Giwer, controv 2-1994

MF> You need to recheck your political science. Fascism is
MF> right-wing, while liberalism is left-wing. Fascism is
MF> something that you should be intimately familiar with.

You should recheck yours. Fascism and Nazism are variations
upon socialism. Very leftist.

®®юю R_9402 ююЇЇ
+++ююююю r_940228 ююююю+++ — *FIDO AUTO* —
From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (1433)
To: Mike Fisher 26 Feb 94 22:03:10
Subject: Ccrrectly politic


* RM 1.2 01261 * Were the Police on the Long Island train?
— FidoPCB v1.5 beta-‘g’
* Origin: Florida Mail Hub * REC18 * 813-321-0734 (1:3603/20)


From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (1434)
To: Michael Jacob 26 Feb 94 17:24:10

*********** Original To: MICHAEL JACOB
* DUPE * posted: On: MERCOPUS
*********** Conf: 0001 – Netmail



MJ> MG> Trying to free American hostages in the Middle East and
MJ> MG> to get communists out of power in Nicaragua were quite
MJ> MG> acceptable objectives and, if it is of interest to you, he
MJ> MG> did not violate the Constitution. You are free to cite what
MJ> MG> part of it he violated of course and I hope you will do so.

MJ> Acceptable to whom? and at what price?

Freeing hostages is very acceptable to me. I have no idea
why you are against it.

MJ> Murder and war and killing because of ideological
MJ> “acceptable objectives” …. undoubtedly the Khmer Rouge
MJ> and Hitler said the same thing.

Then you have no idea of what those wars were about.

MJ> Second thing: the Sandinistas were not communists, they
MJ> were Sandinistas.

Who just happened to get their financial support from Moscow
just like Cuba. You talk as though you know something about
event but you demonstrate knowing nothing.

MJ> Third thing: Nicaragua is a tiny little country with a
MJ> population about the size of Chicago, IL, and with about as
MJ> much of a chance of being a genuine threat to anyone as
MJ> Peoria, IL.

Their target at the time was El Salvador, an even smaller
country. But you know that.

MJ> The fact that you would justify brutality and murder
MJ> against a country for no other reason that to salute the
MJ> anticommunist flag: this means that you’re probably the
MJ> kind of ideologue I wouldn’t even enjoy having a
MJ> conversation with…so if you want to argue, pick someone
MJ> else. If your response to this is anything like the tone of
MJ> your first message, I won’t bother responding again.

Please do not. I read enough ignorance every day that I do
not need any personally addressed to me.

MJ> In terms of the question about the constitution:

MJ> If I remember right, only Congress has the power to declare
MJ> war. Reagan and his bunch were running an illegal war and
MJ> undeclared war against Nicaragua, which included such

They did not declare war therefore they did not violated the
Constitution. I would hope that is clear enough for you. If you
are still in doubt tell me when the Korean war was declared or
the Civil War for that matter if you think declaration means a
damn thing regarding war.

MJ> In fact, before the Congress cut off funds for arms to the
MJ> contras, Nicaragua took the US to the World Court on just
MJ> such a topic: the fact of waging an illegal war against a

You need to read up on the real allegation as there is no
such thing as a legal or illegal war as there are no laws
governing war and no one to enforce them. I am irritated an
bored by people who toss out terms that have no meaning
whatsoever save to people who are equally ignorant.

MJ> fact after the Congress, after feeling the heat from the
MJ> American people who were finding the war more and more
MJ> repugnant, passed legislation to stop US funding and
MJ> support of that war.

And there were no US funds sent directly to the Contras so
there was no law broken. And breaking a law has nothing to do
with violating the Constitution either.

MJ> In many places in the world, one would call that
MJ> “terrorism,” or “international outlaws,” not “acceptable
MJ> objectives.”

Again, you throw around meaningless terms.

* RM 1.2 01261 * If the gods do not listen, what good are they?
— FidoPCB v1.5 beta-‘g’
* Origin: Florida Mail Hub * REC18 * 813-321-0734 (1:3603/20)


From: Matt Giwer Area: Controv – (1435)
To: All 27 Feb 94 03:01:10

*********** Original To: ALL
* DUPE * posted: On: MERCOPUS
*********** Conf: 1412 – Z_Main_Flame

********** Original From: BOB CLARK
* STUFF * Date/Number: 02/25/94 – 0000669
********** On: GUNTALK – 0002 – MEMBER

DN>BC> At any rate, on February 24, 1994 from 12:00 to 15:00 Pacific at
>BC>570 AM KVI (Seattle) a spokesperson from HCI will be on the radio to
>BC>defend HCI against this “confidential memo.”

DN>Bob —

DN>PLEASE let us know how this went! I’m sure that everyone would like to

Since I was asked:

At one o’clock KVI 570 AM (Seattle) presented HCI to Western
Washington. I guess the background is the “alleged confidential memo”
appeared on the Internet sometime yesterday. KVI, always on the prowl,
received copies of the “alleged confidential memo” from two sources and
broke the story. Today’s show was designed to allow HCI a forum to
refute/rebut the contents of the “alleged confidential memo.”
HCI was given about 40 minutes of air time. The questioning went like
KVI: HCI totally disavows this memo?
HCI: Correct.
KVI: Does HCI want to ban the private ownership of handguns?
HCI: The legislation we want doesn’t preclude ownership; we
endorse restrictions. We want to reduce gun violence through common
sense legislation.
KVI: What about the 2nd Amendment?
HCI: No right is absolute. (Spokesperson then read 2A up to the
KVI: Well then, if the Founders meant RKBA for the Militia, why
didn’t they continue using the term Militia instead of People?
HCI: < Quick side step. >
KVI: What do you think of this “alleged confidential memo?”
HCI: <Said with moral indignation and near outrage> “Silly.”
“Outlandish fantasy.” This memo is causing HCI to devote time to
defending itself rather than saving lives.
KVI: I won’t believe this memo isn’t from your organization until
you sue the originators of the hoax for defamation.
HCI: Well, we can’t find out who originated it because it came
from the Internet. But it’s a hoax.
KVI: You support raising fees for FFLs?
HCI: Yes. Everyone should pay the same rate no matter whether you
are a “mom ‘n’ pop” gun seller or a million dollar retail chain. No
guns should be sold outside of a retail establishment. Paying a $1,000
fee is the cost of doing business.

After that exchange, KVI had Alan Gottlieb (my apologies if I bungled
the name) of the 2nd Amendment Foundation on the air for about 15
minutes. Mr. Gottlieb did a pretty good job of making HCI sound like
advocates of “hidden agendas.” Mr. Gottlieb illustrated his point by
saying something like:

HCI always sounds reasonable in public. But their court documents
ALWAYS argue there is no right to private ownership of any
firearms. They always act one way publicly and another in Court.

Finally, KVI ended the hour with a rant against development of
public policy via manipulative tactics. The thrust of the rant was if
a group is going to argue something, put the idea(s) before the American
people and DEBATE the MERITS of the idea(s).

A pretty good hour: HCI in a fluster; its sincerity and integrity in
question — ’bout time the shoe was on the other foot ….

* RM 1.2 01261 * Shoot a gun grabber today!
— FidoPCB v1.5 beta-‘g’
* Origin: Florida Mail Hub * REC18 * 813-321-0734 (1:3603/20)