[SPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to OpEd by lynn

[Guest guest]

Okay...so then " we fundamentally disagree " ...is that

better " verbage " for you ;-)

Since I have no idea who you are (and likewise, you don't know me

either) making " broad based " remarks on my what you percieve to be

my " stance " are based on conjecture at this point....I haven't

shared much at this point except to say that we need to have respect

and tolerance for each other....wouldn't you agree?

Regarding " the group " ....which group are you referring to? There

are many groups which are represented on this list...and as such,

there are many different ideas on how best to " tackle " this

issue....in my case, I've chosen to " align " myself with other

individuals whose strategies/approaches most closely mirror my

own....and I am 100% committed to working towards our " group goals "

and do this on a daily basis (hence, why I don't belong to " lists " --

not enough time in the day and I'd rather focus on forward

movement;i.e. " getting something done " as you so aptly put it :-)

Regarding " negotiations " ....I've " aligned " myself with some of the

best individuals in this community who I think are

absolutely " brilliant " in this department...and I'm guessing that

most of the individuals on this list would agree...and your

assumption that our negotiations involve " delay and deny " are

exactly that...assumptions.

So please, give me the " benefit of the doubt " and I will likewise do

the same for you.

Kelli Ann

SafeMinds

EOHarm , HC <stratpat@...> wrote:

>

> You and I fundamentally disagree on the process.

>

> Whereas you simply state " we agree to disagree "

> I say that specific approach actually corrupts the process.

> I believe you are fundamentally wrong. I believe your strategy is

absolutely wrong.

>

> You appear not to have much experience (if any) in negotiations.

And if you do, why you are taking the positions that you take? It

seems as if you are working at cross purposes to the goals of the

group.

>

> If you have extensive negotiating experience, then I question your

motivations. Because your approach is synchronous with delay and

deny.

>

> We must actually get something done here.

> This is not a debating society.

> If you want that- there is a ton of make-work projects at the UN.

>

> By agreeing to disagree you simply frustrate the purposes of the

goal- you must know that by positing your negotiating strategy you

are playing into the hands of the thimerosal deniers who refuse to

address the one paramount issue regarding the mercury in vaccines

and the poisoning of a generation of children. They seek to deny

and delay.

>

> It is a classical tactic used by people on the defensive.

>

> Running out the clock cannot be our strategy.

>

> It should be and is their strategy.

>

> It should not be yours.

>

> And if it is yours- tell us your plan.

>

> Because if the approach is to play into their hands through your

tactics, my antenna go way, way up.

>

> Nice nice is not a result.

>

> It is a plan for suicide.

>

> You have leverage.

>

> Understand your leverage.

>

> And use it.

>

>

> [sPAM?] Re: Censorship now ??? Re: Response to

OpEd by lynn

>

>

> Well....in this case we will have to " agree to disagree " ....

>

> Hopefully, our statement (to be issued shortly) will help

explain in

> greater detail WHY we chose to " stay at the table " during this

> difficult and challenging process....

>

> Kelli

>

>

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > We move forward from criticism, we don't back away

> from

> > > > > criticism.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > ---------------------------------

> > > > > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone

> calls.

> > > > Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > ---------------------------------

> > > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help.

> > Small Business.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > ---------------------------------

> > > All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get

> > things done faster.

> > >

> >

>