AANR continues its unilateral approach of appeasement with the DPR with the following statement:
AANR chooses to work to continue to build a working relationship with the State and not to jeopardize a positive relationship it has taken years to build by signing on to a petition presented by an organization associated with legal confrontation.Never mind that 16 nudist and naturist groups have signed onto the petition, leaving AANR and AANR-West as the only notable invitees who refused to support the cause. It's truly extraordinary that a national nudist organization would refuse to side with so many nudists and naturists on such an important issue, whatever the reason.
The petition and links to supporting information about the fight at San Onofre can be found here.
I am asking all my readers to support this petition and to closely follow the NAC instructions about how you can help.
I am also asking everyone to let AANR know exactly how you feel about this issue. You can join in on AANR's online discussion group here, or you can contact them directly here.
4 comments:
There's a reason that the AANR will not sign the petition. All of their revenue comes from memberships to landed clubs. Therefore, it is in their best interest if all of the FREE naturist venues go away, forcing people to join clubs.
..and of course we all know how well AANR uses it's "working relationship" when it comes to nude use of public lands and beaches.
JohnO
Please note that I am not questioning AANR's motives. Even the NAC refuses to do that. What I am questioning is their actions, which are distinctly anti-nudist.
AANR agreed with Parks and Rec in California that San Onofre should be closed to nudity because 1) it believed the lies told to it by Parks and Rec, which were later exposed by NAC; 2) it doesn't understand beaches; 3) it doesn't want any beaches it can't control and use for its own purposes.
Post a Comment