[Vision2020] Photos Added "Not On The Palouse" Did we miss something?

[Saundra Lund]

Dear P.S. Stile,

Oh, you poor confused thing!  Your reading comprehension and understanding
of real world things seem to be a bit challenged, perhaps due to your
sheltered upbringing.  I'll try to help you out.

With respect to the police presence and security at the *SUB* during Wilson
World's silly so-called "history" conference, you originally stated,
"According to a Daily News article, the police were on hand to protect the
protestors from conference attendees."  You later added, "It was The Daily
News that reported that security was hired to protect the protestors."

I asked you to cite the article, and in support of those two statements, you
offered the following quote from a Daily News article about the *Peace
March*:
"Deakin Avenue was blocked off to protect the safety of the marchers, and
police were posted throughout the route. There was no resistance to the
marchers, as was expected earlier this week."

Translation:
Deakin Avenue was closed to motor vehicle traffic to protect the *Peace
Marchers* from pedestrian vs motor vehicle collisions.  This is standard
procedure when permits have been requested & approved for parades, marches,
demonstrations, festivals, etc.. in public streets.  Also as standard
procedure, police were posted throughout the route.  Ever been to the Mardi
Gras parade, or any other large open-to-the-public gatherings (i.e.,
Farmer's Market, Latah County Fair, etc.)?  In the interest of *public
safety* (a novel concept for you, I'm sure, since it's for the benefit of
both Believers and Unbelievers alike), police are virtually always present.

No where in TDN quote (nor in the rest of the article) you provided does it
indicate that safety of the marchers from *conference attendees* was the
reason for police presence at the *Peace March* (which is what the article
was about, *not* the silly "history" conference).

So, your proof is clearly still absent.  Discrepancies, discrepancies . . .
Got anything else?  If not, then your original statements are false and
we're awaiting a retraction.

Now, let's go back to your earlier claim:
"It was The Daily News that reported that security was hired to protect the
protestors."

Are you trying to claim that Wilson World hired the police for the *Peace
March* out of concern for the marchers?  We know Wilson World was required
to provide security for their so-called "history" conference, but I doubt
that Wilson World also paid for the police presence at the Peace March.

You need to back up that allegation with proof, Bubba.  


Anxiously Awaiting (but not holding my breath),
Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
-Edmund Burke 

-----Original Message-----
From: P.S. Stile [mailto:psstile@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 11:46 AM
To: sslund@adelphia.net; vision2020@moscow.com; thansen@moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Photos Added "Not On The Palouse" Did we miss
something?

Dear Saundra:
Here is an excerpt from the story in Saturday's TND.
P.S. Stile

>From: "Saundra Lund" 

>>P.S. Stile wrote: 
>>"It was The Daily News that reported that security was hired to protect
the 
>>protestors."  Really?!?!  Where did you read that?  There were several
articles >>published in TDN, but I don't recall reading anything like that.

Hundreds make call for tolerance; Residents unite in opposition to speakers
at history conference
Hillary Hamm
"Deakin Avenue was blocked off to protect the safety of the marchers, and
police were posted throughout the route. There was no resistance to the
marchers, as was expected earlier this week." 

>-----Original Message----- 
>From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com] On 
>Behalf Of P.S. Stile 
>Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:58 PM 
>To: vision2020@moscow.com 
>Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Photos Added "Not On The Palouse" Did we miss 
>something? 
> 
> 
>Dear Tom: 
> 
>It was The Daily News that reported that security was hired to protect the 
>protestors.  You reported one thing on your website, they reported another.

> 
>I was simply pointing out the discrepancy between the two. 
> 
>And, I said, "only a few," not, " just two". 
> 
>P.S. Stile