🚀 go-pugleaf

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--------------314F4DD6C76
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Why are the Feds trying to stop the Oklahoma public from asking
questions about the Ok City bombing and the Federal case?  Many
witnesses who want to testify are not being heard. Many questions are
being rasied about possible government involement,and prior knowledge of
the threat.  Read the current update to find out more:

--------------314F4DD6C76
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: ralph@teaminfinity.com
Received: from teaminfinity.com (ralph@[204.107.208.2]) by flash.net (8.8.3/8.7.5) with SMTP id KAA18596 for <mike777@flash.net>; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:47:39 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from ralph@localhost) by teaminfinity.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id LAA05949 for mike777@flash.net; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:50:32 -0500
From: Ralph <ralph@teaminfinity.com>
Message-Id: <199612051650.LAA05949@teaminfinity.com>
Subject: OKLAHOMA CITY UPDATE (fwd)
To: mike777@flash.net
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:50:32 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text

Forwarded message:
>From ralph@teaminfinity.com Thu Dec  5 11:48:45 1996
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:40:50 -0500
Message-Id: <199612051640.LAA05900@teaminfinity.com>
To: ralph@TeamInfinity.com
From: ralph@TeamInfinity.com
Subject: OKLAHOMA CITY UPDATE

OKLAHOMA CITY UPDATE:


David Hoffman/Haight Ashbury Free Press wrote:

 
                         Bob Macy's 'Can of Worms'
                By David Hoffman, Haight Ashbury Free Press
 
 Oklahomans may have won a significant victory yesterday as the Oklahoma
 Court of Appeals entertained arguments on behalf of impaneling a new Grand
 Jury to investigate the Oklahoma City bombing. The original petition,
 brought by State Representative Charles Key (R-OKC), and Glenn Wilburn, the
 grandfather of two dead boys, was quashed by District Judge Daniel Owens on
 grounds that it would be "reinventing the wheel."
 
 Mark Sanford, Key's attorney, argued that the people of Oklahoma saw it as
 an "opportunity to fill in the missing spokes of the wheel." The two men
 brought the petition in December of 1995 after discovering numerous
 discrepancies in the Federal Government's case. This included evidence of
 foreknowledge, including a government "sting" operation underway at the
 time; indications of additional bombs in the building; attempts by Federal
 prosecutors and Justice Department officials to protect the identity of
 certain suspects, namely John Doe 2; and intimidation of witnesses by FBI
 agents.
 
 About 25 spectators, including some bombing victims, filled the courthouse
 to hear the arguments before the three-judge panel. Sanford's opening
 argument was simple and brief. He stated that the petition was properly
 brought, that much evidence has already been ignored by the Federal
 Government, and that the State Constitution grants the people the right to
 convene a Grand Jury when the facts so dictate.
 
 Beverly Palmer from District Attorney Bob Macy's office, arguing in defense
 of Judge Owens, claimed that the petition was "insufficient on its face,"
 and the request was duplicitous of the Federal Grand Jury's efforts.
 
 Yet, as Judge Ronald Stubblefield pointed out, nowhere did Judge Owens
 state why the petition was insufficient. Palmer replied that "obstructing
 justice" was too broad, and there wasn't enough "specificity" in the claim
 of other suspects. Palmer then tried to play the issue of the petition's
 "legal sufficiency" against the judge's "exercise of discretion." In this
 case, she argued, Judge Owens had the "discretion" to quash the petition
 even if it was "sufficient" on its face.
 
 Both Judges Daniel Boudreau and Stubblefield called her on it, stating that
 it wasn't necessary to state specific facts, being necessary only to state
 a sufficient reason why a crime had been committed. "What more can they
 say?" asked Judge Stubblefield.
 
 It was Stubblefield who really put Palmer to the wall. He was skeptical
 that Judge Owens had any facts to advise him properly in his decision. "I
 question whether Judge Owens has the discretion�" said Stubblefield. "He's
 just operating on what he knows about the bombing. Do you think it's right
 to make a judgment based on what he reads in the newspaper?" Even Palmer
 admitted that the statutes were limited as to what Judge Owens could do or
 how he could interpret the law.
 
 As Sanford stated, "Legally he didn't have the right to quash the petition.
 But because he's a judge he has the power, whether it's legal or not."
 
 Arguments and counter-arguments flew back and forth as two sides battled
 for the legal right of way. While Palmer argued that a County Grand Jury
 would be "duplicitous," Sanford coolly replied that there is nothing to
 prevent multiple Grand Juries from operating simultaneously.
 
 Palmer, visibly nervous, seemed to grasp for straws. She argued that the
 County Grand Jury shouldn't be convened because of the need for "judicial
 economy." And that it contravenes "public policy concerns."
 
 "What policy concerns?" asked Judge Boudreau.
 
 The County doesn't possess the resources and funds, Palmer argued, to
 pursue such a big case. Besides, she pleaded, the "investigation" is
 already "complete," being a "thorough investigation" from "several
 different Federal agencies."
 
 "This case isn't a matter of public policy," said Oklahoma resident Art
 Fisher, who attended the hearing, "it's one of law. And they're trying to
 strip the public's right to determine the law."
 
 Palmer claimed a County Grand Jury would "jeopardize the Federal case." The
 Federal gag order prevents interviewing prospective witnesses, she claimed.
 
 Sanford countered that there would be no interference with the Federal case
 as long as they were interviewing witnesses and suspects that Federal
 prosecutors ignored, which seem to be in abundance. This reporter has
 interviewed numerous witnesses-those who've been questioned by the FBI, and
 those who haven't, eventhough they've attempted to be interviewed. Several
 have even been threatened when they've tried to tell their apparently
 credible stories.
 
 Finally, Palmer, borrowing a favorite acronym of DA Robert Macy's, claimed
 that impaneling a Grand Jury would "open up a new can of worms," the same
 line Macy used to dissuade Key from bringing the Grand Jury early on.
 
 Interestingly, it was just two months ago that Macy claimed to this
 reporter that he intended to prosecute McVeigh and Nichols in a state trial
 on 161 counts of First Degree Murder. "I don't like taking a second seat to
 the [Federal] prosecution," stated Macy. "The bombing killed 10 of my
 friends."
 
 Macy claimed he was interested in getting to the truth. "I'm prepared to do
 what ever it takes to get to the truth, Macy added. "My sole intent is in
 learning the truth."
 
 Curiously, when asked if he intended to conduct an investigation
 independent of the Feds', he said, "Well, I don't want to be a party to
 anything that will interfere with the Feds' prosecution. I Don't want to
 open up a new can of worms."
 
 Yet as Sanford correctly points out, there are holes in the Feds' case big
 enough to drive a truck through. It is, literally, a can of worms begging
 to be opened.
 
 As Judge Stubblefield concluded, "The people have the right to circulate a
 petition if the people find that things aren't going the way they ought to
 be.� Is it not the right, by the sanctified right of the Grand Jury in
 Oklahoma, to inquire whether a crime is committed? �Don't they have the
 right to investigate people who they think are involved? This is a highly
 protected right.�"
 
 David Hoffman, Publisher
 Haight Ashbury Free Press
 6118 N. Meridian, #621
 Oklahoma City, OK 73112
 http://www.webcom.com/haight
 (405) 948-1330 (temorarily in Oklahoma City)



                  A  Note From the Commissioner

     If we look at what the IRS tells us today about income taxes
on the first page of the Form 1040 Tax Instruction Booklet from
1994,  we find a "Note From the Commissioner", which is usually
one of the first things in the booklet.  This one is from
Margaret Richardson, the current Commissioner of the IRS.  It
states in part:

     Dear Taxpayer,
     
         Thank you for making this nation's tax system the
     most effective system of voluntary compliance in the
     world.  The key to maintaining that system is ensuring
     that you are treated fairly and equitably, that your
     privacy is protected, and that our tax system is as
     simple and understandable as possible....
     
     Margaret Milner Richardson
     
The first sentence here is:

     "Thank you for making this nation's tax system the most
     effective system of voluntary compliance in the world."

There it is!  Voluntary Compliance.  Why do they say that ?  What
does that mean ?   And how does it effect you, a sovereign
American Citizen ?  We will come back to those questions in a
bit, but I would point out here that this opening statement is
not unusual.  Nearly every instruction booklet from past years
has opened with some variation of this statement from the
Commissioner.




	  If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of
          servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home
          from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch
          down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget
          that ye were our countrymen.  - Samuel Adams


>>>>>	http://TeamInfinity.com/urls.html
 	
Andrew C Earp 1-800-677-1207 ext. 1800  w/SAPF
#########################################################################



TO RECEIVE email from ralph:  send email to ralph@TeamInfinity.com and in
the Subject make sure your email address and the word GO-RALPH (no spaces)
is in the subject.

TO STOP RECEIVING email from ralph:  send email to ralph@TeamInfinity.com
and in the Subject make sure your email address and the word WHOA-RALPH 
(no spaces) is in the subject.



--------------314F4DD6C76--