As I expected, the letter from Australia is a form letter.
Here is Kevin Quinn's contribution:
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:23:18 -0400
From: Kevin Quinn <email@example.com>
Subject: Your Repugnant Proposal to Write the History of Economic Thought and Economic Theory Out of the Discipline of Economics
Dear David Breit:
Surely you are kidding, right? So, let's see: Milton Friedman' and Anna Schwartz's Monetary History of the United States: not a work of economics, according to David Breit! Axel Leijonhufvud's On Keynesian Economics and The Economics of Keynes: not a work of economics, according to David Breit! I could go on and on and on. If you go through with this bone-headed and philistine proposal, you and your organization will be a laughing-stock in the eyes of any genuine economist, The economy and the discipline of economics have a history, and understanding this history is part of what it means to be an economist: ask Amartya Sen, James Buchanan, Vernon Smith - ask any living Nobelist, I daresay. But I suppose you know better.
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, Ohio