[Vision2020] Bucers & Well, You Know...

Sat Jul 29 14:59:26 PDT 2006

Ellen et. al.

Three posts today and I'm over the limit...

I have gone into Bucers for coffee etc. a number of times, and have never
had a problem.  Of course I have considered the ethical implications of
supporting this business do their connections to, well, you know.  But then
when I put gas into my tank I often feel as though I am supporting the end
of the world, because of, well, you should know!

Ted Moffett

On 7/29/06, Ellen Roskovich <gussie443 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>  *The discussion about Bucer's I would have found interesting. . . must
> have taken place during the period I was absent from V2020.*
>
> *If Bucer's was, or is, being boycotted, maybe it's their own damn fault.
> I have a friend that went there for coffee and was humiliated and embarassed
> and so outraged afterwards that she wrote a letter to the Daily Snooze.*
>
> *Hmmm. . . maybe I'll have to take a peek in the archives.*
>
> *Ellen A. Roskovich*
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> From: *"Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>*
> To: *"Joan Opyr" <joanopyr at moscow.com>, "'Moscow Vision 2020'" <
> vision2020 at moscow.com>*
> Subject: *Re: [Vision2020] [Norton AntiSpam] Re: Escalation of claims
> NOTnormal procedure*
> Date: *Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:42:19 -0700*
>
>
>
>  Ted –
>
>
>
> As much as I sympathize the disparagement you were forced to endure, I
> applaud your willingness to share it here on Vision 2020.
>
>
>
> What you did subsequent to the vandalism committed against your property
> reflects a strong sense of responsibility in your reporting it to the county
> sheriff's office and a strong measure of maturity in not providing false
> witness by wrongfully identifying perpetrators without just cause and in a
> retaliatory fashion.
>
>
>
> Knowingly providing wrong information to the police/sheriff's office when
> reporting a crime (or series of crimes) is worse than not providing any
> information at all.
>
>
>
> If Jackie Woolf, Terry Morin, Charlie Nolan, or Michael Metzler were to
> participate in any type of activity or transaction that required a local
> records check, it is highly likely that they would be listed as "named
> individuals" in relation to a reported history of vandalism and harassment.
> Financial losses and potential loss of employment are only two possible
> repercussions that come to mind.
>
>
>
> So, you see, this police report and statement initiated by Doug Wilson
> amount to considerably more than victimless town gossip.
>
>
>
> It is also another link in what is painfully becoming Wilson's chain of
> malevolence.  Remember a few years back when the discussion On Vision 2020
> concerned peoples' right to frequent coffee shops of their liking.  As the
> discussion evolved, it was becoming evident that a majority of the
> discussion's participants did not favor frequenting Bucer's.  Right away
> Doug Wilson accused us of organizing an unlawful boycott of Bucer's.
>
>
>
> Just digging up old memories, Moscow.
>
>
>
> I will take a short break for now to enjoy a late lunch and to provide
> Doug Wilson ample time to compile the multitude of DPA (Displaying Public
> Animosity) violations detailed above and waddle his way to the police
> station.
>
>
>
> Seeya round town, Moscow.
>
>
>
> Tom "the ol' dung flunger himself" Hansen
>
> Moscow, Idaho
>
>
>
> *************************************************
>
> "When people sin, everybody has to pay."
>
> - Douglas Wilson of Wilson, Inc. (dba Christ Church) (June 7, 2002)
>
> For more details:  http://www.NotOnThePalouse.com<http://www.notonthepalouse.com/>
>
> *************************************************
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Ted Moffett [mailto:starbliss at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, July 29, 2006 1:00 PM
> *To:* Joan Opyr
> *Cc:* Joe Campbell; Vision2020 Moscow; Tom Hansen
> *Subject:* [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [Vision2020] Escalation of claims NOT
> normal procedure
>
>
>
> Joan et. al.
>
>
>
> Joan may remember the extreme vandalism committed against a vehicle I
> owned in the spring of 2005.  I communicated with Joan at that time about
> this incident.  The level of violence and destruction against said vehicle
> makes Wilson's "harassment" look like a playful punch in the shoulder from a
> buddy compared to a having someone drop kick your face into the pavement
> losing your front teeth in a bloody fractured enameled mess.
>
>
>
> My car windows were smashed out, doors frames bent, it looked like from
> being impacted by a cinder block, tires flattened...The car had been pushed
> or towed into the road from the parking area by the vandals, blocking
> traffic.  Consider this was on a rural gravel road, the crime was committed
> in the early morning hours on a Saturday, and my car was parked a distance
> away from the residence.
>
>
>
> When Latah Sheriff deputies showed up, having been notified by someone
> driving that the road was blocked, they had my vandalized car towed,
> sticking me with the 100 dollar tow bill.  I was sound asleep the whole
> time.
>
>
>
> After my car was towed away, the two Latah Sheriff deputies pounded on my
> door, waking me up.  They informed me what had happened, and told me the
> identity of the tow truck business where my car was being held.
>
>
>
> And the main relevance of this story to the naming of "suspects" by Wilson
> regarding the alleged "harassment?"
>
>
>
> During my brief discussion of the vandalizing of my car with the Latah
> Sheriff deputies, one of them asked if I had any enemies, or could give them
> names of suspects.  I offered none.  Sure, I could have reeled off a list of
> people who might or do have something against me for one reason or another.
> But I felt I had nothing solid to go on to name anybody.
>
>
>
> I am not as naive as some on this list who seem to think that offering the
> police names of individuals who might be suspects in a crime, when you have
> no solid evidence to implicate them, is a trifling issue.  I think it is
> highly ethically questionable to implicate others in crimes without solid
> grounds.
>
>
>
> I could expand in great detail on this theme regarding the negative
> consequences of my name being unfairly given to law enforcement to implicate
> me in a crime, based on flimsy, unfounded "evidence."  This can damage
> reputation, limit employment options, subject someone to embarrassing police
> scrutiny, if not harassment, etc.
>
>
>
> We see cases in the media where just naming someone as a suspect in a
> crime does tremendous damage to the person named, even when later they are
> totally exonerated.  And police reports are public documents, are they not?
>
>
>
>
> It would appear so, given that the police reports in question are now on
> Tom Hansen's web site.  I don't think law enforcement would release them to
> the public if they were meant to be kept "secret," unless forced legally by
> some means
>
>
>
> Hansen, Metzler, et. al. are all justified in being very concerned about
> this issue, in my opinion.
>
>
>
> Ted Moffett
>
>
>
>  >=====================================================
>
> > 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/20060729/181e3f16/attachment.htm 