The Free Journal/ASCII Edition Volume II, Issue 9 Copyright 1992 The Partnership for a Free America (Individual articles copyright by author) Editor-in-Chief: Sameer Parekh (zane@ddsw1.mcs.com) This is the Free Journal. Submissions are welcome. Some characters have the high bit set. Distribute at will; cite authors. (Or editors if no author is given.) This is not meant to be an electronic newsletter. This is meant to be an example of on-paper underground newspapers to educate the people about freedom and similar issues. _______________________________________________________________________________ "Galileo's telescopic discoveries generated intense interest and controversy. Some critics refused to look through a telescope lest it deceive them." --Michael A. Seeds, Horizons: Exploring the Universe -- NON CREDO -- I do not believe that my neighbors are at the same time competent to select from among them legislators to run my life, and yet incompetent to run their own. I do not expect legislators to behave as if their interests match those of the governed. I do not believe that decision by half of a legislature elected by half of those who vote (who are themselves a fraction of those affected) is the same thing as decision by society at large. I do not believe a choice of rulers is an adequate substitute for a choice of rules. I do not believe that a majority is always right. I do not believe that private people are in general less honest than regulators. I do not believe that freeing people from the consequences of their actions makes them wiser. I do not believe that uncoupling payment from service is the way to get good services. I do not believe that preventing a voluntary transaction can often be beneficial. I do not believe that national security requires hairdressers to be licensed. I object to having each of my neighbors compelled in my name (and their own) to buy what they do not want, even if I would willingly buy. I object to having my neighbors punished in my name (and their own) for selling to people who wish to buy or buying from people who wish to sell. I believe that people can interact to their mutual benefit even if they are not governed by the same law. Anton Sherwood -- June 1992 Anton Sherwood is a Libertarian candidate for the California State Assembly -- "Executive" Orders -- Under the Constitution, the President is vested with the executive power of the government (Article II, Section 1, clause 1), the power to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" (Art. II, Sect. 1, clause 7), and the power to see that the laws are faithfully executed (Art. II, Sect. 3). >From these powers is implied the authority to issue "executive orders." The President must have the authority to issue directives to keep control of the executive branch and to provide detail to legislation. Neither Congress nor the courts have right to prohibit the executive branch from adding or subtracting authority from one government agency to another, for example. However, this presidential power has been abused in the form of executive orders that impinge across legislative concerns which are properly the province of Congress. In 1842, President John Tyler used EO's in 1842 to round up Seminole Indians in Georgia and Florida and force-march them to Arkansas. In 1863, President Lincoln used EO's to suspend various civil rights to curb draft riots during the Civil War. In 1886 President Grover Cleveland used EO's to ship Apache Indians to internment camps in Florida and Alabama. EO's were used against racial minorities during both the First and 2nd World War. EO's may have been the basis for FBI investigations of Arab Americans during the Gulf war. The validity of executive orders (EO's) has been questioned many times dating at least to the Civil War. However, a ruling as to the extent or limit to which they may be used has never been determined by the courts or by Congress. The Federal Register contains the text of EO's issued by the presidents. There is no congressional authorization required, nor is there any review by the judiciary. All EO's are "laws" made by a single person - the President of the United States. Several Presidents have signed the following EOs which can be put into effect by the President without Congressional approval in the event of a national emergency: EO10995 provides for government control of all communications media. EO10997 provides for government control of all power, fuels and minerals. EO10998 provides for government control of all food and farms. EO10999 provides for government control of all transportation, highways, seaports, etc. EO11000 provides for the mobilization of all civilians into work brigades under government supervision. EO11001 provides for government control of all Health, Education and Welfare activities. EO11002 authorizes the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons. EO11003 provides for government control of all airports and aircraft. EO11004 provides for relocation of any populations. EO11005 provides for government control of railroads, waterways and public storage facilities. E011490 combined all of the above Executive Orders and puts all of them into use simultaneously if the President declares a national Emergency. EO12148 created FEMA. This order allows a president to assume dictatorial powers during a presidentially-proclaimed emergency. These powers remain with the president until specifically revoked by Congress. What Is FEMA? The Federal Emergency Management Agency was originally planned as an umbrella administration consisting of the disaster and emergency response arms of nearly a dozen scattered federal agencies. Questions have existed about FEMA's role from its creation. Veteran Washington watchers have long been puzzled by its secretive nature (Much of its budget is "black", i.e. unspecified as to purpose). It has been learned that the Reagan administration, for example, had plans for using FEMA to arrest tens of thousands of "potentially subversive" suspects aliens, critics and dissenters in the wake of an undefined national emergency. During the first Drug Summit in Cartagena, Columbia, FEMA went to work on an emergency program in case the presidential plane were hit by a Stinger missile somewhere over Colombia. FEMA's emergency measures included preparations to round up more than 10,000 Americans "red-lined" in FEMA's computers as "activists, supporters or sympathizers of terrorism in the United States." In August 1990, after Iraq invaded Kuwait, FEMA got ready to deal with "terrorist emergencies" in the US by preparing a computer compilation of "terrorist supporters and sympathizers," adding thousands of names to it and alerting the US Army to set up detention camps to hold potentially massive numbers of detainees. During the two natural disasters (Hurricane Hugo and the California earthquake in 1989) that FEMA responded to, FEMA officials seemed uninterested and negligent in their disaster response. The reason for that appears to be that FEMA's leadership has more concerns than just developing programs that will not merely ensure the continuity of the federal government in any national emergency. FEMA appears to be developing plans to permanently replace the nation's Constitutional system of government with a totally centralized command system. Does FEMA pose a danger to lawful government? You Bet! Is there the possibility of a dictatorial overthrow of the Constitution with the president seizing all power? Absolutely! When could it happen? It's already almost happened at least once: in the early 70's, President Nixon made contingency plans to continue as President in case the 1972 elections were cancelled. How badly do you think President Bush wants to remain in control of the government even if he loses the election in November? What are the chances that Perot, if elected President, would use EO's to ram through government edicts otherwise resisted by Congress? What tendencies might Clinton have to invoke EOs to accomplish his goals? Stay tuned. - CREDITS - Much of this information is taken from a supplement to the May 1992 issue of The SPOTLIGHT. The supplement has the title "In case of Emergency... FEMA vs. Your Constitutional Rights." Copies of this supplement can be obtained by sending $6 for 8 copies to SPOTLIGHT, 300 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. Subscriptions to The SPOTLIGHT ($36 per year [52 issues]) can be obtained by calling 1-800-522-6292. The SPOTLIGHT will be publishing more material on FEMA. I subscribed to the SPOTLIGHT in the early 80Us. I eventually let my subscription lapse in part because SPOTLIGHT had such strong anti-semetic content. Be prepared for this if you decide to subscribe to this publication (which will be publishing more info on FEMA). -- David Feustel -- Drug Lords Fund Republicans -- The four largest contributors to the Republican National Committee are Joseph E. Seagram & Sons (liquor), Brown Foreman Corp. (liquor), R.J.R. Nabisco (tobacco), and Phillip Morris (tobacco), a few of the largest manufacturers of recreational drugs in the country. (Source: Los Angeles Times Sept. 22 1992 p.A5) And just a reminder: Tobacco kills 650 people per 100,000 users, alcohol kills 150 people per 100k users, heroin kills 80, and cocaine kills 4. --Sameer Parekh -- The Agents of Change -- LIBERTARIANS COMPLETE BALLOT PETITIONING NATIONWIDE "The Libertarian Party has finished the petitioning to be on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia," Libertarian Party national chair Mary Gingell proudly announced. The last petition was turned in on Tuesday, 8 September, in Minnesota. A total of 3,186 signatures were submitted at 9 a.m. by the Minnesota Libertarian Party to the Secretary of State's office at the state capitol in St. Paul; 2,000 were needed. In several states, other paperwork remains to be done, or state officials still must confirm that enough signatures were collected. In Alaska, a lawsuit involving a petition deadline was brought up, but it has been overcome. Andre Marrou and H. Ross Perot are the only presidential alternatives to the two-party system on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. "Rep. Marrou and Dr. Lord deserve to be invited to the national television debates. Their names should be included in the questionnaires for the opinion polls," said Gingell. "America's third largest party will field more than 750 candidates for office this year, including more than 140 for Congress. We are the agents of change." Libertarians believe "That government is best which governs least." Rep. Marrou, 53, was elected as a Libertarian in 1984 to the Alaska House of Representatives and served from 1985 to 1987. Dr. Lord, 40, is both a medical doctor and a practicing attorney. -- Why Vote for a Third Party? -- Why vote according to your beliefs? Why vote for someone who can't win? The two major parties are both effectively saying the same things, although with different words. The Republicans want to spend and increase the deficit, while the Democrats want to spend and increase taxes. Both parties wish to increase police activities and put more people in prison. Already the United States has the highest per capita prison population in the world. Some may say that a vote for a third-party who has no chance of winning is throwing away a vote. This is exactly the opposite. In Illinois, Clinton has a solid lead. If you don't want Clinton to win, voting for Bush won't really do much because Clinton is going to win Illinois anyway. If you don't want Bush to win, voting for Clinton won't do much because Clinton will already win Illinois. Thus, a vote for a major party candidate is a wasted vote. A vote for a third party candidate will show the major parties the amount of support which the third party has, and the major parties will start modifying their platforms and policies to appeal to the members of that third party. The Socialist Party in the early 20th century has never won a presidential election, yet today the government has adopted every plank of the early 20th century Socialist Party's platform. (The modern Socialist Party has a different platform than that of the earlier party.) Vote based on what you beleive in, not who will win. That's what a representative democracy is for; the Revolution of 1776 wasn't fought so that we could be led by tyrants who ignore the will of the people. --Sameer Parekh -- Afterthoughts on a Deposition -- When I say I have no memory of writing Naked Lunch, this is of course an exaggeration, and it is to be kept in mind that there are various areas of memory. Junk is a painkiller, it also kills the pain and pleasure implicit in awareness. While the factual memory of an addict may be quite accurate and extensive, his emotional memory may be scanty and, in the case of heavy addiction, approaching effective zero. When I say "the junk problem is the public health problem number one of the world today," I refer not just to the actual ill effects of opiates upon the individual's health (which, in the case of controlled dosage may be minimal), but also to the hysteria that drug use often occasions in populaces who are prepared by the media and narcotics officials for a hysterical reaction. The junk problem, in its present form, began with the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 in the United States. Anti-drug hysteria is now worldwide, and it poses a deadly threat to personal freedoms and due-process protections of the law everywhere. -- William S. Burroughs Author of _Naked Lunch_ October 1991