All links to other sites will open in a new window.
This issue of Freedomwriter has a number of letters.
Thank you and keep your letters coming!
Nov. 7, 2004
I came across this article on your site. Are there any updates?
REMOVING LIENS & LEVIES BY SUING IRS FOR DISCLOSING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
March 24, 2003
November 3, 2004
Dear Friends of the Constitutional Republic,
I am most grateful to all of you who have supported our campaign and share our desire to restore our original God-honoring American Constitutional Republic. As the campaign has come to an end, I have been overwhelmed by the outpouring of support and encouragement from all corners of the country. I am deeply grateful for your prayers for me, for my wife, Diane and our children, Beth, Patrick and Timothy.
Since I too often forget to thank my brother Steve, I want to acknowledge his love, support and friendship. God has blessed me with a generous and brilliant brother and business partner who cares and works tirelessly for the protection of the unborn.
Last night, we had a wonderful ‘Victory Celebration’ hosted by the Maryland Constitution Party vice chairman, Mike Chastain, and featuring presentations by ‘Little Stevie’ Peroutka, Chairman Jim Clymer, John Lofton and Howard Phillips.
In my remarks I emphasized that when we do our duty, every day is a victory.
Last night, we celebrated God’s glorious and gracious sovereignty over all things. As Christ tells us in Matthew 28:18, ‘All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.’ Of course, this includes authority over civil government and over political elections. His will be done.
Our victory is in declaring God’s sovereign nature and submitting ourselves to His will. We do this when we run for office acknowledging God, defending the family, and working to restore the American Republic. We do this when we vote only for those men who have submitted their lives to faithfulness and obedience to His Word.
With this victory in mind—His victory—I encourage all Americans of good will to join us in the coming days, months and years to build our effort to honor God, defend the family and restore the Republic.
We will be posting an election analysis on line very soon.
For God, Family, & the Republic,
Michael A. Peroutka
8028 Ritchie Highway, Suite # 303
Pasadena, MD 21122
Oct. 24, 2004
Unfortunately due to powerful anti-Iranian activities and the typical incompetence of the Islamic Republic that occupies Iran, the southern states of the Persian Gulf who have only come to existence thanks to foreign powers, have slowly become more brazen. As a result the National Geographic Society has printed at least three major erroneous statements in its Atlas of the World 2005 (Eighth Edition, ISBN: 0-7922-7543-8 & ISBN: 0-7922-7542-x) regarding Iran and the Persian Gulf.
Considering the fact that the National, Geographic is the biggest non-profit educational and scientific institution, it is hard for us to fathom how they made reference to the Persian Gulf with an unrecognized name.
The United Nations, in addition to historical records and facts that date back more than thousands of years, have made it abundantly clear that the body of water in question is recognized as the Persian Gulf.
The atlas also falsely claims that several Persian Gulf Islands belong to the newly created United Arab Emirates. It would appear that the National Geographic Society has joined hands with the enemies of Iran, and is now openly helping those who seek to compromise Iran’s territorial integrity. Perhaps the National Geographic Society should look back on it’s own maps to see that 33 years ago no entity by the name of United Arab Emirates existed, however Iran did. Furthermore, the National Geographic itself had previously always used the formal, and legitimate name, the Persian Gulf to reference the body of water in question. The National Geographic’s stance encourages conflict in an area which has experience relative calm with the use of the official and internationally recognized name of the Persian Gulf for centuries. Iran has existed for more then seven thousand years, and to now have a publication attempt to strip it of its historical territory will not be tolerated.
The Atlas goes further to claim that the Persian Gulf Islands are being occupied by Iran. If anything is being occupied, it would be various parts of Iran that have been taken from us through illegal means starting 33 years ago.
The Marze Por Gohar Party condemns the policies of the National Geographic that have made it possible for such illegitimate maps to be published. We look to hear from the National Geographic regarding the blunders they have made on their 2005 Atlas, and urge them to correct these errors, and to apologize to the nation of Iran for damaging our national culture and heritage in addition to our territorial integrity.
The enemies of Iran should know, so long as there is one Iranian alive with blood pumping through his or her heart, even the thought of taking one grain of Iranian soil, will strongly be opposed and defeated.
Long Live Iran.
Compiled by the Persian Gulf Committee of the Marze Por Gohar Party
Oct. 23, 2004
The Alaska State Constitution; Article 9; section 8 simply says that no state debt is authorized without a public vote on the issue.
The public voiced clear opposition to the legislature deviating from the constitution in a poll conducted by the folks at www.akvoters.org. The first question asked, “If the state constitution clearly states a limit for capital project spending without a vote of the people, should the legislature be allowed to avoid this limit and public vote by authorizing bonding through quasi-state agencies or the Alaska Railroad?”
Of the 691 people that responded 71% said NO! In the second question, “Should the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) and the Alaska Student Loan Corporation assume additional debt to fund capital projects for other agencies, non-profit organizations, or municipal governments? This time 665 people responded with 72% saying NO!
The constitution seems pretty clear to the public, but somehow the legislature just doesn’t get it. Several good examples of their selective interpretation of the constitution include HB-235 which would authorize the Alaska Railroad to issue $76,000,000 in bonds to finance gas pipelines! This was sponsored by Republican Representative Bruce Weyhrauch of Juneau.
Another example is HB-556 which provided a $20 million bonding authorization to finance the acquisition, development, improvement, and construction of port and related facilities for use of a private mining company located on the Lynn Canal. HB-556 was introduced by the House State Affairs Committee chaired by Weyhrauch.
SB-277 authorized the Alaska Student Loan Corporation, to float bonds for up to $75 million, with the bond proceeds used for capital project appropriations. SB-279 did the same thing. Weyhrauch vote in favor of both bills!
Does the public really want this “Enron style accounting” to continue? Learn the truth and vote on November 2 like your future depends on it!
Oct. 17, 2004
"THE SONS OF ELI"
"Bush entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down. His first two years in office resulted in 2 million Americans losing their jobs AND he cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any other president in US History." His presidency has been the most "in-your-face" support of the wealthy whether it be tax cuts, the lack of an energy and environmental policy, failure to crack down hard on corporate corruption etc. Kerry will need to bring back former Clinton advisor Robert Ruben to turn the economy around just as was done after the failed administration of Bush Sr. Kerry will need to fast-track the operationalizing of alternative energy sources in order to reduce U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil specifically and world oil in general. As a former prosecutor, he will need to push for long-term prison sentences for those committing white-collar crimes and reduce the difficulty of prosecuting the likes of Ken Ley.
"Pieter J. Friedrich lives in Northern CA where he works in the emergency medical response field and hopes to become a paramedic. He's a self-professed paleoconservative and a member of the Constitution Party. He writes a weekly column and maintains the weblog, Pumpkinhead."
Pieter J. Friedrich
Oct. 17, 2004
WTC READING LIST
Oct. 14, 2004
TAKING BACK OUR POWER!
Have been thinking of changing my name to Marilyn Luther King because I too have a dream. I dream of taking our country back, I dream of putting the neo-cons on trial for high treason, charged with orchestrating the 9/11 massacre and subsequent massacres abroad. I dream of somehow bringing those Supreme Court justices who unconstitutionally appointed the village idiot president to trial; I dream of shredding the misnamed Patriot Act and then forcing every politician who voted it into being to chew and swallow a shredded copy---dry, no liquid, and if they choke, c'est la vie.
And I dream of rescinding NAFTA as well as sending the illegal aliens home with our blessings; I dream of the cessation of globalization, the tyrannical NWO in its incubator; I dream of the re-instatement of gold backed currency so that money is kept honest while fiat money is declared forever illegal; I dream of the end of imperial America and a raising of the beacon of freedom though I dream, too, of the destruction of the so-called Statue of Liberty as it is in reality a statue of the Illuminati goddess Semiranis!
Yes, I have a dream that people wake up and know how hoodwinked we've been; I dream that we send the global so-called elite, aka the black nobility, aka the Illuminati, into outer space with no return fuel; I dream that we re-name "America" seeing as it was never named after Mr. Nobody explorer Amerigo Vespucci at all but is an Illuminati made up word; I dream that we pattern our newly named country after Solon's Republic and let no politician ever taint our sacred Constitution with his/her unholy hands under penalty of permanent banishment to Mars.
Do I ever dream of setting the unconstitutional Federal Reserve out to sea in a leaky boat, including Sir Alan of Greenspan; I dream of razing the IRS to the ground, every last illegal, extorting IRS office.
Oh I have a dream all right, that no other human being or animal is ever tortured, ever EVER again.
Let me hear an amen!
Marilyn A. Guinnane
Oct. 14, 2004
Just became familiar with your wonderful publication...and not only because you published my own "Blowin' Hot Air" (from "Think Israel").
"Bush recklessly put U.S. soldiers in harms way by invading Iraq in search of weapons of mass destruction which still have not been found." In doing so, he has compromised the war on terrorism by directing 200 billion dollars for an overt combat operation as opposed to a covert operation. The United States has lost over 1,000 soldiers and thousands more are severely maimed prompting some to ask: hey hey GWB, how many kids will it be? The wiser choice would have been to invest 50 billion dollars in covert operations and 50 billion in homeland security. Besides, using conventional troops to fight terrorists is similar to the British army using regulars to fight French guerrillas during the Revolutionary War. Consequently, volunteerism for U.S. military service has sharply declined for all branches prompting rumors of a draft. Kerry will need to redirect resources to enhance homeland security while getting many more nations to share in troop and money commitments overseas especially in Iraq. He will also need to push Saudi Arabia and China to administer sanctions against Iran and North Korea to prevent further nuclear proliferation. Most importantly, however, he will need to fight terrorists overseas through covert operations.
My name is Jerry Honigman, a Florida educator who has done extensive doctoral studies in M. E. Affairs. I am widely published all over the world and am pleased to see that you also have enjoyed my work.
Please take a look at a few more of many examples I could send to you. I think you'll find some unique stuff inside of them. Use any and all in your wonderful publication as you like...and place me on your e-mail list if you have one..
All my best...
Who Won't Be Making Jokes About WMD
by Gerald A. Honigman
March 5, 2004
Appetite Versus Starvation and Some Other Eternal Truths
By Gerald A. Honigman
June 25, 2004
Talking Turkey About Turkey
By Gerald A. Honigman
May 27, 2004
By Gerald A. Honigman
May 9, 2004
By Gerald A. Honigman
July 30, 2004
I don't know. Maybe it was just an exercise in rallying support among millions of key Evangelical Christian voters and winning over some Jews in what promises to be a very close election come November 2004. Dubya, after all, won last time around in a highly controversial election by, literally, just a few handfuls of votes in Florida. But maybe-just maybe-while it undoubtedly involved this, perhaps there was something else astir as well.
I've gotten ahead of myself, so let's backtrack a bit.
Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, made a very hard decision last April. After decades of supporting the construction of Israeli settlements in disputed territories Israel wound up with as a result of having to fight a defensive war for its life in June 1967, the Old Warrior decided that the costs outweighed the gains of keeping Jews in Gaza.
While it is true that, while their numbers drastically fluctuated, Jews had lived in Gaza for millennia; that, since the days of the Pharaohs, Gaza had been used as an invasion route into Israel proper by those aiming to destroy or subjugate it; that Gaza had become a hotbed for terrorists aiming to destroy Israel; that Jewish communities set up in Gaza were not on Arab-owned land; etc. and so forth; it is also true that many-if not most-Israelis were looking for a way out of Gaza if the proper conditions presented themselves.
Israel had long been under pressure to take some steps to revive the all-but-dead, so-called roadmap for peace with Palestinian Arabs. While the latter was seen, at least in a few circles, to exist in such a moribund state due to the unwillingness and/or inability of the Arabs to control their own disembowelers of Jews, this key factor did not matter nearly as much as it should have. So the squeeze was put on the Jews.
While such hypocrisy was by now expected from Europe and much of the rest of the world, the folks at Foggy Bottom also habitually indulge in this sort of behavior, coming up with absurd, alleged "moral equivalencies" and the like.
Lacking any Anwar Sadat or King Hussein-type to deal with among Palestinian Arabs (i.e. Arab leaders willing to allow for a viable Israel still existing on the morrow after a peace treaty is signed), Arik decided to make a unilateral move to break the stalemate while also supposedly enhancing Israel's overall security position. The latter assertion is hotly debated given certain "facts of life."
In April 2004, Sharon thus came up with his Gaza withdrawal plan. In addition to the removal of Gaza's 8,000 Jews, some settlements in Samaria, the northern West Bank, were also placed on the eviction notice. The world had been clamoring for such Israeli moves for decades.
Those who had conquered territories sometimes hundreds or thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own nations' security somehow couldn't figure out the life-threatening problems Israel was constantly faced with due to the armistice lines imposed upon it in 1949 by the United Nations. As is well known by now, those lines made Israel a mere 9-miles wide at its strategic waist, where most of the nation's population and industry are located.
One needn't be Napoleon to figure out what this all meant to a nation grossly out-manned and out-gunned, surrounded by enemies sworn to its demise. And, as would become the norm, the UN had only stepped in after the Jews turned the tide of the Arab invasion in 1948 to snuff out both their own lives and the life of their sole, miniscule, reborn nation.
Israel was never meant to be a 9-mile wide rump state...but that's how it was left when the lines were drawn in '49 marking the point where the Jews finally turned back the invasion of a half dozen Arab armies supplied to the teeth with weaponry left over by the Allies from World War II and led, in Transjordan, by British officers. The UN stepped in to limit Arab losses, not to prevent their blatant aggression. This behavior would be repeated in subsequent decades as well.
Arab settlers from elsewhere then, once again, poured into these disputed territories. As leading international legal scholars like Eugene Rostow have pointed out, the latter had largely been unapportioned state lands belonging to the original Mandate, open to settlement by Arabs, Jews, and others as well. After 1949, however, only Arabs were able to move here with Transjordan's internationally unrecognized land grab.
Purely Arab Transjordan, comprising all the land on the east bank of the River, had already been created by the British in 1922 from almost 80% of the original 1920 borders of the Mandate of Palestine, and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria-the "West Bank"- had been massacred by the Arabs in the 1920s.
During this same time period, the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission documented massive waves of Arabs (scores of thousands in just a few months alone) pouring into the Mandate from Syria, Egypt, North Africa, and elsewhere as well. Many more Arabs entered under cover of darkness and were simply never recorded-more "native Palestinians." Thanks to the Jews, the Mandate was economically booming, drawing Arabs in from the entire region.
While this has been repeated ad nauseam, it must be stated yet again. The architects of famed UN Security Council Resolution 242 (Rostow included), carefully worded the final, accepted draft so that Israel would not be expected to have to return to its pre-'67, suicidal armistice lines. Indeed, the resolution called for the creation of "secure and recognized borders" to replace those lines. The bulk of Israel's settlements have been placed with such a strategic territorial compromise in mind. While some will have to go as a trade off for a real peace agreement, others will have to stay.
The area under discussion is tiny to begin with. When Egypt held Gaza and Jordan (name changed after it came to hold both banks of the River) held the West Bank for almost two decades, no one called for the creation of an additional Arab State...their second, not first, one in "Palestine." But, after 1967, the world demanded the latter of the Jews, expecting them to bare their necks to bring this about (while ignoring the plight of 30 million stateless Kurds, millions of Black African Sudanese, and others as well being slaughtered in the name of Arab nationalism). And the American Foggy Folks constantly make the point that the additional Arab state must not be a bantustan.
Guess what? Justice does not demand that the boundaries and such of any 22nd or 23rd Arab state-that there really is no room for-come at the expense of security for the sole state of the Jews. Despite all of this, Sharon sought to break the log jam with his April 2004 unilateral withdrawal proposals.
So, the hypocrites should have applauded Arik's decision, correct? Guess again... The Arabs, of course, viewed it simply as another victory in their destruction in phases scenario. Terrorism works, Lebanon again, and so forth. That's the message, unfortunately, they got from Arik. And rather than feeling compelled to come up with some real conciliatory moves of their own, they simply made more demands for additional, unilateral Israeli concessions.
Since the failure of their "one fell swoop" plan for Israel's destruction in June 1967, they adopted a strategy to politically force a return to the indefensible armistice lines of 1949. Given new technologies, massive buildups of Arab armed forces, the continuing Arab birth rate, and the like, the return of Israel to its pre-'67 lines, coupled with a demand for a "return" of millions of Arabs to the Jews' rump state, would be the beginning of the end. The Arabs openly acknowledged all of this.
Even their "moderates" called Oslo and other so-called plans for "peace" merely a Trojan Horse, designed to bring about Arafat's so-called "Peace of the Quraysh," the temporary hudna designed to buy time while weakening the Jews for the same final blow Muhammad dealt to his pagan enemies almost fourteen centuries earlier. That Arabs have responded this way was no shock. But they have been supported in this behavior by most of the world as well.
And then there was the magic of April...
There had been talk before Sharon came up with his withdrawal plan that he would get some backing from Washington on some other key matters.There is an indisputable set of facts regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict. If there will ever be peace between Arab and Jew, Arabs will have to give up their eternal plans for Israel's destruction. Had they done this, Arabs could have had their second state in Palestine decades ago. Fair and just plans were presented and rejected over the decades by the Arabs themselves - certainly far more than Arabs had ever offered to any of their own national competitors. The reality is that they still want that additional state to exist in place of, not along side of, the Jewish one.
Enter George W. Bush...
Standing near Sharon, in a news conference being watched on television all over the world, an American President-the first since Truman in 1948--finally took a political stance that might yet lead to peace. Dubya stated, before millions watching him, the two key ingredients for such a recipe: Israel should not be expected to return to the indefensible armistice lines of 1949 (and he called them just that, not "borders"), and real and fudged Arab refugees would have to go to the proposed new Arab state, not overwhelm the Jews in Israel. Half of Israel's Jews were refugees from Arab/Muslim lands.
Einstein was not needed to figure this recipe out.
But Arabs had long been given reason, via the world's actions, to hope that Israel would yet become an updated Czechoslovakia with the West Bank as its Sudetenland. All that was missing was a proper Chamberlain and conditions allowing for another Munich sellout to achieve "peace." President Bush's words, as simple as they were, are the magic ingredients necessary if there is ever to be peace between Arab and Jew in the Middle East.
Unfortunately, they proved to be fleeting. No sooner than they were spoken, the Foggy Folks began to water them down. Again, no surprise here. They fought Truman over the very rebirth of Israel a half century earlier.
But, to make matters worse, something even more disturbing next transpired. America's Iraq prison scandal erupted. This, added to an already increased overall level of Arab animosity surfacing regarding Iraq, the Arab-Israeli conflict, etc., led the State Department to quickly search for additional ways to appease the Arabs.
Gone, apparently in an instant, was the magic of April.
Both the State Department and the President himself soon made statements which basically retracted much of what Dubya had said earlier.
What does this say to Israel?
At the first sign of problems, its best friend, America, is willing to retract its support of what all other nations would naturally expect...the right to protect itself from an alleged "peace" that is really designed to bring about its very destruction.
President Bush still has time to make this right. And if the Arabs ever expect to get anything meaningful regarding that additional state, they will have to come to terms with reality and understand that others, besides themselves, also have a right to a bit of justice in the region. When they do this, they will find an Israel forthcoming in its willingness to meet them far more than half way.
Oct. 10, 2004
DAMAGE DONE BY BUSH
I received an email the other day entitled "He's done more damage than we thought" (author unknown) which is a list of failures attributed to President George W. Bush. After careful research and analysis to verify authenticity, I have come to the conclusion that the American people will fire George W. Bush on November 2, 2004 and hire John Kerry by a landslide of votes. I will summarize this list and comment where appropriate.
- Foreign Policy
- "Bush is the first president in US history to order a US attack AND military occupation of a sovereign nation, and did so against the will of the United Nations and the vast majority of the international community." While it is true that Congress authorized the President to invade Iraq, the fact that U.S. intelligence was so conflicting brings into question the judgment of Bush. I too was wrong in pushing for the removal of Hussein rather than staying focused on Bin Laden and the other terrorist organizations. Further, it is doubtful that Hussein could have developed WMD under the watchful eye of U.N.weapons inspectors and regular sorties flown by U.S. fighters throughout the no-fly zones (not to mention satellite surveillance). Kerry will need to initiate reconciliation through an international summit of European and Middle Eastern nations to begin the process of cleaning up this mess in Iraq (and worldwide). After the summit, the world will witness the slow withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and the quick advancement of U.N. troops into Iraq.
- "Bush spent the U.S. surplus and shattered the record for the biggest annual deficit in history." Bush's tax cuts to the wealthy along with irresponsible subsidizing of the war in Iraq has taken the U.S. budget from dark black to bright red all in the span of four years. Another four years of this squandering will bankrupt the United States. The remaining 100 billion dollars (from above) could have been invested in domestic programs like health care, education and the infrastructure. Kerry will need to revoke the tax cuts for the rich and reduce the United State's financial/military commitment in Iraq. These two changes (along with others) should result in a balanced budget in four years with the possibility of a return to a budget surplus in eight years.
The failures by George W. Bush, the viable alternative of John Kerry, the massive number of newly registered votes, the amount of attention being given by the American people on this election and the mass media trying to spin this race as being close are all clear signs of a Kerry landslide. On the November 2, 2004 the people will speak loud and clear.
Oct. 5, 2004
BUSH AND NATIONAL SECURITY
I have been following the Bush presidency for some time now from afar and it has become apparent to me that the average American has missed a grave threat to our national security because of George W. Bush being in office. George W. Bush¡¯s father was on the board of directors of the Carlyle Group at the same time that members of Osama Bin Laden¡¯s family had money invested in this company and contrary to what has been implied in the media Osama still had contact with these family members in the months directly before 9-11. This is a matter of public record and this corporation had made billions of dollars directly after 9-11 and arguably as a DIRECT RESULT of 9-11. This is the single biggest conflict of interest that has ever existed in the history of our country and it is time that this fact be brought out in the open. We owe this to the victim¡¯s families of September eleventh.
I am tied of hearing from people in the media that George Bush will be a better leader for the security of our country. If it was not for the above-mentioned business relationships the events of 9-11 would have NEVER of happened in the first place. People wake up and smell the coffee. Bush has done nothing for the security of our nation. He has made our country less safe with a conflict of interest that the history books will show to be nothing less than criminal. Let me put it to you like this: we are supposedly fighting a war against an enemy whose very leader is connected to our president by, at the minimum, two degrees of separation! Every piece of foreign policy that has been implemented in the past four years can be understood simply from what I just said in the above sentence.
Why did not the September eleventh commission at the very least mention this possible security liability to the public? The only possible reason would be that they intentionally had something to hide for political purposes. Why has not the mainstream media given this story any mention at all? In the weeks after September eleventh we heard from various news sources that investigative news reporting is just about dead. Does it really take a rocket scientist to understand what they were trying to hint at?
To date no one has taken responsibility for September eleventh, Osama Bin laden included. All physical evidence to date suggests that the culprits are anything but Arab terrorists. A plane did not hit the Pentagon, the World Trade Centers did not collapse by burning jet fuel, and the Anthrax attacks had nothing to with Arab terror. All of theses statements are true and all one has to do is objectively look at the physical facts for themselves to find this out. I am not asking you to believe me. All I am asking is that the citizens of this country start asking questions and demand answers and stop getting their news solely from mainstream sources. The laws of physics do not lie! We have been misled by the leaders of our country and if this great nation is going to last in a form that anyway resembles a democracy, we must find out the truth about 9-11.
The only absolute that has existed throughout history has been corruption. Should this time period of history be under any less scrutiny? Everyone knows that the world is corrupt so why then when presented with facts that suggest that this corruption might currently be going on in the Bush administration is it automatically branded conspiracy theory by the mainstream media? If the fair and balanced Fox network is so quick to point the conspiracy theorist label then why did they like the rest of the establishment media tell the public that a scenario such as planes being flown into the World Trade Center was never considered? Fox themselves had a prime time show about that very same premise almost six months to the day before 9-11! Why were we not told about this?
Why are we not even able to question the official story of 9-11 publicly if there were no truth behind any of this? Are we to trust the people currently in power without question? The only way corruption is able to exist by the people in power is by keeping the general public ignorant. Forget about the greater good of Israel, Forget about ¡°the clash of civilizations¡±, and forget about A New American Century, it is the truth that this country was founded on and without this the United States and indeed the rest of the world will not have a future worth living in. It is the truth that will set us free and when a government no longer has its citizen¡¯s best interest in heart but that of an elite few, that government is no longer legitimate. I ask you to remember these things come Nov. 2 when faced with the question of whether this administration should get another four years.
Joseph J. Hrevnack
Sep. 19, 2004
Dear Bill -
Thank you so very much for listing my site on yours. So kind of you to
see what I am trying to do on behalf of my 1100 lovely clients, most of
whom are in their 70s, 80s, and 90s, some reaching 100.
The case is now before the Florida Court of Appeals, with oral argument
set for November.
I admire you for what you do with your own website. What a copious
writer you are, indeed. I am not a "real" writer. I can only write
when I am irritated or madder than a wet hen. LOL. Then, I simply go
Again, thank you for your kindness to me.
With all good wishes for your happiness always, and in all ways.
READ THE FIRST 3 CHAPTERS ONLINE
GO TO: www.edwardbaskett.com
Edward Eugene Baskett - Author
Send a Letter to the Editor.