PARR Newsletter ARGU Vol.7 No.5

AMERICAN RIGHTS GUARDIAN UPDATE
US Flag

VOLUME 7 NUMBER 5 W 2003 Bald Eagle

The Only Printed Voice of Opposition to Federal Government Indian Policy in Wisconsin.
Published by Protect Americans' Rights & Resources to maintain an informed membership.

Until this time PARR has avoided taking sides in the Crandon Mine situation. However, we can no longer sit on our hands ignoring the issue. The trend in this country is to stop, at all cost, any project that might generate income for downtrodden people in rural areas. PARR doesn’t know if any harm would have ever come to the environment if this mine was allowed to operate. This is doubtful, with all the publicity, and today’s involved anti-pollution laws, and the myriad of agencies monitoring the operation. So why all the effort and money spent to stop a project that would generate many high paying jobs for the locals? The only explanation is power, people control. I read recently that the Potawatomi tribe had spent $1 million fighting the mine. This show of power will send quite a message to those the tribe will be negotiating the next gambling compact with. Shutting off the ability of people to earn a living will eventually force everyone to move on, thereby custom-making a pristine wilderness for the elite to back-pack in. The strategy of economy strangulation appears to be the agenda of The Sierra Club, Wildlife Fund, Indian Tribes and Nature Conservancy, etc. to get more and more of the country into government ownership i.e. Communism !!!

Outrage in Montana
(Extracted from an article By: Diane Alden and appeared in Newsmax.com)     Every time we think we have seen it all, we find we have not seen the half of it. Every time we think our federal bureaucracies and flunkies can't get any more tyrannical, we are proven wrong. Every time we think a change in administrations and political parties will redirect this nation, we find nothing has changed. Every time we think the court system will deliver justice, we find it is not necessarily so. Thanks to activist leftist courts appointed by a series of presidents, none of whom have any respect or appreciation for the U.S. Constitution or Bill of Rights, the outrage continues.
    Troy, Dixon and Libby, Montana and other small Montana towns where only one road connects one with the other. It is the beautiful backcountry of the Intermountain West.
    Libby is located in logging and mining country in northwest Montana. Libby is a town of about 8,000. In October it received some bad news. One of the major employers, Stimson Lumber Company, told the town that Stimson would be closing the mill, putting 300 people out of work. The reasons for this action include the fact that the U.S. Forest Service and the federal government will not allow enough timber to be cut to make it profitable for Stimson to continue. In addition, the feds are constantly paying for environmental lawsuits, which drives up the price of the lumber that is allowed to be cut, thus making it an unprofitable and un-economical form of making a living.
    Contrary to what the greens say, logging on public lands makes money. But the feds spend more than the amount brought into the federal treasury from logging by giving it to environmental education or to greens for inane “studies." Some of the money is spent to employ girly guides from the University of California who tell campers that loggers and ranchers are raping the environment and should be made to get other jobs. This form of abuse of rural people has been documented in many of our parks and public areas.
    In any event, it has become cheaper to buy logs and lumber from Canada or the Far East than to cut timber in the U.S. Who needs the aggravation from Greta Green Britches and Sierra Sue Happy when you can get lumber from places that are not under the hypnotic spell of the Sierra Club and her clones? Most of the price increase in our timber products harvested from feudalized federal lands is because groups like the Sierra Club make a fine living suing the government. After all, it has a brigade of trial lawyers and high-priced lobbyists to feed.
    A couple of years ago the Libby area had a chance to add high-paying jobs when a mining company sought to move into the area. Again the greens prevented it. Along with the uncaring members of the Clinton administration, all the jobs and what those jobs would bring to the community were deep-sixed when mining permits were denied. Obviously, the Clinton cabal knew which side its green bread was buttered on. The collusion between collectivists like Clinton and the greens was and is a common practice.
    According to Mountain States Legal, the economic bright spot after Stimson announced its closing was that the federal government would be hiring those displaced by the demise of Stimson. The EPA needed 200 to 300 employees to address asbestos problems in Libby's buildings. In addition, Bush's forest health initiatives, regarding proper and sensible forest management, would have employed another hundred residents of Libby. Good deal, you say? Think again.
    These new jobs are not going to go to the dislocated folks of Libby, Montana. Nope! When the locals applied at the EPA office in Lincoln County, they were turned away. The EPA told them that they were not qualified. Not because they don't know the job or couldn't learn the job – but because they don't speak Spanish. Apparently, a short time before Stimson announced the plant closure; the Forest Service settled a lawsuit in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ("all leftist all the time") and agreed that they would have to hire more Latino employees. The Mexican American Legal Defense Fund brought the suit and gloated that the settlement would force the Forest Service to impose this decision in every single area and district nationwide.
    Although numerous Supreme Court cases say racial preferences are unconstitutional, the leftists who control the 9th Circuit Court, and leftist groups like the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, could care less. You can't keep a leftist down. They don't give a tinker's damn about how many Supreme Court cases have supposedly settled the issue. Consistently, they show naked aggression and contempt toward the rule of law.
    According to the original intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, racial preferences or quotas should have never been an issue. Yet the Supreme Court has dealt with that very issue on numerous occasions. Nonetheless, the left both in and out of the federal court system never takes no for an answer.
PARR Ed Note: How dumb are we as a nation and a people? How apathetic are we? How much insanity will we be forced to stomach from the court system? Do we Americans have any appreciation for our fellows who are the rural working class of white poor being put out of business in the backcountry of America? Meanwhile, our rich urban elites, located in diverse places like D.C., New York and San Francisco, make public policy for everyone, urban and rural alike. The insanity, however, is that many of them do it by litigating and using federal grants and largesse to destroy their fellow countrymen, the rural poor. Our Congress and executive branch, scared spit less by these reactionary elites, only offer mild resistance to this injustice. The collectivist rich and powerful, like the Sierra Club, Wildlife Fund and Nature Conservancy, are killing this nation. So are those who demand racial quotas and preferences and unlimited immigration or illegal immigration. §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
The Disastrous Gun Control Experiment
(By Bob Manzke Taken From Several News Max Articles)     Two seemingly unrelated recent events have highlighted fundamental flaws in the basic model of gun control. They involve the national gun registry in Canada and a small gun shop in Tacoma, Wash.
    Canada's ambitious Firearms Act, a flagship of Liberal Party social policy, took effect in December of 1998. It required all gun owners to obtain a personal firearms license and register each gun with the Canadian Firearms Centre.
    Recently, Canadian newspapers were filled with stories portraying the undertaking as a total disaster. It was originally promised to cost taxpayers only $2 million, but the bureaucracy has sucked almost a billion Canadian dollars from strained national coffers. To give American readers some idea of the size of this debacle, remember that Canada has roughly one-tenth our population.
     The current scandal was triggered when Canadian Auditor General Sheila Fraser released a report exposing numerous errors and deceptions by those who ran the program. Even those who favor gun control are horrified by the astronomical cost overruns and underhanded efforts to prevent Parliament from discovering the problems. This is a classic example of what happens when a national government is hijacked to carry out an ideological agenda. But there is another important lesson here on the limitations and inaccuracies of a gun registration system.
     According to various reports, many Canadian gun owners were issued inaccurate or largely blank registration certificates. Many violent offenders were not listed in the database of restricted persons. In order to speed up the process and avoid the appearance of failure, thousands of applications were approved without any background check being performed. The agency was apparently unable to cope with the incoming applications even though some say that over 40 percent of Canada's gun owners have not registered.
     The registry is essentially useless and since money was diverted from other law enforcement priorities, the net effect is a reduction in public safety.
     This developing Canadian scandal has an interesting parallel in Tacoma, where the infamous D.C. Snipers allegedly obtained the rifle they used in their killing spree.
     Everyone seems to agree that the rifle was sent to the gun shop by the manufacturer, but it isn't clear how it got into the hands of Muhammad and Malvo, who were banned from owning guns. Perhaps they simply stole it or perhaps the shop owner sold it for cash that he kept off the books.
     In any case, the background check and paperwork required by the much-heralded Brady Act were bypassed. Authorities imply that hundreds of guns may be unaccounted for in this one shop alone.
     These two situations point out the futility of trying to keep guns out of the hands of criminals by using a registry system. If human beings are involved, as they must be, there will always be errors, omissions and fraud. Even if the system could be made foolproof, criminals will always find easy ways around it, like simply stealing the guns they need.
     It is difficult to understand why the gun control lobby has any standing at all in public policy discussion. Even the strictest gun prohibition on the planet has not been effective. In 1997, Britain banned the possession of all handguns, providing for 10-year prison terms for any Englishman rash enough to get nabbed owning one. The British Government has even prohibited Brits from carrying anything they might use to defend themselves if set upon. The result of this insanity:
     The 1994 arrest of a homeowner for using a toy gun to detain a pair of home invasion burglars; A British oil company executive was convicted of carrying an "offensive weapon" because he used an ornamental sword to defend himself when he was attacked.
     Since Britain banned handguns, or anything that even looks like one, vicious criminals have come out of the woodwork to "prey on law abiding British citizens" wrote Joyce Lee Malcolm in her book "Guns and Violence: The English Experience."
     It's been some experience: During the first two years after the ban went into effect, the criminal use of guns in street crimes soared 40 percent; During seven months of 2001, armed robberies in London rose an incredible 53 percent (in London these days the chances of getting mugged are six times greater than they are in New York City). It seems that the Brits are learning the truth of the old saying: "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
     Another lesson the British need to learn is that the experience in the U.S. has proven that in pro-gun states where citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons, crime drops significantly. Since Britain enacted the final, absolute ban on handguns and ultra-tight control of long guns in 1997, the country has experienced its worst wave of gun crime in history. It would seem that the tighter you make the gun laws, the better criminals like it. Yet the gun haters, blinded by their obsession, still urge us to throw good money after bad into their expensive schemes. The only form of gun control that works is to lock up more criminals who misuse them. Costly bans, registration and licensing are a scandalous waste of precious resources.
      Another miserable attempt at gun control in a large democratic country ends up as in disaster. The following report by Ed Chenel Australian Police Officer speaks out.
      Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australian taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
     The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent; Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent) In the state of Victoria alone homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and the criminals still possess their guns!)
     While figures over the past 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly.
     Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased after such a monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns.
     You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the state Assembly disseminating this information.
     The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note Americans, before it is too late!
    With all this evidence that gun control is a disastrous mistake, but the Gun Nazis in America keep beating the same old drum, however the scary thing is that the following came out of Federal Judges… Recently, a three-judge panel of the court, ruling on a challenge to California's ban on private ownership of certain semiautomatic firearms, concluded that the phrase "the people" in the Second Amendment refers not to individual citizens, as "the people" is interpreted in other constitutional language, but instead to the state government's right to arm a handful of persons for something or other: "The historical record makes it equally plain that the amendment was not adopted in order to afford rights to individuals with respect to private gun ownership or possession," penned ultra-Leftist Judge Stephen Reinhardt. "The Amendment protects the people's right to maintain an effective state militia, and does not establish an individual right to own or possess firearms for personal or other use."
PARR Ed Note: Of course, the Second Amendment was written as a prohibition on the prohibition on the central, state and local governments to protect pre-existing rights, not to "afford" any rights. §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Issue Item     John Ashcroft said the [Beltway] snipers will be tried in Virginia. We were so lucky to catch these guys. If Americans had listened to the FBI profilers, we would still be looking for the Dukes of Hazard driving around in a Good Humor truck.
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Issue Item     In faith matters, 'tis the season for "faith"-based marketing appeals. Planned Parenthood mailed out season's greetings calling for "Choice on Earth," a mocking takeoff on the Christmas angels' proclamation of "Peace on Earth" at the birth of Jesus Christ.
White Males Condemned for Eating Pork Chops.
Just when you thought the white male could stoop no lower, PETA tells us that white men don't care about animal cruelty. No, this isn't a joke, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is making such a claim that surfaced a few weeks ago. Here's how the PETA assault on white males begins: "If the idea of animals' being castrated without anesthetics on factory farms isn't at all unsettling to you, chances are you're a man and you're white." The poll, conducted last May, confirms that white males are less likely than Hispanics and African-Americans, the other groups surveyed, to stop eating meat. Also, white males were less likely than the others to endorse excise taxes on meat to help pay health care costs associated with diseases that PETA claims are related to eating meat -heart attacks, cancer, high blood pressure and strokes.
PARR Ed Note: 12% of the population of The United States of America is Black, 13% are Hispanic and less than 1% are Indian. These figures tell us that approximately 74% of the population is white and half of those are males. Lets investigate something that the 37% remaining (white males) are responsible for; paying the taxes that substantially support the recipient groups in minorities, and protest groups including PETA, but how come there is no mention of this. How come we are not credited for building this wonderful country (which we did) but we are blamed for everything that goes wrong, by the victim groups?
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Where Does Sovereignty Rest In America ?
(By: John A Fleming)     Most if not all, of the Indian tribes in our country claim to possess sovereignty as a tribe. This is both untrue and not possible under our U.S. Constitution and the Constitutions of the several States.
    Today, and indeed since the Indian Citizenship Act of June 2, 1924, which gave the then non-citizen Indians (mostly tribal members) citizenship by birth, all American Indians are citizens of the United States of America and of the state that they individually lived in. They each, as well as all other citizens of the United States, posses the attribute of sovereignty that is given to each citizen of our country by the Constitution of the United States. Sovereignty in our nation belongs to the citizens. It does not rest in the state capitals, nor in the federal government at our national capital, Washington D.C.Our sovereignty is not vested in a king, a dictator, a president, nor in elected position of the various states or federal government, and indeed---not in tribes. In short, when our thirteen colonies/states came together and decided to unite, they declared and established a number of principles and rules to include the following,--
* Sovereignty will rest with the citizens.
* Majority rules.
* Through the Articles of Confederation and then the Constitution, they needed and established a national government to do limited national activities with enumerated powers only.
* Through these Articles and then the Constitution, they assured the rights of the sovereign and independent several states, the freedom, liberty and certain other of the individual citizens rights, and placed fixed limitations upon the federal government.
* They established a method to change the Constitution. Indians and their tribes were not only considered but they were mentioned in the primary documents that established our nation. The tribes were not given a place in our federal system of government. The Tenth Amendment of our Constitution specifically provides guidance on this matter and tribes are not included in the distribution of power (to govern). Read it, perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with these documents. The Declaration of Independence gives a good idea of how our forefathers thought of the Indians at that time In our history. Treaty after treaty stipulates that the tribes will obey the Constitution and the acts of Congress. Supreme Court cases abound with the clear facts that the tribes were no longer sovereign but bound to the Constitutional requirements and the will of Congress. Battle after battle defeated the Indian tribes resulting in the tribes being conquered, subjugated and actually subordinated to the will of this nation.
    Here is another myth---the Indian Industry (movement) has for decades been trying very hard to make American citizens in general feel guilty for what "they” did to "them". It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that the pillage, rape, theft, cheating, stealing of property, fighting, killing and hurting of people, that effected Indians and their tribes also affected the common citizen and other immigrants that moved to the west or lived in the west--- the rancher, the farmer, the Mexican property owners and or residences of the southwest, just to mention a few categories. People of all colors, races, and religions, NOT JUST INDIANS, were affected by the lawlessness, wild and uncontrolled criminal activity during this time in our history. The cause was equally as clear. Both levels of Constitutional governments (states/territorial-to include local-and federal) were small, very limited and unprepared for such a massive and rapidly moving force as the migration of peoples to the west. The damage being created by the continuing of this myth, the guilt complex placed upon "whites" by disinformation stemming from the Indian industry, is growing and may well damage many of the good things that industry has accomplished.
     Tribal sovereignty is a myth. American citizens of all racial backgrounds and differing political and religious beliefs individually possess the attribute of sovereignty.
PARR Ed Note: John Fleming has been a ARGU guest author in the past. He has extensive writings on Federal Indian
Policy. John’s expertise on this subject is the result of personal involvement and extensive research he has done. All his writings can be viewed in their entirety on Parr’s web site.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
A Regretful Act     A dear old lady received a bottle of wine as a Christmas gift. There was no indication of the sender, so with some reservations the lady gingerly removed the cork. "POOF" a Genie appeared. The Genie granted the lady the usual three wishes. Her first wish was to be rich. "POOF" just like that a $ million appeared. The Genie then said "you have two more wishes." The lady then said "I wish I was young and beautiful again." "POOF" she became a real knock-out. The Genie then said "you have one more wish, don't rush into it, use it wisely." After much thought the lady said, "now that I am young and beautiful again, please turn my little dog Spot into a handsome young man." "POOF" Spot was gone and in his place stood this handsome muscular young man. "Is that you Spot," exclaimed the lady? "Yes" said the young man, "now aren't you sorry that you had me "FIXED"
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
So Who Gets the Money
(Taken in Part from a Time Magazine Article
by Donald L. Bartlett and James B. Steele)     Anita Hollow Horn, a bright, attractive member of the Oglala Sioux tribe, is a fairly typical beneficiary of Indian gaming. She lives in Pine Ridge, S.D., on her tribe's reservation, with its overcrowded dwellings, 88% unemployment and a school-dropout rate of almost 50%. Hollow Horn, 37, and her four children share a three-bedroom home, opposite a landfill, with her mother and stepfather-and seven other relatives. Fourteen people live in the one-story house with a single bathroom. Hollow Horn and her daughter, 9, sleep on a bed in a corner of the basement; her other children sleep on the floor upstairs. Her brother Reginald, 35, who has cancer, sleeps in another corner with his two sons, 10 and 15. It's toughest when the basement floods. "Sometimes the sewer backs up," says Hollow Horn, "and it just gets all over down there." Black mold has already consumed one wall underneath the staircase and is eating its way up the other. So how, exactly, is Hollow Horn prospering from the $12.7 billion Indian gaming industry? Like most Native Americans, not at all.
    So if the overwhelming majority of Native Americans like Hollow Horn aren't benefiting from the Indian casino boom, who is? In many cases, the big winners are non-Indian investors, some of whom pocket more than 40% of an Indian casino's profits. Actually, calling these people investors understates their role. They often serve as master strategists who draw up the plans and then underwrite the total cost of bringing a casino online: ferreting out an amenable tribe, paying a signing bonus, picking up tribal expenses and paying the salaries of the tribe's officials, all of this before a spade of dirt is turned. If an Indian band isn't federally recognized as a tribe and is thus ineligible for a gaming venture, these full-service backers will bankroll genealogists to construct a family tree, then hire lawyers and lobbyists in Washington to help change the band's status. And if a reservation isn't prime real estate for a casino, the investors sometimes purchase a more suitable patch and instruct their lawyers and lobbyists to persuade the government to designate the land as a trust, as reservation property is called. Building the casino is the easiest step.
    There is almost no oversight of the backers. The National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), the understaffed, under funded, underperforming and under supervised agency that is supposed to police gambling on Indian reservations, knows little about most of the investors. Under its regulations, the agency must approve the management contracts between outside companies and tribes. But a billion-dollar loophole allows tribes to retain companies under consulting agreements without the
NIGC's approval. Neither the companies, their investors nor the consulting terms are subject to the commission's review. A Department of the Interior investigation in June 2001 showed that there were 332 Indian gaming operations, from firehouse bingo games to full-scale casinos, but that only 31 were operating under management contracts approved by the NIGC. As the department's Office of the Inspector General later concluded, "Almost all tribes are utilizing consulting agreements to circumvent the regulatory and enforcement authority vested in the National Indian Gaming Commission."
    As a result, tribes are pretty much free to cut financing deals as they like. Sometimes investors' names surface; sometimes they don't. Tribal leaders don't have to disclose executives' pay or management arrangements, report their profits, issue audited financial statements or divulge self-dealing contracts to the public or their tribe's members. Not all these deals work out for the moneymen, but the ones that do yield spectacular returns.
    Say what you will about Lyle Berman-and people have called him a lot of things: a pit bull, an intimidator, a fearsome competitor-but no one has ever accused him of modesty. Of his casino-development company, Lakes Entertainment Inc., Berman once told reporters, "We're the most successful company in Indian gaming." Because of the secrecy surrounding gambling on Indian reservations, it's impossible to know whether that's true. But Berman has clearly done quite nicely since he began developing and managing Indian casinos more than a decade ago. Among his real estate holdings: a ranch in Telluride, Colo.; a house in Palm Springs, Calif.; an estate called Casa Berman Palmillia on the Mexican Riviera; a condo in Las Vegas; and a $5 million estate in Wayzata, Minn. By his account, as of September 2001, he was worth almost $69 million.
PARR Ed Note: And the poor slob that is trying to compete with the glitzy casinos that offer low cost drinks, food, tobacco, etc. gets busted for having a lousy video poker machine in his establishment. What a bunch of crap. Federal Judge Barbara Crabb granted the right to operate gambling establishments to Indians because they are something special…Indians. So how come so many white-eyes are favored to become millionaires, via the (Sovereign Rights) monopoly the tribes enjoy? Another social engineering project that turns out to be a complete failure.
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Full page ad in The
Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel     Congratulations Governor Jim Doyle. We offer our congratulations on behalf of the 40,000 citizens of the united tribes of Wisconsin, who contribute to the state's economy by: "Helping to provide employment to 35,000 Wisconsin citizens." "Serving 1,520,000 state residents and 500,000 non-residents in our casinos, hotels, restaurants and gift shops." "Supplying opportunities to more than 2,000 Wisconsin businesses that provide our governments and enterprises with goods and services." "Contributing more than $70 million to Wisconsin Charities and other governments."
We congratulate you on this "New day for Wisconsin."
We look forward to working with you to strengthen and expand Wisconsin's economy.
The United Tribes of Wisconsin.
PARR Ed Note: With the gambling compacts due for renewal this year, this add indicates that the Tribes went out and bought a brand new Governor. Apparently, along with blowing their tribal horn about all the wonderful things Indian gambling does for the state, they are reminding Governor Doyle of who contributed very much to put him in office, and they expect repayment when the compacts are re-negotiated. It will be interesting to follow the exploits of Navajo Jim during the next year. Perhaps it would be wise to remind him that he represents more than the interests of The United Tribes of Wisconsin.
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Chairman’s Correspondence
(By Greg Graunke)     Now that we have a new administration to deal with, I feel that we should open a dialog, so I wrote the following letters.
Dear Governor Doyle,
The gambling contracts are coming up with the various Chippewa bands, it is with hope and our wish that you only extend these five years, if you have to extend these monopolies at all. If you have to extend them how about for only one year at a time?
     The Chippewa have repeatedly used the special treaty rights as a lever to extend their gambling monopoly in the past. And future threats of zero walleye bag limits are not inconceivable.
     It is high time that the rest of the citizens of this state be given an equal footing in the area of natural resources.
     Much to my disgust, this summer, I was forced to release a undersize 30 inch musky, with severe spear wounds, knowing full well it would not survive; what a waste!
     I am also forced to check the regulations at each lake to make sure of the rules because the Indians always get theirs 'first and then the rest of us get what is left. Please use your position to put everyone back on an equal footing. You have voiced your opposition to gambling in the past, we would ask that you stay that course. Equally Yours, Greg Graunke…This letter was also c.c. to Wisconsin Senator Feingold.
Dear Secretary Hassett.
PARR would like to congratulate you on your new appointment to secretary of the DNR. To give you some background on our organization we believe that the special treaty rights awarded the Chippewa bands is WRONG and should be changed to reflect equality for all of the sportsmen and tax payers of Wisconsin.
It is our position that shooting deer out of season, spearing spawning walleye and musky, and the unregulated spearing and unaccounted spearing of musky through the ice should be eliminated and everyone should hunt and fish by the same rules. Equally Yours.
    I didn’t get a reply from either Doyle or Hassett, but because I sent a copy of Doyle’s letter to Senator Feingold in Washington DC, I got the following reply from our Senator. Read on: this will amaze you.
Dear Greg,
Thank you for sharing with me your letter to Governor Doyle regarding Native American gaming compacts and natural resource treaty rights. I appreciate hearing from you.
    As you know, the National Indian Gaining Regulatory Act (IGRA) only permits tribes to negotiate for compacts to conduct gambling that is legal in their states. At the federal level, the National Indian Gaming Commission reviews and conducts oversight of Native American casinos.
     However, under IGRA, it is the state governments that ultimately decide the games tribes can conduct. The Wisconsin State Legislature amended the state constitution to allow the class Ill gambling that now exists. The state constitution has since been amended again, meaning if the gaming compacts were to expire rather than be renewed, if the tribes sought a new compact it would be under the current statutes and class Iii gambling would not be allowed.
    You also expressed concerns regarding the spear fishing rights that some tribes currently enjoy. Treaty fishing in Wisconsin is the most closely regulated hunting or fishing activity carried out anywhere in the Midwest. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) conducts population estimates of available fish stocks are made immediately prior to the fishing season. This is accomplished by sampling techniques that determine the population of fish in the lake that are age three or older. Fish of this class are the only fish available for capture, and in order to ensure that there are normal fish populations, DNR prescribes that 35% of this age group are available for capture by all people who wish to catch fish. Of the fish available for capture, Native American spear fishers are allowed to catch up to 50%. The final number, for each lake, however, is determined on a lake by lake basis.
    Thank you again for contacting me regarding these important issue concerning Native Americans in Wisconsin. I encourage you to contact me again in the future regarding this or any other issue of importance to you…Russell D. Feingold United States Senator.
     Well! You read it, and I think you will have to agree with me that it sounds like statements from someone that just fell off the banana boat from Uruguay, not someone who has been a Senator of this state for over a decade. So I wrote the following reply to our Senator:
Dear Senator Feingold,
    Thank you for your reply of January 10: We would like to challenge a few of your statements in your reply to PARR. You state that the Wisconsin DNR conducts fish surveys; in fact that is shared by the DNR with the tribes through The Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission. The Chippewa are allowed up to 100% of the total allowable catch, the part that remains, is what is left for the non-Indian fishermen. Your belief is based, in all probability, on the stated rules by the DNR, that "this is a 50/50” split. To back up our position we would bring to your attention the fact that some lakes have one fish limits on them, and not the regular five. Under this system the 50-50 split is for all the lakes in the ceded territory. The Chippewa opt to take their 50% out of the premiere lakes which brings the hook & line fishermen to a “zero” or “one” fish limit on these lakes. This is because the bands have targeted those lakes for more than half of the total allowable catch.
     To further exemplify the degree to which the 50/50 split is flawed, the Lac du Flambeau band of Chippewa threatened to shut down the lakes in their area to a "zero" bag limit. This sent the DNR into a spending frenzy resulting in the state general revenue fund being tapped to the tune of $100,000.00. At PARR we are convinced that Pittmann-Robertson funds were used for the initial payment. This extortion continues but is now funded by non-Indian sportsmen licenses sold on the reservations.
     One of your statements is that the treaty fishing is one of the most closely regulated fishing activities. This statement stands far from the facts. To mention just a few, the tribes do most of the monitoring of the lakes without the DNR’s presence. What’s that old adage about the fox watching the hen-house?
     Another example is the winter spearing of musky. The Chippewa make an estimate every five years of how many musky have been killed through the ice. That number, which can vary from 300 to 500, is not counted into the yearly quotas by the DNR. Most years the bands open water spear between 300 and 500 spawning musky which are the only muskies tallied. If 300 to 500 are speared in the open water, then why wouldn’t the equal amount speared through the ice be added to the tally, of course that would exceed the quota wouldn’t it?
     This brings us to the 35% are available for capture. The bands are given set limits to spear fish on-each lake which includes size. Could you explain how when knowing that you already have a 24” fish in the boat you can determine the size of the fish in the water to prevent over-quota duplication? Answer is you can’t, so what happens is that the fish are speared, measured in the boat and these (now dead) fish are tossed back in to make the limits come out. To think that all of those fish just happen to be the right size when the boats get back to the dock is a long stretch.
     To back up our statement I would invite you to check with the DNR. About an arrest they made on Jag Lake that had to do with fish being tossed back after being speared and measured. This was observed by the DNR, and not by the Chippewa personnel standing at the boat landing ready to measure and record the fish. The issue of speared fish that are hit, which in all probability means they will die, and not recovered or counted is yet another chapter in this special rights book. The DNR did start a study to look into this but the study was dropped before its completion. In that light the obvious would stand out, many fish are hit and not captured.
     As to how many, it was anybody's guess until we were contacted by a DNR warden just after his retirement. He was given the job of protecting the spearers on the lake by either being in their boats and or in his a short distance away. We would be inclined to believe he would be a very reliable source for information. His comments were straight to the point; he estimated that for every musky speared and boated at least one more was hit but managed to fall off the spear before being put in the boat. It was very obvious to us that this dedicated DNR staff person, who had dedicated his career to the outdoors and the conservation of wildlife, was deeply troubled by what he had seen.
     This brings us to the gambling issue. (A side note here; we noticed the bands just gave our new governor $10,000.00 for his inauguration, and two tribes gave $50,000 and $25,000 respectively to the Governors favorite charity. So in light of the fact he will very soon be renegotiating the gambling contracts will all this $$$ change the outcome)? When Mr. Thompson was in office and negotiating the gambling contracts we contacted him to ask for relief of the special rights and make one law for all of the sportsmen and tax payers of Wisconsin. In essence, fish or chips. His chief of staff at that time called me personally and told me that the bands had made it clear to the governor that if he did not renew the contracts he could expect to see one or zero bag limits the next spring on our lakes. Needless to say we got five more years of monopolized gambling.
     As a final thought on this letter, it would seem that many parties are trying to make this issue seem dead or at least quietly go-away. We very strongly disagree. To make our point we would like to reference the timing of when the lake declarations are put out to the public. When the date was set evidently no one thought about the sports show In Milwaukee, which just happens to be at the same time as the public announcements are due. The first few years they came out on date, but the resort owners and the DNR personnel, at the sports show, took such flak that it now seems necessary to have the information analyzed just about a week longer, right after the sports show is over. To think this is a coincidence would take a lot of thought.
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Your Elite Elected Officials
(By Bob Manzke)     Senate records from 1790-1881 containing signatures of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, and documenting payments for senators' wages and travel expenses. Senators' salaries were then a whopping $6 daily, with travel allowances topping out at another $6 per day. Fast forward to today: The Lords Wednesday voted 58-36 for the Senate and House annual pay hike, boosting their salaries from this year's $150,000 to $154,700. Their take-home pay has raised $18,000 from 1999.
    Are you infuriated by what you read so far? If you really want to blow your top, read on:
     Our Senators and Congressmen do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it. Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society.
     They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. Many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan. For all practical purposes their plan works like this: When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die, except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments.
     For example, Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives. This is calculated on an average life span for each.
    Their cost for this excellent plan is $00.00. Nada. Zilch. This little perk they
voted for themselves is free to them.
You and I pick up the tab for this plan.
    The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds--our tax dollars at work! From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into--every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer)-we can expect to get an average $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (I) month to equal Bryd’s
    Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. And that change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us and then watch how fast they would fix it.
PARR Ed Note: Guys like Feingold that aren’t even on this planet, sure earn the
the $154,000 yearly salary, and of course after floating around Washington in a haze for 20 or 30 years, highly talented people like this deserve to retire in the lap of luxury, living the life of royalty, all at expense of, the people they claim to have served.
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Hollyweird Phonies
(By Bob Manzke)      I am so tired listening to some Hollyweird phony whose only claim to fame is to be able to pretend that they are someone else, and usually a character just the opposite of their own. I’ve had it with these phonies going to the capitols of countries that mean harm to the United States and bad-mouthing this country. Just because they have God-given talent to portray someone they are not doesn’t give them credibility, doesn’t make them experts in foreign policy. I resent them generating career enhancing publicity at their country’s expense. Why don’t they stick to things that Hollywood has become symbolic of…fornicating?
    But there are some highlights in this left wing den of perverts called the entertainment world: Patricia Heaton already demonstrated her class and courage when she unabashedly proclaimed her pro-life beliefs in public. Apparently, she's showing off both traits again.
    Heaton walked out in the middle of the American Music Awards and took a pass on doing her segment of the show.
    Why? Well, Heaton told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that the swearing and racy jokes of the Osbournes and various other presenters turned the program into a "vulgar and disgusting show."
    The actress was particularly appalled at one presenter's references to three-way sex and Sharon Osbourne's joke about Mariah Carey's upper body parts.
    Ryan Seacrest didn't help things either when he pulled open Kathy Griffin's shirt and told a young girl in the audience, "Don't worry, honey, you'll have a pair of these soon."
    Heaton said the show was like being "in the Roman Coliseum." According to the "Everybody Loves Raymond" star, it was "an affront to anyone with a shred of dignity, self-respect and intelligence."
    PARR applauds Heaton and hears that the Osbournes were so crass; the network censor had to have emergency treatment on his "bleep button" finger.
    On Wednesday, Jan. 22, 2003, at the U.S. Senate Dirksen Building Auditorium in Washington, D.C., an extraordinary event took place.
    On the 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Ninth Annual National Memorial for the preborn and their Mothers and Fathers took place. Women who have been injured by abortion gathered with men who have lost children to abortion.
    Perhaps even more stunning to many was the person who offered comments and a prayer during the event.
    She's the national spokesperson for the Silent No More Campaign. She's also a Hollywood actress, model and author. She's the beautiful and inspiring Jennifer O'Neill, and she directed the event.
    Kudos to O'Neill for speaking out for the smallest, most innocent and most ignored Americans -- the little citizens in the womb.
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Issue Item     The Wednesday before Thanksgiving was the biggest travel day of the year; 40 million people traveling and that was just coming across from Mexico. ....
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Issue Item     Emory University history professor Michael Bellesiles's Bancroft Award winning book, Arming America -- specifically its dubious claims that our American predecessors didn't rely very much on arms. Bellesiles's purpose was to suggest that the nation does not really have the Second Amendment legacy claimed by the NRA and other organizations (well, unless, of course, you include that "Revolutionary War" thing). Earlier this week, according to a memo from the Interim Dean of Emory College, the university published a report from the Investigative Committee appointed to evaluate the allegations of research misconduct made against Bellesiles. Despite the "fox guarding the henhouse" nature of such “investigations" by colleagues, the report uncovered "evidence of falsification," "egregious misrepresentation" and "exaggeration of data" that put Bellesiles's "scholarly integrity ... seriously in question." The report concluded that Bellesiles was "guilty of unprofessional and misleading work," which inspired Bellesiles to resign his professorship. The Dean ended his memo: "Emory now considers the investigation of allegations of research misconduct against Professor Bellesiles...to be concluded and resolved." Well, isn't that special!
PARR Ed Note: Beware of false prophets! We are sure you will see many more of these anti-gun studies emerging. With today’s tough economy Professors will be scrambling to impress their left wing gun-Nazi bosses. The sky’s the limit when it comes to retaining one’s permanent, cushy position.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

Back Issue