[nfb-talk] Messages Coming Through Twice
David Andrews
dandrews at visi.com
Sat Aug 18 16:40:48 CDT 2007
I have changed a setting, which should take care of the problem.
Dave
At 09:27 AM 8/13/2007, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>Mary Ellen,
>
>You probably saw my later note, but let me explain what is happening with this note. When I did a reply, just a plain old ordinary reply, your address and the NFB-
>Talk address are placed in the "To" field. I am going to leave the "to" field unaltered to show you what happens. Therefore, you will see this message twice and
>they will look the same. You will see it once because your address is in the "To" field, and you will see it again because the list address is there. This is usually what
>happens when one does a reply-to-all, but it is happening with a plain old reply as well. I have looked at the headers, and there is a reply-to header that has both
>your address and the NFB list address in it and I believe that is causing the problem.
>
>I believe this is a list setting that we have to change, but who knows why it would have acted up right now. In the jmeantime, if people check the "to" field and
>delete the author's address, this will help until we make the change. Also, it truly does appear that messages are not going to the entire list twice.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Steve Jacobson
>
>On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:41:54 -0500, Mary Ellen Sanchez wrote:
>
>>Hi steve. They did not reply to me. They sent the same message to the list
>>twice for some reason. It did not mhave a reply before the message or after
>>it either.
>>Your Friend,
>>Mary.
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>>Behalf Of Steve Jacobson
>>Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 8:26 AM
>>To: mabullis at hotmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>Subject: [nfb-talk] Messages Coming Through Twice
>
>>Mike and Mary Ellen,
>
>>My guess is that people are responding to you by doing a reply to all. This
>>causes you to get a copy of their response sent directly to you and and then
>>you also get it through the list. I haven't observed double messages in
>>general. People get into the habbit of doing this sometimes because some
>>lists are set up so that a reply only goes to the person but a reply to all
>>results in a copy automatically going to the list. When the reply to all is
>>used, the author really should take a look to see where it is going and
>>delete the addresses that are not necessary, but people tend to be lazy
>>about these things.
>
>>On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:06:10 -0400, Michael Bullis wrote:
>
>>>It's been happening for about the last week. I don't know.
>>>Mike
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>On Behalf Of Mary Ellen Sanchez
>>>Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 8:12 AM
>>>To: 'Laura Eaves'; 'NFB Talk Mailing List'
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>
>>>Hello if I may ask how come messages come through twice at times? I
>>>hope everyone is doing well.
>>>Your Friend,
>>>Mary.
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>On Behalf Of Laura Eaves
>>>Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 2:15 PM
>>>To: mabullis at hotmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>
>>>Hi Mike -- thanks for the offer -- you know, as a physically challenged
>>>person, I still do run into the same attitudes I have run into all my
>>>life
>>>-- but you know, I think one's own attitude is the most important. As
>>>with anything in life, if you let yourself get uncentered or unglued so
>>>that you start making mistakes because of it, you are indeed in sorry
>>>shape. And because I said "you" doesn't mean that excludes "me". For
>>>example, growing up I had a hard time accepting some of the realities
>>>of life, even though I steeled myself to go through school and work and
>>>all and found myself reacting to others' opinions of me -- but when I
>>>stepped back to look in the mirror (figuratively I mean) what I saw
>>>were some attitudes of my own that I was reacting to. In short, what
>>>we react against in others is somethings a little part of our own
>>>makeup we are reacting to. I thought I had a handle on my disability
>>>becauase I went ahead and did things, and this got me through school
>>>and working, which was a good thing, but I can't help but wonder how
>>>much easier it would have been not to be so reactive in my emotions to what
>>other people were saying and doing.
>>>Anyway, just some thoughts. I'm at a point in my life now where I'm
>>>being faced by possible "custodial" care, which being an nfb-er I am
>>>opposed to -- and I am tired of battling but sometimes battling wise
>>>and battling smart can get you further than the brute force, do or die
>>approach.
>>>I am not a young person (on the outside) and have a few more fears now
>>>that come with age, and am blessed to have supports available as a
>>>safety net, but I really don't want the hospital if I can avoid it. I
>>>am not ashamed to say I am on disability right now. I earned the
>>>insurance, but a very big part of me feels I am setting a bad precedent
>>>for those who come after me who might have the same challenges.
>>>Everyone is different though in the challenges they face, and I truely
>>>believe it is not ours to judge people for being in assisted living --
>>>but i still miss working in many respects (not the stupid office
>>>politics of course, but the feeling of having a place to go where I can
>>contribute.
>>>Anyway, sorry for the avalanche of personal feelings. I just am trying
>>>to connect to anyone who can relate and perhaps get some feedback that
>>>would help me as I hope my comments might occasionally help someone else.
>
>>>Cheers and good luck to everyone.
>>>--le
>
>
>
>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
>>>To: "'Laura Eaves'" <leaves1 at carolina.rr.com>; "'NFB Talk Mailing List'"
>>><nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 10:36 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>
>
>>>Hi laura:
>>>It's great to hear from you. I've gotten a sense from time to time
>>>that you're involved in your own set of challenges that leave you
>>>frustrated by the attitudes of others. If you ever wish to share,
>>>please don't hesitate to email or call.
>>>410-323-4884
>>>Mike
>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>On Behalf Of Laura Eaves
>>>Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 3:15 PM
>>>To: NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>
>>>Hey Mike, I have been silent on this issue so far as marriage and
>>>therefore divorce has been out of the realm of my experience and
>>>therefore I have felt ill equipped to give counsel, but I join in
>>>everyone else's applause and encouragement at the centered approach you
>>>are taking and wish you and your daughter--and also her mother as she is in
>>the mix -- a positive outcome.
>>>Whatever happens it sounds as if your heart is right and therefore your
>>>pursuit of your rights can only be good for all concerned -- but i do
>>>hope that the ultimate result is to get the custody you desire and that
>>>people can live together amicably.
>>>I am fighting my own internal and external battle right now that I may
>>>post on later--it of course does not involve a spouse or children, but
>>>my own living situation. I am therefore encouraged by reading your
>>>(Mike's) attitude and hope to keep that centered approach myself as I
>>proceed.
>>>You are right that family can be both your best friends and your worst
>>>obstacle to independence. I am wheelchair bound in addition to being
>>>blind and therefore have an added challenge, but hopefully I can solve
>>>this problem in the best way possible.
>>>Anyway, good luck and I hope to hear some good news for you and your
>>>situation!
>>>--le
>
>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Alan Wheeler" <awheeler at neb.rr.com>
>>>To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 8:45 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>
>
>>>I agree, this is an awesome message, Mike.
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Cindy Handel" <cindy425 at verizon.net>
>>>To: <mabullis at hotmail.com>; "NFB Talk Mailing List"
>>><nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 5:52 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>
>
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> Congratulations! This is a great message. I know it will still be
>>>> difficult, but you really do have a purpose, now. You've found
>>>> yourself again and I'm glad you're going to let the court and your
>>>> wife know just who you are...your daughter's father, who has as much
>>>> right to spend time with her and raise her as her mother does. I
>>>> hope things go well for you.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
>>>> To: <william.ritchhart at sbcglobal.net>; "'NFB Talk Mailing List'"
>>>> <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 9:51 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've spent a lot of time with this subject in the past week, sort of
>>>> having my own personal epiphany in the process. Each of you, in your
>>>> own way has given me a different perspective which I had to mold into
>>>> who I am. I knew that much of the situation was in my power to
>>>> change but I had to figure out how to do it from my center, not from
>>>> a weak or wobbly foundation.
>>>>
>>>> Virtually every day, we as people who are blind must quietly smile or
>>>> cringe at the misunderstandings of others. If we are to angry we
>>>> alienate them.
>>>> If we to quickly give in, we perpetuate the very misunderstandings
>>>> we're trying to change. It's a long and often tortuous walk we take,
>>>> balancing how much others misunderstand with our desire to live
>>>> normal lives--compromising here and there and not in other places.
>>>> In the process of recognizing the ignorance of others we also must
>>>> each recognize how much we ourselves still have to learn. As it
>>>> stands, in the first part of the 21st century, we still are daily
>>>> amazed by the accomplishments of people who are blind, often saying
>>>> to ourselves, "I would have never tried that." At the same time we
>>>> are amazed, we are equally appalled by how often blindness becomes a
>>>> personal tragedy for others and how they allow it to become their own
>>>> self created hell. Both of those blind people--the hero and the
>>>> victim live within each of us more than we would probably like or
>>>> wish to admit.
>>>>
>>>> In this loss of a marriage, I have tried to balance misunderstanding
>>>> with humility, always trying to educate and at the same time trying
>>>> to be who I am and to push against that same misunderstanding.
>>>>
>>>> I began to realize how far I had gotten out of balance when I said to
>>>> a friend recently that even if I won the court fight I would feel as
>>>> though I had lost. Why? Because, in the process of
>>>> compromising--allowing home inspections, agreeing to supervised
>>>> visits, agreeing to not take my child outside the house without
>>>> permission, I had given up some central part of me. It has come to
>>>> me over the last days that in this case at least, I have compromised
>>>> what I can, to no effect and must now begin to take back my personal
>>>> dignity, not in an angry way, but rather in a calm and forthright
>>>> manner.
>>>>
>>>> Since there is no rationality to any of the compromises, I have
>>>> decided to quietly but respectfully decline them all. I will go to
>>>> court and present exactly the same visitation and custody terms as
>>>> they would get from any other normal parent. If my wife or the court
>>>> want to argue the matter I am prepared to have people come and talk
>>>> about the competencies of people who are blind and, my own
>>>> competencies where necessary. I will no longer shuffle and grovel,
>>>> hoping to please. If, in the end, I lose I will do it as a man. If
>>>> I win, I will do it as one who has respect for all those who got me
>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps the time has come to simply say no and mean it. Obviously, I
>>>> will follow the courts dictates, but I won't help them make any such
>>>> dictates if they mean treating me less than a fully competent parent.
>>>> I feel strangely at peace with this decision and, although I know
>>>> there are those who will say that they might take another approach, I
>>>> must do what gives me peace and dignity.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to all of you for your help. You have given me what I needed
>>>> in order to move forward, comfort, encouragement and a much-needed
>>>> heart to heart conversation with myself about what lives at the center of
>>my being.
>>>> I said in the beginning that this was about my daughter Julianna and
>>>> I believe she will respect and love her father one day for being his
>>>> own person and speaking with dignity and clarity. What I have
>>>> confused along the way is the difference between visitation by my
>>>> daughter with her father, and visitation by my daughter with half a
>>>> man. I choose to be a whole man.
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Maurer and I spoke this afternoon and he says the NFB will help
>>>> in any way it can. Even if we had won the case before we would have
>>>> really won nothing accept the half victories we must often live with.
>>>> Now, I think we can win a real victory that advances who blind people
>>>> are. And even though we may not win, at least we'll be fighting for
>>>> what we want, instead of what we can live with.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for everything folks. It's been a long and very difficult
>>>> soul searching process for me. In some ways I'm glad the other side
>>>> didn't settle prior to now, because I would have had a solution
>>>> without my soul in it. I will now take charge of my/our Attorneys in
>>>> a much different way.
>>>> This case is about whether a blind man can be a co-equal parent in
>>>> his child's life. That is the rock on which I now stand and from
>>>> which I will only be removed by force.
>>>> Mike Bullis
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>>> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Wm. Ritchhart
>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 6:30 PM
>>>> To: 'NFB Talk Mailing List'
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>> Exactly correct! Mike needs a lawyer. From the original post, the
>>>> bulk of the problem is blindness. There are other issues. But those
>>>> can be dealt with.
>>>>
>>>> Mike, you need to fight. Your daughter is unable to speak. You need
>>>> to do whatever you can to stay in her life.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> William
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>>> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>> On Behalf Of Mike Freeman
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:40 PM
>>>> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>> Cindy:
>>>>
>>>> With great respect, I disagree with you. Going to the press would be
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>> *last* thing Mike should do. It would only cause her lawyer to pull
>>>> something worse.
>>>>
>>>> Divorces are almost always messy and, frankly, the process is often
>>>> irrational at best. Sadly, justice is not always the outcome.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Cindy Handel
>>>> To: mabullis at hotmail.com ; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 1:51 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> It's very sad when things like this have to go to the press. But, I
>>>> think you're right, in your case. She isn't being reasonable and,
>>>> despite your willingness to try to work with her, she's determined
>>>> not to allow you
>>>>
>>>> the
>>>> access, you deserve, to your daughter. You're right...mothers have
>>>> the advantage when it comes to children. It shouldn't be that way.
>>>> The father is expected to be there, financially, but beyond that, it
>>>> doesn't seem
>>>>
>>>> to
>>>> matter, and that's just wrong. Your daughter needs you in her life,
>>>> and I think you should take every opportunity to be there. If that
>>>> means going public, I think you should do that. I'm truly sorry
>>>> your wife has such a mindset against blindness that she was
>>>> unwilling to learn from you, during the time you were together. She
>>>> has her parents supporting her wrong thinking, so something has to
>>>> be done to break through, even if it means you need to be as nasty
>>>> as she's been.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not a parent, but as someone else said, it hurt to read your
>>>> original message. I hope things begin to go your way.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
>>>> To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 2:09 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Ray. I'll hang in there. You're certainly right when you
>>>> say that my self image is suffering. Somehow I have to move this
>>>> into a forum in which the truth will be told. That probably means
>>>> the press at this point because money for lawyers isn't there.
>>>> Thanks for your encouragement.
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>>> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>>
>>>> On
>>>> Behalf Of Ray Foret Jr
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 8:53 AM
>>>> To: mabullis at hotmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>> mike, quite frankly, it hurt to read your original message. But you
>>>> see, your pain is our pain also. What effects one of us effects us
>>>> all.
>>>> Your
>>>> situation is; in my humble opinion, well worth our resources. I
>>>> fear your adversary has perhaps subconsciously been so attacking you
>>>> as a blind person so hard that in the deepest recesses of your
>>>> academic mind, she's got you questioning your self worth. I
>>>> suspect, though, that in the deepest part of your soul and spirit,
>>>> you know better. Time for you to come down off the fence and
>>>> solidly defend yourself. Yes, that means using ALL of the resources
>>>> at your disposal. Yes, technically, the NFB deals primarily
>>>>
>>>> with
>>>> blindness issues; and, as cindy said, "It does seem, however, that
>>>> this is largely due to your blindness. Your X-wife has a basic
>>>> distrust of blindness". The long and the short of it seems to be
>>>> that your x wife doesn't think you can do anything because you're
>>>> blind. In the federation, we care about the whole person, not just
>>>> the not just whether the person is blind or not; at least, that's
>>>> how I've always felt about us. When ever one of us feels pain, we
>>>> all feel it. All too often, it's our very own families which are
>>>> the cause of this pain. You did right coming to us with your
>>>> burden. We'll help you bare it as much as possible. Hang in there.
>>>> Don't
>>>> give up!!!
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely yours,
>>>> The Constantly Barefooted,
>>>> Ray
>>>> Home phone and fax:
>>>> (985)853-0139
>>>> E-mail:
>>>> rforetjratbellsouthdotnet
>>>> Skype Name:
>>>> barefootedray
>>>> Blog:
>>>> www.raysworld.blogs.com
>>>> Podcast .rss Feed:
>>>> http://feeds.feedburner.com/worldofray
>>>>
>>>> God bless President George W. Bush!
>>>> God bless our troops!
>>>> and God bless America
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
>>>> To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 7:20 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Cindy:
>>>> I really don't disagree with Sherri at all. I just see both points
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>> view.
>>>> That's always been my greatest strength and greatest weakness. In
>>>> this case I lack enough objectivity to decisively say how it should
>>>> all be done.
>>>>
>>>> I'm
>>>> also hesitant to think that my particular problem is worth the
>>>> resources of others, particularly when I created that problem.
>>>> Thanks again for your encouragement and help. Perhaps out of all of
>>>> this will come some good.
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>>> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>>
>>>> On
>>>> Behalf Of Cindy Handel
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 6:45 AM
>>>> To: mabullis at hotmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> I read your original message and Sherry's response. I tend to agree
>>>> with her, but can see your position, too, that there are many more
>>>> things, other than blindness, involved. I feel very badly for you
>>>> and wish you the best.
>>>> It does seem, however, that this is largely due to your blindness.
>>>> Your
>>>> X-wife has a basic distrust of blindness...she doesn't want to
>>>> believe
>>>>
>>>> that
>>>> you can do things as well as she can. So, she's creating barriers,
>>>> which really don't exist. I wish there was something you could do
>>>> to change
>>>>
>>>> her
>>>> view of blindness, but that really doesn't seem likely.I do realize
>>>> that the NFB's resources are limited. But, I do hope you can get
>>>> some help.
>>>> The
>>>> custody issue does seem to be largely about blindness. I'm really
>>>> very sorry for you.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
>>>> To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 6:03 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Sherri:
>>>> Thanks so much for your suggestions and personal encouragement. At
>>>> times like this it means a lot to me.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, Dr. Maurer is familiar with the situation. It's difficult
>>>> though. As I tried to indicate in the email, NFB is able to help
>>>> with blindness related costs and I am very grateful for that.
>>>> Unfortunately, in a divorce with an aggressive lawyer, much isn't
>>>> related to divorce. Much is simply related to virtually any act or
>>>> deed one might have ever engaged in that made the
>>>>
>>>> other
>>>> party upset. For example. There is an opportunity in every case
>>>> for both sides to ask questions of one another about virtually
>>>> anything. There
>>>>
>>>> are
>>>> standard questions which mostly relate to finances and then there
>>>> are questions that relate to the cause of the divorce.
>>>>
>>>> My wife responded to what I thought were fairly simple questions in
>>>> order to understand our relative financial situations with seven
>>>> thousand pages
>>>>
>>>> of
>>>> so-called evidence. It was completely unorganized and for all I
>>>> know,
>>>>
>>>> it
>>>> still is. My lawyer, being conscientious, had to go through the
>>>> entire seven thousand pages and evaluate it page by page for it's
>>>> relevance to the divorce. That costs tons of money.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure we want NFB to pay for such brutal and pointless tactics.
>>>>
>>>> As I
>>>> also indicated, I am accused of many things, which, though they're
>>>> taken out of context and frankly irrelevant, they must each be dealt
>>>> with as the accusations they represent. This case, in terms of my
>>>> personal legal fees has cost me about $17,000. The NFB has spent
>>>> $3,400 or there abouts.
>>>> Before it is over, my costs will double or triple, which I simply
>>>> can't afford.
>>>>
>>>> In a broader sense though, I'm not sure I want the money of NFB's
>>>> members used to defend such irrelevant accusations. Dr. Maurer has
>>>> to make tough decisions like these and I don't envy him the task.
>>>> Not all things in
>>>>
>>>> life
>>>> are simple and this is, unfortunately, one of them.
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>>> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>>>
>>>> On
>>>> Behalf Of Sherri
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 2:25 AM
>>>> To: mabullis at hotmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>> Michael,
>>>>
>>>> Though you say that much of this situation does not have to do with
>>>> blindness or rather with your ex-wife's problems with your blindness,
>>>> it really does. I would still think the NFB would support you in
>>>> your desire to get more liberal visitation with your daughter.
>>>>
>>>> Have you sent this e-mail to President Maurer? If so, what is his
>>>> opinion?
>>>> Perhaps Barbara Cheadle would be a good person to talk with about
>>>> your situation.
>>>>
>>>> I have known several blind fathers who have primary custody of their
>>>> children. One of these got custody of his little boy when the child
>>>> was an infant, because his wife walked out on them. He had to jump
>>>> through a lot of hoops for it to happen though.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be a very caring and devoted father who has made the
>>>> mistake, as I have, of thinking that people are decent and will play
>>>> by your rules. Not true!
>>>>
>>>> I hope you have success and will get good advice about how to deal
>>>> with your problem. Know that you were there for your daughter when
>>>> she was little and she will always love you no matter what.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
>>>> To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:43 PM
>>>> Subject: [nfb-talk] Blind Parents and Divorce
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We have all heard about blind parents being questioned in their
>>>> ability to care for their children by social workers or spouses.
>>>> There have even been some notable cases in which courts have ruled
>>>> in favor of blind parents in such situations. NFB has been
>>>> instrumental in many of these cases.
>>>> What
>>>> most of us little understand though is how complex the matter
>>>> becomes in family court.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> First of all, family court is civil court. The only people who go
>>>> there are people with money. For all practical purposes, you can't
>>>> go without an Attorney and unless you're very poor there are no
>>>> organizations set up
>>>>
>>>> to
>>>> help you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Many of you don't know me well, and frankly, if it weren't for this
>>>> situation, I would prefer to leave my personal life outside these
>>>> lists.
>>>>
>>>> However, I find myself in a situation which may well be common to
>>>> others so will tell my story at some length.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This story is really about my daughter, but, since it begins with my
>>>> wife and I, I'll tell it that way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In January of 2002 I lived in Portland Oregon. I met a lady named
>>>> Kristen.
>>>> At the time I was 49 and she was 39. With very little knowledge
>>>> about
>>>>
>>>> one
>>>> another we had what one could describe as a whirlwind romance that
>>>> included unprotected sex. By March first we were aware that Kristen
>>>> was pregnant.
>>>> For me, having a child was always the most scary and at the same
>>>> time most wonderful possibility in my heart. Scary because I didn't
>>>> know if I'd
>>>>
>>>> be a
>>>> good father, didn't know if I could do all the things a father
>>>> needed to do, and honestly, because I really didn't like being
>>>> around kids, I wasn't
>>>>
>>>> sure
>>>> if I would really love my child like a father should. Friends
>>>> assured
>>>>
>>>> me
>>>> that such things were the fears of all would-be fathers but I just
>>>> didn't know.
>>>>
>>>> What was important to me was that my child would be loved and cared
>>>> for and that I would be everything a father should be. I quit my job
>>>> as the Assistant to the Director of the Oregon Commission for the
>>>> Blind and moved to Maryland to live with Kristen in May. We were
>>>> married in July.
>>>> I'd like
>>>> to tell you that the romance was still thriving, but, even by that
>>>> time there were signs of trouble. Four days before our marriage we
>>>> had an hour long argument in which she gave me the option of not
>>>> going through with the marriage. I didn't take the option, assuming
>>>> that we, as responsible adults could work out anything. So, on July
>>>> 21st, we were married.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Julianna Michaela Humphrey Bullis was born on October 31st, 2002. It
>>>> was
>>>> the most wonderful, stunning, life changing moment of my life. I
>>>> threw
>>>> myself into parenting like I had always loved it and would love it
>>>> forever.
>>>> My little girl never knew her daddy was blind. I changed her diapers,
>>>>
>>>> gave
>>>> her bottles, dressed her, bathed her and fed her. She took over my
>>>> heart in
>>>> a way that nothing ever had. I always knew that if I had a child it
>>>> could
>>>> never be that the child would be my servant. I wanted my blindness to
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>> just something, like brown hair or blue eyes. And it was that for
>>>> Julianna.
>>>> Because she never knew any different, daddy was just daddy. In fact,
>>>> at
>>>> first she never believed I was blind, even when I explained it to her
>>>> as she
>>>> approached two years old. She said once, apparently after giving the
>>>> matter
>>>> much consideration, "Daddy, you're not blind. I know it because you
>>>> have
>>>> eyes." Hey, how can you argue with such simplicity. I told her that
>>>> my eyes
>>>> didn't work, much like when she had a broken toy. It was obvious she
>>>> didn't
>>>> agree because she just looked at me and went on playing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We walked in the neighborhood. We played with neighbor kids. I
>>>> tucked her
>>>> in at night and kissed her in the morning. A place in my heart was
>>>> overflowing with the love I had never known could exist.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But, on the marriage front things were not going so well. My wife and
>>>>
>>>> I,
>>>> for a variety of reasons, simply didn't relate to life in the same
>>>> ways. By
>>>> summer of 2003 we began marriage counseling and were, off and on, in
>>>> some
>>>> form of counseling until the summer of 2006. The simplest thing I can
>>>>
>>>> say
>>>> about the counseling was that it didn't seem to work. I think we both
>>>> honestly tried to do everything we could to make it work, but it
>>>> didn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The issue of blindness began rearing it's head when Julianna was a
>>>> little
>>>> past one. My wife purchased a harness with a strap on the back which
>>>> she
>>>> asked me to use so Julianna wouldn't "get away." I told her that
>>>> nobody in
>>>> the neighborhood used such a thing and I didn't want our daughter
>>>> looking
>>>> like a weirdo. "Besides," I said, "I can always hold her hand and
>>>> stay
>>>> close to her when we're out." The next thing that came was a wrist
>>>> strap
>>>> which I was asked to use. Again I said that it was unnecessary. My
>>>> wife
>>>> called in her parents who described their fears about Julianna getting
>>>>
>>>> away
>>>> from me. I told them that I respected their concerns and that if I
>>>> ever
>>>> felt that Julianna was in danger I would use the strap, or, if I were
>>>> in a
>>>> large crowd, I could see some merit to it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In September of 2005, the parallel paths of blindness and
>>>> disagreements
>>>> about other issues came to a head and we separated. I got an
>>>> apartment in
>>>> Charles Village, a neighborhood of Baltimore, and my wife stayed with
>>>> our
>>>> daughter at the house. I provided financial support and we continued
>>>> to
>>>> attempt reconciliation, both through personal and joint counseling.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At first, my wife asked me not to tell our daughter that I was living
>>>> away
>>>> from home. She felt I should just say I was working hard and would be
>>>>
>>>> home
>>>> soon. I did see Julianna two or three times per week at the family
>>>> home. At
>>>> some points I suggested that Julianna and I might go on a bus trip to
>>>> the
>>>> ice cream shop. Kristen became very uncomfortable and said she was
>>>> afraid
>>>> of busses and their lack of safety. She also didn't want me taking
>>>> her in
>>>> cabs because that too would be dangerous.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By January of 2006 Julianna had figured out on her own that daddy had
>>>> an
>>>> apartment. I asked Kristen to allow her to come and visit. She
>>>> demurred,
>>>> saying that she just needed a little more time to become comfortable
>>>> with
>>>> all of it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In April of 2006 things came to a head when I suggested to Julianna
>>>> that we
>>>> could go on a bus ride because she was asking about busses. My wife's
>>>> response in this email was clear and to the point. I quote it here:
>>>> "What
>>>> frightens and makes me, Mom and Dad mistrust your ability to care for
>>>> and
>>>> protect her, in addition to all the ways in which you have damaged my
>>>> trust
>>>> (and by extension theirs') is your arrogant insistence that Julianna
>>>> faces
>>>> no ADDITIONAL peril or jeopardy in potentially dangerous situations in
>>>>
>>>> the
>>>> care of someone who cannot see.
>>>>
>>>> That is absurd, and no amount of political correctness with regard to
>>>> your
>>>>
>>>> (considerable) skills and abilities despite your blindness can make up
>>>>
>>>> for
>>>> having the additional sense of sight when it comes to locating an
>>>> object, in
>>>> this case an erratic, extremely quick toddler, that has alluded your
>>>> grasp.
>>>> This is most especially true in any type of noisy, crowded conditions
>>>> and/or
>>>> unfamiliar territory."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "It is not a matter of subjectivity, Mike. We have all observed that
>>>> if
>>>> Julianna wants to evade you, she can do so quite effectively within
>>>> the
>>>> confines of OUR HOUSE. So what could the consequences be if she were
>>>> to
>>>> suddenly become restless, frustrated, tired of waiting, stubborn and
>>>> angry
>>>> at a bus stop on a street where cars are speeding past? Or even if she
>>>> should decide to chase a stray ball into the street in front of our
>>>> own
>>>> house? You cannot continue to pretend that she cannot wriggle free of
>>>> you,
>>>> or that she is not capable of defying your admonitions against
>>>> straying (she
>>>> can suddenly decide to check out a speck glinting in the sunlight in
>>>> the
>>>> street, that to her is a previously undiscovered treasure!), much less
>>>>
>>>> your
>>>> ability to recapture her in the split second necessary to keep her
>>>> from
>>>> darting in front of a car if she were to wriggle free. You cannot
>>>> continue
>>>> to insist that your ability to recapture her is the same as someone
>>>> who can
>>>> see precisely where she is and where to grab her. You cannot continue
>>>> the
>>>> pretense that your abilities ARE the same or equal, merely different,
>>>> because the stakes are just too high: your daughter's very life."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I could make many responses , but they feel so defensive. No, I
>>>> didn't stop
>>>> Julianna from evading me at that age in the house. I preferred to
>>>> ignore
>>>> the behavior, acting as though I didn't want to find her sometimes.
>>>> That
>>>> way I wouldn't set up a challenge situation in which she would become
>>>> more
>>>> creative and desirous of hiding from me. I think that whether I was
>>>> sighted
>>>> or not, I would handle the situation that way. Exerting control sets
>>>> up a
>>>> very adverse situation. Now, when it comes to being out in public, I
>>>> maintained much stricter control, without letting Julianna know it in
>>>> order
>>>> that she not be in danger.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But, at least the cards were on the table and we knew what we were
>>>> fighting
>>>> about I hoped. My style when it comes to handling sighted people and
>>>> their
>>>> concerns about my blindness is to show by example. I could point out
>>>> that
>>>> thousands of blind people have successfully raised sighted children
>>>> and so
>>>> far as the numbers go, there are no more incidents of injury than for
>>>> any
>>>> other children. I tried unsuccessfully to point out that I work with
>>>> young
>>>> children as a part of my job, but it was dismissed because those were
>>>> blind
>>>> kids who couldn't run away like sighted kids. What became troublingly
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>> dismayingly apparent was that no amount of convincing would work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Our separation continued and communication deteriorated. I was still
>>>> able
>>>> to visit Julianna at the family home but that was it. She couldn't
>>>> come to
>>>> my home and so I continued to not be able to tuck her in at night or
>>>> feed
>>>> her breakfast in the morning. A year had gone by since our separation
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>> still, my heart was breaking because I couldn't just be with my
>>>> daughter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In August, my wife filed for divorce asking for full legal and
>>>> physical
>>>> custody. What I discovered was a sad truth about divorce. It's
>>>> messy! The
>>>> grounds were that I was abusive, that I was an irresponsible, risk
>>>> taking,
>>>> dangerous, alcoholic. Frankly, when I read all the things that were
>>>> said
>>>> about me I started to realize how difficult it would be for anyone to
>>>> not
>>>> believe at least some of it. In fact, I believed much of it, although
>>>>
>>>> it
>>>> was out of context and far out of proportion. But, in the divorce
>>>> game the
>>>> one who accuses the most is the one with the best chance of winning.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I still believed though that Kristen would come to her senses and
>>>> realize
>>>> that nobody should keep their child from her daddy and that we were
>>>> doing
>>>> irreparable harm. I also believed the courts would see this as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, after she filed for divorce, I too, had to find a lawyer and
>>>> respond. I
>>>> knew going in, as did everyone else, that I had little money to
>>>> continue a
>>>> long battle. I had one credit card that I could run up $20,000 on but
>>>>
>>>> that
>>>> was pretty much it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But, I made the decision that when my daughter got older and asked me
>>>> "Daddy, didn't you care? Did you fight for me?" I had to answer,
>>>> "yes,"
>>>>
>>>> and mean it. My little girl has to know, when all is said and done
>>>> that her
>>>> daddy loved her with all his heart and wants her to be with him and
>>>> that he
>>>> did everything humanly possible to make that happen without breaking
>>>> the
>>>> law.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Court justice moves slowly. The soonest we could get a hearing on the
>>>> "facts" of the matter was March 12th 2007. Meanwhile all visitations
>>>> were
>>>> in restaurants or public libraries. I couldn't come to the family
>>>> home
>>>> because I was dangerous and Julianna certainly couldn't come to my
>>>> home and
>>>> be with me unsupervised. Do I sound like a pedophile to you. It's
>>>> what I
>>>> felt like. Some kind of criminal who couldn't be trusted to have
>>>> private
>>>> communications or interactions with his daughter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Three or four days before the March hearing my wife's lawyer called to
>>>>
>>>> begin
>>>> negotiating. He agreed to a plan that would lead to week-end visits
>>>> within
>>>> four months. He knew that all the accusations were simply tactics,
>>>> not
>>>> realities. He also knew that my witness list would overwelm his. I
>>>> had
>>>> people willing to testify about my character and about my ability to
>>>> work
>>>> with children. I also had former neighbors who were ready to testify
>>>> that I
>>>> was a capable and responsible parent. No way did he want to go to
>>>> court on
>>>> the issues of visitation. Michael Jones was scheduled to come in from
>>>> Atlanta, paid for by the NFB, to deal with broader matters of blind
>>>> parenting. In other words, when the chips were down, my wife's lawyer
>>>> didn't want to go to court about these matters and so quickly
>>>> negotiated an
>>>> agreement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Among the stipulations in the agreement was one that said that I would
>>>>
>>>> allow
>>>> Kristen to "inspect" my house and make "recommendations" about things
>>>> that
>>>> were unsafe. I'm a bachelor now and felt that any advice anybody
>>>> wanted to
>>>> give was useful so, I agreed, particularly since the language clearly
>>>> said
>>>> "recommendations". What I discovered, after the hearing, was that my
>>>> wife's
>>>> lawyer had no intention of encouraging her to follow the agreement.
>>>> My
>>>> wife's position was that she could make lists of problems within my
>>>> house
>>>> and that I must fix them all in order for any meaningful visits to
>>>> take
>>>> place. No matter what I fixed, there were more problems. I spent $600
>>>> trying
>>>> to make things right, but, they never were. Because of the way courts
>>>>
>>>> work,
>>>> I would have to take her back to court in order to get a judge to
>>>> declare
>>>> her in default of the agreement. I have no money for this anymore.
>>>> In
>>>> fact, I've had to terminate my Attorney because I simply can't afford
>>>> one.
>>>> Bankruptcy is likely for me in the next few months, depending upon how
>>>>
>>>> my
>>>> creditors choose to pursue payments.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, here we come up on two years and I effectively have two hours per
>>>> week
>>>> of supervised visits with my daughter. Yes, she can now come to my
>>>> home,
>>>> but only if Kristen or her parents are here to supervise. Julianna
>>>> now
>>>> believes that I'm unsafe. Apparently she's heard enough family talk
>>>> to
>>>> figure out that daddy is dangerous.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't know what to say. In one sense, my story is about a blind man
>>>> who is
>>>> being discriminated against because of the misconceptions about
>>>> blindness.
>>>> In another sense, it's the story of family court justice that depends
>>>> upon
>>>> money to gain any form of resolution. Yes, there are nonprofit
>>>> organizations available but they usually focus on the parent rather
>>>> than the
>>>> child. If a female or her children are being abused, there is help.
>>>> Moving
>>>> the case to the criminal side of things gets attention. Legal Aid is
>>>> for
>>>> poor people but even legal Aid doesn't do many divorces because their
>>>> resources simply aren't adequate.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Finally, men just aren't very pitiable. We don't look like victims
>>>> and
>>>> often stay silent for far to long when this kind of situation comes
>>>> up. I
>>>> find it hard to believe that I've let two years of my daughter's life
>>>> go by,
>>>> always believing that things will resolve themselves at the next
>>>> meeting or
>>>> in the next court action.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The difficulty with this case is that, although it revolves around
>>>> blindness, like many divorces, it also revolves around many other
>>>> things.
>>>>
>>>> I questioned my own sanity at one point and contacted my X-wife. I
>>>> gave her
>>>> the allegations of my abusiveness and angry tendencies and asked her
>>>> if she
>>>> saw these things in me. She said she'd be glad to come and testify on
>>>>
>>>> my
>>>> behalf that I had never even raised my voice to her in our eight year
>>>> marriage. My lawyer told me that having X-wives testify in divorce
>>>> cases is
>>>> pretty much not done but, if I have the chance I'll ask her to do it.
>>>> I
>>>> mean, if anybody should have bad things to say it would be her.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The NFB has taken on cases like mine, but only to the extent of
>>>> helping with
>>>> blindness related issues. In my case, about twenty-five percent of the
>>>>
>>>> case
>>>> is blindness related. NFB was/is willing to pay for that, but, it will
>>>>
>>>> be of
>>>> little value if I can't afford the other 75 percent. If clever
>>>> opponents can
>>>> mask their true concerns behind other subterfuge, the case becomes
>>>> very
>>>> expensive. Divorce court is a very sleazy and messy place. The lawyer
>>>> who
>>>> makes the most accusations and breaks the other party financially
>>>> wins.
>>>>
>>>> Although the best interests of the child is the standard, few cases
>>>> come to
>>>> trial and no lawyer is censured for bare knuckle fighting when it
>>>> comes to
>>>> divorces.
>>>>
>>>> What my daughter needs is an Attorney for her side. Usually courts
>>>> will
>>>> appoint somebody to represent the child's interests if requested, but
>>>> you
>>>> have to pay for that. I'm asking for the Baltimore County Courts to
>>>> appoint
>>>> an Attorney for Julianna but also have to ask that the Attorney work
>>>> for no
>>>> pay. Results are doubtful. She is the real loser here and somebody
>>>> needs
>>>> to defend her right to see her daddy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All I have ever wanted was to get to a court-room in which I could
>>>> present
>>>> witnesses to refute their accusations and vouch for who I am. I don't
>>>> believe, by the way, that my wife is lying. She's not making things
>>>> up. In
>>>> her own mind she really believes what she says. What I think though
>>>> is that
>>>> the courts ought to do what they say their mission is. They say that
>>>> the
>>>> standard is the "best interests of the child." I believe when they
>>>> sort it
>>>> out, the best interests for my daughter involve being with her daddy,
>>>> in his
>>>> home, unsupervised. I believe she needs a daddy to go fishing with.
>>>> She
>>>> needs a daddy to wake her up in the morning and kiss her goodnight. I
>>>>
>>>> also
>>>> believe that lawyers like my wife's should be evaluated on the extent
>>>> to
>>>> which they truly seek to find resolution to family cases. When a child
>>>>
>>>> is
>>>> involved, the usual attack and attack rules ought to be changed.
>>>> Lawyers
>>>> ought to be given public scrutiny for the extent to which they resolve
>>>>
>>>> cases
>>>> rather than prolong them. A lawyer with a history of divorce cases
>>>> going to
>>>> trial ought to be evaluated on his negotiating abilities. Most
>>>> importantly,
>>>> lawyers who take on divorce cases where children are involved should
>>>> be held
>>>> to a much higher standard than others. They should be required to
>>>> demonstrate that they counseled their client on the possible danger to
>>>>
>>>> their
>>>> clients' children of anger over the divorce interfering with good
>>>> judgment.
>>>> Or, allowing their anger over a marriage gone bad to interfere with
>>>> withholding visitation. They should be required to justify with
>>>> actual
>>>> evidence which they have evaluated, any limitation of parental rights.
>>>>
>>>> In
>>>> other words, the courts ought to hold to a high standard when it comes
>>>>
>>>> to
>>>> children. Finally, courts need to move away from the presumption that
>>>> mothers are better care-givers than fathers. My lawyer advised me
>>>> from the
>>>> beginning, that I would have little or no chance of gaining fifty
>>>> percent
>>>> custody of Julianna. Because she is with her mother, that is where
>>>> she
>>>> should stay. I think that we often think of dads as having to be
>>>> dragged
>>>> into court to do what's right by their children. Sadly, I think
>>>> that's true
>>>> far more often than it should be. But, I have spoken to many father's
>>>>
>>>> who
>>>> simply say that they were being asked to pay but weren't being given
>>>> the
>>>> rights of parents so they just rebelled and quit the system. I'm a
>>>> dad who
>>>> continues to pay but who wants to be his girl's daddy before it's to
>>>> late.
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>> Michael Bullis
>>>>
>>>> Work phone: 410-737-2604
>>>>
>>>> Cell: 443-992-1537
>>>>
>>>> Evening phone: 410-323-4884
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ----
>>>> ----
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.11/944 - Release Date: 8/9/2007
>>>> 2:44 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>
>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.15/949 - Release Date: 8/12/2007
>>>11:03 AM
>>>
>
>>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.15/949 - Release Date: 8/12/2007
>>>11:03 AM
>>>
>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>
>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.15/949 - Release Date: 8/12/2007
>>11:03 AM
>>
>
>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.15/949 - Release Date: 8/12/2007
>>11:03 AM
>>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>nfb-talk mailing list
>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>
>
>__________ NOD32 2457 (20070813) Information __________
>
>This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>http://www.eset.com
More information about the nfb-talk
mailing list