<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font face="Arial">Thanks to everyone for their work on this. I really
like the present draft (with Shaily's additions). I think that as CS we
must speak out unequivocally on this topic.<br>
<br>
I agree.<br>
Best, Ginger<br>
</font><br>
shaila mistry wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:715739.30335.qm@web55206.mail.re4.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style>
<div
style="font-family: bookman old style,new york,times,serif; font-size: 10pt;">
<div>Many apologies...I meant STRENGTHEN... as in add strength....
not straighten..glad I spotted this !!!</div>
<div>shaila</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: bookman old style,new york,times,serif;">
<div
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;">
<div
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: bookman old style,new york,times,serif;">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Hi Lisa and Max and
everyone.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Thank you all for this
combined effort. I was out of town and just got back and wanted to make
a few suggestions. Hope I am not too late.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">I apologize for the
lateness of my comments. I have made a few suggested changes to Draft
5 as posted by Lisa. My intention was to straightened the statement.
Please feel free to edit as you see fit. I just felt that we can
present our cause for human rights with greater determination.. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">I went to look for this
on the website but could not access it .</span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">I have cut and paste
below, in addition I have attached the file so that the changes are
tracked.Also corrected some typo's</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"></span> regards </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Shaila </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"></span> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"></span> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">DRAFT STATEMENT (V5).<font
color="#0000ff">edited in blue by Shaila Rao Mistry 9-9-09<br>
</font><br>
The Caucus [and undersigned DCs] repeat their request that the<br>
programme for IGF-4 in Egypt gives <font color="#0000bf">greater</font>
priority </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">to human rights. The
WSIS Declaration and Tunis Agenda <font color="#0000bf">strongly</font>
reaffirmed the centrality<br>
of human rights in the information society, <font color="#0000bf">despite
</font>this <span> </span>human rights and<br>
associated principles have received too little attention at the IGF so<br>
far. This is problematic <font color="#0000ff">because :<br>
</font><br>
* <span class="yshortcuts">Fundamental human rights</span> such as
the rights to freedom of<br>
expression, privacy, civic participation, education and the right to<br>
development are strongly threatened by actions and restrictive policies<br>
of a growing number of actors vis a vis the internet, including state<br>
and private actors at both national as well as global levels.<br>
* The internet presents new opportunities for upholding and<br>
advancing human rights, for example through enhancing access to<br>
knowledge and common resources. It is vital that we build on and enhance<br>
these opportunities. <font color="#0000bf">Ignoring <span> </span>these
avenues to uphold human rights implies a serious opportunity cost for
the well being of peoples, globally.<br>
</font>* <span class="yshortcuts">International human rights</span>,
as contained in the <span class="yshortcuts">Universal</span><br>
<span class="yshortcuts">Declaration of Human Rights</span> and
confirmed by the core <span class="yshortcuts">human rights</span><br>
<span class="yshortcuts">treaties</span> and other <span
class="yshortcuts">universal human rights</span> instruments, are
legally<br>
binding. The growing role of information and communication technologies<br>
has not changed the legal obligation of states having ratified these<br>
instruments to respect, protect and implement the human rights of their<br>
citizens.<br>
* The human rights framework is an internationally agreed set of<br>
standards that has practical as well as <span class="yshortcuts">ethical
value</span>. It balances<br>
different rights against each other to preserve individual and public<br>
interest. In addition to its legally binding implications, human rights<br>
are therefore a useful tool for addressing <span class="yshortcuts">internet
governance issues</span>,<br>
such as how to deal with security concerns on the internet in compliance<br>
with the rights to freedom of expression and privacy. Besides stating<br>
the obligations of states and governments, the human rights framework<br>
also allows us to derive the rights and responsibilities of other<br>
stakeholders. <br>
<br>
The Internet <span class="yshortcuts">Governance</span> Caucus [and
undersigned DCs] call for the human<br>
rights dimension of all internet governance issues to be included in the<br>
planning and implementation of all <font color="#0000bf">future </font>IGF
sessions, so that human rights<br>
are given the attention they deserve as cross-cutting issues. This<br>
should include explicit consideration of how global, regional and<br>
<span class="yshortcuts">national policies</span> affect human
rights, and the development of positive<br>
policy principles to build an open and accessible internet for all. The<br>
Caucus [and undersigned DCs] would like to <font color="#0000bf">volunteer
active involvement</font> <span> </span>with the<br>
organizers of the main plenary sessions <span> </span>to do this, and
would like to<br>
support all stakeholders through providing <span> </span>relevant
guidelines<br>
and experts <font color="#0000bf">from private and public sector.s and
civil society..</font></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><font color="#0000bf">The
IRP and the Caucus see this upcoming IGF in Egypt and future IGFs as </font></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><font color="#0000bf">renewed
opportunity to </font></span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"><font color="#0000bf">make
Rights and Principles a core theme.<br>
</font><br>
</span></p>
<div>thanks</div>
<div>Shaila<br>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><font size="1"><strong><span
style="font-size: 8pt; color: blue;">Life is too short ....challenge
the rules</span></strong><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: black;"></span></b></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><font size="1"><strong><span
style="font-size: 8pt; color: blue;">Forgive quickly ... love truly
...and tenderly</span></strong><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: black;"></span></b></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><font size="1"><strong><span
style="font-size: 8pt; color: blue;">Laugh constantly.....and never
stop dreaming! </span></strong><b><span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: black;"></span></b></font></p>
<p>
</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><font color="#6000bf"
face="bookman old style, new york, times, serif" size="1"> </font></p>
<p
style="font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: bookman old style,new york,times,serif;"> </p>
<p><font color="#6000bf" face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="1"> </font></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><font color="#7f003f"
face="times new roman, new york, times, serif"><br>
</font> </p>
<p><font size="2"> </font></p>
<p><font size="2"> </font></p>
<p> </p>
<p><font size="2"> </font></p>
<p><span></span></p>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div style="color: rgb(64, 0, 127);"><font face="comic sans ms"><strong>
<div style="font-weight: normal; color: rgb(127, 0, 127);"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: comic sans ms;"><font
face="comic sans ms"><strong></strong></font></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: comic sans ms;"><font
face="comic sans ms"><strong></strong></font></span> </div>
</strong></font></div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: bookman old style,new york,times,serif;"><br>
<div style="font-size: 13px; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><font
face="Tahoma" size="2">
<hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b>
Lisa Horner <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lisa@global-partners.co.uk"><lisa@global-partners.co.uk></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday,
September 9, 2009 9:56:29 AM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> RE:
[governance] Statement by IGC supporting rights and principles<br>
</font><br>
Thanks for your detailed comments Paul - really useful and make sense.<br>
<br>
Since that posting, we've come up with a new draft that emphasizes that<br>
rights are legally binding. I hope it addresses your concerns.<br>
<br>
Wolfgang - you said you didn't understand what we mean in the last<br>
sentence. In my view, the idea would be to provide session organizers<br>
with access to information and experts in the IGC who can help them to<br>
consider the human rights dimensions of the issues that they are<br>
discussing. Does that make sense? I tried to incorporate the gist of<br>
your comments as best I could, given that you were working with an<br>
earlier version.<br>
<br>
I've pasted a new draft (v5) below, incorporating the comments we've had<br>
today.<br>
<br>
The deadline for comments is 0900 CET tomorrow, and I hope we're moving<br>
towards consensus...<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Lisa<br>
<br>
--------------------<br>
<br>
DRAFT STATEMENT (V5).<br>
<br>
The Caucus [and undersigned DCs] repeat their request that the<br>
programme for IGF-4 in Egypt gives the required attention to human<br>
rights. The WSIS Declaration and Tunis Agenda reaffirmed the centrality<br>
of human rights in the information society, but human rights and<br>
associated principles have received too little attention at the IGF so<br>
far. This is problematic as:<br>
<br>
* Fundamental human rights such as the rights to freedom of<br>
expression, privacy, civic participation, education and the right to<br>
development are strongly threatened by actions and restrictive policies<br>
of a growing number of actors vis a vis the internet, including state<br>
and private actors at both national as well as global levels.<br>
* The internet presents new opportunities for upholding and<br>
advancing human rights, for example through enhancing access to<br>
knowledge and common resources. It is vital that we build on and enhance<br>
these opportunities.<br>
* International human rights, as contained in the Universal<br>
Declaration of Human Rights and confirmed by the core human rights<br>
treaties and other universal human rights instruments, are legally<br>
binding. The growing role of information and communication technologies<br>
has not changed the legal obligation of states having ratified these<br>
instruments to respect, protect and implement the human rights of their<br>
citizens.<br>
* The human rights framework is an internationally agreed set of<br>
standards that has practical as well as ethical value. It balances<br>
different rights against each other to preserve individual and public<br>
interest. In addition to its legally binding implications, human rights<br>
are therefore a useful tool for addressing internet governance issues,<br>
such as how to deal with security concerns on the internet in compliance<br>
with the rights to freedom of expression and privacy. Besides stating<br>
the obligations of states and governments, the human rights framework<br>
also allows us to derive the rights and responsibilities of other<br>
stakeholders. <br>
<br>
The Internet Governance Caucus [and undersigned DCs] call for the human<br>
rights dimension of all internet governance issues to be included in the<br>
planning and implementation of all IGF sessions, so that human rights<br>
are given the attention they deserve as cross-cutting issues. This<br>
should include explicit consideration of how global, regional and<br>
national policies affect human rights, and the development of positive<br>
policy principles to build an open and accessible internet for all. The<br>
Caucus [and undersigned DCs] would like to offer assistance to the<br>
organisers of the main plenary sessions to do this, and would like to<br>
support all stakeholders through providing access to relevant guidelines<br>
and experts.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Paul Lehto [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lehto.paul@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:lehto.paul@gmail.com">lehto.paul@gmail.com</a>] <br>
Sent: 09 September 2009 17:38<br>
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>;
Lisa Horner<br>
Subject: Re: [governance] Statement by IGC supporting rights and<br>
principles<br>
<br>
In the draft IGC statement below, it refers to the "human rights<br>
*framework*" (emphasis mine) and then characterizes this framework<br>
with words and phrases like "internationally accepted set of<br>
standards" and "has practical as well as ethical value", constitutes<br>
"guidelines" or "tools" and, in a prior paragraph, refers to<br>
"opportunities to uphold" human rights in certain areas being "vital."<br>
<br>
All of these phrases understate the actual binding status of human<br>
rights, even while appearing to stress its "vital" importance (a word<br>
that, unfortunately, almost any lobbyist on any issue no matter how<br>
mundane will often attempt to claim). In general, it is much stronger<br>
to be urging the enforcement and upholding of current law (the case<br>
with human rights) because there is a duty to uphold it, than it is to<br>
be urging the adoption of a new law or the application of a "standard"<br>
to a new issue, because those are optional or at the discretion of the<br>
person or entity being urged to take appropriate action.<br>
<br>
The true status of international human rights is more as follows:<br>
<br>
(1) Anything less than rigorous and liberal interpretation of the<br>
rights and principles ultimately means that national or global society<br>
goes off course, because they've either ignored or understated their<br>
most important rights and principles, instead of vindicating and<br>
respecting them at all times. Ignoring rights and principles, even<br>
if unitentional and even if only in part, is ultimately deadly, and<br>
often deadly quite soon.<br>
<br>
(2) When these rights take the form of constitutional law, as they do<br>
in the USA in which treaty obligations are higher federal<br>
constitutional law, they are supreme law three separate ways: (1) as<br>
federal law, under the Supremacy clause of the US Constitution higher<br>
than state law, (2) as constitutional law, in corporated by reference<br>
into the Constitution, and (3) as international law, recognized as<br>
supreme by the US Constitution itself, expreslly in the case of treaty<br>
ratification, and even without treaty ratification where core human<br>
rights amounting to war crimes are involved (see Justice Jackson's<br>
opening statement at Nuremberg, stating the principles equally<br>
applicable to the victors in WWII as they were to the Germans).<br>
<br>
(3) Human rights and their necessary correlative principles are<br>
nothing less than existing and binding LAW that almost all the<br>
countries of the world have even specifically consented to, via treaty<br>
ratification procedures. Nobody is free to ignore them. Nobody is<br>
free to treat actual or alleged violations of human rights as if they<br>
were optional "opportunities" to behave correctly.<br>
<br>
(4) In the context of a relatively new technology, new contexts for<br>
issues do arise, but it is the same old rights and principles that are<br>
applied in the new context, so as to vindicate the underlying<br>
principles, even if the doctrine ends up changing to accomodate the<br>
new context.<br>
<br>
(5) In light of the above, the "opportunities" "to uphold" are in fact<br>
binding legal requirements to uphold. "Uphold" is often a word used<br>
in oaths, and it implies not only compliance with a constitutional<br>
scheme but more than that: It obliges the person taking the oath to a<br>
"holding up" -- in veneration -- of the binding principles, just as a<br>
trustee would be expected to do, who holds and exercises rights on<br>
behalf of another (We the People). Upholding rights means giving them<br>
wide sway out of respect, not simply lawyering it to death in order to<br>
narrow or eliminate its effects, while all the while claiming to<br>
respect the rights. If this latter sense is the intent of the phrase<br>
"opportunities to uphold" then it would be ok, IMHO, provided it is<br>
joined with a stronger statement that makes clear that compliance with<br>
the law is not an option, it's a binding requirement of law.<br>
<br>
(6) FWIW, treaty signature is not always required even though it<br>
exists in the case of human rights generally speaking. In the case of<br>
the most fundamental rights like anti-slavery, and the prohibitions on<br>
torture, mistreatment of prisoners and on genocide, the international<br>
law prohibiting these is binding even without treaty ratification,<br>
under the jus cogens principles of international law (one of the bases<br>
of war crimes tribunals, to which failure to ratify a treaty is no<br>
defense). The alleged fact, for example, that one was ordered to<br>
violate these rights is no defense to a charge for their violation.<br>
(See Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, for example, in which the Chief<br>
Justice Jackson there also specifically states that these principles<br>
apply just as much to the victorious countries in WWII as they did to<br>
the Germans).<br>
<br>
As always, the violation of a right does not mean that the right<br>
doesn't exist. Some may detect violations in the area of war crimes<br>
in recent US history. No amount of violations will make the right go<br>
away, even if violated at the highest levels. After all, especially in<br>
the area of war crimes, one often sees an entire nation's apparatus<br>
perverted to accomplish rights denials of the most atrocious kinds.<br>
If the violations themselves did anything to diminish the actual<br>
rights in question, the Nazis would have gotten off scot free at<br>
Nuremberg in addition to having a "nice" run of it for approaching two<br>
decades.<br>
<br>
In general, I favor not "lobbying" people to apply human rights LAWS,<br>
but rather to urge them to do their **duty**, do their job, and uphold<br>
their oaths (if applicable) by following human rights laws, upholding<br>
them vigorously, and giving them a reasonably expansive<br>
interpretation whenever a range of possible meanings exist.<br>
<br>
Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor<br>
<br>
On 9/2/09, Lisa Horner <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lisa@global-partners.co.uk" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:lisa@global-partners.co.uk">lisa@global-partners.co.uk</a>>
wrote:<br>
> Hi all<br>
><br>
> I've pasted a statement below for discussion. I've tried to
explain<br>
(a) why<br>
> it's important to consider rights and principles and (b) what we
think<br>
> should be done. Over to everyone else for comments and edits.<br>
><br>
> Anja - thanks for your thoughts. In response to yours and Ginger's<br>
comments<br>
> I only included the suggestion of offering to work with people to<br>
ensure<br>
> that rights issues are addressed. In relation to your last comment<br>
about<br>
> being more explicit about violations and commitments, I personally<br>
think we<br>
> should try and present the rights and principles discussion in<br>
positive<br>
> rather than negative terms in a statement like this. Whilst we
should<br>
of<br>
> course be clear on what standards are and what constitutes
violation<br>
of<br>
> them, I think we want to encourage widespread participation and<br>
engagement<br>
> with the issues rather than scare people off? Rather than
including<br>
it in<br>
> this statement, maybe we could do something else, for example start<br>
> compiling a list of violations to circulate at the IGF or to
include<br>
as<br>
> guidance for session organizers?<br>
><br>
> As usual, please edit directly or send through explicit suggestions<br>
for<br>
> changes rather than more general opinion which can be more
difficult<br>
to<br>
> incorporate into amendments.<br>
><br>
> Does next Thursday 10th September sound ok as a deadline for this?<br>
><br>
> All the best,<br>
> Lisa<br>
><br>
> --------------------<br>
><br>
> DRAFT STATEMENT<br>
><br>
> The following statement is submitted on behalf of the Civil Society<br>
Internet<br>
> Governance Caucus.<br>
><br>
> The Caucus requests that the human rights are given adequate
attention<br>
in<br>
> the programme for IGF-4 in Egypt. The WSIS Declaration and Tunis<br>
Agenda<br>
> reaffirmed the importance of human rights in the information
society,<br>
but<br>
> human rights and associated principles have received very little<br>
attention<br>
> at the IGF. This is problematic as:<br>
> * Fundamental human rights including freedom of expression and<br>
privacy are<br>
> threatened by current internet governance processes and practice.<br>
> * The internet presents new opportunities for upholding and<br>
advancing human<br>
> rights, for example through enhancing access to knowledge and<br>
resources. It<br>
> is vital that we build on and enhance these opportunities.<br>
> * The human rights framework is an internationally accepted set
of<br>
standards<br>
> that has practical as well as ethical value. It contains
guidelines<br>
on how<br>
> to balance different rights against each other to preserve
individual<br>
and<br>
> public interest. This makes it a useful tool for addressing
internet<br>
> governance issues, such as how to balance freedom of expression
with<br>
> concerns for security on the internet. The framework also
considers<br>
both<br>
> rights and responsibilities of different stakeholders.<br>
><br>
> The Internet Governance Caucus calls for human rights issues to be<br>
addressed<br>
> during the planning and implementation of all IGF sessions. This<br>
should<br>
> include explicit consideration of how policies affect fundamental<br>
rights,<br>
> and the development of positive policy principles to build an open
and<br>
> accessible internet for all. The Caucus would like to offer<br>
assistance to<br>
> the organisers of the main plenary sessions to do this, and would
like<br>
to<br>
> support all stakeholders through providing access to relevant<br>
guidelines and<br>
> experts.<br>
><br>
> --------------------------------------------------------<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Anja Kovacs [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:anja@cis-india.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:anja@cis-india.org">anja@cis-india.org</a>]<br>
> Sent: 01 September 2009 11:49<br>
> To: governance<br>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Statement by IGC supporting rights and<br>
principles<br>
><br>
> Dear all,<br>
><br>
> Sorry for responding to this belatedly - I was travelling last week<br>
with<br>
> only sporadic, very slow, Internet access.<br>
><br>
> Thanks Lisa, for these excellent suggestions, and for offering to<br>
draft<br>
> a text. There were just two things I wanted to note. In terms of<br>
> strategy, I have been wondering whether it would perhaps be wiser
not<br>
to<br>
> include in the statement a request for space in the emerging issues<br>
> session to reflect on the meaning of "rights and principles". Why,<br>
> after all, discuss the meaning of rights and principles in the last<br>
> session, if we have already integrated rights and principles and
their<br>
> implications in IG practice in all preceding ones? If wider
support<br>
for<br>
> putting the rights debate back on the official IGF agenda does
emerge<br>
> during the planning meeting, this particular suggestion would make
it<br>
> too easy for those opposing such attention to ensure that this<br>
> discussion is relegated once again to this one session at the very
end<br>
> of the IGF. If, at the planning meeting, we get the sense that a<br>
> discussion in the emerging issues sessions is probably the best we
can<br>
> get, we can always still make this suggestion right there and then,<br>
> rather than including it in a written statement already now.<br>
><br>
> I have also been wondering whether it is time that we start using<br>
> somewhat stronger language and explicitly remind governments not
only<br>
of<br>
> the international commitments to human rights that they have made,
but<br>
> also of the fact that not actively working to uphold such
commitments<br>
> effectively amounts to condoning rights violations - or am I being
too<br>
> impatient here? Such a phrasing would of course implicate a
country<br>
> like France as much as it would, say, China.<br>
><br>
> Cheers,<br>
> Anja<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus<br>
signature<br>
> database 4389 (20090902) __________<br>
><br>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.<br>
><br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</a><br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank"
rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
><br>
> For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Paul R Lehto, J.D.<br>
P.O. Box #1<br>
Ishpeming, MI 49849<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:lehto.paul@gmail.com"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:lehto.paul@gmail.com">lehto.paul@gmail.com</a><br>
906-204-4026<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" target="_blank"
rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank"
rel="nofollow">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>