WBAI (New York) Interview with Nikki Craft
December 1991

INTERVIEWER: NOW HERE IS NIKKI CRAFT...

CRAFT: We started doing graffiti on the streets, and we released a statement that we believe that conservative values such as corporate trademark laws, private property rights and individual privacy, as opposed to public safety and welfare, severely infringe upon and limit free expression and they enjoy more rights legally, socially, and politically than women do in the public and private domain. We're going to push some buttons to prove it.
     We started a button making business, registered legally under the name ALWAYS CAUSING LEGAL UNREST, PUSHING BUTTONS ACLU. We are satirizing the fundamentalist first amendment position, and the name ACLU is part of that. We say "What a coincidence, our acronyms are the same!" Don't get us confused with the American Civil Liberties Union. We're not that group that supports the pornographers, the Nazi's, the KKK, the tobacco industry and the child pornographers. We're not those guys fixated on reciting defamatory whining mantras about Andrea Dworkin.
     And so lo and behold on November 28 (1991) we got a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union signed by the Northern California Chapter Executive Director, Dorothy Ehrlich. The letter says that there's confusion over our acronym, or name, and make no mistake about it, the American Civil Liberties Union and the acronym is precious, and what it stands for is precious to them and their 275,000 members, and that they will take every legal effort to protect it.
     So they asked us to respond by December 15th. Well it turned out that December 15th was Bills of Rights Day and the American Civil Liberties Union was having a benefit in San Francisco and inviting 1000 people for drinks and films and various presentations. Ferlengetti was there, different speakers talking about Civil Rights, they passed out copies of the Bill of Rights, which of course reads: "No law shall infringe upon the rights of free speech." "No Law." It doesn't say "No law except trademark laws, no law except copyright laws." It says no law. "Congress shall make no law restricting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the rights of people to assemble and to petition the government for redress of grievance."
     We took our leaflet, we labeled it "Happy Bill Of Rights Day, but there must be some mistake" and we told them about our button business. We knew we were asking for trouble, but still we couldn't believe it when we got this letter printed below from the Northern Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. Here they are trying to use intimidation and governmental intervention to infringe upon our freedom of speech. More humorless than McDonald's when they sued McDonald's(?) in Santa Cruz, more arrogant than the US Olympics Committee when they sued Gay Olympics in San Francisco, now the American Civil Liberties Union is going to try to bully us with a national organization of criminal lawyers (and we don't necessarily mean lawyers who defend criminals). Their argument for justifying this repression, are you ready for this? They claim they own four letters of the alphabet. Talk about promoting conservative values.
     Ehrlich (ACLU No. California Chapter Executive Director) gave us until the December 15th deadline, what a coincidence it's Bill of Rights Day. Well here we are at this fundraising shindig, your worst nightmare come true, go ahead American Civil Liberties Union make our day.

INTERVIEWER: SO YOU WENT TO THEIR FUNDRAISER?

CRAFT: We went to their fundraiser, we took a thousand leaflets with us, and there were eight women. At a certain point, we pulled out the leaflets. We weren't on the floor five minutes, we worked very quietly, we were just passing the leaflets out in a very determined way, they were in the middle of cocktail parties. A lot of men in suits, people all dressed up, there were very few rebels in this group, very few renegade thinkers. It was real obvious. There were a lot of, it looked like, a lot of kind of sleazy types who looked like pornographers, a lot of people there just socializing. And there were, you could count them on both hands, the people who looked like alternative types; one guy who was working with the homeless and had a lot of buttons on. It was the people who were out of business suits who came over and spoke with us.
     Immediately the women who were at the door came over and grabbed our arms and said "You can't leaflet in here, you have to go outside." And we were not in the area where they had taken tickets, we were in a main lobby where in the surrounding rooms, the cocktail party was going on in one room, and the speeches were fixing to start in another room, and then they had a gathering with the founders of the ACLU in another room adjoining this one room. They said "You can't leaflet that in here." Repeatedly they tried to tell us that, and I said, "Get your hands off of me, I am going to leaflet this in here." Anyway, I had a ticket and so when I went to present my ticket a man came up behind me, ironically the same attorney (Mathew Coles) who handled the fight with the Gay Olympics, against the US Olympics.

INTERVIEWER: EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS ABOUT, SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND.

CRAFT: Evidently when the Gay Olympics named itself "Gay Olympics," the US Olympics sued them to prevent them from using the name. The attorney who handled the case presumably for the ACLU, (now he may have just handled the case as an individual lawyer, I don't know, I'll find that out), but the same lawyer who handled that case physically assaulted me without ever reading the leaflets. He knew that we were dissidents and he.... I had a framed artwork that was protesting..., the content of it is irrelevant, but it was a framed art piece that I had worked all day on, that I was going to display in there. I had bought my ticket. I gave my ticket to go in, and one woman grabbed me on one arm and then he grabbed me on the other side and pulled the frame apart and destroyed it, broke it in pieces, and he admits to the assault. I've told him that all I want is an apology on ACLU stationary released to the media, and that is awaiting. I don't know whether they'll do it or not. That's what I want. (It was never received.) Obviously, he's not going to go to prison for what he did, but I think it's absolutely appalling that on the 200th anniversary of the Bill of Rights that the American Civil Liberties Union was attempting at their little party to prevent people from leafletting.
     Some of the responses from the people that were there, it didn't come from people who are free thinkers, or people who you feel very at ease about having --that is allegedly having--civil liberties in their hands on a national level, they weren't thinking people. We could have been lynched in a corner and they wouldn't have lifted a hand. They didn't care. They were arguing with us without ever reading the leaflet. They said they were appalled by what we were doing. One man come up and said "There's no reason for you to say 'fucking.'" And so, at one point I told one group of lawyers that we would need a lawyer and I hoped for their sakes that somewhere in their organization that they could find an ACLU attorney that would defend us. And I said, "Because if you can't, your organization is in serious trouble." And he said "Why?" I said "Because it's a facade and farce if you don't have somebody who will defend our rights, when you defend the pornographers, and the Nazis, and the tobacco industry." They weren't seeing connections, it was quite pathetic.

INTERVIEWER: IN TERMS OF HOW THE WHOLE ISSUE WITH THEM STARTED, IN TERMS OF THE BUTTONS, LET'S JUST SAY SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT'S ON THE BUTTONS. IF YOU COULD JUST TELL PEOPLE WHAT IT IS YOU'RE PUTTING ACLU (ALWAYS CAUSING LEGAL UNREST) ON.

CRAFT: Well, can we say the address on where people can order these buttons?

INTERVIEWER: YOU MAY. BUT FIRST WHY DON'T YOU TELL THEM WHAT'S ON THEM?

CRAFT: I'll just read off some of them. First of all, on each of the buttons it says "ALWAYS CAUSING LEGAL UNREST, PUSHING BUTTONS." And we are a publishing . . . a political group that is a publisher . . . so any form of attempted suppression by the American Civil Liberties Union could have a very chilling effect on the publishing industry. (Laughter) They could set a very very dangerous precedent. Their position is that if a rape is committed and it's put on video, that it is free speech. If a child is molested or abused and photographed, and that's put in a book, it's free speech.
     So what we're doing is putting together buttons and by framing this art--by putting it in buttons--it seems to us that unless the ACLU is a walking contradiction, (and I'm not saying that it's not), of its own values and statement of purpose, that this would be protected speech and that it must be allowed to be distributed. We have intentionally picked controversial subjects, and a lot of people love the buttons, and a lot of people hate them. They are thought provoking. It's very important to stimulate thinking, and we're very committed to free speech. And so the buttons have handguns on them and say "FEMININE PROTECTION," one says "NO MEANS NO (BLEEP)," "PROTECTED BY THELMA AND LOUISE," "THE BEST WAY TO A MAN'S HEART IS THROUGH HIS CHEST," "DEAD MEN DON'T RAPE, DEAD MEN DON'T WHINE, DEAD MEN DON'T USE PORNOGRAPHY, AND DEAD MEN DON'T BOTHER ME." "REAL WOMEN DON'T EAT MEN," "STOP SUCKING START BITING," "KILLER FEMINISTS FROM HELL," "MEN AND WOMEN WERE CREATED EQUAL AND SMITH & WESSON MAKES DAMN SURE IT STAYS THAT WAY," an Andrea Dworkin quote "WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT EVERY ONE OF US HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO BE THE WOMEN THAT MARK LEPINE WANTED TO MURDER." And he of course is the Montreal killer, the femicidite.
     And then one button says, "IF THEY LAID ALL THE MEN ON EARTH END TO END SO THEY CIRCLED THE GLOBE, IT MIGHT BE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA TO LEAVE THEM THAT WAY." And various other things: "THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO TAKING CARE OF BRETT EASTON ELLIS THAN JUST CENSORING HIM." "GAG SPERM, NOT WOMEN." "BONDAGE IS NOT SEXUAL LIBERATION, IF YOU LOVE SOMEBODY SET THEM FREE." "SO MANY MEN, SO LITTLE INTELLIGENCE." "SO MANY MEN, SO LITTLE AMMUNITION."
     So what we're doing is an experiment in free speech, it's conceptual art to the ultimate, and part of the parody is using the ACLU acronym. And it becomes ineffective if they start trying to..., It's like the anti-war protests and the "FUCK (Fuck was bleeped by the moderator.) THE DRAFT" demonstrations, which the ACLU stood behind. It would be like saying, "You're welcome to protest the war, but we're going to tell you what phrasing you can use to do it." And that wouldn't hold water with the ACLU. And yet what they're trying to do, in an appalling hypocritical position, is to say, "You're welcome to criticize the ACLU but we're going to tell you how to do it." I've got news for them, they're not going to tell us how to do it.

INTERVIEWER: NOW, IF IT'S ALRIGHT WITH YOU I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THE BUTTONS AND EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE ON. THEN I WANT TO GET BACK TO THE ISSUE OF THE INITIALS "ACLU" ON THEM. THE BUTTONS ARE CERTAINLY PROVOCATIVE AND...

CRAFT: Well done too. Aren't they beautiful? and colorful?

INTERVIEWER: THEY ARE VERY COLORFUL.

CRAFT: I mean, you spotted them, I believe, one night when you were out on the town.

INTERVIEWER: THAT'S RIGHT, I DID IN FACT SPOT THEM ONE NIGHT OUT ON THE TOWN. I HAD TWO REACTIONS, AND I WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT BOTH OF THOSE REACTIONS WERE, BECAUSE I HAD THE SAME REACTION JUST NOW. ONE OF THEM IS SOME OF THE BUTTONS, WELL MOST OF THEM, MADE ME LAUGH. MY FIRST RESPONSE WAS I KIND OF LAUGHED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF ME THAT SAYS, WELL THIS IS AWFULLY VICIOUS AND IT COMES OUT ATTACKING EVERY MAN. WHEN YOU SAY "REAL WOMEN DON'T EAT MEN," IT'S AN ATTACK AGAINST ALL MEN, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE DECENT HUMAN BEINGS OR NOT. OR "DEAD MEN DON'T RAPE," THERE'S A SORT OF SUPPORT THERE OF... OF KILLING MEN. AND I GUESS PART OF ME SAYS, "YES, THERE'S ALL THIS AWFUL PORNOGRAPHY, AND RAPE, BUT IS THE ANSWER THAT WE GO BACK AND CONDONE THE SAME THING TOWARDS MEN?"

CRAFT: You see, I think the whole point of the first amendment is free speech, and what we've learned in this greedy society is that when you talk about what the pornographers are doing you don't talk about the content of what they're doing, you talk about their right to do it. And so I'm not going to get into whether what we're saying is right or wrong, or how irresponsible it is, or how it might even cause harm--if it could be considered harm. (laughter.) There's no proof, there's no correlation that intimidation could cause men any harm. (laughter) There would have to be a lot of studies on that, we couldn't just take their word for it that it harms them. But, we're not going to discuss whether this is responsible speech or not, because we don't have to defend it. You can look at what's done to women in this society, you can look at what kind of a society makes Brett Easton Ellis' book a best seller. This is direct retaliation against Brett Easton Ellis and all the misogynist material. It's got to go both ways.

INTERVIEWER: I GUESS MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, BY DOING THIS, AS I SAID I HAD TWO REACTIONS, PART OF ME LAUGHED AND PART OF ME, MY QUESTION IS STILL, IT'S LIKE AN EYE FOR AN EYE, A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH, AND THEN THE WHOLE WORLD IS BLIND AND TOOTHLESS, DO WE WANT TO FIGHT BACK WITH THE EXACT SAME TACTICS THAT ARE BEING USED, AND I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT ON THE PART OF MEN THEY'RE ALWAYS TOTALLING CONSCIOUS TACTICS IN THE WAY THAT YOU'RE CONSCIOUS ABOUT PUTTING OUT THESE BUTTONS, I MEAN IT'S JUST BECOME SUCH AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE CULTURE THAT THEY'RE NOT EVEN THINKING ABOUT IT ANYMORE, BUT THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU THINK THAT USING THE SAME TACTICS,...

CRAFT: Laura, you're evading the real issue here, which is this is a political statement and it's being done, no matter how much anybody likes it, no matter how much anybody dislikes it in the very controversial aspects, the very dilemma it puts you in as a civil libertarian where there should be no infringement, where it puts the ACLU, the very controversy of this dilemma that it puts you in, is going to further a discussion around just what are the limitations of free speech. Why should men get away with what women aren't doing? Women have been incredibly responsible and very silent too. But this is political speech, and it needs to be defended. That's it. Period.

INTERVIEWER: I AGREE WITH YOU, IT IS ABSOLUTELY DEFENDED AND I AM COMPLETELY IN SUPPORT OF YOUR HAVING EVERY RIGHT TO PUT THIS OUT.

CRAFT: Thank you.

INTERVIEWER: BUT THAT ISN'T WHAT I'M QUESTIONING - I AM NOT QUESTIONING YOUR RIGHT TO DO IT.

CRAFT: Well, let's question the pornographers responsibility about what they're doing, let's question the ACLU's responsibility for saying that if a rape is committed on film, that that becomes free speech. But don't come to me, and talk about my responsibility, when what I am doing is an extremely responsible satirical, conceptual art piece in response to all of this. Let's question the responsibility of others, because this wouldn't have been done were it not for what the media is doing. I'm not going to be that accountable in a society that's flourishing with men like Larry Flynt, Bob Guccione, and Al Goldstein, for christsakes.

INTERVIEWER: YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE. NOBODY'S TELLING YOU YOU HAVE TO BE. BUT THIS WOULD BE THE QUESTION. WHEN I SEND SPEECH OUT INTO THE WORLD, WHY I GOT INTO JOURNALISM, WAS WITH THE HOPE OF DOING SOME GOOD, SOMETHING POSITIVE...

CRAFT: Well I'm into this because I hope to do some bad. (laughter) And I advocate retaliation against men who are abusing women. And that's the purpose of this, and that's what we are trying to do. We are trying to turn women into strategically thinking criminals like Thelma and Louise. We want women to begin to fantasize about doing serious damage to batterers, and to rapists. We're tired of women being victims.

INTERVIEWER: I THINK THEY DO FANTASIZE ABOUT THAT...

CRAFT: We need to find a voice for that, and have buttons that reinforce that, and in the very loosest sense of the word, give women permission to start imagining what they can do to men who are abusing them.

INTERVIEWER: SOME OF THESE BUTTONS I TRULY THINK ARE GREAT, I REALLY LIKE THE ONE WITH A GUN ON IT THAT SAYS "NO MEANS NO MOTHER (BLEEP)" WHICH IS A WORD WE CAN'T SAY BUT I'M SURE YOU ALL KNOW...

CRAFT: Because we live in such a free society

INTERVIEWER: THAT'S RIGHT, BECAUSE WE LIVE IN SUCH A FREE SOCIETY I CAN'T SAY THAT WORD. AND IT IS IRONIC THAT HERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FREE SPEECH AND I CAN'T SAY THAT.

CRAFT: Yes, and we're supposed to be the ones who are so aligned with the right wing, and all these media sources have built in censors, people who do nothing in their job but censor the media. And they're not censoring it to make it appealing to us, believe me.

INTERVIEWER: IF YOU ARE PUTTING THESE BUTTONS OUT, AND LIKE I SAID, I LIKE SOME OF THEM, THE "KILLER FEMINISTS FROM HELL", VERY FUNNY, SOME OF THEM THOUGH MAKE ME MORE SQUEAMISH THAN OTHERS...

CRAFT: What are the ones that make you the most squeamish?

INTERVIEWER: I GUESS "REAL WOMEN DON'T EAT MEN," NOT SQUEAMISH SO MUCH AS...

CRAFT: Well let me ask you this Laura, You know the magazine ON OUR BACKS, how do you feel about the series where they've got the woman on the dog collar and the chain? Let's talk about that for just a minute -- Doesn't that make you feel squeamish at all?

INTERVIEWER: NO... NOT REALLY..

CRAFT: Well you've got a real problem them. You've got to examine within yourself what's making you squeamish and why? Why are you so much into protecting men when you see women strung around like slaves and dogs? Not that dogs should be strung around like that either.

INTERVIEWER: WELL, I DON'T DO THAT TO MY DOG EITHER. BUT WHAT GOOD, IN TERMS OF THE MAGAZINE ON OUR BACKS, I GUESS WHEN IT COMES TO EROTIC THINGS, AS LONG AS NOBODY IS HURT, I THINK TWO PEOPLE...

CRAFT: Well, nobody is actually hurt by saying to women "REAL WOMEN DON'T EAT MEN." Nobody's hurt by that.

INTERVIEWER: NO, NOBODY IS HURT BY THAT NECESSARILY. I GUESS...

CRAFT: But, as a feminist, why does it make you squeamish?

INTERVIEWER: THIS IS A GOOD QUESTION...

CRAFT: When a woman can be down on her hands and knees, and you know we are not talking about consensual images in some of the issues in ON OUR BACKS, we're talking about subordinated images where people aren't taking responsibility for their own sexuality, where there's coercion, where they're honoring slave relationships, very oppressive situations as power and sex. That doesn't make you feel squeamish. Yet you feel squeamish by a button that proudly proclaims "REAL WOMEN DON'T EAT MEN" which is a takeoff from "Dead men don't dance, "or something like that. It's a Norman Mailer novel about murdering a woman in Cape Cod, where he writes this very aggrandizing novel about a murder of women. There's a problem here. What this is is an experiment, it's conceptual art to the extreme to get people to examine those very things in themselves. And believe me there were some buttons in here that made me squeamish. But it is important that this position of man hatred be put out there. Because unless we can express hatred of men, we can't know that there is true democracy and true freedom in this society. It's just the purist, fundamentalist first amendment position that there is.

INTERVIEWER: WELL LET ME GO BACK...

CRAFT: I hope you can see a bit of the satire even in the position that I'm presenting here. We are going to be their worst nightmare come true...(laughs)

INTERVIEWER: ONE THING I JUST WANT TO...

CRAFT: That is our goal. We have taken the "Bitches from Hell" Oath. . .

INTERVIEWER: I GUESS ONE THING I JUST WANT TO BE SURE TO TELL PEOPLE IS WHO YOU ARE, THAT I'M SPEAKING WITH NIKKI CRAFT WITH THE ACLU (ALWAYS CAUSING LEGAL UNREST). WE'LL CONTINUE WITH THE INTERVIEW NOW.

CRAFT: Why don't we give the address right now? I feel very strongly that people might want to respond; I'd love to hear feedback on what we've said. We're a volunteer organization, so of course we can't answer all the correspondence, but we'd love to hear criticisms, letters of support, we'd love to send you brochures on our buttons. Send us a self-addressed stamped envelope to ACLU (Always Causing Legal Unrest), P. O. Box 2085, Rancho Cordova, California 95741-2085, and you can become a card carrying member of Always Causing Legal Unrest by sending a $25 donation. We will use donations for our Illegal Defense Fund.

INTERVIEWER: ONE THING I WAS SAYING WAS, I ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT (THIS IS WHERE YOU AND I DIFFER) TO PUT OUT WHATEVER KIND OF GARBAGE THEY WANT TO PUT OUT: PEOPLE CAN PUT OUT THE MOST RACIST HORRIBLE SPEECH THAT THEY WANT, AND THEY DO, I MEAN THE KLAN AND THE NAZI'S AND PEOPLE LIKE THAT, THEY DO. BUT IT CERTAINLY ISN'T AS PREVALENT AS PORNOGRAPHY. AND MY FEELING IS THAT THE REASON IT'S NOT AS PREVALENT IS BECAUSE, AS A SOCIETY, WE HAVE GENERALLY EDUCATED PEOPLE FROM DAY ONE (NOW WE DO, OVER THE LAST FORTY YEARS) THAT RACIST SPEECH IS A BAD THING. SO IT'S LESS AND LESS ACCEPTED AND YOU SEE LESS AND LESS OF THIS SORT OF THING.

CRAFT: Yes, There's a social critique and a political critique of it, and it's considered a no no.

INTERVIEWER: BUT THAT WAS DONE WITHOUT SOMEBODY PUTTING OUT BUTTONS THAT SAID "WHITE PEOPLE..."

CRAFT: Wait a minute, that's just not true. Come on. We've all seen anti-racist buttons, there have been political movements dedicated to undoing racism.

INTERVIEWER: ABSOLUTELY, BUT THAT MOVEMENT...

CRAFT: And there was a movement that became a very appreciated one for blacks to not only be critical of whites, but to "hate honkies," and I certainly don't blame them in the least. It took Malcolm X to get us where we are right now on racism, and it wasn't just any easy struggle, and we aren't far enough along about it yet. Now the reason that that same process is not taking place is that any person who criticizes the media right now is silenced and villified. They are called Femi-nazi's, or they're aligned with the right wing, and that critique is being silenced.

INTERVIEWER: I DON'T THINK THE MEDIA IS ANY MORE COMFORTABLE THOUGH WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE, WITH BLACK POWER PEOPLE WHO ARE ANTI WHITE, THAN IT IS TOWARDS, GENERALLY BEING, IT'S NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE PEOPLE EITHER...

CRAFT: Well, comfort has nothing to do with this: It has nothing to do with political struggle. No political change happens easily. You know, you plow up the ground, you tear things up, before it can land again. And that's the whole point of any political struggle.
     And I think there's a very important issue that's taking place even in this interview; and that is the content of these buttons is irrelevant to this point. The issue is, there were leafletters at the 200th anniversary of the Bill of Rights, women who were doing nothing but peacefully leafletting. We were physically assaulted, there are criminal misdemeanor charges filed against two members of the American Civil Liberties Union, and more than that took part in this in grabbing up and destroying an art work. Why isn't that being covered in the media? Why isn't that being covered on Pacifica Radio? Why are you the only journalist who's interviewed me twenty-four hours later about this? That is the real crux of the issue here, not whether "REAL WOMEN DON'T EAT MEN" might cause discomfort to somebody when they read it. The point is that it got your attention, it got you thinking. You're talking about the limitations of free speech now, you're talking about responsibilities regarding it. That is a vitally important discussion to take place, but the ACLU is going to have to reckon over the next couple of years with what their limitations to free speech are, and how they can dare reconcile on the Bill of Rights Day physically assaulting people who were doing nothing but educating their members about an inconsistency in their political positions. It's pretty disgusting. Anybody out there who isn't disgusted by this who's a civil libertarian has got real problems.

INTERVIEWER: I THINK THERE ARE REALLY TWO ISSUES GOING ON HERE. I SEE THAT ISSUE. I'M LOOKING AT THE ISSUE OF THE ACLU AND THE TRUE IRONY OF THEM SUPPRESSING YOUR RIGHT TO LEAFLET AT THEIR BANQUET, AND AT THE SAME TIME, GOING BACK TO THE FORMATION OF "ALWAYS CAUSING LEGAL UNREST," AND PUTTING OUT THESE PARTICULAR BUTTONS, AND THE CHOICE OF THESE PARTICULAR BUTTONS, WHICH IS ANOTHER ISSUE. SO THERE'S TWO ISSUES HERE.

CRAFT: Yeah, but it's interesting which one is being focused on. You've chosen the word "irony" in what they did to us, what about "Battery" and "Vandalism"? Isn't there a stronger word within yourself that you can find than "irony"? Aren't you outraged by it?

INTERVIEWER: IT'S BOTHERSOME TO ME... I'M GOING TO CALL THE ACLU, AND NEXT WEEK I WOULD LIKE THEM TO RESPOND.

CRAFT: I'll be very interested.

INTERVIEWER: OKAY, WELL WE ARE ABOUT OUT OF TIME, AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS INTERVIEW. I KNOW YOU'VE HAD A VERY DIFFICULT TWENTY-FOUR HOURS, AND I THINK YOU HAVE RAISED SOME IMPORTANT AND THOUGHT PROVOKING ISSUES. I AM SURE THAT YOU WILL GET SOME RESPONSE FROM PEOPLE, AS I PROBABLY WILL HERE AT THE STATION...

CRAFT: Hopefully not the FCC.

INTERVIEWER: HOPEFULLY NOT THE FCC, WELL IF I BLEEP OUT THAT, THAT BLEEPER, MAYBE EVERYTHING WILL BE OKAY. SO NIKKI CRAFT OF ALWAYS CAUSING LEGAL UNREST,

CRAFT: I appreciate you very much giving us the opportunity to present this position, I credit you for that.

INTERVIEWER: THANKS FOR JOINING US. GOODBYE.