--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBY00012 Date: 07/27/96 From: L P Time: 09:49am \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Libertarian Or Republi(3) --==<<< Continued from previous message >>>==-- very small risk. There were people who went before us, the Colonists, the Revolutionaries, who risked their lives for an opportunity for Liberty. They didn't have a guarantee of winning. The odds are they could have lost, or would have lost. They were up against the best army in the world. But they risked their lives because they had an opportunity. They had a chance for Liberty. What I'm asking you to do is to invest your vote in a chance for Liberty. And that's the way you win. You don't win by helping anybody who betrays the Second Amendment. You don't win by helping anybody who does not take the Constitution seriously. You only win by fighting for your principles. You only win by fighting for Liberty. You cannot win by telling the Republicans, "Yes, you can betray me, but I will vote for you anyway." Because the day will come when the Republicans will know, as they are finding out, that they don't have to take your vote seriously. When Bob Dole killed the legislation to overturn the ban on assault weapons, he did that because he was making a political judgment. His political judgment was that he could betray you, he could sell out the Constitution, he could sell out the Second Amendment, and you would still walk into that voting booth and vote for him. And as long as you walk into the voting booth and you vote Republican, then the Republicans will know that they can betray you and get your vote anyway. If you want Liberty, then you must vote for it. And you must make the Republicans and the Democrats understand that you are serious about Liberty. You won't get it this election. You won't get it next election. It's going to take about 10 years. So what? This is a long battle. What you need to do is you need to look at the long run, and you need to say, "I'm in a war, not a battle. I'm here for Liberty, I'm here for freedom, not for less gun control." And there's one thing you can be sure of. If you vote for the Republicans, you will probably get less gun control than the Democrats will give you. But one thing you can also be sure of is if you vote for Liberty, if you vote for freedom, in the long run, you can win. Thank you very much. (Applause) Schulman: What message will it send to the media, to the Democrats, to the Republicans, and to the Libertarian Party, if in January of 1997, it is William Blythe Jefferson Clinton raising his hand to be sworn in for another four years? I assure you, it will not be a message to the Republican Party that our concerns are important. What the message will be to them is the American people don't care about this issue, that's why they reelected Clinton. If we are to have any power at all, we must have a realistic assessment of what our possibilities are. I do not believe that a Libertarian Party, which for 25 years has failed to make an impact in a presidential election, can gain a foothold in politics running in a presidential election. The Libertarian Party, if it is going to become a third party, has to do so at the grassroots level, winning mayorships, winning congressional seats, winning governorships, and winning a senate race. And then, after they have a handful of congresspersons and a senator or two and maybe a mayor of a few cities and maybe a governorship, then they'll have a candidate to be taken seriously for president. And when they reach that level, I would be out there supporting them to the best of my ability because Joe is right, they are the future of Liberty in this country. However, if they cannot get to that point, there is an alternative strategy, and that is a Libertarian caucus within the Republican Party itself. Basically, you do the same thing that the Libertarian Party is, except you organize within the Republican Party and you find Libertarian candidates to run on the Republican ticket until you have a Libertarian Republican caucus in Congress. At that point, you've got a power base to start pushing the Liberty agenda. But the American system of government as it is right now does not favor a third party gaining political power. It is not designed to do that; it cannot do that, and by supporting a third party, you are not advancing Liberty, you are simply advancing a spoiler who will make sure that the worst of the two bad parties remains in power. What the Libertarian vote does, if the Libertarians gain --==<<< Continued next message >>>==-- --- RBBSMail/386 v1.0 * Origin: Who's Askin'? Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK (1:17/75.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBY00013 Date: 07/27/96 From: L P Time: 09:49am \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Libertarian Or Republi(4) --==<<< Continued from previous message >>>==-- significant victories, is assure that the more statist, the more anti- Liberty of the two parties will always remain in power. It divides us. It is divide and conquer. And we must unite in order to be victorious. I am not happy that we do not have a great Libertarian candidate to vote for this time around. God knows, I wish we had Ronald Reagan to vote for again. It would be great if we had somebody at least of his stature, and he wasn't perfect. We don't have that choice. Our choice right now is between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party and its two standard bearers who will be the leadership of that party. But let me give you a danger that is crucial here. If William Blythe Jefferson Clinton wins the presidency again, there is the possibility that our gains in 1994 will be lost. We will lose the Congress as well. This is a risk I do not think we can tolerate. We need to send the following message to the Republicans loudly: Number one, you can't win without us, so you better start taking us seriously, and you better do it now. So I argue that we must support Dole. And two: We must get on his case and put his feet to the fire and make sure he takes us seriously. (Applause) Zychik: What Neil is suggesting to you is that you vote for the lesser of two evils. So let's talk about voting for the lesser of two evils, and let's see exactly where that takes you. History is showing it to you. I want to talk to you about Adolf Hitler. Adolf Hitler did not overthrow the German government violently. Adolf Hitler won the election. How did he win? He didn't win on his anti-Semitism. Most of the Jews in Germany didn't even take his anti-Semitism seriously. He won because compared to the communists, he was the lesser of two evils. And people went into the booths and they voted for Adolf Hitler to keep the communists out. And you know what? They got what they voted for. They got the lesser of two evils, because if you compare the evil of communism to the evil of Hitler's Germany, it's very clear that the evil of communism is far worse than the evil of Hitler's Germany. Ladies and gentlemen, if you continue to walk into a voting booth and you vote for the lesser of two evils, the day will come when you will be confronted with an equivalent of an Adolf Hitler and the equivalent of a Joseph Stalin. And Bill Clinton is not too far from Stalin. The fact of the matter is this: If you want Liberty, then walk into a voting booth and vote for it. Don't let the Republicans intimidate you into getting you to give them your vote even though they betray you. Fact: Legislation was passed in the House of Representatives to overturn the ridiculous ban on assault weapons. Fact: Bob Dole killed that legislation. Fact: Bob Dole killed that legislation because he made a political evaluation. He bet. His bet was that he could betray you and get your vote anyway. And as Neil said, you must show the Republicans that they cannot betray you, that they cannot take you for granted. Well, Ha! Ha! Ha! How are you going to show the Republicans that they can't take you for granted if every year you walk into the voting booth and vote for them anyway? If you want to show the Republicans that they can't take you for granted, then vote Libertarian. Vote for the party that will not take you for granted. Vote for the party that is pro-Liberty. Don't wait. Don't wait until they have a governor and two senators and a mayor. Vote for them now and help them get that governor, help them get that senator, help get those mayors. Invest in your Liberty. It's really as simple as that. A vote today is a vote for Liberty. A vote next year is a vote for Liberty. And every time you vote for Liberty, you pass the word, and you tell other people and you encourage them to vote for Liberty. And that is how you win a war. You win a war politically with a small margin of voters, that is all you need. Bill Clinton won by 3%. If 4% of the pro-gunners had went and voted for--I'm sorry, if 4% of the vote was pro-gun and had voted for the Libertarians, you can bet that both the Democrats and the Republicans would be singing a pro-gun song to get your vote. This is nothing more than welfare. What the Democrats and Republicans are asking you for is something for nothing. They want to give you nothing and get something in return. They want to give you less gun control than the next guy. That is not Liberty. That is not something. Something is an end to all gun control --==<<< Continued next message >>>==-- --- RBBSMail/386 v1.0 * Origin: Who's Askin'? Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK (1:17/75.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBY00014 Date: 07/27/96 From: L P Time: 09:49am \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Libertarian Or Republi(5) --==<<< Continued from previous message >>>==-- laws. Something is an end to all registration. Something is an ending, an overturning, an abolishing of the 1968 Gun Control Act. It's calling for an end, an immediate dissolving of the BATF. That's where you stand. That's where the Libertarians stand. And now it takes an act of courage on your part to simply walk into a voting booth and risk your vote. Risk your vote for Liberty. It is far wiser to risk your vote for Liberty than to throw it away for less gun control than the Democrats are offering you. That is no deal. That is no wonderful situation for you. That doesn't secure your right to keep and bear arms. All it does is, it secures the Republicans in their decision to nominate somebody like Bob Dole, who's nothing more than a gun grabber in the Republican party. That is all he is. And it tells the Republicans that they can continue to nominate gun grabbers and get your vote anyway. If you want Liberty, hey--vote for it. Thank you very much. (Applause) Joe Zychik Editor, The Zychik Chronicle http://www.pacificnet.net/~jzychik To receive the ZC free, contact: jzychik@pacificnet.net "All rights are individual." --- Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 * Origin: Who's Askin'? Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK (1:17/75.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBY00015 Date: 07/27/96 From: L P Time: 10:29am \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Norml News 07/25/96 (1) NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE REFORM OF MARIJUANA LAWS 1001 CONNECTICUT AVENUE NW SUITE 1010 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 T 202-483-5500 * F 202-483-0057 E-MAIL NATLNORML@AOL.COM Internet http://www.norml.org/ ... a weekly service for the media on news items related to Marijuana Prohibition. July 25, 1996 Conservative California Readership Strongly Supports Medical Marijuana Initiative July 22, 1996, Sacramento, CA: A California ballot initiative (Proposition 215) that would permit patients who have the approval of a licensed physician to use marijuana for medical purposes received a strong vote of confidence from the results of a recent poll conducted by the Orange County Register. Responding to the question: "Do you think marijuana should be legalized for medicinal use?" readers answered "yes" by nearly a three to one margin. In all, over 1,100 Californians participated in the poll, with 73 percent responding that they approved of the use of medical marijuana. "The results of the Orange County Register poll are quite significant because of the widely acknowledged conservative political slant of the paper's readership," announced NORML Deputy Director Allen St. Pierre. "These findings, coupled with the results of similar polls conducted both in California and nationally, demonstrate that there is ample support for the legalization of medical marijuana among both political conservatives and the general public." The results of the Orange County Register poll are the latest in a series of polls indicating strong support for medical marijuana. A 1995 survey conducted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) demonstrated that 83 percent of the American public agreed that patients who find marijuana an effective therapeutic agent should be able to use it legally. In addition, six California polls -- including one conducted by the Binder Research Group -- have shown that a strong majority of Californians support medical marijuana. For more information please contact either Dave Fratello of Californians for Medical Rights @ (310) 394-2952 or Allen St. Pierre of NORML @ (202) 483-5500. Welfare Reform Bill Amended To Deny Convicted Drug Users Federal Benefits July 22, 1996, Washington, D.C.: An amendment introduced by Senator Phil Gramm (R-Texas) that would deny federal assistance-based benefits to those individuals convicted of drug offenses -- including marijuana misdemeanors -- has been overwhelmingly approved by the Senate. The amendment is part of an overall welfare reform package (S. 1956) that is currently in conference committee and is expected to be sent to the president's desk shortly. It is not yet known if Clinton will sign the bill. The amendment proposed by Gramm would deny for five years all "means-tested" federal benefits, including programs such as welfare, Medicaid, food stamps, and student loans, to any individual who is found guilty of a minor drug offense. Those found guilty of drug felonies would be ineligible for life. "If we're serious about our [anti-]drug laws, we ought not to give people welfare benefits who are violating the nation's drug laws," said Gramm. Gramm's amendment struck a chord with some congressmen, including Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) who voiced strong opposition to the measure. "Under this amendment, if you are a murderer, a rapist, or a robber, you can get federal funds; but if you are convicted even for possession of marijuana, you cannot," he said. "[This amendment] would undermine the whole notion of providing drug treatment as an alternative sentence to a first-time drug offender if the individual requires federal assistance to obtain the treatment. ... It is overly broad and is strongly opposed by [both] the [Conference of] Mayors and the National League of Cities." "Over 10 million individuals have been arrested on marijuana-related charges since 1965 with nearly one-half million arrested in 1994 alone," stated NORML Deputy Director Allen St. Pierre. "This amendment could potentially make millions of otherwise law abiding Americans ineligible for federal benefits and is yet one more example of how our nation's alleged 'War on Drugs' is nothing more than a war on marijuana smokers." The amendment passed by a 75 to 25 vote. For more information, please contact Allen St. Pierre of NORML @ (202) 483-5500. Thousands Expected To Gather On Washington State Capitol In Support Of Marijuana Legalization --==<<< Continued next message >>>==-- --- RBBSMail/386 v1.0 * Origin: Who's Askin'? Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK (1:17/75.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBY00016 Date: 07/27/96 From: L P Time: 10:29am \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Norml News 07/25/96 (2) --==<<< Continued from previous message >>>==-- July 1996, Olympia, WA: Washington state marijuana law reform proponents are anticipating a crowd of thousands to gather on the front steps of the Washington state capitol for the first ever Hemp Education Day on August 5. In past years, marijuana reform events such as the Seattle Hempfest have drawn crowds in excess of 20,000 people. Organizers of the upcoming festival are hoping to harness the popularity of past gatherings and transform the Washington hemp reform movement into a strong political force. "We are aware that in the current political climate, you can't even discuss [the] issue [of marijuana law reform] publicly or privately without being singled out in the media as ... 'pro-drug,'" stated event organizer Gideon Israel. "We must use this opportunity to open up a forum for truth and free expression on this matter. ... Hemp Education Day will provide a soapbox for the people of Washington state, lawmakers, and other citizens to educate and be educated [about] marijuana." Activists scheduled to speak at the rally include NORML Legal Committee member Jeffrey Steinborn, Esq., Hemp BC owner Marc Emery, author Jack Herer, Don Wirtshafter of the Ohio Hempery, medical marijuana patient Ralph Seeley, and others. The gathering is planned to take place from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. For more information on Hemp Education Day, please call (360) 459-9107. Anti-Drug Ad Called Homophobic By Gay Watchdog Group July 1996, New York, NY: A recent public service announcement produced by the Partnership for a Drug Free America (PDFA) has been branded homophobic by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), a media watchdog organization based in New York City. The ad, scheduled to air nationwide this month, depicts a teenager named David whose life plummets downhill because of an addiction to heroin. The ad concludes with the narrator saying, "And now I have sex with men for money, to support my habit. ... I wish I didn't have to be like this." According to GLAAD, the ad suggests that drug use ultimately leads males to engage in homosexual sex and portrays homosexuality as a social ill more severe than drug use. "The spot sends a misguided message to America's young people and specifically to lesbian and gay youth," stated GLAAD managing director William Waybourn. "The ad has the potential to exacerbate higher-than-average risks gay and lesbian youths face for substance abuse and suicide by implying that being gay is worse than being addicted to heroin." Although GLAAD has voiced their objections about the PSA to the Partnership, PDFA President Richard Bonette responded that he will not pull the ad. "While I appreciate your concerns, I simply disagree with your perspective and, therefore, cannot honor your request to remove 'David' from distribution," said Bonette. -END- MORE THAN 10 MILLION MARIJUANA ARRESTS SINCE 1965 ... ANOTHER EVERY 65 SECONDS! Reporters and Researchers are welcome at the world's largest on-line library of drug policy material at: http://www.druglibrary.org/ --- Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 * Origin: Who's Askin'? Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK (1:17/75.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBY00017 Date: 07/28/96 From: PHIL PATTENGALE Time: 05:01pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Reference material search Hello all.... I can't find on my HD some files I'm almost certain were posted here. I'm looking for a reference that compares toxicity levels of all the major drugs (caffiene, alcohol, nicotine, pot, lsd, etc). Also, I'm looking for a document that details debate logic. If you have either the original files or copies of those posts, please either re-post them here, or let me know where I can obtain the "original" copies via fido FREQ or the Internet. Many thanks! Phil --- GOMail v2.0 [94-0279] * Origin: The Graphics Shop - Graphics & DOOM (v.34) (1:2201/23) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBZ00000 Date: 07/28/96 From: BOB COLLINS Time: 11:54pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: smoke it choke it. --- WWIVGate 1.12c * Origin: Dragon's Dreams [619-562-3928] (1:202/1318) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBZ00001 Date: 07/28/96 From: JANET AU-YEUNG Time: 06:46pm \/To: CHRIS TSANG (Read 1 times) Subj: Hey.. Hey Bud... Okie .. i hate it when someone calls in while i'm on here.. sosooo now i have to write ya.. but i'm a day later.... Anyways i just realized that You come from temp... sooooo you know that teacher.. MR. Gill.. he's a awsome teacher.. he's like the best teacher i have ever had in math... Well.. that's cool.. hey did you get him last year whenn you went to summer school... Hey.. When i come to visit you one day at the theater.. CAn i borrow your annual.. Oh pretty please .. i lend you mine tooo okie... PROMISE i won't do anything bad to it.. i just want to see you annual cause i need some ideas for my schools annual since i'm EDITOR... and if it sux.. i get into trouble with the people in the school.. Anyways.. HEy i forgot about your last letter.. tell me what you want me to help you with and i help.. okie.. well gota gooo byebye --- FMail 1.0g * Origin: WOWZERS!, Surrey BC, 604-581-8921 (1:153/9130) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBZ00002 Date: 07/29/96 From: PHIL PATTENGALE Time: 01:11pm \/To: PAUL ANDREW MITCHELL (Read 1 times) Subj: Press Release -> Anyone having this info please post it here? Do you have Internet Access? Phil --- GOMail v2.0 [94-0279] * Origin: The Graphics Shop - Graphics & DOOM (v.34) (1:2201/23) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: DBZ00003 Date: 07/28/96 From: GUY GEORGE Time: 07:31pm \/To: MIKE PHILLIPS (Read 1 times) Subj: Seizures increase -=> Quoting Mike Phillips to All <=- [Many interesting paradoxes deleted for brevity...] MP> In order to seize property, the government not only doesn't need to MP> establish guilt, but also doesn't need any facts. As Mr. Levy states, MP> "Hearsay, circumstantial evidence, and anything more than a Supreme MP> Court not only turned a blind eye to injustice, but also to the MP> corrupt influence of asset seizures on police and prosecutors. Under MP> this ruling, a person can prevail against a government prosecutor in a MP> criminal trial, only to have the prosecutor seize the person's MP> property in a "civil forfeiture." [....] Great articles, Mike! To Everyone: Compare what "IS" to what "SHOULD BE":