v04-n201
38 Pages

v04-n201

Course Number: STA 575, Fall 2009

College/University: Air Force Academy

Word Count: 4688

Rating:

Document Preview

From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca on behalf of Cdn-Firearms Digest [owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca] Sent: Wednesday, 17 October, 2001 11:24 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #201 Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, October 17 2001 Volume 04 : Number 201 In this issue: Column: POLITICS OF FEAR Editor's Comment (The gun could...

Unformatted Document Excerpt
Coursehero >> Colorado >> Air Force Academy >> STA 575

Course Hero has millions of student submitted documents similar to the one
below including study guides, practice problems, reference materials, practice exams, textbook help and tutor support.

Course Hero has millions of student submitted documents similar to the one below including study guides, practice problems, reference materials, practice exams, textbook help and tutor support.

owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca From: on behalf of Cdn-Firearms Digest [owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca] Sent: Wednesday, 17 October, 2001 11:24 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #201 Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, October 17 2001 Volume 04 : Number 201 In this issue: Column: POLITICS OF FEAR Editor's Comment (The gun could have been stolen or HOME INVASION DESTROYS VICTIM'S LIFE Editorial: Tough on terrorism EDITORIAL - Preventive detention... UN Suppression of Terrorism Regulations Ottawa unwittingly assists terrorism: Column: McLellan finds it all rather tiresome ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:11:25 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: Column: POLITICS OF FEAR PUBLICATION: The Calgary Sun DATE: 2001.10.17 SECTION: Editorial/opinion PAGE: 15 SOURCE: Calgary Sun BYLINE: Roy Clancy - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- POLITICS OF FEAR; ENVIRONMENT OF UNEASE USHERS IN ANTI-TERROR LAW - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - -- Benjamin Franklin - - - - "People who live in fear of their personal safety cannot live in a free and democratic society." - -- Anne McLellan, Minister of Justice - - - - Fear has become the predominant emotion in North America these days. We can't open a newspaper, or turn on a television or radio without finding unsettling news of the latest anthrax scare. For the most part, "scare" has been the operative word. There has been a mere handful of confirmed cases of anthrax spores sent through the mail in the U.S., but that hasn't prevented hysteria from infecting Canadians across the nation. "For the first time in the lifetime of most people, they are truly experiencing existential fear," said Norman Sussman, professor of psychiatry at New York University. "People seem to look at it as a cliche, but by definition, terrorism is to inflict terror," Sussman told USA Today reporters. "A subgroup of people is scared out of their skins," he said. And many others, it is safe to say, are seriously worried. Although most of us are trying to keep a cool head as we go about our day-to-day business, there is no denying the impact of fear. >From altered travel arrangements, to economic fallout -- things like lost jobs and plummeting financial investments -- we're acutely aware of the dramatic change that has transformed our world. It is into this environment that Canada's proposed new anti-terrorism bill was unveiled this week. Under the provisions of the bill, Canadians could face arrest without a warrant and held for up to three days for a crime not yet committed. They could also be forced to testify before a judge, even in the absence of a formal trial. That may sound scary from a civil rights point of view, but in the worrisome days we've been inhabiting for the last few weeks, it seems less frightening than the alternative. Such provisions would normally draw a deafening outcry of protest, but in the surreal, post-Sept. 11 world, criticism has been muted Canadians have been demanding tough measures against terrorism. There's no doubt these measures -- crafted at an unprecedented pace -- are tough and at first glance, appear to offer some tangible tools for weeding out potential terrorists before they are able to unleash their horrors. There are those who find the idea of diminished personal <liberties> repugnant and unthinkable -- and they have plenty of points worth considering. We should feel extremely uneasy when the government seeks to diminish our personal <liberties>, even when, as Prime Minister Jean Chretien assures us, "a free and open society never lightly increases the power of law enforcement authorities." McLellan has mandated an automatic review of the bill in three years to make revisions, but it would be reassuring to see even further safeguards against abuse built into the legislation. As critics of the bill point out, turning Canada into a police state in the name of liberty is bizarre. Fred McMahon of the Fraser Institute puts it succinctly. "Flood enough cops on the streets, eliminate civil <liberties>, exile anyone who commits a street crime to barren, arctic penal camps, and street crime would virtually disappear," he writes. "The streets of Soviet Moscow were safer than the streets of Toronto or New York -- but at what cost?" In a column on the technology we have available to fight terrorism, McMahon points out that the world now has at its disposal "the very tools - -- and more -- that George Orwell imagined in his nightmare totalitarian world of 1984. "The technology was not ready in 1984, but it is now." Canadians have been demanding tough new measures against terrorism and with this proposed bill, the government has attempted to grant our wishes. This legislation definitely has merits, but in considering them, we must be vigilant that the current climate of fear does not generate a nightmarish environment more frightening than the threat we hope to eliminate. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:09:32 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: Editor's Comment (The gun could have been stolen or unregistered. Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca PUBLICATION: The Edmonton Sun DATE: 2001.10.17 SECTION: Editorial/opinion PAGE: 10 COLUMN: Letters to the editor - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- LETTERS TO THE EDITOR COLUMN - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- THE GUN that killed the 16-year-old boy last weekend was a restricted firearm and by law must be registered. I don't understand why the authorities are launching an inquiry. Isn't it a simple matter of finding out who the <gun> was registered to, charging that individual with the murder and then throwing the registered <gun> owner in jail? Rob Almberg Editor's Comment (It isn't that simple. The <gun> could have been stolen or unregistered.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:10:35 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: HOME INVASION DESTROYS VICTIM'S LIFE PUBLICATION: The Calgary Sun DATE: 2001.10.17 SECTION: News PAGE: 4 SOURCE: Editor BYLINE: Licia Corbella ILLUSTRATION: Photo by JIM WELLS, Calgary Sun LOST EVERYTHING ... Home- invasion robbery victim Reese Dossa stops outside of youth court yesterday. The accused in his case appeared there on other charges. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- HOME INVASION DESTROYS VICTIM'S LIFE - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- We read about it all the time. Stories about robberies and home invasions. Many of us turn the page and neglect to imagine the horror behind such words. Reese Dossa said he used to do that. Not any more. A simple knock on the door on June 3 by two 15-year-old thugs turned Dossa's privileged life upside down. Yesterday, at the youth court on 7 Ave. S.W., as defence attorney Vic Russell entered a plea of guilty on behalf of his young client for seven unrelated house break-ins. Dossa tried to do his bit to reclaim his shattered life by telling "the world" about the havoc these underaged thugs have wrought. The knock came at about dinnertime. Like most of us would do, Dossa opened his door without giving it a second thought. The youths asked to speak to Scott. As Dossa politely tried to assure them they had the wrong address, they forced their way into his home, kicked him, punched him, perhaps even pistol-whipped him and held a fully loaded semi-automatic handgun to his head -- flicking the safety lock off and on, off and on. They then tied Dossa's hands and feet together, slipped a noose around his neck and strung him up from his four-poster bed, causing him to lose his voice for four days as a result. Ever since that Sunday evening, Dossa has lost so much that listing it all would be impossible. But here are just a few things. He lost his fearlessness, his sense of safety, all of his hair as a result of the stress for a while, tens of thousands of dollars, his girlfriend, his real estate clients, his new vehicle, his ability to work, his ability to live alone in a house, his joy, household effects and his belief in justice. But worst of all, Dossa -- despite being the victim of a random act of violence -- even lost his reputation, as a result of the crimes committed against him. At the time, Dossa, 32, was a successful real estate agent working with his mother, Sherin Dossa, in the same field. He was living in his own $500,000 Mount Royal house on the 1400 block of Prospect Ave. and had, just one month earlier, bought a new silver 2001 BMW SUV, which he left parked in his driveway -- a beckoning beacon to the home invaders. After the attack, other real estate agents spread rumours that Dossa's house was broken into was because he was a drug dealer. It was a vicious and untrue smear that saw numerous clients cancel their listings. "It disrupted every aspect of my life," says Dossa, who as a result of the beating he received that night suffered some swelling on his brain and some other nerve damage that causes him to clench his teeth almost constantly. "I'm still seeing a therapist. Every night I think about what these guys did to me. I don't feel safe in my own home." Despite upgrading his home alarm system, he was never able to sleep there again so he sold the house -- which was appraised at $498,000 -- for well under the listed price in order to get out of there as fast as possible. Now he lives in a high-security condo and drives a non-descript car. The next day, Det. Keith Cain and partner, Det. Len Street arrested the pair at the Red Carpet Inn on 16 Ave. N.W. After the detectives read the suspects their rights, they let them get dressed and that's when one of them -- the one whose lawyer pleaded guilty for him in court yesterday -- lunged across the bed, reached under a pillow and grabbed his <gun>. Street pounced on the offender and wrestled the <gun> away. That's when the two officers made the chilling discovery that the weapon was no toy and it was fully loaded. The maximum sentence this attempted police killer can receive is four years. He is expected to get a much lighter sentence when he appears in court on Dec. 6 at 2 p.m. Dossa says he has heard that one of his assailants -- the one with the shorter criminal record -- will get no more than six months in custody for his crime. "I just wanted you to know what the reality is behind the words 'home invasion,' " says Dossa. "I am the one who has paid the price. Those who did this to me are going to get a slap on the wrist." That's the law. It's a knock. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:16:05 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: Editorial: Tough on terrorism PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen DATE: 2001.10.17 EDITION: Final SECTION: News PAGE: A16 SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Tough on terrorism - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Part II In trying to protect Canada from terrorism, are the Liberals threatening those <liberties> that make our society worth defending? Yesterday, we argued that in terms of combating the terrorist threat -- outlawing fundraising for terrorist groups and imposing tough jail sentences on those who aid terrorism, for example -- the government's Anti-Terrorism Act is good. But other elements of the bill give us pause, and should concern all who prize their civil <liberties>. Consider the proposals for "preventive detention" and "investigative hearings." If the legislation is approved unamended, it will be possible for police to take citizens into custody before a crime has been committed, almost unheard of in Canadian law. Existing law requires that a crime be committed, or that there be strong evidence of a conspiracy to commit a crime, before someone is arrested. The terrorism law would allow police to detain some one on the "reasonable suspicion" that they are involved in terrorist activities. The bill considerably lowers the standard of proof needed for the state to strip you of your freedom. To be sure, there are safety checks. The police need permission from the attorney general to do this. As well, they can only hold someone for 24 hours before appearing before a judge. The judge, though, can extend the detention for as much as 48 hours. And you can bet that during that time the detainee will be asked questions. Here, again, the legislation takes an unprecedented step. Currently, citizens have a right of silence; they don't have to tell authorities anything (unless subpoenaed to appear in court). No longer: For the purposes of anti-terrorism investigations, people can be compelled to answer questions. To refuse would be contempt of court. Do these measures go too far? Well, if there's reason to believe someone has evidence that might prevent a terrorist attack, it's hard to argue that society doesn't have a right to monitor, detain and compel that person to speak. Yet we should be cautious, particularly because other parts of the legislation are less defensible. For example, the government wants the courts to be able to order Internet sites to delete "publicly available hate propaganda" as part of an increased effort to combat so-called hate crimes. This is censorship, a suppression of free speech. Open societies should deal with "hate" by exposing it to reasoned argument. People should be free to say stupid things (right, Ms. Thobani?), others to refute them. Ultimately, though, the danger of the anti-terrorism legislation is its potential for leaching into other areas of the law. For example, some future government might apply the practice of pre-offence detentions to, say, men considered a danger to women. This example alone suggests the bill needs more than a three-year review provision as a check on abuse. Governments are always reluctant to give up power; it would be better to have a sunset clause that would see this bill go out of force in, say, five years, if the terrorist threat were marginalized. Much of this bill is good; parts of it need rethinking and debate. Terrorism must be fought. But cherished freedoms must remain safe. Otherwise, the wrong people win. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:18:03 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: - EDITORIAL Preventive detention... PUBLICATION WINNIPEG FREE PRESS DATE : WED OCT.17,2001 PAGE : A14 CLASS : Editorial Leaders EDITION : - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- EDITORIAL - Preventive detention... - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Editorial Staff EDITORIAL - Preventive detention Canadians fear for their safety, like the Americans, who, on Sept. 11, saw the treacherous power of terrorism. The Liberal government has pledged to make Canadians safer by getting tougher on terrorists. Central to that plan is a proposed "preventive arrest," which would grant police the extraordinary power to arrest and detain someone merely on the suspicion of plotting a terrorist act. This should cause Canadians to be fearful, indeed. Bill C-36 includes the new concept of arresting to prevent a criminal act. At present police must have cause to believe someone is conspiring to commit a criminal offence, or catch them in the act. Parliament would have Canadians accept that arresting people on suspicion -- not on reasonable grounds of belief, the usual test -- will improve public safety. A person, on suspicion, could be held up to 24 hours before coming before a judge, and up to 72 hours without charge. Those suspicions, after review by the judge, could be used to restrict that person's <liberties>. What constitutes "suspicion" of a terrorist plot is unknown, because there is not a good body of experience upon which to lean. At present, an officer who sees a car moving erratically across the road can stop the driver on suspicion he is impaired and insist upon a breathalyser. That is a far cry from arresting and holding without charge. Observing a person who is acting strangely cannot be the terrorist equivalent of a threat on the road. Would last weekend's warning by the FBI that new terrorist attacks are imminent have caused authorities to scoop up "the usual suspects," perhaps people who may have been seen with religious zealots who themselves were suspected of carrying out criminal acts? This may be what frightened Canadians would want now, but is it right and appropriate? Is it helpful? A law such as this would not have prevented the attacks of Sept. 11. There was some evidence that a terrorist attack was imminent, but who and where and how was unknown. In the aftermath of the plane crashes, stories emerged that men of Mid-east origin wanted to learn how to steer a plane, but were not interested in learning to land one. Today, such a detail is telling, but we cannot know what are the tiny details that are relevant to the next, new act of terrorism. If the government has some examples showing how previous acts or plots of terrorism might have been averted through the powers to arrest upon suspicion, it should lay them out now for Canadians to consider. If the government has no such examples, it may be reaching for solutions that are not, in fact, helpful, but might merely lull Canadians into a sense of safety. In the extreme, preventive arrest may be abused, and innocent people hurt. This endangers Canadians' civil <liberties> to no good end. Justice Minister Anne McLellan said, in introducing this new measure Monday, that Canadians living in fear of personal safety cannot live in a free and democratic society. Her remedy is to trade off some liberty. Without evidence that erosions of this sort will pay off, she is merely making Canadians less free. Canadians should reject that. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:18:43 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: UN Suppression of Terrorism Regulations http://canada.gc.ca/gazette/part2/pdf/g2-135x4.pdf Government names 18 more individuals and entities which there are reasonable grounds to believe are involved in or associated with terrorist activities. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:19:45 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: Ottawa unwittingly assists terrorism: PUBLICATION: National Post DATE: 2001.10.17 EDITION: National SECTION: News PAGE: A6 COLUMN: War on Terrorism: Investigation BYLINE: Adrian Humphreys SOURCE: National Post DATELINE: MONTREAL - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Ottawa unwittingly assists terrorism: RCMP: Welfare and crime - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- MONTREAL - When terrorists arrive in Canada, there are two support systems ready to assist them -- one created by like-minded extremists and another erected by the government of Canada, two of the RCMP's anti-terrorist investigators said in a rare presentation. Tracing the activities of known terrorists and their associates in Canada shows a pattern of abuse of the legal and social systems, organized assault on financial institutions and routine victimization of the population through street crime, said officers with two of the RCMP's most secretive units. The public rarely hears from the National Security Investigation Section (NSIS) or the Criminal Intelligence Directorate (CID). Yesterday, however, investigators from both offices briefed delegates at the International Money Laundering Conference. It is believed to be the first public presentation by the CID. "Some people are sent here with a mission and some people come on their own and are recruited. But once here, they all have the same MO [modus operandi]," said Sergeant Philippe Lapierre, with the NSIS, the force's counter-terrorism branch. The first step is to claim refugee status, allowing the claimant to remain in Canada while their case works its way through Canada's often cumbersome immigration and refugee regulations. Next comes applications for Canadian benefits -- welfare and health cards granting access to medical care. That is used as a base salary as they establish themselves. The terrorist then typically links with others in Canada who engage in crime to boost their income. The focus is usually on "invisible crime," Sergeant Lapierre said, referring to bank fraud or automatic teller machine swindles that are usually absorbed by the banks, or petty thefts. Next comes money laundering to mask the illegal origins of the cash. They then use the profits to infiltrate the legal economy. "Instead of having money in the bank or in a safety deposit box, they start running a business. Then, if you approach them, they say 'I'm a legal businessman and I'm making money. Why are you bothering me?' They have a source of income with which they can justify their standard of living," he said. "Some people get assimilated and buy all the luxuries that North America can provide, like stereos and TV, but some people are dedicated to the cause until the end." It is then that they typically become involved in planning or executing some terrorist activity that supports their cause, he said. "Terrorists require means to finance their operations and with the exception of state sponsors, crime is an option," said Corporal Tim O'Neil, an investigator with the secretive CID. In Canada, investigators have seen terrorists involved in low-level street crimes, manipulation and production of fraudulent documents such as credit cards and passports and other government papers, and abuse of charitable foundations and non-governmental organizations, he said. "An organization such as al-Qaeda, headed by the infamous criminal Osama bin Laden, is nothing more than an organized criminal element. He has been likened to Al Capone of the 1920s," said Corporal O'Neil. "Al Capone was able to bring together violent factions to create a very potent business and criminal enterprise in the United States. Bin Laden has been able to bring together the resources of a multitude of nations and criminal organizations and terrorist organizations to suit his needs and his agenda." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:23:54 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" <BreitG0@parl.gc.ca> Subject: Column: McLellan finds it all rather tiresome PUBLICATION: National Post DATE: 2001.10.17 EDITION: National SECTION: News PAGE: A7 COLUMN: War on Terrorism: In the House BYLINE: <Paul> <Wells> SOURCE: National Post ILLUSTRATION: Black & White Photo: Tom Hanson, The Canadian Press / Anne McLellan, the Minister of Justice, answers -- or doesn't answer - -- questions in the House yesterday.: (Photo ran in all editions except Toronto.); Black & White Photo: (A line of mounted police.) - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- McLellan finds it all rather tiresome - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Today we bring you Jean Chretien's Approximate Words of Reassurance. "As Roosevelt said, there is nothing worse than the fear of fear," Jean Chretien told reporters after a Cabinet meeting yesterday. Precisely so, more or less. And as Winston Churchill once said, we have nothing to offer but the sweating and the tears and the other fluids. Never let it be said that these halls were empty of stirring oratory at this historic moment. Or as Julius Caesar put it, I came, I saw, I performed optimally against the victory parameter. The Commons is debating terrorism around the clock, except when members pause to complain they're shut out of the debate on terrorism. On Monday, they were at it until 2 a.m. Then they were right back at it for another 12-hour session yesterday, devoted to second reading of C-36, Anne McLellan's jumbo economy-sized anti-terrorism bill. At this rate the bill could pass second reading and be fired off to the justice committee by tomorrow. Already yesterday a few clauses of the massive bill had become the subject of concern among MPs from every party. As sometimes happens outside Question Period, partisan labels mattered less than individual members' interest in passing a good law. Which is sort of the way this place is supposed to work. Here's John Bryden (Liberal, Ancaster), for instance, worrying that C-36 would permit the Justice Minister to declare information that led to the detention of a suspected terrorist off-limits -- unavailable for public examination -- forever. "Mr. Speaker, that is terribly dangerous," Mr. Bryden, a long-time freedom-of-information advocate, said. "That is precisely the excuse that has been used by dictatorships throughout history and around the world." That's not the way Liberals usually talk about Liberal bills. But as somebody once said, you learn something new approximately seven times a week. Variations on Mr. Bryden's concern about rights abuses were shared by several of his colleagues -- even Scott Reid (Alliance, Lanark-Carleton), a bright young libertarian who's had little to say on the Opposition benches because his assigned topic, intergovernmental affairs, has been as lifeless as the Parti Quebecois lately. Mr. Reid staggered to his feet very late Monday night to sound the alarm about "six limitations of freedom" in the new bill, "which I think ought to be taken very seriously by all of us." Some of these, like the restriction on free association implied in jail terms for participation in terrorism activity, are fine with Mr. Reid. But others worry him in a sweeping bill that extends police powers of surveillance and arrest; assigns the label terrorist activity to a dozen kinds of behaviour; and attempts to sweep terrorists' henchmen, helpers and bankers up in the same governmental dragnet. Given all that, Mr. Reid said, "there is an absolute need for a sunset clause in the legislation." This idea -- that the new law would become ineffective after, say, three years, unless specifically reintroduced by the government -- is gaining fans in every party, although they hardly seem the majority of MPs yet. Still, already you can sense a lively play of ideas around this crucial bill. That's good news, because as Edmund Burke once said, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to play hooky. The question is whether Ms. McLellan will show any patience for mere MPs' meddling with her brainchild. The Justice Minister is not fond of free advice. Her answers during question period yesterday were a litany of condescension as she systematically pooh-poohed each critique. Fun excerpts: "Mr. Speaker, as the Leader of the Opposition should know ..." "Mr. Speaker, I believe the Honourable Member is incorrect ..." "Mr. Speaker, if the Honourable Member cares to read the definition of terrorist activity ..." "I would hope that nobody in the House would suggest ..." "Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member deliberately misconstrues ..." It all became wearisome for the Minister, and she began pleading with her colleagues to put a cork in it until later in the legislative process. "If the Honourable Member wishes to discuss this point further I would be happy to do so at committee." And again a minute later, "As I have said I will be more than happy to take this matter up with the member in committee." One wonders why, if the Minister finds her colleagues' every thought repetitive or excessive or ill-informed at second reading, she expects to become a font of collegiality at committee. Still, anything's possible. As P.T. Barnum once said, there's a sucker born at frequent intervals. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #201 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:akimoya@sprint.ca List owner: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca FAQ list: http://www.magma.ca/~asd/cfd-faq1.html and http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Faq/cfd-faq1.html Web Site: http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/homepage.html FTP Site: ftp://teapot.usask.ca/pub/cdn-firearms/ CFDigest Archives: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/~ab133/ or put the next command in an e-mail message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca get cdn-firearms-digest v04.n192 end (192 is the digest issue number and 04 is the volume) To unsubscribe from _all_ the lists, put the next five lines in a message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca unsubscribe cdn-firearms-digest unsubscribe cdn-firearms-alert unsubscribe cdn-firearms-chat unsubscribe cdn-firearms end (To subscribe, use "subscribe" instead of "unsubscribe".) If you find this service valuable, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the freenet we use: Saskatoon Free-Net Assoc., 1702 20th St. West, Saskatoon SK S7M OZ9 Phone: (306) 382-7070 modem lines: (306) 956-3700 and (306) 956-3701 Home page: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/ These e-mail digests are free to everyone, and are made possible by the efforts of countless volunteers. Permission is granted to copy and distribute this digest as long as it not altered in any way.

Textbooks related to the document above:

MOST POPULAR MATERIALS FROM STA 575
MOST POPULAR MATERIALS FROM STA
MOST POPULAR MATERIALS FROM Air Force Academy