Re: OT - Eva - Mail Not Delivered

Kitty, I think you misspelled it. I think you left out the "a". It is
supposed to be evatesq@gmail.com.

On 10/15/05, kmrsy@netzero.net <kmrsy@netzero.net> wrote:
>
> Eva, I attempted to reply to a message you sent but it was returned. Any
> idea why gmail "doesn't like" you?
>
> Kitty
>
> ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
> Unfortunately, your mail was not delivered to the following address:
>
> <evtesq@gmail.com>:
> 72.14.205.27 <http://72.14.205.27> does not like recipient.
> Remote host said: 550 5.7.1 No such user f17si4091414qba
> Giving up on 72.14.205.27 <http://72.14.205.27>.
>
> --- Below this line is a copy of the message.
>
> Return-Path: <kmrsy@netzero.net>
> Received: from
outbound21-sr.nyc.untd.com<http://outbound21-sr.nyc.untd.com>(
> webmail28.nyc.untd.com <http://webmail28.nyc.untd.com>
[10.141.27.168<http://10.141.27.168>
> ])
> by smtpout01.nyc.untd.com <http://smtpout01.nyc.untd.com> with SMTP id
> AABBXCKMFAWV5XFS
> for <evtesq@gmail.com> (sender <kmrsy@netzero.net>);
> Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: (from kmrsy@netzero.net)
> by webmail28.nyc.untd.com <http://webmail28.nyc.untd.com> (jqueuemail) id
> K7C6N4RQ; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:50:47 PDT
> Received: from [64.136.26.225 <http://64.136.26.225>] by
> webmail28.nyc.untd.com <http://webmail28.nyc.untd.com> with HTTP:
> Sat, 15 Oct 2005 15:50:21 GMT
> X-Originating-IP: [64.136.26.225 <http://64.136.26.225>]
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> From: "kmrsy@netzero.net" <kmrsy@netzero.net>
> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 15:50:21 GMT
> To: evtesq@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Sneak Attack on Organic Standards
> X-Mailer: Webmail Version 3.0
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed;boundary="--__JWM__J446b.794bS.15fbM"
> Message-Id: <20051015.085047.6752.219643@webmail28.nyc.untd.com>
> X-ContentStamp: 2:2:3177546941
> X-UNTD-OriginStamp:
> 7Eo94d05QXEvKTQYF6q6WVPWM1naqY8QL7c45t4FTadtEWbNkmYW4A==
> X-UNTD-Peer-Info:
>
10.141.27.168|webmail28.nyc.untd.com|outbound21-sr.nyc.untd.com|kmrsy@netzero
.net
>
> ----__JWM__J446b.794bS.15fbM
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Geez, it never seems to end, does it, Eva?
> This administration is determined to destroy everything in its path. It
> wants to enable big business to gobble up everything it can and spit out
> adulterated products. Then they prevent small business from even
> labeling exceptional differences as in when Ben & Jerry wanted to label
> their ice cream as not including any BGH-tainted milk and the Angus beef
> company that wanted to test every animal for mad-cow disease and list
> that on its packages.
>
>
> The damage that has been wrought in these 5 years could take 50 years to
> undo, if it can be done at all.
>
> Kitty
>
> Please note: message attached
>
>
>
> ----__JWM__J446b.794bS.15fbM
> Content-Type: message/rfc822
>
> Return-Path: <evtesq@gmail.com>
> Received: from mx07.lax.untd.com <http://mx07.lax.untd.com> (
> mx07.lax.untd.com <http://mx07.lax.untd.com>
[10.130.24.67<http://10.130.24.67>
> ])
> by maildeliver04.nyc.untd.com <http://maildeliver04.nyc.untd.com> with
> SMTP id AABBXCJXCAGU98SA
> for <kmrsy@netzero.net> (sender <evtesq@gmail.com>);
> Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from
bourbon.democracyinaction.org<http://bourbon.democracyinaction.org>(
> bourbon.democracyinaction.org <http://bourbon.democracyinaction.org> [
> 67.19.170.130 <http://67.19.170.130>])
> by mx07.lax.untd.com <http://mx07.lax.untd.com> with SMTP id
> AABBXCJXBAUDCD52
> for <kmrsy@netzero.net> (sender <evtesq@gmail.com>);
> Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from
scotch.democracyinaction.org<http://scotch.democracyinaction.org>(
> scotch.democracyinaction.org <http://scotch.democracyinaction.org> [
> 67.19.162.194 <http://67.19.162.194>])
> by bourbon.democracyinaction.org <http://bourbon.democracyinaction.org> (
> 8.12.11/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j9FFQ3wd006525
> for <kmrsy@netzero.net>; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:26:03 -0400
> Message-ID: <
> 12193604.1129391168430.JavaMail.root@scotch.democracyinaction.org>
> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 10:46:08 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Eva <evtesq@gmail.com>
> Reply-To: evtesq@gmail.com
> To: kmrsy@netzero.net
> Subject: Sneak Attack on Organic Standards
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="----=_Part_219_5370470.1129391168428"
> X-ContentStamp: 1:1:2397781786
>
>
X-MAIL-INFO:0fe9ad2964e1cdad91ad91e1e07d05f50d007479b9740481b9d5d5f981840575b
d4d602dcd9144d5e995b03dc0e9e4e4f075453040c4158941155d41557411e499b49439f9a924
a4501d5051c4a454d024c41deded60c430f4d5306dd43d40d11911dd555db56411c171
>
> X-UNTD-Peer-Info:
>
67.19.170.130|bourbon.democracyinaction.org|bourbon.democracyinaction.org|evt
esq@gmail.com
> X-UNTD-UBE:-1
>
> ------=_Part_219_5370470.1129391168428
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Hi,
> Thought you might find this interesting.
>
> The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) needs your immediate help to
> stop Congress and the Bush administration from seriously degrading
> organic standards. After 35 years of hard work, the U.S. organic
> community has built up a multi-billion dollar alternative to industrial
> agriculture, based upon strict organic standards and organic community
> control over modification to these standards.
>
>
> Now, large corporations such as Kraft & Dean Foods--aided and abetted by
> the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), are moving to lower organic
> standards by allowing a Bush appointee to create a list of synthetic
> ingredients that would be allowed organic production. Even worse these
> proposed regulatory changes will reduce future public discussion and
> input and take away the National Organic Standards Board's (NOSB)
> traditional lead jurisdiction in setting standards. What this means, in
> blunt terms. is that USDA bureaucrats and industry lobbyists, not
> consumers, will now have more control over what can go into organic
> foods and products.
>
>
> This week, acting in haste and near-total secrecy, the U.S. Senate will
> vote on a "rider" to the 2006 Agriculture Appropriations Bill that will
> reduce control over organic standards from the National Standards Board
> and put this control in the hands of federal bureaucrats in the USDA
> (remember the USDA proposal in 1997-98 that said that genetic
> engineering, toxic sludge, and food irradiation would be OK on organic
> farms, or USDA suggestions in 2004 that heretofore banned pesticides,
> hormones, tainted feeds, and animal drugs would be OK?).
>
>
> For the past week in Washington, OCA has been urging members of the
> Senate not to reopen and subvert the federal statute that governs U.S.
> Organic standards (the Organic Food Production Act - OFPA), but rather
> to let the organic community and the National Organic Standards resolve
> our differences over issues like synthetics and animal feed internally,
> and then proceed to a open public comment period. Unfortunately most
> Senators seem to be listening to industry lobbyists more closely than to
> us. We need to raise our voices.
>
>
> In the past, grassroots mobilization and mass pressure by organic
> consumers have been able to stop the USDA and Congress from degrading
> organic standards. This time Washington insiders tell us that the "fix
> is is already in." So we must take decisive action now. We need you to
> call your U.S. Senators today. We need you to sign the following
> petition and send it to everyone you know. We also desperately need
> funds to head off this attack in the weeks and months to come. Thank you
> for your support. Together we will take back citizen control over
> organic standards and preserve organic integrity.
>
>
> Take action here:
>
>
http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=1242
>
> ------=_Part_219_5370470.1129391168428
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Hi,<BR/>Thought you might find this interesting.<BR/><BR/>The Organic
> Consu=
> mers Association (OCA) needs your immediate help to stop Congress and the
> B=
> ush administration from seriously degrading organic standards. After 35
> yea=
> rs of hard work, the U.S. organic community has built up a multi-billion
> do=
> llar alternative to industrial agriculture, based upon strict organic
> stand=
> ards and organic community control over modification to these
> standards.<BR=
> /><BR/>Now, large corporations such as Kraft & Dean Foods--aided and
> abette=
> d by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), are moving to lower
> organic=
> standards by allowing a Bush appointee to create a list of synthetic
> ingre=
> dients that would be allowed organic production. Even worse these proposed
> =
> regulatory changes will reduce future public discussion and input and take
> =
> away the National Organic Standards Board's (NOSB) traditional lead
> jurisdi=
> ction in setting standards. What this means, in blunt terms. is that USDA
> b=
> ureaucrats and industry lobbyists, not consumers, will now have more
> contro=
> l over what can go into organic foods and products.<BR/><BR/>This week,
> act=
> ing in haste and near-total secrecy, the U.S. Senate will vote on a
> "rider"=
> to the 2006 Agriculture Appropriations Bill that will reduce control over
> =
> organic standards from the National Standards Board and put this control
> in=
> the hands of federal bureaucrats in the USDA (remember the USDA proposal
> i=
> n 1997-98 that said that genetic engineering, toxic sludge, and food
> irradi=
> ation would be OK on organic farms, or USDA suggestions in 2004 that
> hereto=
> fore banned pesticides, hormones, tainted feeds, and animal drugs would be
> =
> OK?).<BR/><BR/>For the past week in Washington, OCA has been urging
> members=
> of the Senate not to reopen and subvert the federal statute that governs
> U=
> .S. Organic standards (the Organic Food Production Act - OFPA), but rather
> =
> to let the organic community and the National Organic Standards resolve
> our=
> differences over issues like synthetics and animal feed internally, and
> th=
> en proceed to a open public comment period. Unfortunately most Senators
> see=
> m to be listening to industry lobbyists more closely than to us. We need
> to=
> raise our voices.<BR/><BR/>In the past, grassroots mobilization and mass
> p=
> ressure by organic consumers have been able to stop the USDA and Congress
> f=
> rom degrading organic standards. This time Washington insiders tell us
> that=
> the "fix is is already in." So we must take decisive action now. We need
> y=
> ou to call your U.S. Senators today. We need you to sign the following
> peti=
> tion and send it to everyone you know. We also desperately need funds to
> he=
> ad off this attack in the weeks and months to come. Thank you for your
> supp=
> ort. Together we will take back citizen control over organic standards and
> =
> preserve organic integrity.<BR/><BR/>Take action here:<BR/>
> http://www.demac=
>
tion.org/dia/organizations/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=3D1242<http://tion.o
rg/dia/organizations/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=3D1242>
> <BR/>
> <BR>Take action now at <a href=3D'
> http://www.democracyinaction.org/oca/camp=
> aign.jsp?campaign_KEY=3D1242'>
> http://www.democracyinaction.org/oca/campaign=
> .jsp?campaign_KEY=3D1242</a>
> ------=_Part_219_5370470.1129391168428--
>
>
> ----__JWM__J446b.794bS.15fbM--
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
> message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT
>
>


--
Eva
Long Island, NY
Zone 6/7

Honor our dead. Demand the truth.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/
http://www.downingstreetmemo.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index