<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/268929-leahy-denies-supporting-bill-to-allow-warrantless-email-searches</font><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><br></font></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 13px; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><div class="title" style="border: 0px; font-family: arial, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><h1 class="title" style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 20px; margin: 10px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;">Leahy denies
supporting bill to allow warrantless email searches</h1></div><div style="border: 0px; font-family: arial, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><span class="author" style="border: 0px; font-size: 12px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: rgb(17, 17, 105);">By Brendan Sasso </span>- <span class="date" style="border: 0px; font-size: 12px; margin: 0px 15px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; color: rgb(113, 113, 113);">11/20/12 02:22 PM ET</span></div><div class="txt" id="el-article-div" style="border: 0px; margin: 5px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; font-family: Georgia !important; font-size: 14px !important; line-height: 1.5 !important;"><div class="social" style="border: 0px; font-family: arial, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-table; vertical-align: middle;"><iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"
src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.1352365724.html#_=1353526099940&count=horizontal&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fblogs%2Fhillicon-valley%2Ftechnology%2F268929-leahy-denies-supporting-bill-to-allow-warrantless-email-searches&size=m&text=Leahy%20denies%20supporting%20bill%20to%20allow%20warrantless%20email%20searches%20-%20The%20Hill's%20Hillicon%20Valley&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fblogs%2Fhillicon-valley%2Ftechnology%2F268929-leahy-denies-supporting-bill-to-allow-warrantless-email-searches" class="twitter-share-button twitter-count-horizontal" title="Twitter Tweet Button" data-twttr-rendered="true" style="border-width: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; float: left; width: 110px; height: 20px;"></iframe></span> <span style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-table; vertical-align: middle;"><fb:like
send="true" layout="button_count" width="125" show_faces="false" fb-xfbml-state="rendered" class="fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget" style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative; display: inline-block; clear: both;"><span style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative; display: inline-block; vertical-align: text-bottom; text-align: justify; height: 20px; width: 129px;"><iframe id="f1496688c8" name="f333975c04" scrolling="no" title="Like this content on Facebook." class="fb_ltr"
src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?api_key=369058349794205&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&channel_url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.ak.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D17%23cb%3Df1451e11b8%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fthehill.com%252Ff229120de8%26domain%3Dthehill.com%26relation%3Dparent.parent&href=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fblogs%2Fhillicon-valley%2Ftechnology%2F268929-leahy-denies-supporting-bill-to-allow-warrantless-email-searches&node_type=link&width=150&layout=button_count&colorscheme=light&show_faces=false&send=true&extended_social_context=false" style="border-style: none; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: absolute; overflow: hidden; height: 20px; width: 129px;"></iframe></span></fb:like></span> <span style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-table; vertical-align: middle;"><div id="___plusone_0" style="border: 0px none;
font-size: 1px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; height: 20px; width: 90px; display: inline-block; background-color: transparent; float: none; line-height: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" hspace="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" tabindex="0" vspace="0" width="100%" id="I0_1353526100001" name="I0_1353526100001" src="https://plusone.google.com/_/+1/fastbutton?bsv&size=medium&hl=en-US&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fblogs%2Fhillicon-valley%2Ftechnology%2F268929-leahy-denies-supporting-bill-to-allow-warrantless-email-searches&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en.MgXduRLGmxI.O%2Fm%3D__features__%2Fam%3DAQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAItRSTNR4vFYz8SNPxk8mQfE98AqLuFtIw#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled&id=I0_1353526100001&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com" title="+1"
style="border-width: 0px; border-style: none; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: static; top: 0px; width: 90px; left: 0px; visibility: visible; height: 20px;"></iframe></div></span></div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">A Judiciary Committee aide denied on Tuesday that Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) supports legislation that would allow government agencies to read emails, Facebook messages and other forms of electronic communication without a warrant. </div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">CNET, a technology news site, <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/" mce_href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/" style="border: 0px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;
margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: initial; color: rgb(24, 29, 120); outline: none; line-height: normal;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia !important; font-size: 14px !important; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5 !important;">reported</b></a> on Tuesday that Leahy was backing a bill that would allow more than 22 federal agencies to read private emails without a warrant.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">"CNET has it wrong," an aide tweeted from Leahy's account. "Sen. Leahy does NOT support an #ECPA exception to search warrant requirement [for] civil enforcement [for agencies] like FTC, SEC."</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;"></div><div class="module" style="border: 0px; font-family: arial, tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div
style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div style="border: 0px; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"></div></div></div></div>A Judiciary Committee aide confirmed to The Hill that Leahy "does not support broad carve-outs for warrantless email searches."<div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;"></div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Leahy is pushing a bill that would revise the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) of 1986. The Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on Leahy's measure next week.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">The <a href="http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/section-by-section-breakdown-of-senator-leahys-ecpa-amendment" mce_href="http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/section-by-section-breakdown-of-senator-leahys-ecpa-amendment" target="_blank" style="border: 0px;
font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: initial; color: rgb(24, 29, 120); outline: none; line-height: normal;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia !important; font-size: 14px !important; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5 !important;">original version</b></a> of Leahy's bill would have toughened the privacy protections of ECPA. </div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Under current law, police only need an administrative subpoena, issued without a judge's approval, to read emails that have been opened or that are more than 180 days old. Police simply swear an email is relevant to an investigation, and then obtain a subpoena to force an Internet company to turn it over.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Leahy's revision would require police to obtain warrants to read private
emails, regardless of how old they are or whether they were opened. </div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Leahy, one of the original co-sponsors of ECPA, said in a statement last year that "updating this law to reflect the realities of our time is essential to ensuring that our federal privacy laws keep pace with new technologies and the new threats to our security.”</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">But according to CNET, Leahy agreed to weaken the bill in order to appease Republicans and law enforcement groups.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">The site reported that a new version of his legislation exempted more than 22 federal agencies, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve, from the warrant requirement.
The bill would give the FBI and the Homeland Security Department even more extensive powers in some circumstances, allowing them to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying the owner or a judge, according to CNET.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">The Judiciary Committee aide explained that discussions between lawmakers and interest groups on Leahy's bill are ongoing. The aide said it is possible that there will be "tweaks" to the bill before the committee's markup next week, but that major revisions are unlikely. </div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">The aide said it is possible that CNET was referring to a draft of the bill circulated by other lawmakers or interest groups, but that Leahy would not support any similar proposal.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">"Ideas from many sources always
circulate [before] a markup [for discussion], but Sen. Leahy does NOT support such an exception for #ECPA search warrants," Leahy's account tweeted.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">The account tweeted that "the whole point of the Leahy reforms is [to] require search warrants [for government] to access email stored with [third] party service providers."</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who has been following the issue, said he had seen the draft bill cited by CNET, but he said he was never under the impression that Leahy supported it.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">"There was a lot of language floating around," Calabrese said. He added that the ACLU would not support any proposal that includes broad exceptions for civil
enforcement.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">"That undercuts the whole purpose of the bill," he said.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Calabrese noted that the proposal cited by CNET is similar to amendments proposed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the Judiciary Committee's top Republican.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Grassley expressed skepticism about creating new barriers for police investigations at a committee meeting in September.</div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">"I have heard concerns about this amendment from state and local law enforcement officials. These officials are concerned with the impact this amendment may have on law enforcement operations," Grassley said. "Specifically, I have heard concerns about how this could impact cases where time is
of the essence, namely kidnapping and child abduction cases." </div><div style="border: 0px; margin: 15px 1px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;">Grassley said he asked for input from the Justice Department, and officials told him the measure could "adversely affect the department’s activities."</div></div></font></div><div style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"></div><div style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br></div> <div style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> <div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font size="2" face="Arial"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Paul Rumelhart <godshatter@yahoo.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Sue Hovey <suehovey@moscow.com> <br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b>
"vision2020@moscow.com" <vision2020@moscow.com> <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, November 21, 2012 10:02 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Vision2020] another litmus test<br> </font> </div> <br>
<div id="yiv1949068603"><div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;">Senator Leahy has backed off from his attempt to put through a bill that allows searches of emails without warrants, or possibly cnet got the story wrong. As of this moment, there is nothing to protest.<br><br>We all just need to keep a watchful eye out for any other attempts to do this kind of thing.<br><br>Paul<br><div><span><br></span></div><div><br></div> <div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Sue Hovey <suehovey@moscow.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">To:</span></b> Paul Rumelhart
<godshatter@yahoo.com> <br><b><span style="
font-weight:bold;">Cc:</span></b> Tom Hansen <thansen@moscow.com>; Art Deco <art.deco.studios@gmail.com>; "vision2020@moscow.com" <vision2020@moscow.com> <br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, November 21, 2012 9:26 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Vision2020] another litmus test<br> </font> </div> <br>
<div id="yiv1949068603"><div><div>Any pickets planned for around here? Would be a good idea to stand with them somewhere. <br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Nov 21, 2012, at 9:21 AM, Paul Rumelhart <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;">According to Wikipedia (<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_act">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_act</a>), the controversial roving wiretaps sections are still in there. They have a little more oversight now, but they are still there. Can you point me to the section(s) that was removed? If you can point me to such a thing,
I would be relieved, because the Obama I originally voted for might actually exist.<br><br>Here's an article from The Nation that came out on the day of the first vote. It didn't pass that day, but did minutes before it was set to expire. It paints a different picture of President Obama with relation to the Patriot Act. Here is the article:<br><br>http://www.thenation.com/blog/158381/obama-takes-wrong-turn-civil-liberties-adopting-worse-patriot-act-stance-gop<br><br>Here's another article from the Huffington Post
talking about how Obama signed into law the reauthorization on 28-Feb-2011, after Rand Paul had unsuccessfully tried to force a change to the bill that would "diminish the government's ability to monitor individual actions", because he thought the bill in its current form was "an abuse of privacy rights". According to this article, President Obama was on the wrong side of this debate.<br><br>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html<br><br>I really wish we had had this conversation *before* the election.<br><br>Paul<br><div><br></div> <div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Tom Hansen <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"
target="_blank" href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</a>><br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">To:</span></b> Art Deco <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</a>> <br><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Cc:</span></b> "<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a>" <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a>> <br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, November 21, 2012 8:09 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Vision2020] another litmus test<br> </font> </div> <br>
<div id="yiv1949068603"><div><div><span></span></div><div><div>We are talking two versions of the Patriotic Act; the one under King George XLII and the one under President Obama.</div><div><br></div><div>Yes. President Obama did sign and approve continuation of the Patriot Act AFTER AUTHORITY FOR WARRANTLESS SEARCHES WAS REMOVED.</div><div><br></div><div>You know . . . fourth amendment and all.</div><div><br><div>Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .</div><div><br></div><div>"Moscow Cares"</div><div>http://www.MoscowCares.com</div><div> </div><div><div>Tom Hansen</div><div>Moscow, Idaho</div><div> </div></div></div><div><br>On Nov 21, 2012, at 7:51 AM, Art Deco <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>And so far not a lot of help from the courts which ought disallow
such things on constitutional grounds.<br><br>w.<br><br><div class="yiv1949068603gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Sunil Ramalingam <span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">sunilramalingam@hotmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="yiv1949068603gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><div dir="ltr">
It's called Obama's Patriot Act now. He signed the NDAA. He's legitimized the Bush policies. It's a little late to be fooling ourselves about him, isn't it?<br><br>Case of beer of choice says it passes, with a lot of blather about Safety. <br>
<br>Sunil<br><br><div><div></div><hr>From: <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:thansen@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</a><br>Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:03:54 -0800<br>To: <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a><br>
CC: <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a><div class="yiv1949068603im"><br>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] another litmus test<br><br></div><div><div class="yiv1949068603h5"><div>Unlike Bush's Patriot Act that gave law enforcement agencies authority to thoroughly search private property jus' 'cuz they're bored.<br>
<br><div>Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .</div><div><br></div><div>"Moscow Cares"</div><div><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.moscowcares.com/">http://www.MoscowCares.com</a></div><div> </div><div><div>
Tom Hansen</div><div>Moscow, Idaho</div><div> </div></div></div><div><br>On Nov 20, 2012, at 10:55 AM, Paul Rumelhart <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div>
<blockquote><div><div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;">There's a bill going through the Senate that will be a good litmus test for our President and our democratically-controlled Senate with respect to civil liberties. Senator Leahy (D) of Vermont introduced a bill before that Senate that required a warrant to search email. The Justice Department and some law enforcement groups didn't like it because they oppose the warrant requirement. So Senator Leahy reworked the bill to allow access to emails to 22 different governmental organizations *without* the need for a search warrant.<br>
<br>This bill goes up for a vote in the Senate next week. Let's see if we are still on the path to a totalitarian government or not. Will it pass? Will our President veto it if it gets to him? Stay tuned.<br><br>Here is some information on the
bill:<br><br>http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/<br>
<br>Paul<br><div><br></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><span>=======================================================</span><br><span> List services made available by First Step Internet,</span><br><span> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br>
<span> <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br><span> <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br><span>=======================================================</span></div>
</blockquote><br>=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</a>
mailto:<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================</div></div></div> </div></div>
<br>=======================================================<br>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</a><br>
mailto:<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
=======================================================<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<br><a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</a><br>
<br><img><br><br>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>=======================================================</span><br><span> List services made available by First Step Internet,</span><br><span> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br><span> <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br><span> <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br><span>=======================================================</span></div></blockquote></div></div></div><br>=======================================================<br> List services made available by First Step Internet,<br> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</a><br> mailto:<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>=======================================================<br><br> </div> </div> </div></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>=======================================================</span><br><span> List services made available by First Step Internet,</span><br><span> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br><span> <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.fsr.net/">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br><span> <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br><span>=======================================================</span></div></blockquote></div></div><br><br> </div> </div> </div></div></div><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/" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a><br> mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>=======================================================<br><br> </div> </div> </div></body></html>