Subject: Re: Local newspaper article on Wyoming gathering From: prop1@uujobs.com (Peace Through Reason) On 26 Aug 94 01:36 PDT uunet!eskimo.com!john1 wrote: >rschmidt@panix.com (Robert Schmidt) writes: >>An article from the Star-Tribune of Casper, Wyoming dated July >>10, 1994. >>BIG PINEY CRITICIZES LAW ENFORCEMENT >>Town says officers overzealous during Rainbow gathering --rest omitted-- >This is a "problem" often when our people gather. It's a sad >fact of life but never fails to infuriate me. Can't OUR legal >types respond in some way so that our "rights" are acknowledged? >Maybe some advice on "what are our rights?" might be a start.... >John Howdy John, Always a pleasure to meet someone interested in learning "what our rights" are. There are folks who like to charactorize me as one of those "legal types," but truly my interests are truth, justice, freedom and equality. Consequently, for quite awhile now, been trying to get some of the love and light types to take the issue of the heavy handed police state seriously. For example, on November 13, 1993, Waco: The Policy was widely disseminated though light and love networks, hoping to arouse some interest. It is encouraging to see folks are beginning to discuss this issue with more concern. Thanks for thinking. In my opinion, an important thing to know about rights is, you can't count on the courts to protect them. _WACO:_THE_POLICY_ The Forest Service is proposing regulations that would change freedom of assembly and expression into a crime, punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. For twenty-one years the Rainbow Family of Living Light has gathered, in numbers from 14,000 to 30,000, in a Ntional Forest for the expressed purpose of "praying for peace on earth and the healing of the planet." Every year the Forest Service does a report on the Gathering. Every report relates that the Gathering caused no problems, and that the land was left as good, if not better, than it was in the beginning. The proposed regulations would render this harmless religious observence a "crime". Some folks think the problem is just a few wild bureaucrats who've run amok. Others think the problem is that government thrives on power, power corrupts, the more power government obtains, the more it wants, and that this regulation is the "logical" extension of the government's continuing drive for power. What hasn't the government already regulated? What valid interest can the government possibly have to regulate freedom of thought and assembly? If government is the problem, then the only solution might be to change the government. What about the Koresh massacre? For fifty one days the FBI arrested any media person who came within two miles. Each morning Special FBI Agent Bob Ricks held a press conference to assure the world that David Koresh was irrational. The FBI blasted the Koresh people with amazing stereo equipment and flooded them with blazing lights. Then, fearing the bright lights and loud music might cause psychological damage to "the children," the FBI rammed main battle tanks into the Koresh compound "poking holes" and spraying "non-flammable" teargas inside. "The next logical step." Agent Ricks said. Coincidently -- Agent Ricks, Attorney General Reno, and President Clinton tell us -- the Koresh people chose that moment to commit suicide by setting their house on fire. Imagine, the "Rainbow Gathering" becomes a "crime," but, the People gather anyway. Given an outlaw Gathering, what's poor Uncle Sam supposed to do? Most economical solution might be to just surround the Gathering with a chainlink fence. These CFR regulations, called "citation offenses," provide that when an agent accuses a person of a violation, the accused may post a $50 bond. Anybody who wanted to get past the Rainbow fence could just put up 50 bucks and make it back to Babylon. To facilitate "due process" the Feds could just bring a gigantic T.V. screen down to the Main Circle, set up two-way video and audio equipment, and offer to hold court -- like those closed circuit courts they've already got going in Florida and some other places. Anybody who wanted could go to the video court and plead the First Amendment, or try to cut a deal with the magistrate for an intermediate sentence, trade time served for community service, or something. On the other extreme, anybody who wanted to hang out for six months could just hang tight, The federales could send in supplies. After six months, sooner if they want, they could take down the fence and everybody could go their way. Of course, at smaller gatherings, a hundred or so folks, the feds might think it was more economical just to round everybody up and farm them out to surrounding county jails. After Waco, one of the first things U.S. Attorney Reno suggested was looking at new laws and regulations to control "cults." Waco was a "proactive" enforcement approach. So is this rule. Thought needs to be focused on a broad unified opposition to proactive enforcement. If government is the problem, perhaps the only solution is to change government. In service to understanding, D.C. Scribe