PJ#105, AMERICA IN PERIL- AN UNDERSTATEMENT!

[wave]

PJ 105

CHAPTER 1

REC #2 HATONN

SAT., JUL. 30, 1994 11:56 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 348

SAT., JUL. 30, 1994

We were interrupted in the middle of writing about Abe Fortas as a "Usurper". I would like to continue this subject for a while today because I really do want to stay with this until we can cover Clark Clifford. He still makes almost daily news and, although he may not be as powerful or brilliant a schemer, he has nonetheless become involved to the point wherein he is PROTECTED by the powers that be until he has been able to skive off billions upon billions of dollars from you-the-people and never get so much as a hand-spank. Perhaps we can finish the subject of Fortas today. Thank you.

THE USURPERS, Part 13

by Medford Evans, Ph.D.

Western Islands (publishers), Belmont, MA 02178, 1968. [Out of publication].

Continuing directly from Part 12:

THE SCHEMERS:
ABE FORTA

Because of the vigor with which they pressed their cause, the moving spirits of the UA (International Juridical Association) did not have to wait to get their men Abe Fortas and Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court in order to achieve most of their objectives in liberating Communists and supporting "workers... organizations... against the forces of the state." M. Stanton Evans in 1965 summarized the record:

The Supreme Court under Earl Warren has been the most powerful instrument of the Establishment program in this [internal security] field. The Warren Court has laid level internal security statutes and regulations in almost every sector of American life. It has struck down state sedition laws (the Nelson case), emasculated the Smith Act (the Yates case), hampered Congressional investigating committees (the Watkins case), forced opening of security files to Communist defendants (Jencks case), upset execu­tive department security procedures (Service case), and hindered efforts to prevent Communist entrance to and exit from the country (Kent case). The Court has erased from the books almost every sanction the United States has against the internal activities of the Communists. (The Liberal Establishment, pp. 192, 193.)

[H: When you see something that indicates a MAKING OF LAW by the Supreme Court the red flags should be flying at full mast. THE SUPREME COURT IS SUPPOSED TO IN­TERPRET LAWS AS TO CONSTITUTIONALITY (YOUR OLD CONSTITUTION) AND NEVER TO "MAKE" LAWS!!!]

The American Bar Association [H: This is not a constitu­tional licensing division, a State licensing division or board--the ABA is a PRIVATE CLUB.] received in the Summer of 1958 a report of a Special Committee on Communist Tactics, Strategy, and Objectives which itemized twenty pro-Communist Supreme Court decisions (the characterization is mine), in­cluding all those mentioned by M. Stanton Evans, except the Service case, which like many another was yet to come when the Bar Association report was prepared. Communism did not win victories in our courts because Communist-fronters Fortas and Marshall finally made it to the high bench. It is the other way around. Fortas and Marshall were able to make it to the Supreme Court because Communism had already won so many victories there!

The IJA could hardly have started at the summit. It had to infiltrate its way upward by degrees. Its success has been phenomenal, surpassing all expectations. When the House Com­mittee on Un-American Activities in 1944 wrote in Appendix IX that "there is not a single important Communist-front organiza­tion which does not have a substantial representation from the personnel of the International Juridical Association," it surely did not contemplate that by 1964 the Supreme Court of the United States would be added to the list.

It was in 1965 that Lyndon Johnson appointed former IJA National Committee member Abe Fortas to the Court. Two years later he added former IJA member Thurgood Marshall. To be sure this was not the first time the Supreme Court had re­ceived a justice who had once belonged to an organization that would be cited as subversive by the Attorney General, for Jus­tice Hugo Black had belonged to the Ku Klux Klan. [H: Isn't TRUE HISTORY interesting? Further, isn't it even MORE interesting to find that the Ku Klux Klan was also started by the British Intelligence Agency who started the Anti-Defamation League--B'nai B'rith? Dear ones--the blacks and the "Jews" are not friendly enemies--they are HATED enemies!]
Abe Fortas' life can be divided into five chapters: youth, Yale, the bureaucracy, private law practice, the Court. At Yale he met William O. Douglas and has followed him in some fash­ion ever since. After graduating from law school Fortas taught at Yale under Douglas, with whom he also worked in the Secu­rities and Exchange Commission in Washington; these academic and bureaucratic activities overlapped. Prior to working part time with the SEC, young Fortas, while still teaching at Yale was, in 1933-1934, Assistant Chief of the Legal Division of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA). Alger Hiss, the convicted Communist, was a lawyer with the AAA in 1934. In­deed, Hiss was "an Assistant General Counsel", as he proudly told the House Committee when Whittaker Chambers first called the turn on him in 1948. Assistant General Counsel sounds pretty good. Lee Pressman, another convicted Communist was one too, at the same time, in the same agency--AAA. Abe Fortas at this time was AAA's Assistant Chief of the Legal Di­vision. These are brilliant men. They wouldn't be likely to miss each other at that level in that agency. It's interesting the way Chambers describes the subterranean political atmosphere of those days. In Witness he writes:

I can imagine no better way to convey the secret power of the Communist Party in the domestic policies of the United States Government from 1933 to 1943, and later, than to list the members of the leading committee of the Ware Group [Chambers has previously gone into the workings of this "under-ground section of the American Communist Party", led by the late Harold Ware] and the posts that mark their progress through the Federal Gov­ernment.
The leading committee of the Ware Group included:

Nathan Witt
August 1933 through February 1934--attorney on the staff of the AAA.

Lee Pressman
1933--Assistant General Counsel of the AAA.

John J. Abt
1933--Attorney for the AAA.

Charles Kramer alias "Krivitsky"
1933--On the staff of the AAA.

(pp. 343-344.)

Every one of them was a Communist. Chambers omits Hiss from the list. Hiss, like the others, was, in 1933-1934, a mem­ber of both the Ware Group of underground Communists and of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration. But his transfer to the staff on the Nye Committee of the Senate, investigating mu­nitions-makers, was in prospect, and Chambers says the Party thought it prudent to separate Hiss from the group. But here in 1933-34, at the outset of the New Deal, are five AAA lawyers: Hiss, Pressman, Witt, Abt, and Kramer, all known to be Com­munists, and the Assistant Chief of the AAA Legal Division is Abe Fortas, who is not known to be a Communist. It is no wonder the justice is scrupulous in avoiding imputations of guilt by association! John Abt is the one Lee Harvey Oswald said he wanted for his lawyer. One wonders what chance Oswald had of retaining him, though it might have been a problem for Abt to turn him down. The problem never came to a head. Jack Ruby saw to that. The reason Oswald wanted Abt is brought out by William Manchester in the opus, p. 247: [H: Don't you find involvement with such as the "Agricultural Adjustment Ad­ministration" a bit interesting--what does Agriculture have to do with anything attached to this mess? Perhaps it is the same as SENDING ARMS TO IRAQ, ETC., THROUGH THE AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT AND CLIF­FORD'S BCCI? MY, my.]

....when the Dallas Bar Association's president drove to the station, Oswald declined his assistance, declaring a preference for John Abt, a New York lawyer celebrated for his defenses of political prisoners.
The parallelism of the above with the words of the IJA preamble is striking.

In 1937, Fortas left Yale and went to Washington to work full-time for the Securities and Exchange Commission. From 1934 to 1937 Fortas had worked part-time for the SEC. In 1936, John Abt worked for the SEC--Special Counsel in the case against Electric Bond and Share. It is a small world. For­tas moved on up to the bureaucracy. From SEC he went to the Public Works Administration and from there to the Department of the Interior. In 1942, when he was thirty-two, Abe Fortas was made Under Secretary of the Interior. Old Ickes (Harold the curmudgeon) liked him. So did Franklin D. Roosevelt. Ickes wrote in his diary:

The President spoke in high terms of Abe Fortas' qual­ities and said that he was thinking of taking him away from me and making him a member of the SEC. I told him Fortas was very important to me.

So that is how Fortas got to be Under Secretary. Nothing wrong with it. Nothing wrong with being in demand in two agencies and getting a promotion.

It was about this time that Abe Fortas and Lyndon Johnson became acquainted. Johnson first went to Congress by special election in 1937, the same year Fortas moved to Washington from New Haven. The young Schemers hit it off together. They palled around, too, with Eliot Janeway and an older lawyer, Edwin Weisl, who was later to become a bitter enemy of Joseph Kennedy. My authority for this is Rowland Evans and Robert Novak. (Lyndon B. Johnson: The Exercise of Power, pp. 8-9, 281.)

Abe Fortas has a way with Presidents. Roosevelt liked him, and Truman liked him, and the latter made him in 1945 an ad­viser to the United States delegation to the organizational meet­ing of the United Nations--administered by Alger Hiss as Secre­tary General! But important as Hiss was, Abe Fortas had al­ready passed him on the rocky road to success. A legal adviser has a kind of status that a strictly administrative office, no mat­ter how high, doesn't have. And Fortas, as Under Secretary of the Interior, would have outranked Hiss protocol-wise, for though State is very much more elegant than Interior, still an Under Secretary is an Under Secretary, and Hiss was several layers down from that level within State.

Fortas' contacts were thoroughly interdepartmental. The following selection from Interlocking Subversion in Government, Part 30: Harry Dexter White Papers, a publication of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, seems worth quoting exten­sively, though a certain amount of repetition is involved:

On January 4, 1945, Abe Fortas, the Under Secretary of the Interior, wrote to Harry D. White congratulating him on his appointment as Assistant Secretary of the Trea­sury. Fortas felt that the promotion was "completely de­served" and would "strengthen the Government consider­ably". White expressed his "deep satisfaction" at the note. Fortas was a member of a dinner group which met on May 11 (year not given) at the Athens Cafe, 804 Ninth Street, NW, Washington, D.C., including Dr. [Isador] Lubin, David Niles, Mr. [Paul H.] Appleby, C.B. Baldwin, Dr. [Mordecai] Ezekiel, Oscar Chapman, L [auchlin] B. Cur­rie and others. [White and Currie have attained fame as identified underground Soviet agents; the others are Left Liberals.]

On a letterhead dated May 18, 1942, of the Interna­tional Juridical Association, 100 Fifth Avenue, New York City, appears the name of Abe Fortas as a member of its national committee. Among his fellow members with records as members of the Communist Party were: Joseph R. Brodsky, Nathan Witt, Leo Gallagher, Lee Pressman, David J. Bentall, Isaac E. Ferguson, and others who have been active in defending Communist cases. The House Committee on Un-American Activities characterized the International Juridical Association as an organization which "actively defended Communists and consistently followed the Communist Party Line" (Report on National Lawyers' Guild, September 21, 1950). It was an official offshoot of the International Labor Defense, cited by the Attorney General as the "legal arm of the Communist Party".

The International Juridical Association was succeeded in the Communist hierarchy by the National Lawyers' Guild. The leadership of the two organizations interlock significantly. In 1937, Fortas was a member of the na­tional executive board of the National Lawyers Guild, which has been cited as subversive by the Attorney Gen­eral. In 1940, a split occurred in the organization and there was a defection of a large group of well-known anti-Communists. To our knowledge Fortas' name has not ap­peared on its letterhead since then.

A letterhead of the American Law Students Association shows Prof. Abe Fortas, of Yale Law School, as a mem­ber of its faculty advisory board [along with Fred Rodell, by the way]. The American Law Students Association was a part of the American Youth Congress which has been cited as subversive by the Attorney General. It was also an affiliate of the United States Peace Committee, a part of the Communist-controlled peace front. Its letter­head shows union label 209, of the Prompt Press, which prints Communist Party literature.

Abe Fortas was a member of the Washington Commit­tee for Democratic Action, which has defended the inter­ests of individual Communists and whose meetings have been addressed by such well-known Communists as Eliza­beth Gurley Flynn, Lee Pressman, and Doxey Wilkerson. It was active in 1940 and 1941 during the period of the Stalin-Hitler Pact. (p. xxiv, Italics added)

Abe Fortas defended the "political prisoner" Owen Lattimore against perjury charges based on his testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1952--charges eventually dropped by the Justice Department because of its repeated fail­ure to draft an indictment in terms casuistically acceptable to Federal Judge Luther Youngdahl. The basic charge of the Sen­ate Committee, that Lattimore was "a conscious, articulate in­strument of the Soviet conspiracy", was never brought to trial, except in the court of public opinion, where those who have read the record find much that is persuasive in support of the accusation. Professional intellectuals on the other hand, who see no need to read the hearings of a Congressional investigative committee, indignantly reject anything that smacks of "McCarthyism".

In the 1950s, and to a lesser extent today, the intelligentsia preferred not to discuss such a proposition as that "X is an in­strument of the Soviet conspiracy," for merely to discuss it is to imply (1) that there IS a Soviet conspiracy, and (2) that it is bad. The intellectuals are not at all sure, and really prefer not to know, about point one, but if by any chance it is true, then they incline to take issue with point two, and in any case certainly do not want to discuss it with the laity. In the interests of open sci­entific discussion, the intellectuals seem to advocate that all fol­lowers of Senator McCarthy ought somehow to be silenced, but if that is not feasible then at least they should be studiously ig­nored. This is what they mean by freedom of speech. With such brokers in the marketplace of ideas, Abe Fortas acquired much credit by defending a tycoon of the intelligentsia like Owen Lattimore.

Two questions one must never ask: (1) what has Owen Lat­timore ever done that makes him such an intellectual? and (2) is he really a Communist? Both these questions are quite beyond the pale. A full professor at one of our great eastern seaboard universities is, like Caesar's wife, simply above suspicion.

Owen Lattimore was first brought to public attention by Sen­ator McCarthy in 1950 as the architect of the Free World's loss of China to the Communists. McCarthy had most of his in­formation from the late Alfred Kohlberg, and the information was straight. Nevertheless, the Senator's use of the importer's knowledge of the Orient-hardened resistance in the fortresses of the Establishment, for Alfred Kohlberg, a patriotic and well-to-do merchant in the Chinese linen trade, who had once himself been a member of the now notorious Institute of Pacific Rela­tions (IPR), had, when he learned the devious pro-Communist line of the IPR, spoken out in intransigent protest. Kohlberg demanded Board action against Communist-line staffers and in other ways made the power structure uncomfortable. In partic­ular, Kohlberg had made an enemy of Arthur H. Dean of the New York law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell, then vice chair­man of IPR. Dean was later to become a leading disarmer of America. Though Kohlberg's information of Lattimore was good, McCarthy was bucking the whole financial and legal Es­tablishment as well as the intelligentsia. The cards were stacked against McCarthy before he began. Abe Fortas was a dealer for the house. He represented Owen Lattimore.

Eleanor Lattimore, Owen's wife--who writes for juveniles--has told of the selection of Fortas as her husband's attorney. Lattimore was in Asia when McCarthy began his expose and, though he promptly came back to the States, events here did not entirely wait for him. "I don't know how I happened to think of Abe Fortas," writes Eleanor Lattimore, author of Chapter II in her husband's pitiful book Ordeal by Slander:

...because everybody in Washington knew more about him than I did. [In 1950 most people had never heard of him.] We had met him once at dinner, and heard him talking about the attack on Dr. Condon [Dr. Edward U. Condon, once described as the "weakest link in our atomic security", a charge which he denied] and the way he thought such attacks should be handled. Owen and I both liked what he said but, not dreaming that my husband would ever be in a similar situation, I had not given Mr. Fortas another thought. So it was instinct rather than cleverness that made me telephone him that night to ask for an appointment.

Instinct or no, however, Eleanor Lattimore still sought advice from friends about going to the attorney. The friends were Joseph Fels Barnes and his wife Elizabeth. "Joe was finally convinced," continues Eleanor Lattimore, "it was going to be tough, and he and Betty approved of my talking with Mr. For­tas. I went alone to see him. Strange to say it was the first time I had ever been in a lawyer's office. But in the sea of unreality in which I had been floundering I knew at once that Abe Fortas was another solid rock, like Joe and Betty." (Ordeal by Slan­der, pp. 36-37.)

Another "solid rock"? What could this mean? Barnes is a world traveler, especially to Russia and Asia. Moreover, Barnes has been identified before a Senate committee by five sworn witnesses as a Communist and as an espionage agent.

Abe Fortas helped Lattimore deny any Communist connec­tion. Not only was Fortas Lattimore's attorney, Fortas helped him write Ordeal by Slander. In the Foreword the professor expresses his gratitude to his lawyer and friend:

The story would have been different, and more tragic, if it had not been for the law firm of Arnold, Fortas and Porter; and particularly for Abe Fortas, who after weeks of exhausting work on the "case" still had wisdom and pa­tience left to give me counsel on the book. (Ordeal by Slander, p. viii.)

Lattimore was American-born but English bred, (early school in Cumberland), had done graduate study at Harvard, been an adviser to Chiang Kai-shek, become an author of prestige books on international relations, and been made director of the Walter Hines Page School of International Relations at Johns Hopkins University.

Lattimore came to owe Fortas a great deal. Whatever the narrowly averted danger from Senator McCarthy's charges in 1950, it was repeated with emphasis in 1952. After extensive hearings before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (which sedulously avoided dependence on either McCarthy or Alfred Kohlberg), Lattimore was indicted by a Federal grand jury on seven counts of perjury in his denials of Communist ac­tivity. Fortas' "wisdom and patience" endured, and Judge Luther Youngdahl was academically judicious. The judge said the terms "promotion of Communism" were not sufficiently de­fined, and so prevented the trial that would have defined them. The Justice Department in the early Summer of 1955 dropped the charges. This was about the same time that President Eisen­hower had his picture taken with Bulganin at Geneva. Neither Lattimore nor Bulganin had ever been cleared of the standing imputations against them, but the world entered an era of ideo­logical detente; everybody said, Aw, the devil with that stuff, McCarthy slowly sickened and died (May 2, 1957), Korea was over, Vietnam and Castro's Cuba were incubating, the first Suez crisis and the Hungarian Revolt was just around the corner. The long sea lanes opening to the humiliation of the U.S. Navy in the Sea of Japan in January 1968, were just ahead; and to the discrediting of the American military and diplomatic presence in Saigon; and to the predictable eviction of American power, and loss of American investment in the Far East. None of these could have been prevented without a real reversal of trends, a reversal that could come only when somebody in the United States learns how to keep a keen lawyer like Abe Fortas from securing the release of a propagandist as mendacious and impu­dent as Owen Lattimore.

Owen Lattimore had to be impudent to survive, for Mc­Carthy almost had him convicted and punished. Yet the power was on Lattimore's side, as Abe Fortas knew; what he did not know at first was whether Lattimore would use it. At the first interview Abe Fortas asked Eleanor Lattimore: "Will he fight"? He would, as events were to show, but even with enough assur­ance to take the case Fortas needed a while to learn how tough Lattimore might be. The lawyer thought the professor might be ethically too scrupulous, which seems to have been a bit naive of the lawyer. Fortas wrote Lattimore, who got the letter in London, on his way back from Afghanistan:

As evidence of your non-Communist attitude, [Drew] Pearson broke at some length the story of the Living Bud­dha and the two other Mongols who are in residence at the [Johns Hopkins] University.... The emphasis in this part of the story will be that these people are refugees from Communism who were brought to this country as a result of your efforts and who are and will be of great assistance in contributing to an understanding of the Far Eastern problem. This may sound somewhat insane to you, but I assure you that we are operating in a situation character­ized by insanity, and a certain amount of drama is not only desirable, but also completely unavoidable. (Ordeal by Slander, pp. 20-21, Italics added.)

The attorney continued to his client: "It may be necessary that you get down in the gutter in which we are now operating as a result of Senator McCarthy's personal attack on you. But if we can place the Senator in the gutter where he belongs..." (Ibid.) It was all right with Lattimore.

Ironically enough, Lattimore had wondered if Fortas would fight. At least he says he did. In his opening chapter Lattimore writes:

Then I thought, or tried to think, about Abe Fortas. I remembered that I had once met him at somebody's house at dinner, and that I had had an impression of him as a man with a keen mind and a warm and human personality. But I found I could not fit him into my thinking as my own lawyer, helping me to defend my own case. Never having been involved in any kind of legal proceedings I had a vague feeling that most lawyers are fixers rather than fighters. This fellow McCarthy was obviously a round­house brawler and a dirty fighter. A fight with him would be a slugging match. I was all set to slug, but was Abe Fortas going to be the kind of lawyer who would try to make me pull my punches? (Ordeal by Slander, p. 15.)

The two were soon to know each other better. Besides ask­ing Eleanor Lattimore if her husband would fight, Abe Fortas had just one other question to put to her about her husband.

"Look here," he said, "I don't want to find that when Owen was a boy in his teens he foolishly joined something that turned out afterward to be Communist." I laughed. "You don't need to worry on that score," I said. (Ordeal by Slander, p. 15.)

Louis Budenz was reportedly going to tell the Tydings Com­mittee that Lattimore was a Communist, and just for a moment Fortas was apparently a bit shaken, suddenly recollecting what he himself had done earlier, in the International Juridical Asso­ciation. He was a professor at Yale when he joined IJA, and the HA connection apparently lasted right down to the time he be­came Under Secretary of the Interior. Fortas knew that it is a whole lot more comfortable in the politically straight world if you have just never belonged to a Communist or Communist-front organization.

What manner of man is Justice Fortas? He is not an ordinary Supreme Court Justice. He is the superb Schemer who put Lyndon Johnson into the Senate when the voting majority of Texas wouldn't. He is the man Katzenbach "went straight to" when he wanted the Warren Commission set up, and Fortas was certainly the right man to go to, because Fortas had been the first man in Washington that Johnson called after the assassina­tion of President Kennedy.

Abe Fortas is successful. There is a Latin motto, fiat justitia, ruat caelum, translatable as "Let justice be done, though the heavens fall." In Fortas' life the heavens have not fallen. They may not have fallen on Johnson--though his March 1968 abdica­tion would seem to indicate they have. But what will it cost Fortas, in any case? On that high court, he is set for life. The best thing to do is put a man in the White House who won't lis­ten to him on those Opinions which undermine the Constitution. [H: Isn't ever likely, is it?]
Yet the struggle for worldly position has not stopped Abe Fortas from religious and philosophical moralizing, nor has the physiognomic fact observed by New York Times-man Anthony Lewis that there is "no visible sign of sentimentality in Abe Fortas. He has the lidded toughness of, say, a houseman in Las Vegas." Actually the tough guy in Fortas sometimes finds the sensitive moralizer quite useful. In the McCarthy-Lattimore duel Fortas' law firm fired a letter to the Senator saying, "We suggest that a decent regard for the welfare of your country, for the high office you hold, and for elementary Christian virtues, require you immediately to put a stop to this fantastic outrage." (Ordeal by Slander, p. 23) [H: "Christian" virtues?? Oh my...] Since McCarthy was a Christian and Fortas did not claim to be, that seems like a cynical appeal to the other man's values. McCarthy was also a patriot and held the Senate in such high respect that he died after it rejected him.

Writing in 1964 in the Yale Law Journal, which he had edited thirty years before, lawyer Fortas, in an interval of contempla­tion between consolidating Johnson's position after November 22, 1963 and ascending to the Supreme Court said:

For a justice of this ultimate tribunal, the opportunity for self-discovery and the occasion for self-revelation are unusually great. Judging is a lonely job in which a man is, as near as may be, an island entire. The moment is likely to come when he realizes that he is, in essential fact, answerable only to himself. [H: Hmmnn--not to God or citizen??]
Unlike the letter to Senator McCarthy, this obiter dictum in­vokes no religious considerations. In this context, you would think it might have, quite legitimately. Taking the awful loneli­ness of the earthly judge to the edge of contemplation, one could well--this would be the place to do it--say that such a judge was answerable only to the Constitution--and God. But Abe Fortas didn't say it. He said the judge is "answerable only to himself". Of course, he was writing about William O. Douglas.

The boy who walked to religious school in Memphis forty-odd years ago to save streetcar fare (then a nickel) has for a long time now ridden in his own Rolls-Royce. He and his wife Carolyn, who is also a lawyer, are said to have made (before the Court thing came up) more than $200,000 a year. Carolyn Fortas is a tax specialist. Fortas plays the role of a "Liberal," which is to say--for one thing--anti-big-business, and yet he got rich counselling big corporations. I don't care how you explain it, that is basically two-faced. Of course, it is exactly the same thing Johnson's other top Schemer, Clark Clifford, has done, possibly on an even bigger scale. It is, really, one of the for­mulae of the Establishment. Set up a Big Government, set up Big Business, switch the money back and forth from one to the other, like a man kiting checks between two banks, and you can manage the populace--both those who think they are "Liberals" and those who think they are "Conservatives." Someone has attempted to give a formula for political success: Tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect. It's done now on a bigger scale. The difference is they don't try to spend it all on the WPA or the PWA, they spend it through contracts with big cor­porations--including big universities. Big Business and the Big Government hold each other up like two sides of a sandwich­board-sign which you and I have to carry around on our shoul­ders.

Still, as convenient as this marriage of Socialism and Capital­ism is, there have to be intermediaries--marriage brokers, marriage counselors. That's where Abe Fortas and Clark Clifford come in. Anthony Lewis of The New York Times says that as alawyer Fortas "spent less time in courtrooms than in the offices of big corporations, advising them on how to improve their management and enlarge their profits without running afoul of the government." (The New York Times Magazine, August 8, 1965, p. 11.)

Clifford, as we shall see, has done the same thing. Liberals of the naive stripe, who want to feel that Fortas and Clifford belong to them, worry from time to time as to whether this kind of law practice is not somehow selling out to Big Business. Be­fore you answer that question for yourself, remember that while the client may get a government contract and pay less taxes than he would without such lawyers, the government is always as­sured that its main interests are protected. Tax laws are written so that the revenue from them may be, depending on how they are construed and applied, either high--or very high. Never low.

About two years later--June 4, 1967, to be exact--Fred P. Graham, a lawyer who covers the Supreme Court beat for The New York Times, also had a Times Magazine article about For­tas, with Fortas' photograph on the cover. Graham says that Supreme Court Justice William 0. Douglas, Fortas' mentor from the old, was discovered to be getting a $12,000 a year re­tainer from a "nonprofit foundation with very thin financial ties to gambling interests in Las Vegas". Foundation official Harry Ashmore, speaking in defense of the corporate virtue, declared, the organized philanthropists in the case would pursue a "Caesar's wife" policy. What they actually did, according to Graham, was to hire Carolyn Fortas, the tax-law-expert spouse of Justice Fortas. [H: My goodness, they REALLY DON'T ever change, do they?] Oddly enough, Carolyn Fortas said the foundation was actually as clean as one of Harry Ashmore's houndstooth jackets. Graham concludes his resume of this episode with the reflection: "That the investigation was con­cluded without raising any hint of a possible conflict of interest is further evidence of [Abe] Fortas' prowess as a behind-the-scenes mover and shaker." In other words it is Carolyn who is Caesar's wife.

On Fortas' elevation to the Court in July 1965, The New York Times (it has published at least three analytical and evaluative curricula vitae on him) called him an eminence grise, which is what Cardinal Richelieu was called when he governed France for Louis XIII. That, too, may be an exaggeration, for Fortas' influence with Johnson, probably unique in early 1964, has been to some indeterminate but undoubtedly significant degree dis­placed subsequently by the influence of that other master Schemer, Clark Clifford. (Rostow's influence has never been personal with Johnson. Rostow's influence is almost automatic on whoever is in the White House.)

In a world where the Viet Cong can take the American Em­bassy in Saigon, and the North Koreans can capture an Ameri­can vessel on the high seas, it may emerge as an advantage to have been once a force in the International Juridical Association. Even for this we cannot charge Fortas with naivete. Lack of sophistication is the last charge to which he would be vulnera­ble. According to Anthony Lewis cited in The New York Times Magazine, a lawyer who once worked with Fortas said:

Of all the men I have met, he most knows why he is doing what he is doing. I don't like the s.o.b. [sic!], but if I were in trouble, I'd want him on my side. He's the most resourceful, the boldest, the most thorough lawyer I know.

* * *

And I remind you readers:

PROTOCOLS OF ZION:

"We have already established our own men in all important positions. We must endeavor to provide the Goyim with lawyers and doctors; the lawyers are au courant with all interests; doc­tors, once in the house, become confessors and directors of con­science."

And from a Fifteenth Century Zionist Protocol:

"...As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix themselves up with the affairs of State, in order that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them."

Now, where do I fit in all this gibberish? The Zionist Anti-Christ is my direct enemy. This group of Khazarian role-steal­ers and heritage-thievers of the Judean peoples--have declared war on GOD of Christed perfection. I speak not of a "person"; I speak of that which is now called by all sorts of non-meaning names which fit no definition as USED. Communism was es­tablished by this very GROUP OF ONES CALLING THEM­SELVES AND ACTING AS SELF-STYLED JEWS. THEY ARE NOT! YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED! THEY ARE NOT!

Are all the ones in POWER of said lineage? NO--and as soon as they realize THEY TOO HAVE BEEN "HAD" IN THE NAME OF POWER AND GREED, MIGHT WELL LOOK CAREFULLY AT WHAT THEY HAVE DONE--AND YOU MIGHT WELL RISE UP AND SMITE THEM--HUMAN CITIZEN. I will remind you of something very, very important: WITHOUT LAWS SET IN GOODNESS, JUSTICE AND AB­SOLUTE FAIRNESS FOR ALL, YOU HAVE MONARCHY AND ANARCHY CONTROLLED BY DICTATORIAL FORCES OF POWER AND COERCIVE FORCE. WHEN THE HIGHEST COUNCILS OF THE LAND SIT IN COR­RUPTION AND SELF-APPOINTED KINGDOMING--YOU HAVE LOST FREEDOM IN THE WORST POSSIBLE MAN­NER--FOR THERE NO LONGER RESIDES JUSTICE AMONG YOU. YOU ARE THE PAWN OF THE ELITE POWER BROKERS HANDING OUT DEATH, LIFE, PRISON OR FREEDOM--ACCORDING TO THAT WHICH GATH­ERS UNTO THEMSELVES THE SPOILS OF A PLANET WHILE THE MASSES BECOME BLINDLY ENSLAVED AND HERDED LIKE THE BEASTS AS CHATTEL. IT HAPPENS AND MAN DOESN'T NOTICE UNTIL TOO LATE! Salu.

CHAPTER 2

REC #1 HATONN

SUN., JUL. 31, 1994 8:08 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 349

SUN., JUL. 31, 1994

RONN JACKSON?

FROM CHUCK AND MARY IN NORTH CAROLINA--
LIGHT BRIDGES

Yesterday a letter was faxed to a lot of people, apparently. Chuck and Mary give their return number as FAX 1-704-898­4211. It showed up on my doorstep very late last night so we will address it "first" this morning.

SANCTIONS AND C.O.U.P.E.S.
SPECIFICALLY THE CLINTONS

I do not presume to answer questions FOR Mr. Jackson or any­one else--nor do I agree with many things from a lot of people with whom we share and work. Some of you have turned Mr. Jackson into some kind of an encyclopedic guru and others simply want confirmation and information. This is what we are here for, readers, but not to specifically attend everyone's busi­ness. I will, however, comment on this particular information because it seriously impacts everyone if true, and everyone if not true. It will speak of killing a president. And, furthermore, it WOULD NOT be Ronn Jackson who would be directly in­volved--and it is, further, THE major reason Mr. Jackson stays incarcerated--so that it cannot be "assumed" a work of his doing if this takes place as would be set up by "dealers" in the assassi­nation game! The latter part does NOT please Mr. Jackson ex­cept that he can see the wisdom of compliance and continued in­carceration. The facts are, however, that there are at least two other assassins trained and operable within orders who could ac­complish such a task. I ask that all of you who pile the letters onto Mr. Jackson for response--continue the barrage because it keeps him SO BUSY that he can't even consider the possibilities involved here. WE NEED NO KILLING OF ANY KIND TO ACCOMPLISH RECLAIMING OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL GOODLY FUNCTION OF YOUR NATION.

Mr. Jackson is just beginning to understand his purpose and di­rection--and no longer is "sanctioning" a part of his job--it never WAS with God and citizen.

What is really incredible to witness is the sending forth of the Clintons and Gore on this stupid bus journey--they are not wel­comed ANYWHERE. All YOU are shown are the nice parts--the nasty parts are KEPT FROM YOU. Indeed there are evil intents afoot.

WILL THE REAL CLINTON STAND UP?

NO! He can't. The Clintons have already been removed and he was a puppet at best from upstart of his public imaging.

I warn you, citizens of the world, when you act in violence against the LAWS OF GOD AND CREATION--you WILL NOT have the help of same.

I believe the best thing is to print the letter so that any comments make sense to you.

[QUOTING:]

Saturday, July 30, 1994

From: Light Bridges

TO: Whom it may concern:

In a telephone conversation with Ronn Jackson, Ronn said he had agreed to one last job (or sanction or killing or murder) for C.O.U.P.E.S.

Ronn then said to us that he would be willing to tell us more information if we could guess who it was that C.O.U.P.E.S. wanted him to kill.

So Mary and I used an encrypted message in saying our guess to him by saying, "What do you think about Clint East­wood and his ton of bills?"

This was our way of saying we thought he was going to kill Bill Clinton.

So we said this to Ronn over the phone, and after a long pause on the phone, he said, "Shit, you guessed it!"

So then we had a three or four hour conversation with him on 4-24-94 which has been taped and copied and given to several people. However on this tape we did not mention the subject of Bill Clinton or what C.O.U.P.E.S. wanted Ronn to do. In fact, we have told no one until now.

THE ABOVE MIGHT BE PURE BS FROM A MAN IN PRISON WHO LIKES TO MAKE UP BIG LIES, OR IT MIGHT BE TRUE. SO, IF IT IS TRUE, WE FEEL WE HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO TELL THE PUBLIC SO C.O.U.P.E.S. AND RONN JACKSON CAN BE STOPPED. WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN MURDER, WE BELIEVE IN HOLDING HANDS. WE ARE NOT HAWKS, WE ARE DOVES. I KNOW A LOT OF PATRIOTS WILL NOT AGREE WITH US IN THIS MATTER. [H: No, MOST "real" patriots WILL agree with you in this matter--it is no way to gain anything for your NATION.]

We do know what Larry Nichols and many others have ex­posed about Clinton and his drug smuggling through Mena, Arkansas, and believe all or most of it to be true. Bill Clinton and C.O.U.P.E.S. need to be put in prison so our United States Government can operate without being sabotaged by the inter­national families and the Federal Reserve Board and the Rocke­fellers and the C.F.R. and the Bank of England, etc., etc., etc.

If what Ronn is saying is pure BS, then there is no harm done. However, if it is true, then we wash our hands of this in­formation and call the prosecutors in the judicial system to do their job in stopping the treason and injustice from happening.

We know that the FBI, CIA, NSA, NSC, ad nauseam have been infiltrated by anti-Constitutionalists, but there are enough clean people left to get the job done. In 1938 Germany the problem was not too many Nazis, the problem was there was not enough vocal good guys and gals.

So let's use the information highways to our advantage and let the pen work and let the sword sit in the corner and rust!!!

Peace, Love and Light,

Chuck and Mary

* * *

Then came the call to Rick from T. Buckley ["Treasurygate"] and the inquiry as to whether or not Ronn had ever said anything about this to Rick. Answer: IF SO, IT WAS NEVER RE­PEATED HERE! However, Buckley indicated that Ronn has spoken to him about the same order/action. So what have you? Now, the question comes full circle and back to me--why would that be? This is not my business and to "wash one's hands" as stated above, hardly sounds "new" in expression. I am NOT of your place so I can't do anything save speak about it. IF I WOULD BE PERMITTED--I WOULD NOT. I WILL SHARE ANOTHER LETTER WITH YOU IN A BIT SO LET US FINISH THESE FEW COMMENTS. YOU MUST UNDER­STAND DIFFERENT "ROLES" BEING PLAYED HERE, READERS, I MAY BE ONE OF YOU--BUT I AM NOT "OF" YOU--NOT YET!

CAN "YOU" THINK OF A BETTER WAY FOR THE COM­MITTEE TO GET RID OF RONN JACKSON FOREVER?? JUST BARGAIN HIM AWAY ON A MISSION OF SUCH STUPIDITY AS TO GET HIM KILLED OR INCARCERATED FOREVER? COME NOW--THEY KNOW THEY CAN ONLY CONTROL ONE RONN JACKSON IN THIS MANNER--FOR ACTUALLY KILLING THE BEING IS NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL AND WOULD BE A MOST FOOLISH MANEUVER AGAINST A MEMBER OF THEIR OWN COMMITTEE WHO IS MORE POWERFUL, ULTIMATELY, THAN ARE ANY OF THEM.

I would think it most unfortunate in perception that Ronn would have ever said such a thing to anyone. It does mean, however, that he was approached and it was a plan and probably will be attempted in another way by other parties. CAN YOU SEE--THAT THERE WOULD BE NOTHING GAINED FOR FREEDOM OR NATION--BY MORE ASSASSINATIONS? NOT EVEN KILLING OFF THE ENTIRE BUNCH ON ALL THE NEGATIVE SATANIC COMMITTEES OF THE GLOBE COULD YOU ACCOMPLISH FREEDOM AND GOODNESS! CHANGE THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF MAN--OR YOU CHANGE NOTHING--NO PLACE--NO TIME! YOU CHANGE THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF MAN THROUGH TRUTH IN INFORMATION!

You will note that the information came through sometime in this past April (24th?). That is quite a while ago, readers, and much changes daily--much the less, in several months. How­ever, it does NOT make the suggestion less valid or the agony of sorting out responsibility easier. If, in fact, anything of this sort was spoken to any in this place--it has never been repeated. I would guess that it proves discretion on the part of our TEAM.

WHO ARE MARY AND CHUCK?

Well, they are close enough to be heard and have frequent con­versations with Ronn and that is reality. They are the very ones who were to put Ronn's books to press as publishers, etc.

Have they betrayed Ronn some way? No! They are SERVING his security in this very telling and sharing. I WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY DAMAGE UNTO THEM AND I SUG­GEST THAT IT BE SEEN TO, MONITORS! THEY ARE GOOD PEOPLE TRYING TO DO RIGHT--AND THIS WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO! I trust the "reasons" are equally as "right" for I cannot but wonder why it took so long to show and tell. Would it be only after they got nothing ex­pected? Please, consider "reasons" for actions and make sure, always, readers, that your "reasons" match your words--FOR GOD KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE AND HE ONLY JUDGES BY INTENT--NOT WORDS!

Ronn Jackson is a very shrewd and brilliant mind. He set up possible "leaks" and found them! This very leak turns out to be his security blanket. Thank you, Chuck and Mary.

One major reason we turned our attention to other resources for back-up information on the network of high-level players, is that very focus. We need to inform you with that which you would NOT receive, because this information from Jackson WILL BE PUBLISHED.

In the inability to extricate Ronn from the incarceration system it has interrupted a lot of promises. One such promise was a ma­jor funding for Light Bridges, computers, print equipment and thus and so. This has NOT been forthcoming as has neither funding promised to ANYONE. Does this mean Ronn is a liar, a fool, a deceiver--or, not able to do anything about such busi­ness? The latter--but it doesn't ease the "minds" of participants when the happenings begin to look this negative. I don't know what arrangements Ronn may have made with them. IT IS NONE OF MY BUSINESS--IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH "HAND WASHING"!

I WOULD GUESS THAT THIS WILL NOT HELP BIND A LOVING FRIENDSHIP AND, AS REQUESTED OF CON­TACT WE OFFER THE LETTER AND CONTACT, INFORMATION: Charles Wright & Mary Craig, Light Bridges, Fax: 1-704-898-4211; Voice: 1-704-898-4404.

I WOULD GUESS THAT THIS ONE LETTER IS ABOUT AS GOOD A THING TO HAPPEN IN BEHALF OF RONN JACKSON WHILE HE SITS IN PRISON--AS ANY SHIELD THAT COULD HAPPEN. HE CERTAINLY CAN'T BE BUMPING OFF ANYBODY WHILE SITTING IN A NEVADA PRISON, WHETHER IT BE IN CARSON CITY OR JEAN. THUS WE MAY ALL LIVE TO SERVE AN­OTHER DAY--IN ANOTHER WAY!

Ronn has also promised to fund the paper, CONTACT, as well as to fund a lot of groups of patriots and, as well, individual parties who are in great trouble. He and others from the same services of past experience seem to have ability to do "that" if and when they can break loose and get something attended busi­ness-wise. Have YOU tried to shift money--even in a local bank and even a small sum? How can you shift it from Europe when both ends of the corruption net are RIGHT THERE? Ronn got money shifted through the New York system and to the Fed system in San Francisco--for CONTACT. This, only to have the Feds stop it, and hold it--illegally and knowingly ille­gally. The money has been recovered but was not released. No, we are not talking "small" sums--we are speaking of multi-millions.

WHO IS WHO?

I am not going into mysterious reproduction systems or who is/was who and how and what they are doing BACK in your play. I will tell you that it would be wise to find out everything you can about ones such as Thomas Paine--and go further up the ladder--and find out the full history of, say, ST. GERMAIN. Germain has showed up in every generation since God alone knows when! He was sometimes a fine fellow, sometimes a rat-fink. What he did, however, was ALWAYS started in honor and goodly intent--only to be spoiled and rotted by destroyers. He was Frances Bacon who was William Shakespeare and thus and so. He would simply be around in the busy times and van­ish--even to the point that funerals would be had only to find the "box" quite empty. He was at your Constitution writing--and I would think it appropriate that he be back now! He dictated in­formation to Dharma which has gotten her into a lot of legal hassle. I think he will participate in getting her OUT of it or he shall answer--SOON--to me, his Compatriot!

Germain was always IMPORTANT, high-level "important" at every station. He was known by MANY, MANY names so don't get crazy, readers--YOU ARE EXPERIENCING THAT WHICH THE ADVERSARY WOULD LIKE YOU NOT TO BELIEVE!

When God gets BUSY--the "busy" get going! I would watch the goodly things that Ronn Jackson does as he AWAKENS (which he already has done; HE CAN REMEMBER--YOU CAN'T-- YET!)

Do I or did I approve of one, St. Germain? NO, in most in­stances I did not--but my job and my mission are only the same as is his as far as the INFORMATION task is concerned. There will be the need for physical leadership and direction--THAT IS NOT MY MISSION! MY PRESENCE IS NOT YET EVEN DESIRABLE, MUCH THE LESS, NECESSARY.

YES INDEED, I WOULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT THE HISTORY--THE REAL HISTORY OF SIR ST. GERMAIN. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT ABOUT HIM--AND NEITHER WILL THE "I AM" PEOPLE. BUT HE IS ONE OF THE GREATEST COHANS AND MASTERS OF ALL REMEMBERED HISTORY--AL­WAYS SEARCHING FOR A WAY TO MAKE "MANKIND" "WORK"; ALWAYS OBSERVING AND WRITING ABOUT THE NATURE OF MAN--EVEN WITHIN ROYALTY. HE STAGED THE FRENCH REVOLUTION--I BELIEVE THE HEAD-CHOPPING GOT A BIT HEAVY THEN, ALSO. NO, I DO NOT RECOGNIZE VIOLENCE AS ANY SOLUTION--EVER. I HOLD HIGHER RANK AND HAVE TRAVELED FARTHER. UNLESS MAN FINDS BETTER THAN VIO­LENCE--THERE WILL NEVER BE PEACE, FREEDOM OR, MUCH THE MORE, PERFECTION, IN YOUR REALMS.

BOTH SIDES

Be patient, readers, while we attend a child in need of game-playing:

[QUOTING:]

From: Joe Schaffer
5602 Tumbleweed Circle NE,
Brooks, Oregon 97305; 503-463-4229.

[H: It is refreshing that such a letter is not anonymous as is the usual stance of insulting individuals.]
17 July, 1994 [H: The way he writes the date is a dead give­away of who and what this party is!]

Hatonn
CONTACT
P.O. Box 27353
Las Vegas, Nevada 89126

CONTACT, July 5, 1994, Pg. 61, "The Test is What You DO With Challenges"

Somebody masquerading as a friend, gave me a copy of CON­TACT some time back. The material got my attention and gen­erated a call to your 800 number, leading to a subscription by me. It did very little to produce any information but I did learn, or at least was told, that you are an etheric being.

After digesting several issues of CONTACT [H: Several issues of the paper? My, my, how informed can you get--since I have written over 104 BOOKS, hundreds of papers and thousands of tapings--this must make YOU very, very IN­FORMED!], I believe it is safe to say that you do have a lot to say in these papers. In this issue you got just a little noisy and loudmouthed for a ball of smoke so I thought I would give you the benefit of my observations.

I would like to see a little documentation regarding the great hero Bo Gritz. I no longer believe him to be the white hat he tries to appear but put it down to his being misled because of his own lack of expertise in some areas. If you can prove he is as you say, spit it out, I will immediately confront him with it. [H:Oh my, good sir, I am quite sure you need no documentation for such confrontation for surely the information just jumps onto you without need of research. Why should I, a smoke-ball, supply you with anything? Perhaps he only needs YOUR "expertise" in all the obviously missing areas of his own.]
You do run off at the mouth about everyone out here being so dilatory and doing nothing [H: I have never used the word "dilatory".], believing nothing, and making excuses. Hatonn, old spook [H: Thank you for recognizing my finer qualities. Do you suggest I am simply a spook as in vapor--or a spy out in the cold?], I will match efforts with you any day. I have given everything I have to the point of destroyed health and poverty and I am still in there pitching. [H: Gosh, sir, how greedy of you to think we write all these papers JUST FOR YOU!] I'm tryin' and that, Casper, is all a steer can do. [H: Ah, but sir, if you KNOW that you are a steer and not a bull--why not act in wisdom and intelligence and quit tryin' and start doing something intelligent? If you suggest that somehow you have been castrated--and know it--why suggest you can't help it if you are not a stud? I find your example interesting--and about as intelligent as the rest of your ob­servations from "several issues of a paper".] I know a whole lot of others that have done the same and languished in hell holes for their efforts. Look up men like Tupper Sausy, Alan Stang, Rudy Stanko, Yorrie Kahl, Kaltenberger, Bill Benson, Red Beckman, on and on and be aware that those men are out here where you are throwing your shit.

I have no problem with that really, just consider the source as one who was probably still wearing jammies with feet in them when I started drawing my SS. I do have a problem with your apparent claims that you have some sort of an inside track with God, a direct franchise, and never mind that guy called Jesus. You have got a real problem there. I suggest in all seriousness and concern for your welfare, that you get that problem solved at once. [H: Indeed, I take your suggestion, sir; YOU are a much better spokesman for the perfection of JESUS CHRIST.]

You may be an etheric being, an angel, a just man made perfect, pure spirit, pure intelligence, pure power and pure as the driven snow, but you are not pure enough to qualify as a top kick for God, that is the spot reserved for a man [H: a MAN?] named Jesus Christ who earned it. [H: Ah yes--you must have been there? And, sir, did you base all this information on a few issues of a biblical newspaper or what, Sir? I assume God made YOU the chief JUDGE and counsellor?] If you want to talk with God it would be best to go through the proper chan­nels. [H: Proper channels? What channels--if, as you say, Jesus Christ is God--what CHANNELS do you now suggest? Perhaps your infinite KNOWLEDGE came from going through the "proper" channels--instead of to GOD!] He might just zap you into even less than smoke.

You know the drill and I refuse to honor the sheer stupidity of your statements by attempting rational discussion about them with such an obvious spiritual cripple. [H: Fine, sir, for I don't believe you would recognize a "rational" discussion under any circumstances. I believe you might look in the mirror, sir, for you seem to know a lot about spiritual crip­ples if you can so judge!] As the saying goes, I refuse to en­gage in a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Think it over!!! [H: Likewise!!!]

Your diatribe against Bo Gritz included some reference to the Coalition For Human Dignity [H: I may have quoted from it--I doubt I had much of a "diatribe" and I don't "hang around" with them--I don't recall the subject as you describe it--I do not, in fact, recall ever hearing the name of Coalition for Human Dignity.] I have a copy of their report and also some of their other garbage. If you are hanging around with such people as that, no wonder you talk so squirrelly at times, they are queer as a three dollar bill, or are you one too? [H: You just proved you are a fine example of CHRISTIAN NON-JUDGMENTAL LEADERSHIP QUALITY.] There were a couple of references to residence in Portland, I live very close to Portland. If you are an etheric being, why don't you just employ a smidgen of that there astral projection or whatever and come on over, we can have a good discussion about all this.

[H: I assume you will have Jesus Christ there also, since you seem to know all about his business and you assume to rep­resent him as an authority? Sir, this being that you insult by your very presence--TRAVELS WITH ME AND THIS IS HIS PROGRAM UNDER-WAY. YOU INSULT HIM BY YOUR VERY LANGUAGE AND I DOUBT IT SHALL BE "ME" WHO IS ZAPPED FOR BEING MISINFORMED OR PRESENTING MYSELF AS SOMETHING I AM NOT. You claim to be a Christian and prove otherwise in every breath!]
God bless you anyhow, why not, none of us deserve it. [H: Speak for yourself--and at last, you have put the facts wherein they lie--when you say "none of US". I deserve HIS blessings as does every God-respecting being. I cannot an­swer FOR you.]

Sincerely sig.
Joe Schaffer sui juris

* * *

What does it require to be a "top kick for God"? I would sur­mise that I am not the "spiritual cripple" here. This is, how­ever, more interesting than a similar writer once wrote--that I was a "...horney, sex-deprived queer needing a good f !

So be it, I thank the good sir for his attention to my shortcom­ings. This is "obviously" the very type of person who will re­gain your national Constitutional LAW and return goodness and Christ unto your nation. Are we all to be impressed with your signature and "sui juris"? It appears that quite possibly you are a frustrated lawyer of some kind who would have some humble patriot trappings to fool the people. Good luck.

Salu.