Blowing Away
Police State Smokescreens

by Angel Shamaya
Founder and Executive Director of KeepAndBearArms.com
http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com 

Copyright 2000, KeepAndBearArms.com, All Rights Reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without express written permission by the author. Reprint in full will be freely granted -- with prior written approval -- in any format where it will serve the cause of Liberty as exampled by America's redcoat-besieged Founding Fathers -- provided the intentions are to create positive forward motion on behalf of our worthy cause.

December 20, 2000

A friend of mine once told me, "If you stick your head up, somebody is going to try to chop it off, and it will probably come from an ally." I guess I know what he means now, and when it happens, it's utterly disgusting. If you read this, you will see what I mean. To help keep a confrontational topic as light as possible while leaving no stone unturned, I have also distilled the humor out of this situation. Sometimes ya gotta laugh to keep from crying.

A well-known Second Amendment-supporting police officer in the gun rights community has attempted a public Character Assassination -- with me as his target. This good gentleman and his worthy associates have publicly called me a "lying, fabricating, deceiving, cop hating, fear-mongering, hateful rhetoric spewing, naive and greedy Shamey Sham Scam wretch and whacko" in defense of the Second Amendment Infringers and their tactics. My accuser's scathing response to a recent news report I wrote has received wide publication through "gun channels" on the internet. In fact, the person who gave it the widest distribution and urged the recipients to forward it claims to have a list that is "several thousand strong." A lot of people received it, and read it -- and some of them even believed it.

But what lies beneath this gentleman's disparaging announcement is his unabashed stand for what I call "Cops First, American Freedom Second." His love of and respect for the many good men and women in law enforcement who daily put their lives on the line to keep our streets safe has been placed above his commitment to the Second Amendment. I stress this point because it is urgent that we understand it before continuing any further, so I will repeat it plainly: my accuser's Actions are coming from Love. Having been in and around law enforcement for most of his adult life, he knows the great challenges his badged brothers bear, and he is their champion true. Unfortunately, his love of the badge is misprioritized above his love for and understanding of Freedom -- and the trouble he's having resolving that issue has been directed squarely at me.

If you have some time and would like to get the most out of this document, click here.  Another way to read this document involves reading Leroy Pyle's Attempted Assassination of My Character and then clicking on the text where you agree with him or would like to see my response. But you'd miss a lot of what these people have done to attempt to cover for their support of the enforcement of unConstitutional gun laws if you skipped over the following sections. The highlighted ones are most enlightening -- but so are the rest. There is also information contained herein about how my accusers are using the same tactics against JPFO/CCOPS, as well.

If you really want to get the most out of this document...

1. First read the first report I wrote about a recent gun confiscation conducted by the ATF here in Arizona. This is the report from which many of my Accuser's quotes are derived.
   
   

2. Next, read Mr. Leroy Pyle's recent announcement to our community from start to finish without clicking any of the links. I have provided the text, in full, below this introduction.
   
   

3. Then, before going through my following responses, come back up here and ask yourself these questions:
   A) How do I now feel about Angel Shamaya?
   B) Do I believe anything Mr. Pyle has said about Angel Shamaya?  
   C) If YES, then how much of what Mr. Pyle has said do I believe about him?
   
   

4. Go back through Mr. Pyle's announcement and use the linked words to investigate for yourself -- before you draw conclusions. Explore and examine all the links. Leave no stone left unturned.
   
   

5. Proceed to Part 2 of this document where I have taken care to distill from this experience some of the fundamental tactics used to defend the police state:
   False Accusations
   Tactics of Discrediting
   Alarming Beliefs Held by Some Police Officers
   Being an American
   
   

6. Conclusion

Following are many foundations of a Police State Mentality that can and must be questioned at every turn.

Character Assassination Attempt

(Killing the Messenger)

Following is the exact text of what was sent out far and wide about me, including to some of our own KeepAndBearArms.com members. This announcement was sent out by another of my would-be character assassins, Chris Stark -- to his list he claimed on 12/15/2000 to be "several thousand strong." Recipients of his message in at least one online forum were urged to "please forward."

Note: Mr. Stark also published this announcement on his own website here: http://www.goa-texas.org/cgi-bin/alerts/mb.pl?PN=113 - where you will see the words "by Chris Stark." I've never understood why he does that when someone else authored the piece, but understand that Chris Stark did not write the following; though he may have helped, Leroy Pyle wrote this libelous and instructive piece of history. And they published it on one or two other public forums frequented by liberty advocates, as well -- smearing me at will along the way.

Click any text that is underlined to be taken to my response. Start reprinted material: 

07 December 2000
Innocent Until Proven Guilty!
by Leroy Pyle
The  Second Amendment  Police  Department
http://www.2ampd.net

Go to  http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer/

An article on KABA attracted attention by its obvious exaggerations and bias. KABA editor, Shamaya, had gone out of his way to create the perfect story. BATF had served a warrant on a gun store and Shamaya's story of the incident included every gun owners worst dream. The BATF "storm troopers" said and did everything that you have ever heard a government agency gone bad do, in spades and did not even deserve the slightest peep in the press. The story was too perfect and begged an investigation.

Angel wasn't there, of course, and had traveled to visit the store owner to conduct his "interview". You can see this story at:

http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer/atf.htm

Shamaya's e-mail address is Director@KeepandBearArms.com.

To the layman, it may have appeared legitimate. To anyone familiar with procedure, it was like hearing the "news" report on a semi-auto revolver. It stank.

I asked Shamaya to produce the affidavit that he claimed was in his possession, but he explained that the store owner did not want to make that public until he prepared a response. I asked, repeatedly, over a period of time, to try to let him ease away from his fabrication.

Melissa, a list member of the 2ampd@egroups.com discussion group insisted on evidence to prove my claim that the story appeared exaggerated. She repeated it enough that I looked around for a copy of the affidavit. Shamaya had faxed it around, so a copy came my way. It wasn't until I reviewed it closely to answer Melissa that I realized what a fabrication Shamaya's story really was. I could not believe the outright lies, clearly proven by merely comparing his "news" with the affidavit.

This has nothing to do with the store owner, or the validity of the affidavit. I hope that the store owner will take advantage of every legal device afforded him.

It has everything to do with the "news" story that Shamaya created on his website. If you compare his "news" to the affidavit, it is clear that he lied. It wasn't until I hit "reply" to Melissa and started cutting and pasting some of the elements that I realized just was a fabrication the story was. Granted, there are some who prefer to believe the "news" :-). For the curious, compare the "story" to the affidavit at http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer/.



e-mail to Melissa:

Melissa, you seem to be desperate in your attempts to deny the fear mongering and hateful rhetoric contained in Shamaya’s news items. And, really, you may be reading it the same way most folks read the anti-gun news reports in the newspapers, just taking it for face value. We all depend on our own personal biases and life experiences to make decisions on these things.

Let me point out what I consider to be biased reporting and lies. This is just me and Joe and Bruce and cops, so take it for what it is worth:

The title sets the tone, don’t you think? A lengthy investigation took place where the dealer is alleged to have committed numerous violations over a period of time. Those reports were reviewed by a prosecuting attorney, an affidavit was prepared and presented to a judge, who approved the legitimacy, and the warrant was served. All procedures were correctly followed and administered. Remember, there are people who violate the laws. I am surprised you don’t see the bias in the title, itself, since it would be just as easy to speculate that the ATF was going out of their way to avoid violating the suspect’s rights by studying the evidence further prior to an arrest. This is a common procedure, but Shamaya knows nothing of it, and could care less as long as his news gets your attention:

ATF Rips Off Another Gun Dealer in Arizona
Confiscates 274 guns and 3,000 Form 4473's
Without making an official arrest or even filing charges

by Angel Shamaya
Director, KeepAndBearArms.com

Shamaya writes: "On October 25, 2000, The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms sent approximately 30 federal and local agents in stormtrooper attire to confiscate firearms from a dealer."

That’s a lie. They wore windbreakers to identify them. Intended to prejudice, no doubt.

Shamaya writes: "These government operatives also confiscated guns Jerry held on consignment for several customers, and they also took his personally-owned firearms along with guns he'd been storing for an ailing friend."

The affidavit demonstrates that Jerry was illegally and repeatedly selling guns marked personal use. I, too, feel sorry for Jerry’s ailing friend, and recommend that he kick Jerry’s rear, warrant or not! No one can deny that the ailing friend was intended to inject emotion. Would you?

Shamaya writes: "When I called ATF today to find out if it is standard operating procedure to want only damage collector's items when they are stealing them, Larry X said..."

That is another Shamaya lie and a very good example of how he reports news in an inflammatory manner. They didn’t steal the evidence. And as further evidence of Shamaya’s youthful naiveté, he goes on to express some surprise when the person on the other end of the phone wanted to know who the blazes was calling. I mean Melissa, read what he said to the guy over the phone. Wouldn’t any sane person expect to be considered a nut with such a question?

Shamaya writes: "so there was a new tape in the player and the tape was rolling. But ATF confiscated the tape that shows them unnecessarily and irreparably damaging Jerry's property -- and broke his VCR in the process. I am sitting here reading -- for the third time -- the search warrant, given to me by Jerry himself, and I can't seem to locate the words "video tape" anywhere on the warrant."

Another Shamaya lie. The affidavit clearly defines certain evidence, and anyone with half a brain can read page 4 at http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer and see that a videotape is clearly included.

Shamaya writes: "(Was ATF afraid to let people see what abusive and disrespectful people they are? Why else would they cover their tracks like common hoodlums? Maybe Special Agent in Charge and Group Supervisor Marvin G. Richardson or Assistant SAIC, Joe M. Gordon -- overseers in this outrageous act of violence -- can answer those questions. Or perhaps Robert C. Gantt, the agent who secured the search warrant from U.S. Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson -- the judge who presided over Bob Stewart's preposterous hearings -- can help shed some light on how a tape can be stolen when it's not on the search warrant.)"

An obvious Shamaya lie, to anyone who read the affidavit. It is clear that the investigation alleged repeated violations in the store involving customers. The affidavit was intended to obtain evidence of those transactions. What better source than the surveillance camera? Was it not intended to capture illegal activity? Well, it did, and it may be used for evidence as intended.

Shamaya writes: "The Mesa police assisted in this raid, as well, earning themselves a demotion in the eyes of every gun owner in Arizona. Congratulations, officers. You helped assault a Good Guy and alienated a whole segment of the society you are supposed to protect and serve. Nice goin'."

Shamaya now tries to paint the local cops as bad guy, and paint them with his broad brush. Who the blazes is he to say his lying articles represent ALL Arizona gun owners? It is a safety procedure to place uniforms in the vicinity of a plain-clothes operation to assure neighbors of the validity of the operation. Makes sense, doesn’t it? But common sense often escapes Shamaya when he is writing "news".

Shamaya writes: "Jerry's crime? Apparently, in Mesa, the city has an ordinance requiring gun dealers to have a "pawn permit" if they sell used firearms -- or so he was told while a team of armed and consistently disrespectful "men" busied themselves stealing 274 guns with an estimated value of approximately $300,000. "How much is the pawn permit," you ask? $100.

A BIG TIME Shamaya lie. Read the affidavit. Is there even the slightest reason to believe that the only violation was a neglected pawn permit? Let’s face it, Melissa, Shamaya was making his own case, the truth be damned! And he runs the lie up the flagpole for all to see, including his "take" on the chance that lying is not enough, with:

Shamaya writes: "Except for that little permit said to be required in Mesa. And that is only if the ATF was telling the truth. (Some of them are incorrigible liars, you know. ATF sends super-secret special agents who impersonate other people's identities into gun dealers' businesses to attempt to trick them into committing technical violations, so they are not only liars, they are entrapping imposters, as well.)"

Melissa, it is beyond me how you might miss the obvious bias in this "news" report. I can understand that you might miss some of the lies, but clearly, a comparison of the Shamaya "news" and the affidavit shows lies.

You may not agree that Shamaya lied, but I am sure many who compare the "news" with the facts will see the obvious lies. And it has nothing to do with whether you agree with what ATF does, but by how this is being "reported". Have you ever heard the expression, "You can’t win in a piss-fight with a skunk?" Once you are proven a liar, how is the public expected to view future "articles?"

How can Shamaya express indignation over alleged abuses when he has to lie to prove the abuses? And if he lied about the case based on the "testimony" of the store owner, wouldn’t you be a little wary of his "testimony"? The store owner participated in the many violations over a period of time. He then tells Shamaya if you are to believe Shamaya:

"Jerry Michel gets the closing statement today, as follows: "If these guys will do this to me over some $100 permit when I was already licensed to sell firearms, I shudder to think of what they would do to someone over a $10,000 violation." If you wish to contact Jerry Michel of Specialty Firearms, here is how you do so: (480) 962-0913  1055 N. Mesa Drive, Mesa Arizona 85201."

The store owner lied about his violations. So, Melissa, can’t you see the possibility that Jerry lied to Shamaya, who then fabricated his story using more lies and emotional rhetoric to create the "news"?

The abuses have to be addressed, Melissa, but we don’t have to make them up. If we "cry wolf" and are caught lying, what affect [sic] does that have where there is a serious abuse and we try to call out?

Sincerely,

Leroy Pyle
The  Second Amendment  Police  Department
http://www.2ampd.net

Back to the Top

07 December 2000

By the time you have finished this correction of the misstatements made about me, you may understand why I find great humor and fascinating irony in the fact that Mr. Stark and Mr. Pyle launched their public attack against me on Pearl Harbor Day.

Back to the Top

Innocent Until Proven Guilty!

In the very same report my accusers called "Innocent Until Proven Guilty!," they have convicted a yet uncharged gun dealer of being guilty until proven innocent.

Back to the Top

Go to http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer/

Mr. Pyle telling you to "Go to http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer/" was, to some, egregious. As I said in my second report over this gun confiscation,

"I will produce as much of this affidavit as Jerry permits, as soon as he says I can do so. Though it's now a matter of public record available to anyone, I respect this man enough to do what he asks. I also respect the opinions of Neal Knox, Larry Pratt and David Hardy (former NRA lawyer who is still closely allied with them), and they all suggested to not pound on this too much until ATF files charges."

Publishing false information about a man who just went through every gun owner's nightmare is not the best way to positively influence the gun community on his behalf, as evidenced by Mr. Pyle's convicting him as being guilty until proven innocent.

And the preponderance of "pounding" has been necessitated in defense of Mr. Michel from "Second Amendment" allies.

Because this document is being used falsely (in at least some ways) against a gun dealer by his own community, here is the link to the affidavit: http://www.2ampd.net/azdealer/. We hope some of the people who were turned against Mr. Michel will revisit their opinions -- and then base them solely on the facts after reading this entire message. (If the pages are no longer there, we can hopefully assume Mr. Pyle has read this message, realized his mistakes, and stopped his attacks on Mr. Michel. If that is the case, please know the the only text in that document that bears on the truth in this matter is contained in the text below or on my website, where it will remain.)

Back to the Top

Leroy Pyle

Leroy Pyle has done a great deal of good for the cause of gun rights. You can see his KeepAndBearArms.com archive here: http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/Pyle. I hope when people see the mistakes he made against me that they will go easy on him. While I disagree with some of his positions including his choice to prematurely convict a gun dealer and side with the ATF in this gun confiscation, he fights on our side a heck of a lot more than most Democrats, and we should remember that. I am hoping he comes around to the full support of the Second Amendment as intended by the Founders, and I am not giving up on him, at all. Quite the contrary, I am pulling for him to make the shift to supporting the Real Second Amendment as opposed to the watered down version many people including gun owners have been willing to accept from their masters -- and I believe he can. 

Please read my assessment of this situation throughout this document and see if we can come up with ways to help him and other law enforcement officers understand that the Constitution, the Oath to defend the Constitution and Freedom come before following unConstitutional orders.

http://www.2ampd.net

Mr. Pyle has quite a nice archive going on his own website. If memory serves me correctly, he is the one that actually came up with the name of his organization, but we did discuss various names for the new Pro Gun Police Organization we agreed our community needed. 2ampd.net and the Second Amendment Police Department were, in part and in conjunction with several other liberty-focused people, a KABA project. Mr. Pyle even commandeered the email discussion list called KABACops, at my request/urging. (As of this writing, he is still holding our KABACops list hostage -- refusing to return the list and list controls over to KABA after repeated requests including a legal notice from our President.)

Mr. Pyle gave me his American Express card over the phone and in email, telling me to procure the domain name in the name of KeepAndBearArms.com -- as his show of commitment to working together. After thinking about it for a few days, I refused -- as a show of mine. After reading his accounts of how he'd had problems arise during his time with NRA and LEAA, I told him I wanted him to maintain full control of his organization -- and that we'd support him in whatever ways we could including publishing whatever he sent us so long as it fit our mission.

I have only ever refused to publish one thing that Mr. Pyle wrote: It's the GUNS...Stupid!.  He strongly supports the so-called "war on drugs." Along with many civil rights activists, I stand in direct opposition. The fact that the WOD is being used to violate more rights than any other civil matter in modern times coupled with the fact that a great many of our own members would have eaten him alive had I published it, I politely refused. The fact that our site is about guns and his article is much more a "down with drugs" type of message made it all the less sensible to divert people's attention away from our primary objective. Had it been more about guns and less about supporting the "war on drugs" because drugs are "bad" or "wrong," I'd have published it anyway. We've published quite a few things with which we personally disagreed. Disagreement is good... when it is civil and leads to reasoned debate.

Back to the Top

part 2

obvious bias attracting attention

Quoting My Accuser:  "An article on KABA attracted attention by its obvious exaggerations and bias."

This depends on how you define the word "bias." I can see this two ways. See bias.

Back to the Top

part 2

exaggerations

Quoting My Accuser:  "An article on KABA attracted attention by its obvious exaggerations and bias."

After having reviewed my news reporting to which Mr. Pyle has taken exception, here are the exaggerated statements I see that I made:

1)  "ALL"

In this paragraph:

"The Mesa police assisted in this raid, as well, earning themselves a demotion in the eyes of every gun owner in Arizona. Congratulations, officers. You helped assault a Good Guy and alienated a whole segment of the society you are supposed to protect and serve. Nice goin'."

For accuracy, the phrase "every gun owner" should say "many gun owners," and the phrase "a whole" should say "an important."

It should read:

"The Mesa police assisted in this raid, as well, earning themselves a demotion in the eyes of many gun owners in Arizona. Congratulations, officers. You helped assault a Good Guy and alienated an important segment of the society you are supposed to protect and serve. Nice goin'."

I completely agree with Mr. Pyle's analysis of the phrase "every gun owner." I commit to being attentive to the use of absolutes in future reporting unless I am speaking of absolute truths -- in which case I will defer to the Truth before "political correctness."

2) A different version of "ALL"

In this sentence:

"They strip people of their possessions and livelihood for insignificant, petty technical violations as a way of life. It's who they are."

It should read:

"The strip people of their possessions and livelihood for insignificant, petty technical violations as a way of life. As far as gun confiscations go, it's who the ATF is."

This statement and a couple of others were so absolute as to not allow for the POSSIBILITY of good things I have heard a couple of gun owners tell me the ATF does. For example, I had one anti-smoking person tell me he likes the BATF's hassling of tobacco outlets.

In fairness, if anyone wishes to write an article about the many good and worthy aspects of the federal, right-infringing entrapment professionals who confiscated Jerry Michel's guns over unconstitutional gun laws, feel free. We'll print it. Submit it here: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNPAdd.asp.

That includes any of the agents who took his guns, too. I have said exactly what I think about them, so I will gladly let them offer their opinions of what I've said, and I will publish their rebuttal on our site as soon as I see that it has been Submitted. Here is my note to the agents who robbed Jerry Michel at gunpoint. Hopefully one of them reading our site will pass it along:

Mr. ATF Gun Confiscator, 

I will happily publish your version of what you did at Specialty Firearms. However, because so many agents in your organization have created and subsequently justified the image of you gun confiscators as liars through the repeated use of fake identities in your bid to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, I will need to verify that you're not using one of the aliases you used to trick Mr. Michel before you stole his collection. Please provide the following along with your submission:

1. Your full name, address and telephone number along with your email address
   
   

2. Full names and phone numbers o 5 people you know personally, including your closest living blood relative, and please throw in their ID's as well.
   
   

3. The full list of all ATF employees including addresses and phone number in digital computer format so I can cross reference the names of your 5 personal friends -- to make sure you aren't giving me names of other agents who may be impersonating someone else on your behalf.
   
   Based on prior knowledge of the activities of your agency and its representatives, I consider these Requirements for your Submission to our Humor Section to be reasonable.

Back to the Top

part 2

inflammatory

Quoting My Accuser:

"...a very good example of how he reports news in an inflammatory manner."

Inflammatory:  Arousing passion or strong emotion, especially anger, belligerence, or desire.
Dictionary.com

Mr. Pyle is correct in asserting that my news reporting was inflammatory. I was then and am now inflamed with the ATF in general and with and their actions in this case, and I habitually say what I think and how I feel most directly. And, while I obviously had and thus have Good reasons for speaking so creatively about our modern day redcoats, I am also quite aware of what some people consider to be the unproductive aspects of intentionally inflaming the poor, abused, misunderstood Waco Killers. I will share my observations in hopes you will see something new for yourself -- or at least that you'll understand where I come from when I am purposely being inflammatory. First, a quote from a guy I understand:

"A gentleman is someone who never gives offense unintentionally."
~~ OSCAR WILDE

Here are the things I see as Good about my use of hearty inflammation in this particular report:

1. It helps some people get ticked off, mad, angry, upset, outraged... inflamed.
   
   

2. Getting inflamed about a violation of our constitutional rights is often the first step -- for many people -- into getting busy.
   
   

3. A good number of people in the gun rights community do not understand the true meaning of the Second Amendment. Seeing/reading someone taking an overtly outraged stance has caused some of them to look closer at what I was so upset about. Those who look closely must analyze their beliefs about what is and is not acceptable from our government. Some of those folks will wake up and realize just how unacceptable the ATF's actions were. (See Second Amendment.)
   
   

4. And after having had the ATF get raked over the coals in 70's and early 80's for their abuses, and after having watched them cull 75% of the gun dealers out of the herd in just the last few years -- confiscating all gun records -- it is smart to assume they don't listen to reason or view the Second Amendment in its proper historical light and probably never will. While there may be individuals within ATF who support RKBA, as an organization, their track record show a lot of sewage rolling downhill from their ranks.

Here are the things I see, in part, as Unproductive about my use of hearty inflammation in this particular report:

1. To those who read between the lines and understand the dire constitutional violations being foisted upon our People by the ATF and other unconstitutional law enforcers, the facts can speak for themselves. The already (truly) converted don't need help getting ticked off when presented with facts.  (See Preaching to the Choir.)
   
   

2. Too many inflammations in the same article leave some people with the impression that I am a raving lunatic. (I have never denied being a raving lunatic, by the way. By our current society's dilapidated and government-indoctrinated standards, I am quite insane -- and enjoying it.)
   
   

3. To people who are just sticking their feet in the water in the gun rights issue to gain a foothold of understanding as to why We Who Care stand so strongly for the right to keep and bear arms, a first pass through an article with widespread use of inflammatory words and phrases can sometimes have an effect of turning them off or pushing them away. And we never get a second chance to make a first impression.

And, other than the very slight shifts in phraseology you will find in this message, I stand by the words I wrote as valid. Because the ATF and the Second Amendment are like oil and water, until we take the F out of ATF, they can go suck an egg. (That isn't what I really want to say, but I'm being a good sport about these hired Infringers -- in this section.)

Inflame Thy Oppressors to Draw Them Out

O' wandering brethren oppressed,
Thy heartland is so long besieged --
Brought to thine knees by dark masters,
And nary a soul seems egrieved.

Speak not of your foes like they serve thee.
Sing never a word in their praise.
Give unto the land all the boldness you can,
And Lead us to Liberty's Days.

My countrymen urge to be gentle
With servants who steal by the gun.
They scream to be kind and civil,
But tuck their young tails and run.

O' Brothers and Sisters of Freedom,
Listen not to these cowardly cries.
Until you shout down your oppressors,
Ne'er shall we see bluer skies.

~ Angel Shamaya, 15 December 2000

Recommended Reading:  

Murder By Gun Control  by L. Neil Smith

Back to the Top

part 2

bias, obvious bias, intended to prejudice

Quoting My Accuser:  "An article on KABA attracted attention by its obvious exaggerations and bias."

bias
v. tr. bi·ased or bi·assed, bi·as·ing or bi·as·sing, bi·as·es or bi·as·ses.

1. To influence in a particular, typically unfair direction; prejudice.

First, I'll address the "unfair" aspect, which I believe is what Mr. Pyle was suggesting. Given my views on the Second Amendment and the clear contrast between my position and that exhibited by Mr. Pyle, I understand why he would view my report as unfair toward the ATF. To him, it was. 

But not to me. To me, I was gentle with government agents who are by very definition traitors.

The extent to which the ATF went over the allegations I believed at the time were held against him necessitated -- in my opinion -- harshness toward their activities. In fact, knowing everything I know about this case as of this writing, I feel the same level of ire I did before. (More, actually, because I have had to invest so much time in defense of the Second Amendment from people within our own community.)

Second, the "influence with prejudice" aspect, I confess. I am personally biased, and everything about our organization is most heavily biased -- in support and defense of the Second Amendment. Anyone who has read our Mission should know that by now.

And I believe it is safe to say that the people who are attracted to KeepAndBearArms.com are attracted here because we exhibit such socially-unacceptable "obvious bias." 

But the Truth still comes before our bias. If you doubt that, prove me wrong -- and that includes any anti-gun person who thinks there is something false printed on our website. After reading this entire document where I methodically address each of Mr. Pyle's grievances, if you are still convinced that I need some explainin', submit an editorial to our site, and show me the light. If you find a mistake or false statement on our site -- anywhere -- we will quickly correct it, as usual. (All we ask is that you don't hurl insults and false accusations all over the internet until you bring it to us in a civil manner in a rebuttal -- like a gentleman/woman.)

Just to make sure nobody around here is feeling misled by our "obvious bias," I will tell you what type of bias to expect from me personally, and from our many other writers in general. I will state this as a "we" and trust that our members will correct me in an article if I am wrong. Assume that the truth comes before any and all of these biases we so enjoy:

• We are biased for individual and societal Freedom, Liberty and Sovereignty as outlined in the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.
  
  
• We are biased for Americans and their rights, and we are biased against any and all oppressors of every fundamental right as outlined in the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. 
  
  
• We are biased for the love of God (or whatever spiritual or natural source from which you draw your inspiration, including your holy Self if you're an atheist) and Country, Honor and Dignity, and we are heavily biased for Truth and Justice and the REAL American Way.
  
  
• We are biased in any honorable way that will serve to convert people in joining us in stopping the assaults taking place against gun owners with "laws" and by "law" enforcers -- including and most especially the ways that are politically incorrect and thus tweak peoples' gizzards and sets them straight as they come unraveled. (See Police.) 
  
  
• We are biased for innocent until proven guilty, and for INNOCENT CITIZENS DON'T GET TREATED AS GUILTY UNTIL THEY ARE PROVEN GUILTY.
  
  
• We are biased for stopping Blatant BATF Entrapments over unconstitutional gun laws.

I am biased for my gun dealers, whether they live in Kalamazoo Michigan, Palm Beach Florida, New York State or in my own back yard. They get screwed, I get screwed, and I'm refuse to sit around and invest my precious time and energy saying a bunch of niceties about the federal thugforce who: lied about Jerry Michel, stole his property, conspired to implicate him through sheer trickery on asinine technicalities, rushed in with amateurish elephant-sized holes in their case, treated him like a criminal when he isn't, stole things that weren't even on their phony unConstitutional "warrant" and congratulated themselves for a job well done while once again confiscating guns and gun records that hold the names and addresses of my countrymen on them.

I'm just not built to sweet talk about thugs with badges. Candy-coating tyranny makes about as much sense to me as putting a band-aid on a bullet wound. Bull in a China shop I may be, but I must be effective, or I wouldn't have such a respected peer attacking me with so many flimsy arguments it takes me a week to effectively set them all straight and explain how deep his ruse truly goes.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am fairly biased...

But the Truth still forever comes first.

Back to the Top

part 2

perfect, too perfect

Quoting My Accuser:

"KABA editor, Shamaya, had gone out of his way to create the perfect story."

I see no perfection in this ATF gun confiscation. 

In fact, I see quite the opposite: flaws. Lot of them. From the methodologies employed all the way down to the foundation of the unConstitutional sewage upon which the ATF's "case" floats, there are a good many imperfections, and some of them are grotesque.

Mr. Pyle's assertion is incorrect.

From the Lexington and Concord perspective, the "perfect" story would have turned out much differently.

Back to the Top

part 2

"storm trooper"

Quoting My Accuser:

"The BATF "storm troopers" said and did everything..."

This is one of the examples of a Diversionary Tactic I call Severity Lessening.

Mr. Pyle has taken exception over and over again in various internet forums with the "storm trooper" description I used in my report of the ATF gun confiscation he is defending. Unbeknownst to him, I have seen the video of the entry of the first several gun confiscators.

I don't know what definition of a "storm trooper" Mr. Pyle holds as valid. If "storm troopers" are the guys in Star Wars with shiny white armor suits, then no, they didn't look like storm troopers. (My first relationship with the term "storm troopers" did in fact come from that movie.) To me, a guy coming in with a fully automatic machine gun, others with arms drawn and aimed, bullet proof vests, backup guns exposed, thigh holsters, aiming their guns to kill anyone who doesn't yield to their order to submit, well, they are a'troopin for a storm. It's a term, to me, to describe an aggressor ready to kill if you don't submit, and they were, I assure you. For what? Was it justified? I say NO, and so does the Second Amendment. 

I got the term "storm trooper" in reference to this case from the description Mr. Michel gave me. His experience of having many armed and body-armored people pointing guns at him and tearing his place apart gave him the feeling of being "storm trooped," whatever that means. Were you in his shoes, you might feel the same way. 

I think the term is not only fair but accurate -- an opinion shared heartily by the man who was "legally" assaulted. I don't know if there is a legal definition of "storm trooper," but I did go have a look at Dictionary.com's definition, which states:

• A member of the Nazi militia noted for brutality and violence.
• One who resembles or behaves like a member of the Nazi militia.
• A member of a force of shock troops. (these troops did shock Mr. Michel quite thoroughly)

I didn't know that term would even be in a dictionary, but Dictionary.com is quite thorough. (I recommend its regular use for the improvement of your Vocabulary Muscle.) I also didn't know the Nazis called their better-developed version of our Rights Infringers "storm troopers," either. I learn something new every day.

But I sure can see why Mr. Pyle didn't like the term, and here we come to a touchy subject for Mr. Pyle and some of his associates. In his worldview, using the word "nazi" anywhere on the same page with the word "cop" is taboo -- even if you are relating a story where the actions of rogue officers directly resemble the actions of Hitler's finest. Don't do it in their presence unless you would like a hearty discussion about how you are a cop hater or a nincompoop. (Cops don't say nincompoop, and neither do I, but I am choosing to be polite while still making some very challenging points.)

But having now verified the actual dictionary definition of "storm trooper," I must say it does bear some direct resemblance to the truth of what I wrote. "Storm troopers" are known for brutality and violence, and in gun circles, to some extent, so is the ATF. If you don't believe me, ask the 80+ dead people who once lived in Waco, Texas but made a premature departure to the pearly gates because someone was alleged (in a search warrant affidavit) to have done something so onerous as to warrant murdering little children who weren't alleged to have done those things -- with, among other lethal methods, a deadly combination of CS gases and fire. (If memory serves me correctly, the Nazis used gas and fire to kill innocent people, as well, did they not? See above definition re: "behaves like a member of the Nazi militia" and repeat after me: WACO.)

Am I saying "all" ATF people are brutal and violent? Certainly not. For example, the support staff in ATF offices probably wield nothing more dangerous than a stapler and a hole puncher. Though they are the support structure for treason, they themselves are -- at least some of them -- decent people.

But some people with the ATF have punched holes in human beings who had never hurt anyone, and we consider that brutal and violent. The people within the ATF who behaved -- in the past -- in storm trooper-like ways were wearing what the people who stole Jerry Michel's property were wearing, so my phrase Mr. Pyle picked at was not only correct in the spirit in which it was passed on, quoted and intended, it is technically correct, as well.

I hope this satisfies Mr. Pyle's grievance regarding the term.

Back to the Top

part 2

everything

Quoting My Accuser:  "The BATF 'storm troopers' said and did everything that you have ever heard a government agency gone bad do, in spades and did not even deserve the slightest peep in the press."

Well, no. They didn't throw CS gas into his shop and make him choke to death and die a painful, violent death like the little children died in Waco. And they didn't shoot him multiple times, either. So, no, the BATF didn't do "everything that you have ever heard a government agency gone bad do".

I did not say or suggest that the BATF "said and did everything..."

Bear in mind that Mr. Pyle attempted to discredit me for, among other things, exaggerating. (For a touch of humor, see The Lighter Side of This Mess.)

Back to the Top

part 2

did not even deserve the slightest peep in the press

Quoting My Accuser:  "The BATF 'storm troopers' said and did everything that you have ever heard a government agency gone bad do, in spades and did not even deserve the slightest peep in the press."

I consider this phrase to be all of the following:

• an attempt to lessen the severity of the gun confiscation, to minimize the situation
  
  

• an attempt to make me out to be a bad person for drawing your attention to an ATF gun confiscation by using my writing skills effectively to assure that it made you as mad as it made me
  
  

• an indication of the "he had it coming to him" mentality
  
  

• an insult to the Founders and the many men who fought and died to preserve our freedom (including those who work for the ATF but are ignorant of the true meaning of the Second Amendment and thus work for an organization who consistently defiles it under the honorless, failed-at-Nuremburg guise of "just following orders." See "infringe".)

Mr. Pyle would have you believe that the gun confiscation was no big deal.  Sadly, he has also been successful at getting other gun owners to agree with his position.  (See Guilty Until Proven Innocent.)

Plus, I am the press, and I broke the story. Discriminating against me because I have original material not picked up by the Associated Press seems less than helpful to the cause of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Back to the Top

part 2

begged an investigation.

Quoting My Accuser:   

"The story was too perfect and begged an investigation."

Yes, it did beg an investigation. Before receiving Mr. Pyle's rebuttal we are now analyzing, I would say I had invested a good 60 hours engaged in various aspects of investigation, including the following:

• speaking with the gun dealer by phone (30 or 40 times or more) and in person (4 times so far)
  
  

• speaking with the gun dealer's attorney (5 or 7 times by phone)
  
  

• calling ATF's offices on two occasions
  
  

• speaking with a reporter at the Phoenix New Times (None of the other local rags even gave this "legal" assault a mention, which is probably good in that they, like Mr. Pyle, would probably have held Mr. Michel guilty until proven innocent.)
  
  

• going to to federal courthouse 5 times (I went once for first affidavit and 4 times for 2nd affidavit -- and the 2nd affidavit still wasn't there as of Dec. 6, so Mr. Michel hasn't been given the opportunity to know what ATF said to get the second warrant signed.)
  
  

• writing up now 4 reports (5 counting this monster) during which calls to Mr. Michel and Mr. Hardy have proven most helpful to verify information before publishing it
  
  

• investigating what was being said about Mr. Michel behind his back during the attack by Mr. Pyle and his associates -- and responding to some extent in attempts to damage control on Mr. Michel's behalf

During Mr. Pyle's investigation he never spoke with the dealer or his attorney before attacking me publicly in defense of ATF's gun confiscation -- and before he and his associates condemned the gun dealer as guilty until proven innocent. Why? Since our colleague is calling for an investigation, why hasn't he spoken with the accused?  (See Conclusion.)

Back to the Top

part 2

"interview"

Quoting My Accuser:  

"Angel wasn't there, of course, and had traveled to visit the store owner to conduct his "interview"."

Neither of us were there, of course, and I never said I was there. And I did "interview" Mr. Michel, in person and on the phone, so many times I've lost an actual count. Why Mr. Pyle never "interviewed" Mr. Michel before convicting him is still a curious and unanswered question.

This line was designed to throw doubt about the validity of what I told you. Mr. Pyle wants you to doubt what I told you for a reason. Do you know what that reason is? (See Conclusion.)

Back to the Top

part 2

Shamaya's e-mail address is

As if I don't get enough email (7,724 unread as of this writing to me plus at least 2,000 in various web-based forms I am frustrated I haven't found the time to read and reply to), Mr. Stark and Mr. Pyle sought to get people to send me some hate mail for "lying" to the community. It worked. I have received threats from four KeepAndBearArms.com members that if I didn't stop lying to them, they would cancel their memberships and ask for refunds. (Considering that I didn't lie, you can imagine how much fun that was.)

Back to the Top

part 2

Procedures for Tyranny

Quoting My Accuser:  

"To anyone familiar with procedure,..."

"All procedures were correctly followed and administered."

Why is a "pro Second Amendment" ex(?) police officer who swore an oath to defend the constitution and has the words "Second Amendment" in his organization's name legitimizing a federal gun confiscation with the word "procedure" when the "laws" said to have been violated by the gun dealer are repugnant to the constitution and are thus -- according to the U.S. Supreme Court -- null and void? (See Marbury vs. Madison.) 

This is another of many comments that point to a fundamental difference in the way Mr. Pyle and I view the Second Amendment. (See Second Amendment. See Contrast.)

I say one of two things is at play here:

1. Leroy Pyle either doesn't understand the Second Amendment as intended by the Founders, or
   
   

2. his first allegiance is to defending "law" enforcers, followed by his second allegiance, RKBA. (See Cops First, American Freedom Second.)
   
   

3. (At least 43 people have suggested a third, but I don't want to say it; it's too disturbing.)

There is no acceptable "procedure" that supports infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms; it simply "shall not be infringed." 

In a nation besieged with anti-gun legislation that directly contradicts the intentions of our Founding Fathers regarding the right of the people to keep and bear arms, when the majority of the national law enforcement community gives First Priority to "administrative procedures were correctly followed," it is only a matter of time before war.

Back to the Top

part 2

Comparing me to Anti Gunners

Quoting My Accuser:  

"...like hearing the "news" report on a semi-auto revolver."

"...the anti-gun news reports in the newspapers..."

My analysis of the IRONY of these two statements is as follows:

• Mr. Pyle is the one taking the anti-Second Amendment position in this matter,
  
  

• I am the one taking the PRO-Second Amendment position,
  
  

• and he has attacked me so vigorously because he doesn't want people to see that what he subtly suggests about me is true about him, not me.  (See Cops First, American Freedom Second.)

(See The Lighter Side of This Mess.)

Back to the Top

part 2

"that he claimed was in his possession"

Quoting My Accuser:  "I asked Shamaya to produce the affidavit that he claimed was in his possession, but he explained that the store owner did not want to make that public until he prepared a response."

This is untrue.

I never "claimed to have possession" of Jerry Michel's affidavit in the report Mr. Pyle quotes -- or at any time before the report Mr. Pyle quotes. In fact, I claimed just the opposite -- at least twice in the same report from which Mr. Pyle quotes me -- that I did not have the affidavit.

That false statement by Mr. Pyle was used to turn people against me, costing me time and energy and possibly costing our "greedy" organization desperately needed money -- when Mr. Pyle had the truth in his possession, published on his own website.

Mr. Pyle erred egregiously in his zeal to support the ATF's actions -- to defend the gun confiscators.  See The Comparison Mistake.

Back to the Top

part 2

asked, repeatedly, over a period of time

Quoting My Accuser:  "I asked Shamaya to produce the affidavit that he claimed was in his possession, but he explained that the store owner did not want to make that public until he prepared a response. I asked, repeatedly, over a period of time to try to let him ease away from his fabrication."

This is also a false statement. 

Mr. Pyle never "asked, repeatedly, over a period of time" me for the affidavit. With "asking" comes respect and good intentions and a second party who receives your request -- and that didn't happen. By the time I realized he was wanting me to provide the affidavit, it was already apparent he was siding with the gun confiscators, so he wouldn't have gotten the affidavit anyway. If that isn't enough -- in your mind as the reader -- to invalidate the above false statement Mr. Pyle made, read the following:

First, if something was so important as to legitimize a negative (and fraudulent) report about me all over the internet, a phone call would been appropriate. But Mr. Pyle never picked up the phone to call me even though all of the following are true:

• He has my telephone number.
  
  

• He has called me several times in the past.
  
  

• He has been a featured writer of ours on this site since at least 5/16/2000.
  
  

• We had just spent time together at the fantastic Gun Right Policy Conference in October.
  
  

• He had called just a couple of weeks earlier to discuss the publication of his It's the GUNS...Stupid!. 

But my phone never rang when he was allegedly "asking repeatedly, over a period of time" for the affidavit.

Second, supposing he still suggests he "asked repeatedly, over a period of time" via email, I submit the following:

1)  Mr. Pyle did send me ONE request to see the affidavit, on November 8. If I saw it before, I honestly don't remember seeing it in the email flood. (Had I seen and understood the urgency of this message, I would have touched base with Jerry to make sure it was OK with him to send it to allies -- and I would have easily convinced him these gentlemen were on our side. I thought they were.) 

2)  The very next mention of the Jerry Michel raid I can find in any email communication from Mr. Pyle took place on Nov 18 when he was expressing his extreme distaste over my reporting complete with accusations much like we see in this message. In this message, his very next "asking," he said accused me, on a public domain email list, of the following:

"Using the articles that I uploaded to KABA to deny their anti-cop leanings..." November 18

"KABA is quick to jump on any excuse to demean law enforcement..." November 18

"...crying wolf..."

"...obvious bias against LEOs on the KABA website..."

3)  These sentiments do not denote what I consider to be "asking," that was exactly his second "asking" and wasn't sent to me but rather published to a public domain email list (still no phone call), and Mr. Pyle's tone -- had I even seen this firsthand -- would have left me no choice but to refuse to send the affidavit to him; he was defending the ATF in their absurd actions.

4)  I received his second "asking" as a forward from someone who joined his list to defend my name after he started bashing me and KeepAndBearArms.com on yet another internet discussion list.

ASK Mr. Pyle to send you a string of court-admissible (unaltered) emails to prove his claim of "ask[ing], repeatedly, over time".  He cannot.

Because it never happened. 

The fact that Leroy Pyle said he "asked, repeatedly, over a period of time" was self-destructive for these three reasons: 

1. his telephone records cannot show you a single phone call during the time period in question,
   
   

2. his archived internet discussion list archives do not have a record of such "askings",
   
   

3. and neither do his personal email files.

I find this level of fraudulent information being propagated about me to be nothing less than atrocious, for these reasons:

1. Mr. Pyle suggested I was withholding information to deceive people.
   
   

2. Mr. Pyle urged you strongly to buy into his ruse.
   
   

3. And I did no such thing.

Back to the Top

part 2

fabrication, outright lies

Mr. Leroy Pyle of the Second Amendment Police Department has accused me to thousands of people that I lied/fabricated. The scathing rebuttal he wrote about my report contains no fewer than 21 accusations of lying/fabricating.

But there wasn't a single "outright lie" or "fabrication" in my entire report. Not one.

I don't intentionally mislead people. And I would not be so stupid as to jeopardize my future credibility and the success of our organization as a cog in the Liberty Machine just to convince you of how little respect I have for the ATF. I just sent a letter to them telling them that to their face, for goodness sake. (A letter I sent them on Thanksgiving Day -- amidst the attacks and even threats from Mr. Pyle and/or his associates -- is archived on our site right here:  http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=1609.) 

The concept of lying and/or fabricating suggest willful or intentional misleading or deception. When one of several supporters emailed me that Leroy Pyle was calling me a liar, I was shocked that he had the nerve to make such absurd accusations again.  I still am.  (He has done this before.)  

I believe the foundation of Mr. Pyle's false accusations of lying and fabricating rest in The Comparison Mistake. 

But I believe the Inspiration for him to make those false accusations is far more important than the mechanism by which he made his bid to discredit me. (See Conclusion.)

If this laborious response to Mr. Pyle's false accusations of lying and fabricating doesn't solve the mystery, you didn't read it all, or somebody needs to show me. I've gone through 200+ hours -- with a fine toothed comb, every word I wrote -- and based it on the information I had at my disposal at the time I wrote it, and I still don't see one lie. I've asked several people I trust the most to look this all over and tell me I lied, and they can't.

I asked the people I trust the most to be fair and impartial -- and rip me a new one if I deserved it.  Here is just a sample of what came back to me:

Melissa

The Melissa Mr. Pyle was quoting is quite a liberty advocate. She joined his list -- on her own volition, without my asking -- after he began making false statements about me and KeepAndBearArms.com on another list. She attempted to right the false accusations and clear my name and was met with some interesting responses. For example:

Trying to Discuss the "Nazi" Comparison

When Melissa was young, family members described horrifying firsthand experiences under the Nazi regime. She tried to explain her viewpoint relating some police activities to the police activities made famous under Adolf Hitler. She was respectful and dispassionate. Mr. Horn's response to her sharing her early developmental sensitivity to brutal police activities was precisely as follows:

Joe Horn:  I recall that you were talking about your reasons and qualifications re: 2A activism and you mentioned the holocaust affected you at an early age. I would like you to define what you mean by the holocaust and then tell me how it affected you.

Melissa:  I was referring to the annihilation of millions of people in Nazi-controlled Europe... I learned what happened when I was 8, complete with graphic stories and movies and meeting survivors... it was horrible, and I lived in fear of my life for many years after that. I lived in fear because I thought any day, the Nazis would be smashing down my door.

Joe Horn:  You poor baby, fear is such a terrible thing to endure. All us big nasty soldiers must have had a picnic in our wars. Is it nazi soldiers that our widdle girl fears, or is it just American soldiers, or worse, evil American cops. Your whining is pathetic.

Here are the 10 favorite websites of the woman Mr. Pyle was quoting and defaming: 

Quoting My Accuser:  "Granted, there are some who prefer to believe the "news" :-)."

I consider this statement to be all of the following:

• an attempt to make anyone who believes the validity and accuracy of my reporting feel stupid for believing me
  
  
• another revelation of Mr. Pyle's need to cast doubt on my reporting as a subterfuge for his semi-Second Amendment and Cops First, American Freedom Second leanings
  
  
• an attempt to portray his vicious attack as somehow humorous and light by providing the people he sought to turn against me with a smiley face  :-)

Back to the Top

part 2

2ampd@egroups.com 

In my personal experience and that of two other very strong patriotic activists, bringing up the issue of cops breaking their oaths to defend the Constitution by enforcing infringing gun laws -- on the 2ampd@egroups.com list -- is a good way to get attacked. (See Cops First, American Freedom Second.)

Back to the Top

part 2

faxed it around

Quoting My Accuser:

"Shamaya had faxed it around, so a copy came my way."

The "faxed it around" could easily leave people with the impression that I was sending Mr. Michel's affidavit to anybody who asked -- everybody but you. Such is not the case. 

I faxed the affidavit to three people: Neal Knox, Dave T. Hardy, and John Arbon of CPHV.com. 

Mr. Pyle used that phrase in attempt to suggest to you the following:

• that I was withholding information from him with dishonorable intentions

• and that I was withholding information from you with dishonorable intentions

Nothing could be further from the truth.

(See The "Withholding Information" Accusation.)

Back to the Top

part 2

a copy came my way

Quoting My Accuser:

" Shamaya had faxed it around, so a copy came my way."

Mr. Pyle's "so a copy came my way" is most interesting jockeying for position. I sent it over to John, John to Joe Horn, Leroy's right hand man.

John faxed it to Mr. Horn thinking he was on our side; he was wrong, and I'm sure he regrets aiding and abetting people who are attempting to justify and legitimize a federal gun confiscation under circumstances with which he is very familiar -- attacking his friend in the process. (John has been friends with Mr. Michel nearly four years.)

Back to the Top

part 2

The "Withholding Information" Accusation

Mr. Pyle has tried to paint me like a "withholder of information" because I took Mr. Michel's attorney's advice  and the advice of Neal Knox and Larry Pratt and didn't publish the warrant or affidavit after I did receive it. Dave T. Hardy's reasons for not printing the affidavit, and the gun dealer's desire to not have false information spread around the internet that would be used against him in the court of public opinion were enough for me to conclude that I would not publish it. 

After seeing how appalled Mr. Michel was by what was alleged on that document, and after he spoke with Dave Hardy about the (lack of) sensibility in publishing something that would get used against him in the court of public opinion even though, to him, it wasn't true, I offered the gun dealer an agreement to get his permission to send it to specific people who might help in the case. I even called Mr. Michel to get permission to send it to Neal Knox. 

(I left the radio business because I got tired of being around news vampires who trashed people for principle-less reasons to climb some ugly ladder. And I take the defense of our dwindling number of gun dealers more seriously than almost anything but truth and honor, especially under the circumstances in which this "raid" was conducted.)

And it turns out that the leaders whose advice I heeded were correct, though in an unexpected way; Mr. Pyle and his associates convicted Jerry Michel in their court of public opinion, turning his own community against him, smearing him by flatly stating that unproven allegations are factual realities and attacking me for accurately telling them they are incorrect to do so at this juncture. And other "pro Second Amendment" people have jumped on that bandwagon, it seems, based on a report from Mr. Pyle that is partially disproved on his own website, as I will demonstrate in a moment.

It is time for this matter to be settled in a court of "law," where facts of the case yet unknown to but a few will close this matter with finality. I have not and will not present certain facts in this case on the internet -- at the request/suggestion of Mr. Michel, his attorney, and two other highly respected leaders in the gun rights community. Anyone who suggests that because I didn't print the affidavit after I received it I am a "withholder of information" is correct. And I would do the same thing for you if you were in Mr. Michel's shoes, too, even if "pro Second Amendment" cops were badgering me to show your hand to the ATF.

The saddest part about this mess is that I DO have additional information to share with you about the Jerry Michel case, but I'm having to invest time disproving false accusations hurled by one of our own who is busy attacking him and me in defense of traitors.

Back to the Top

part 2

The "Comparison" Mistake

Mr. Pyle has asked you to expect me to do the impossible -- and to convict me of the harsh things he has said about me based on my not having the ability to do so. 

At least six (6) times in his scathing rebuttal, Mr. Pyle asks you in one way or another to compare my first report with the affidavit he published (against the gun dealer's wishes and the advice of his attorney) and draw a conclusion that I lied through my teeth.

Quoting My Accuser:

1. "comparing his "news" with the affidavit."
   
   

2. "If you compare his "news" to the affidavit, it is clear that he lied."
   
   
   (This is a true statement to the letter and would certainly be useful in discrediting me -- if I had the affidavit, had seen the affidavit, or if I had even heard what was on the affidavit when I wrote my first report on the gun confiscation Mr. Pyle is defending and justifying.)
   
   

3. "compare the "story" to the affidavit"
   
   

4. "A BIG TIME Shamaya lie. Read the affidavit."
   
   

5. "obvious Shamaya lie, to anyone who read the affidavit"
   
   

6. "comparison of the Shamaya "news" and the affidavit"
   

Following is a quote from the report Mr. Pyle has used in his attempt to discredit me which plainly states that I didn't have the document Mr. Pyle tells you I should have used as a basis for my reporting. (Mr. Pyle published the report that contains this quote on his own website. If he has removed it, click here.)

Please bear in mind that I said the following before Mr. Michel and Mr. Hardy said not to do it: 

"We will procure the search warrant affidavit as soon as possible and post it on KeepAndBearArms.com."

Meanwhile, I ask you:  How was I supposed to print something from an affidavit when I didn't have it in my possession, had never even seen it, and had never heard from anyone what the ATF had written on it?  

I may be insightful from time to time, and I may occasionally make an accurate prediction -- but I never professed to be clairvoyant.

Back to the Top

part 2

Retraction & Diversion

Quoting My Accuser:

"This has nothing to do with the store owner, or the validity of the affidavit. I hope that the store owner will take advantage of every legal device afforded him."

"...nothing to do with the store owner..."

The "nothing to do with the store owner, or the validity of the affidavit" phrase is an attempt to divert attention away from the fact that exactly the opposite is true. That is ALL this matter is about: the illegitimate infringements upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms. My accuser's attempt to centralize the gun community's focus upon "procedures" is little more than an excuse he uses to avoid having to call upon police officers to honor their oaths to the Constitution.

"I hope that the store owner..."

After Mr. Pyle's support of the ATF and a gun confiscation, his guilty until proven innocent attitude, and his putting Cops First, American Freedom Second had been exposed, he came back out and said something supportive of the gun dealer. Before, Mr. Pyle said the following, exactly as stated on our website:

"I am not familiar with Jerry's case other than what Shamaya has written and the affidavit contents, and have no reason to contact him or his attorney...I couldn't care less about the outcome of the criminal proceedings."

The sentence he uttered immediately after that one I neglected to print last time: 

"Heaven knows, crooks are a dime a dozen."

In reference to a man who still has not been charged.

Mr. Pyle also never intervened while his associates were saying Jerry was guilty of the crimes for which he has yet to be charged, nor did he step in and put an end to the slanderous things they said against him. He has also placed blame on Mr. Michel in this very rebuttal to which I am now responding.  

Why did Mr. Pyle toss out a "hopeful" word about the man he was convicting?

1. After I reported exact quotes on what he and his friends said about the innocent-until-proven-guilty gun dealer, he realized he'd better come up with something that shows support, lest he be painted as the "Cops First, American Freedom Second" person he has shown himself to be.
   
   

2. He offered a decoy in hopes of receiving agreement from more than just the police state apologists in the gun community.
   
   

3. So people would keep listening to him as he trashed this gun dealer in the very same libelous smear.

Back to the Top

part 2

fear mongering, hateful rhetoric

Quoting My Accuser:    

"Melissa, you seem to be desperate in your attempts to deny the fear mongering and hateful rhetoric contained in Shamaya’s news items."

I consider Mr. Pyle's statement to be all of the following:

• an attempt to suggest that there is no reason for some good, healthy, natural-instinct quality fear
  
  

• an attempt to suggest that you shouldn't say unkind things about traitors  (See Inflammatory.)
  
  

• an attempt to bolster an exaggeration claim against me
  
  

• a revealing of his own desperation (as projected on Sweet Melissa, wife of Neal) to protect the ugly fact that a 20-year Second Amendment fighter puts people who infringe on the Second Amendment above the Second Amendment itself

If Mr. Pyle fully understood the Second Amendment, he wouldn't be so quick to condemn a patriot's flaming verbal volleys aimed at these gun confiscators. And here is the biggie:

My outrage and ire pushed his button so good and hard in an area he doesn't want to deal with that he had to lash out in order to bring his issue to the surface for resolution.

I am curious as to why telling people about a horrendous ATF gun confiscation that stripped a man of 274 guns valued at over $300,000 and my being nasty about these hired federal gun confiscators is considered "hateful rhetoric" -- from the perspective of someone who has professed for so long to be a strident supporter of the Second Amendment. That is precisely why I published eight questions for 2ampd: I would like to understand the answers to those questions from Mr. Pyle's perspective to gain some clarity about how he can both support infringing federal gun confiscations on "legal" (unconstitutional) technicalities while also claiming to support the Second Amendment.

Guns are our last hope for keeping from being utterly enslaved as a nation. The ATF is among the biggest threats to gun dealers (our sources for guns) based on their "sting" operations and treating minute technical infractions of unconstitutional "laws" as though they were heinous crimes of violence. When they break laws (according to Dave T. Hardy) to assault and rob an innocent (until proven guilty and who maintains his innocence of all charges) man, would Mr. Pyle and his team have me flatly support their "just following orders" as they seem to? Sorry. No can do. I'm just not built to sweet talk gun confiscations or those who conduct them, and a traitor with a badge is still a traitor. We just see it differently; that's all.  (See Emotions.)

What About Fear?

And as far as "fear mongering," it's not like gun dealers and gun owners shouldn't have a certain level of fear with what is going on -- with what the ATF is systematically doing. The ATF and the liberal media bragged in "reports" last week about weeding out 74% of America's gun dealers since the Brady Law was passed. Can LEO's fully understand what we learned from Lexington and Concord?

Call me a "fear mongerer," and call my ire toward federal gun confiscators "hateful rhetoric" if it paints your wagon; I just call 'em like I see 'em. I don't respect the ATF's gun and gun record confiscation methodologies or tactics -- or the "principles" upon which they thrive. If Mr. Pyle thinks lowly of me for saying that strongly, I can accept that. I don't understand it, and I certainly don't like it, but I can accept it. Here is more red meat for Mr. Pyle:

1. Sugar-coating tyranny makes about as much sense as putting a band-aid on a bullet wound. 
   
   

2. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms needs to remove the "Firearms" from its name and get out of the Right Infringing business.
   
   

3. And until we get the "Firearms" out of their name, when they abuse my gun dealers  or gun owning compatriots, I will call them what they are: traitors.

Mr. Pyle behaves with his "hateful rhetoric" accusation -- hurled not only at me but at Aaron Zelman, as well -- as if hating tyrants and those who do their bidding is a bad thing. Mr. Pyle doesn't understand the difference between Hatred and Righteous Rage. While I rarely actually say "I hate ___," I can certainly say I am mad as all hell about ATF confiscating guns after an 8 months sting operation when all they really needed to so was sit Jerry down and spell it out to him where they were about to actually go so far as to investigate him. They didn't give him a WARNING, no matter how you read his affidavit -- and the laws themselves deserve NO RESPECT from an American.

A man I now consider a close friend and a very trusted Advisor who served in Vietnam and was discharged as a Master Gunnery Sergeant and who also worked 6 years on Texas Highway Patrol and 4 years as a Texas Ranger in law enforcement told me, 

"If I was a cop in Mr. Michel's jurisdiction and I was aware that he was potentially doing something that could get him in trouble, I would have looked him in the eye and told him if he did it one more time he was going to jail. I would have given him a warning to alert him to any said violations, and I would have pushed him hard to make sure he understood the severity of the situation. This was not handled appropriately. My job is to uphold the law in relationship to its Constitutionality, therefore, I would have approached him with dignity and respect for my badge, my office, and my position." 

This friend of mine has a lot of friends who are cops, some of whom Mr. Pyle probably knows. He has this attitude -- shared by many good cops -- because he puts American Freedom a