Email Exchange with an Anticommunist "Conservative"

or,

How to Discuss an Important Issue with a Conservative Who Does Not Know Anything but Who Thinks He Knows It All

The following exchange took place in early January, 2007. It was initiated by "RepublicPraetor."

I am not making this up -- "RepublicPraetor"  really did the following things, as you'll see when you read this exchange.

• He really did start this discussion with the subject line "hey jackass."
  What intellect! I mean, I may as well just flat-out resign right now -- what chance do I have against somebody whose discourse is so brilliant?
• He really did withhold his name until I told him I would not answer any more of his messages unless he identified himself.
  Then and only then did he give his name and write:
  "I am proud of who I am and do not hide it from you."
  No? Then why didn't you give your name in your first email, as I did?
• He really did fail to cite a single book, much less any kind of research or scholarly sources.
  This despite the fact that I repeatedly asked him to do so!
• He really did email the Administration and Trustees of my university and threaten them unless they "asked" me "to tender [my] resignation."
  That's it! He disagrees with what I wrote, so I should be fired!
  HE doesn't have to provide any evidence, even, that what I have written is wrong.
  Much less does he have to make the argument that, if I do write something that's wrong, I should be fired for it.
  Not a bit of it! If he disagrees with it, I should resign, period!
• He really did contact a friend of his, who also wrote the Board of Trustees and asked them:
      "Please fire him, or suspend him without pay. ... He has no right to spew his wrongheaded opinions."

Stupid? or Enslaved to a Rotten Ideology?

Some will be tempted to dismiss "RepublicPraetor" 's remarks as "stupid". I think there's a deeper problem.

Somebody -- some conservative, or conservatives, along with television talk shows, the Mass Media, and "conservative" magazines -- has taught this young man that this -- the way he behaves here -- is an appropriate, and intelligent, method of argumentation!

That's the tragedy. "RepublicPraetor" is capable of much, much better -- but he thinks that this is good! He actually believes that he does not have to study, to do any research, because he knows it all already! So why bother with all that work: reading, finding books and articles, making notes, thinking, ... Why do it, when you already know everything?

If he has been so miseducated by the right-wing media and "conservative" liars, then so have many of our students. That's the tragedy -- the minds of these young people are being ruined by lying "conservatives" and anticommunists.

Though a "conservative", "RepublicPraetor" is in reality extremely "liberal" -- with himself. He lets himself get away with real nonsense. Why doesn't he "fire himself"?

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subj: hey jackass

My Lithuanian grandparents lived under Joseph Stalin, who murdered my people wholesale, while people like you sat in coffeehouses passing gas and going on about how great Socialism is!

From: Grover Furr
Subject: re: hey jackass

The Lithuanians VOTED to join the USSR.

Stalin was the best thing that had ever happened to Lithuania.

Have a nice day!

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re: hey jackass

In a message dated 1/5/2007 7:38:09 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, furrg@mail.montclair.edu writes:

> The Lithuanians VOTED to join the USSR.

Ok, I'll play along, on what day was this plebiscite held, and what was the margin of vote? The Molotov-Ribbentropp Treaty had nothing to do with that? Is that a figment of my imagination, like the atrocities committed by the NKVD are figments of my grandparents'?

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Lithuania joins USSR

Dear RepublicPraetor@aol.com:

I'll answer this message. I won't answer any more until you send me a proper email, with your real name. You have mine, after all. And I don't correspond with people who hide their ignorance behind anonymity and insults.

Lithuania was a fascist dictatorship before it joined the USSR. Nothing to be proud of, unless you were a pro-Polish capitalist or landowner.

The USSR forced Poland to return the capital of Lithuania, Kaunas, to Lithuania. Poland had stolen it in the '20s.

I can recommend two sources in English:

Anna Louise Strong, The New Lithuania. NY: Worker's Library, 1941.
Phillip Bonosky, Devils in Amber - The Baltics. NY: International Publishers, 1992.

Both give the precise information you want. It's lengthy, so I'm not going to retype it all for you.

The dates are: July 14-15, 1940, for the elections to the Sejm (Parliament), that returned a socialist government; and August 25 1940 for the vote by the Sejm to join the USSR.

Since I don't know your grandparents and what they say, specifically, I can't even begin to research whether what they say is true or false.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lithuania joins USSR

My name is A. Matthew Dedinas. I am proud of who I am and do not hide it from you. I am the son of Stasys Dedinas, who was born in Lithuania and came to this country at Age 8, after living through WWII and its aftermath. I am the grandson of Antanas and Victorija Dedinas, two people who lived peaceably in Lithuania until the Soviet takeover. There was NO election determining when Lithuania would join the USSR. Stalin promised, after the days of Molotov-Ribbentropp that if Lithuania would allow Soviet bases on its soil, there would be no further encroachments on Lithuanian sovreignty. It was a lie.

The capital you refer to is Vilnius, not Kaunas. Vilnius is the traditional capital of Lithuania, Kaunas was what served while the Poles owned Vilnius. Vilnius was annexed to the SOVIET UNION, because Lithuania was a part of it at that point. My grandmother told me of the saying they had at the time "we regained the city but lost our country." Of course you didn't say that where the NKVD could hear you.

No democratically elected Lithuanian government EVER voted to join the USSR. Oh sure there were and still are a few quisling Lithuanians out there, but they wouldn't make ten percent of the population.

Matt Dedinas
Lithuanian-American
FSU Grad Student
3rd Infantry Division (1996-1999)

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lithuania joins USSR

Deare Mr Dedinas:

You are right that I wrote "Kaunas" when I should have written "Vilniius." As for the rest of it, you are wrong (except for your grandparents, of course).

You wrote:

> There was NO election determining when Lithuania would join the USSR.

You are mistaken. See the sources I cite.

You wrote:

>  Kaunas was what served while the Poles owned Vilnius.

That is correct.

> Vilnius was annexed to the SOVIET UNION, because Lithuania was a part of it at that point.

That is INcorrect. Poland occupied Vilnius in April 1919 and permanently in October 1920.

The USSR returned Vilnius to Lithuania on October 10, 1939. This was long BEFORE Lithuania had voted to join the USSR, and during the time Lithuania had a pro-German, fascist government.

 > No democratically elected Lithuanian government EVER voted to join the USSR.

I disagree entirely. Strong makes a powerful argument against your position.

We could quarrel about what "counts" as "democratically elected."

Perhaps you are one of those who would say: "If the election does not turn out the way I would have wanted it, then it was not 'democratic'."

But if we did that, we'd have to both admit that Lithuania had not been "democratic" in any sense BEFORE 1940.

You wrote:

> Oh sure there were and still are a few quisling Lithuanians out there, but they wouldn't make ten percent of
> the population.

"Quisling" meant "pro-Nazi." I assume you mean "pro-Soviet."

There were a lot. Lithuania was a fascist, highly repressive government run by a few landlords. Lithuanian "nationalists" later joined the Nazis.

I assume you know that the Soviets had the OK from the Allies, the UK and USA, before occupying the Baltic states?

Here's an article that should interest you:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329642196-110481,00.html

One final remark -- for now:

I have done a little bit of "research" -- looking around -- because you asked, or rather challenged, me to do so.

Now it is your turn. Cite some sources, other than your relatives, for future statements. It's the right way to go about a discussion.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lithuania joins USSR

From: Grover Furr
Subject:  Re: Lithuania joins USSR

Dear Mr Dedinas:

Thanks for your reply. Here is mine, briefly (as yours is brief as well).

You wrote:

> I am saying that when Vilnius was returned to Lithuania, it was returned to a Lithuania that was about to be annexed by the USSR, and thus the USSR was only rewarding itself.

You are incorrect. The USSR returned Vilnius to Lithuania on October 10, 1939. Lithuania voted to join the USSR in August 1940.

 > The only people allowed to run in Lithuanian elections of July, 1940 were the quislings of the Lithuanian Communist Party handpicked by Stalin.

The sources I cited state that you are wrong here. I'd like to know what your _evidence_ is for this statement. Do you have any (other than the say-so of your grandparents)?

As for "quisling", here's the problem. There are conflicting ideas of what constitutes "patriotism."

It's just childish to insist that "only those who agree with MY political values are 'true patriots'". Childish, because anybody can say it!

And "anybody" DOES say it! Those from the Baltics, Ukraine, etc., who fought on Hitler's side claim that THEY did it out of "patriotic" motives. Those Baltics, Ukrainians, etc. who fought on the Soviet side claim that THEY are the "true patriots."

If we are going to ever understand anything, we have to get beyond calling those who disagree with us "traitors" and those who agree with us "patriots."

>Yes, I'd say stacking for the outcome you want constitutes undemocratic.

I agree! But, just to remind you:

* You need some evidence to support this statement. If you don't have any good evidence, then you are not looking for the truth.

* In a real sense there never had been a "democratic" election in Lithuania, and Lithuania is STILL -- TODAY -- not "democratic."

Likewise, in a real sense the USA is not at all "democratic," since only those nominated by the two major parties can in fact ever win, and both parties are controlled by big business.  See Lewis Lapham, of Harper's Magazine at

http://www.rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=524

 >Smetona may have been a bit of a thug, but he was no Stalin.  What's more he was a Lithuanian leader.  At least Lithuania was a sovereign country, if not totally free.

No, it was not, and never could be. Such a small country could never be truly independent.

I agree that Smetona was a fascist thug. Stalin, however, was a great leader.

> But under Stalin we got big brother and Russian rule.  If you knew any Lithuanians or had a clue how they thought, you'd realize how utterly ridiculous you sound asserting that Lithuania
> welcomed Russian rule with open arms.

I have known some. But they were all pro-Soviet Lithuanians.

 > Who's Strong?  Is he a writer for the "Daily Worker"?  Or a Berkeley professor who drops too much acid?

It'd be good if you were to do a little research before holding such strong opinions.

What you seem to be saying is something like: "Either you are an anticommunist like I am, and agree with me, or you are a bad person and wrong besides."

It's impossible to have a sensible discussion with anyone who thinks like that.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Re: Lithuania joins USSR

Dear Mr Dedinas:

You wrote:

> You need to unlearn a whole lot of crap and then learn what really happened.

Now we are getting somewhere! I keep asking you what YOUR sources and evidence are.

So, tell me: What should I read to "learn what really happened"?

And, What evidence do these sources have? That's the key question, isn't it?

You wrote:

> Your sources are ridiculous, pro-Communist sources, who probably wrote their rot in some coffeeshop a thousand miles away from any danger.

The question is not what the political affiliations of a source are.

The question is whether the statements are correct or incorrect.

You can't tell whether someone is telling the truth or not from his or her political affiliations.

You actually have to do some research!

You wrote:

> It's like your 1940 election in Lithuania.  It was a farce done at the point of a bayonet.

What evidence do you have that this is the case?

You may "feel" this way. But that's not the same thing as the truth, which can only be based on evidence.

You wrote:

> Stalin murdered millions of people and you deny that it happened....You are denying tens of millions.

I've researched this very carefully. From the evidence I have seen, it simply isn't true.

I don't blame you for believing it. Many historians repeat it, so how are most people to know any different?

But the evidence shows them to be wrong.

You wrote:

> You are a modern Walter Duranty.

I've actually read the articles for which Duranty won the Pulitzer Prize. I think they are very good for their time!

I've also read the two major books that attack Duranty. They do not show that he did anything wrong.

Duranty was anticommunist, but made an effort to be objective -- to report the USSR the way all reporters in his day were trained to report the USA.

Cold Warriors and anticommunists thought that was horrible. But they are applying a double standard.

You wrote:

And you are a bigger bastard than a Nazi Holocause denier,

Namecalling settles nothing, of course. Suppose I called YOU names? What would that prove?

If you have evidence to support your claims that I am wrong and you are right, please send it along to me.

I'm always willing to learn. And I'm very glad to hear from _informed_ people who disagree with me. It is a good way to learn!

But anger, and strong views unsupported by evidence, are not going to convince anybody.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re: Lithuania joins USSR

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Re: Lithuania joins USSR

Dear Mr Dedinas:

I wrote:

    > What you seem to be saying is something like: "Either you are an
    > anticommunist like I am, and agree with me, or you are a bad
    > person and  wrong besides."

You replied:

 > No, what I am saying is that you admit what everyone on planet earth knows- that Stalin was a butcher who murdered millions,

You are incorrect. You shouldn't generalize from those people YOU know to "everyone on planet earth."

Since the end of the USSR in 1991 a lot of formerly secret Soviet documents have been published. They show that the Cold-War view of Stalin and the USSR during his period is, virtually 100% wrong.

> or you are someone who really doesn't care about human life.  And that's what you are.  You talk about sources and cite a bunch of Daily Worker crap that isn't remotely credible,

"Credibility" is a statement about the reader or hearer, not the material. What is "credible" to one person isn't to another.

Let's say I said: "Your grandparents' view of Lithuania isn't credible." Isn't it clear to you that I'd be making a statement about ME, not about THEM?

That'd be true even if I had heard their view. Of course I haven't (and wouldn't say this).

I cited two books to you. You haven't read either of them. Yet you say they are not 'credible'!

Even if you had read them, you'd have to do some research to determine whether they were accurate or not.

Bottom line: "Credible" is not important at all. What is important is the TRUTH.

> so don't lecture me on sources.  that's garbage.  You are a holocaust denier.  You are not fit to teach students.  Resign!!!!!
 
> Matt Dedinas

I am sure you see that you are writing from ignorance.

There is no crime in disagreeing with what YOU and your friends believe.

In general, you should drop "belief" and "credibility". They are BAD guides to what is true.

Take a look at my two articles "Stalin and the Struggle for Democratic Reform", at

http://eserver.org/clogic/2005/furr.html

and

http://eserver.org/clogic/2005/furr2.html

Do some research! It's fascinating! You will get closer to the truth.

And when you do, you'll get some emails that accuse YOU of 'denying the holocaust'. Like I do.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Text of Soviet-Lithuania Mutual Assistance Pact 10.10.39

Dear Mr Dedinas:

Here's the text of the treaty. I thought you might be interested.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

At this point "RepublicPraetor"  emailed me three articles from the Internet.

• Andrew Stuttaford, Contributing editor to The New Republic, "Prize Specimen: The campaign to revoke Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer."  His subject line? "Duranty, your comrade."
• "Russia: Khrushchev's Secret Speech Remembered After 50 Years," from Radio Free Europe-Radio Liberty. He added: "Since you seem to prefer Communist sources to back up your argument, here's one: Nikita Khrushchev."
• Charles Diggs, "Massive Stalin-Era Graves Uncovered", St. Petersburg (FL) Times (from Johnson's Russia List, 1997).
  In front of this one he wrote the following:
      "Another Communist source is Mikhail Gorbachev. I remember he opened many mass graves from the Stalin era in 1989. I saw pictures of the Lithuanians in one, the people you deny were murdered. If you have a shred of decency or conscience, you will resign from teaching our youth, a post you are not fit for in the least."
  It should be noted that I had never denied -- or affirmed, or mentioned in any way -- the murder of Lithuanians.
  "RepublicPraetor"  is seriously "veracity-challenged."

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Re more yet

Dear Mr Dedinas:

Thanks for all these -- I guess. But you realize that NONE of what you have sent me constitutes either evidence or research.

* Nobody denies that several hundred thousand people were executed in 1937-38. The article below just repeats this. What it gets WRONG is that this was "Stalin's" doing. Recent research, based on Soviet documents now available, shows Stalin opposed it -- it was Ezhov and others, for which they themselves were executed.

For that research, look at the two articles of mine I sent to you.

As for the rest:

* The National Review is hopelessly biased, and the article on the Ukrainian famine is completely wrong. Conquest no longer claims it was "man-made." There is a huge amount of scholarship on this subject, none of which supports the contents of this article, much less Conquest's old 1980s book.

It was the Nazis -- really! -- who invented the story of the "man-made famine." But you'd have to know the research, to know this.

* As for Khrushchev's "Secret Speech", I have a book coming out (supposedly) in Russia on this very subject.

Khrushchev lied! Every single 'revelation' in that famous Speech is false. NONE of them are true!

Furthermore, a lot of this has been known by anticommunist researchers for years. But they have "covered it up" -- because it is soo convenient for them to be able to cite Khrushchev to beat up on Stalin.

The dishonesty concerning the history of the USSR, Stalin, and the communist movement is immense! I myself am continually surprised by it, and I have been working on it for years now.

* * * * *

It does trouble me -- and should trouble you -- that you seem to think you can discover the truth without doing research, simply by reading magazines and newspapers. Don't you know that journalists do not deal in "truth", but in repeating statements by official and mainstream sources?

But suppose THESE official and mainstream sources are wrong? Suppose they are lying, as in this case?

You'd never know -- unless you did the research.

I've been working a bit on Katyn recently. The evidence that the Soviets killed the Polish officers is incredibly weak, and the evidence against the Germans very strong. But you'd NEVER guess this by the journalistic accounts!

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re more yet

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Re more yet

Dear Mr Dedinas:

    > National Review is a much more credible resource than either you
    > or the ridiculously biased Communist sources you cite, so please,
    > don't be more ridiculous than you already have been.

Suppose I were to say: "Not with me. I do not find the NR "credible" in the least. It consistently lies, about just about everything."

See what I mean? "Credibility" is in the eye of the reader. It is not an objective statement about anything. It says nothing about truth and falsehood.

 > How do the Nazis have responsibility for the man-made famine of the Ukraine in 1933, when they did not occupy the Ukraine at that time?

The Nazis invented the myth of the "man-made famine". It's kept alive by Ukrainian nationalist groups which collaborated with the Nazis and are responsible for the Holocaust you yourself have referred to. In the US, these fascist groups are a significant power in the Republican Party, which has lots of ties to Nazis old and neo.

 > I know that the Liberal Media doesn't deal in truth.  It has people like Walter Duranty writing for it.  The Liberal Media often took the Soviet side of things.

Too bad they did not do this more often! The communists were the best! for working people, that is.

> Oh, and by the way, people like my family and other real wtinesses of the atrocities of Stalin are far more credible than a supposed scholar such as yourself who dwells in an ivory tower, never
> touched by the real world, just sitting there making all your pie-in-the-sky theories.  It's people like my grandparents who had to live in the theory put into practice, while pro-Stalin types like
> yourself coined the phrase "can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs."
 
>You are not a teacher, you are a clown.

And YOU are not interested in the truth, not a bit! You are interested in mouthing off as if you knew anything.

This is typical of most conservatives, I find. Not only ignorant, but proud of their ignorance.

If you have some evidence, scholarship, or research to recommend, I'll be glad to discuss it with you. I'm often mistaken (though not as often as you are!), and admit it when I am (have you ever done this?).

If all you can do is quote the NR and send insults, then your emails are not worth replying to.

Too bad! You could do research, act intelligently, contribute something to the world. You choose not to do so. What a pity -- for you!

Sayonara,

Grover Furr

From: RepublicPraetor@aol.com
Subject: Re more yet

From: Grover Furr
Subject: Re more yet

Dear Mr Dedinas:

I wrote:

    > See what I mean? "Credibility" is in the eye of the reader. It is  not an
    > objective statement about anything. It says nothing about truth and
    > falsehood.

You replied:

 > No, truth is truth, not what is in the eye of the beholder.

You missed the point completely. You had claimed my sources are not "credible," and I replied that "credibility" is irrelevant.

It's good you value truth. But you can't discover the truth without research.

You haven't done ANY research -- none! So far, you haven't even named a single book. Just magazine and newspaper articles.

Without doing research, you have ZERO chance of knowing the truth. None whatsoever.

Why? Because you are just "choosing to believe" one set of "authorities" or another. In your case, "conservative" authorities.

    >>  How do the Nazis have responsibility for the man-made famine of  the
    >> Ukraine in 1933, when they did not occupy the Ukraine at that time?
   

    >The Nazis invented the _myth_ of the "man-made famine". It's kept alive
    > by Ukrainian nationalist groups which collaborated with the Nazis and
    > are responsible for the Holocaust you yourself have referred to.
    > In the US, these fascist groups are a significant power in the Republican
    > Party, which has lots of ties to Nazis old and neo.

    > What a load of BS.  Bolsheviks like yourself call Republicans Fascist, but you should remember that Nazi stands for "National Socialist."  They were people like you, not like me.

Mr Dedinas, if you believe the Nazis were socialists, you really are completely ignorant. The Nazis were like the Republican Party -- supporters of Big Business, anti-labor, mass murderers.

  > You should hear some of Hitler's speeches where he calls on good National Socialist Germans to exterminate the Jew Capitalists!

Yes, that's what he said.

    >>>  I know that the Liberal Media doesn't deal in truth.  It has  people
    >>> like Walter Duranty writing for it.  The Liberal Media often  took the
    >>> Soviet side of things.

   >> Too bad they did not do this more often! The communists were the best!
   >> for working people, that is.

    > Then why did the working people throw out the Communists every chance they got?

They didn't.

> In truth, like most Left Wing movements, the rhetoric never comes close to matching the reality, a Party elite lives the high life and everyone else gets to live like Winston Smith in "1984" or
> worse.

Like capitalists, you mean -- the rich and powerful live better? I think that's right. The biggest failure of the communist movement of the 20th century is retaining too many capitalist inequalities, especially for the communists themselves. This led to corruption, ultimately abandonment, of communist ideals.

But capitalism is BASED upon preserving such inequalities! Therefore, the solution is not to revert to capitalism, but to eliminate these features from communism.

  > What did the working people get?  They got a big nothing is what they got.  Or shot in the head for disagreeing, if they were foolhardy enough to do so.

We all owe "Stalin" -- meaning, the USSR, the communist movement -- a huge debt of gratitude.

From fear of revolution, all the industrialized countries instituted serious social welfare reforms: health care, unemployment insurance, pensions, vacations, family allowances, and so on. Even here in the US, where it is worse than anywhere else by far, Roosevelt instituted Social Security, legalized unionization, and instituted the WPA for jobs.

Now that the communist movement has collapsed -- due to the weaknesses you and I have noted -- all these important benefits are being taken away.

> You know very little about life under Communism, you should actually talk to some non-Party members who lived under it.

I know lots! But they have opinions different from the people YOU know, evidently. All those I know wish communism were back!

But here is the real issue:

Mr Dedinas, you are ignorant! You have strong beliefs, but that's all they are.

You have done no research, and -- it seems -- almost no reading. Yet you think you know the truth!

You are arrogant. In addition, you are abusive to those with whom you disagree.

You should be modest. You have a lot to be modest about.

If you enjoy calling me names and insisting that I'm wrong, it is yet another failing on your part.

I hope, for your sake, that you learn to research and discover the truth.

At this point, you are simply an ignorant, prejudiced person who has no chance at all of being right.

Sad! but facts are facts.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr

From: Grover Furr
Subject: one (maybe last) thing

Dear Mr Dedinas:

A few years ago an ignorant anti-abortion person started emailing me. We had a discussion, some like the discussion you and I are having.

I used it to make the following web page, which I use in my classes. Take a look!

http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/essays/abortion2000.html

I am going to make a similar web page our of YOUR emails and my responses. Then I'll use it in my classes.

That, at least, will be useful. Students will learn how NOT to argue, and also how to respond to someone who doesn't know anything, but thinks he does.

I wrote:

    >> Too bad! You _could_ do research, act intelligently, contribute
    >> something to the world. You choose not to do so. What a pity --
    >> for you!

    >> Sayonara,

    >> Grover Furr

You replied:

> I am contributing to the world by fighting your Holocaust denying lies.

No, you are not.

I am asking you to do so. I'd be glad if you did.

You can't fight "lies" with insults and -- mainly -- with assertions not backed up with any research at all.

You just can't! Instead, you come across as a loud-mouthed, arrogant, ignorant person who likes to insult people over the Internet, but who thinks that he already knows the truth, even though he has never done any research!

You are not "fighting" what I am saying at all. You are simply displaying the fact that you are incapable of doing so.

But you are not really incapable. If you did some research, you could learn something. Maybe you would disagree with me! Then we'd have something to really discuss.

I hope you do! Think about it.

Sincerely,

Grover Furr