From:  Nick Barlow   Chief foreign correspondent for  bartcop.com

You'll like this one...

From: Roy Batty

Subject: Guns don't kill people ...
 

 Here's the critical stat on gun deaths:

 USA (Significant Anglo-Saxon population, exposed to
 movie/video game violence, ridiculously weak gun laws):

 5.2 gun-related deaths PER DAY per 20 million people in 1996.
 6.0 gun-related deaths PER DAY per 20 million people in 2000.

 __________________________________________________

 AUSTRALIA (Significant Anglo-Saxon population, exposed to
 movie/video game violence, stronger gun laws which were
 strengthened even further five years ago):

 0.5 gun-related deaths PER DAY per 20 million people in 1996.
 0.2 gun-related deaths PER DAY per 20 million people in 2000.

 Bottom line:
 Anyone with a brain (i.e. anyone other than George W "tell me
 what to say Mr Heston" Bush) can see that the variable here is
 the law. Australia's works, America's doesn't.

 For the record, I am an Australian clay target shooter and
 occasional hunter. Despite that, I never bought the tired old
 "they're taking away our freedoms" line that the gun lobby (yes,
 we have one) trotted out when our government moved to tighten
 laws in the wake of the world's worst mass-shooting, which
 occurred right here in 1996.

 Five years on, I feel vindicated. In 1996, our streets were more
 than 10 times safer (in terms of gun deaths) than yours, a stat
 which INCLUDES the aforementioned mass-shooting. Five
 years on, our streets are 30 times safer, and the mythical forces
 of government control are no closer to hegemony. Do the math
 America - it's really simple.

 Please don't take this as a foreigner's anti-USA rant, but I simply
 have to ask: when is America going to wake up from the trance
 that allows the gun industry (through its mouthpieces, Smirk and
 the NRA) to re-define a death-and-destruction issue as one of
 imperilled freedom and "compromised values"? The same
 trance that allows big oil to decimate the world's environment
 while the people barely stir, that instills apathy in the face of a
 homeless problem more readily associated with the Third World
 than the First, that allows democracy to be sacrificed so that the
 "right" candidate can impose his backers' rapacious,
 objectionable agenda. Personally, I blame the "Liberal" media.

 You're right Smirk: Guns don't kill people; gun laws which
 appease your major contributors do.

 Wake up: you're being scammed.

From:  crabhead@alaska.net

Subject: Napster

Hi Bartcop,
               In regards to Napster,,I've bought umpteen thousands of albums, cassettes
and cd's in my lifetime.With the exception of greatest hits albums, I usually buy a product
for one or two good songs for eighteen dollars an album.We are forced to do this.
In my opinion its like wanting the Discovery channal but having to pay for the
Watching Flies Fuck channal to get it!

I figure I'm owed some freebies.
Long live Napster!
Thanx

crabby

From: hermans@prodigy.net

I sat, as did millions of other American's, and watched as our government underwent
a peaceful transition of power.  I was proud as Mr. Bush took his oath of office.
I was sad as I watched Mr. Clinton board Air Force One for the final time.

It may surprise you that this made me sad, but let me explain.
Watching this part of the days festivities, I saw 21 U.S. Marines, in full dress,
with rifles deliver a 21 gun salute to the outgoing president.
It was then that I realized what was wrong with America's military.
They need more practice with their fire arms.
Every last one of them  missed.

Herman Schaffel

From:  gruesome@prodigy.net

Subject: The Honorable Justices

Hey Bartcop!

Have you ever noticed that while we are encouraged to voice our opinions
to our elected officials in both the legislative and executive branches of
government, our appointed judicial officials are inferred implied immunity
from public opinion? Where does the Constitution say that I cannot bitch
at a Supreme Court Justice?

But for some reason the mailing address of the Court has been a secret, until now.

Honorable Pissant Justice_______________
The Supreme Court of The United States of America
1 First Street, N.E.,
Washington, D.C. 20543

There is something to be said for pissing off the big dogs!

--gruesome

From: efestag@mail.alac.org

Subject: Two groups of people agree with Rush Limbaugh

(1) One group is every bit as cynical as Rush. Make no mistake about it,
whenever he makes noises like he cares about his listeners, he comes off
phony as a 3-dollar bill. He laughs all the way to his mansion in Florida.
All his broadcasting art cannot hide the essential reptile he is inside.
This group knows all this, but doesn't care.
That's because they're equally reptilian.

(2) The other group is so naive, they are entirely taken in by Rush. While
the first group merits contempt, the second merits pity. They are probably
fooled by every con man that comes their way, not just Rush. Just because
Rush tells them to, they will bend over backwards to work against their best
interests in every way. In the meantime, Rush counts his millions in the
bank and laughs maniacally.

Eckhard Festag

From: tcmack@swbell.net

Subject: a project...

Being stuck in Texas, I run into a bunch of Smirk idiots who continue to
blast Clinton and are not aware of anything done wrong by the President
Select, "Oh he's such a good prez!"

What would be useful would be a printable log of everything Smirk has done wrong...
from stealing the election, backtracking on emmissions, all the moneys he's taken from
corporations, the Greenville accident, the lopsided tax cut, etc.

It would be a valuable tool to unravel a paper and go down the list of how bad a president he is.
Could this be implemented online?  If it were started now, it wouldn't take long and would easily be upgraded.

Tommy
 

Tommy, what a good idea!

Everyone - send your lists of what Smirk has done wrong to Tommy at tcmack@swbell.net
We will print his compilation.

Good work, Dude.

(Condolences on being in Texas...)

From: kdoyle@hass3.hass.usu.edu

Subject: little help

BC.

Now and then I cruise over to the CNN online chat rooms.  They're terrifically right-wing
and I sometimes feel overwhelmed.  There's a fairly new chat room on Bush's first 100 days in office.
How about some of our people going over there to help me knock down some of these right-wingers?

If you have the time,

http://community.cnn.com/cgi-bin/WebX?@65.8xBTcblsMDA^1@

K. Doyle

Subject: Oh for fuck's sake

I found out tonight watching "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" that
Smirk's presidential salary is a 100% increase over that of Clinton.

I believe Clinton received $200k, so Smirk is making almost half a mil.
Think of it, half the brains for twice the money.

Cynthia
(no email address please)
 

Cynthia,
The weird part is, Smirk & Tin Man were making almost $30,000,000 a year
and they gave that up to "help" the country.

That's scary...

From: jenden@gateway.net

Subject: Where are the naked Republicans

I can't find them.  Help.  I am trying to share with friends from Bluff City,
just a few miles from Manchester, Oklahoma.
They deserve a beaver shot too you know.

Den of Jenden
 

The naked Republicans are at  http://www.bartcop.com/picidx.htm
Most of them, anyway...