Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

[Guest guest]

Isn't this sickening. Now the ears of Americans United prick up.

Where the fuck have they been all along while our souls were being

brutally gang raped by the 12-step soul rapers:

" The first thing I thought when I heard about it

is this could have major implications for

the

faith-based initiatives program, " said

Boston, the communications director for

Americans

United for Separation of Church and State.

The

Washington D.C.-based organization has

been

outspoken in its criticism of Bush's plan.

" Bush

seems to believe that these organizations

can still

preach and promote their religious beliefs

and get

the funding. We've been very skeptical of

that

claim and this ruling underscores that. "

> Hello All,

> I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the lawsuit,

for the

> Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded and

coerced

> Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping

with that

> conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

background,

> see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who has

gone

> through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown

NY. I am

> specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved

in

> dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in this

issue of

> early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

Times-Herald

> Record.

[Guest guest]

Isn't this sickening. Now the ears of Americans United prick up.

Where the fuck have they been all along while our souls were being

brutally gang raped by the 12-step soul rapers:

" The first thing I thought when I heard about it

is this could have major implications for

the

faith-based initiatives program, " said

Boston, the communications director for

Americans

United for Separation of Church and State.

The

Washington D.C.-based organization has

been

outspoken in its criticism of Bush's plan.

" Bush

seems to believe that these organizations

can still

preach and promote their religious beliefs

and get

the funding. We've been very skeptical of

that

claim and this ruling underscores that. "

> Hello All,

> I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the lawsuit,

for the

> Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded and

coerced

> Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping

with that

> conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

background,

> see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who has

gone

> through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown

NY. I am

> specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved

in

> dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in this

issue of

> early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

Times-Herald

> Record.

[Guest guest]

I tell you where I was -- in a position where I didn't want to lose my

license to practice law. Most Americans, additionally, probably do

not realize AA is religious.

> > Hello All,

> > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the

lawsuit,

> for the

> > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded

and

> coerced

> > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping

> with that

> > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

> background,

> > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who

has

> gone

> > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown

> NY. I am

> > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved

> in

> > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in

this

> issue of

> > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> Times-Herald

> > Record.

[Guest guest]

I tell you where I was -- in a position where I didn't want to lose my

license to practice law. Most Americans, additionally, probably do

not realize AA is religious.

> > Hello All,

> > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the

lawsuit,

> for the

> > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded

and

> coerced

> > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping

> with that

> > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

> background,

> > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who

has

> gone

> > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown

> NY. I am

> > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved

> in

> > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in

this

> issue of

> > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> Times-Herald

> > Record.

[Guest guest]

Kayleigh,

Do you know who Barry Lynn is?

http://www.au.org/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/12-step-free/message/1895

> > > Hello All,

> > > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the

> lawsuit,

> > for the

> > > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded

> and

> > coerced

> > > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In

keeping

> > with that

> > > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

> > background,

> > > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who

> has

> > gone

> > > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in

Middletown

> > NY. I am

> > > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was

involved

> > in

> > > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in

> this

> > issue of

> > > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal

professionals

> > > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> > Times-Herald

> > > Record.

[Guest guest]

I have read the sites you posted URLs for, and understand your point.

But you do not explain whether or not Lynn gave you a reason for the

brush-off, saying only that he made notes in the margin of your

letter. Did he, in fact, acknowledge that AA is religious? Did he

have any knowledge of that issue at all?

> > > > Hello All,

> > > > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the

> > lawsuit,

> > > for the

> > > > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government

funded

> > and

> > > coerced

> > > > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In

> keeping

> > > with that

> > > > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for

my

> > > background,

> > > > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone

who

> > has

> > > gone

> > > > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in

> Middletown

> > > NY. I am

> > > > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was

> involved

> > > in

> > > > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in

> > this

> > > issue of

> > > > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > > > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal

> professionals

> > > > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> > > Times-Herald

> > > > Record.

[Guest guest]

I have read the sites you posted URLs for, and understand your point.

But you do not explain whether or not Lynn gave you a reason for the

brush-off, saying only that he made notes in the margin of your

letter. Did he, in fact, acknowledge that AA is religious? Did he

have any knowledge of that issue at all?

> > > > Hello All,

> > > > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the

> > lawsuit,

> > > for the

> > > > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government

funded

> > and

> > > coerced

> > > > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In

> keeping

> > > with that

> > > > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for

my

> > > background,

> > > > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone

who

> > has

> > > gone

> > > > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in

> Middletown

> > > NY. I am

> > > > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was

> involved

> > > in

> > > > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in

> > this

> > > issue of

> > > > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > > > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal

> professionals

> > > > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> > > Times-Herald

> > > > Record.

[Guest guest]

I have read the sites you posted URLs for, and understand your point.

But you do not explain whether or not Lynn gave you a reason for the

brush-off, saying only that he made notes in the margin of your

letter. Did he, in fact, acknowledge that AA is religious? Did he

have any knowledge of that issue at all?

> > > > Hello All,

> > > > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the

> > lawsuit,

> > > for the

> > > > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government

funded

> > and

> > > coerced

> > > > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In

> keeping

> > > with that

> > > > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for

my

> > > background,

> > > > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone

who

> > has

> > > gone

> > > > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in

> Middletown

> > > NY. I am

> > > > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was

> involved

> > > in

> > > > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in

> > this

> > > issue of

> > > > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > > > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal

> professionals

> > > > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> > > Times-Herald

> > > > Record.

[Guest guest]

> I have read the sites you posted URLs for, and understand your

point.

> But you do not explain whether or not Lynn gave you a reason for

the

> brush-off, saying only that he made notes in the margin of your

> letter. Did he, in fact, acknowledge that AA is religious? Did he

> have any knowledge of that issue at all?

Kayleigh,

Within a few days I will try to get the letter (with his chicken

scratch on it) copied and sent as an attachment. He made no

acknowledgement at all of any type. And it is not just Lynn who has

been blind to the cause. As I mentioned before, both Trimpey and

Schaler have commented on their (ACLU) nonresponsiveness to our

cause. Ten years ago when I wrote to the Church/State committie of

the ACLU, Lynn was the chairman of the committie. He has been the

head honcho at AU for years--I don't know exactly how many. Also you

might recall that in those days I talked to some heavy-duty

constitutional dudes, including Wood of Baylor and Van Alstein

of Duke. The frustrating thing is that there can be no more blatant

violation of the Religion Clauses than forced AA. Yet talking to

these heavyweights was like talking to brick walls. I have asked

myself a million times why, and I do not know why organizations like

the ACLU and ACLJ battle time after time in the Supreme Court and both

are totally oblivious to the horribly wicked 12-step inquisition. My

best guess is that the ACLU has liberal leanings and that means

paternalism/pro-Therapeutic State, and the ACLJ is looking to get

government sponsored prayer back in the schools, and just will not

take a separationist stand of any type. Except I just read today on

the AU site that Pat on has blasted Bush's faith base plans

because it aids " minority " religions. However I am very cautious

about what I believe about what one organization says about the other.

Tommy

[Guest guest]

I believe that Rita approached the ACLU and was given a reason that

they didn't want to take on AA. I admit that fighting AA seems more

important than fighting creches on courthouse lawns, because while the

creches may be offensive, AA does real psychological damage.

Perhaps Rita can reiterate the reason the ACLU would not assist her.

I do know that for some years courts were not receptive to the theory

that AA was religious, relying on the " spiritual not religious " phrase

instead of digging into the actual practices. Look what District

Judge Shabazz did in Wisconsin, before the 7th Circuit remanded the

case. He made no analysis whatsoever. (I believe he was a Reagan

appointee who was not considered a distinguished jurist by any means.)

>

> Kayleigh,

>

> Within a few days I will try to get the letter (with his chicken

> scratch on it) copied and sent as an attachment. He made no

> acknowledgement at all of any type. And it is not just Lynn who has

> been blind to the cause. As I mentioned before, both Trimpey and

> Schaler have commented on their (ACLU) nonresponsiveness to our

> cause. Ten years ago when I wrote to the Church/State committie of

> the ACLU, Lynn was the chairman of the committie. He has been the

> head honcho at AU for years--I don't know exactly how many. Also

you

> might recall that in those days I talked to some heavy-duty

> constitutional dudes, including Wood of Baylor and Van

Alstein

> of Duke. The frustrating thing is that there can be no more blatant

> violation of the Religion Clauses than forced AA. Yet talking to

> these heavyweights was like talking to brick walls. I have asked

> myself a million times why, and I do not know why organizations like

> the ACLU and ACLJ battle time after time in the Supreme Court and

both

> are totally oblivious to the horribly wicked 12-step inquisition.

My

> best guess is that the ACLU has liberal leanings and that means

> paternalism/pro-Therapeutic State, and the ACLJ is looking to get

> government sponsored prayer back in the schools, and just will not

> take a separationist stand of any type. Except I just read today on

> the AU site that Pat on has blasted Bush's faith base plans

> because it aids " minority " religions. However I am very cautious

> about what I believe about what one organization says about the

other.

>

> Tommy

[Guest guest]

I believe that Rita approached the ACLU and was given a reason that

they didn't want to take on AA. I admit that fighting AA seems more

important than fighting creches on courthouse lawns, because while the

creches may be offensive, AA does real psychological damage.

Perhaps Rita can reiterate the reason the ACLU would not assist her.

I do know that for some years courts were not receptive to the theory

that AA was religious, relying on the " spiritual not religious " phrase

instead of digging into the actual practices. Look what District

Judge Shabazz did in Wisconsin, before the 7th Circuit remanded the

case. He made no analysis whatsoever. (I believe he was a Reagan

appointee who was not considered a distinguished jurist by any means.)

>

> Kayleigh,

>

> Within a few days I will try to get the letter (with his chicken

> scratch on it) copied and sent as an attachment. He made no

> acknowledgement at all of any type. And it is not just Lynn who has

> been blind to the cause. As I mentioned before, both Trimpey and

> Schaler have commented on their (ACLU) nonresponsiveness to our

> cause. Ten years ago when I wrote to the Church/State committie of

> the ACLU, Lynn was the chairman of the committie. He has been the

> head honcho at AU for years--I don't know exactly how many. Also

you

> might recall that in those days I talked to some heavy-duty

> constitutional dudes, including Wood of Baylor and Van

Alstein

> of Duke. The frustrating thing is that there can be no more blatant

> violation of the Religion Clauses than forced AA. Yet talking to

> these heavyweights was like talking to brick walls. I have asked

> myself a million times why, and I do not know why organizations like

> the ACLU and ACLJ battle time after time in the Supreme Court and

both

> are totally oblivious to the horribly wicked 12-step inquisition.

My

> best guess is that the ACLU has liberal leanings and that means

> paternalism/pro-Therapeutic State, and the ACLJ is looking to get

> government sponsored prayer back in the schools, and just will not

> take a separationist stand of any type. Except I just read today on

> the AU site that Pat on has blasted Bush's faith base plans

> because it aids " minority " religions. However I am very cautious

> about what I believe about what one organization says about the

other.

>

> Tommy

[Guest guest]

As a postscript to my previous answer: Generally, courts are

reluctant to substitute their judgment for that of the legislature.

Look at the recent USSCt decision on medical marijuana -- based on

Congress' finding that marijuana has no medical value. I realize that

there are exceptions to that, such as the case in which the recent 6th

Circuit nominee Sutton, the fool that argued that Congress did not

intend states to be sued under Congressional age discrimination

provisions, despite all evidence to the contrary, prevailed.

Nonetheless, traditionally courts will also not substitute their

judgment for that of agencies, such as the corrections department

officials sued in the Wisconsin case, because such agencies are

thought to have more expertise in these matters than courts. The

recent trend toward recognizing AA as religious is just that --

recent. It was not the trend when you were pursuing your case. I

hope it holds up under the Shrub's onslaught, and if religious figures

like on, whom one would have thought would support Bush, are

against his faith-based initiatives, maybe there is some hope.

Obviously the basis for his objection to the idea, if true, would open

a whole can of worms if " minority " religions brought cases to the

courts. Or equally, if " majority " religions felt they were

discriminated against in favor of the minority ones, and brought that

to the courts. I can't imagine what a court could do except throw out

the whole idea. I don't see how a federal grant can possibly be given

to a religious program without the federal government implicitly

endorsing that religion.

>

> Kayleigh,

>

> Within a few days I will try to get the letter (with his chicken

> scratch on it) copied and sent as an attachment. He made no

> acknowledgement at all of any type. And it is not just Lynn who has

> been blind to the cause. As I mentioned before, both Trimpey and

> Schaler have commented on their (ACLU) nonresponsiveness to our

> cause. Ten years ago when I wrote to the Church/State committie of

> the ACLU, Lynn was the chairman of the committie. He has been the

> head honcho at AU for years--I don't know exactly how many. Also

you

> might recall that in those days I talked to some heavy-duty

> constitutional dudes, including Wood of Baylor and Van

Alstein

> of Duke. The frustrating thing is that there can be no more blatant

> violation of the Religion Clauses than forced AA. Yet talking to

> these heavyweights was like talking to brick walls. I have asked

> myself a million times why, and I do not know why organizations like

> the ACLU and ACLJ battle time after time in the Supreme Court and

both

> are totally oblivious to the horribly wicked 12-step inquisition.

My

> best guess is that the ACLU has liberal leanings and that means

> paternalism/pro-Therapeutic State, and the ACLJ is looking to get

> government sponsored prayer back in the schools, and just will not

> take a separationist stand of any type. Except I just read today on

> the AU site that Pat on has blasted Bush's faith base plans

> because it aids " minority " religions. However I am very cautious

> about what I believe about what one organization says about the

other.

>

> Tommy

[Guest guest]

No matter where else Shabazz was coming from, he certainly relied on

the representations of the warden and social worker that AA was

spiritual and not religious.

I assume that Judge was a federal District Court Judge. I was

once a law clerk for a state SCt justice, and I can assure you that

all the judges voted on issues, and the opinion was assigned by

lottery to one of the judges in the majority. Sometimes there was

no reasoning, just a vote. That would leave the law clerk who

drafted the opinion at quite a loss, and resulted in some pretty silly

decisions. That can certainly happen when you've got a single judge

presiding.

But don't put down law clerks who are fresh out of law school. They

probably have a better take on the most recent law than many seasoned

lawyers. Remember that it is just a snapshot, and they can view it,

as it were, with a wide angle lens, whereas lawyers who have practiced

for a while have lots of little pictures of many details, but no broad

view.

>

> I'm not sure where Shabazz was coming from. It appears that he

> thought the three prongs of the Lemon test are separated by the word

> " or " rather than " and. " Or perhaps he just wanted to get rid of

such

> a " trivial " issue as fast as possible. Afterall he was dealing with

a

> prisoner. I sometimes wonder if Judge just gave my complaint

> to his clerk (probably right out of law school, since it was late

> summer) and said, " Get rid of this shit. " You might recall that he

> attempted to dismiss me as time-barred with a state statute when my

> case was as purely federal as a case can be.

[Guest guest]

No matter where else Shabazz was coming from, he certainly relied on

the representations of the warden and social worker that AA was

spiritual and not religious.

I assume that Judge was a federal District Court Judge. I was

once a law clerk for a state SCt justice, and I can assure you that

all the judges voted on issues, and the opinion was assigned by

lottery to one of the judges in the majority. Sometimes there was

no reasoning, just a vote. That would leave the law clerk who

drafted the opinion at quite a loss, and resulted in some pretty silly

decisions. That can certainly happen when you've got a single judge

presiding.

But don't put down law clerks who are fresh out of law school. They

probably have a better take on the most recent law than many seasoned

lawyers. Remember that it is just a snapshot, and they can view it,

as it were, with a wide angle lens, whereas lawyers who have practiced

for a while have lots of little pictures of many details, but no broad

view.

>

> I'm not sure where Shabazz was coming from. It appears that he

> thought the three prongs of the Lemon test are separated by the word

> " or " rather than " and. " Or perhaps he just wanted to get rid of

such

> a " trivial " issue as fast as possible. Afterall he was dealing with

a

> prisoner. I sometimes wonder if Judge just gave my complaint

> to his clerk (probably right out of law school, since it was late

> summer) and said, " Get rid of this shit. " You might recall that he

> attempted to dismiss me as time-barred with a state statute when my

> case was as purely federal as a case can be.

[Guest guest]

Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

> Isn't this sickening. Now the ears of Americans United prick up.

> Where the fuck have they been all along while our souls were being

> brutally gang raped by the 12-step soul rapers:

>

>

> " The first thing I thought when I heard about it

> is this could have major implications for

> the

> faith-based initiatives program, " said

>

> Boston, the communications director for

> Americans

> United for Separation of Church and State.

> The

> Washington D.C.-based organization has

> been

> outspoken in its criticism of Bush's plan.

> " Bush

> seems to believe that these organizations

> can still

> preach and promote their religious beliefs

> and get

> the funding. We've been very skeptical of

> that

> claim and this ruling underscores that. "

>

>

>

>

> > Hello All,

> > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the lawsuit,

> for the

> > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded and

> coerced

> > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping

> with that

> > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

> background,

> > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who has

> gone

> > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown

> NY. I am

> > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved

> in

> > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in this

> issue of

> > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> Times-Herald

> > Record.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

> Isn't this sickening. Now the ears of Americans United prick up.

> Where the fuck have they been all along while our souls were being

> brutally gang raped by the 12-step soul rapers:

>

>

> " The first thing I thought when I heard about it

> is this could have major implications for

> the

> faith-based initiatives program, " said

>

> Boston, the communications director for

> Americans

> United for Separation of Church and State.

> The

> Washington D.C.-based organization has

> been

> outspoken in its criticism of Bush's plan.

> " Bush

> seems to believe that these organizations

> can still

> preach and promote their religious beliefs

> and get

> the funding. We've been very skeptical of

> that

> claim and this ruling underscores that. "

>

>

>

>

> > Hello All,

> > I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the lawsuit,

> for the

> > Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded and

> coerced

> > Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping

> with that

> > conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my

> background,

> > see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who has

> gone

> > through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown

> NY. I am

> > specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved

> in

> > dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in this

> issue of

> > early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> > rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> > are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's

> Times-Herald

> > Record.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

At 12:22 AM 5/17/01 -0400, Mike wrote:

>Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

This is one of several mean-spirited and trollish statements

you've made on the list. I presume Ken is taking notice.

-----

This post (except quoted portions) Copyright 2001, Ben Bradley.

http://listen.to/benbradley

[Guest guest]

> Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

Least of all you.

[Guest guest]

> Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

Least of all you.

[Guest guest]

does that mean any dissenting statements are 'mean spirited and trollish'?

You sound like you are a peer pressuring type. Very undemocratic. Mike.

Re: Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

> At 12:22 AM 5/17/01 -0400, Mike wrote:

> >Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

>

> This is one of several mean-spirited and trollish statements

> you've made on the list. I presume Ken is taking notice.

>

> -----

> This post (except quoted portions) Copyright 2001, Ben Bradley.

> http://listen.to/benbradley

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

does that mean any dissenting statements are 'mean spirited and trollish'?

You sound like you are a peer pressuring type. Very undemocratic. Mike.

Re: Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

> At 12:22 AM 5/17/01 -0400, Mike wrote:

> >Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

>

> This is one of several mean-spirited and trollish statements

> you've made on the list. I presume Ken is taking notice.

>

> -----

> This post (except quoted portions) Copyright 2001, Ben Bradley.

> http://listen.to/benbradley

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I agree, least of all, me. Mike.

Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

>

> > Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

>

> Least of all you.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I agree, least of all, me. Mike.

Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

>

> > Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

>

> Least of all you.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I agree, least of all, me. Mike.

Re: URGENT- PERISHABLE ISSUE

>

> > Noone can 'rape your soul' unless you let them. Mike.

>

> Least of all you.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Hello All,

> I spoke this morning to the legal team that is handling the lawsuit, for the

> Mayor of Middletown (NY), which seeks to halt government funded and coerced

> Alcoholics Anonymous in the MACC in Middletown NY. . In keeping with that

> conversation I have an important request for all of you (for my background,

> see Warner v Orange County). I need to quickly reach anyone who has gone

> through the Middletown Alcohol Crisis Center (MACC) in Middletown NY. I am

> specifically interested in exactly how much the staff was involved in

> dispensing Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a time constraint in this issue of

> early june, so please respond as quickly as possible to me at

> rwarner1@c... I will see that the appropriate legal professionals

> are given your information. BTW, the story is in today's Times-Herald

> Record.