparing for some time to
>counter such actions by the federal government by organizing a National Militia.
> We believe that if all groups in the movement unite together, we can be a
>political force that those in power will have no other choice but to
>recognize. After organizing together, we can use accepted political means
>to inform the American people of exactly who we are, why we exist, and what
>is happening. And, we can inform the federal government that such
>harassment of our membership will not be tolerated any longer.
> Further details will be forth coming in future editions of HEADS UP.
> -- End of message --
>----------------------------------------------------------
> Safety in numbers is where it's at, all right! But, most important in this
>message is the expressed intent of joining together as an organized group to
>work out problems through accepted political means.
> The American Citizen's Militia Movement has many hundreds of thousands of
>members throughout the country. In fact, last year a Senate Committee said
>that militia membership may even approach five million Americans.
> The important point is, all of them could already be loosely classed as
>political activists. And, organized together, this would become a very
>strong political group. With the proper leadership, such a group could
>ultimately benefit all American citizens by setting forth a workable
>political agenda to rein in the excesses of the federal government.
> Mentioned in last week's message was their intent to write a Code of
>Conduct for Citizen Militia members. This would go far in alleviating the
>fears held by many Americans not actually familiar with militia members and
>their core ideals. It would also be an outward sign to those in government
>that these Americans need not be feared, but that they MUST be respected.
> If this organization forms -- and it is starting to look as though it may
>-- the sheer energy of that many dedicated political activists working
>together towards the same political goal would be unlike anything this
>country has seen in over a century! And what a lofty goal that would be:
>Liberty.
> Wow! Picture, if you can, a whole nation of people with the freedom
>Americas experienced before FDR imposed socialism on this country -- but
>this time, including 100% of all Americans. What a dream!
> You might even be able to start a small business, grow some crops, start a
>school, build a home, or provide a useful service for your community,
>without first securing the written permission of government. What a concept!
> No political party in the United States has a "few hundred-thousand"
>political activists in its ranks. (We are not talking just "members" now.
>Activists are people who actually want to work towards a goal.) If they are
>lucky, the major political parties may be able to rustle up that many
>volunteers for a short time -- such as for a presidential campaign. But,
>they can't keep that many people interested in anything for more than a
>month or two.
> The militia movement, however, exceeds that number every day of the year.
>Yup, get all of them politically involved, and working together, and some
>good political stuff is going to happen!
> A little old fashioned Liberty might be good for this country. And it
>would sure be interesting to experience living under a truly Constitutional
>form of federal government for a while.
>
> -- END --
>
> ==================================
>Dear M R,
> It is encouraging to find that many militia members are beginning to
>get clever. "Politics" comes in two varieties: violent and non-violent.
>(Incidentally, my sister observes that the world is divided into two types
>of people: those who think the world is divided into two types of people and
>those who don't.)
> The problem with violent solutions -- aside from the risk death --
>is that once the oppressor is defeated, you have no guarantee that things
>will be any better; you only know they won't be the same. Could get worse.
>Here are a few of the enduring thoughts of the greatest military strategist
>of all time.
> ****************************************
> [The quotations below are taken from _The Art of War_ by Sun Tzu as
>translated by B.Gen. Samuel B. Griffith, U.S.M.C.]
> "Generally in war the best policy is to take a state intact; to ruin
>it is inferior to this." --Offensive Strategy, v.1
> "For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the
>acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."
>--Offensive Strategy, v.3
> "Thus, those skilled in war subdue the enemy's army without battle."
>--Offensive Strategy, v.10
> "One who is confused in purpose cannot respond to his enemy."
>--Offensive Strategy, v.23. (Meng, quoting the Grand Duke)
> "He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be
>victorious." --Offensive Strategy, v.25
> "Thus a victorious army wins its victories before seeking battle; an
>army destined to defeat fights in the hope of winning." Dispositions, v.14
> ****************************************
> Those who are seriously interested in a political victory, but
>unsure of how to achieve it, can get a complete "how-to" manual. The book is
>_The Citizen's Guide to Fighting Government_ by Sen. Steve Symms and Larry
>Grupp. It is published by Jameson Books, P.O. Box 738, Ottawa, Illinois,
>(815) 434-7905. As I recall, the price for one to four copies is $12/ea plus
>$4 for shipping & handling. For five to one hundred copies, the price is
>$10/ea, postage prepaid.
> (almost) EVERYTHING you need to know for success in non-violent
>politics is contained in the book. Get a copy now. Better yet, get several.
>One of my friends ordered 20 copies last Thursday. He kept one and sold four
>at breakfast on Saturday. On Tuesday, he sent the remainder to a political
>gathering with 55 people in attendance. His 15 remaining copies were sold
>for $15/ea.
>
>-- Harvey
>
>P.s., Please, understand that I personally recognize the natural right of
>all people at all times and places to defend their lives, liberties, and
>property by whatever means are made necessary by the transgressors. Forming
>a militia is an exercise of that right.
>
>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail