<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=utf-8 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19120"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>What I wrote below is much closer to that of a
"classical libertarian" than "classical liberal."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Verdana>w.</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=lfalen@turbonet.com
href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, September 03, 2011 10:49 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=deco@moscow.com href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art
Deco</A> ; <A title=Vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Moscow Vision 2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] who pays for Megaload
cops?</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Wayne<BR><BR>Paul Rumelhart is not an economical conservative, he
is a classical liberal. This is something those of you who claim to be liberals
should embrace. Most of the rest of you post I would not disagree with too much.
It is for the most part a classical liberal stance. <BR>Roger<BR>-----Original
message-----<BR>From: "Art Deco" <A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR>Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011
10:36:00 -0700<BR>To: "Moscow Vision 2020" <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?<BR><BR>> What I find appalling in
this discussion is the apparent lack of historical and contemporary knowledge of
the importance and the results that have proceeded from the right of free
expression from letters to the editor to demonstrations lasting years and
involving millions of people in this country.<BR>> <BR>> Civil rights,
environmental issues, anti-war issues, poverty issues, pro/anti-abortion issues,
etc allow citizens the right and the opportunity to express their opinions and
feelings. It should be clear to all but the most ignorant and arrogant
that demonstrations in these areas have influenced public policy.<BR>>
<BR>> The right of free expression is one of the most important we
have: It allows us to struggle, sometimes haltingly and erroneously,
towards the truth and towards finding values that make this a more just and
habitable planet.<BR>> <BR>> We pay taxes for police and allied services,
one of these services is protect our constitutional rights, including the right
of free expression. Except for a very nominal fees for parades and larger
demonstration permits whose purpose would be to inform policing agencies and
others that their services like enforcement, traffic control, etc may be needed,
I am opposed to requiring citizens to pay fees, payments, and/or make other
concessions of any legal kind simply to exercise a fundamental and very
important constitutional right.<BR>> <BR>> Dissent (and agreement) has
been a very important part of the history of this country. I hope we do
not try to stifle this dissent by making it only the province of those able to
pay well.<BR>> <BR>> I also find it ironic and hypocritical, but not
surprising, that the conservatives like Crabtree, Borden, and Rumelhart* are the
anti-free expression advocates on this list [along with pathetic Henry Johnson
in the DN]. [*Rumelhart claims not to be a conservative, but almost all his
posts here espouse positions touted by conservatives.]<BR>> <BR>> I
understand the position of the MPD to take steps to prevent serious consequences
of someone's breaking the law. That is part of their duties.<BR>>
<BR>> It's the little Napoleans/Hitlers who wish to stifle dissent by making
the dissenters pay to express their feelings that pose the greatest threat to
free expression.<BR>> <BR>> Two years ago, I sat in traffic on Washington
between 5th and 4th while a large group of tea partiers crossed Washington, most
of them not in the crosswalks and hold up traffic a few minutes. I
do not agree completely with the tea party's analysis of the nation's problems
and with their solutions of them -- I think many of them are ill-informed and
delusional -- but I applaud their efforts to dissent in a public manner, even if
a few minor laws were broken. I would have been very vocal and
combative if someone had suggested that they would pay for whatever extra police
services might be needed.<BR>> <BR>> Having been in on efforts to draft
legislation to make megaload permiting more open, with easier to appeal
provisions, to mitigate the inconvenience to other highway users and businesses,
and to recover the cost of issuing the permits and the costs of usage above
normal being picked up by the applicants, I can say that intense lobbying by big
oil and others certainly tilted the playing field in their favor and no such
legislation had a chance. Money does talk, sometimes in very devious ways,
both statewide and in Moscow.<BR>> <BR>> w.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
From: Jay Borden <BR>> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 9:00 PM<BR>> To:
Paul Rumelhart ; Donovan Arnold <BR>> Cc: vision2020 <BR>> Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Personally, I
find much of this lunacy hilarious.<BR>> <BR>> Subscribers here utilize
the V20 service to help organize/update on protester activity... <BR>>
<BR>> .. which forces additional police response as a result of successful
organized protests....<BR>> <BR>> .. which causes the very same V20 crowd
to blame Exxon for not picking up the tab....<BR>> <BR>> ..... for the
additional police.... <BR>> <BR>> .. to handle the additional
protesters.<BR>> <BR>> <slow clap><BR>> <BR>> Bravo folks....
bravo.<BR>> <BR>> Jay<BR>> <BR>> Sent via DROID on Verizon
Wireless<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> -----Original message-----<BR>>
<BR>> From: Paul Rumelhart <<A
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>
To: Donovan Arnold <<A
href="mailto:donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com">donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>
Cc: vision2020 <<A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A>><BR>>
Sent: Sat, Sep 3, 2011 01:13:28 GMT+00:00<BR>> Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> Here's my take on the "who pays?" issue. Exxon/Mobil has
the proper permits, and is abiding by their use on a public highway. If there
were no protesters, then there would be no cops needed on extra duty. Forcing
Exxon/Mobil to pay is akin to a denial-of-service attack in the computer world.
All you need to do, if you don't like someone or some company, is to stage a
protest outside their place of business. The larger the better. Then the person
or the business will have to pay for their protection from the police,
regardless of whether or not they've done anything wrong. You might as well get
a bunch of people to write letters in protest and then force whoever is the
current target of their ire to pay for the paper, the envelopes, the postage,
and their time.<BR>> <BR>> The only way I can see a
justification for Exxon/Mobil paying for the policemen on extra duty is if they
specifically contracted for them in order to protect the safety of their
drivers. Which leads to the question: who authorized the extra duty for the
police officers - the city, the police department, Exxon/Mobil or some other
group?<BR>> <BR>> Paul<BR>> <BR>> P.S. I
snipped Mayor Cheney and Councilman Lamarr's names from the to: list. I'm sure
they get enough spam as it is and can choose whether or not to read the Viz on
their own cognizance.<BR>> <BR>> On 09/02/2011 05:27 PM,
Donovan Arnold wrote:<BR>> > Wayne,<BR>> >
It has already been confirmed that Exxon is not paying the cost of the >
permit. You can check the donation records of Idaho Republicans if you >
don't believe they are getting something for this from Exxon. And the > US
Attorney General office isn't going to do anything about it either > or any
other politician because they are also owned and operated by > Exxon and a
handful of corporations.<BR>> > Donovan
Arnold<BR>> ><BR>> > *From:* Wayne Price
<BR>> > *To:* Donovan Arnold <BR>> > *Cc:*
Bill London ; vision2020 > ; nancy chaney ; Tom Lamar >
<BR>> > *Sent:* Friday, September 2, 2011 6:15
PM<BR>> > *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for Megaload
cops?<BR>> ><BR>> >
Donovan,<BR>> ><BR>> > IF you can prove
that, contact me off line and I'll give you a point > of contact at the US
Attorney's Office to get in touch with.<BR>>
><BR>> > WMP<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>> > On Sep 2, 2011, at 5:05
PM, Donovan Arnold wrote:<BR>> ><BR>> >>
Wayne,<BR>> >> No, they didn't. They paid the politicians
to change the law and make >> the people pay for the cost of the
permit.<BR>> >> Donovan Arnold<BR>>
>><BR>> >> *From:* Wayne Price
><BR>> >> *To:* Bill London ><BR>>
>> *Cc:* vision2020 > >; nancy chaney > >; Tom Lamar >
><BR>> >> *Sent:* Friday, September 2, 2011 5:35
PM<BR>> >> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for
Megaload cops?<BR>> >><BR>> >>
Bill,<BR>> >><BR>> >> EXXON paid for
the permit which gave them the right to transport the >> loads
legally.<BR>> >><BR>>
>><BR>> >><BR>> >>
Wayne<BR>> >><BR>>
>><BR>> >><BR>>
>><BR>> >> On Sep 2, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Bill London
wrote:<BR>> >><BR>> >>>
WMP-<BR>> >>> my point exactly<BR>>
>>> Exxon wants to play, Exxon should pay<BR>>
>>> BL<BR>> >>> *From:* Wayne Price
<BR>> >>> *Sent:* Friday, September 02, 2011 4:21
PM<BR>> >>> *To:* Bill London <BR>>
>>> *Cc:* vision2020 ; nancy chaney >>> ; Tom Lamar
<BR>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for
Megaload cops?<BR>> >>> Didn't advocate making them "so
expensive that those rights >>> disappear", but what is wrong with you
play, YOU pay?<BR>> >>> WMP<BR>>
>>> On Sep 2, 2011, at 4:16 PM, Bill London wrote:<BR>>
>>><BR>> >>>> WMP-<BR>>
>>>> so your goal is to make freedom of expression and civil
>>>> disobedience so expensive that those rights
disappear?<BR>> >>>> BL<BR>>
>>>> *From:* Wayne Price <BR>> >>>>
*Sent:* Friday, September 02, 2011 2:05 PM<BR>> >>>>
*To:* Bill London <BR>> >>>> *Cc:* vision2020 ; nancy
chaney >>>> ; Tom Lamar <BR>> >>>>
*Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] who pays for Megaload cops?<BR>>
>>>> So, some protesters show up and the local police respond and
you >>>> want the folks that have the permits to
pay?<BR>> >>>> WHEN the protesters break the laws,
their fines should pay for the >>>> disturbances they cause. Now,
who decided some 25 additional >>>> police officers were
needed?<BR>> >>>> That dog won't
hunt!<BR>> >>>> WMP<BR>>
>>>> On Sep 2, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Bill London
wrote:<BR>> >>>><BR>>
>>>>> According to newspaper reports, about 25 local cops (17
Moscow, 9 >>>>> county) were at the latest megaloads
confrontation Thurs night in >>>>> downtown
Moscow.<BR>> >>>>> Who is paying for all the
overtime for those officers? I called >>>>> David Duke (Moscow
police chief) who said that we are. The >>>>> taxpayers. You. Me.
Us. We are spending money to help the >>>>> world’s richest
corporation (Exxon/Mobil) get their equipment >>>>> delivered on
time.<BR>> >>>>> Thankfully, Duke said that the
city council will be discussing >>>>> this issue on Tuesday (Sept
6) at their regular meeting. I hope >>>>> the council tells Exxon
to pay those costs.<BR>> >>>>>
BL<BR>> >>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>
>>>>> List services made available by First Step
Internet,<BR>> >>>>> serving the communities of
the Palouse since 1994.<BR>> >>>>> <A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A> <<A
href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net/</A>><BR>>
>>>>> <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>
>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>
>><BR>> >><BR>> >>
=======================================================<BR>>
>> List services made available by First Step
Internet,<BR>> >> serving the communities of the Palouse
since 1994.<BR>> >> <A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A> <<A
href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net/</A>><BR>>
>> <A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A>
<BR>> >>
=======================================================<BR>>
>><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>> >
=======================================================<BR>> >
List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>> >
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>> > <A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>> > <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>
> =======================================================<BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>>
=======================================================<BR>> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>> serving the
communities of the Palouse since
1994.<BR>>
<A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>>
<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>
=======================================================<BR>>
<BR></BODY></HTML>