Posted: 3/20/2003 8:38:31 AM EDT
|
Hello all, I am posting to request the help of fellow members. I am currently attending Saginaw Valley State University in Saginaw Michigan. A huge rash of extremist liberal hate has been going around. "Teachers" are posting propaganda that the US, not Saddam, gassed Iraqi citizens and covered it up. Members of our Armed Forces are being referred to as murders, baby killers, etc. Most of this hate is being spewed from [url=http://www.svsu.edu/~boles/]Elson Boles[/url], his email [email][email protected] [/email]. This morning I received the email below that is encouraging teachers to let students skip class and get extra credit for this propaganda. I am asking everyone to please take a moment to respond to these idiots that are using taxpayers money to spread their hate. Thanks to all and God bless our troops. [Liberal BS] To the University Community: We share our students' confusion, fear, horror, and sadness about the U.S. bombing of Iraq and feel called to address the issue with a Teach-in for Peace. This event is scheduled on Thursday, March 20 from 9:00 to 12:00 in the Performing Arts Center (526 seats) and in Founders Hall from 9:00 to 2:00 and 6:00 to 8:30. At the teach-in, your faculty colleagues and students will read poetry and will discuss the ethical, historical, psychological, political, and sociological ramifications of the war. A flyer and a schedule should be in your mailbox with Wednesday's mail. We are inviting faculty to modify your syllabus on Thursday and invite students to join them at the teach-in. We will have moderators standing at each door so students may sign in and out, and we'll send faculty their attendance list. You could also, of course, choose to give your students the choice either to attend or to remain in class, but we are really hoping that many of our colleagues, both faculty and staff, will join us. If you do not teach on Thursday, can you offer your students extra credit for attendance at this important university event? We cordially invite everyone in the campus community to join us. Call or email one of us if you have questions or comments. Mary Harmon, [email][email protected][/email] Professor of English Rosalie G. Riegle, [email][email protected] [/email]Professor of English Scott Youngstedt, [email][email protected][/email]Associate Professor of Sociology [/Liberal BS] I apologize for the length of this posting, buy I am sick of this crap and would like to expand to voice of disapproval. SVSU President Gilbertson's email address is [email][email protected][/email]. |
| Wow, thank you everyone for your support. It has been an uphill battle for the students that are fighting this. We have been trying hard to do this ourselves, but the "teach peace" and anti troop rhetoric was the last straw. Also, if anyone knows of anyother pro troop, anti protestor sites, please let me know. I would like to get this as much attention as possible. Thanks again for everyone's support. |
|
At the teach-in, your faculty colleagues and students will read poetry and will discuss the ethical, historical, psychological, political, and sociological ramifications of the war. Oh good. Read poetry. That will make VX nerve gas go away. Why didn't we think of that? |
|
From "Eric Gilbertson", His reply. Subject: Re: Elson E. Boles, Ph.D. I am writing this single response to several e-mail messages that have been sent to me over the past few days. I apologize for not writing a personal response to each of you, but trust you will understand why time will not permit me to do so. The concerns raised in each of your messages were similar. They all involved a program conducted by some faculty of this University in facilities on this campus. These are, of course, difficult times, and issues facing our nation are clearly raising emotions to a high level - as they should. But this University and other colleges and universities have an important obligation to serve as a forum for the free expression of opinions and ideas - all opinions and ideas, even if some are offensive to the views of others. And the protection of this freedom is, if anything, even more important during such difficult times. Let me then state my position on some of the objections raised in your messages. First, faculty and staff and students must be free to express their views on controversial subjects on this campus - indeed in this society. No one must be prevented from or punished for the exercise of this right. We have faculty and staff whose views vary widely on the issues of the day - ranging across a wide spectrum from right to left. This is as it should be in a university. The University will protect the right to hold and express controversial views, understanding that those who disagree also have the same right to speak out. If some would choose to attend or to send their children to a college or university where everyone's views were the same or where the only views allowed were those they found agreeable, they would deprive themselves or their children of a rich and full academic experience. I might add that I personally disagree with some of the views I have heard expressed on this campus and am disappointed with the propogation on campus of what I regard as biased information. And I reserve my right to disagree with this and to express that disagreement, as others already have - and as you are free to do. Second, the University does allow faculty and staff and students and their organizations to use campus facilities for meetings and discussions. We do not restrict this use on the basis of what topics might be discussed or what views might be exressed. To do so would be a form of censorship that is unacceptable at this University and in this country. Third, and finally, the University also allows faculty and staff and student groups to use the campus network to publicize their events and activities. These notices are generally sent through the Offices of University Communications, but the forwarding of such notices on the network is clearly not an expression of University endorsement of the event or of the things said at that event. I must say that I was disappointed some faculty used their notice to encourage the awarding of academic credit to students for participation in a discussion that may not have been related to the subjects of their classes - indeed a discussion that may have provided a less than balanced approach to the subject. I do not personally think this represented very good academic judgement, and I will ask them to reconsider whether this should be done in the future. I am certain that this response will not satisfy some of you who wrote to me - particularily those of you who called for my resignation! But I believe, strongly, that this is the right position for a university to take on such matters and in such times. And I believe, strongly, that this is a position grounded in our nation's best traditions and highest values. Eric Gilbertson |
|
I decided to respond directly to the professors. I got lengthy and oratorical, but here's my response: I recently heard about your efforts to put on the above event at Saginaw Valley State University. While I understand your opposition to the current hostilities in Iraq, I do not agree with it, and strongly urge you to reconsider wasting your valuable time, that of the students, and the taxpayer's money on an event that will accomplish nothing. As an active-duty Air Force officer, I willingly put my life at risk to defend your freedoms. I give the gift of my life freely to every American, including you, whether they love me and what I do, or not. However, I do not enjoy or want to risk my life needlessly, senselessly, or frivolously. Having said that, I feel that this conflict in Iraq is worth risking (though not giving) my, and every other life in the U.S. military. Why? For several reasons. First and foremost, Saddam Hussien presents a clear and present danger to our country--not because he would invade our shores tomorrow, but because he sponsors and supports those who would kill you, an innocent American, simply because you are an American. The Bin Ladins of the world do not bother getting a United Nations resolution before visiting violence on you, nor will they care that you are opposed to war and embracing peace; they will simply rather see you dead. Singing, reading poetry, and philisophical discussions will not change their desire to kill Americans. Secondly, Saddam presents a destabilizing influence to the region around him. Our friends have asked us to help; we will provide it. Lastly, the United Nations has made a promise, in the form of 18 different resolutions (the last being 1441) that said Saddam had to disarm or suffer the consequences. He did not disarm. He is suffering the consequences. When you start a class, you inform the students of the consequences of plagiarism, tardiness, and poor study habits, do you not? And if someone crosses the line of plagiarism, or fails to study, you provide those consequences, do you not? In short, Ms Harmon, the time has past for words. It is time for America to be decisive, unyeilding, and firm, to protect its citizens and free the people of Iraq. Ms. Harmon, please understand that no one in the military cherishes the thought of conflict; but like cancer surgery, view it as a necessary evil to make you, your friends, and your loved ones safe. To quote George Orwell, "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." Sleep tight, Ms. Harmon; we will take it from here. |
|
Quoted: I decided to respond directly to the professors. I got lengthy and oratorical, but here's my response: I recently heard about your efforts to put on the above event at Saginaw Valley State University. While I understand your opposition to the current hostilities in Iraq, I do not agree with it, and strongly urge you to reconsider wasting your valuable time, that of the students, and the taxpayer's money on an event that will accomplish nothing. As an active-duty Air Force officer, I willingly put my life at risk to defend your freedoms. I give the gift of my life freely to every American, including you, whether they love me and what I do, or not. However, I do not enjoy or want to risk my life needlessly, senselessly, or frivolously. Having said that, I feel that this conflict in Iraq is worth risking (though not giving) my, and every other life in the U.S. military. Why? For several reasons. First and foremost, Saddam Hussien presents a clear and present danger to our country--not because he would invade our shores tomorrow, but because he sponsors and supports those who would kill you, an innocent American, simply because you are an American. The Bin Ladins of the world do not bother getting a United Nations resolution before visiting violence on you, nor will they care that you are opposed to war and embracing peace; they will simply rather see you dead. Singing, reading poetry, and philisophical discussions will not change their desire to kill Americans. Secondly, Saddam presents a destabilizing influence to the region around him. Our friends have asked us to help; we will provide it. Lastly, the United Nations has made a promise, in the form of 18 different resolutions (the last being 1441) that said Saddam had to disarm or suffer the consequences. He did not disarm. He is suffering the consequences. When you start a class, you inform the students of the consequences of plagiarism, tardiness, and poor study habits, do you not? And if someone crosses the line of plagiarism, or fails to study, you provide those consequences, do you not? In short, Ms Harmon, the time has past for words. It is time for America to be decisive, unyeilding, and firm, to protect its citizens and free the people of Iraq. Ms. Harmon, please understand that no one in the military cherishes the thought of conflict; but like cancer surgery, view it as a necessary evil to make you, your friends, and your loved ones safe. To quote George Orwell, "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." Sleep tight, Ms. Harmon; we will take it from here. [b] Excellent well thought out email, I would love to hear what her response to it if she should write back. I especially liked the reference to the George Orwell quote. |
| limaxray, thank you for taking the time to respond. That was a very good, well thought out letter. I am glad that people like you are there to defend and protect our country. It does look like the influx of response is doing some good. The local news picked up on the situation and is going to mention it and there is now a US flag on SVSU's homepage. Hopefully with the emails and the pressure from the group on campus, we can make a difference. |
|
Lets be clear here folks (as I think some of the younger crowd is getting confused). No one is saying that people shouldn't be allowed to speak out if there's something they don't agree with (at least I hope not). I would encourage people to speak out if that was the case. Hell, that is the whole problem in the fight to keep and bear arms, too many people sit idly by. Don't get offended when your opposition is better organized and prepared than you. what I had a problem with in all of what was reported here was: 1) People go to college to learn. I object to teachings being one sided, kids should be allowed to develop their own sense of right and wrong. 2) Professors should not be allowed to give extra credit for activities that have nothing to do with the course of study, AND violate #1 above. 3) Professors propogating pure lies in defense of their position. Whether that be pro- or anit- war it doesn't matter. As the man said "just the facts, ma'am". Again, the issue here is not (or at least shouldn't be) dissent. Dissent should always be encouraged. The issue is the abuse of power by those we have entrusted to shape the minds of our youth. |
| Norman74, you are correct, this is not against people speaking out. This is against the endorsement of the university for such views and supporting the abuse of power. Everyone can have their own opinion, but it should not be forced on everyone (especially when claimed as fact) and spread at the support of taxpayers. |
|
[blue]Armed223, I received the same canned response from Mr Gilbertson. Below was my response:[/blue] Dear Sir, In my original question to you, I asked "if the purpose of Saginaw Valley State University was one of education or political indoctrination." Thank you for your quick response. I agree with you that it is unreasonable to believe that students should expect to be protected by ideas that they deem to be disagreeable. However, that did not answer the question I originally posed to you. This "Teach-in for Peace" is not about a free expression of ideas. It is quite clear that the agenda was set before the first word was spoken. This presents what is quite transparently an attempt to promote an unbalanced view of the current political events. Of course, I might be wrong if SVSU was also presenting a rally which promoted the opposite political viewpoint. Is this the case? If not, I stand by my original point of view that the purpose here is not one of education. Additionally, you stated in your response to me, "I might add that I personally disagree with some of the views I have heard expressed on this campus and am disappointed with the propogation on campus of what I regard as biased information." I wouldn't suggest or expect that you restrict an individuals right to hold an opinion or view of world events. However, it goes far beyond that when your faculty specifically arranges to hold a "Teach-in for Peace" for the quite specific point of promoting ONE singular side of the issue. I would suggest that you provide guidance to your staff in regards to the true purpose for which they are employed. Should you decide not to do so, it is evident that your aims are clear and that your agenda is skewed by personal motives. People go to college to learn. It is the purpose of the faculty to teach - not indoctrinate. I submit to you that your university has failed the students on this occasion. [blue]edited to add: Emails forwarded to Hannity & Colmes, Bill O Reilly & G. Gordon Liddy.[/blue] |
|
[blue]I forwarded my above email to Mr Gilbertson to the three professors who coordinated the anti-war rally as a courtesy. I received the following email response from Rosalie G. Riegle.[/blue] Dear Mr. Reno: You suggested that SVSU present "a rally which promotes the opposite viewpoint." "Teaching for Peace" was organized by three individual members of the faculty. Perhaps you'd be interested in organizing a similar teach-in which explores additional viewpoints on the war in Iraq or on war in general. If you did not receive a copy of the presentations included in the teach-in, I'll be glad to forward one to you. Rosalie G. Riegle Professor of English [blue]Here is a copy of my reply:[/blue] Dear Ms. Riegle, Please re-read my response to Mr. Gilbertson. I did not advocate or suggest that SVSU present a rally which promotes an opposite viewpoint. I questioned whether one was being presented as a means to balance your "Teach-in for Peace" rally in which an obvious political agenda was apparent. I suspect that you have entirely missed my point throughout all of this. Perhaps I haven't been clear enough in relating my thoughts. If so, I apologize and will try to clarify it for you. I do not believe it is the purpose of a college to promote personal political indoctrination or viewpoints. People pay to attend college to receive an education - not to receive the personal political viewpoints of the faculty who are employed to provide that education. Your personal political views, as well as mine, have absolutely no bearing or relevance in providing that education. In this setting, our political views do not matter. The only possible exception that I could see to this would be if a student was pursuing an education in political science. However, I see that you are a Professor of English so I suspect that was not the case or motivation for your rally. What is troubling is that I suspect that college resources were used by you to promote your personal political views. Were the flyers for this event produced using university resources? I see that you coordinated this rally using your university email address. Does the university have a policy regarding the use of their computer assets for promoting personal political views? I also see that you used university buildings for this event. I consider that to be misuse of university resources as well. Additionally, I find your recommendation of awarding students extra credit for attending your rally to be particularly troublesome. Does the university include your personal political views as part of its syllabus? If it does, I have low expectations of Saginaw Valley State University. If it does not, then I submit that you and your other two colleagues have abused your positions as educators. I hope that I have cleared up any confusion that you may have had in regard to my views on this issue. Sincerely, J. Reno [blue]thoughts?...ideas?...comments? Edited to add that I, of course, forwarded the updated correspondence to OReilly, Hannity, and Liddy.[/blue] [:D] |
|
Johnny_Reno, two words to your reply: Awe--SOME! Absolutely on target. If she can't figure out EXACTLY what you meant, then she's dumber than...well, an anti-war protestor. I have yet to receive a reply to my earlier email to all the profs; apparently... [jack nicholson in "A Few Good Men"] THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! [/jack nicholson] |
|
Quoted: If she can't figure out EXACTLY what you meant, then she's dumber than...well, an anti-war protestor. Well, I tried to make it as clear as possible without using profanity. We'll see if it goes anywhere from here. Oh, and I cc'd a copy of it to the University President again. I sure hope he gets tired of seeing their name. |
|
Done, This is a copy of what I sent! To Mr. Boles, I have CC'd a number of your colleagues, so that they can read this. I have been informed that on the campus where you teach, you have begun to protest the War on Iraq. This is your right to free speech and assembly. I totally agree with your right to voice your views as our forefathers and brave men have given their lives to provide you with this right, and privelage. Please be aware that you are doing everyone of your students a disservice by lableing the men and women in the armed forces as "baby killers" and "mass murders". Having served in the United States Marine Corp in the post Vietnam era, I was subject to, and very aware of, the intense hatred focused on the members of our armed services. I had first hand view of the effect this had on many war veterans, and the psychological pain it caused to be on the receiving end of this behavior. Going to war is an awful and painful job for those that are called to this duty. The bravery of these men in defending our nation and our constitutional rights is unparralleled. Every single one of them is willing to die to defend your/our rights in this country. Maybe, just maybe, you may want to rethink your name calling, as in doing so you appear to all educated people as an ignorant, prejudice individual (possibly not all military personel are baby killers). By chosing to engage in this name calling and disrespect for our troops you demonstrate your cowardice. Everyone of our service people in Iraq would agree that you have the right to say what you want. They are willing to die to give you this right. Do you think that while they are over on the other side of the globe risking their lives to protect us and defend our rights that you may give them a little credit for being human beings, or at least keep your ignorant comments to yourself. It is easy in the comfort of your campus and home, to label those involved in dangerous and horrific work as awful murderous people. So please remember, NEVER comment on what a soldier does in combat, until you have been there yourself, because no one knows what they would do under those conditions!! Sincerely, starsil9 |
|
Wow, Johnny_Reno and starsil9, those are some great letters. I see that you received a reply Johnny. Others and myself have yet to have heard a respone back from the three faculty members. A few of us tried to have a logical conversation with Boles, but that was a wash. This is the email that I sent to all three offending faculty members. Ms. Harmon, I am writing in regards to the "Teaching Peace" seminar that took place last Thursday on the campus of SVSU. As a current student of SVSU, I find the email that I received on that topic to be very disturbing. First and foremost let me say that our armed forces personnel are honorable, upstanding pillars of society that have voluntary taken the call to defend our country, our citizens, and the citizens of the world. To state that any action undertook by these personnel cause (and I quote) "confusion, fear, horror, and sadness" is unimaginable. With that statement said, I would like to share a few things with you. First let me share with you my confusion. I am "confused" on how liberating an oppressed people would be something that you do not support. I "fear" that ignorance and disrespect for human rights will become more commonplace if people like you have their way. I am "horrified" that you support Saddam in that you feel no problem with him thumbing his nose at the world and refusing to disarm. Finally I am "saddened" that person of your stature, supposedly educated, would abuse your power by asking instructors to cancel classes and award extra credit for attending a seminar based on your personal agenda. If you had truly wanted peace, you should have invited Saddam to your teach peace by asking to comply with the United Resolutions. Further, your ignorance in the matter is only made stronger by the fact that SVSU does have Iraqi nationals attending that support the actions of the US. I am proud of our servicemen and women. They have honor, integrity, and a sense of duty that must be foreign to you. I sincerely hope that in the future you will separate your personal agenda from your job. God bless our troops, and God bless America. Cordially, ARmed223 |
|
Well, I finally got a response back from one of the faculty members, Rosalie G. Riegle, that organized the event. Now she denying that she was involved. Thank you for sharing your views. Perhaps you would also like to respond to the person who forwarded the email to you. Rosalie G. Riegle Professor of English |
|
Quoted: Well, I finally got a response back from one of the faculty members, Rosalie G. Riegle, that organized the event. Now she denying that she was involved. Thank you for sharing your views. Perhaps you would also like to respond to the person who forwarded the email to you. Rosalie G. Riegle Professor of English How can she deny involvement when she originally stated in her email to me that the rally was coordinated by herself and two other faculty members? [BS] |
|
Quoted: we should try & get Sean Hannity or Limbaugh to pick this up Go right ahead, I nominate YOU to take care of this. What's with "we should"? That's like saying "I knew that was going to happen". If you knew it was going to happen, you should have stopped it. If you "should" do something, shutup and do it. |
|
Cnatra, I think trying to have different media outlets pick this up would be great. I have emailed Neal Boortz and a few others. Hopefully they will mention this on their shows. Johnny_Reno, I am dumbfounded as to why she is denying involvement. I replyed to her with the last paragraph of the orginal message and told her that all three had received responses. I can only guess that the heat is on and she wants out. Updated Here is the new reply from Riegle who is an English professor. I'm sorry--I understood you were a student. The announcement of the teach-in was sent only to faculty and staff so if you are a student and not on staff or teaching as a lecturer, someone who is must have forwarded it to you. First off, she sent it to everyone, including students. I also like the run on sentence and I think she needs another comma too. |
|
Quoted: Wow, that Elson Boles is a nut job! Look at the crap he bases his exams and extra credit on. [url]http://www.svsu.edu/~boles/111/articles/foroil.htm[/url] Wow - he is straight from the "Blame America First" club. Perhaps we should send him the URL for DU. He would be a big hit over there. [whacko] |
|
Folks, due to your help, I would like to update you on the happenings at SVSU. A group of students put up a website detailing the actions of above, said faculty members. They had to take their site down due to the threat of legal action on the behalf of the university. I have also had correspondence with Elson Boles, which is included below, in which he states that he "supports" our troops. As to the references to Venezuela, he feels that the US is responsible for the current state of that country. On a side note for Michigan residents, Monday through Wednesday next week, students at Baker College of Flint will be taking donations to send care packages to our troops overseas. (I think that is more than Boles has done for them.) Letter addressed to me: The wording of claims on the site looked very similar to your letter to Eric Gilbertson. I didn't "blame" you, but presumed it was your site and explained my objections to parts of its content. As for your contentions about the articles on my site about Venezuela and Colombia, they are not "my articles," but articles from mainstream sources that explain facts. Just because you lived in Venezuela doesn't mean you or anyone have superior knowledge of the relevant facts, no more than because someone lives in the US they are automatically a better informed and open-minded individual. Further, you presented no counter evidence against the reported facts, which I'd be willing to consider. Chavez, like Lula in Brazil, was elected to office, and even if he was a communist, which he isn't, if he was elected then that's what the people want. Leftist reformer yes, but in what sense could you call the reforms he supports communist in nature? Dismissing the national legislature and reforming the constitution certainly don't qualify as policies that define communist governments. Left as well as right politicians in parliamentary democracies do this all the time, and legally. I therefore suspect you are not familiar with what communism is (or was, as there are very few communist states left - not even China qualifies anymore as pursuing communist policies.) I know the photo of Bush is a fake, and is no more realistic than the comparisons of him to chimpanzees. It is called political humor. However, the quotes by Bush are real, and so is his lack of abilities. As for Saddam, in fact I did say that I don't support Saddam's vile regime. I pointed out that he's a tyrant and a butcher. Nonetheless, what some students didn't like hearing is that the US government helped this butcher come to power and supported his regime of terror for many years. One cannot logically infer that because some people criticize the US policies of putting Saddam and the Baath Party into power in the 1960s, and of building up his military, including acquiring chemical weapons during the 1980s, and of actively assisting that regime in gassing tens of thousands of Iranians, that therefore one supports Saddam. On the contrary, it makes much more sense to infer that such critics put Saddam and US officials in the same category, as I did explicitly in my article - "If Saddam is a tyrant, what do we call the makers of tyrants?" Here's a fact you'll have a hard time grappling with: with the exception of the Halabjah massacre, which the Reagan administration tried to cover up by blaming on Iran, Saddam's regime has never since 1983 used gas against anyone without the approval and active assistance of the US government - and it didn't even use those weapons against the US when the US attacked Iraq in 1990 or in 2003. As for the US troops, of course they are honorable and upstanding folks. I've never criticized them. I've only critized the goverment polices that they had no choice but to follow. In fact, I've largely quoted US government and military officials criticizing those policies as they revealed them to the public (see the articles in display case or on my site). Thus, in my view and that of many of my friends in the military, I'm more of a real supporter of US troops than you. I want them out of harms way. You want them in harms way. The blood of the killed US troops, the blood of thousands of dead Iraqi troops (who likewise simply followed orders), and the blood of hundreds of civilians, women and children, including the thousands killed *during* Saddams regime, is on US government hands (specifically those officials who supported these policies over the years) and people in the US and abroad who support those policies. As for fighting for my freedoms, that is not what this war is about. The last time US troops fought to uphold US freedoms was in WWII. Dr. Boles |
|
Quoted: [snip] As for the US troops, of course they are honorable and upstanding folks. I've never criticized them. I've only critized the goverment polices that they had no choice but to follow. In fact, I've largely quoted US government and military officials criticizing those policies as they revealed them to the public. [snip] Dr. Boles [img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030411/capt.1050085651.iraq_war_us_military_jjx103.jpg[/img] [s]United States Marines of Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 7th Marines sign their autographs for some Iraqi children who approached them while on patrol through a neighborhood of Baghdad Friday, April 11, 2003.[/s] [Boles]A United States Marine oppresses an Iraqi child while carrying out the unlawful occupation of a sovereign nation. Iraqi citizens have been swarming U.S. servicemembers to pass on their thanks to all of the anti-war protesters.[/Boles] |
|
Elson Boles rings a bell - has anyone researched his past - I will bet that he is an avowed Socialist. Well, heck, lookee what I found. Be kind with your Photoshop work - [url]http://www.svsu.edu/~dboehm/Elson%20Boles%20web.htm[/url] and [url]http://www.blarg.net/~minsq/NCArchive/00000006.htm[/url] and how about this for a "smoking gun' [url]http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/wsn/2003/msg00482.html[/url] [url]http://www.counterpunch.org/boles1010.html[/url] Boles is definitely not an AR15.com type. Here is a link to his home page; nobody should try to crack his user name and password for access - [url]http://www.dougdowd.org/NewFiles/links/[/url] and here a link you will love [url]http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/000579.html[/url] [url]http://www.kdp.pp.se/BOLES.htm[/url] Can someone please go kick this knucklehead in the nuts? Also, no one should call him - If you want his home phone number and address, try a search a [url]www.anywho.com[/url] [red][Make damn sure this is the right person before you harass him.][/red] Edited to appease some grannies - examination of the Conduct Code yields no indication of violation, except that the entire thread could be interpreted as a viloation of 2c) and 7). [I guess that is why no moderator warnings were issued!] |
| AeroE, all I have to say is Wow! You spent some serious time researching that. I think the president of the university might be interested in the website that totally rips apart his "article". The Erin O'Connor website went over the site put up by other students. That has since been taken down because the English Dept said they were going to sue for libel. After reading her synopsis, I fail to see how it would be libel. The third story down on www.erinoconnor.org/ explains the website issue in further detail. I knew about one of his articles, but had no clue about the rest. Thanks for your help. Johnny, I love the Boles interpertation of the photo. I just emailed him again in response to his last email. Things might get interesting. By the way, I am not sure if he lives in Midland, that might be a different person. |
|
The Boles links took about 30 seconds to find, and five minutes to post. This asshole has been a seditious activist since at least his days in Oklahoma, probably longer. Midland, Mi is about 10 or 12 driving miles from Saginaw - maybe he ought to take up tree hugging and save some gas. |
|
Here's a fact you'll have a hard time grappling with: with the exception of the Halabjah massacre, which the Reagan administration tried to cover up by blaming on Iran, Saddam's regime has never since 1983 used gas against anyone without the approval and active assistance of the US government - and it didn't even use those weapons against the US when the US attacked Iraq in 1990 or in 2003. I am having a very difficult time trying to verify that fact. So Saddam hasn't gassed us, YET. The war is not over. So Saddam never used any chem/bio weapons in 1991. I wonder if he has ever heard of Gulf War Syndrome? That peice by Jurjen sure rips boles apart many times over. [url]www.blarg.net/~minsq/NCArchive/00000006.htm[/url] I get the feeling you have dealt with this yahoo before AeroE? |