PDA

View Full Version : NY Times story



wolfdancer
10-17-2007, 03:20 PM
Now before either of the Bobbsey twins claims this is another anti-Bush statement....it's just a **** news story....period
Lord knows I hoped it would be, but
web page (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/washington/14weapons.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=t h&adxnnlx=1192654926-nADVDENtY5zQK1MU0VumQQ)

LWW
10-18-2007, 07:54 AM
Why would it be anti Bush?

Israel did what we should have done.

LWW

Chopstick
10-18-2007, 09:07 AM
And month before last, that chemical warhead that exploded while they were trying to fit it on top of a scud missile, killing fifteen, that was just for crop dusting because we all know Syria doesn't have a WMD program anymore. They said so and we learned our lesson about that cuz Saddam said so too.

LWW
10-18-2007, 09:12 AM
And Saddam never moved scuds and WMD's into Syria before the war and all the sat intel which shows it is part of the big lie? /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Don't worry, as soon as a western city is attacked again you can all join in and blame Bush for not doing anything despite you did everything in your power to make sure "doing something" actually never happened.

LWW

Qtec
10-18-2007, 09:42 AM
LMAO. Powell had sat intel when he made his speech at the UN and we all know how accurate that was!
This wild, totally illogical fantasy has been dreamed up by the die-hard deniers. The idea that Syria, under the watchful gaze of the US spy machine, took Saddam's WMDs [ when to be found out might have Syria the next target], is lunacy of the highest order.


Q....... /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

LWW
10-18-2007, 10:25 AM
Well, that certainly explains:

1-We found the trailers we said we would, although they were "dual use".

2-The fact that illegal rocket engines were found on their way to who knows where in Jordan.

3-A massive chem weapons atack was broken up in Jordan right after we invaded.

4-Saddam's generals say that's what they did.

BTW, Syria should have been next.

LWW

Gayle in MD
10-19-2007, 12:31 PM
Q,
Laughing at these jerks who are inventing WMD's in Iraq, is about all one can do.

There were no WMD's and no biological materials that could do any damage to anyone. It was all a lie. That has been proven over and over. They based it all on Curveball, and he was an alcoholic, and a known fabricator.

I can't believe that people would be so dumb that they would STILL be trying to spread around lies that have been debunked over and over again.

Only an idiot would still be out there trying to say that Saddam had any WMD's.

From the Epilogue in the book, Against All enemies by Richard Clarke, former anti-terrorist Czar, and completely bi-partisan, having served under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush.

Terrorism, which never once was addressed by the presidential candidates in 2000, will be a major topic in the 2004 campaign. Already, as I write before the candidates have been nominated, President Bush is telling fund-raisers, illogically, that he deserves money for his reelection because he is "fighting the terrorists in Iraq so that we don't have to fight them in the streets of America." he never points out that our being in Iraq does nothing to prevent terrorists from coming to America, but does divert funds from addressing our domestic vulnerabilities and does make terrorist recruitment easier. Nonetheless, the Las Vegas oddsmakers and Wahsington pundits think that Bush will esaily be reelected. One shudders to think what additional errors he will make in the next four years to strengthen the al Qaeda follow-ons; attacking Syria or Iran, undermining the Saudi regime without a plan for a successor state?

A week before September 11, I wwrote that the decision the Administration had o make was whether al Qaeda and its network was just a nuisance to the great superpower or whether it represented an existential threat; if it was the latter, then we had to act like it was. Despite September 11 and the many al Qaeda network attacks around the world since then, most Americans and most in the American government still think that the great superpower cannot be defeated by a gang of religious zealots who want a global theocracy, a fourteenth century Caliphate.

Never underestimate the enemy. Our current enemy is in it for the long haul. They are smart and they are patient. Defeating them will take creativity and imagination, as well as energy. It will be the struggle of the friends of freedom and civil liberties around the world.

what happened to that team that tried to get the Bush White House to pay attention to al Qaeda before September 11 and then stayed in the Situation Room on that day holding things together, even though they thought the White House was about to be hit by a hi-jacked aircraft? where are Lisa Gordon-hagerty and Roger Cressey and Paul Kurtz? They all left the Administration, frustrated. They were never formally thanked by the President, never recognized for what they did before or on September 11. Lisa is working on the safety of nuclear materials in the United States. Paul is busy promoting cyber security. roger and I are consulting with private sector companies concerned with security and with information assurance; we appear regularly on television, still trying to warn about al Qaeda.

And the opthers? Mike Sheehan gave up a cushy job to go to work for the NYPD as Deputy commissioner for Counterterrorism, to try personally to protect the city he loves. You may see him on Wall Street, or on the Brooklyn Bridge, or at the LIncoln Tunnel checking the defenses. Randy Beers became the national security coordinator for the John Kerry campaign.

Cressey, Beers, and I are also teaching graduate students, hoping that we can ehlp the nexty generation of national security managers to understand the dangers of simplistic and unilateral approaches to counterterrorism. Some in our classes may have to make tough decisions for our country in the fitht against terrorism someday, because it is going to be a generation-long struggle.

As Americans, it is up to all of us to be well informed and thoughtful, to help our country make the right decisions in the time of testing. We all need to recommit ourselves to the ancient pledge "to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of American, Against all Enemies...

Foreign and Domestic.
----------------------------------------

That includes Republicans! Republicans put us where we are now. In a quagmire! Republicans are still endangering our country by continuing to lie about George Bush, the Republican blank check Congress, and their former Republican Presidents, and Congress, who led us to this situation, and also distracted our country from the mission that Bill Clinton was determined to win, defeating al Qaeda, killing bin Laden, and protecting this country from terrorist attacks. According to Richard Clarke, that was his number one priority. Obviously, it was last on Bush's list!

Gayle in Md.

Drop1
10-19-2007, 12:49 PM
The other day,it was Iran should have been next,I guess you and Bush are not tight,which really would mean nothing between two guys,that that don't know the questions,let alone the answers.

LWW
10-19-2007, 01:07 PM
So, Saddam didn't really gas his people then?

Illegal rockets weren't actually used and found?

David McKay is a liar when he said Iraq was more dangerous than we had thought and also when he reported they had human testing labs?

LWW

Gayle in MD
10-23-2007, 11:37 AM
Hey Drop,
Have you ever heard of David McKay? LMAO! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Why are we even reading anything that someone from the lunatic right wing mainstream, yep, they're now the mainstream of the Republican party, so brilliant that they voted for the man who made the following statements....

------------------------------------------------------------

1.It's in our country's interests to find those who would do harm to us and get them out of harm's way.
2.There's a lot of us getting ready to retire. We're called baby boomers. As a matter of fact, my retirement age is 2,008.
3.I like to tell people, Laura and I are proud to be Texas -- own a Texas ranch, and for us, every day is Earth Day.
4.I'm looking forward to a good night's sleep on the soil of a friend.
5.And so, in my State of the -- my State of the Union -- or state -- my speech to the -- nation, whatever you wanna call it, speech to the nation -- I asked Americans to give 4,000 years -- 4,000 hours over the next -- of the rest of your life -- of service to America. That's what I asked. I said 2 -- 4,000 hours.
6.And, most importantly, Alma Powell, Secretary of Colin Powell, is with us.
7.No question in my mind these are tough times for America. But there's no question in my mind we'll prevail. Right is on our side. And we'll prevail, because we're a fabulous nation, and we're a fabulous nation because we're a nation full of fabulous people.
8.I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe -- I believe what I believe is right.
9.We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country.
10.There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once -- shame on -- shame on you. You fool me, you can't get fooled again.
-------------------------------------------------------
Hey Drop, you are so right, they don't know the questions! LMAO, that is the perfect way to frame the right. Hey, they voted for the dufus who made these statements!
Why are we even reading anything they write? Republicans, conservatives, you know, are for torture, illegal wire taps, swift boating a very sick child who has fought a courageous battle, paying private thugs in Iraq to kill civilians without oversight, paying off oil CEO's, whose retirement packages are through the roof, suspending sentences for top white house aides who obstruct justice, fighting a war with no strategic advantage to the United States, allowing border guards to go to jail for doing their jobs, spending 12 billion a month on a militarily unwinnable war, supporting an attorney general who is agnostic on torture, pre-emptive attacks against countries of no immediate threat, a president who refuses to describe his version of what torture is, suspending habeas corpus, censoring Scientific studies which expose the global threats to the planet, bashing veterans who gave both legs in their service to their country, outing secret covert agents as a payback for those who dare to speak out, which is basically punishing people for using their freedom of speech, ignoring Congressional law through the use of unprecedented signing statements, trying to use government to deny a family's right to decide the fate of a brain dead woman, going trillions of dollars in debt to China, while running up the largest trade deficit in history, and in fact, borrowing more money than all previous presidents combined, defending a person like Ann Coulter when she attacks the widows of one of our greatest national tragedies, flying the relatives of our attacker to safety, defending an Attorney General who politicised the Department Of Justice, for political purposes, and then committed purgery, over and over and over again, allowing Mexico to invade our country, cutting the funds for sick and hungry American children, and for the Administration's own "Federal" mandatory education program forced upon every state in the union, saving the life of an unborn fetus, in preference to saving the life of a living grown woman who's health is at risk, preventing the scientific study of cells, censoring scientists, appointing a woman in charge of family planning who is against birth control!

PAHLEEZE!!! Does any of this sound conservative to you???? The Republican base is just one oxycontin prescription away from Rush Limbaugh!
/ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

LWW
10-23-2007, 12:11 PM
Oh, the shame, you caught me in a typo...

LWW

Drop1
10-23-2007, 12:11 PM
No,I never heard of McKay,but then again,I never heard of LWW,the resident retentive of the Forum. Nothing,can stand against ignorance,and legalized deception,coupled with Faith based factless frauds. I once worked with a fellow,who claimed computers were the work of Aliens,that visited Earth,in search of food,and when they left,they left a computer behind. His belief,is the Saucer sightings are the Aliens looking for the lost computer. Talking to him,was like talking to a Faith based Republican, no amount of facts on computer history, would cause him to rethink his faith in the return of the Aliens in favor of historical facts.

Gayle in MD
10-23-2007, 12:23 PM
LOL, and typing two totally different names, is now a typo!

This guy doesn't even know what Bush was authorized to do. He was authorized to use force, IF, Iraq didn't let the weapons inspectors do their jobs. They were doing their jobs, until Bush told them to get out.

He was authorized to use force to remove Saddam, (In that case) to liberate the Iraqis from Saddams' rule, and to remove the WMD's.

Bush was not authorized to occupy Iraq, before the inspections were complete, nor was he authorized to remain in a sectarian civil war. Obviously, the WMD's weren't even there, and there had been no complicity with al Qaeda, no safe harbor in Iraq, for al Qaeda, no connections to 9/11, and no WMD's in Iraq.

bush, did not get the go- ahead from the United Nations, which was another condition of going to Iraq.

This is an illegal immoral war. Bush has never been authorized to occupy Iraq, and leave our troops in the middle of a sectarian, civil war, and further, had Bush been honest with the congress about what he knew, he wouldn't have even gotten what conditional permission that he DID get.

Bush lied, to the congress, which is a felony, and outed a covert agent, which is treason.

Apparently, these AZBers don't have any informed citizens to yap at over there.

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

LWW
10-23-2007, 01:37 PM
Oh what a wicked web you weave...


[ QUOTE ]
Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in "material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations" and urged the President "to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations" (Public Law 105-235);

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001 underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949;

Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677";

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1)," that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and "constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region," and that Congress, "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688";

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to "work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge" posed by Iraq and to "work for the necessary resolutions," while also making clear that "the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable";

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region;

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(a) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(b) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to


(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.

In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS. --


(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. -- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. -- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS

(a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998).

(b) To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.

(c) To the extent that the information required by section 3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.<hr /></blockquote>

Oddly enough I knew what it actually said and you didn't.

Stranger still, is that I read it before I pontificated upon it's contents as opposed to going to MOVEON and letting them explain my opinion to me.

LINKIE ---&gt; The real reasons we gave for going to war. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html)

LWW

wolfdancer
10-23-2007, 02:18 PM
Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country.
Hey, I thought just the opposite...too many were "loving" their patients

Gayle in MD
10-24-2007, 11:04 AM
LMAO, Wolf, I can't believe his puny little tricks. he diesn't even grasp his own posts...

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS. --


(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. -- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. -- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

I guess he was not paying attention when Bush threw the inspecters out of Iraq?

I suppose he doesn't get it, that the conditions for using force, were supposed to be subject to the UN conditions, and that they intelligence given to Congress, as regards al Qaeda terrorist being in Iraq, and Iraq supporting terrorist who attacked the U.S., were all manufactured by the administration.

Bush had no legal authority to invade, and occupy, Iraq, and put our troops in the middle of a sectarian, civil war, period.

The Administration's claims, all proved to be false, including the amount of time they would be there, they said three to four months, and their reasons for going, there had been no re-constituting of the biological weapoons, nor of nuclear enrichment, no connections to 9/11, or al Qaeda.

These AZBers are a total JOKE!

/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Total Ignore, is appropriate! They're about as credible as Bush is right now. BWA HA HA HA...only 5% of the country thinks Bush is credible about the Iraq war, hence, he had to find a new puppet, Betrayus, and use him for political purposes.

80% of Americans wanted the s-chip bill to go through. REpublicans denied them, and then Bush turns right around and asks for another almost 50 Billion more for Iraq.

Thank heavens most Americans are not as stupid as the right wing AZ nuts!

George Bush is a joke, too bad he's made our country a joke to the rest of the world. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Love,
Gayle

LWW
10-24-2007, 11:49 AM
All you need is anything which supports your most recent lie...which of course you don't have.

Much to the chagrin of neoleftists the USA is still a sovereign nation AND nothing in there mentions any UN requirement AND we had 15+ resolutions which the UN would not enforce AND Saddam was in gross violation of thew 1991 ceasefire...yes, the neoleft horror is facing up to the idea that the 1991 war never ended.

But, of course, you knew all that. You just hoped nobody else did.

Sorry Gaylie.

LWW

Chopstick
10-24-2007, 12:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I once worked with a fellow,who claimed computers were the work of Aliens,that visited Earth,in search of food,and when they left,they left a computer behind. His belief,is the Saucer sightings are the Aliens looking for the lost computer. Talking to him,was like talking to a Faith based Republican, no amount of facts on computer history, would cause him to rethink his faith in the return of the Aliens in favor of historical facts. <hr /></blockquote>


<font color="blue">That's just plain silly.
Computers are the work of the devil and they are all connected di...rectly to Hell. </font color> /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Drop1
10-24-2007, 01:01 PM
Chop,I knew there had to be a logical explanation,for Hell. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif