Question:
So go suck shrub’s dick, since you both have so much in common; like being fundy xtains, coke users, liars, draft dodging cowards, and mealymouthed scumwhores.
Are you talking about Bill Clinton? My, how the bomb-throwers come out when the truth and reason fail them…. lies, more lies, and Jerry-Springer journalism is all thats left for the left.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Of course Bush is a liar. And if he didn’t know all those other politicians are liars as well, he’s pretty damned stupid as well. – theoneflasehaddock
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – First, the Cole attack was against a MILITARY ship, that is not terrorism. The battle ship should have been able to defend itself. Nineteen soliders killed. Second, the WTC attack happened February 26, 1993. Bill Clinton had been president for approximately 35 days. Not exactly the 9 months that Shrub had been President before the Saudi’s took the buildings down. Thirdly, after the bombing of the Murrow building in Oklahoma City, President Clinton put for the strongest counter terrorism bill, ever put forth. Every Republican Senator voted against it. http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/pearly/htmls/bill-terrorism.html That’s what Clinton had the balls to put forth.
But don’t stop there. The Cole attack happened on 12 October 2000. Clinton had a counter-terrorism plan put together by 20 December 2000, well into the lame-duck period of his presidency. Since getting your starting a war that you will immediately drop into your successor’s lap is not done, he gave the plan gift-wraped to the Bush administration. It was the Bush administration who sat on the plan; and the Bush administration who had no response to the Cole attack. For a more information on Clinton’s counter-terrorism measures, see http:/www.winterdream.com/~politics/cterrorism.html
Response:
"The Cunning Linguist" *snip* and this has what do to with Paganism, Wicca, religion etc?
Response:
First, the Cole attack was against a MILITARY ship, that is not terrorism. The battle ship should have been able to defend itself. Nineteen soliders killed.
Of course it is terrorism. It was an attack. Just because it was a military ship doesn’t mean everyone gets a free shot. How about the attacks on the embassies in Africa. Are those not terrorism. Second, the WTC attack happened February 26, 1993. Bill Clinton had been president for approximately 35 days. Not exactly the 9 months that Shrub had been President before the Saudi’s took the buildings down.
So exactly what point in time is "enough".
Response:
I guess we’re into the two lies make it right game… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Please, Please! Don’t introduce *facts* into this issue! Liberals are ill-equipped to handle them… they’re better equipped to handle pay stubs and innuendo… "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Response:
What’s your point? Clinton was smart enough to not wage a "preemptive" war on Iraq.
Or Al Queda… oops
Response:
. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t think either of them is any better than the other – just the same tune played in a different key. I’ve heard stories of how the no-fly zones that were in effect while Clinton was in office weren’t all they seemed – western fighters were often ordered back to their bases to let turkish bombers carry out raids against the same kurdish villagers they were supposed to be protecting from Saddam. I think part of the story with Iraq and Hussein is that he was partly brought to power by the CIA in the first place, and supported by the US while they saw him as an ally against Islamic fundamentalism, and then when he started to go his own way, this was (a) an embarrassment to their previous policy, and (b) a possible example to others who might do the same. I’m not claiming this is the whole story, or that i know what that is, but I know it’s not as simple as the ‘Hussein was a bad dangerous man who hurt his people and threatened other countries, and we’re the good folk for having the balls to get rid of him’ line that Bush tries to make out was what it was all about.
Well, I have to say that I’m impressed with your ability to reserve judgment, even though it smells of liberal slant…. Skullcap, why don’t you read up on terrorist attacks against America during Clinton’s administration… especially during the WTC attack during ‘93, or the multitude of attacks thereafter- Clinton proceeded to decimate the CIA and the Military and it’s abilities during his administration, and did basically nothing in retaliation to the attack on the USS Cole… There is also strong evidence that Clinton covered up the terrorist attack on TWA flight 800- I’m not about to champion that cause because I haven’t reviewed it… but the evidence is there…
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – . I don’t think either of them is any better than the other – just the same tune played in a different key. I’ve heard stories of how the no-fly zones that were in effect while Clinton was in office weren’t all they seemed – western fighters were often ordered back to their bases to let turkish bombers carry out raids against the same kurdish villagers they were supposed to be protecting from Saddam. I think part of the story with Iraq and Hussein is that he was partly brought to power by the CIA in the first place, and supported by the US while they saw him as an ally against Islamic fundamentalism, and then when he started to go his own way, this was (a) an embarrassment to their previous policy, and (b) a possible example to others who might do the same. I’m not claiming this is the whole story, or that i know what that is, but I know it’s not as simple as the ‘Hussein was a bad dangerous man who hurt his people and threatened other countries, and we’re the good folk for having the balls to get rid of him’ line that Bush tries to make out was what it was all about. Well, I have to say that I’m impressed with your ability to reserve judgment,
thanks for the compliment – i’ve spent most of my fucking life reserving judgement and usually ending up piggy in the middle on questions like this, which isn’t an easy place to be, so it’s nice to know someone appreciates it. even though it smells of liberal slant…. Skullcap, why don’t you read up on terrorist attacks against America during Clinton’s administration… especially during the WTC attack during ‘93, or the multitude of attacks thereafter- Clinton proceeded to decimate the CIA and the Military and it’s abilities during his administration, and did basically nothing in retaliation to the attack on the USS Cole… There is also strong evidence that Clinton covered up the terrorist attack on TWA flight 800- I’m not about to champion that cause because I haven’t reviewed it… but the evidence is there…
I know there have been terrorist attacks on the US – the question for me is whether this justifies a policy of continuous warfare against a string of other countries which could go on for decades, and is causing far more harm to the people of those countries than any plausible terrorist threat to western citizens. These attacks hurt national pride badly, and do spread fear as is their intention, but in reality the number of people dead as a result of them isn’t that great (which doesn’t make it alright – just trying to find some perspective). Personally I’m far more worried and sometimes scared about what bush and his ilk may turn the western democracies into on the back of the 9/11 attack, than I am about being blown up by a terrorist bomb. I’m not just saying this – the first of these is a pretty much constant low level concern for me, and the second hardly ever crosses my mind as worth worrying about. The thing that really bugs me about all this is regardless of the rights and wrongs of it, the way that Bush et. al. talk about the issues just seems to be spreading fear and ignorance, from what I see of him on our TV. He’s always using phrases like ‘we will punish the evildoers’, ‘war on terror’ which to me is an ignorant way of talking that just appeals to the most basic simple minded patriotism, rather than making a real effort to say what he sees happening and what his agenda is. ‘war on terror’ makes no sense to me – how can you fight a war against a human emotion, and will it eventually involve removing all horror movies from sale in the shops? What this says to me is either he’s as stupid as he makes out, in which case he shouldn’t be in charge of the largest economic and military power in the world, or he has such a low opinion of his countrymen that he’s prepared to bring the debate down to that level in order to get people to vote for his (largely hidden most likely) agenda, and scare the ones who question him into keeping quiet or going along with it. Using words that make people think about important global issues in a stupid way isn’t a good or clever thing to do in my book. I’m not exactly a liberal either, but i’d still rather side with them than the likes of bush and blair on questions like these. — http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org/skullcap.html remove ‘n-u-l-l’ to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam bin unless notified with [html] or [attachment] in the subject line.
Response:
So go suck shrub’s dick, since you both have so much in common; like being fundy xtains, coke users, liars, draft dodging cowards, and mealymouthed scumwhores. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 so clinton lied too – so what. i saw bush on tv the other night explaining how hussein didn’t actually have any WMDs, but we must understand that he had the _capability_ to develop them, which made him a Dangerous Person in a Dangerous Part of the World, so it was all allright really. Which all sounds a bit dodgy to me. So what? Did you have a big problem with Clinton attacking Iraq? If not, then you ought to lay off Bush.
I don’t think either of them is any better than the other – just the same tune played in a different key. I’ve heard stories of how the no-fly zones that were in effect while Clinton was in office weren’t all they seemed – western fighters were often ordered back to their bases to let turkish bombers carry out raids against the same kurdish villagers they were supposed to be protecting from Saddam. I think part of the story with Iraq and Hussein is that he was partly brought to power by the CIA in the first place, and supported by the US while they saw him as an ally against Islamic fundamentalism, and then when he started to go his own way, this was (a) an embarrassment to their previous policy, and (b) a possible example to others who might do the same. I’m not claiming this is the whole story, or that i know what that is, but I know it’s not as simple as the ‘Hussein was a bad dangerous man who hurt his people and threatened other countries, and we’re the good folk for having the balls to get rid of him’ line that Bush tries to make out was what it was all about. — http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org/skullcap.html remove ‘n-u-l-l’ to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam bin unless notified with [html] or [attachment] in the subject line.
Response:
First, the Cole attack was against a MILITARY ship, that is not terrorism.
Really???? Exactly *What* country’s army attacked the Cole and killed American soldiers???? OH??? No country attacked the Cole??? WELL THEN, I GUESS THAT WAS *TERRORISM* Fool. The battle ship should have been able to defend itself. Nineteen soliders killed.
Kind of like Pearl Harbor should’ve been able to defend itself? You make me sick! The ship didn’t sink and *DID* defend itself! I HOPE TO CRAP THAT YOU AREN’T AN AMERICAN POSTING THIS SHIT! If you are, you’re a despicable example of an American, if you’re not, ESAD, and even if you are, ESAD. Second, the WTC attack happened February 26, 1993. Bill Clinton had been president for approximately 35 days. Not exactly the 9 months that Shrub had been President before the Saudi’s took the buildings down.
You’ve GOT to be kidding! Clinton never even visited the site or stepped up security, as a matter of fact, he spent the rest of his administration castrating the CIA and dismantiling the military. He was a borderline traitor. Bush isn’t a great President, but at least he understands the concept of national sovereignty. Thirdly, after the bombing of the Murrow building in Oklahoma City, President Clinton put for the strongest counter terrorism bill, ever put forth. Every Republican Senator voted against it.
Oh, I’d love to see the details of *that* bill was it even close to the Patriot Act, which all the Dems voted for and are now screaming against???? That’s what Clinton had the balls to put forth.
We don’t need you to tell us that, We can ask Monica what Clinton had the balls to put forth. GET THE FUCK OUT WITH YOUR CLINTON NONSENSE!!!!! NEXT!
Response:
First, the Cole attack was against a MILITARY ship, that is not terrorism. The battle ship should have been able to defend itself. Nineteen soliders killed. Second, the WTC attack happened February 26, 1993. Bill Clinton had been president for approximately 35 days. Not exactly the 9 months that Shrub had been President before the Saudi’s took the buildings down. Thirdly, after the bombing of the Murrow building in Oklahoma City, President Clinton put for the strongest counter terrorism bill, ever put forth. Every Republican Senator voted against it. http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/pearly/htmls/bill-terrorism.html That’s what Clinton had the balls to put forth. — We were at the Polo Lounge at the Beverly Heights Hotel, in the patio section of course, drinking Singapore Slings with Mescal on the side. Hiding from this foul Year of Our Lord, Nineteen Hundred Seventy One." HST
Response:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
so clinton lied too – so what. i saw bush on tv the other night explaining how hussein didn’t actually have any WMDs, but we must understand that he had the _capability_ to develop them, which made him a Dangerous Person in a Dangerous Part of the World, so it was all allright really. Which all sounds a bit dodgy to me. — http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org/skullcap.html remove ‘n-u-l-l’ to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam bin unless notified with [html] or [attachment] in the subject line.
Response:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 so clinton lied too – so what. i saw bush on tv the other night explaining how hussein didn’t actually have any WMDs, but we must understand that he had the _capability_ to develop them, which made him a Dangerous Person in a Dangerous Part of the World, so it was all allright really. Which all sounds a bit dodgy to me.
So what? Did you have a big problem with Clinton attacking Iraq? If not, then you ought to lay off Bush.
Response:
What’s your point? Clinton was smart enough to not wage a "preemptive" war on Iraq. Not only that, but Clinton *succeeded* in keeping Hussein from developing the WMDs everyone was so concerned about.
Sure he did. Clinton also did a great job preventing Islamic terrorism from reaching our shores. Oh wait, no he didn’t. But he did effectively retaliate against those groups and those governments supporting terrorist organizations after attacks in the WTC and the USS Cole… Oh wait, no he didn’t. T.B.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What’s your point? Clinton was smart enough to not wage a "preemptive" war on Iraq. Not only that, but Clinton *succeeded* in keeping Hussein from developing the WMDs everyone was so concerned about. Sure he did. Clinton also did a great job preventing Islamic terrorism from reaching our shores. Oh wait, no he didn’t. But he did effectively retaliate against those groups and those governments supporting terrorist organizations after attacks in the WTC and the USS Cole… Oh wait, no he didn’t. T.B.
Thank you Thom, for spanking that poor ignorant fool!
Response:
What’s your point? Clinton was smart enough to not wage a "preemptive" war on Iraq.
Not only that, but Clinton *succeeded* in keeping Hussein from developing the WMDs everyone was so concerned about.
Response:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 We know for a fact that Clinton is a liar and since he and Bush have said the same thing we can conclude that Bush too is a liar. So what’s the problem?
That you’re calling Clinton a liar… duh!
Response:
Not to mention dental records…tom’w CNN breaks the blockbuster story that in Alabama in the fall of ‘72, there was a time when 1st Lt. Bush forgot to floss!!!
Wha-Wha-What???? BUSH FORGOT TO FLOSS???? Well that changes everything! I’m voting for Kerry!!!!
Response:
Not to mention dental records…tom’w CNN breaks the blockbuster story that in Alabama in the fall of ‘72, there was a time when 1st Lt. Bush forgot to floss!!!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Please, Please! Don’t introduce *facts* into this issue! Liberals are ill-equipped to handle them… they’re better equipped to handle pay stubs and innuendo… "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Response:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
We know for a fact that Clinton is a liar and since he and Bush have said the same thing we can conclude that Bush too is a liar. So what’s the problem? — Visit my blahg site. GO NOW DAMMIT! http://myblahg.blogspot.com/
Response:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Response:
What’s your point? Clinton was smart enough to not wage a "preemptive" war on Iraq. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Response:
Please, Please! Don’t introduce *facts* into this issue! Liberals are ill-equipped to handle them… they’re better equipped to handle pay stubs and innuendo… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." – President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program." – President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." – Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." – Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." – Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." – Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." – Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…" – Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. – Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." – Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …" – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Response:
Subscribe to Posts
I may see what you mean by this – a sort of ‘catching most of the good breaks/opportunities?’ [or more of a 'well of wyrd' concept?] It *is* about magick (IMHO), but on a more subtle, yet basic, level than rituals and correspondances and all that "spiritual technology". For me it is like a "trust" that I will always land on my feet in the long run, always get what I need. 
) I find curiosity is generally an admirable trait; most people who lack curiosity do so because they lack intelligence, imagination and/or motivation. I can see what the uses are of this organization that he is talking about. It makes me see something beyond myself. Pip Noble of you… I do not pretend any such noble motivations myself. I’m just interested because it sounds, well, interesting. If you do want my input, you know where to find me. R. 
P – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – R. 