[Vision2020] Escalation of claims (was: Echoes from the Whinery)

[Joan Opyr]

Joe is quite right.  The escalation of claims -- from a nail in a tire 
to tires slashed, to calling this a campaign of terror -- is 
outrageous.  When did "There's a condom in my mailbox" become "Play 
Misty for Me?"  A smelly smudge on a picture window is not the work of 
the Nightstalker.  No one I know approves of actual vandalism, but 
let's not pretend that that's what this is.  Doug Wilson has 
suspicions.  He's had a couple of flat tires.  He's had a condom in his 
mailbox.  He's been obliged to break out the Windex with Ammonia D.  
And, lest we forget, Doug includes as "harassment" legitimate legal 
zoning complaints.  He writes this specifically in his statement.

There is no relationship between dirty condoms and zoning complaints.  
None.  Moscow Zoning Code forbade educational institutions in the 
Central Business District.  That was a fact.  The previous City Council 
had to rewrite zoning code to permit New St. Andrews to operate in the 
CBD.  City Council first legitimized the complaint and then rendered it 
moot.  Is this in any way related to a screw in a tire?  Prove it.

Prove all of it.  Show me the money.  Photograph the screws.  
Photograph the stinky window.  Document these complaints and then ask 
Moscow Police to investigate.  In fact, I think the five (not four) 
people Doug Wilson names should insist that this be investigated.  
They've been named and shamed without evidence, without proof, without 
recourse.  How fair is that?  I'd rank it right up there with asking 
"When did you stop beating your wife?"

Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
www.joanopyr.com

On Jul 28, 2006, at 7:40 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:

> Donovan,
>
> It is hard for me to determine what has actually happened to Wilson. I 
> am interested in knowing the basis of your claims below, for instance? 
> Did you see nails in Wilson's drive way? Did you help him change some 
> of his tires?
>
> I don't know of anyone who would cheer violent acts toward another 
> individual, whether or not they agreed with the individuals religious 
> and political views. Vandalism is always wrong, as far as I can see.
>
> But what proof do we have that violence or vandalism has actually been 
> done to Wilson? Furthermore, what proof do we have that Wilson's 
> political critics have had anything to do with it, even if it did 
> happen?
>
> I know of at least two persons, both critics of Wilson, who have had 
> dog feces speared on the inside (in one case) and outside (in another 
> case) of their cars. If I think that Wilson had something to do with 
> this -- perhaps only indirectly, since he suggests that violent 
> behavior toward gays and lesbians is justified -- does that give me 
> the right to say in public that he is responsible for it? I don't 
> think so.
>
> We need to get a better grip about what's going on here. You can start 
> by telling me exactly how Wilson has been harmed and what EVIDENCE 
> there is to believe that such harm has occurred.
>
> Best, Joe
>