<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Georgia"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>Uh, let's see.
</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>1. Rose quotes
willy-nilly from a copyrighted site (dougwils.com), but then says no one can
comment on <EM>her</EM> "copyrighted" content. Hypocritical? You bet.
Unexpected? Nah. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>2. If I reply to this
post and it is archived on Vision2020, am I violating copyright law? Does that
mean that I (and no one else) are allowed to reply to copyrighted Emails? Very
nifty. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>3. Go talk to Wayne Fox
about copyright. First, fair use says I can extract copyrighted material in
order to comment on it. Yes, even if it is copyrighted. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>Good try, though.
</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>best,</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=416052613-12062005>Dale</SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> vision2020-bounces@moscow.com
[mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>DonaldH675@aol.com<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, 12 June 2005 00:32<BR><B>To:</B>
vision2020@moscow.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Vision2020] Finally done: The Boy Who
Cried Wolf<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV><FONT id=role_document face=Georgia color=#000000 size=3>
<DIV>Visionaries and Doug Wilson, </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>When my children were little they liked to hear Aesop's Fables. We
had a particularly nice edition of the book with great illustrations which made
the stories especially enjoyable. A perennial favorite was "The Boy Who
Cried Wolf." The kids couldn't wait to get to the moral; "Liars are
not believed even when they speak the truth." Douglas Wilson did
you not hear that story when you were young? In your response to
our op-ed piece you continue to lie and misrepresent the truth. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>1. We referenced your claim that the UI gave credit
for protesting the 2004 non-history conference. Your blog response
was:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>" I did not claim that <U>all </U>the protesters got class
credit." </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Guess what, Douglas Wilson? I used <STRONG>your</STRONG> words which did
not include the freshly added word "all." You use that word
now as a device to disassociate yourself from previous public
statements. Douglas Wilson, shame on you. This is your
usual modus operandi when caught out. It's the same old sleight
of hand, smoke and mirrors, and deliberate misdirection that have
worked to your advantage for a very long time. Do you think
this rhetorical trickery will continue to work in your favor? You shame
yourself, and by extension your church, when you pull this
crap. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What you did say was:</DIV>
<DIV>"It was the UI that spent (some sixteen) thousands of dollars to generate
opposition to <EM>Credenda's</EM> history conference, and even offered a
(for-credit) class to instruct students in how to be good, little protesters
against us." </DIV>
<DIV> <A
href="http://dougwils.com/?Action=Search&searchstring=riggins">http://dougwils.com/?Action=Search&searchstring=riggins</A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Georgia color=#000000 size=3 PTSIZE="12"
FAMILY="SERIF"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Georgia color=#000000 size=3 PTSIZE="12"
FAMILY="SERIF">And:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV>"the University of Idaho spending $16,000 to resist our history conference
(along with offering a credit class for protesting us)"</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG> </STRONG><A
title=http://dougwils.com/?Action=Search&searchstring=weird+alliance
href="http://dougwils.com/?Action=Search&searchstring=weird+alliance">http://dougwils.com/?Action=Search&searchstring=weird+alliance</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>2. Regarding the boarding houses, you say:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"For example, it never occurred to me to "disclose" that we had students
boarding with us. You know, our house has a certain number of bedrooms. We
<I>thought</I> it was okay if people lived in them. But who knew?</DIV>
<DIV><A
title=http://dougwils.com/index.asp?Action=Anchor&CategoryID=1&BlogID=1156
href="http://dougwils.com/index.asp?Action=Anchor&CategoryID=1&BlogID=1156">http://dougwils.com/index.asp?Action=Anchor&CategoryID=1&BlogID=1156</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In fact, you knew, Douglas Wilson. On May 11, 2000,
Chris Schlect (then and now an Elder in Christ Church and then and now an
employee of NSA's) received a letter from Joel Plaskon, Assistant City
Planner. <A title=http://www.zonemoscow.com/past/answer2.html
href="http://www.zonemoscow.com/past/answer2.html">http://www.zonemoscow.com/past/answer2.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>The last paragraph of the first page reads:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"Please be aware that the City's regulations of the subject property</DIV>
<DIV>do not preclude your use of it as a means of income. If Conditional
Use Permit approval can not be given for New Saint Andrew's College at the
subject property, the Zoning Ordinance could allow other potential income
generating uses, some of which require use permit approval, and which may
include residential apartments, a home occupation, boarding house, bed and
breakfast, and daycare facilities."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Are you now going to claim that Chris didn't share that information with
you? Good heavens, man, the college that you help found was in
jeopardy. You were/are a life-time trustee. Chris is/was an elder.
Is it likely that he would keep something of this magnitude from
you? I don't think so. Are you going to claim that the
wording of the letter is ambiguous? Please scrape together enough
dignity and self-respect to avoid heading down that road. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the DN article we mentioned that you had boarders. If we had had
more space we would have included the names of some of the other elders,
senior administrators of NSA, or respected members of Christ Church or Trinity
Reformed (your Moscow Mission Church) who also have disregarded the requirement
for a Conditional Use Permit. We have that space now:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Doug Wilson: Pastor of
Christ Church, Life-time Trustee NSA </DIV>
<DIV>Roy
Atwood President, NSA
(former elder)</DIV>
<DIV>Chris Schlect Administrator
NSA, Elder</DIV>
<DIV>Jim
Nance Logos
Secondary Teacher</DIV>
<DIV>Dale
Courtney Part-time
Logos Teacher, Full time Blogger </DIV>
<DIV>Dr. Grauke, M.D. Board Member,
NSA </DIV>
<DIV>Dr. Matt Rice</DIV>
<DIV>Matt Whittling, Principal Logos School, Chairman of
NSA Board</DIV>
<DIV>Todd Flack, Son-in-law
of a Christ Church Elder </DIV>
<DIV>Bill Amos</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It may well be the case that some of the church members who run
boarding houses knew nothing about the Conditional Use Permit and other
city requirements. They may have presumed that they could trust
the elders of Christ Church. Instead, they have been caught up
in a web that you, and other knowledgeable elders, have spun. No doubt,
given the number of boarders in some homes (up to five), and the
amount charged, these boarders (indirectly) pay the mortgages for many
church members. Shame on you and your elders for this wretched
behavior. A question that remains to be answered is this:
did you (and the elders) deliberately remain silent on this issue, or have you
carefully inculcated an attitude of disregard of city code in your
congregation? I hope the members of Christ Church that are caught up in
your boarding house snare press you for further explanations on this
matter.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Details on this program are available at:</DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://www.newstandrews.org/admissions/housing.html">http://www.newstandrews.org/admissions/housing.html</A></DIV>
<DIV>Scroll down to "Boarding with a Christian Family."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>3. You claim that the property tax exemption on
Anselm House and part of NSA was lost because:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"The reason the two parcels lost their tax exemption is a reason that
applies equally well to virtually every other tax exempt parcel in the state of
Idaho."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Please point Saundra Lund or me in the direction of <U>any other church</U>
in Moscow which owns a $900,000 publishing house (2004 revenue
according to Douglas Jones, editor of Canon Press) operating in a church
owned office building (which has never been used as a church) that has the
unmitigated gall to expect a property tax exemption, and we will hop right
on it. I doubt that such an entity exists anywhere else in Idaho.
And, if we throw in the very special benefits and opportunities that you
receive, (remember, last July we presented undisputed evidence to the
Board Of Equalization that 27.8% of Canon Press publications were authored by
you, and that you received royalties for those materials?) the chance of
this behavior being replicated elsewhere in Idaho is practically nil.
In my lay opinion, your royalty payments suggest inurement - which, as I am
sure you know, invalidates a claim for a non-profit status. Saundra and I
are the first to admit that we are not attorneys. This issue is best
sorted out by IRS staff who thoroughly understand the requirements, don't you
agree? Can we expect you to contact them on the matter for
clarification? Well, no, probably not.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You are also aware that under Idaho law the exclusivity
clause pertaining to schools (other than charter schools) does
not allow a school to lease part of their property to a for profit business and
retain a property tax exemption. Help me to understand, Douglas Wilson,
your claim that "virtually every other tax exempt parcel in the State of Idaho"
does this. That is simply not true. It is a lie. You aren't being
singled out, although truly, your behavior is singular.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>4. Regarding Atlas School and St. Monica's</DIV>
<DIV>You say:</DIV>
<DIV>"Christ Church members do not need the permission of the church to educate
their own children at home, or to open a school. "</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Perhaps they don't need your permission, but what a disgrace that the
school administrators of Atlas and St. Monica's didn't have the blessing
of wise counsel and the truthful elders who knew that schools are required
to have a Conditional Use Permit. Why didn't you tell them?
You certainly were notified that NSA, when located in Chris Schlect's home, was
not appropriately sited. How did you suppose that locating a school a
block away would be acceptable? Did you hope that the school would fail
before this was found out? Did you intend that the operators of the school
would be out of compliance with city ordinances? Or, did obeying city code
not matter to them any more than it does to you?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Saundra and I appreciated your invitation for even more scrutiny.
And, of course we whole heartedly agree that when your organizations begin to
act as though the laws of this nation, state, and city do indeed apply to
them, as they do to us, this controversy will end. Do you have any idea
when we can expect that to happen? I can assure you, no one will be
happier than Saundra and me when that day comes.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Rose Huskey<BR></DIV>
<DIV>P.S. And, just for the record, Douglas Wilson, how is it that you
equate our expectation that your organizations obey the law with attempts to
"run you" and yours out of town? The two situations are not
analogous. The only conclusion that I can draw (at this admittedly late
hour) is that for some unfathomable reasons you (and yours) feel that you
are above the law. (This Dale, is exactly what I meant when I said Christ
Church is full of "white men of privilege and entitlement who need to get
over it." Hint: It is not a compliment and it is an apt
description.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>NOTE: This email is copy righted. None of the contents of
this email may be reproduced or quoted without my written
permission. (Don't bother to ask Dale, the answer today, tomorrow,
and forever will be<FONT color=#ff0000>
NO!!</FONT>)</DIV></DIV></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>