[Vision2020] this disagreement seems like testosterone fueledstupidity
Joe Campbell
philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Fri Jan 30 21:47:00 PST 2009
Please Warren bring popcorn and any other food you can. I can only
provide the flyers.
And I will be there to make Moscow aware of the racist ideologies in
our community. I hope that Crabtree shows and tries to explain why I'm
wrong. If so, it should be fun!
Joe Campbell
On Jan 30, 2009, at 9:02 PM, "Warren Hayman" <whayman at roadrunner.com>
wrote:
> Oh boy! Can I bring popcorn? To heck with Keely et. al. and their
> quashing the right to free speech. This is better than off-list,
> this is off-line altogether at its best! As the W. would say, "Bring
> it on!" And how fitting a place could there be?
>
> Warren Hayman
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joe Campbell
> To: g. crabtree
> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 8:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] this disagreement seems like testosterone
> fueledstupidity
>
> Sorry. I got caught up in the lectures and failed to fully read this
> post until now.
>
> You're on, Crabtree. Noon on Tuesday, Feb. 3, Friendship Square.
> I'll bring the flyer!
>
> Joe Campbell
>
> On Jan 30, 2009, at 7:04 AM, "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I believe that Mr. Arnold & Ms. Mix are correct and this will be my
>> final world on this topic.
>>
>> Campbell, you are an blithering idiot, a liar, a coward, and a dolt
>> with poor reading skills. I have already said that I accept your
>> simple minded challenge. (at least I think I did, it was tough to
>> see my keyboard through the wracking sobs and copious teats) I also
>> said that it's one more threat in a long line of threats you won't
>> carry out but, to make it as easy as possible for you to work up
>> the nerve to execute your little imaginary assault, you pick the
>> day, any day, any time of day. Make it a surprise attack, phone
>> ahead, or take out an ad in the paper, I really don't care. When
>> you're finished and you go home to a rousing chorus of, what I can
>> only imagine will be "I told you that was a bad idea!" perhaps
>> you'll find someone else to "help."
>>
>> g
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Joe Campbell
>> To: g. crabtree
>> Cc: Saundra Lund ; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 8:10 PM
>> Subject: Re: this disagreement seems like racism
>>
>> You're wrong, Gary. I said YOU pick the time and place, within
>> reason. It is a challenge that you won't accept. Why?
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out how someone as apparently sensitive as you
>> are (I mean you are practically sobbing in this last post) could
>> not think the stuff in question is racist, offensive. I'm
>> just trying to help you and I'm trying to understand you, that's all.
>>
>> If everything you say is right, you have nothing to loose by
>> accepting my challenge.
>>
>> Joe Campbell
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2009, at 6:23 PM, "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'll write Rush's comments and No Weatherman's subject lines on a
>>> piece of paper and we'll put you on a street corner in Newark and
>>> you explain to people who pass by that the comments aren't racist.
>>> If you convince them, I'll rest my case."
>>>
>>> So, because your point of view would be more popular in The Murder
>>> Capital of New Jersey, I must be wrong? Coming from someone who
>>> lauds himself as a master of logic, that's a rather awkward
>>> argument don't you think? (anybody out there want to tell the rest
>>> of the class which logical fallacy Perfessor Campbell has been
>>> repeatedly making in the last few posts using this line of
>>> reasoning? Bueller?)
>>>
>>> "I'll be happy to take the same sheet of paper and ask the folks
>>> coming and going into your shop on any given day what they think.
>>> What better audience could you have?"
>>>
>>> Despite your blatantly transparent intent to bully by attempting
>>> to falsely identify me with racist attitudes, this is the course
>>> of action I choose for two reasons. First, I believe that my
>>> clients are much smarter then you (heck, I think lawn furniture is
>>> smarter than you) and will see your actions for what they are,
>>> another spineless and ultimately ineffective attempt to inflict a
>>> little character assignation on someone you have repeatedly and
>>> publicly expressed your hatred for. Second, you have made repeated
>>> threats to come to my shop and do this thing or that
>>> thing but in the end you've never had the fortitude to follow
>>> through. It seems very unlikely to me that you're going to man up
>>> at this late date.
>>>
>>> As a dry run for this imaginary undertaking that you propose, why
>>> don't you post your "sheet of paper" containing these comments and
>>> subject lines, verbatim, In quotation marks, with citations along
>>> with my exact remarks in support. (you have, after all been known
>>> to make it up as you go along) I'm quite sure that without your
>>> adding your own special spin to the remarks that the whole thing
>>> is going to come across as weak and not a little pathetic.
>>>
>>>
>>> g
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Joe Campbell
>>> To: g. crabtree
>>> Cc: Saundra Lund ; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:13 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Crabtree once again defends racism (was blah, blah,
>>> blah)
>>>
>>> Rush resigned like Nixon resigned.
>>>
>>> Let's it simple. I'll write Rush's comments and No Weatherman's
>>> subject lines on a piece of paper and we'll put you on a street
>>> corner in Newark and you explain to people who pass by that the
>>> comments aren't racist. If you convince them, I'll rest my case.
>>>
>>> If you prefer, I'll be happy to take the same sheet of paper and
>>> ask the folks coming and going into your shop on any given day
>>> what they think. What better audience could you have?
>>>
>>> Or you pick the street corner, shop, or audience (not members of
>>> your favorite church, though). However you want to do it. Put your
>>> theory to the test. What have you got to loose if you're right.
>>>
>>> Joe Campbell
>>>
>>> On Jan 29, 2009, at 6:23 AM, "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "I, and most sensible people?" looks as though we're off to a
>>>> great start.
>>>>
>>>> It would seem that you are not very well informed with regard to
>>>> the Donovan McNabb/Rush Limbaugh incident. From the ESPN web site:
>>>>
>>>> George Bodenheimer, president of ESPN and ABC Sports, issued the
>>>> following response: (to Limbaugh's resignation)
>>>> "We accept his resignation and regret the circumstances
>>>> surrounding this. We believe that he took the appropriate action
>>>> to resolve this matter expeditiously."
>>>>
>>>> The comments referenced by Limbaugh came during Sunday's pregame
>>>> show when the conservative talk show host offered the opinion
>>>> that McNabb wasn't as good as the media perceived him to be.
>>>>
>>>> "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the
>>>> NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do
>>>> well,'' Limbaugh said. "There is a little hope invested in
>>>> McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this
>>>> team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."
>>>>
>>>> It is an unambiguous fact that the media was rooting a little
>>>> extra for McNabb and if you watched any of the reporting and
>>>> commentary at the time you couldn't miss it. It is hardly racist
>>>> to acknowledge this reality. Jump ahead five years and substitute
>>>> BHO for DM. It isn't racist to point out the obvious.
>>>>
>>>> In the first two games of the 2003 season McNabb's performance
>>>> was sub par. To offer up the opinion that he was currently over
>>>> rated was just that, an opinion on his performance, not his
>>>> color. McNabb went on to have a pretty good year so
>>>> consequentially Limbaugh's comments may have been premature, or
>>>> poorly informed, or flat out wrong but they were opinions on a
>>>> quarterback and not racism.
>>>>
>>>> Let's review. Rush did not say that McNabb "was not subject to
>>>> criticism because he was black." Rush was not "FIRED" (note to
>>>> jc: all caps and repetition do not constitute truth) from ESPN.
>>>> That being cleared up, it really isn't at all hard to
>>>> characterize your misinterpretation of the incident as liberal
>>>> bias.
>>>>
>>>> For the record, I do not think that it's racist to disagree with
>>>> people of color. I don't think that it's racist to
>>>> not get all tingly in my lower extremities when a person of color
>>>> gets elected to high office and I most assuredly don't think it's
>>>> racist to offer up the same criticism to a person of color that I
>>>> would to any other public figure where it's warranted. In fact, I
>>>> do think that it's more then a little condescending and, quite
>>>> frankly, racist not to.
>>>>
>>>> Now, All that having been said, I don't think YOU'RE a
>>>> belligerent, racist, liar but, you sure do sound like one. Oh,
>>>> and by the way, you have on several previous occasions called me
>>>> a bigot when the subject was race, making the first two sentences
>>>> along with the general theme of your post prevarications.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> g
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Joe Campbell
>>>> To: g. crabtree
>>>> Cc: Saundra Lund ; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 5:58 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Crabtree once again defends racism (was blah, blah,
>>>> blah)
>>>>
>>>> I'm not trying to pick a fight. Nor did I call you a racist. I
>>>> just find it curious that you keep putting your stamp of approval
>>>> next to comments that I and most sensible people consider to be
>>>> racist. First there was your defense of No Weatherman and then
>>>> your recent defense of comments by Rush.
>>>>
>>>> The recent Rush comments, by the way, were similar to comments he
>>>> made about Donovan McNabb - that DM was not subject to criticism
>>>> because he was black. Those comments, if you remember, got Rush
>>>> FIRED from espn. You don't have a problem with the comments but
>>>> enough people did that he was FIRED.
>>>>
>>>> It is hard to pass off my disgust for Rush's recent comments as
>>>> some kind of liberal bias in light of this history, these facts.
>>>> And it is equally hard to make sense of your support for Rush's
>>>> comments in light of this history, these facts.
>>>>
>>>> Lastly, I like how you brush off my suggestion that you
>>>> characterize all liberals as holding the same stupid view but you
>>>> do it again below! I never said anything negative about Soul, or
>>>> Williams, or Steele. I never said anything about any of them. I
>>>> don't even know who some of them are!
>>>>
>>>> But somewhere, somewhen, some stupid liberal made some stupid
>>>> comment about one of them and the rest of us have to pay -
>>>> because we're all the same.
>>>>
>>>> And somehow this all explains why a comment made by Rush, which
>>>> would have gotten him fired were he still on espn, isn't as
>>>> racist as common sense suggests.
>>>>
>>>> Look, maybe you're not a racist, Gary. But you sure sound like one.
>>>>
>>>> Joe Campbell
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 7:43 AM, "g. crabtree"
>>>> <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> First line, irrelevant babble, no response required.
>>>>>
>>>>> Second, same as first. Yawn.
>>>>>
>>>>> Third. Like calling someone a nazi when your argument is
>>>>> floundering, hurl out the "racist" appellation when you're
>>>>> desperate to make some sort of a point and nothing else is
>>>>> sticking. If you would like to continue down this woeful road,
>>>>> why not explain for me and the rest of the readership what,
>>>>> exactly, is racist about not being impressed (or distressed) by
>>>>> our new leaders fathers skin color? How does it make BHO's
>>>>> policy's divinely inspired while the ideas put forth by Thomas
>>>>> Soul, Walter Williams, and Michael Steele something to be
>>>>> disregarded as irrelevant and beneath contempt?
>>>>> And finally, what the hell do your pals pockets have to do with
>>>>> anything? Are they packed full of moon beams and fairy dust?
>>>>>
>>>>> g
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Joe Campbell
>>>>> To: Saundra Lund
>>>>> Cc: g. crabtree ; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 6:54 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Contradictory Crabtree (was RE: Say
>>>>> What?)
>>>>>
>>>>> Sandra, no sense in letting the facts get in the way of the
>>>>> radical right rhetoric. Those who disagree are all communists,
>>>>> God-haters.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, we're all a team, accepting all of the same
>>>>> views. How else could the Bush ideology win, unless it was black
>>>>> (liberalism, communism, atheism) against white (truth, justice,
>>>>> and the American way)?
>>>>>
>>>>> And Tom's original post about Rush's racist comments - which
>>>>> Crabtree supported without a blink, just like he supported the
>>>>> racist rants of No Weatherman - is smoothly swept under the rug.
>>>>> What's a little racism when what is at stake is God Himself? Or
>>>>> the pockets of my friends?
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe Campbell
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 27, 2009, at 4:33 PM, "Saundra Lund" <sslund_2007 at verizon.net
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet again, what an enormous crock, but that’s what many of
>>>>>> us have come to expect from you in this forum J
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, how wrong you are, as usual. As everyone who knows me
>>>>>> knows, Obama wasn’t “my” candidate, let alone any kind of
>>>>>> deity to me. I did, however, vote for the candidate out o
>>>>>> f the choices we wound up with who I thought would do the
>>>>>> best job, a decision a clear majority agreed with. So tak
>>>>>> e your sour grapes and go make some more whine – continue
>>>>>> to be part of the problem rather than part of a solution .
>>>>>> . . that’s what you’re good at.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It’s not surprising at all to me – nor should it be to any
>>>>>> of us here -- that you don’t bother to even try to correc
>>>>>> t what you say I got wrong in summarizing the positions yo
>>>>>> u’ve taken here. It would be pretty difficult for you, wh
>>>>>> at with the V2020 archives being open for all J
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saundra Lund
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Moscow, ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good
>>>>>> people to do nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~ Edmund Burke
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2009
>>>>>> through life plus 70 years, Saundra Lund. Do not copy,
>>>>>> forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum
>>>>>> without the express written permission of the author.*****
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: g. crabtree [mailto:jampot at roadrunner.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 7:42 AM
>>>>>> To: Saundra Lund; vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Contradictory Crabtree (was RE: Say
>>>>>> What?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ms. Lund,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure exactly how pointing out that I will support
>>>>>> your new god when (if) I see him doing good for the
>>>>>> country and oppose him when he's not
>>>>>> qualifies as whining but, I guess it's in
>>>>>> the ear of the termagant. I defer to your mastery as eight
>>>>>> continuous years of effort have, without a doubt, left you well
>>>>>> practiced on the matter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I find it highly amusing and not a small bit refreshing that
>>>>>> you feel comfortable enough in your creative writing style to
>>>>>> forge ahead without feeling even the slightest need to anchor
>>>>>> yourself to anything resembling a fact. The errors
>>>>>> in your brief communication are many, and
>>>>>> I'm just sure that you'll forgive me if (what with life being
>>>>>> short and all) I don't bother to enumerate them. Lets face it,
>>>>>> as one of The Chosen Ones most fervent followers it's clear
>>>>>> that you have gotten beyond the need for accuracy and reason
>>>>>> where it comes to your cute little school
>>>>>> girl affaire d'coeur with your freshly minted deity. My only
>>>>>> request would be that if you are going to do the other members
>>>>>> of this little electronic community the service of pointing out
>>>>>> that evil "Crabtree's" position on any given topic that you
>>>>>> provide a cite so that the others can make a reasonable
>>>>>> distinction between my actual stand on any given matter and
>>>>>> what is a fantasy fueled by your freshly found religious fervor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My most heart felt thanks in advance,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> g
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Saundra Lund
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 9:31 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subject: [Vision2020] Contradictory Crabtree (was RE: Say What?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL – let the whining begin!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary Crabtree wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “As I said previously, if there is an issue that "our" pre
>>>>>> sident should come up with that I think makes America a be
>>>>>> tter, safer, or less restrictive place to live, I'll suppo
>>>>>> rt him.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note the quotation marks Crabtree uses – he’s clearly want
>>>>>> ing to continue with the divisiveness that doomed the elec
>>>>>> tion for the GOP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, he contradicts himself here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “If BHO plans on making good on his campaign promises with
>>>>>> regard to abortion, education, taxes, health care, the se
>>>>>> cond amendment, the global warming hoax, and the war on te
>>>>>> rror, then I suspect a huge portion of the 53 million Amer
>>>>>> ican's who didn't vote for him (once) hope he fails misera
>>>>>> bly, myself included.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, Crabtree only wants a less restrictive place to live if it
>>>>>> suits his notion of a “less restrictive place to live” – h
>>>>>> e’s against reproductive rights, even for rape victims. L
>>>>>> et’s keep them thar women broodmares! Remember, he’s a st
>>>>>> aunch supporter of misogynistic “conscience laws” that ena
>>>>>> ble pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives, emer
>>>>>> gency or otherwise, which would certainly make America a m
>>>>>> uch more restrictive place for women to live. The broken
>>>>>> health care system folks like Crabtree want to cling to ha
>>>>>> s made America a much more restrictive place to live for m
>>>>>> any regular hardworking Americans – he’s seemingly proud o
>>>>>> f the fact that we are the only ind
>>>>>> ustrialized nation where people lose their homes due to un
>>>>>> conscionable health care costs. The Second Amendment our
>>>>>> founding fathers gave us isn’t good enough for Crabtree an
>>>>>> d his ilk – they want a Second Amendment on Steroids. He’
>>>>>> s content that the War on Terror has lead to the terroriza
>>>>>> tion of US citizens through the ero
>>>>>> sion of our guaranteed civil liberties and put us on a pat
>>>>>> h to a police state – that sure seems like a much more res
>>>>>> trictive place to live to me, and that’s without even gett
>>>>>> ing into the shame of torture and denial of due process to
>>>>>> suspects. He’s pleased with a tax system that unfairly b
>>>>>> urdens the least among us while providing nothing but loop
>>>>>> holes ripe for exploitation by the greedy amongst us, espe
>>>>>> cially those who benefit from the special interest lobbyin
>>>>>> g they fund. Education – his solution is I don’t know w
>>>>>> hat, but it would likely look similar – and have results s
>>>>>> imilar to – the deregulation that’s caused the financial c
>>>>>> risis that came crashing down around Bush’s ears. God onl
>>>>>> y knows what nonsense fills his head about global warming
>>>>>> – it would appear his understanding of science is limited
>>>>>> to the right-wing whack jobs who flunked science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fortunately, the election was a resounding rejection of those
>>>>>> like Crabtree who want keep doing things that don’t work.
>>>>>> And, I’m sure we have his sore loser whining to look forw
>>>>>> ard to for the next four years. After all, this was a leg
>>>>>> itimate win for Obama, which must make the win
>>>>>> that much more difficult to swallow J
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saundra Lund
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Moscow, ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good
>>>>>> people to do nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~ Edmund Burke
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright
>>>>>> 2008 through life plus 70 years, Saundra
>>>>>> Lund. Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the
>>>>>> Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of
>>>>>> the author.*****
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of g. crabtree
>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:38 PM
>>>>>> To: Chasuk
>>>>>> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Say What?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess that it all depends on which side of the Kool-Aid jug
>>>>>> you sit on. I can't believe that you can say with
>>>>>> a straight face that what you might find
>>>>>> on drudge or the freep is as over the top as some of the
>>>>>> mindless, howling at the moon, wackiness found at kos or
>>>>>> huffington.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I said previously, if there is an issue that "our" president
>>>>>> should come up with that I think makes America a better, safer,
>>>>>> or less restrictive place to live, I'll support him. On
>>>>>> everything else I'll fight him to the best of my ability and
>>>>>> hope for his catastrophic failure. Since I am unaware of a
>>>>>> single issue with which I am in agreement major policy wise, I
>>>>>> don't think that there will be much to
>>>>>> support. If every mega leftist measure your hero puts forward
>>>>>> is an abject failure it will hopefully
>>>>>> discredit the ultra liberal wing of the democrat party and
>>>>>> hasten the rise of a truly conservative candidate. All to the
>>>>>> greater glory of our republic, in my
>>>>>> opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> g
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Chasuk" <chasuk at gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>; "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 11:43 AM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Say What?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 06:51, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >> Remember how your side wished President GW the best? Sort of
>>>>>> like that but
>>>>>> >> without the shrillness and childish demonstrations.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Sorry, I read a lot of blogs and new sites, across the
>>>>>> political
>>>>>> > spectrum -- including http://drudgereport.com,
>>>>>> > http://www.freerepublic.com, and http://worldnetdaily.com --
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> > "shrill" and "childish" are words that much more accurately
>>>>>> describe
>>>>>> > the conservative side of things. Other accurate words would be
>>>>>> > inarticulate and ungrammatical.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > And how about wishing that Obama simply fail to successfully
>>>>>> implement
>>>>>> > those policies and agendas with which you disagree? As far as
>>>>>> > conservatives go, you are the voice of reason on this forum,
>>>>>> Gary.
>>>>>> > You really don't strike me as subscribing to the
>>>>>> > cut-off-the-nose-to-spite-the-face philosophy.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>>
>>>>>> D================
>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>
>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>> nbsp; http://www.fsr.net
>>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>> ======================================================= BODY>
>>>> =========================nbsp; http://www.fsr.net
>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>> ======================================================= BODY> >
>>> D========================== BODY>
>>> =========================nbsp; http://www.fsr.net
>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> ======================================================= BODY> >
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
> w.com">mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ======================================================= BODY> >
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ======================================================= KQUOTE>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090130/f9c4db30/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list