ML> EP> He was found guilty of violating the NRA bylaws. Beyond that I can't
ML> EP> comment officially; because the vote was held in Executive Session.
ML> EP> Only the results of the vote were read in the regular meeting. Sorry 

ML> EP> can't be more explicit; because I'd love to explain the whole thing.
ML> EP> Ernie P.
ML>   I am a bit uneasy with the idea of dissent is not allowed, and is being
ML>dealt with in secret tribunals.
        Max, rest easy. I believe I already said *I* would NOT have
        voted to expell him because of his disagreement with current NRA
        policy; nor do I think the majority of the board would have.
        I value the right to speak up as much as anyone; even if what is
        said is hogwash. Please note the near unanimous vote; after he
        had been given the opportunity to speak. His expulsion had
        NOTHING to do with dissent. EP
ML>   IMHO, the NRA should explain the Edmondson issue to the membership in
ML>detail.
        Mr. Edmundson is free to state what the charges were; what
        evidence was presented against him; and dispute them in public,
        if he so chooses. For NRA to do so might easily be viewed as
        bashing him. The bottom line is that Mr. Edmundson is free to
        re-open the issue in public if he feels he was wronged; but THEN
        NRA would likewise be free to respond publicly, to his public
        statements. If Mr. Edmundson prefers the matter remain private,
        that is also his right. EP
ML>   Please note, Ernie, I said the NRA should explain. This is not a dig
ML>at you for respecting the confidences entrusted to you. Thanks for the
ML>reply.
ML>   -Max-
        Understood, Max. Hope I was clear in stating the reasoning
        behind NOT putting the whole thing in public. Don't forget Mr.
        Edmundson still has a right to privacy; if he chooses to
        exercize that right. It's his choice, not NRA's. Ernie P.
___
 X SLMR 2.1a X I was born free; I WILL die free.
--- Maximus/2 2.02
---------------