Documents

Giwer, controv 1-1995

DG> MG>MG> Do you have a problem with that?
DG> MG>
DG> MG>DG> What if I do?
DG> MG>
DG> MG>DG> What if I don’t?
DG> MG>
DG> MG>DG> Pick one and write an essay.
DG> MG>
DG> MG> I do not use the essay format; never have.

DG> Then what do you call those numerous posts you upload into
DG> every conceivable conference on Fido? The ones that you
DG> take great care to copyright before posting them.

It is the editorial format. See your local newspaper or
subscribe to the Conservative Chronicle.

DG> MG> And Taub was lying.

DG> About what? The presence of gas chambers in Nazi death
DG> camps such as Auschzwitz, Dakau or Treblinka?

He was lying that I was claiming they did not exist.

I was only pointing out there is no credible evidence of
their existence.

If you would like to be the first to provide that credible
evidence please do so. Please do not continue this thread
without leading with that evidence.

Remember. Not just any claim will do. The evidence must
withstand all reasonable scrutiny. For example, descriptions of
death by cyanide must match what we know about death by cyanide.
It is impermissible to hold people died differently in those
days.

®®юю R_9501 ююЇЇ
+++ююююю r_950107 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (184)
To: Darrel Grattidge 29 Dec 94 21:12:00
Subject: LIBERALS, NEW DEFINIяяяя
—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Ruby Creek, Waco; the war has already begun.

— WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12a
* Origin: DOC’S PLACE IN THE GHETTO, NC3603! (1:3603/141.0)
SEEN-BY: 250/99 101 201 224 246 301 401 470 501 601 701 801 259/99 396/1
SEEN-BY: 3603/141 270 20020 20050 20060 3615/50 51

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (185)
To: Charles Doll 30 Dec 94 22:22:00
Subject: A BOMB STAMP

CD> MG> It has been some time so I do not remember the name of the
CD> MG>General in charge of the Manhattan Project.

CD> Major General Leslie Groves

Thank you. Strangely he didn’t win any air medals for it.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Bureau of Firearms, Alcohol, Religion and Tobacco

— WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12a
* Origin: DOC’S 822-4637, Fido. Internet Access Too! (1:3603/141.0)
SEEN-BY: 250/99 101 201 224 246 301 401 470 501 601 701 801 259/99 396/1
SEEN-BY: 3603/141 270 20020 20030 20050 20060 3615/50 51

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (186)
To: Dandelion 30 Dec 94 22:24:00
Subject: BELL CURVE

DD> Yes, but the authors (their names slip my mind at the
DD> moment) made great efforts to make clear that IQ really
DD> doesn’t matter; a person with a 100 IQ can become a CEO, a
DD> person with 150 may not.

Said great pains are in the first appendix discussing the
meaning of large sample statistics as used in population studies.

What you say is possible is at the same time extremely
unlikely.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * “Flame on!” — Janet “The Torch” Reno

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (187)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 30 Dec 94 22:29:00
Subject: BELL CURVE

BS> MG> It is about IQ as a predicter of most all aspects of
BS> MG> what is considere to be success in our society. It is an
BS> MG> excellent book if the subject interests you. And if the
BS> MG> subject does interest you then you need to read as it is
BS> MG> going to be around for years.

BS> The objectionable things, if Murray really wrote them, are
BS> alleged statements such as that we are encouraging high
BS> birth rates among low IQ segments of the population.

We are encouraging? It is the most common mammalian
response to hard times to reproduce. For some obscure reason it
has a survival value.

A population successful based upon intelligence will have a
lower birth rate but the births will be within the IQ isolated
group and thus the mean of that group will rise a bit.

But were anyone to seriously address human matters in such
terms they would be ridiculed out of the political process if not
tarred and feathered.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * God Lord! It’s a cookbook! — FBI manual

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (188)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 30 Dec 94 22:34:00
Subject: FACE ON AIDS

BS> MG> BS> You obscure one very important mode of
BS> MG> transmission, which BS> is through lesions. This can
BS> MG> involve the virus or infected BS> cells found i blood,
BS> MG> semen, vaginal lubricatants, and BS> various other body
BS> MG> fluids.

BS> MG> The number of cases of this means of transmission please.

BS> Most in Africa and Asia.

And if we are talking about Haiti and their voodoo based
customs that regularly involve passing around the machete so
people can cut themselves and all the other blood rituals, human
and otherwise, we would still be talking about Haiti.

Now as to Africa and Asia, please give the number of cases
and the means of transmission.

BS> MG> BS> The penis can have a variety of lesions,
BS> MG> often not BS> noticeable. These can be due to disease, or
BS> MG> can occur even BS> during intercourse if there is not
BS> MG> sufficient lubrication.

BS> MG> How does this differ from 2 and 3?

BS> It differs from vaginal because normal vaginal in healthy
BS> people does not involve lesions.

BS> It differs from blood-to-blood because the virus or
BS> infected cells introduced into a lesion need not come from
BS> a lesion in the other person.

Anal sex creates lesions which is the social point you
appear to be avoiding.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Today Waco. Gestern USA.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (189)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 30 Dec 94 22:39:00
Subject: FACE ON AIDS

BS> MG> The dishonesty has been in the changing definition over
BS> MG> the years. Do you realize the latest change means that
BS> MG> more people will be surviving AIDS The marker of being HIV+
BS> MG> was removed. When that was a criteria or two or m ARC
BS> MG> diseases as at first were in place the few survivors were
BS> MG> legendary.

BS> I don’t think it appropriate to refer to the changes in
BS> definition of AIDS as “dishonesty”.

When you are willing to honestly state that you consider it
honest for a person to be including in the cancer statistics when
they do not have cancer or in the heart attack statistics when
they did not have a heart attack then you can claim it is honest
for a person to be declared to have AIDS without being infected
with the disease.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * First thing we do, we arrest all the hostages. FBI at Waco.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (192)
To: Matthew Russotto 1 Jan 95 13:27:00
Subject: AMERICAN DREAM CONTRACT

MR> Try to work out a system which does. You CAN’T get it
MR> right– unless you dispense with the progressive tax
MR> system.

And the good news is that the newcomers are talking about
both a flat tax and the elimination of the income tax entirely.

Encourage those talking the right way.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Of the people, by the people, and for the people or else!

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (193)
To: Jim Higgins 1 Jan 95 13:31:00
Subject: CORRECT, POLITICALLY?

JH> MG> Compared to Ken? Certainly I am. I get bored after
JH> MG> grinding to a pulp. Ken eats the body.

JH> After dancing on it screaming maniacally. Entertaining,
JH> but only occasionally.

I am the kinder and gentler Ken Pangborn. It is the classic
bad KGB / worse KGB routine.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * “Flame on!” — Janet “The Torch” Reno

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (194)
To: Jim Higgins 1 Jan 95 13:33:00
Subject: FACE ON AIDS

JH> MG> The dishonesty has been in the changing definition over the
JH> MG> years. Do you realize the latest change means that more
JH> MG> people will be surviving AIDS? The marker of being HIV+
JH> MG> was removed. When that was a criteria or two or more ARC
JH> MG> diseases as at first were in place the few survivors were
JH> MG> legendary.

JH> I suppose you technically are correct about the numbers if
JH> they could be taken separately from the definitions, but
JH> there is dishonesty in the mix of numbers and definitions
JH> and hence in the numbers themselves.

Let me try it again. Originally the criticism was leveled
against the CDC. Those are the folks who honestly compile the
numbers in accordance with the definition. It is the people who
run the CDC all the way up the chain of command to the
politically appointed Surgeon General that monkey with the
definition for political reasons. The dishonesty comes from the
likes of Elders.

JH> MG> The cost of AIDS care is something that has to be rethought
JH> MG> in light of reality. The disease is like trying to treat
JH> MG> bubonic plague without anti-biotics. It is not treatable.
JH> MG> All money is wasted. Pain killers are the only rational
JH> MG> expense and that is out of compassion. If I were king I
JH> MG> would prosecute AZT prescribers as charlatans.

JH> Obviously you do not own stock in the manufacturers of AZT,
JH> nor do you expect a cozy job with them after retirement.

For them it was just luck. It was something that had been
approved years ago for use in cancer cases but it was of marginal
utility and it was rarely prescribed. The price didn’t change
after it started being prescribed for AIDS. That people are
demanding and doctors are prescribing something that has no
particular value is not the fault of the manufacturer.

JH> MG> Precisely the point. There are two approaches to wiping out
JH> MG> sleeping sickness in Africa. One is the best medical and
JH> MG> epidemological efforts we can finance. The other is shoes.

JH> Shoes? I guess you mean this as in move elsewhere. If not
JH> I don’t get it. The disease is caused by a protozoan and
JH> delivered by tsetse fly bites. Prophylactic medication has
JH> proven quite effective in those areas where the populace
JH> will cooperate, and quite expensive due to cost of delivery
JH> to a widespread population.

Right. That is the fly. There is another disease that
still escapes me that does get in through the soles of the feet
and is rather worse than sleeping sickness. I first got into it
as the symptoms are very like the stereotype of the slave
sleeping all day and talking funny.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Waco lesson 1. Kill them before they burn you alive.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (200)
To: Scott Summers 2 Jan 95 00:44:00
Subject: AMATEUR NIGHT

SS> MG> If you are going to get drunk be someplace where you can
SS> MG> stay until you are sober.

SS> Yes, mother.

Hey, Scotty, going to beam someone up before the collision?

Read it again.

The point is only to get through to those who think their
driving skill or their drinking experience can keep them safe.

I could care less who goes out there and drives. I once
did. After realizing the real situation I stopped very cold. I
still have no problem with drunk or drinking or even driving.

I post this message annually to make the important point.

There are amateurs out there attracted to on-coming
headlights.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * BBQed Baby Back Ribs, Waco style.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (201)
To: All 2 Jan 95 01:06:00
Subject: SEASONS GREETINGS / LATE

I appear to have forgotten my seasonal manners.

Everyone out there, have a Happy Newt Year.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * God Lord! It’s a cookbook! — FBI manual

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (202)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 2 Jan 95 01:08:00
Subject: AMERICAN DREAM CONTRACT

BS> MG> And this is the fifth in the House Republican Contract with America

BS> 5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT = Welfare by any other name

BS> MG> A $500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage
BS> MG> tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts
BS> MG> to provide middle class tax i

BS> MG> And what is wrong with it?

BS> It is WELFARE. It is AFDC by any other name.

BS> The welfare has to be disguised as a “tax credit” so
BS> conservatives can keep up their phoney facade.

Rather it is the result of a focus group study and the House
is now talking about both a flat income tax and eliminating the
income tax entirely.

Sounds like the noises I have wanted to hear for 30 (thirty)
years at the least.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * We are here to help you, Jude, I mean Mr. Koresh.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (203)
To: Lee Grimsley 2 Jan 95 01:11:00
Subject: CREATIONISM

LG> MG> Despite repeated requests there has been no evidence in
LG> MG> favor of creation presented.

LG> And evolution is still known as

LG> THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION……….

You would be well advised to learn the difference between a
scientific theory and “Dr. Watson, I have a theory.” The latter
is a hypothesis in the sense of science.

LG> MG> The best that has been done is attacks upon evolution which
LG> MG> have no bearing upon the subject of creation.

LG> Are you ready to admit you sprang from the same
LG> loins that spawned BOB SILLYHEIMER?

Are you saying the creation of Yahweh God is faulty? If
not, why not? Where is your reference to natural birth supported
in your idiot religion?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * “Flame on!” — Janet “The Torch” Reno

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (206)
To: All 2 Jan 95 17:12:00
Subject: THE SOCSEC SCAM

Social Security, welfare or mismanaged scam?

Not a debate as I do not debate myself or with anyone else
who is always right.

At first it appeared important to find a good average life
time income estimate. It turns out that is unnecessary. In fact
it turns out not much is necessary for this analysis save to
assume a person can get 2% real earnings on their investment
regardless of what the inflation driven interest rate of the
moment is.

Anyone can do the same thing I did. Simply use the future
value of a regular investment formula. If we can agree on 45
working years as a base figure then we can compare the average
monthly earnings over a working life with that during retirement.

On more assumption. The average life after retirement is
ten years which is close enough not to have to quibble. But to
correct for the average life being longer I am going to assume
that at retirement the person simply takes out the savings in 120
equal monthly payments. There are a lot of assumptions, this one
gets us in the ball park.

At the worker’s contribution only of 7% of income into a tax
free retirement account having a 2% real growth the retirement
monthly income is 51% of the average working income.

If you consider the employer’s 7% then the retirement income
is 102% of working income.

OK, you don’t 2% real earnings. How about 0% real earnings
but only enough to keep up with inflation and nothing more? Then
with only your 7% your monthly income will be 31.5% of your
average working income and including your employer’s contribution
you will have 63%.

I think I have considered every justification for saying
that in in some manner someone can get a better deal from the
government than from private savings, even it if be in T-Bills.

Lets suggest the high cost is to cover those who do not earn
much in their lives. The average payment today is about $500 per
month. That, considering only your 7% would mean a $12,000
average annual income. Using the full 14% would correspond to a
$6000 income. Note that a life time at minimum wage is a $7500
income. So this is not the problem.

There is something the government is doing with social
security money that has nothing to do with supporting people in
old age that is the reason there is a future problem with social
security. In a person’s life there is more than enough money
being paid in for an income equal to the average of their working
life.

Is it all of the “extras” that have been added on over the
years that are causing the problem? Then it appears the answer
is simple; stop all the extras or at least treat the other things
as a separate insurance fund. Then people can retire with what
today, based upon an average income of $22,000, would be an
average monthly income (pre tax) of $1,872.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Gore in ’94!

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (208)
To: All 2 Jan 95 19:02:00
Subject: THIEFBLIND FOR RENT

For Rent

One of the finest thiefblinds in the country. Perfectly
located near an interstate entrance in the wrong part of town.
The house has not bars, a door with that has obviously been
forced and a Lincoln Towncar in the driveway.

Need real life combat shooting practice?

Need a steady supply of live targets?

This is the place for you.

Respond email.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * “OK punks, make my term.” — Clint

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (209)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 2 Jan 95 21:39:00
Subject: AIDS STATS.

BS> MG> Table 14. Male adult/adolescent HIV infection cases (not AIDS) by

BS> Table 3 AIDS cases has the following major categories:
BS> The percentages are for stats reported for the period of July
BS> 1993-June 1994

BS> Men who have sex with men 45%
BS> Injecting drug use 28%
BS> Men who have sex with men and inject drugs 5%
BS> Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 1%
BS> Heterosexual contact 10%
BS> Recipient of blood transfusion 1%
BS> Other/risk not reported or identified 10%

BS> The “Injecting drug use” figures are for HETEROSEXUALS

Very good. And as in every case where I talk about the new
cases I say gays and IV drugs users as one category I do not see
what you think you originally posted to me for in the first
place.

Back to the numbers. 78% (sum of the first three) are in
the combined category I always mention. Going to the hetero
contact this one I usually discuss as a further breakout of it
finds something like 9 of the 10 percent are women who have sex
with bisexual men which is close to that combined category as one
one of the partners is heterosexual.

Going a touch further, I can easily lump IV drugs and IV
blood in the same category as there is no question as there has
never been a question (given the existing statistics and their
history) that HIV contaminated blood products come from gays as
did the HIV drugs users start with drug shooting gays.

This is not a disease that is following the pattern of the
classic STDs. Save for where “some people” associate with “those
people” the disease remains with “those people.” Those people
being the categories described.

The independent spread of hetero to hetero to hetero is
quite rare and is showing no signs of increasing. Percentagewise
it is no worse than it ever was.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Ruby Creek, Waco; the war has already begun.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (210)
To: Josef Berg 2 Jan 95 22:01:00
Subject: CREATIONISM

JB> I took it upon myself to learn as much as I could,
JB> since it was a fascinating subject. I made several
JB> observations, that were conveniently left out when the
JB> teachers taught evolution, and came to several conclusions.
JB> First, evolution is not this continuous “stream” of species
JB> that can be traced through fossil evidence from the first
JB> amino acids in the Pre-Cambrian seas, to the diverse life
JB> forms we see today. There are many, -large- gaps in the
JB> physical evidence, where evolutionists make monumental
JB> leaps, on assumption, to the next genus or species that
JB> fits into the line they are following.

If you actually did that you should have published as Gould
made his reputation upon what you are describing. He called it
punctuated equilibrium.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Sometimes the Gov has to kill kids in order to save them.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (211)
To: Josef Berg 2 Jan 95 22:04:00
Subject: CREATIONISM-2

JB> This is where “Creationism” comes in. I am not
JB> saying that eh biblical story of how God created the world
JB> is a plausable explaination for what transpired here on
JB> planet Earth. But it is easier to beleive that -someone-
JB> or -something- every now and then came along and gave the
JB> life forms on this planet a helping hand.

But “easier to believe” is not science. It is coming to
everything hard to explain and saying “and then a miracle
happened” and moving on to the easy parts. I have been known to
schedule miracles into R&D projects but that is not how science
works.

JB> This message is getting rather long, so I will
JB> close for now.

Look into Gould’s work. He writes a number of
popularizations and one of them. There is only one of his books
around and its list of other titles by him yields none that are
obviously punctuated equilibrium. The full name is Stephen Jay
Gould and these popularizations should be in any library.

Any overview work on modern theories of evolution should
cover the subject. However it is not a field I keep up on first
hand but rather as best I can from any source that comes my way.

=====

To get you started the general concept is that reproductive
isolation causes speciation as well as changing conditions. One
of those speciation events you listed coincides with the break up
of Gaia. Obviously the changing conditions always works such as
the end of the dinosaurs and suddenly there are mammals,
marisupials at least.

As to what can cause speciation, consider reproductive
success. So successful that a species spreads across a
continent. Then local variations can accumulate faster than they
can diffuse over an entire continent. Any rabbit can marginally
survive near a desert but the jackrabbit variations develops
without diffusing back to the rest of the rabbit population.

If that start is interesting enough you should be able to
find further readings on the subject. I am certain that at some
time Scientific American had an article if not an issue on it.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * All right, Koresh, make my day. — Reno

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (212)
To: Josef Berg 2 Jan 95 22:22:00
Subject: CREATIONISM-2

JB> There are 5 major periods defined by types of life
JB> forms, and whose ends are marked by mass extinctions:
JB>
JB> (1) We have the Pre-Cambrian seas teaming with protozoa
JB> and other simple single celled or loose collections.
JB>
JB> (2) We have the Palaeozoic, from the Cambrain to the
JB> Devonian, where the waters are teaming with rather
JB> complex invertebrates from brachiopods to vertebrates
JB> like osteolepis.
JB>
JB> (3) All of the sudden, these animals start to move onto
JB> land during the Carboniferous, in the form of
JB> amphibians andlow and behold, insects.
JB>
JB> (4) Then we start seeing the appearance of reptiles like
JB> dimetrodon, a true reptile defined by the hip
JB> developement and leg placement. These reptiles seem
JB> to have lived side by side with the dinosaurs that
JB> developed and reached their hayday during the
JB> Cretaceous. Then, most died off, in what is still a
JB> debateable manner.
JB>
JB> (5) Then, we see an explosion of mammals.
JB>
JB> ……..Each of these periods desribed, are defined by the
JB> type of dominanat life form.

BTW: Be careful with cause and effect here. It is quite
clear that the existence of species proves only the existence of
taxonomists. The existence of the ages only proves the existence
of paleontologists.

There may or may not have been a specific cause or defining
event but rather a convenient reference. By that I mean to say
that none are as clear as the end of the age of the dinosaurs.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Give me liberty or I will take it.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (213)
To: Al Warmington 2 Jan 95 22:28:00
Subject: EX-STURGEON GENERAL …

AW> Regards,

AW> Al (Former LT/USN).

Depending upon your desires that speaks very well or very
poorly of you. NROTC I would presume (that is a good.)

AW> Did you know Ev is now on TV telling us we have to all lose
AW> weight? (No joke). This from a guy who makes Teddy K. look
AW> like a body- builder. But I read he’s off the sauce. Give
AW> this job to some General. In someone else’s country.
AW> Makes the Navy look rrrrrreal bad.

I know but being lectured by Koop at least makes you feel
like someone of substance is paying attention even though it is
the same damned meddling. He is more like being paid to listen
to a speech. Elders is like having her laugh at you for
listening.

Seriously, having heard him the week just before Elders was
canned, I thought it was an administration thing to get him to
take the job back. At least he was not a political hack and did
his job.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Waco lesson 1. Kill them before they burn you alive.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

+++ююююю r_950112 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (202)
To: All 8 Jan 95 01:33:00
Subject: BELL CURVE CONTROVERSY

Critiquing The Bell Curve
by
Matt Giwer (c) 1995 <1/7>

This is not a critique of the book rather a commentary upon
those who critique the The Bell Curve by Herrnstein and Murray.
There are two camps, those who to some degree or other consider
the findings of interest and supportive of the positions
expressed in the book. The other group flat out condemns the
book as racist at the very least.
What separates these two books is that the former have read
the book and the latter have not.
We have seen this before. They are the censors and the book
burners. Although the “did not read” group has refrained from
clear calls for censorship if not burning but they share a belief
in common with the book burners. They devoutly believe they can
know what the book says without reading the book.
And how do they know? For example they have “heard”
something of the background of Murray (they never seem to know
anything about Herrnstein though). Why he takes money from an
organization that had some very unmodern ideas some sixty year
ago. Some centuries ago the Roman Catholic Church refused to
look through Galileo’s telescope as he was a known Copernican.
Consider the condemnation is the R word, racist. That of
course is addressed only in chapters 13 and 14. Further the
detractors can not be passed the simple claim it is racist as
they have no idea what the chapters say.
The order of these two chapters is significant. First comes
a general discussion of the racial difference in IQ followed by a
demonstration the cultural differences follow the IQ differences.
Were chapter 14 left to stand on its own it would clearly have
exposited the known cultural and social differences and left them
unexplained.
As it is exposited the book first addresses the difference
that exists and then demonstrates it explains the otherwise
unexplainable social differences between the races. What it
does demonstrate is that equal IQ of all races have essentially
the same social characteristics and thus that IQ is a better
predictor than race.
Those who are blessed with infused knowledge of the
contents of the book never learn is that it removes the race
component from the discussion. It invalidates race from all
social debate. But then, that is what distinguishes the sides in
the discussion, those who condemn the book have not read the
book.
The first barrage against the book appears to have been in
the October 31, 1994 issue of The New Republic. None of the
contributed articles, sixteen of them, gave the slightest
indication the authors had read the book either but they
uniformly repeated the “racist” allegation.
When there is some justification other then identifying the
authors as known Copernicans as evil the reasons are fallacious
in themselves or again demonstrate a failure to have read the
book. For example, one author admits that social attempts to
raise IQ by education have not succeeded but then calls the
efforts on again off again. And in doing so they ignore accepted
studies of those programs showing no benefit.
In the January 85 issue of Scientific American it
contributes its less than sterling reputation in recent years to
this frenzy of ignorance. Associate Editor, Timothy Beardsley
provides a serious of quotations about the book from people who
also give no indication of having read the book or at most
chapter 13. But those who have heard of this article, not having
read it either, proudly proclaim an article by a writer who has
advanced to editor is evidence against the book.
What all share in common is a knowledge that the question
has been answered long ago, that everything has to be environment
and nothing can be heredity save for race. They know IQ can not
be heritable. But do they really? No!
What they do know is that it is a truth that can not be
spoken. They know that no study demonstrating it can be admitted
to be true. They know the only way to stop what they know is
true from being stated publically is to attack it.
Is this too harsh? Consider the attitude of those who
condemned Galileo’s telescope and The Tropic of Cancer. Show me
where it is different. They will not look. They will not read.
The WILL condemn.
They will call names. They will call heretic, pornographer,
racist. Any and all be by true but where is the difference
today? I see none. Is anyone willing to tell me why the brain
dead fundamentalists who are attacking The Bell Curve are
different from any other brain dead fundamentalist?

* * * * *

Further distribution is encouraged by the author.

P.O. Box 82541, Tampa, Florida, 33682-2541, Bus. 813-969-0362

[note new address and phone]

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * 6 dead, 22 wounded, a law against guns. Some excuse.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (210)
To: All 8 Jan 95 03:42:00
Subject: INCREASE YOUR POWER

The Power of Fifty
by
Matt Giwer (c) 1995 <1/8>

There appear to be many who still fear the diminishment of
the power of the federal government. I do not understand this
fear. I have to ask after the uncertainty of those who do not
fear the excess power of the federal government.
Now it is obvious that, all else being equal including
party affiliations and seniority, that the average citizen of
Idaho has the same influence as the average citizen of the state
of California. That is why the US constitution is written the
way it is at the federal level.
Of course, seniority, chairmanships, party affiliation and
the like took that equality away as one of the first amendments
to the Constitution. I am not here to cry over milk spilt long
ago.
Rather I would point out that the 10th amendment has been
effectively nullified in recent (40) years. Now I will stipulate
for purposes of this discussion that I presume a party system and
some sort of ordered system is required in Congress be it
seniority or not. If you will accept that stipulation then I
will ask you to accept another, that I can speak in terms of
averages with little more.
And I only want to point out that if you call the President
you are only one of all the citizens. If you call your governor
you are, on average, fifty times more influential. If you are
the average person in the average state then, as there are fifty
states, your power is that much greater. Power? Influence, what
the people think, what the people want. That is what
representatives listen to if they wish to be re-elected.
Try calling, writing, faxing, interneting, whatever your
representative in the federal government. No matter what the
results, on average you are fifty times more effective dealing
with your state equivalent.
Obvious, right? So then if the federal government decides
to honor the 10th amendment to the US constitution and stop
dictating to the states is not the power of every state citizen
enhanced by an average factor of fifty? Would this not be the
end to local complaints of a Jesse Helms or a Tipper Gore
dictating moral policy for the country? Would this not be the
end of complaints of a Kennedy or a Goldwater dictating economic
policy for the country?
Where am I wrong here? Diminishing federal power gives back
to the states the power to live under the rules they wish. On
average it makes every state citizen fifty times more powerful,
more vocal, more influential than we are under the current
system?
Does this not allow us all to better live under the system
in our states that we wish to live under? If you want a liberal
state who am I to object as you have increased influence in your
state as i do in mine. I have an equivalently increased
influence but under the 10th I have no way to impose my ideas
upon you or your state.
It is intuitively obvious that abjuring the power to dictate
to other states a power that only comes from the party and
seniority to impose ideas upon all the states is a good idea. I
can find no justification that Tom Folley, Speaker of the House
because of his near life time election to Congress should have
the power to push through legislation that effects Florida much
less the rest of the country. Thanks but no thanks.
I have no interest in insulting the voters in Seattle but
please, i have no interest in my local US representative imposing
his ideas upon you either. But then, if retribution is the game,
I am certain it can be accomplished.
But retribution is not the name of the game. We end this
nonsense and honor the 10th amendment. I see no problem with
this.
And in honoring it every one of us, on average, becomes
fifty times more influential in regard to the way we want to
live. And if you do not like the results, use your new influence
to gain an equivalent multiple by changing the way your state
operates. This is a society that can get what it wants by the
vote is it not?

* * * * *

Further distribution is encouraged by the author.

P.O. Box 82541, Tampa, Florida, 33682-2541, Bus. 813-969-0362

[note new address and phone]

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Guns cause crime and matches cause arson.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (211)
To: Scott Summers 8 Jan 95 03:52:00
Subject: AMATEUR NIGHT

SS> MG> The point is only to get through to those who think
SS> MG> their driving skill or their drinking experience can keep
SS> MG> them safe.

SS> I’m posting from Houston, remember? Here, to odds are only
SS> slightly in your favor if driving stone sober.

I am only saying “don’t drive.”

SS> MG> I could care less who goes out there and drives. I
SS> MG> once did. After realizing the real situation I stopped
SS> MG> very cold. I still have no problem with drunk or drinking
SS> MG> or even driving.

SS> Yeah, me too. Many years ago (1976) my wife was killed by a
SS> drunk driver, leaving me and our five year old son with
SS> some strong views on the subject.

I woke up one morning some 15-20 years ago and completely
remembering what I had done and then driven said, never again.

SS> Those amateur comments are somewhat funny, but the
SS> hard-core drinkers are really no less dangerous. It’s
SS> really very simple. You shouldn’t drive drunk or stoned.
SS> But *any* one of us who pulls a cork has done so,
SS> considering what constitutes “legally” drunk nowdays.

Pardon me, but that is irrelevant. Hardcore drinkers, the
real and the imaginary, are the readers I want. I do not care.
If you are on the road and know what it out there on New Year’s
Eve you are a fool to join them. I do not care if they have a
license to drive drunk, you are no less dead.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Get Janet a fiddle.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (212)
To: Matthew Russotto 8 Jan 95 03:58:00
Subject: FACE ON AIDS

MR> MG> Right. That is the fly. There is another disease that
MR> MG> still escapes me that does get in through the soles of the
MR> MG> feet and is rather worse than sleeping sickness. I first
MR> MG> got into it as the symptoms are very like the stereotype of
MR> MG> the slave sleeping all day and talking funny.

MR> Ringworm gets in through the feet. I don’t know what the
MR> symptoms are.

One of these days I am going to remember it. Ringworm is a
scalp problem. You are on the track of the right name.

The symptoms are slurred speech and drowsiness for what I am
remembering.

Possibly “hookworm”? That sounds closer but still not
certain.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * First they came for Weaver and I did not speak. Then they

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (213)
To: All 8 Jan 95 04:04:00
Subject: CINCINNATI BBS NEEDED

My brother finally got a computer. He is in Cincinnati, OH.
Does anyone out there have the balls to invite a complete novice
to logon?

Please provide the phone number here.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * “Stand and Deliver!” — Tom Foley

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (215)
To: All 8 Jan 95 20:35:00
Subject: CINCINNATI BBS NEEDED

My brother finally got into the 20th century and got a
computer. I am looking for a BBS in Cincinnati with a sysop
willing to be a bit patient with a total new comer to the
subject? Are there any recommendations?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Four different tax cuts add up to real money.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (223)
To: Dandelion 9 Jan 95 02:27:00
Subject: BELL CURVE

DD> I’ll take your word for it; all I’ve heard is the few TV
DD> debates about it. 🙂 I -do- plan to pick it up when I get
DD> a chance, though…maybe I can find a way to get out of my
DD> rut… (I consider myself fairly bright, and have a solid
DD> IQ, I just don’t find any appeal in the “normal” way to
DD> live life…it’s fucking boring. <grin>)

Get the book and stop worrying about what you damned IQ
score might be. Anyone’s particular IQ is not under discussion
here. What they say stands or falls on its own. That IQ might
predict the ratio of stand to fall is a separate matter.

And that is the only rational way to take the book.

It is not a call for prescreening based upon IQ. It is an
explanation of social conditions and trends that are happening
because of IQ.

One of the most insightful points in the book is that the
breakdown of the inner cities is because of TWO things, the legal
end of racism and IQ. The following made no reference to the
book but should have.

===

This morning I happened to see a segment (12/17) on Auburn
Street in Atlanta (all new to me.) To recount.

Auburn street was billed as the richest negro street in the
world. Doctors, lawyers, night life, thriving businesses. Nat
King Cole and Cab Calloway being regular performers at the main
nightclub. The commentary goes on to say that once they were
free to practice anywhere they left. The conclusion of the
segment is that the street has gone downhill as the best have
left.

===

Without discrimination bright people congregate, by
neighborhood, by job, by education, even by BBS conference. And
in this case they leave the inner city. So we have high income
professional neighborhoods, middle class neighborhoods and lower
class neighborhoods. And this is because of civil rights laws
permitting a certain color to leave their neighborhoods as in
Auburn street.

That this is most simply and universally explained, not just
in the US but around the world including Africa, most
fundamentally by IQ is an astounding contribution to social
science, so much so that it might be the first science ever in
the field. The WSJ compared it to The Origin of the Species. I
do not think they are far off the mark.

And so far the only fault of the book is timing. Darwin
published that one first leaving out the human species and
everyone accepted it. It was only after The Descent of Man
including the human species that the furor erupted. That The
Bell Curve included human races up front caused the furor up
front. That makes the responses of the “creationists” no less
violent.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * BATF Motto “Let God sort out the innocent!”

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (224)
To: All 9 Jan 95 02:51:00
Subject: ENEMIES OF ALL AMERICANS

Enemies of All Americans
by
Matt Giwer (c) 1995 <1/9>

We have a serious problem here. I hope people will bear
with me while I discuss it. There have been two clear, no
questions asked atrocities committed by the US government in a
little over two years. They are Ruby Ridge and Waco. There is
hardly any reason to recount the illegal and down right immoral
behavior of the government in these cases.
And we have had a formal determination in the case of Ruby
Ridge two innocent deaths were caused solely by the failure to
follow proper procedure and the appropriate penalty for that is
administrative. I do not think I am missing anything here. We
have just had the government determine murder deserves only an
administrative penalty.
Let us go back to the days before governments took on crimes
as offenses against the state. Then it was up to the family to
punish the criminal and if the family of the guilty refused the
aggrieved family took its own revenge. We now have exactly the
same situation regarding Ruby Ridge. I expect we will soon have
a similar situation resulting from Waco.
But let me not get ahead of the case. There is no
difference between an employer determining their employees are in
need of only a hand slap than the family of the guilty party
sending him to his room with supper. That is no different from
leaving the fate of a serial killer in the hands of his mother.
As such there has been no justice in the matter of Ruby
Ridge. Winning a wrongful death suit will not be justice, only
compensation. A woman and child are dead because of the actions
of these people and the deaths are not being judged by an
impartial judge and jury. They are being judged by their
employer.
Going back to those days before there were crimes against
the state the response to perceived failure of the family of the
guilty to administer proper punishment was vendetta. Simple
revenge became the order of the day. Those sent to bed without
supper or receiving a reprimand in their personnel jackets simply
became targets of revenge killing by the aggrieved parties.
In this case who are the aggrieved parties? Obviously Randy
Weaver, who lost his wife and son, is so aggrieved. In a larger
and more real sense, so are we all. It may not be a common
perception but in our being citizens of this same country and
agreeing to abide by its constitution and the laws that flow from
it we have also agreed to deal with matters such as this.
By the meanest of hair splitting one may say only those who
have taken an oath to support and defend the constitution of the
United States would be so aggrieved. Even if that is accepted
that means all past and present members of the armed forces as
well as all past and present members of the federal civil
services along with elected officials and the like. That is
hardly a seriously limiting category.
Put simply, by the rule of humanity when there is not
justice the aggrieved have the option to take whatever action
they deem suitable after careful consideration. There can be no
moral condemnation of such action even if it is an eye for an
eye.
What is striking to me is that the government believes it
can get away with this. Certainly if the people responsible for
these deaths had been given to an impartial trial then all
grievance rights would be terminated in deference to the right of
the government to judge crimes against the state. But in this
case we have the highest federal prosecutorial agency deciding
not to prosecute its own people. This is like believing Ted
Bundy’s mother could be impartial.
Is any rational person truly expected to believe this was an
impartial finding? And lets get to the crux of the matter. The
man who murdered Vickie Weaver is not even going to miss supper.
He did nothing wrong. He was only the following orders of those
who just might be forced to retire early at full pension. Give
ME a rifle!
Does the government not realize that we the people have
every right to extract the basics of justice from situations like
this? The government’s actions have made everyone involved in
Ruby Ridge enemies of all Americans. The FBI has labeled itself
an agency that protects murderers. As such it has labeled itself
an enemy of the American people.
Pardon one more digression into history. Whatever failings
you may ascribe to J. Edgar Hoover, he took over a corrupt
organization that was despised by the American public and changed
it into one that became one of the most respected in the nation.
See how quickly it has fallen back into a gang of thugs and
hooligans again. God have mercy upon the FBI.

* * * * *

Further distribution is encouraged by the author.

P.O. Box 82541, Tampa, Florida, 33682-2541, Bus. 813-969-0362

[note new address and phone]

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * God Lord! It’s a cookbook! — FBI manual

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (225)
To: All 9 Jan 95 15:54:00
Subject: KICK ‘EM OUT

On Jan. 3 an article appeared on the front page of the Wall
Street Journal entitled “Catron County, N.M., Leads a Nasty
Revolt Over Eco Protection”. The article related that local
ranchers, with the help of local law enforcement, had basically
run federal forresters, biologists and land use planners out of
the county under the threat of arrest or worse. The county
government has passed laws restricting the activities of agents
of various federal regulatory bureaucracies within the borders of
the county (which laws have been pronounced unconstitutional by
conventional legal scholars). A law requiring the heads of all
households to keep a firearm is among other such laws that have
been passed.

One of the relatively constant threads in this debate seems to be
the contention by many of the participants that the federal
government really shouldn’t own vast tracts of land within the
boundaries of states.

The article also indicated that over 100 counties in the western
states and several eastern and midwestern states have passed
similar ordinances.

These activities seem to relate to the growing recent phenomena
of the resurgence of citizen militias.

Does anybody have more information about this movement (or
comments). I would particularly like to know which other counties
are involved. Also I would like to hear the opinions of law
enforcement personal as regards these issues.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * If you wish peace, prepare for war.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (228)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 9 Jan 95 23:39:00
Subject: AIDS STATS.

BS> If you want to talk about “heterosexual sexual contact”,
BS> yes the numbers are not 50%.
BS>
BS> But some people have been talking here about
BS> “heterosexuals”, not about “heterosexual sexual contact”.

Then you deal with those “some people” as I deal with those
same people when I have to the time to follow these threads. You
have no need to include me as one of “them” when you know I do
not post like them or make their assumptions.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * God Lord! It’s a cookbook! — FBI manual

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (229)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 9 Jan 95 23:41:00
Subject: AIDS STATS.

BS> MG> Going a touch further, I can easily lump IV drugs and
BS> MG> IV blood in the same category as there is no question as
BS> MG> there has never been a question (given the existing
BS> MG> statistics and their history) that HIV contaminated blo
BS> MG> products come from gays as did the HIV drugs users start
BS> MG> with drug shooting gays.

BS> Not true.

BS> You don’t know that that is the way HIV got into the IV
BS> drug population, and if you want to draw your conclusion
BS> from “the existing statistics and their history”, so be it,
BS> but don’t add “there has never been a question”.

If there was ever a suggestion that the few straights with
HIV were the sole cause of it getting into the drug shooting
population I must have missed it. That when it started the
straight cases were primarily medically caused hardly suggests
they were the drug shooters causing the problem.

BS> Don’t forget that we have had Haitians come here from a
BS> country with a large infection rate. I don’t know how
BS> heavily involved in IV drugs they have been,

Read up on voodoo ceremonies and guess how they got their
infection rate.

but I’m sure
BS> they are and they could well have been the way HIV was
BS> introduced.

Please keep this real. Regardless of the population of
Haitians or their rate of infection, they were included in the
statistics at the time.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * We are here to help you, Jude, I mean Mr. Koresh.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (230)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 9 Jan 95 23:50:00
Subject: AMERICAN DREAM CONTRACT

BS> MG> Rather it is the result of a focus group study and the
BS> MG> House is now talking about both a flat income tax and
BS> MG> eliminating the income tax entirel

BS> MG> Sounds like the noises I have wanted to hear for 30
BS> MG> (thirty) years at least.

BS> I hadn’t heard about the “focus group”, but I had heard
BS> about “Focus on the Family”, the Colorado Springs
BS> fundamentalist organization which, along with many other
BS> right wing groups has been campaigning for this $500
BS> “family value” for a long time.

If that is the only group you have heard of seeking such
consideration you have missed a lot current politics.

BS> So now rich people will be able to get an extra $500 in
BS> their pockets while poor children are going to be taken
BS> from their mothers and be put into orphanages.

It appears you have

1) bought into the the idea that there is a constitutional
distinction between rich and poor when it comes to the equal
protection clause,

and

2) you believe what sound bite liberals are telling you
about what Gingrich said in a 15-20 statement to the press as an
opening to the conference.

So why not address what is going on rather than what you
have been told to believe is going on?

BS> What is $500? That’s more than a welfare mother and child
BS> get in some states in a month.

Why in the world should the mother get any money if the
“compassion” is for the child? The mother gets all the money.
There is never the slightest pretension of any auditing of her
expenditures to assure they are on the child.

But if you do not like the OPTION of STATES possibly
choosing orphanages in place of the foster care system (that is
what Gingrich said but would never know it from the likes of
Democrats from Hitlary on down) then why do you propose no option
to leaving the child in a home where the child is in danger?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Ruby Creek, Waco; the war has already begun.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (231)
To: Michael Johnson 10 Jan 95 00:00:00
Subject: FACE ON AIDS

MJ> MG> Right. That is the fly. There is another disease
MJ> MG> that still escapes me that does get in through the soles of
MJ> MG> the feet and is rather worse than sleeping sickness. I
MJ> MG> first got into it as the symptoms are very like the
MJ> MG> stereotype of the slave sleeping all day and talking
MJ> MG> funny.

MJ> Recently saw an article that seemed to relate that
MJ> Non-Aids Kaposi’s sarcoma (found mainly in the
MJ> medeterranian and N. Africa) might be caused by volcanic
MJ> soil bits that work their way into the feet of the
MJ> victims.

I was thinking of hookworm. The symptoms include drowsiness
and slurred speech. Want to dig up an old parody of a slave?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Waco lesson 1. Kill them before they burn you alive.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (232)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 10 Jan 95 00:02:00
Subject: FACE ON AIDS

BS> MG> When you are willing to honestly state that you
BS> MG> consider it honesr for person to be including in the cancer
BS> MG> statistics when they do not have cance or in the heart
BS> MG> attack statistics when they did not have a heart attack the
BS> MG> you can claim it is honest for a person to be declared to
BS> MG> have AIDS without being infected with the disease.

BS> How many CDC cases fit your case?
BS>
BS> The changes I have seen in CDC classification have involved
BS> two things where significant numbers (thousands) were
BS> involved:
BS>
BS> 1.) Expansion of the definition of AIDS to include
BS> opportunistic disease not originally included (most
BS> recently some affecting mainly women).

Expansion of the definition to include people who are not
infected with the disease is totally stupid.

BS> 2.) Removal of a large block of cases from “heterosexual”
BS> to “unknown”.

Cause has nothing to do with an HIV+ test result.

What is it your are trying to get at here?

That HIV is not the cause of the disease?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * First they came for Weaver and I did not speak. Then they

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (233)
To: Bob Sillyheimer 10 Jan 95 00:28:00
Subject: LESIONNAIRE’S DISEASE

BS> MG> Anal sex creates lesions which is the social point you
BS> MG> appear to be avoiding.

BS> Anal intercourse doesn’t always and necessarily create
BS> lesions, but most of the time it certainly does, and that’s
BS> the major problem with it. You had already covered anal
BS> intercourse as your major point, and that’s why I did not
BS> repeat it as a separate item.

Fine now keep that in mind.

BS> Vaginal intercourse, on the other hand seldom creates
BS> lesions unless there is a lack of lubricant. But lesions
BS> can exist in the vagina and on the penis due to venereal
BS> disease. And a man can easily get friction lesions if there
BS> is a lack of lubricant.
BS>
BS> I think in Africa and elsewhere the extraordinarily high
BS> rates of venereal disease and resulting lesions probably
BS> are most responsible for spreading the disease almost
BS> equally among heterosexual men and women.

Try this one more time. We are NOT talking about Africa and
the rest of the world. We are talking about western nations,
specifically the US. What happens some place else has been
adequately demonstrated not to apply here else the doubling would
have continued for the last two years.

BS> And should American heterosexuals be concerned about
BS> lesions?

STD lesions are interestingly not in question. HIV
infection rates have not tracked with STD rates in general.

=====

Lets take this from the top. How do I know US gays don’t
give a damn? Simple.

When anal sex became the most likely suspect to this day
when it is damn near convicted the discussion was on how to do it
“safely” rather than avoiding it completely. The effort is in
finding a safe way rather than ceasing the practice completely.
Sorry about that. You folks take your risks then you take the
consequences with no “poor little me” whines.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * FOIA? We don’t need no stinking FOIA!

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (234)
To: Virginia Cramer 10 Jan 95 01:07:00
Subject: SEASONS GREETINGS / LATE

VC> —–=====< START QUOTE >=====—–
VC> > I appear to have forgotten my seasonal manners.
VC> >
VC> > Everyone out there, have a Happy Newt Year.
VC> ——=====< END QUOTE >=====——

VC> Can Canadians have a Newt Year?

Unfortunately not. It is a privilege reserved for Americans.

You know, if you had left
VC> this a little longer, it would have been just in time for
VC> Ukrainian Christmas. It’s tomorrow for those who didn’t
VC> know that.

The Ukranians can’t have one either. They are not
Americans.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Give me liberty or I will take it.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (250)
To: All 10 Jan 95 18:27:00
Subject: NYC CALL IN

Forum: Political Debate+ Section: Individual Liberty
Subj : Get on TV!
To : ALL Monday, January 09, 1995 4:47:02 PM
From : WNYC-TV, NYC, 71360,2142 #292815

New York Hotline, the live weekly New York City issues public televison
program puts you e-mail on the air!

Television and radio journalist Brian Lehrer hosts the one-hour weekly
program addressing critical city issues and news. NY Hotline features
in-studio expert guests, who will be questioned by New Yorkers via e-mail,
desktop video, telephone call-ins and fax.

The focus for this week’s show is “Is Gun Control Working in New York
City?”

Does gun control help fight crime? Should citizens carry arms? Do metal
detectors in schools help our children safe?

Start sending us your e-mail questions and comment now. Watch the program
live on Wednesday, January 11th at 8 p.m. on WNYC-TV, broadcast channel 31,
channel 3 on Manhattan cable systems. Check local listings for your local
cable channel. WNYC-TV is carried by over 60 cable systems in the NY-NJ-CT
NYC metro area.

Address your E-mail message to CIS:HOTLINE.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Bureau of Firearms, Alcohol, Religion and Tobacco

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

+++ююююю r_950115 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (98)
To: Darrel Grattidge 10 Jan 95 20:20:00
Subject: LIBERALS, NEW DEFINIяяяя

DG> I know what that format is. Too bad that your editorials
DG> miss the mark about as often as those that I peruse in the
DG> Washington Post.

Then you should start writing them.

DG> MG>DG> About what? The presence of gas chambers in Nazi death
DG> MG>DG> camps such as Auschzwitz, Dachau or Treblinka?

DG> MG> He was lying that I was claiming they did not exist.

DG> MG> I was only pointing out there is no credible evidence of
DG> MG>their existence.

DG> Your double-talk is indicative that you deny their
DG> existence, said existence being well-documented not just by
DG> camp survivors, but by camp personnel and camp liberators
DG> as well.

Then would you please quote the evidence that convinced you
they exist? That isn’t so hard, is it? Some evidence convinced
you. What was it?

DG> MG> If you would like to be the first to provide that
DG> MG> credible evidence please do so. Please do not continue this
DG> MG> thread without leading with that evidence.

DG> First, don’t ever tell me what I can or can’t do; that
DG> little act of intimidation on your part may come back to
DG> haunt you. You don’t want that.

In other words you will continue to make the assertion
without evidence. What is your point? That you can convince by
mere assertion?

DG> In addition, it is your assertion that credible evidence
DG> doesn’t exist –

Take it real slow. The person making the claim of the
positive, in favor or existence, bears the burden of proof just
as much as does a person claiming that god exists.

that would be your responsibility to prove
DG> in any debate, especially since you have history and
DG> learned opinion going against you.

If you have been paying attention I have reviewed the
evidence presented by everyone including the internet holocaust
faq. None of it is credible. I have discussed what others have
presented on many conferences. You obviously read many of those
conferences as you lead with a comment about how many conferences
on which I posted the same material.

Therefore you know no one has posted credible evidence.

DG> But, having read your posts over the past year or so I know
DG> that you are one who is not given to providing proof, that
DG> you consider your words to be the proof that backs up your
DG> opinions.

Obviously you can not tell the difference between an opinion
and a fact. My opinions are clearly opinions. When I state
something as factual I will support them with sources. If you
have any examples of when I have not done so please post them.

In essence, your mind is made up at this point –
DG> it makes no difference to you what evidence I provide
DG> because you still will not believe,

Because you have no such evidence. It is a rather fool
copout to claim you will no show me because I won’t believe it
anyway.

That leave you able to claim you have the evidence and a
grounds for not posting it.

even if that proof is
DG> concrete enough by objective standards (i.e., not your
DG> own). Further I should not even be giving you the time of
DG> day on this issue for there are not two sides.

That is a first for any issue, save for other religious
beliefs.

There is
DG> only one – they did exist. Your supposition of a lack of
DG> evidence is probably wishful thinking on your part; a
DG> thought process grounded more in anti-semitism on your part
DG> than the presence or absence of gas chambers.

Present the evidence that convinced you or have the courtesy
to admit you have none and believe in them as an article of
faith.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * BATF Motto “Let God sort out the innocent!”

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (102)
To: Darrel Grattidge 10 Jan 95 20:46:00
Subject: LIBERALS, NEW DEFINIяяяя

DG> MG> Remember. Not just any claim will do. The evidence
DG> MG> must withstand all reasonable scrutiny. For example,
DG> MG> descriptions of death by cyanide must match what we know
DG> MG> about death by cyanide. It is impermissible to hold people
DG> MG> died differently in those days.

DG> The only proof that matters is that they existed. A small
DG> proof for you to consider, as noted by Eugen Kogon, a
DG> prisoner at Buchenwald; he wrote a small book on the camps,
DG> _The_Theory_And_Practice_Of_Hell_ (1950):
^^^^

This is as good as any place to start.

DG> The gas chambers were simplicity in itself, yet
DG> they were planned with diabolical ingenuity. Each
DG> chamber had the appearance of a public bath, and
DG> was so represented to the victims. In the
DG> dressing-rooms there were signs, in all the
DG> principal languages in Europe, instructing the
DG> prisoners to tie their shoes together and fold
DG> their clothes neatly to avoid loss. Hot coffee was
DG> promised after the bath. From the dressing rooms
DG> the way led directly to the “bath,” where
DG> hydrocanic acid gas was admitted through the shower
DG> heads and ventilator outlets as soon as the doors
DG> had been closed.

The first point to make is that none of these shower rooms
have ever been found with the equipment to hand HCN gas. Nor are
there any records of unaccounted for production of HCN. What is
usually mentioned is Zyklon-B which is a pellets of kaolinacious
earth holding liquid HCN. Pellets do not go through shower heads
or ventilators. Extraction from the pellets would require
heating it and then pumping it. So such equipment was ever
found.

Also no ventilator on any real shower room was found to blow
inward. Not that that would do any good as in a sealed room you
can use a fan all day and get no no more than a very slight
amount into the room with most of it being wasted.

A nice story but it says things that can not work. Physics
is against it.

Death took as long as four or
DG> five minutes, depending upon the amount of gas
DG> available. During this time the most dreadful
DG> screams could be heard from the men, women and
DG> children inside, as their lungs slowly ruptured.

Compare this to the descriptions of cyanide gas deaths in
American gas chambers. It is quiet. Generally there are no more
than two breaths reported until the prisoner is unconscious. And
in no case have there ever been any ruptured lungs much less that
being a cause of death.

So why did people die differently from Nazi HCN than from
American HCN?

In this case a description of death totally contrary to
everything that is known about human death from cyanide is not
credible.

DG> Any bodies tht showed signs of life when the doors
DG> had been opened were clubbed into quiescence.

By people breathing cyanide.

The
DG> prisoners of the service squad then dragged out the
DG> bodies, stripped off any rings, and cut off the
DG> hair,

In other equally incredible stories have the hair being
removed while alive as part of delousing and the rings voluntarily
removed as valuables.

which was bundled into sacks and shipped to
DG> plants for processing.

Processing? Whatever happened to the crematoria and burning
the bodies?

(In 1944 a young Jew from
DG> Brno, Yanda Weiss was a member of this squad. He
DG> is the source of the details here presented, which
DG> have been confirmed from other sources.

For what it is worth Buchenwald was outside of Weimer in
Germany. A few years back those confronted with never finding a
gas chamber claimed they were all outside of Germany in the
occupied countries. I do have a series of messages from a war
crimes investigator who did visit Buchenwald at the end of the
war. He found nothing. His name is also in the Hall of the
Righteous Gentile in Israel for his work in bringing so many
Nazis to justice. He tells me he found no gas chambers or
evidence of same.

DG> A little further he adds the following:
DG>
DG> The highest “output” attained by Auschwitz was
DG> 34,000 bodies, in one continuous day and night
DG> shift.

A little division finds they are gassing a bit over 1400 an
hour in this one room. Amazing given all the extra labor
required to haul out the bodies and clean up the shit and urine
for the next unsuspecting group that must have been too far away
to hear all those “screams.”

According to the confession of Camp
DG> Commandant Hoss, during his reign alone, from 1942
DG> to early 1944, some 2,500,000 persons were gassed
DG> at Auschwitz.

Then why was he tried and acquitted of that crime when tried
for it by the Russians? The Russians do not have an exclusionary
rule for confessions.

DG> I note at this point that Kogon’s book was used as a basis
DG> for the Nuremberg investigations as the material was
DG> written immediately after the liberation of Buchenwald as
DG> part of an Allied effort to understand how the camps
DG> operated.

Just how could a book published in 1950 be used as a basis
for investigations that were completed in 1948? You would be
well advised against making such obviously false claims.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * BATF Motto “Let God sort out the innocent!”

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (107)
To: All 11 Jan 95 03:27:00
Subject: INFORMATION DIRT ROAD 01

IN ’95, BIG BATTLES ON THE GOVERNMENT’S ELECTRONIC FRONTIER

New York Times (Jan 3)

WASHINGTON – Newt Gingrich versus Al Gore: warriors in
cyberspace?

Look for some big new battles on the electronic frontier next
year as Newt Gingrich and his Republican followers in Congress
face off against the Clinton administration over government
policies to promote new technology.

Gingrich, who is about to become speaker of the House of
Representatives, is at least as enthusiastic as the
administration’s technologist in chief, Vice President Gore,
about the prospect of “virtual communities” linked by global
computer and communication networks.

But where Gore has been a champion of federal guidance in
technology development, Gingrich is a libertarian free-marketer
who would rather the government keep its checkbook and its advice
to itself.

Gingrich and the other GOP leaders are hostile to government
regulation and have already proposed cutting Federal money for
commercial technology development.

Among other programs, they are likely to hack away at federal
financing for collision-avoidance systems for cars, advanced
battery technology for electric vehicles and perhaps even the
Pentagon’s $500 million program to catch up with Japan on
flat-panel displays for computers.

And yet, Gingrich is a true believer that advances in information
technology, like the expanding Internet network of computers,
will bring radical and beneficial changes to politics and
society.

Besides drawing heavily on the ideas of Alvin Toffler, the
futurist and author of “The Third Wave,” Gingrich is a student of
technology pundits like George Gilder and Esther Dyson.

One can get a sense of Gingrich’s technological views from a
manifesto called “Cyberspace and the American Dream,” written
largely by Toffler and Gilder for the Progress and Freedom
Foundation, a research organization closely allied with the
incoming House speaker.

The document breathlessly heralds a new “knowledge age” in which
advances in computers and communications destroy bureaucracy and
promote more egalitarian forms of social organization.

“Government does not own cyberspace,” the document says. “If
there is to be an “industrial policy for the knowledge age,’ it
should focus on removing barriers to competition and massively
deregulating.”

It will bear watching whether this world view has any impact on
the biggest single issue in technology policy for 1995: the
continuing effort to rewrite the nation’s 60-year-old
communications law. A key goal for many is to allow local
telephone and cable television companies to compete in each
other’s markets.

Democrats agree with Republicans on the basic principle that
promoting competition will serve consumers better than treating
telephone and cable services as “natural” monopolies and
regulating their prices. And leaders in both parties, who came
close to passing a bill last September, say they are eager to
finish the job this year.

Still, the political differences are profound.

The telecommunications reform bill drafted in the Senate would
have imposed dozens of pages of new regulations, including a
requirement that advanced video and data networks reserve some
capacity for nonprofit institutions. These restrictions caused
objections from Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, who will now be majority
leader, that the bill was too restrictive.

On a related issue, Republicans and Democrats both support using
auctions to award licenses to the nation’s airwaves, a
once-heretical notion that many Democrats considered a concession
to big business.

But now, under the direction of a Democratic chairman of the
Federal Communications Commission, auctions are under way for
wireless telephone licenses and are expected to bring the
government at least several billion dollars in 1995.

The dispute, however, will be over what to do with the proceeds.
Gore has proposed that at least some of that money be used to
hook up the nation’s elementary and secondary schools to
high-speed interactive communication networks. The Republicans
have had little to say about that proposal, but they are likely
to resist any new spending programs.

The industries with a stake in all these debates are not sure
what to expect.

Long-distance carriers like AT&T and MCI will try once again to
prevent the regional Bell companies from entering their markets
for at least several more years. The telecommunications bill that
almost passed last fall would have probably delayed Bell entry.
Republicans and Democrats alike can be found on both sides of the
long-distance issue, divided between those who fear the Bell
companies would stifle competition in long distance and those who
believe that the long-distance restrictions have become outdated.

Another clash in technology policy will be over government
programs to help finance industrial research efforts. The Clinton
administration has been an unabashed proponent of so-called
industrial policy, directing heavy government assistance toward
specific technologies like flat-panel video display screens and
computer networking.

Since it came to power, the Clinton administration has expanded
the Commerce Department’s Advanced Technology Program from $68
million a year to $441 million.

The Pentagon and the Department of Energy, meanwhile, are now
directing hundreds of millions of dollars toward joint ventures
with industry. These include a so-called clean car initiative
with the Big Three American car manufacturers to develop an
automobile that produces little or no pollution.

Expect those programs soon to come under fire. The incoming
chairman of the House Science Committee, Rep. Robert S. Walker,
R-Pa., is a close ally of the new House speaker and has been a
frequent critic of the government-industry joint ventures.

“We’re trying to promote technological freedom and opportunity,
as opposed to a federal command-and-control system,” a senior
aide to Walker said.

Walker and some other Republican lawmakers say that the
government cannot presume to be better able than private industry
to identify important areas of commercial research. Rather, they
add, the government needs to focus on basic research and then
offer a combination of tax cuts and deregulation to stimulate
private commercial activity.

Administration officials see things differently.

“We believe very strongly that civilian technology programs, like
.
Continued in the next message…

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

+++ююююю r_950124 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (140)
To: George Bethel 20 Jan 95 21:30:00
Subject: ADAM AND EVE

GB> BM> Do you then deny the biblical story of Adam and Eve
GB> BM> and the garden of Eden?

GB> The story of creation states that God created the world and
GB> then Adam and Eve. It does not state that Adam and Eve were
GB> the only humans God created.
GB>
GB> You should study Genesis before you ask more questions.
GB> Judging from your questions the only thing you know about
GB> it is what you have been told.

Then you hold only descendants of A&E were given dominion
over the earth. How do we know which are and are not those
descendants?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Lt. Frank Drebbin was in Charge of Corpus Crispy OPS.

— WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12a
* Origin: DOC’S 822-4637, Fido. Internet Access Too! (1:3603/20020.0)
SEEN-BY: 12/98 250/99 101 201 301 401 470 501 601 701 801 259/99 396/1
SEEN-BY: 3603/270 20020 20050 3615/50 51

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (149)
To: Frank Hay 21 Jan 95 18:00:00
Subject: CREATIONISM-2

On 01/17/95 ANDREW CUMMINS to FRANK HAY on CREATIONISM-2

AC> FH> Maybe easier to believe but that isn’t scientific proof. Lightening
AC> FH> might have been easier to explain as light bolts thrown by God, but
AC> FH> it wasn’t a scientific explaination.

AC> If you were walking along a beach and found a pocket watch, would
AC> you say “It might be easier to explain this watch as a product of
AC> human design, but that isn’t a scientific explaination.” It
AC> is sad that evolutionists are more interested in finding
AC> naturalistic explanations that in finding the truth. It is
AC> unimpressive to say evolution is true when you have assumed
AC> before investigation that the alternative is false.

AC> Anyway, to be strictly scientific, it has to be observable,
AC> reproducible, and testible. The origin of life, and many
AC> of the other claims of evolutionists, have not been observed,
AC> reproduced, or tested. The quality of being “naturalistic”
AC> doesn’t make something scientific, let alone true.

Let me tell you the saga of Andrew Cummins.

I am certain you have found him out for what he is but there
is more.

Way back before he “twitted” me and that includes denying he
ever did it he claimed to have seen the Paluxy River human
footprints in a cast. He described this as a normal 15 (fifteen)
inch long human foot print. I pointed out his definition of
normal to him.

The next event in our relationship was that he was claiming
the Dead Sea was evidence of a young earth in that there were no
salt deposits. I pointed out the salt business in mining them
but he was adamant there were no salt deposits.

This went on for a while so I shifted the argument to claim
that after the flood the rift valley of the Dead Sea was filled
to the brim yet there were no salt deposits.

Immediately he responded saying there were salt deposits.
When I pointed out the change in his position he told me he
“twitted” and did never again respond.

About six months later he came back and he responded to one
of my messages on the subject. I asked him why he had decided to
relent on his twitting me. I recounted the above information to
him about the first events and he never again responded to me.

I am now provoking him to the point of response and he has
not done so. At least this time he has had the sense to keep his
twit filter working so he will not need to lie again.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Lt. Frank Drebbin was in charge of Waco operations.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

+++ююююю r_950126 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (14)
To: Tony Miller 22 Jan 95 03:18:00
Subject: CREATIONISM-2

TM> But God is a valid reason for why things are here.
TM> Atheistic scientists are not even CONSIDERING the hand of
TM> God in the creation of the universe. They are discounting
TM> it without rational proof that it DIDN’T happen that way.
TM> That is not very scientific. Discounting a valid theory
TM> because what you may learn scares you to death.

I have no idea why you folks are so terminally ignorant.

You are a liar, a fool, you raped your mother, you kidnap
and eat children.

And I do not have to prove any of that. You have to prove I
am wrong.

You know better than that yet you would claim there is a
burden of disproof where you would deny having any such burden.

Are you not being just a bit hypocritical?

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Children of Waco, I feel your pain. Bill Clinton

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (17)
To: All 22 Jan 95 16:47:00
Subject: IQ CONSISTENCY

Recently there was an execution by lethal injection in
Texas. The usual suspects against the death penalty immediately
pointed out this man had a low IQ. Interestingly they are the
same suspects who are decrying The Bell Curve.

Not that anyone ever accused liberals of consistency but
this is a bit much. First IQ means nothing and then it means a
person should not be executed. A more honest statement would be
that IQ should only be used to promote the liberal agenda.

These folks are certainly making no case for their
intellectual honesty.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Ruby Creek, Waco; the war has already begun.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (27)
To: All 23 Jan 95 01:53:00
Subject: CRIME

DR> “Under our form of government, the legislature is not
DR> supreme … like other departments of government, it
DR> can only exercise such powers as have been delegated
DR> to it, and when it steps beyond that boundary, its
DR> acts, like those of the most humble magistrate in the
DR> state who transcends his jurisdiction, are utterly
DR> void.” Billings v. Hall 7 CA 1

Amazing is it not?

Under our form of government the supreme court is not
supreme either. Yet everyone bows down to it as though it were.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * “What is Truth?” asked the doubting Clinton.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (28)
To: All 23 Jan 95 03:10:00
Subject: POLISH POPE

Oldie but …

The Pope is speaking to god.

Pope: will there ever be a woman priest?

God: Not while you are Pope.

Pope: will there ever be approved birth control?

God: Not while you are Pope.

Pope: Will there ever be another Polish Pope?

God: Not while I am God.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * A sufficiently advanced person will appear to be god.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (29)
To: All 23 Jan 95 15:27:00
Subject: URGENT! LEAD BULLET BAN

########## Original From: BOB FENSTERMACHER
# STOLEN # To: ALL
# STUFF # Date/Number: 01/20/95 – 0000150
########## On: DOC’S – 0028 – Airgun
———————————————————————–

(To moderator: Reason for this posting? A ban on lead bullets
would provide considerable technical challenge to those who use
firearms or airguns, or reload ammunition for them…especially
since bullets made of materials other than lead are, in many
cases, already banned as “armor-piercing.” Here’s what’s in the
works, courtesy of a GOA fax alert, presented here verbatim.)

Clinton Regs. Could Ban Lead Bullets– Response needed to your
Congressman & EPA

by Gun Owners of America

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield VA 22151 (703)321-8585

(January 18, 1995) — New rules issued by the Environmental
Protection Agency could lead to to the banning of lead bullets.
The EPA will investigate whether it deems lead bullets as toxic to
the environment and will then consider implementing either a
complete ban or partial restrictions on the manufacture of such
bullets.

This is nothing but another one of Bill Clinton’s attempts at
gun control!

The EPA will begin studying this issue to determine whether lead
bullets should be banned or regulated. But clearly, the EPA has
no constitutional authority to make these determinations.

To make matters worse, the EPA could ban the bullets, even if
they never complete their environmental-impact study. The EPA
states they can issue “an order to prohibit or limit the
manufacturing, processing, or distribution” of lead bullets while
they continue their risk evaluation.

This is clearly an outrageous attempt — once again — to
infringe upon our Second Amendment liberties. Legislators like
Sen. Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) have made it clear that the way to
ban guns is to dry up the supply of bullets. This is just another
chipping away of our rights. If they can claim authority over
lead bullets, where will it end?

In Texas this type of environmental tyranny has recently led to
the closing of a shooting range. State authorities used local
environmental regulations to deem the bullets as toxic waste, and
thus, closed the range.

You need to speak out before they ban our bullets, close down
our shooting ranges and leave you wiht guns that serve no other
purpose than as bulky paper-weights. Your Congressman and the EPA
need to hear from you before January 27, 1995. HERE’S WHAT YOU
MUST DO:

*Call/fax your Representative (202-225-3121) and urge him to
express his opposition to this new gun control attempt. He must
contact the EPA before Jan. 27. Tell him that Gun Owners of
America will be circulating a letter (signed by Rep. Bill Emerson)
opposing the regulations. Ask your Representative to call Rep.
Emerson and sign the letter.

*Send a message to the EPA and ask them what constitutional
authority they have to ban or regulate lead bullets. Tell them
that the Second Amendment prevents ANY infringment, and that means
bullets are protected. Remind them that in the recent elections
voters rejected the “Nanny Government” view; and that if they
persist in violating the Constitution, you will demaind that your
Congressman press for disbanding the entire EPA. The EPA must
receive your written comments before January 27, 1995. You may
send your comments to the EPA by the following means:

1. Letters: OPPT Document Control Officer (7407), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency,
Rm. E-G99, 401 M. St., SW, Washington, DC 20460. All written data
and comments should be identified by the docket number OPPTS-50618
and should be submitted in triplicate.

2. Electronic Mail (3 ways) (a) By sending electronic mail (e-
mail) to [email protected]; (b) by sending a
“Subscribe” message to [email protected] and once
subscribed, send your comments to RIN-2070-AC37, or (c) through
the EPA Electronic Bulletin Board by dialing 202-448-3671, enter
selection “DMAIL,” username “BB-USER” or 919-541-4642, enter
selection “MAIL,” user name “BB_USER.” All comments and data in
electronic form should be identified by the docket number OPPTS-
50618.

Note: The EPA’s proposed regulations on lead bullets are part
of a larger “advance notice” on lead in general. The EPA will
also be studying the ”dangers” of lead solder, gutters, fishing
sinkers, motor fuel and much more.

… All in favor of losing their rights, please do nothing.

(end message)

… No tagline.
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12

— GEcho 1.00
* Origin: Paul Revere Net/Chicago (1:115/176)

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Catapult testing condemned by ASPCA.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

+++ююююю r_950131 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (177)
To: All 26 Jan 95 01:52:00
Subject: MISNAMED TEN

The Misnamed Ten
by
Matt Giwer (c) 1995 <12/26>

The first ten amendments to the the Constitution were added
to the Constitution as a condition of ratification of the
Constitution by four states. Had it not been for the formulation
and submission of those amendments for ratification the basic
Constitution of the United States would not have been ratified
and we would not have a United States of America. This puts the
importance of those amendments in perspective.
The reason for the insistence upon these amendments was not
that their subject matter was not covered. Rather that the
subject matter was not clearly covered. Every one of them and
many more are clearly implied by the intention of the
Constitution, that those were the only powers being granted to
the government of the United States were those written in the
Constitution and none other.
The reason for this was quite foresightful. The wisdom that
men of ill-will would find ways to add to those granted powers
with clever wording of legislation. An example is the use of
the power to regulate interstate commerce and control of foreign
affairs to prohibit rather than regulate. The purpose of the
first ten amendments was to specifically prohibit the federal
government from doing such things.
This was not achieved with the same wisdom as the wisdom of
the need for them. They were phrased in a rather haphazard
manner. The first eight are perhaps best described as a list of
the most serious grievances against England. They are specific
prohibitions against the federal government doing what is listed.
As such they are misnamed. It is not a bill of rights. It
is a bill of prohibitions that applies to the federal government.
It is not a granting of rights to the people. It is a
prohibition incumbent upon the federal government from infringing
the pre-existing rights mentioned. And if the enumeration of
such rights is not sufficient there are the 9th and 10th.
The 9th says that because other rights are listed, an
acknowledgement of an incomplete list, that those other rights
still exist. The 10th says that those rights are retained by the
states and the people, period. There is no way to honestly read
the federal constitution and the this bill of prohibitions
without understanding it does not grant rights.
The point of this that if the bill of rights were repealed
tomorrow every right mentioned and unmentioned in it would remain
intact and complete. Any infringement of any right by the
federal government can be met with all the force necessary to
stop that infringement including deadly. Once a protection is
removed the court no longer has a say in the infringement of the
right. At that point it is simply the individual or organized
group or militia against the state as there is no other recourse.
This applies with equal clarity to the legal abrogations of
rights such as the use of regulation as a means of prohibition.
Of course it also applies to prohibitions where there is no
delegated power to prohibit.
The question arises as to issues that have been decided by
the Supreme Court. Let me be very clear about this. When we
talk about the federal government usurping powers not delegated
we are talking about the Supreme Court as part of that federal
government.
To put any branch of government above any other is contrary
to our system of government. To consider any branch of
government as more important than any other is contrary to our
system of government. To hold the Supreme Court is the final
arbiter it to put it above the other two branches of our
government.
In any event, a law passed that is not within the delegated
powers in the federal constitution is not within those powers
simply because the Supreme Courts says it is.
The moral use of force, even deadly force, to resist such
laws is a decision for each individual or group involved in
resistance to those laws. In some cases resistance is the
equivalent ot rebellion against the government. It would not be
the first time Americans rebelled against their government in the
name of liberty. There is no shame in it.
Our rights are not changed by laws or by the Constitution no
matter what law is passed who interprets the laws or the
Constitution. Our right to defend those rights by any means we
so choose. That choice is left to our own conscience alone.

* * * * *

Further distribution is encouraged by the author.

P.O. Box 82541, Tampa, Florida, 33682-2541, Bus. 813-969-0362

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Were the Police on the Long Island train?

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (178)
To: All 26 Jan 95 04:28:00
Subject: AIDS IMMIGRATION BAN BAD

ED> 2) THERE WILL BE NO ADDED BURDEN ON THE US HEALTH CARE
ED> SYSTEM. Currently every immigrant who APPLIES for
ED> immigration to the United States must go through a test for
ED> HIV. Each Year that test comes to over 1.2 BILLION dollars.
ED> That means EVERY year, for EACH Hiv carrier the US
ED> excludes, it costs taxpayers 2 million dollars.

I would hope the letters B and S mean something to you.

The basic test is $10. Add the overhead and it might get up
to $20. That means 60 million potential immigrants are being
tested. That means you have your head up your ass.

On the
ED> other hand to treat an HIV carrier for LIFE it costs an
ED> average of 74,000 dollars.

And if you ONLY count the direct medical care and not all
the welfare you just might get a number that low. AZT is $1000 a
week all by itself. People are put on it as soon as they turn
positive and it is years before they show symptoms. That is
$52,000 a year for that alone.

Do the math but that kind of
ED> money could be put to much better use in the US Health Care
ED> System or to Aids research.

LEARN some math and get some real numbers.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * A contribution from each according to his ability. Clinton

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (187)
To: All 26 Jan 95 22:13:00
Subject: OJ DEFENSE STATEMENT

In a surprise announcement by the OJ defense team in its
opening argument, it was stated the glove could not possibly
belong to OJ as OJ has a rare birth defect and has six fingers.

—
* RM 1.3 01261 * Four different tax cuts add up to real money.

®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ®юЇ

The Aktion Reinhard Death Camps

Auschwitz Birkenau

Bergen-Belsen

Buchenwald

Chelmno

Dachau

Maidanek (Majdanek)

Mauthausen

Nordhausen

Belzec

Treblinka

Mittelbau Dora

Gusen

Westerbork

Matthias Giwer

John Hron

Ken McVay

Steve Thomas

Fairview Technologies

Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood: Islamic Extremists and the…

The Heritage Front

The Anti-Defamation League

Giwer, controv 1-1995

Latest article

Who’s On First: The Fairview Server

Fairview Technologies: BC Response

Fairview Technologies

The History of Lies

Materials