Heads Up

A Weekly edition of News from around our country

February 28, 1997 #24

by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net

----------------------------------------------------------

Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html

----------------------------------------------------------

SOME TRUTH FROM D.C.

We have said repeatedly that the next

great American leader -- the next Washington, Jefferson,

Madison or Franklin -- will probably not come from our

current crop of politicians. The group we have running

the country today is more interested in the control of

the people than the freedom of the people, more

interested in keeping their over-paid positions secure

than bothering to obey the Constitution.

Oh sure, there are some lights that shine

a little brighter than others in Washington. Senator

Fred Thompson comes to mind. But, there are none

championing the Constitution. Nor do we see any of them

showing an interest in reinstituting those unalienable

rights once guaranteed the American citizen by our

Constitution.

But folks, sometimes even the cynic on this

end can be pleasantly surprised.

In the mix, our very busy fax and e-mail

line received a message from Congress. The message said

to call 1 (888) 322-1414 for a "toll free Legislative

Update." So, OK, why not? It was free, and who knows,

it might be about something suitable for "Heads Up."

Then, out of that dark maze of overpowering

inequity in the Capitol Building came a message shining

as bright as an over-lit one-hundred foot tall billboard

at midnight. This, folks, was definitely not the type of

message one normally gets from Congress! Rather, it was

closer to the type of message we *dream* of hearing from

Congress, but have not in our lifetimes.

The recorded message was misnamed "The

Coming Police State." And the word "misnamed" is used

here only because the message did a very excellent job of

outlining the basics of the police state that we already

have.

This was Texas Representative Ron Paul

telling it like it is. There was no equivocation, no

excuses, and no political obfuscation. Just the facts of

the matter are given. Better yet, the speech was first

given on the floor of the House of Representatives, and

so is part of the official record.

Paul's message will be available until

Monday morning. Take the minute or two to listen. It

is well worth the time.

He will have recorded messages available

24 hours a day and, according to the tape, they will

change every Monday morning.

THEY LOST THEIR BOMB

It's not often one misplaces a bomb.

But they did.

It was just a little bomb, though. Only five pounds

of explosives -- hidden in one of those kitchen style

plastic containers.

They describe their lost bomb as "a blue

top and a semiopaque white bottom, about 8 inches wide

and 12 to 18 inches long." They will not say exactly

what type of explosives were in the container. But on

this end we're betting it was C-4.

Oh. And folks, they would really like to get

it back. . . .

So, if any of you who flew out of, or

through, Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee last

week ended up with an extra little something in your

baggage . . . well, there are some Sheriffs' deputies and

a bomb-sniffing dog-in-training that would appreciate a

call.

Apparently, none of them are very well

trained yet. They need the bomb returned so they can

loose it again, and practice finding it -- hopefully,

before a passenger leaves with it again.

And just as an aside to this story: This

is the second time they "lost" their bomb at that

airport. Last time, the FAA report reads, they put a

half-pound of C-4 in a passenger's bag for the dog to

find and "forgot" to remove it. Evidently, the passenger

took it home.

An FAA official said that he did not know

precisely how many times trainers had lost explosives at

airports or on planes but that it was "extremely rare."

Yeah, sure! It is extremely rare that such screw-ups get

reported is probably a lot closer to the truth.

Now, we don't want to get on a rant here . . .

But geezzz! Some underpaid county mounty and his

undertrained bomb sniffing Beagle protecting us against

terrorists that we have never had by bringing their own

bombs to commercial aircraft? This is stupidity

personified!

That's like training our Great Dane to

find lost kids in the woods out back by first loosing a

kid a week back there for him to try to find. Or maybe

we could teach him to be a good guard dog by hiring some

prowlers for him to attack?

But, hey, these people are "protecting" us,

folks.

Sure they are. By placing explosives in

our luggage.

JOHN DOE TIMES

As the court trials loom closer, interest

is picking up in the events leading up to the bombing of

the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. An excellent

background account -- and running commentary -- regarding

the bombing can be found on the Internet in a publication

called the "John Doe Times."

The "John Doe Times," and a wealth of

other information, can be reached though Dave Feustel's

Website at: http://feustel.mixi.net/ Or, the index for

the "John Doe Times" can be addressed directly at:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6784/jdtindex.htm

The text is well written and easy to read.

However, there is a lot of interesting material there, so

plan on staying a while.

WORKING MEN

Those darn U-Hall trucks keep popping up

all over the country. So, when the FBI released an all

points bomb alert for two or more guys in a U-Hall, they

were flooded with calls.

It was a "terrorist threat advisory," the

feds said. They had reports about two men seen in a

small Texas town with a U-Haul rental truck hauling

something. Uh huh, sounds criminal to us on this end too.

Then -- gasp -- the men stopped to get

30 gallons of diesel fuel. Yup, for sure they must be

"terrorists." Hell, there couldn't be any other use for

diesel fuel out there in the country now, could there?

Nope. They must be up to no good.

So, whatever the men were hauling in the

back of the truck suddenly got upgraded to "thousands of

pounds of fertilizer." Hence, the all points bulletin

for the truck. Well, heck, that could be enough material

to produce a bomb similar to the one that exploded in

Oklahoma City. Yup, must be terrorists.

The U-Hall officials said they were

cooperating with the FBI. But, as they verified, there

were thousands of trucks like that on the road, and there

is no telling where that particular truck might be.

Then CNN picked up the story, and the

FBI had to back down a notch or two. After all, all it

takes is one cop with a gun playing hero to really ruin

someone's day, and thousands of people fit this profile.

Yet another FBI advisory spiced up the

story by saying the truck might be carrying 4,500 pounds

of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and 30 gallons of diesel

fuel. So, news accounts reported that the prosecutors in

the Oklahoma City case say that Timothy McVeigh used

that combination of material to fashion the bomb that

destroyed the federal building.

The FBI advisory asked people with any

information to call a toll-free number (888) 324-9800,

and it urged the men who had been spotted to call the FBI

or the local police "at once because of the possibility

that the materials in the truck were meant only for

innocent use."

Hey! They thought of that, too. Wow,

there may be some intelligent life in Washington after

all. . . . "Heads Up" would really like to know exactly

how they got that "4,500 pounds of ammonium nitrate"

rumor out there, though. That was, to say the least,

rather irresponsible on the part of federal agents.

Turns out, the two men live in the area

of Haltom City, outside Fort Worth, said Les Martz, ATF

agent in charge of the Dallas division. Agents found the

two men by canvassing U-Haul rental outlets and places

throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth area where fertilizer is

sold. The men "were surprised and they were

cooperative," an FBI spokeswoman said.

Bet on it! All those FBI and ATF guns

would get anyone's attention.

They were hauling "baking powder for use

as an antiseptic in scrubbing floors and tiles," a

federal law enforcement official in Washington said on

condition of anonymity.

Now, wait. . . Hold on just a darn minute

here! What if they really were hauling ammonium nitrate

fertilizer in that truck? So what! This is the time of

year we country folk start purchasing stuff like that.

And the men were, by the way, in a rural area.

And what would be wrong with bringing

home a few gallons of diesel fuel too? It costs more to

purchase it that way, but that's their business, not the

FBI's.

Are all of us to be suspects when we buy

fertilizer nowadays? If so, watch for another alert

sometime next week -- this time on a blue Plymouth

Minivan -- because it's time to get busy here, too. And,

yup, we're getting some ammonium nitrate fertilizer.

GOVERNMENT FOR SALE

If you pay them enough money, they'll

make the law you want. That's how it is in Washington

these days.

Remember the old song "King of the Road?"

Well, instead of "trailer for sale or rent, rooms to let

fifty cents," it is now 'government for sale or rent, pay

Congress or the president.' The problem is that all this

pay'en is going on, but it is not doing us citizens the

slightest bit of good. In fact, it usually works directly

against our best interest.

Back in "Heads Up" #19 we exposed a little

of how Congress accepts their legal pay-offs to

legislate. We don't need to go over that again except to

say that they're all still at it. The special interest

money flows freely up on Capital Hill. They're still

scooping in the money with both hands, and evidently,

legislating accordingly.

And so is the Slickster on the other end of

Pennsylvania Ave. Old Slick Willie seems to be putting

everyone in Congress to shame with his "fund raising"

abilities. He raised $10,210,840, that we know about,

just from renting out one bedroom. Then, he picked up

another $27-million and change by having coffee with a

few chosen folks from time to time. Hey, $38-million

without even leaving home. What a deal!

There seems to be another "first" in this

administration, too. There are currently 25 FBI agents

working on an espionage case tied to the White House.

And, the Clinton, Clinton & Gore team is dead center in

the middle of it all.

A while back, the National Security Agency

intercepted a communication between the communist China

government and its embassy in Washington. The

communication concerned how, and how much, money will

be "contributed" -- stealthy, or course -- to the Clinton

campaign and the Democratic National Committee by the

Government of China.

There are a few Members of Congress quite

interested in that communication. Hopefully, the FBI is

too. On one hand, it seems very doubtful that Janet Reno

would allow the Justice Department to do much about it.

But on the other hand, a grand jury has already started

hearing testimony concerning the administration's fund

raising fraud.

So, what was the quid pro quo on this?

What did China buy? Most Favored Nation status, for

one. Better trade relations -- relaxed regulations --

for another. We suddenly quit selling arms to Taiwan.

And, we haven't said anything about all this oppression

looming over the heads of the people in Hong Kong,

either. Oh, and they now get access to a lot of our new

technology so their missiles and military aircraft are

more accurate.

Special interest money talks in

Washington. Meanwhile, our individual freedoms get

sacrificed in favor of better population control.

ANOTHER DUMMY

This week, a federal mail facility near

Cheverly, MD received a "suspicious package" addressed

to the FBI. The offending box was 12 inch by 12 inch,

and for some reason it caught the attention of one of the

FBI technicians at the facility. So, they X-rayed it.

Sure enough, it looked like a bomb. So the

technicians left the package on the X-ray machine and

called in the bomb squads from both the FBI and the

Prince George's County Fire Department.

Then, in the midst all the hubbub of the

bomb squads and people running around looking important,

someone got a bright idea: The package had a shipper's

tracking number. And, the shipper said it had come from

the FBI office in San Francisco. So . . . why not call

the sender and ask what was really in there?

Yes, said the San Francisco agent, he had

sent the dummy bomb. And yes, it had also fooled someone

on that end a couple of months ago. But, whoops, the

agent had forgotten to follow procedures and tell

headquarters it was on the way.

TWICE THE SPEED

Here's a deal the "Heads Up" computer can

sure use: Hayes is offering consumers a free modem

upgrade. If you buy one of their Accura or Optima 33.6

and 28.8 kbps by April 15, they will trade you for the

new 56K.

Or, if you're like us and do not now use a

Hayes modem, Hayes will swap your internal or external

modem for a new one for $99 -- regardless of manufacturer

or speed.

However, upgrades to Hayes modems other

than Accuras and Optimas are offered for $89. And darn

if we don't have one of the original external 300's still

sitting on the shelf next to an old Z80 CPM computer.

So, that's what they will be getting in trade from us:

the Hayes original.

They say the new modem will almost

double the speed of downloading information from the

Internet and will enable uplink speeds of up to 45 kbps

over standard telephone lines. We'll see. It sounds

good, anyway.

"Heads Up" is not advertising Hayes, or

any product. This just sounded like a good deal, so we

decided to pass along the information. Their web site

is at: www.hayes.com

THE DECLINE OF LIBERTY

Can the United States Supreme Court

produce an unconstitutional opinion? Technically,

probably not. But they certainly came very close on

February 19, 1997.

In the Maryland v. Jerry Lee Wilson

(95-1268) opinion the Court said that: "a police officer

may as a matter of course order the driver of a lawfully

stopped car to exit his vehicle," and that this authority

"extends to passengers as well."

Maryland State Police stopped a car for

driving nine miles over the limit and not having a

license plate visible. There were three men in the car.

And, during the pursuit, the officer noticed that "the

two passengers turned to look at him several times,

repeatedly ducking below sight level and then

reappearing."

As the officer approached the car on

foot, "the driver alighted and met him halfway. The

driver was trembling and appeared extremely nervous,

but nonetheless produced a valid Connecticut driver's

license." The officer instructed him to return to the

car and retrieve more documents, and he complied.

"During this encounter, the officer noticed that the

front seat passenger, respondent Jerry Lee Wilson, was

sweating and also appeared extremely nervous." While

the driver was sitting in the driver's seat looking for

the documents, the officer ordered Wilson out of the car.

Now, here's where the scenario becomes

unbelievable: "When Wilson exited the car, a quantity

of crack cocaine fell to the ground. Wilson was then

arrested and charged with possession of cocaine with

intent to distribute."

Let's see here: The three were transporting

illegal drugs, got stopped by the cops, and one of the

guys just happened to leave the evidence sitting right

out in the open, on his lap. Get real! Perhaps we are

to believe that the two passengers had been ducking down

earlier so as to get all the illegal drugs up where the

nice officer could find them easily?

Either this guy Wilson is one of the

stupidest twits walking the streets of America or the

police officer illegally searched the car. Our two-bits

would bet it is the latter.

And now for the Court's reasoning for

allowing a police officer to order everyone out of an

already stopped vehicle. Check this logic:

"On the public interest side of the

balance, the same weighty interest in officer safety

is present regardless of whether the occupant of the

stopped car is a driver or passenger. Regrettably,

traffic stops may be dangerous encounters. In 1994

alone, there were 5,762 officer assaults and 11 officers

killed during traffic pursuits and stops. Federal Bureau

of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports: Law Enforcement

Officers Killed and Assaulted 71, 33 (1994). In the case

of passengers, the danger of the officer's standing in

the path of oncoming traffic would not be present except

in the case of a passenger in the left rear seat, but the

fact that there is more than one occupant of the vehicle

increases the possible sources of harm to the officer.

"On the personal liberty side of the

balance, the case for the passengers is in one sense

stronger than that for the driver. There is probable

cause to believe that the driver has committed a minor

vehicular offense, but there is no such reason to stop or

detain the passengers. But as a practical matter, the

passengers are already stopped by virtue of the stop of

the vehicle. The only change in their circumstances

which will result from ordering them out of the car is

that they will be outside of, rather than inside of, the

stopped car. Outside the car, the passengers will be

denied access to any possible weapon that might be

concealed in the interior of the passenger compartment.

It would seem that the possibility of a violent encounter

stems not from the ordinary reaction of a motorist

stopped for a speeding violation, but from the fact that

evidence of a more serious crime might be uncovered

during the stop. And the motivation of a passenger to

employ violence to prevent apprehension of such a crime

is every bit as great as that of the driver."

So, we are all to be suspects now? Because

we exist, because a vehicle is stopped for a minor

traffic violation, all concerned are to be treated as if

they are suspected felons? Whew!

Are the police now expected to be

"proactive," too? If so, the police state is here.

And, as far as the safety of the police

officer is concerned, two very important points were

conveniently forgotten by the Court. First, police

officers are trained to make safe traffic stops. And

second, the officers, by virtue of applying for and

training for that position, put themselves out there on

the street. The officer wanted to do that job.

"In summary," the Court writes "danger

to an officer from a traffic stop is likely to be greater

when there are passengers in addition to the driver in

the stopped car. While there is not the same basis for

ordering the passengers out of the car as there is for

ordering the driver out, the additional intrusion on the

passenger is minimal. We therefore hold that an officer

making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of

the car pending completion of the stop."

This opinion trashes our American ideal

of liberty. We are supposed to be presumed innocent

until proven guilty of a crime. And a traffic violation,

by the way, is not even a crime. It is a civil

infraction. Therefore, no person -- not the driver, nor

any passengers -- should be treated with anything less

than the utmost respect by any and all police officers.

Police officers are hired "to protect and

to serve" the needs of the community. That does not

include ordering the citizens of that community around,

for any reason, except during an emergency.

Hassling passengers of a vehicle because

of a little traffic violation by the driver is analogous

to making all customers in a restaurant stand up against

the wall while the officers eat their donuts. Because,

if citizens are not to be trusted in one situation, such

as on the street, who is to say they can be trusted in

any situation, anywhere?

And folks, it looks like that is exactly

where some in government want all this to lead us: To

immediate, unquestioned obedience to government authority.

Why?

-- End --