[Vision2020] Hypocrisy

Thu Sep 15 18:36:09 PDT 2011

Perjury is lying under oath.  It does not take a court finding to know that perjury has occurred.  I have seen it occur many times. 

My information about Jim Wilson's testimony in court came from someone who was in court and heard that testimony.  If that persons chooses to comment on Vision 2020, they will.

However, here's a link:

Community Christian Ministry 208-883-0997 
Here's what I originally wrote:

"A male member of his church was convicted of sexually molesting his child.  The wife filed for divorce.  During the child custody proceedings, Jim Wilson testified in favor of the father, then a convicted pedophile, being given custody of the child he defiled."

How you can verify the above:

1.    Dial the Above number.
2.    Ask for Jim Wilson.
3.    Ask Wilson if the above quote is substantially correct.
4.    Post his response here on Vision 2020.

If you are interested in the truth, you'll do the above, if not you'll make some attempt-at-humor remark.

As to your wondering why this hasn't appeared before:  There are many things on this subject, the CCM, the CCC and related subjects/issues that are known but have not appeared here yet.  Stay tuned, especially if you crave the salacious.

w. 

From: Gary Crabtree 
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:55 PM
To: Art Deco ; Vision2020 at moscow.com 
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Hypocrisy

Last time I checked, perjury was for the court to decide not The Amazing Sandi and yourself. They didn't and anything less is your "humble" opinion backed by odious vapor
and precious little else.

Moving on to your "enabling child molestation" claim, this is classic Fox vague innuendo. Why don't you provide a link or two to some source material that might
provide some substance and context for your assertion? To expect anyone unfamiliar with the this case (should it exist at all. It's a tad suspicious how this recent 
thread is the first mention when all things negative to Wilson & Co. has been the hottest topic on this forum since its inception) to accept your highly biased 
analysis as a sound argument for throwing Jim to the wolves is to expect far too much. You have often implied that others on this list were either lazy or stupid 
for not backing up their claims to your complete and total satisfaction, perhaps you would like to show us all how someone as masterful as you imagine yourself 
to be does it.

In breathless anticipation,
g

From: Art Deco 
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:18 PM
To: Vision2020 at moscow.com 
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Hypocrisy

Here's one reason:

You wrote:

"Neither your concerns about tax exemption nor Wayne's concerns about his testimony in a child custody case are reversing my impression of him, mainly because I suspect that the reasons why he did those things are religious in nature, very likely Bible-based, and this understandable to me."

So whatever anybody believes because of religious reasons is OK?  That's being dismissive and condescending.

The issues that many in the community have with Jim Wilson and Douglas Wilson arise because of their determination to either persuade the gullible or cram their religious beliefs and/actions based on those beliefs down people's throats.

Excusing advocating placing a molested child in the custody of the molester or excusing perjury committed to avoid paying taxes and criminal charges because the perpetrator believe that is what some alleged god wants is not a value worthy of debate?  That's dismissive and condescending.

Good old Jim.  Enables child sexual molestation, lies under oath to avoid paying taxes, etc.  But what a prince of a fellow.  Good old charming Ted Bundy.  Murdered a few people, but what a charming and fun guy to have around.

Avoiding/refusing to debate a belief and the results of that belief which end in morally reprehensible behavior because the belief is bible based.  That's chickenshit!

w.

From: Paul Rumelhart 
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 11:58 AM
To: Saundra Lund 
Cc: 'vision 2020' 
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Hypocrisy

I've never claimed to be Jesus Christ or Gandhi.  Of course I have issues of my own.

I find climate change interesting.  I read up on it, and even write programs to graph data.  I'm always doing projects like that, not all of them tied to issues on this list.  It's what I do.  My opinion differs from the norm on climate change, so when someone posts something about it I often disagree.  Sometimes I like to respond as if it were a public mailing list.  

Why does everyone think that I'm always being dismissive, condescending, or patronizing?  I'm just having a conversation.  I'm not trying to score points or beat my viewpoint into others.  When someone responds, I reply if I have something to say.

Paul

On 09/14/2011 10:39 AM, Saundra Lund wrote: 
  Paul wrote:

  "In my personal opinion, some people on this list should question whether or not they are obsessing too much about these people."

  Do you mean "obsessing" as in your obsession to respond to virtually all climate change posts with which you disagree?

  Or, do you mean "obsessing" as in the expertise some list members (including yourself) have pursued to learn about climate change, mega-loads, child sexual abuse, etc.?

  Or, do you mean "obsessing" as in people not willing to accept your opinion on any particular topic as gospel as evidenced by offering opinions/experiences different than your own???

  One person's obsession is another's passion, you know.  Personally, I'm grateful we have longer term community members on the Viz who value community history.  There are some who'd like us to forget about things like SSAIW & religiously motivated local laws pushed by their own personal lobbyists actually on the city council & board of county commissioners . . . and that unsuccessfully tried to run stealth anti-public education candidates for the school board.  There are some who'd like us to forget the role of certain local religious factions in Proposition 8 & in boycotting "immoral" local businesses so they can whine with phony "righteous indignation" when individuals choose not to patronize their businesses.  And, there are some who'd like us to forget all about certain local churches that have been caught dead to rights - and more than once -- violating the conditions of their tax exemption status by partisan politicking from the pulpit.

  And, there are certainly local (as well as state & national) politicians on both sides of the aisle who'd like us to forget their campaign promises . . . and lies.

  Your "obsessing" comment is yet another in a long line of examples of your dismissive, condescending, and patronizing jabs at those who disagree with you.  You're not the only one, of course, but you - as are others - are pretty consistent about it.  You might do well to pay more attention to the plank in your own eye than to the speck you perceive in the eyes of others.

  In my personal opinion, of course  J

  Ha - and the subject line actually still fits!

  Saundra

  Moscow, ID

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

  ~ Edmund Burke

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

=======================================================
 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
======================================================= 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110915/a962fb11/attachment-0001.html>