9/23/2004.
By Andy Byrnes - Editor of 'The Mountain Sun Newspaper'

Maybe it's me.

I believe that major media is trying to convince those among the electorate who would like to see this country undergo a major change in management on November 2nd that we're fighting a losing battle.

I think they're lying.

Maybe it's all those Exxon and Pfizer ads in between the news stories, but something tells me that Senator John Kerry's campaign is not in the shambles they would have us believe it is.
I believe the networks are just as guilty of pandering to large corporations - and I understand they do pay the bills - as is the current administration, and if the networks can convince those of us who would like to see George W. Bush returned to Crawford, Texas that we haven't got a chance, maybe enough of us will stay home on November 2nd to extend his lease on the White House.

As you know, I prefer to write primarily about local issues in this column, but what triggered this train of thought was a phrase I heard more than a handful of times while watching TV at my sainted mother-in-law's house this weekend. "The March of freedom."

Now, that's a catchy little bundle of words; it's something a political speech writer could inject into almost any mundane policy statement to jazz things up, but it's hardly a policy statement, is it?

It is if you're George W. Bush.

When asked - as he often is these days - how things are going over there in Iraq, George W. Bush always manages to get that particular phrase in there somewhere amidst the stuttering, "Nothing can stand against the march of freedom."

That's what he says.

The talking heads on network television have taken this all in, digested it, analyzed it and decided that it clearly indicates Mr. Bush's superior leadership abilities; not to mention his clear grasp of foreign policy regarding invaded (past, present and future) countries.That phrase scares me. "Nothing can stand against the march of freedom". Does that include us? I believe it does. Those of us - young and old - out to scratch a simple living from the soil have already suffered at the hands of this administration. Mr. Bush's education reform has been a catastrophe, his healthcare initiatives nave only begun to break the bank, and his tax cuts-well, you tell me.

How are you doing financially?

I'm really not qualified to question the guy's foreign policy skills, but if we aren't embroiled right now in the mother of all disasters in the Middle East I'm a monkey's uncle.

I don't know if anyone in the country's former middle class can look around and say that things are better now than they were four years ago, but all Mr. Bush has to say is "Nothing can stand against the march of freedom" and apparently all those witless souls who have suffered under his "leadership" will stiffen their spines in patriotic fervor and return him and Mr. Cheney to the White House.

I don't believe that many people are that stupid.

I believe that any polls showing Mr. Bush with a ten point lead have been conducted by special interest pollsters. And I believe those polls and the media mantra that has Kerry going down the drain are the last - and somewhat inspired - gasp of a regime that has run out of any other answers.

I couldn't help but notice that at the same time they were lauding Mr. Bush for his terse perspicacity, the talking heads on TV were less than generous with his opponent's positions on the issues - let alone his record of achievements.

Senator Kerry's political enemies have flaunted reason and created their own ethical standard out of garbage at every turn of this campaign and yet nobody behind a microphone ever actually looks directly into the camera and says: "Does anybody really believe this nonsense ?"

John Kerry is awarded a Silver Star and three Purple Hearts in Vietnam and they call him "weak". They question whether he actually deserved that third Purple Heart. The media reports the story without ever calling them what they deserve to be called.

Incidentally, the members of our current administration, with the exception of Colin Powell, are all cowards - moral and physical cowards. I'm happy to call them what they deserve to be called.

John Kerry returns after fighting a war that history has proven to be a policy - if not a moral -mistake of epic proportions and he puts himself on the line to testify before Congress on the side of reason and they attempt to label him a "traitor".

No one in the mainstream media leaps to his defense. There are guys my age who would disagree with me, but as a Vietnam-era vet I kind of wish I had that kind of courage back in 1970 when I got out of the service.

He was a man of his convictions and it is that man who I would like to see become President of the United States.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Maybe we should have Mr. Bush for four more years. Maybe we should re-elect the guy who to this day can't prove that he showed up for National Gua'rd duty in Alabama while Kerry and a lot of far less privileged grunts were getting their tails dusted on the Mekong Delta.

This latest flap is perhaps the most egregious. Dan Rather turns up documents that prove Bush was, at the least, a slacker back in the 70's and the argument somehow transmutes into the originality of the documents:

Nobody cares to dispute their accuracy, but that issue seems to have been placed well beyond the back burner.

Look, I'm as sick of hearing about Vietnam as you are, but the flaks running Bush's campaign are going to force feed it to us for as long as they can.

You know why ?

Because by doing so they can accuse Kerry of living in the past, they can divert attention from his positions on all the important issues - positions which he has, incidentally, and which he has clearly stated - and they can divert our attention from Mr. Bush's performance as Chief Executive which -impossible though it may seem - casts even greater doubts on his character, integrity and intelligence faff than his performance in the Texas Air National Guard 30 years ago.

And the networks are allowing them to get away with it.

Hey, I love a parade as much as the next guy, but if you think I'm falling into step with this "march of freedom" you're crazy.

Use your heads.
**********

Below is feedback on the story above
Supporting Intelligent Dissent That Does Not Benefit Enemy
Dear editor,
Andy, you have always been a good friend of mine and I do not expect this letter or your recent editorial to change that. However, I do take strong exception to being called stupid. Let me explain. Each work day for over 20 years now I come into contact with persons who assume that I am stupid. They display this to me by telling me ridiculous lies. When they are driving 85 MPH in a 55 MPH zone and I stop them and ask if they know why they are being stopped they respond with a "no". When they are driving from one side of the road to the other and I stop them and they reek of alcohol, have bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, open containers of alcohol in the vehicle and I ask them if they have been drinking they respond with a "no". When I find marijuana growing on their property and ask if it is theirs, they respond with a "no". These people think that I am stupid enough to believe them. I could go on but my point here is that after all these years I do not take kindly to being called stupid. Now no one has called me this to my face including yourself Andy, but in your latest blast of President Bush you called all of us who support him "stupid". You called all of us who will vote for our current President "stupid". That is one of the problems many of you liberals have; you have always had this superiority complex. You state in your editorial that President Bush's use of the phrase, "The march of freedom", scares you. That's another one of your problems; liberals scare easily. Now let me get to my real point in this letter. What you are about to read in print I have felt strongly about for a long time. John Kerry has every right to be proud of his military service, but what he did after he came home from Vietnam was wrong. It was more than wrong, it played a part in the deaths of 28,000 servicemen and women. After the Tet offensive the Vietcong and North Vietnamese were on the verge of defeat. At this time America had lost approximately 40,000 servicemen and women. The war could very well have ended at that time except our enemies saw the division in our country. They were further emboldened by the actions of persons like Jane Fonda and John Kerry. Both of these people met with representatives of North Vietnam, our enemy and a country we were at war
with, and neither were there to beg the release and/or humane treatment
of our POWs. Like you, Andy, I also served during the Vietnam War but not
"in country". I was actually stationed in Washington, D.C. during the large anti-war demonstrations in the 1970's. I witnessed throngs of young people, people my own age, who were lashing out at everything associated with the government, including myself and my friends, lowly, non-policy making, Navy Seamen. This division is also what North Vietnam saw. These actions prompted North Vietnam to continue the war and an additional 28,000 servicemen and women lost their lives. In their naive attempts to end the war the anti-war faction actually prolonged it. This same thing is going on in Iraq now. The insurgents, many of whom are al-Qaida, the same people who attacked our nation on 9/11, see the division in our country and are continuing the terrorist tactics in the hope that we will abandon Iraq just as we did in Vietnam. Right now our military personnel are killing terrorists who want to do our country harm and prevent Iraq and Afghanistan from
becoming free societies. This is what our military does, it fights wars, it protects our country and our interests. The majority of its members believe in what they are doing and when you do not support what they believe in the%it is very hard for them to believe that you support them. Did you feel supported, Andy, while you were serving in the Marines during the Vietnam War? I realize that now you are going to become scared that I would like to see a limit on the right of our citizens to disagree with our government. But that is not what I am proposing. What I would like is some intelligent
dissent, done in a way that does not benefit the enemy and cause additional deaths to our military members. Remember Andy, this war was voted on and John Kerry voted in favor of it. I realize that it is hard to believe since he has changed his opinion so many times since that vote, but it is true, he voted for the war and based his vote on the same intelligence utilized by President Bush. I also take strong exception to you calling our current administration, with the exception of Colin Powell, moral and physical cowards. I assume that you make this assumption based on the fact that they either did not serve in our military or served in our National Guard. This is very unfair. Being, or having been, a member of our Armed Forces does not make one brave nor does having never served make one a coward. I am at odds with anyone who dodged the draft back during the Vietnam War, including Vice President Cheney, but President Bush volunteered for National Guard Service and became a fighter pilot. There was never any guarantee that the National Guard, particularly fighter squadrons, would not be activated. The accusation that. President Bush never fulfilled his duty with the guard has never been proven and certainly not by the documents that you mention in your editorial. Fabricated and forged documents obviously prove nothing. What is known as a fact is that John Kerry received an "early out" from the Navy to run for political office. Andy, I'm not surprised that you are not "falling into step" with President Bush's "march of freedom", but I am surprised that you so freely fall into step with a person who may have contributed in the deaths of so many of our fellow service members. Bill Campeau
**********

Now that you've read Bill's B.S.,
below is feedback to Bill's story from
someone who KNOWS the Truth !
There is an edited copy of this letter in the 10/14 issue of The Adirondack Sun. The following is the letter, in it's entirety.
Many more responses have poured in that are about the same message...
It would take up to much space to put them all up...
Guess you'll have to buy a subscription :)

Ignorant may be a better term...
after all, Ignorance is curable, stupidity is not.
Dear editor,
This is a long response... rhetoric and insults tend to shorten a letter while truth has lots of words. 2 years ago when a state policeman pulled into my driveway and asked me arrogantly and disrespectfully if I knew cannabis plants were growing nearby, I said no, and I was telling the truth. When that same officer asked me if the cannabis plants that were found were mine, I said no, because it was the truth. When that same officer asked me if I knew whose plants they were, and I answered no, I was telling the truth. And when I was treated like I was guilty until the officers left my yard, I was convinced they couldn't tell or didn't care when someone was telling the truth.... or, you are guilty before proven innocent.
  I got news for you, usually people don't know when cannabis is grown on their property. A lot of times people who grow cannabis, don't own land. Sometimes when people say no, they are telling the truth. I've got news for you- Your president is 'misleading' you to your face and you are treating it like it was truth. Stupid ? No... Ignorant ? Yes. Confused over what is fact and what is a lie... Yes. If Mr. Campeau believes he can tell when someone is lying, then the blatant manipulation of this administration should be obvious to him. It's obvious to me, and just about every mother who has raised teenagers. They'll get away with as much as possible while 'misleading innocently' to your face. This administration thinks they are superior AND they think instilling fear and intimidation against innocents is nothing more than how you get from point A to point B to push their agenda. That's just how things get done. Bullys. Well, there's more of us than there are of them. Remember 'A Bug's Life' ?

Ok, #1... there is no Kerry/ Fonda connection. That is pure republican propaganda, because let's face it, if they played fair, they'd never win. Rather than give these reopened wounds the serious treatment they deserve, the Republicans substitute the politics of scapegoating and sheer fantasy.... There are many ways to be a traitor, and John Kerry wouldn't ever be considered as one of them. Who's the traitor who reported the CIA operative's name anyway? Robert Novak, wasn't it ? Wasn't it his patriotic duty not to release such information ? Wasn't it his patriotic duty to turn in the person who gave him this information ? Donald Rumsfeld could be considered a traitor since he approved torture techniques used at the prisons and he sold chemical weapons to Iran when he knew full well that they were being used against Iraqis. Both side of the fence was played on that one... and is a writing that is not for today.

John Kerry coming back from his tour of duty and telling the truth was brave and honorable. He spoke out against the atrocities witnessed with his own eyes. He too, was just 'following orders'. To assume that "it played a part in the deaths of 28,000 servicemen and women." is purely speculative, given what in your words of your role as a "lowly, non-policy making, Navy Seamen." Does that give you expertise in military operations ? I would think it would be irresponsible to state such a thing, knowing your admitted 'lowly' position. You should check your sources. Oh, and check your math. according to the website www.vietnam.com, it states 58,000 of our soldiers died for reasons unknown, not 68,000. I would say "killing gooks for sport, sadistically torturing captured VietCongs by cutting off ears and heads, raping women and burning villages." would be the reason they were prompted to continue the war. Not what John Kerry said when he got home. Should they have just laid there with their legs spread, ready to do what the soldiers told them to do like a good citizen of their own village ??

Another misstatement in the letter was "The insurgents, many of whom are al-Qaida, the same people who attacked our nation on 9/11" This is one of the biggest lies ever propagated by the Bush Administration, and you fell for it. There are so many lies that are repeated so often, eventually they are constued as fact again and again. One thinks what they are told in the media is correct, in fact they have their own agenda. They are major contributors to the Bush campaign... Bush passes legislation leaned in their favor. It is misleading at least, then the misinformation gets spread around with nobody checking to see if it's fact. Nobody does their homework to check facts. They think it's the journalists job to weed out fact from fiction, but they are just reading the copy under their nose. One thinks he/she can tell the difference between truth and fiction, but they are dismally incompetent. So the lie continues... vehemently, as if it was truth. Believed... as if it was truth. Go to the library and look up news for yourself. They have the internet there. That isn't regulated... yet. Look up other country's newspapers and non-profit news sources... find out for yourself. Being spoonfed your news, only teaches you the shape of the spoon. Watch LinkTV, and NWI.

The 'insurgents' in Iraq, as they are called are NOT AL QAIDA ! Repeat after me... Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.

Nothing NADA Zip zilch. no evidence of a connection... no evidence of Weapons of Mass destruction... no evidence of a nuclear weapons program... no evidence of biological weapons... no evidence of chemical weapons... no evidence of weapons programs... no evidence of posing as a threat... no evidence he finished his own guard training. no evidence the president understands anything about the war. He led the nation into it with false pretenses. It is a truth that he doesn't know the truth, but he is a darn good pretender.

What our military does, is follow orders from the higher up's agenda, whether it be an honorable agenda or not. My heart breaks for those soldiers like my heart breaks when I see a child being manipulated and abused by a guardian, who is only out for their own agenda.... using them for their own gain, while cutting their pay and benefits. Sometimes those orders get them court martialed and landed in jail while the commanders keep their hands free of any 'dirty' work. Sometimes they have to be brainwashed into thinking what they are doing is the 'patriotic' thing to do, whether it is or not, and may God help anyone who disagrees... and sometimes there is a reason to fight. For lies isn't a reason. Our soldiers deserve more than this administration will give them. They are, after all, doing the rich man's dirty work.

Who's freedom are we marching for when over 3,000 Iraqi children died in September alone, either by soldiers hands on both sides, or having their mothers watch them starve to death under circumstances not fit for a dog ? Bush approved all this. The biggest story of the Iraq war is about the torture of Iraqi children. A German magazine called 'Report Mainz' aired accusations from the International Red Cross, that over 100 children are imprisoned in U.S.- controlled detention centers, including Abu Ghraib. "Between January and May of this year, we've registered 107 children, during 19 visits in 6 different detention locations," said a Red Cross representative.

The report outlined eyewitness testimony of the abuse of these children. A Staff Sergeant who was stationed at Abu Ghraib, said interrogating officers had gotten their hands on a 15 or 16 year old girl. Military police only stopped the interrogation when the girl was half undressed. Another incident described a 16 year old being soaked with water, driven through the cold, smeared with mud, and then presented before his weeping father, who was also a prisoner. Boys were sodomized with cameras rolling, and the worst part is the soundtrack, of the boys shrieking... and this is your government at war. The abuses took place, the files show, in a chaotic and dangerous environment made even more so by the constant pressure from Washington to squeeze intelligence from detainees. Riots, prisoner escapes, shootings, corrupt Iraqi guards, unsanitary conditions, rampant sexual misbehavior, bug-infested food, prisoner beatings and humiliations, and almost-daily mortar shellings from Iraqi insurgents--according to the annex to General Taguba's report, that pretty much sums up life at Abu Ghraib. According to coalition intelligence officers cited in a Red Cross report from last May, between 70% to 90% of Iraqi detainees held in these prisons were arrested "by mistake." That means they were innocent. Bush was the most murdering governor on record... how many of those were innocent ? Memos ordering the abuse of prisoners were signed by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. The Justice Department and Mr. Bush's senior legal advisor went out of their way to craft arguments justifying this, claiming that torture isn't really torture and that the President is basically above the law. We took thousands of innocent civilians off the streets in Iraq and threw them into hellhole prisons, where they were beaten, raped, and killed. Those pictures are out there, and they show the rape and torture of children. The international media is reporting on it. Where is the American news media? Where are the pictures? Who is responsible for this abomination? Torturing children in the name of freedom? Is this what we have become? The phrase 'March to Freedom' should be looked upon skeptically. Is this what the 'march of freedom' is all about ? People attack our country, so we 'liberate' a country that had nothing to do with it in retaliation ? What line of reasoning are you justifying this with ? Lives are saved when wars are ended. Especially illegal, immoral ones like this one. Too many people have died for this lie already.

I wouldn't be blaming the 'dissenters' in this country for the outrage Iraqi citizens and extremists feel about our troops occupying their country.

John Kerry said the president should have the power. It is up to the president being an honorable man, with checks and balances as a back up - for that abuse of power to be kept in check. Just like all the other people who are in position of power. Without honorable intentions, 1st comes Ego, then superiority complexes, then corruption. It is dishonorable men in positions of power that have superiority complexes. Without the dishonor and power, it would just be a small neurosis.

So how do we dissent, without 'aiding the enemy' ? I did not read how to do that in the letter.

I would have to agree with Andy on the coward thing. 100%. We do not get our news from the propaganda factory called network news. We get our news from places that don't have an agenda other than getting the T R U T H O U T. Having not served, by itself, does not make one a coward. Getting special treatment so the spoiled rich kid can claim 'patriotic' status while not serving, is another. George Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service -- first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty. He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts. The 1968 document has received scant notice. On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge, Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit. Bush's unit certified in late 1973 that his service had been ''satisfactory" -- just four months after Bush's commanding officer wrote that Bush had not been seen at his unit for the previous 12 months. Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense for manpower and reserve affairs in the Reagan administration, said after studying many of the documents that it is clear to him that Bush ''gamed the system." - Like he's doing now. Sounds like now would be a good a time as any to fulfill his obligations. I suggest he return to active duty, without safety equipment. It what he's asking his troops to live through. I say give him a taste of real life.
[Minister Kathy Colton]
**********

One Sandwich Short of a Picnic
Dear Andy,
This letter is in reply to Bill Campeau. I agree with you, Bill. All of your people are not stupid, just one "sandwich short of a picnic". If all people saw the movie Fahrenheit, 9-11 you would change your mind. I know, everyone on your side of the coin will say the entire movie was based on lies. Well Bill, if this is so, Bush could have ground the maker of the movie into dust and put him out of business. However, no reply from Dubya. Bill, instead of using the Jane Fonda cry of "Hanoi Jane" why not use your own. Ms. Fonda probably was wrong but that's over 30 years ago. To say Fonda and Kerry and others caused 28,000 more deaths is pure "horse-pucky". However, in 2004 Bush and Co. have caused well over 1,000 deaths of our wonderful kids, and this frosts my cookies. This was never, ever necessary. There were no WMD, no ties to Osama Bin Laden, and as I said before, it was Bush's ego trip. As far as the entire administration being cowards, that is not entirely true. But Bush and Cheney were for sure. Don't give me the crap that Bush really was a pilot. If we all live long enough one will see this
was arranged, as I believe his honorable discharge was, by his Daddy. Bill,
after watching your hero in the first debate, you can see that he is really not worthy of four more years. He stumbled, fumbled and repeated himself for 90 minutes. While Mr. Kerry took him apart, piece by piece. He may be your Commander in Chief, Bill, but he's not mine.
Respectfully submitted,
[Cpl. M.R. lelfield], Retired, US Army (four years Germany)
P.S. Bill, I'm a good Republican but I think for myself !
**********

Blame Loss of Lives on Nixon, Not Kerry
Dear Editor,
Andy, I hope you respond to Bill Campeau's letter yourself, but I couldn't let such B.S. go without responding myself. First of all, I would think that making a public political stand as a New York State Trooper is somewhat unethical if not 'stupid'. But everyone has an opinion, so I'm going to give you mine. I was born in the early sixties so I didn't fully understand what was going on about the Vietnam war until it was almost over. I never

had to worry about the draft, going to war and possibly dying. I have talked to many of my friends over the years and we all have said that we would have avoided the draft one way or another, I for one would have been one of those protesters that you blame for 28,000 lost lives. Bill, let me educate you about Vietnam. We went to war to keep our form of government - democracy -in South Vietnam. Our government is based on freedom and everyone having a voice. Yet you and the people like you would suppress protests and opposition and make everyone cower to the government. (Ever hear of communism?) To blame opposition and protesters for 28,000 lives just proves how ignorant you really are. I don't suppose that President Nixon had anything to do with those deaths? Oh yeah, you are probably one of those people who still think that Nixon was a good president! Those protesters and opposition probably ended the war several years and many lives before it would have ended otherwise. You are way out of line to criticize John Kerry for anything he did during or after the war. He was there. He experienced war firsthand. You did not. Wake up, Bill. If you want to blame anyone for the 58,000 American deaths blame the Lyndon Johnson and Nixon administrations for underestimating what resistance and resilience we would encounter. Now let's move on to the Iraq war. President Bush put us in a war on false information and very poor intelligence. You fail to realize that we still have found no weapons of mass destruction and there is absolutely been no proof of an al Qaida connection or any connection to 9-11. President Bush also failed to have any real plan to run the infrastructure of Iraq after we toppled the government. I am a strong supporter of our military but feel that our military should be used as a defensive force to defend our country and people. If you think that we are defending ourselves by attacking Iraq you are stupid. I mourn and feel real bad for the over 1,000 young men and women and their families who have died unnecessarily. You are going totally against the ideals of democracy by talking about limiting the rights of citizens to disagree with the government, it is also impossible to have intelligent dissent when you are dealing with idiots. I sincerely hope that this war ends real soon before any more of our fine young men and women die. Anyone who can't see the comparison to Vietnam is blind. When we pulled but of Vietnam the government we left behind crumbled in about a year and the very same thing will happen in Iraq. We have the most division in our country since the Vietnam war and the only thing keeping away large demonstrations is that we don't have the draft - yet. I hope the young people in this country rally and start some protests because this middle aged man would surely join them. Bill, you also talk about liberals having a superiority complex, yet you belong to a group of people who have the biggest superiority complex and are on the biggest power trips than anyone else. Yes, we are scared because it's people like you who want to take away our freedoms that so many have died for. So after reading your 'opinions' Bill I think you're way beyond stupid; you're something far worse.
 [Todd Lyndaker]
**********

Paper Appears to be Domain of Liberals
By officer [Bill Campeau]
Dear Editor,
Andy, it appears your paper is the domain of the liberals and dissenting opinions are not welcome nor even read with enough open-mindedness to be properly understood. I clearly stated that I am in favor of intelligent dissent in time of war. You seemed to understand this, Andy, as you titled my letter "Supporting intelligent dissent that does not benefit enemy." However, the respondents did not seem to. So, I will say it again, intelligent dissent that does not encourage the enemy, that does not further endanger our troops. This is possible with a little thought if you liberals could set aside the hate you have for everyone not of your own opinion and for'every thought,' idea or plan that is not of your own making. And I do not need a history lesson on the Vietnam War from Todd Lyndaker, a person who never served in the military of this country, who states that he and his friends would have "avoided the draft one way of another" and would have "been one of those protesters". Well let me tell you something, Mr. Lyndaker, you would have fit right in. Now that you have political aspirations you want to sound pro-military, you want to appear to be on the right side of everything, but you don't care enough about our community, or have courage enough, to help solve a serious drug abuse problem in our county. A few weeks ago I found 70 marijuana plants on your property. When I interviewed you in regards to this you claimed that they were not yours but stated that you knew who did own them. When I asked for that person's name you refused to give it. This tells me that you either condone the use of marijuana, lack courage, or do not care about the adverse effects it has on our youth, their families and our society. You also state that I "belong to a group of people who have the biggest superiority complex and are on the biggest power trips than anyone else," and that you are "scared because it's people like you who want to take away our freedoms that so many have died for." By these statements I assume the group you are referring to are police. Well let me educate you, Mr. Lyndaker. The police, along with our military, protect your property, your rights, your freedoms and your very life. We do this obviously for very little appreciation from people like you.

I stand by my thoughts in my first letter and will not respond further on this matter as I seem to be creating exactly what I had hoped to change.

Bill Campeau
**********

Editor's Note: Okay Bill, Now It's My Turn !
by [Rev. Neil Colton]