[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights

john.phillips at lp.org john.phillips at lp.org
Wed Aug 15 12:42:10 EDT 2018


If its not a popularity contest then this is not needed.  Just like if it is already in the platform it is not needed.
Sad that so many people supposed to be freedom loving have found it ok to emulate "1984" and "Animal Farm" and be thought police.  Especially considering the emulation of the Red Scare at the same time. At least "Lord of the Flies" would have been more entertaing for the spectators to watch.
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell 217-412-5973
------ Original message------From: Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business Date: Wed, Aug 15, 2018 11:12 AMTo: Steven Nekhaila;Cc: Caryn Ann Harlos;Lnc-Business;Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
Precisely.

It’s not a popularity contest.

Guess how many people freak out the same way about our immigration position?

More.


Doesn’t matter.


On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:08 AM Steven Nekhaila 
wrote:

> When it comes to the government bombing weddings, deporting immigrants and
> separating families, imprisoning innocent peaceful people, or silencing
> those who speak out when no one else does, we are proud and willing to
> re-affirm our principles. Our Platform is our muscle, we need to flex our
> muscles every now and again. We must embody and preach our Platform, or it
> may as well collect dust in an old state run library.
>
> In Liberty,
>
> Steven Nekhaila
> Region 2 Representative
>
> impotentes defendere liberatum non possunt
> “Those without power cannot defend freedom”
>
>
> On Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 PM,  > wrote:
>
>    The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.
>
>    It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.
>
>    -Caryn Ann
>
>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
>
>    <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>      Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support of
>      our
>      LP platform?  Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
>      (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
>      libsocs,
>      all have their *own* platforms.  I support our LP platform, and
>      that's a
>      founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a separate
>      platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
>      Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
>      favor
>      of the *LP Platform*?  I like to see that resolution.
>      ---
>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      On 2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
>      > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
>      underlying
>      > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary to
>      our
>      > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
>      messaging
>      > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as opposed
>      to
>      > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
>      simply
>      > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members, and
>      many
>      > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
>      outspoken
>      > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
>      > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
>      they
>      > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is incumbent
>      upon
>      > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of our
>      > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
>      platform
>      > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
>      > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our platform
>      and
>      > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from the
>      LNC.
>      >
>      > ---
>      > Yours in Liberty,
>      >
>      > Justin O'Donnell
>      > LNC Region 8 Representative
>      > LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
>      > Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
>      > Candidate for US Congress, NH-2
>
>      > [2]www.odonnell2018.org
>
>
>      >
>      > On 2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
>      >> We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were
>      the
>      >>    platform committee chair for 2018.  I was on that committee,
>      as
>      >> were
>      >>    several other members of this board.
>      >>    Did we not do our duty?  Did we leave the platform to be
>      ambiguous
>      >> and
>      >>    confusing?  I don't think so.
>      >>    Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells
>      prospective
>      >>    members where we stand.   We educate from that document, and I
>      know
>      >>    that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing
>      >> platform
>      >>    plank posts on social media.  You know that the platform
>      speaks for
>      >> us
>      >>    on issues of property rights.
>      >>
>      >>    ---
>      >>    Elizabeth Van Horn
>      >>
>      >>    On 2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>      >>
>      >>    It is quite problematic that stating the Party's foundational
>      >>    Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform
>      change.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    We have gone far from our roots.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    -Caryn Ann
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
>      >> Lnc-business
>      >>    <[1][3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>      >>
>      >>      I also would have supported the first effort (with my
>      language
>      >>      changes)
>      >>      as it was a clear support of capitalism.  Too bad that
>      wasn't
>      >>      embraced.
>      >>      On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about
>      past
>      >>      actions as
>      >>      a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more
>      times I
>      >>      see,
>      >>      the more this looks like a grudge match.
>      >>      As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on
>      social
>      >>      media,
>      >>      are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the
>      targets
>      >> of
>      >>      this
>      >>      suggested resolution.  Only, some of the players also happen
>      to
>      >> be
>      >>      on
>      >>      the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
>      >>      I was willing to support a resolution that embraced
>      capitalism,
>      >> as I
>      >>      live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of
>      choice,
>      >>      and I
>      >>      make an effort to teach this to others.
>      >>      Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful economic
>      >> system
>      >>      of
>      >>      capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP
>      >> members.
>      >>      ---
>      >>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      >>      On 2018-08-14 14:26, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business
>      wrote:
>      >>      > This is not the same language as was presented and
>      discussed
>      >>      earlier.
>      >>      >    Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
>      >>      >    I probably would have gone along with the first.  This
>      one
>      >> is
>      >>      toxic
>      >>      > and
>      >>      >    the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
>      >>      >    If it was just a supporting of property rights I would
>      >>      absolutely
>      >>      >    support it.  This is far more than that, and honestly
>      far
>      >>      exceeds
>      >>      > the
>      >>      >    scope of the duties of this body.  It is a direct
>      change to
>      >>      policy
>      >>      >    seriously impacts current members and activists.
>      >>      >    If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That
>      is not
>      >>      our
>      >>      > job.
>      >>      >    I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else to
>      >>      seriously
>      >>      >    consider whether they support a precedent of purging
>      groups.
>      >>      Not to
>      >>      >    mention how many of you during the JC discussion were
>      >> treading
>      >>      very
>      >>      >    carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that
>      was
>      >> well
>      >>      taken
>      >>      >    after reflection, will you be consistent here?
>      >>      >    John Phillips
>      >>      >    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>      >>      >    Cell [1]217-412-5973
>      >>      >
>      >>      >    ------ Original message------
>      >>      >    From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
>      >>      >    Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
>      >>      >    To: LNC-Business List;
>      >>      >    Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
>      >>      >    Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for
>      Resolution to
>      >>      > Re-Affirm
>      >>      >    The LP's Stance For Property Rights
>      >>      > Dear Colleagues,
>      >>      >
>      >>      > I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution which
>      >> disavows
>      >>      > socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the
>      Libertarian
>      >>      Party
>      >>      > position on championing property rights.
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn Ann
>      >> Harlos
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market
>      and
>      >>      therefore
>      >>      > the right of privatization of property as an extension of
>      the
>      >>      > individual;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian
>      Party
>      >>      > explicitly
>      >>      > supports the right to private property ownership,
>      including the
>      >>      right
>      >>      > to
>      >>      > do business utilizing that property as capital;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the
>      rights of
>      >>      > individuals to own private property including land,
>      structures,
>      >>      natural
>      >>      > resources and other private space through homesteading,
>      >> purchase,
>      >>      and
>      >>      > other lawful libertarian means;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but not
>      >> limited
>      >>      to
>      >>      > land and housing, does not require continual or personal
>      use to
>      >>      exist
>      >>      > as
>      >>      > justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the
>      >> Libertarian
>      >>      > Party
>      >>      > since its inception;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist
>      >> property
>      >>      > ownership schemes, including the collectivization of
>      property,
>      >>      unlawful
>      >>      > usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations of
>      >> private
>      >>      > property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all
>      parties,
>      >> are
>      >>      > incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party.
>      >>      >
>      >>      >
>      >>      > In Liberty,
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Steven Nekhaila
>      >>      > Region 2 Representative
>      >>      > Libertarian National Committee
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
>      >>      > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>      >>      >
>      >>      > References
>      >>      >
>      >>      >    1. tel:217-412-5973
>      >>
>      >>      --
>      >>
>      >>    --
>      >>    In Liberty,
>      >>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>      >>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>      >>    - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
>      >>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>      >>
>      >>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>      >>    We defend your rights
>      >>    And oppose the use of force
>      >>    Taxation is theft
>      >>
>      >> References
>      >>
>
>      >>    1. mailto:[4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>      >>    2. mailto:[5]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
>    --
>
>    --
>    In Liberty,
>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>    - [6]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
>
>
>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>    We defend your rights
>    And oppose the use of force
>    Taxation is theft
>
> References
>
>    1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    2. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>    3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    5. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>    6. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> --
-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org  or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*

   Precisely.

   It’s not a popularity contest.

   Guess how many people freak out the same way about our immigration
   position?

   More.

   Doesn’t matter.

   On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:08 AM Steven Nekhaila
   <[1]steven.nekhaila at lp.org> wrote:

   When it comes to the government bombing weddings, deporting immigrants
   and separating families, imprisoning innocent peaceful people, or
   silencing those who speak out when no one else does, we are proud and
   willing to re-affirm our principles. Our Platform is our muscle, we
   need to flex our muscles every now and again. We must embody and preach
   our Platform, or it may as well collect dust in an old state run
   library.
   In Liberty,
   Steven Nekhaila
   Region 2 Representative
   impotentes defendere liberatum non possunt
   “Those without power cannot defend freedom”

   On Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 PM, <[2]Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business>
   wrote:

   The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.

   It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.

   -Caryn Ann

   On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business

   <[1][3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

     Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support of
     our
     LP platform?  Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
     (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
     libsocs,
     all have their *own* platforms.  I support our LP platform, and
     that's a
     founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a separate
     platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
     Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
     favor
     of the *LP Platform*?  I like to see that resolution.
     ---
     Elizabeth Van Horn
     On 2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
     > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
     underlying
     > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary to
     our
     > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
     messaging
     > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as opposed
     to
     > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
     simply
     > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members, and
     many
     > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
     outspoken
     > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
     > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
     they
     > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is incumbent
     upon
     > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of our
     > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
     platform
     > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
     > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our platform
     and
     > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from the
     LNC.
     >
     > ---
     > Yours in Liberty,
     >
     > Justin O'Donnell
     > LNC Region 8 Representative
     > LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
     > Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
     > Candidate for US Congress, NH-2

     > [2][4]www.odonnell2018.org

     >
     > On 2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
     >> We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were
     the
     >>    platform committee chair for 2018.  I was on that committee,
     as
     >> were
     >>    several other members of this board.
     >>    Did we not do our duty?  Did we leave the platform to be
     ambiguous
     >> and
     >>    confusing?  I don't think so.
     >>    Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells
     prospective
     >>    members where we stand.   We educate from that document, and I
     know
     >>    that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing
     >> platform
     >>    plank posts on social media.  You know that the platform
     speaks for
     >> us
     >>    on issues of property rights.
     >>
     >>    ---
     >>    Elizabeth Van Horn
     >>
     >>    On 2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
     >>
     >>    It is quite problematic that stating the Party's foundational
     >>    Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform
     change.
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>    We have gone far from our roots.
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>    -Caryn Ann
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
     >> Lnc-business
     >>    <[1][3][5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
     >>
     >>      I also would have supported the first effort (with my
     language
     >>      changes)
     >>      as it was a clear support of capitalism.  Too bad that
     wasn't
     >>      embraced.
     >>      On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about
     past
     >>      actions as
     >>      a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more
     times I
     >>      see,
     >>      the more this looks like a grudge match.
     >>      As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on
     social
     >>      media,
     >>      are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the
     targets
     >> of
     >>      this
     >>      suggested resolution.  Only, some of the players also happen
     to
     >> be
     >>      on
     >>      the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
     >>      I was willing to support a resolution that embraced
     capitalism,
     >> as I
     >>      live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of
     choice,
     >>      and I
     >>      make an effort to teach this to others.
     >>      Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful economic
     >> system
     >>      of
     >>      capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP
     >> members.
     >>      ---
     >>      Elizabeth Van Horn
     >>      On 2018-08-14 14:26, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business
     wrote:
     >>      > This is not the same language as was presented and
     discussed
     >>      earlier.
     >>      >    Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
     >>      >    I probably would have gone along with the first.  This
     one
     >> is
     >>      toxic
     >>      > and
     >>      >    the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
     >>      >    If it was just a supporting of property rights I would
     >>      absolutely
     >>      >    support it.  This is far more than that, and honestly
     far
     >>      exceeds
     >>      > the
     >>      >    scope of the duties of this body.  It is a direct
     change to
     >>      policy
     >>      >    seriously impacts current members and activists.
     >>      >    If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That
     is not
     >>      our
     >>      > job.
     >>      >    I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else to
     >>      seriously
     >>      >    consider whether they support a precedent of purging
     groups.
     >>      Not to
     >>      >    mention how many of you during the JC discussion were
     >> treading
     >>      very
     >>      >    carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that
     was
     >> well
     >>      taken
     >>      >    after reflection, will you be consistent here?
     >>      >    John Phillips
     >>      >    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
     >>      >    Cell [1]217-412-5973
     >>      >
     >>      >    ------ Original message------
     >>      >    From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
     >>      >    Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
     >>      >    To: LNC-Business List;
     >>      >    Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
     >>      >    Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for
     Resolution to
     >>      > Re-Affirm
     >>      >    The LP's Stance For Property Rights
     >>      > Dear Colleagues,
     >>      >
     >>      > I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution which
     >> disavows
     >>      > socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the
     Libertarian
     >>      Party
     >>      > position on championing property rights.
     >>      >
     >>      > Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn Ann
     >> Harlos
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market
     and
     >>      therefore
     >>      > the right of privatization of property as an extension of
     the
     >>      > individual;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian
     Party
     >>      > explicitly
     >>      > supports the right to private property ownership,
     including the
     >>      right
     >>      > to
     >>      > do business utilizing that property as capital;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the
     rights of
     >>      > individuals to own private property including land,
     structures,
     >>      natural
     >>      > resources and other private space through homesteading,
     >> purchase,
     >>      and
     >>      > other lawful libertarian means;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but not
     >> limited
     >>      to
     >>      > land and housing, does not require continual or personal
     use to
     >>      exist
     >>      > as
     >>      > justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the
     >> Libertarian
     >>      > Party
     >>      > since its inception;
     >>      >
     >>      > THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist
     >> property
     >>      > ownership schemes, including the collectivization of
     property,
     >>      unlawful
     >>      > usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations of
     >> private
     >>      > property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all
     parties,
     >> are
     >>      > incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party.
     >>      >
     >>      >
     >>      > In Liberty,
     >>      >
     >>      > Steven Nekhaila
     >>      > Region 2 Representative
     >>      > Libertarian National Committee
     >>      >
     >>      > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
     >>      > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
     >>      >
     >>      > References
     >>      >
     >>      >    1. tel:217-412-5973
     >>
     >>      --
     >>
     >>    --
     >>    In Liberty,
     >>    Caryn Ann Harlos
     >>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
     >>    - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
     >>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
     >>
     >>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
     >>    We defend your rights
     >>    And oppose the use of force
     >>    Taxation is theft
     >>
     >> References
     >>

     >>    1. mailto:[4][6]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >>    2. mailto:[5]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

   --

   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [6]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.

   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:[7]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   2. [8]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   3. mailto:[9]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   4. mailto:[10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   5. mailto:[11]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
   6. mailto:[12]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

   --

   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [13]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:steven.nekhaila at lp.org
   2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   4. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   6. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   7. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   9. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  11. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  12. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  13. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
-------------- next part --------------
   If its not a popularity contest then this is not needed.  Just like if
   it is already in the platform it is not needed.
   Sad that so many people supposed to be freedom loving have found it ok
   to emulate "1984" and "Animal Farm" and be thought police.  Especially
   considering the emulation of the Red Scare at the same time. At least
   "Lord of the Flies" would have been more entertaing for the spectators
   to watch.
   John Phillips
   Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
   Cell [1]217-412-5973

   ------ Original message------
   From: Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
   Date: Wed, Aug 15, 2018 11:12 AM
   To: Steven Nekhaila;
   Cc: Caryn Ann Harlos;Lnc-Business;
   Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
   Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
Precisely.

It’s not a popularity contest.

Guess how many people freak out the same way about our immigration position?

More.


Doesn’t matter.


On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:08 AM Steven Nekhaila
wrote:

> When it comes to the government bombing weddings, deporting immigrants and
> separating families, imprisoning innocent peaceful people, or silencing
> those who speak out when no one else does, we are proud and willing to
> re-affirm our principles. Our Platform is our muscle, we need to flex our
> muscles every now and again. We must embody and preach our Platform, or it
> may as well collect dust in an old state run library.
>
> In Liberty,
>
> Steven Nekhaila
> Region 2 Representative
>
> impotentes defendere liberatum non possunt
> “Those without power cannot defend freedom”
>
>
> On Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 PM,  > wrote:
>
>    The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.
>
>    It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.
>
>    -Caryn Ann
>
>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
>
>    <[1[2]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>      Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support of
>      our
>      LP platform?  Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
>      (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
>      libsocs,
>      all have their *own* platforms.  I support our LP platform, and
>      that's a
>      founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a separate
>      platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
>      Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
>      favor
>      of the *LP Platform*?  I like to see that resolution.
>      ---
>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      On [3]2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
>      > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
>      underlying
>      > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary to
>      our
>      > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
>      messaging
>      > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as opposed
>      to
>      > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
>      simply
>      > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members, and
>      many
>      > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
>      outspoken
>      > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
>      > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
>      they
>      > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is incumbent
>      upon
>      > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of our
>      > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
>      platform
>      > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
>      > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our platform
>      and
>      > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from the
>      LNC.
>      >
>      > ---
>      > Yours in Liberty,
>      >
>      > Justin O'Donnell
>      > LNC Region 8 Representative
>      > LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
>      > Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
>      > Candidate for US Congress, NH-2
>
>      > [2][4]www.odonnell2018.org
>
>
>      >
>      > On [5]2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
>      >> We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were
>      the
>      >>    platform committee chair for 2018.  I was on that committee,
>      as
>      >> were
>      >>    several other members of this board.
>      >>    Did we not do our duty?  Did we leave the platform to be
>      ambiguous
>      >> and
>      >>    confusing?  I don't think so.
>      >>    Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells
>      prospective
>      >>    members where we stand.   We educate from that document, and I
>      know
>      >>    that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing
>      >> platform
>      >>    plank posts on social media.  You know that the platform
>      speaks for
>      >> us
>      >>    on issues of property rights.
>      >>
>      >>    ---
>      >>    Elizabeth Van Horn
>      >>
>      >>    On [6]2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>      >>
>      >>    It is quite problematic that stating the Party's foundational
>      >>    Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform
>      change.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    We have gone far from our roots.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    -Caryn Ann
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
>      >> Lnc-business
>      >>    <[1][3[7]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>      >>
>      >>      I also would have supported the first effort (with my
>      language
>      >>      changes)
>      >>      as it was a clear support of capitalism.  Too bad that
>      wasn't
>      >>      embraced.
>      >>      On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about
>      past
>      >>      actions as
>      >>      a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more
>      times I
>      >>      see,
>      >>      the more this looks like a grudge match.
>      >>      As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on
>      social
>      >>      media,
>      >>      are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the
>      targets
>      >> of
>      >>      this
>      >>      suggested resolution.  Only, some of the players also happen
>      to
>      >> be
>      >>      on
>      >>      the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
>      >>      I was willing to support a resolution that embraced
>      capitalism,
>      >> as I
>      >>      live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of
>      choice,
>      >>      and I
>      >>      make an effort to teach this to others.
>      >>      Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful economic
>      >> system
>      >>      of
>      >>      capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP
>      >> members.
>      >>      ---
>      >>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      >>      On [8]2018-08-14 14:26, [9]john.phillips--- via Lnc-business
>      wrote:
>      >>      > This is not the same language as was presented and
>      discussed
>      >>      earlier.
>      >>      >    Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
>      >>      >    I probably would have gone along with the first.  This
>      one
>      >> is
>      >>      toxic
>      >>      > and
>      >>      >    the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
>      >>      >    If it was just a supporting of property rights I would
>      >>      absolutely
>      >>      >    support it.  This is far more than that, and honestly
>      far
>      >>      exceeds
>      >>      > the
>      >>      >    scope of the duties of this body.  It is a direct
>      change to
>      >>      policy
>      >>      >    seriously impacts current members and activists.
>      >>      >    If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That
>      is not
>      >>      our
>      >>      > job.
>      >>      >    I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else to
>      >>      seriously
>      >>      >    consider whether they support a precedent of purging
>      groups.
>      >>      Not to
>      >>      >    mention how many of you during the JC discussion were
>      >> treading
>      >>      very
>      >>      >    carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that
>      was
>      >> well
>      >>      taken
>      >>      >    after reflection, will you be consistent here?
>      >>      >    John Phillips
>      >>      >    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>      >>      >    Cell [1][10]217-412-5973
>      >>      >
>      >>      >    ------ Original message------
>      >>      >    From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
>      >>      >    Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
>      >>      >    To: LNC-Business List;
>      >>      >    Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
>      >>      >    Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for
>      Resolution to
>      >>      > Re-Affirm
>      >>      >    The LP's Stance For Property Rights
>      >>      > Dear Colleagues,
>      >>      >
>      >>      > I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution which
>      >> disavows
>      >>      > socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the
>      Libertarian
>      >>      Party
>      >>      > position on championing property rights.
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn Ann
>      >> Harlos
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market
>      and
>      >>      therefore
>      >>      > the right of privatization of property as an extension of
>      the
>      >>      > individual;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian
>      Party
>      >>      > explicitly
>      >>      > supports the right to private property ownership,
>      including the
>      >>      right
>      >>      > to
>      >>      > do business utilizing that property as capital;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the
>      rights of
>      >>      > individuals to own private property including land,
>      structures,
>      >>      natural
>      >>      > resources and other private space through homesteading,
>      >> purchase,
>      >>      and
>      >>      > other lawful libertarian means;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but not
>      >> limited
>      >>      to
>      >>      > land and housing, does not require continual or personal
>      use to
>      >>      exist
>      >>      > as
>      >>      > justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the
>      >> Libertarian
>      >>      > Party
>      >>      > since its inception;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist
>      >> property
>      >>      > ownership schemes, including the collectivization of
>      property,
>      >>      unlawful
>      >>      > usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations of
>      >> private
>      >>      > property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all
>      parties,
>      >> are
>      >>      > incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party.
>      >>      >
>      >>      >
>      >>      > In Liberty,
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Steven Nekhaila
>      >>      > Region 2 Representative
>      >>      > Libertarian National Committee
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
>      >>      > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>      >>      >
>      >>      > References
>      >>      >
>      >>      >    1. tel:[11]217-412-5973
>      >>
>      >>      --
>      >>
>      >>    --
>      >>    In Liberty,
>      >>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>      >>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>      >>    - [2][12]Caryn.Ann.[13] Harlos at LP.org or[14] Secretary at LP.org.
>      >>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[15] LPedia at LP.org
>      >>
>      >>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>      >>    We defend your rights
>      >>    And oppose the use of force
>      >>    Taxation is theft
>      >>
>      >> References
>      >>
>
>      >>    1. mailto:[4[16]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>      >>    2. mailto:[5[17]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
>    --
>
>    --
>    In Liberty,
>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>    - [6][18]Caryn.Ann.[19] Harlos at LP.org or[20] Secretary at LP.org.
>
>
>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[21] LPedia at LP.org
>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>    We defend your rights
>    And oppose the use of force
>    Taxation is theft
>
> References
>
>    1. mailto[22]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    2. [23]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>    3. mailto[24]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    4. mailto[25]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    5. mailto[26]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>    6. mailto[27]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> --
--
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [28]Caryn.Ann.[
29]
Harlos at LP.org  or[30] Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[31] LPedia at LP.org

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*

   Precisely.

   It’s not a popularity contest.

   Guess how many people freak out the same way about our immigration
   position?

   More.

   Doesn’t matter.

   On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:08 AM Steven Nekhaila
   <[1[32]]steven.nekhaila at lp.org> wrote:

   When it comes to the government bombing weddings, deporting immigrants
   and separating families, imprisoning innocent peaceful people, or
   silencing those who speak out when no one else does, we are proud and
   willing to re-affirm our principles. Our Platform is our muscle, we
   need to flex our muscles every now and again. We must embody and preach
   our Platform, or it may as well collect dust in an old state run
   library.
   In Liberty,
   Steven Nekhaila
   Region 2 Representative
   impotentes defendere liberatum non possunt
   “Those without power cannot defend freedom”

   On Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 PM, <[2]Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business>
   wrote:

   The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.

   It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.

   -Caryn Ann

   On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business

   <[1][3[33]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

     Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support of
     our
     LP platform?  Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
     (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
     libsocs,
     all have their *own* platforms.  I support our LP platform, and
     that's a
     founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a separate
     platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
     Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
     favor
     of the *LP Platform*?  I like to see that resolution.
     ---
     Elizabeth Van Horn
     On [34]2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
     > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
     underlying
     > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary to
     our
     > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
     messaging
     > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as opposed
     to
     > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
     simply
     > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members, and
     many
     > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
     outspoken
     > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
     > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
     they
     > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is incumbent
     upon
     > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of our
     > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
     platform
     > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
     > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our platform
     and
     > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from the
     LNC.
     >
     > ---
     > Yours in Liberty,
     >
     > Justin O'Donnell
     > LNC Region 8 Representative
     > LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
     > Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
     > Candidate for US Congress, NH-2

     > [2][4][35]www.odonnell2018.org

     >
     > On [36]2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
     >> We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were
     the
     >>    platform committee chair for 2018.  I was on that committee,
     as
     >> were
     >>    several other members of this board.
     >>    Did we not do our duty?  Did we leave the platform to be
     ambiguous
     >> and
     >>    confusing?  I don't think so.
     >>    Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells
     prospective
     >>    members where we stand.   We educate from that document, and I
     know
     >>    that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing
     >> platform
     >>    plank posts on social media.  You know that the platform
     speaks for
     >> us
     >>    on issues of property rights.
     >>
     >>    ---
     >>    Elizabeth Van Horn
     >>
     >>    On [37]2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
     >>
     >>    It is quite problematic that stating the Party's foundational
     >>    Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform
     change.
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>    We have gone far from our roots.
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>    -Caryn Ann
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
     >> Lnc-business
     >>    <[1][3][5[38]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
     >>
     >>      I also would have supported the first effort (with my
     language
     >>      changes)
     >>      as it was a clear support of capitalism.  Too bad that
     wasn't
     >>      embraced.
     >>      On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about
     past
     >>      actions as
     >>      a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more
     times I
     >>      see,
     >>      the more this looks like a grudge match.
     >>      As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on
     social
     >>      media,
     >>      are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the
     targets
     >> of
     >>      this
     >>      suggested resolution.  Only, some of the players also happen
     to
     >> be
     >>      on
     >>      the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
     >>      I was willing to support a resolution that embraced
     capitalism,
     >> as I
     >>      live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of
     choice,
     >>      and I
     >>      make an effort to teach this to others.
     >>      Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful economic
     >> system
     >>      of
     >>      capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP
     >> members.
     >>      ---
     >>      Elizabeth Van Horn
     >>      On [39]2018-08-14 14:26, [40]john.phillips--- via Lnc-business
     wrote:
     >>      > This is not the same language as was presented and
     discussed
     >>      earlier.
     >>      >    Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
     >>      >    I probably would have gone along with the first.  This
     one
     >> is
     >>      toxic
     >>      > and
     >>      >    the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
     >>      >    If it was just a supporting of property rights I would
     >>      absolutely
     >>      >    support it.  This is far more than that, and honestly
     far
     >>      exceeds
     >>      > the
     >>      >    scope of the duties of this body.  It is a direct
     change to
     >>      policy
     >>      >    seriously impacts current members and activists.
     >>      >    If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That
     is not
     >>      our
     >>      > job.
     >>      >    I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else to
     >>      seriously
     >>      >    consider whether they support a precedent of purging
     groups.
     >>      Not to
     >>      >    mention how many of you during the JC discussion were
     >> treading
     >>      very
     >>      >    carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that
     was
     >> well
     >>      taken
     >>      >    after reflection, will you be consistent here?
     >>      >    John Phillips
     >>      >    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
     >>      >    Cell [1][41]217-412-5973
     >>      >
     >>      >    ------ Original message------
     >>      >    From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
     >>      >    Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
     >>      >    To: LNC-Business List;
     >>      >    Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
     >>      >    Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for
     Resolution to
     >>      > Re-Affirm
     >>      >    The LP's Stance For Property Rights
     >>      > Dear Colleagues,
     >>      >
     >>      > I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution which
     >> disavows
     >>      > socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the
     Libertarian
     >>      Party
     >>      > position on championing property rights.
     >>      >
     >>      > Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn Ann
     >> Harlos
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market
     and
     >>      therefore
     >>      > the right of privatization of property as an extension of
     the
     >>      > individual;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian
     Party
     >>      > explicitly
     >>      > supports the right to private property ownership,
     including the
     >>      right
     >>      > to
     >>      > do business utilizing that property as capital;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the
     rights of
     >>      > individuals to own private property including land,
     structures,
     >>      natural
     >>      > resources and other private space through homesteading,
     >> purchase,
     >>      and
     >>      > other lawful libertarian means;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but not
     >> limited
     >>      to
     >>      > land and housing, does not require continual or personal
     use to
     >>      exist
     >>      > as
     >>      > justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
     >>      >
     >>      > WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the
     >> Libertarian
     >>      > Party
     >>      > since its inception;
     >>      >
     >>      > THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist
     >> property
     >>      > ownership schemes, including the collectivization of
     property,
     >>      unlawful
     >>      > usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations of
     >> private
     >>      > property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all
     parties,
     >> are
     >>      > incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party.
     >>      >
     >>      >
     >>      > In Liberty,
     >>      >
     >>      > Steven Nekhaila
     >>      > Region 2 Representative
     >>      > Libertarian National Committee
     >>      >
     >>      > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
     >>      > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
     >>      >
     >>      > References
     >>      >
     >>      >    1. tel:[42]217-412-5973
     >>
     >>      --
     >>
     >>    --
     >>    In Liberty,
     >>    Caryn Ann Harlos
     >>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
     >>    - [2][43]Caryn.Ann.[44] Harlos at LP.org or[45] Secretary at LP.org.
     >>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[46] LPedia at LP.org
     >>
     >>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
     >>    We defend your rights
     >>    And oppose the use of force
     >>    Taxation is theft
     >>
     >> References
     >>

     >>    1. mailto:[4][6[47]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >>    2. mailto:[5[48]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

   --

   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [6][49]Caryn.Ann.[50] Harlos at LP.org or[51] Secretary at LP.org.

   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[52] LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:[7[53]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   2. [8][54]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   3. mailto:[9[55]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   4. mailto:[10[56]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   5. mailto:[11[57]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
   6. mailto:[12[58]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

   --

   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [13][59]Caryn.Ann.[60] Harlos at LP.org or[61] Secretary at LP.org.
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[62] LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto[63]:steven.nekhaila at lp.org
   2. mailto[64]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. mailto[65]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   4. [66]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   5. mailto[67]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   6. mailto[68]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   7. mailto[69]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. [70]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   9. mailto[71]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  10. mailto[72]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  11. mailto[73]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  12. mailto[74]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  13. mailto[75]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

References

   1. tel:217-412-5973
   2. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. tel:2018-08-14 15
   4. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
   5. tel:2018-08-14 15
   6. tel:2018-08-14 14
   7. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. tel:2018-08-14 14
   9. http://john.ph/
  10. tel:217-412-5973
  11. tel:217-412-5973
  12. http://Caryn.An/
  13. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
  14. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
  15. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
  16. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  17. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  18. http://Caryn.An/
  19. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
  20. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
  21. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
  22. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  23. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
  24. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  25. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  26. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  27. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  28. http://Caryn.An/
  29. mailto:
Harlos at LP.org
  30. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
  31. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
  32. mailto:]steven.nekhaila at lp.org
  33. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  34. tel:2018-08-14 15
  35. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
  36. tel:2018-08-14 15
  37. tel:2018-08-14 14
  38. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  39. tel:2018-08-14 14
  40. http://john.ph/
  41. tel:217-412-5973
  42. tel:217-412-5973
  43. http://Caryn.An/
  44. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
  45. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
  46. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
  47. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  48. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  49. http://Caryn.An/
  50. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
  51. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
  52. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
  53. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  54. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
  55. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  56. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  57. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  58. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  59. http://Caryn.An/
  60. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
  61. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
  62. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
  63. mailto::steven.nekhaila at lp.org
  64. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  65. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  66. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
  67. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  68. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  69. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  70. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
  71. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  72. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  73. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  74. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  75. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list