Conor, your post illustrates my points ideally. For that, I am most
obliged. I would also like to extend my thanks, to the variety of others
who have helped demonstrate to those of reason what I precisely ment.

I would like to reiterate a personal point here. My problem (for I speak
not for Mhaldor) is with Oakstone and the forests exclusive circle of
the ruling elite. Not with the forestalls themselves. Many are in some
shape or form related to me, why would I wish them ill will? What groves
have I destroyed, what livelihoods have I stolen?

And yes Conor, I wear my enemy status to the forests elite and their
allies with pride. In much the same way that you wear my brothers and
sisters blood.

The Rev. Lodi Vespic de'Ta'sa

P.S. No side is innocent, for innocence is a lie. This hatred stretches
back generations and unlike the vast majority of this worlds populace, I
have seen much of it. Logic dictates that neither side's hands are clean
of blood or burn marks. Yet Oakstone still masquerades behind a Church
like mask of moral innocence. The image of the oppressed Druid, beset on
ever side by great evil is a thing of the past . . . yet Oakstone still
encourages such a perception. Oakstone still claims innocence in the
whole affair. For those of reason such a statement should seam logically
impossible. But then, if Oakstone is not innocent, then they must in
some shape or form be guilty. Guilty of committing actions, weather
threw official routs, unofficial routs or just plain apathy, that have
in some shape or form had motives other than the forests protection at
their hart and have contributed to its ultimate harm and destruction.
There for, how can you still stand there and claim that Oakstones only
directive is to protect the forests from harm at all costs?

Penned by my hand on the 9th of Aeguary, in the year 349 AF.