Mr. Armond's \ campaign\ response

[David Lesher]

Thus far, I've avoided making any comments about things in any way
related to the topics being bandied about. But I am so disturbed by
John F. Haugh II's statement that I felt I must say something. Please
note I'm not upset or surprised about the attacks / denials /
counterclaims, etc. Not that they are trivial matters (exactly the
opposite) but they seem to be almost commonplace in this era.

No, what disturbs me is Mr. Haugh's statement:

>I am simply going to give the Secret Service the information on which
>I based my statement.  It is up to them to investigate the information
>and to determine Len's guilt or innocence.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In case Mr. Haugh has not noticed, there is something called the
Constitution, and its amendments. Because of it, Mr. Rose is innocent
unless and until found guilty in a trial, by a JURY OF HIS PEERS. This
is true no matter what he (or anyone of us) is ACCUSED of, be it:
attempted illegal parking, xenophobia, inciting to riot, jaywalking,
booing a TV wrestler, or you name it.

ANYTHING!

For Mr. Haugh to make such a statement as the above displays either such
ignorance of the concepts of the United States as to horrify me, or
such disrespect for them as to make me wonder how he feels about our
system in general. Perhaps he would be happier elsewhere, in places
where such bothersome concepts do not impede things. 

BTW, I visit, as part of my work, lots of places where the above
protections do not exist. I like the country I live in a lot better,
despite its flaws, after seeing them.



-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.....wb8foz at mthvax.cs.miami.edu 
& no one will talk to a host that's close............(305) 255-RTFM
Unless the host (that isn't close)......................pob 570-335
is busy, hung or dead....................................33257-0335