<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 10pt
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19046"></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>Both Johnson and Rumelhart argue that only so-called
legal issues should be at stake in the megaload issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>1. No one would argue that there are not sound
reasons within the law for the IDT to use their discretion to deny the
permit, among them the disruption of traffic and inconvenience to local
residents and the real and displacement costs to the state, cities and counties
which will not be reimbursed. For example, if you haven't seen the bridge
over the CDA River, the signage at the north end of the bridge, and the 90
degree turn just a bit after that, the you do not begin to understand the total
expenses to local entities - direct and displacement. The IDT could
have/can use their discretion to deny the permits. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>However, it was long ago decided that these permits
would be issued by the IDT regardless of the facts, inconvenience, and costs.
This decision was made long ago irrevocably behind closed doors out of and
without consideration of public views. However, Moscow could have easily
exercised their discretion under the known facts to deny the
permits.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>2. The fight for desegregation in the United
States is a prime example of concerned citizens acting to right continuing and
future wrongs by going outside the narrow, local so-called legal issues to
effect meaningful change. Except for the great amount of individual
courage exhibited, there is little difference between what anti-megaload
proponents are doing than what Rosa Parks and other brave people did in the
fight for desegregation. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>If something is grossly wrong, then a wide range of
actions ought be taken to correct or prevent that wrong. I posted an
article from the <EM>Calgary Herald</EM> recently showing that citizen concerns
about the megaloads traveling in Idaho and Montana were having effects on the
management of the oil sands projects, not for altruistic reasons, but for
financial ones. Continuing protests of all kinds might eventually retard
or cause this project to be downsized or abandoned.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>The Moscow City Council, in addition to sound legal and
financial considerations, could have added their voices to this concern and
protest. Instead, Steed the Sneak and others decided to support First
Nations genocide, to support aiding our biggest, most dangerous, and most unfair
global competitor, China, and to support mammoth environmental damage.
They did this without allowing for the opportunity for hardly any public input
intentionally; how anti-American is this?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>So when Johnson and Rumelhart say that the so-called
legal issues are the only considerations, they exhibit where their real values
lie: so-called local legal issues are far more important that genocide, aiding
and abetting the enemy, and environmental damage. They may be comfortable
with these values. But when they claim they are "concerned" about the
oil sands projects, what a bunch of hypocritical bullshit. They made be
"concerned" but hardly a whit's worth.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>If people, including Johnson and Rumelhart, are
really concerned, then they can act. Most of us are limited to acting
locally through influencing our elected representatives and other agencies, not
globally. That's what we are doing. There is a big difference
between Johnson, Rumelhart, and their ilk and Rosa Parks. I hope most of
us are of her image, though none of us will shine nearly, nearly as
brightly.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana>w.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=idahovandal1@live.com href="mailto:idahovandal1@live.com">Carl
Westberg</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 09, 2011 9:43
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Two Seperate
Issues</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>"Can anyone on this forum say that you would still be opposed
to loads of this size if they were large solar panels or wind turbine
equipment?" Yes. I already have.<BR><BR>
<HR id=stopSpelling>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:41:06 -0700<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:hearseboy85@gmail.com">hearseboy85@gmail.com</A><BR>To: <A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>Subject:
[Vision2020] Two Seperate Issues<BR><BR>
<DIV>I see that we're not going to make any progress here on this Megaload
issue because some people can't get over the end result.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm as concerned about the enviromental damage in Canada as many of
you on this forum. But those concerns cannot weigh into whether or not
the permits are issued to move said loads through Moscow if the laws and rules
exist for other loads of the same demensions (though not maybe owned by oil
companies) to be permitted.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The basis of my opinion is about the megaloads themselves - height,
weight, noise, damage to roadways, etc... all of which were deemed null issues
by our police and fire chiefs and the road concern was deemed null by our city
streets supervisor. Such loads are also permittable under current Idaho
law/admin rules.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Can anyone on this forum say that you would still be opposed to loads of
this size if they were large solar panels or wind turbine equipment? If
you're opposed to the loads based on the size/noise/etc.. regardless
of use then I respect and can see your point of view even though its
different than mine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But I won't engage in a discussion about whether or not we should be some
sort of heros to the people of Canada by stopping these loads for their well
being. It is my position that its not Moscow's position to do so.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If that ends the discussion then so be it but all my opinions are now on
the table.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>***</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>@ Joe - You're really hung up on this hippie thing and all I can say is
get over it. I've gotten over the fact you called me an offensive
idiot.</DIV><BR>======================================================= List
services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the
Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
=======================================================
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
http://www.fsr.net
<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>