(The following contains language that may well be considered offensive. This post is an attempt to make clear what was written in past Ron Paul newsletters. More information can be found here)
had monitored the Weavers for 18 months. Yet the y never told the FBI about this. Instead, they suggested that the FBI shoot anyone who carried a weapon outside the house.
That order led to the death of Vicki Weaver. The sniper who shot her, Lon Horiuchi, blew her head off. Horiuchi was trained to hit a quarter-inch target from 200 yards. Yet at the trial he testified that it was “accidental” and he was trying to hit someone else.
The Marshall’s Service also reported to the FBI that the Weavers attacked the government, killed an officer, and had the government “pinned down in a fire fight.” This too was a lie. The Service had told the FBI that Mrs. Weaver was a religious fanatic who intended to kill her children and then herself. But there was no evidence of any of it. In fact, she was a good Christian and a fine wife and mother.
Further, they did not mention that they had shot Weaver’s son in the back the day before the FBI arrived. The FBI did not find out about it until they discovered the boy’s body. The FBI now claims it thought he was shot by someone in the family.
Other troubling aspects of the case include entrapment. The reason the government was interested in the Weavers was because he sawed off a shotgun. But the BATF solicited Weaver to cut it a quarter-inch short and sell the guns to an undercover agent. The government paid Weaver $300 to commit the “crime” they later used to justify their siege.
A U.S. Marshal was shot only after Weaver’s son had been killed. A federal jury acquitted the Weavers for this. The Justice Department is reviewing the case under the auspices of the Office of Professional Responsibility. If the final report follows the tradition of its report on Waco, it will be a whitewash.
“Waco, the Big Lie” videotapes are available for $24.95, including shipping. Send your payment to 18333 Egret Bay, Suite 265, Houston, TX 77058, or phone 800-RON-PAUL.
More than a year ago, the Anti-Defamation League office in San Francisco was caught illegally buying confidential police and other government records in pursuit of groups thought to be anti-Semitic. The uproar caused firings at the ADL, but in court, it got off easy.
The District Attorney in San Francisco agreed to drop the investigation. The Anti-Defamation League agreed to spend $75,000 in San Francisco “combating bigotry.” The ADL did not admit to any wrongdoing. But they promised not to obtain confidential information from any California state or local law enforcement officer in the future.
A woman who represented one of the organizations spied upon was not happy. “Not only is there no admission of guily,” she said “but the ADL are portrayed as good Samaritans waving the flag against bigotry.” Evidence indicated the ADL monitored such groups as the Davidians in Waco, and may have helped instigate the attack.
If you heard a certain behavior of yours caused a deadly disease, wouldn’t you immediately cease and desist? Well, gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense. They have stopped practicing “safe sex.” The rate of AIDS infection is on the increase again. From the gay point of view, the reasons seem quite sensible, as the New York Times explained.
First, these men don’t really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners. These conditions do not make one’s older years the happiest. Second, because sex is the center of their lives, they want it to be as pleasurable as possible, which means unprotected sex. Third, they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick. Put it all together, and you’ve got another wave of AIDS infections, that you, dear taxpayer, will be asked to pay for.
The Council on Foreign Relations, organized in 1921, started publishing its journal Foreign Affairs 70 years ago. Most Americans have never heard of the journal and quite possibly have never heard of the CFR. In the early years the CFR was very secretive and only the newsletter industry along with the John Birch Society ever mentioned it or tried to explain its program and power.
Times have changed. Ever since the 1980s when Ronald Reagan, who was once a critic of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission, hosted the Trilateral Commission in the White House, there has been much more openness and boldness on the part of both of these organizations.
The original pdf of this newsletter can be found at The New Republic.