In , on 12/14/2003
at 06:34 PM, Leo M. Cavanaugh III
said:

Yes, you should be ashamed that you take the word of the U.S. Code ahead of
RG himself.

The REAL shame is that there are idiots (such as yourself) who seem to think
Phil can read and interpret the US Code and "transcripts" in question and it
actually means something. I've fond non-thinkers tend to stick together.
Case in point.

US Code and the Boggs transscripts are linked from my site. See:

http://rcc.servehttp.com/#bogophobe

Try reading this? Then tell me what you think. Key questions might
include: Do the words "possess" or "possession" seem to be present? Does
the Boggs ruling, where he actually LOST the case (and he actually produced
and purchased things with his wares), levy any real penalty on Mr Boggs?
Did they confiscate any cars? Houses? Hang him? Put him in prison at all?
Hmmmmm?

All these, of course, are rhetorical.

Nick