| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Re:- The Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC | | Date: | Thursday, June 30, 2005 13:51:46 (-0600) | | From: | Martin Hattersley <hattersleyjm @.........com>
|
The article that I wrote on my own feelings about referenda is attached.
Martin Hattersley
1970-10123-99 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA
e-mail: hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Thomson
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Re:- The Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC
You are right, CIR in BC was made as difficult as possible. And Recall only
slightly less so. The debate over CIR at the time the legislation was enacted
involved the 'supremacy' of Parliament, and whether it would be wise or not to
compromise that. The NDP obviously thought not. The original BC 'Socred'
proposal was, as I recall, more in line with what Vic Bridger's attachment
outlined. I believe the spectre of what happened in California after their
infamous CIR 'Proposition 13' measure to limit State taxes weighed upon the NDP,
who are traditionally a 'socialist' oriented, borrow, spend and tax Party that
believes ''Big Brother knows best." Long as they're "Big Brother".
The way CIR is structured here at present it is virtually useless, yet any
proposal to put some 'teeth' in it would likely run right back into all the
reasons given 10 years ago why that's not advisable. Martin Hattersley, on his
website, once had a very well considered article on governing by Referendums, and
some of the disadvantages. Perhaps he might reproduce it for the List.
While I'm not at all opposed to CIR to determine 'policy', my own concern
remains how it would be possible to simply decide what is 'policy' in regards to
many issues without venturing into what should clearly be regarded as areas of
'administration'. Also, and I believe this was an element in some of the
'timber' CIRs in California, how fair is it to have heavily populated urban
areas, easily susceptible to the pseudo-science of some well-funded
'Environmental' group's propaganda, voting to end a way of life long enjoyed by a
less populated rural region? Which is then forced to try to match that
propaganda and often well-paid, professional activism, dollar for dollar in a
highly uncertain effort to get their message out?
There is, in such instances, no equivalent whatever to the "Senate" in
American, Australian, and to a lesser extent Canadian federal politics. Or the
''House of Lords'' in Britain. A place where the proposed legislation either
also has to pass, or where it at least can be given a good 'second look' before
it becomes law. And no body which represents 'area', that can be a venue for
objection to a 'population' dominated Initiative.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: John G Rawson
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 2:41 PM
Subject: RE: [socialcredit] Re:- The Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC
Thanks for pointing out some pitfalls; looks as though it was made as
difficult as possible. The clause requiring a certain number in every electorate
in particular. Lethargy and a different philosophy in our Maori seats alone
would make that very difficult here.
While I'm not directly involved in this particular campaign, it seems to me
our organisers manage to put it over a great deal more simple and briefly than it
has been portrayed in this group and that it has every chance of gaining support.
I don't know how your politicians are regarded; ours are rated below some of
the very least popular groups. That doesn't help when it washes off even on us
as "just politicians" but would help immensely a trans-political movement like
this.
Regards. John R.
>From: Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
>Reply-To: socialcredit@elistas.com
>To: socialcredit@elistas.com
>Subject: [socialcredit] Re:- The Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:13:42 -0700
>
>In the waning days of the last BC 'Social Credit' Party government of
Premier Bill Vander Zalm, there was a promise made to pass legislation enabling
both 'Recall' and 'CIR'. That Premier was brought down by a conflict of interest
scandal, where he was perceived to have benefitted personally by abusing his
position in a private real estate transaction involving the sale of his business,
before the legislation could be enacted. At that time, early 1990's, there had
been considerable discussion in BC on the desireability of both CIR and Recall,
and the whole concept of 'direct democracy' was on the ascendant here. After the
election of 1991, a New Democratic Party government took office, and, being
conscious of the fact that CIR and Recall had seized the public consciousness,
promised to bring in both measures. It might be noted that the NDP, in BC and
Canada, is roughly the equivalent of the Labour Party in Australia, and
elsewhere. Below is a summary of the NDP's version of CIR, which is now law in
BC. Further details, if desired, can be accessed by viewing the BC Social Credit
Party's website www.bcsocialcredit.bc.ca and then clicking on the link marked
'Elections BC'. The fate of the 'petitions' launched under CIR and Recall are
recounted there. As a result, I would say the issue has been removed from the
public 'consciousness' here for some time to come.
>
>The Initiative Process in British Columbia - Brochure
>
>Overview
>
>The Recall and Initiative Act allows voters in British Columbia to propose
new laws or changes to existing laws.
>
>The Application Process
>
>Any registered voter can apply to have a petition issued to gather support
for a legislative proposal. A legislative proposal (or draft Bill) can be on any
matter within the constitutional jurisdiction of the provincial Legislature.
>
>A registered voter who wants to start an initiative petition must obtain an
application from the Chief Electoral Officer. A completed application consists of
a fully completed and signed application form, a copy of the draft Bill, and a
non-refundable $50 processing fee. The draft Bill must be written in a clear and
unambiguous manner.
>
>Approval in Principle
>
>If the application and draft Bill meet the requirements of the Recall and
Initiative Act, the Chief Electoral Officer notifies the applicant (the
"proponent") that approval in principle will be granted and that a petition
will be issued. Approval in principle of an application is officially granted at
the time a Notice of Petition is published in the British Columbia Gazette.
Notice is also published in daily newspapers throughout the Province.
>
>Opponent Registration
>
>An individual or organization who wishes to oppose an initiative may apply
to the Chief Electoral Officer within 30 days after the day on which notice is
published in the Gazette.
>
>The Chief Electoral Officer appoints the financial agent for opponents and
opponent groups from the names they propose. An opponent or opponent group must
not act as such until given notice by the Chief Electoral Officer that they are
registered and that an individual has been appointed as financial agent.
>
>Initiative Petition Period
>
>Sixty days after notice is published in the Gazette, the Chief Electoral
Officer issues a cover sheet and an original petition signature sheet for each
electoral district to the proponent. An initiative petition must be signed within
90 days from the date on which it is issued.
>
>Canvasser Registration
>
>A proponent may be helped by volunteers to gather signatures. The
volunteers are called "canvassers". Canvassers must be registered voters and must
have been a resident of British Columbia for at least six months before the date
on which they intend to begin canvassing. Registered voters may apply to be
canvassers any time after the petition application has been submitted to the
Chief Electoral Officer.
>
>Collecting Signatures on the Petition
>
>The Recall and Initiative Act requires that an initiative petition be
signed by 10 percent of the registered voters in each of the electoral districts
of the Province.
>
>An initiative petition can only be signed by a registered voter who was
registered to vote on the date the petition was issued. A person may only sign
the petition signature sheet for the electoral district in which they are a
registered voter at the time of signing. A signature on the petition must be
accompanied by the residential address of the individual who signed and must be
witnessed by the individual who canvassed the signature (a registered canvasser).
>
>Submitting Petitions
>
>The proponent must submit, at one time, all of the petition pages
containing signatures to the Chief Electoral Officer. The petition period ends
when the proponent submits the petition to the Chief Electoral Officer,
regardless of whether the full 90 days have elapsed.
>
>Petition Verification
>
>When a petition is submitted, the Chief Electoral Officer has 42 days to
complete the verification process. Petition signatures are verified to ensure
that the people who signed the petition were entitled to do so and that the
signatures on a petition match the signatures on file for those voters.
Signatures that do not include the residential address of the voter who signed
the petition will not be counted. The registration status of canvassers is also
verified to ensure that signatures were gathered by authorized individuals.
>
>Referral of Initiative to a Select Standing Committee
>
>If the verification process shows that sufficient signatures have been
collected in every electoral district, and the financing requirements have been
met by the proponent, the Chief Electoral Officer sends a copy of the petition
and draft Bill to a Select Standing Committee on Legislative Initiatives.
>
>The Select Standing Committee must meet within 30 days of receipt of the
petition and draft Bill. From their first meeting, the Committee has 90 days to
consider the legislative proposal and either table a report recommending
introduction of the draft Bill, or refer the initiative to the Chief Electoral
Officer for an initiative vote.
>
>After a Bill is introduced in the Legislature, the requirements of the
Recall and Initiative Act have been satisfied, and any subsequent readings,
amendments and passage of the Bill will proceed as with any other Bill.
>
>Initiative Vote
>
>If an initiative vote is required, a vote will be held on September 28,
1996, and on the last Saturday of September in every third year after that date.
If more than 50 percent of the total number of registered voters in the Province
vote in favour of the initiative, and more than 50 percent of the total number of
registered voters in each of at least two-thirds of the electoral districts in
the Province vote in favour of the initiative, the Chief Electoral Officer must
declare the initiative vote to be successful and government must introduce the
Bill at the earliest practicable opportunity.
>
>Financing and Advertising
>
>There are detailed provisions in the Recall and Initiative Act regarding
the disclosure and limits of expenditures and financial contributions permitted
during the initiative petition process and during an initiative vote.
>
>Contributions to initiative proponents and opponents are not eligible for
income tax receipts.
>
>Initiative advertising can only be conducted by a proponent, registered
opponent or a registered advertising sponsor. It is very important that
participants follow these rules. Non-compliance can result in significant
penalties.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
>http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>You're subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com
>For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discover fun and games at XtraMSN Kids!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.8/35 - Release Date: 30/06/2005
------=_NextPart_001_002C_01C57D7A.DB792940
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The article that I wrote on my own feelings about referenda is
attached.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Martin Hattersley<BR>1970-10123-99 St., <BR>EDMONTON AB
CANADA<BR>e-mail: <A
href="mailto:hattersleyjm@interbaun.com">hattersleyjm@interbaun.com</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca href="mailto:thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca">Joe Thomson</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=socialcredit@elistas.com
href="mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 30, 2005 9:13
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [socialcredit] Re:- The
Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You are right, CIR in BC was made as difficult as
possible. And Recall only slightly less so. The debate over CIR at
the time the legislation was enacted involved the 'supremacy' of Parliament,
and whether it would be wise or not to compromise that. The NDP
obviously thought not. The original BC 'Socred' proposal was, as I
recall, more in line with what Vic Bridger's attachment outlined. I
believe the spectre of what happened in California after their infamous CIR
'Proposition 13' measure to limit State taxes weighed upon the NDP, who
are traditionally a 'socialist' oriented, borrow, spend and tax
Party that believes ''Big Brother knows best." Long as they're
"Big Brother".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The way CIR is structured here at present it is
virtually useless, yet any proposal to put some 'teeth' in it would likely run
right back into all the reasons given 10 years ago why that's not
advisable. Martin Hattersley, on his website, once had a very well
considered article on governing by Referendums, and some of the
disadvantages. Perhaps he might reproduce it for the
List. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> While I'm not at all opposed to CIR to
determine 'policy', my own concern remains how it would be possible to simply
decide what is 'policy' in regards to many issues without venturing into what
should clearly be regarded as areas of 'administration'.
Also, and I believe this was an element in some of the 'timber' CIRs in
California, how fair is it to have heavily populated urban areas, easily
susceptible to the pseudo-science of some well-funded 'Environmental' group's
propaganda, voting to end a way of life long enjoyed by a less populated rural
region? Which is then forced to try to match that propaganda and
often well-paid, professional activism, dollar for dollar in a highly
uncertain effort to get their message out? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>There is, in such instances, no equivalent
whatever to the "Senate" in American, Australian, and to a lesser extent
Canadian federal politics. Or the ''House of Lords'' in Britain. A
place where the proposed legislation either also has to pass, or where it at
least can be given a good 'second look' before it becomes law. And no body
which represents 'area', that can be a venue for objection to a 'population'
dominated Initiative. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Joe</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color:
black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=johngrawson@hotmail.com href="mailto:johngrawson@hotmail.com">John
G Rawson</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=socialcredit@elistas.com
href="mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 29, 2005 2:41
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [socialcredit] Re:- The
Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P>Thanks for pointing out some pitfalls; looks as though it was made
as difficult as possible. The clause requiring a certain number in
every electorate in particular. Lethargy and a different philosophy in
our Maori seats alone would make that very difficult here.</P>
<P>While I'm not directly involved in this particular campaign, it seems to
me our organisers manage to put it over a great deal more simple and briefly
than it has been portrayed in this group and that it has every
chance of gaining support.</P>
<P>I don't know how your politicians are regarded; ours are rated below some
of the very least popular groups. That doesn't help when it washes off
even on us as "just politicians" but would help immensely a trans-political
movement like this.</P>
<P>Regards. <FONT color=#339933 size=4>John
R.</FONT></P><BR><BR><BR>>From: Joe Thomson
<thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca><BR>>Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com<BR>>To: socialcredit@elistas.com<BR>>Subject:
[socialcredit] Re:- The Dream vs.the Reality ~ CIR in BC<BR>>Date: Wed,
29 Jun 2005 08:13:42 -0700<BR>><BR>>In the waning days of the last BC
'Social Credit' Party government of Premier Bill Vander Zalm, there was a
promise made to pass legislation enabling both 'Recall' and 'CIR'. That
Premier was brought down by a conflict of interest scandal, where he was
perceived to have benefitted personally by abusing his position in a private
real estate transaction involving the sale of his business, before the
legislation could be enacted. At that time, early 1990's, there had been
considerable discussion in BC on the desireability of both CIR and Recall,
and the whole concept of 'direct democracy' was on the ascendant here. After
the election of 1991, a New Democratic Party government took office, and,
being conscious of the fact that CIR and Recall had seized the public
consciousness, promised to bring in both measures. It might be noted that
the NDP, in BC and Canada, is roughly the equivalent of the Labour Party in
Australia, and elsewhere. Below is a summary of the NDP's version of CIR,
which is now law in BC. Further details, if desired, can be accessed by
viewing the BC Social Credit Party's website www.bcsocialcredit.bc.ca and
then clicking on the link marked 'Elections BC'. The fate of the 'petitions'
launched under CIR and Recall are recounted there. As a result, I would say
the issue has been removed from the public 'consciousness' here for some
time to come.<BR>><BR>>The Initiative Process in British Columbia -
Brochure<BR>><BR>>Overview<BR>><BR>>The Recall and Initiative
Act allows voters in British Columbia to propose new laws or changes to
existing laws.<BR>><BR>>The Application Process<BR>><BR>>Any
registered voter can apply to have a petition issued to gather support for a
legislative proposal. A legislative proposal (or draft Bill) can be on any
matter within the constitutional jurisdiction of the provincial
Legislature.<BR>><BR>>A registered voter who wants to start an
initiative petition must obtain an application from the Chief Electoral
Officer. A completed application consists of a fully completed and signed
application form, a copy of the draft Bill, and a non-refundable $50
processing fee. The draft Bill must be written in a clear and unambiguous
manner.<BR>><BR>>Approval in Principle<BR>><BR>>If the
application and draft Bill meet the requirements of the Recall and
Initiative Act, the Chief Electoral Officer notifies the applicant (the
"proponent") that approval in principle will be granted and that a petition
will be issued. Approval in principle of an application is officially
granted at the time a Notice of Petition is published in the British
Columbia Gazette. Notice is also published in daily newspapers throughout
the Province.<BR>><BR>>Opponent Registration<BR>><BR>>An
individual or organization who wishes to oppose an initiative may apply to
the Chief Electoral Officer within 30 days after the day on which notice is
published in the Gazette.<BR>><BR>>The Chief Electoral Officer
appoints the financial agent for opponents and opponent groups from the
names they propose. An opponent or opponent group must not act as such until
given notice by the Chief Electoral Officer that they are registered and
that an individual has been appointed as financial
agent.<BR>><BR>>Initiative Petition Period<BR>><BR>>Sixty days
after notice is published in the Gazette, the Chief Electoral Officer issues
a cover sheet and an original petition signature sheet for each electoral
district to the proponent. An initiative petition must be signed within 90
days from the date on which it is issued.<BR>><BR>>Canvasser
Registration<BR>><BR>>A proponent may be helped by volunteers to
gather signatures. The volunteers are called "canvassers". Canvassers must
be registered voters and must have been a resident of British Columbia for
at least six months before the date on which they intend to begin
canvassing. Registered voters may apply to be canvassers any time after the
petition application has been submitted to the Chief Electoral
Officer.<BR>><BR>>Collecting Signatures on the
Petition<BR>><BR>>The Recall and Initiative Act requires that an
initiative petition be signed by 10 percent of the registered voters in each
of the electoral districts of the Province.<BR>><BR>>An initiative
petition can only be signed by a registered voter who was registered to vote
on the date the petition was issued. A person may only sign the petition
signature sheet for the electoral district in which they are a registered
voter at the time of signing. A signature on the petition must be
accompanied by the residential address of the individual who signed and must
be witnessed by the individual who canvassed the signature (a registered
canvasser).<BR>><BR>>Submitting Petitions<BR>><BR>>The proponent
must submit, at one time, all of the petition pages containing signatures to
the Chief Electoral Officer. The petition period ends when the proponent
submits the petition to the Chief Electoral Officer, regardless of whether
the full 90 days have elapsed.<BR>><BR>>Petition
Verification<BR>><BR>>When a petition is submitted, the Chief
Electoral Officer has 42 days to complete the verification process. Petition
signatures are verified to ensure that the people who signed the petition
were entitled to do so and that the signatures on a petition match the
signatures on file for those voters. Signatures that do not include the
residential address of the voter who signed the petition will not be
counted. The registration status of canvassers is also verified to ensure
that signatures were gathered by authorized
individuals.<BR>><BR>>Referral of Initiative to a Select Standing
Committee<BR>><BR>>If the verification process shows that sufficient
signatures have been collected in every electoral district, and the
financing requirements have been met by the proponent, the Chief Electoral
Officer sends a copy of the petition and draft Bill to a Select Standing
Committee on Legislative Initiatives.<BR>><BR>>The Select Standing
Committee must meet within 30 days of receipt of the petition and draft
Bill. From their first meeting, the Committee has 90 days to consider the
legislative proposal and either table a report recommending introduction of
the draft Bill, or refer the initiative to the Chief Electoral Officer for
an initiative vote.<BR>><BR>>After a Bill is introduced in the
Legislature, the requirements of the Recall and Initiative Act have been
satisfied, and any subsequent readings, amendments and passage of the Bill
will proceed as with any other Bill.<BR>><BR>>Initiative
Vote<BR>><BR>>If an initiative vote is required, a vote will be held
on September 28, 1996, and on the last Saturday of September in every third
year after that date. If more than 50 percent of the total number of
registered voters in the Province vote in favour of the initiative, and more
than 50 percent of the total number of registered voters in each of at least
two-thirds of the electoral districts in the Province vote in favour of the
initiative, the Chief Electoral Officer must declare the initiative vote to
be successful and government must introduce the Bill at the earliest
practicable opportunity.<BR>><BR>>Financing and
Advertising<BR>><BR>>There are detailed provisions in the Recall and
Initiative Act regarding the disclosure and limits of expenditures and
financial contributions permitted during the initiative petition process and
during an initiative vote.<BR>><BR>>Contributions to initiative
proponents and opponents are not eligible for income tax
receipts.<BR>><BR>>Initiative advertising can only be conducted by a
proponent, registered opponent or a registered advertising sponsor. It is
very important that participants follow these rules. Non-compliance can
result in significant
penalties.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>---------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>Some
introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are
at<BR>>http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium<;BR>>You're
subscribed to this list with the email johngrawson@hotmail.com<BR>>For
more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit<;BR></DIV><BR clear=all>
<HR>
Discover fun and games at <A href="http://g.msn.com/8HMAENNZ/2731??PS=47575";
target=_top>XtraMSN Kids!</A>
<P><PRE>---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
<P></P></PRE>
<P></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><PRE>---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
<P></P></PRE>
<P>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.<BR>Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.8/35 - Release Date:
30/06/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_002C_01C57D7A.DB792940--
[MIME component not shown: EFERNDM.DOC (application/octet-stream)
]
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.8/35 - Release Date: 30/06/2005
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message