I meant your most recent post, which you haven't edited, and please don't, because it vindicates my response to it.
Looking forward to seeing Bin Laden in a bodybag
- Thread starter pk
- Start date
well red
Ruder Than You
Whowhere - If you're going to continue to wave this Churchill business about, you might care to reflect on the fact that in the election that came right after the Second World War, Churchill was thrown out of office and a Labour Government elected, on a huge landslide vote, with a mandate to end all the Tory shit and create the Welfare State. "Do you know why we carpet bombed German cities?" Because "Bomber Harris" had run out of military/industrial targets and wanted to demonstrate to the War Ministry how effective "area bombing" could be. Cities with absolutely no strategic importance were levelled, largely for the sake of it. If you "knew anything about military tactics" you wouldn't be using this particular issue as an example of how you have justice on your side. And you've probably got the Russians to thank for defeating Germany far more than the Americans. Sorry to burst your "special relationship".
Reasoned answer over. When you say "And don't go on about some bloody Afghan refugees, nobody in the real world gives a flying shit about them." You show yourself up as the pathetic arsewipe that you are. You come here demanding compassion whilst standing on the bodies of murdered children. You may not care about people in other countries (except your special chums in the USA of course), that doesn't mean that everyone else is a heartless, conscience-free, arrogant, bloodsucking piece of scum like you.
Reasoned answer over. When you say "And don't go on about some bloody Afghan refugees, nobody in the real world gives a flying shit about them." You show yourself up as the pathetic arsewipe that you are. You come here demanding compassion whilst standing on the bodies of murdered children. You may not care about people in other countries (except your special chums in the USA of course), that doesn't mean that everyone else is a heartless, conscience-free, arrogant, bloodsucking piece of scum like you.
I was too nice to say that last paragraph, but it's ABSOLUTELY FUCKIN RIGHT!!!
The Churchill stuff, too.
The Churchill stuff, too.
PatelsCornerShop
watching you watching me
This goes out to Whowhere, and all those other people defending uppitiness:
However much I hate the American events (and now the events in Afghanistan), I would not point my fingers at innocent people. Nor would I be sounding off about war and western superiority and civilisation in the most arrogant manner. This is why I would not be uppity.
If bombing Afghanistan on the flimsiest of excuses was ever justification for after what happened to the WTC, then you might as well let all the Iraqis, Sudanese, Lebanese, Palestinians, Libyans and a hell of a lot more people go and bomb America, because they have far, far more justification for doing it, based on real facts which no American can now afford to ignore.
Which, of course, is precisely what could have happened on September 11th. America can just go and add Afghanistan to the list of hard enemies they've already made.
Which is fine by me. As long as that puppet Blair doesn't sweep Britain into the same mess - and it is very likely that he will now make Britain a target of similar attacks - then America can do what it likes.
As much as I sympathise with the victims and the families of the American attacks (at least as much as I sympathise with those Afghans now suffering from US bombings) I just hate it when people come crying here after something The US brought upon itself, however unfair it was. All they will do is make the situation much, much worse for themselves and I don't want to waste time saying 'I told you so' after the next time it happens. Which it will if things carry on the way they do.
And if that sounds hard-hearted, then most of the world is hard-hearted. Tough. Don't expect any compassion from me when you don't show any compassion for others.
[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
However much I hate the American events (and now the events in Afghanistan), I would not point my fingers at innocent people. Nor would I be sounding off about war and western superiority and civilisation in the most arrogant manner. This is why I would not be uppity.
If bombing Afghanistan on the flimsiest of excuses was ever justification for after what happened to the WTC, then you might as well let all the Iraqis, Sudanese, Lebanese, Palestinians, Libyans and a hell of a lot more people go and bomb America, because they have far, far more justification for doing it, based on real facts which no American can now afford to ignore.
Which, of course, is precisely what could have happened on September 11th. America can just go and add Afghanistan to the list of hard enemies they've already made.
Which is fine by me. As long as that puppet Blair doesn't sweep Britain into the same mess - and it is very likely that he will now make Britain a target of similar attacks - then America can do what it likes.
As much as I sympathise with the victims and the families of the American attacks (at least as much as I sympathise with those Afghans now suffering from US bombings) I just hate it when people come crying here after something The US brought upon itself, however unfair it was. All they will do is make the situation much, much worse for themselves and I don't want to waste time saying 'I told you so' after the next time it happens. Which it will if things carry on the way they do.
And if that sounds hard-hearted, then most of the world is hard-hearted. Tough. Don't expect any compassion from me when you don't show any compassion for others.
[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
"twazzock" LOL 
All this whining about the WTC. I thought you guys were anti-capitalists. I am surprised you aren't dancing in the streets, I am sure that old Ted K. is doing a jig in his cell. After all 6000 capitalists bit the dust along with two symbols of the evil capitalist west. How else do you expect to get capitalists to give up. Do you think a capitalist will give up voluntarily? I think history has shown that once the boot is taken off of their necks most people are eager to become capitalists. The strong, smart and ambitious aren't going to voluntarily allow themselves to be chained to the weak, stupid and lazy for very long. Why do you think the Berlin wall had to be built? It wasn't to keep the capitalists out, it was to keep the wanna be capitalists in. Stalin, Mao, and Castro understood that a worker's paradise could not be built without breaking some eggs. And I shouldn't forget that visionary Pol Pot. He understood what was necessary to rid Cambodia of the evils of capitalism. You guys should really have the courage of your convictions. You claim that capitalism and America are the epitomy of evil and someone finally decided to act on your beliefs 
Still LOL at he fact that Patel is the one who used the term "Uppity" first (post oct 8 11.37pm "Uppity Yanks going all doolah", Post oct 9 9.36pm " bunch of uppity Americans", "post only applies to uppity Yanks" and then PK explained that people using those terms were redneck racist scum , or as he put it..."word used by redneck racist scum"...so Patel, how does it feel to be called this by one of your buddies ...or is the proof that even Patel can be a bit of an ass himself at times...nice teamwork there, guys..(as we say in the Good Old US of A)
LOL
...or is the proof that even Patel can be a bit of an ass himself at times...nice teamwork there, guys..(as we say in the Good Old US of A)LOL
O
Otto
Guest
pk, your attempt to paint me as a racist is weak and juvenile. As for getting an education, even money says you couldn't hold my academic jock.
Whowhere, don't let these cretins push you around. The spectrum of diversity among most u75 posters ranges between piss and moan. And regardless of the issue, it's the American's fault.
wellred is right, the eastern front accounted for something around 2/3 of German casualties. That said, England would still be speaking German had Hitler crushed the British at Dunkirk and stuck to bombibg military targets. Who knows, when the Russians got done with the Germans, they might have felt inclined to roll on the the channel and the Atlantic. Then you could study English as a third language. Good thing the damn yankees saved Europe from that fate. Not to mention the fact that if it weren't for American Marshall Plan money after the war, the whole continent would still be in the stone age.
As for PCS's bullshit about the US bringing it on itself is just that, bullshit. Read Jonathan Alterman's take on silliness like that here.
Whowhere, don't let these cretins push you around. The spectrum of diversity among most u75 posters ranges between piss and moan. And regardless of the issue, it's the American's fault.
wellred is right, the eastern front accounted for something around 2/3 of German casualties. That said, England would still be speaking German had Hitler crushed the British at Dunkirk and stuck to bombibg military targets. Who knows, when the Russians got done with the Germans, they might have felt inclined to roll on the the channel and the Atlantic. Then you could study English as a third language. Good thing the damn yankees saved Europe from that fate. Not to mention the fact that if it weren't for American Marshall Plan money after the war, the whole continent would still be in the stone age.
As for PCS's bullshit about the US bringing it on itself is just that, bullshit. Read Jonathan Alterman's take on silliness like that here.
frogwoman
Let them eat newts
"The spectrum of diversity among most u75 posters ranges between piss and moan. And regardless of the issue, it's the American's fault."
How many times do I have to say it, that is not the view of most u75ers. Most hate the taliban. if you can't be botherd to read our post, dont post here. In thhe style of another rightwing troll a few days ago, don't you have nothing better to do than sit round here arguing with us when you could be doing good for your country?
How many times do I have to say it, that is not the view of most u75ers. Most hate the taliban. if you can't be botherd to read our post, dont post here. In thhe style of another rightwing troll a few days ago, don't you have nothing better to do than sit round here arguing with us when you could be doing good for your country?
O
Otto
Guest
PCS, I read the William Dalrymple article you suggested. Either Mr. Darymple is vastly overstating his case, or the tabloid press in England are some serious assholes. Print, TV, and radio media in the US has been contientiously even handed with regard to Islamic extremism versus mainstream Islam. Several public figures, including an Louisiana congressman, have been publicly bitch slapped for mouthing off with stupid muslim slurs. There have been many articles, TV programs etc here, that attempt to educate as opposed to inflame. Don't take Mr. Dalrymple's analysis as an accurate depiction of what's going on in the US anyway.
O
Otto
Guest
Frogwoman, I don't know what board you're reading, but any hint of pro-Americanism on this board is immediately attacked and shouted down. If they're not pissing about how stupid they think W is, they're moaning that he's going to blow up the world. None of which has the slightest contact with reality. Debate generally consist of "you're a wanker arsehole blah blah blah for saying that blah blah blah," followed by the usual litany of Chile, Guatemala, Iran, blah, blah, blah.
U75 posters may hate the Taliban, but few show any balls to do anything about it.
U75 posters may hate the Taliban, but few show any balls to do anything about it.
J
johnwisehammer
Guest
You mean the kind of balls required to sit at home with a family-sized bucket of fried chicken and whoop while watching the latest footage of ever so brave men drop 2,000 lb bombs on hospitals from 10km altitude?
Riiiight...
Riiiight...
D
Well-Known Member
A few miscellaneous comments:
1) Otto -
While arguably accurate, your incessant references to the ideological homogeneity of urban75 are wearing a bit thin. You have not taken any time to examine the content, most of which has nothing to do with the World Trade Center or the present military intervention, of urban75. You haven't contributed significantly to other threads. In short, your claim that urban75 isn't a paragon of political diversity may be correct, but you're not arguing it from a well-informed position.
2) Otto (again!) -
"grasshopper, the US stopped paying UN dues because because we got tired of financing a bunch of ridiculous ingrates."
Your statement implies either that the US government's neglect of UN dues is a response to an imagined expression of public opinion on the legitimacy of the UN ("we got tired…" [although not tired enough to abandon the Security Council seat]) or that you mistakenly failed to substantiate the claim by attributing it (in its original, non-Otto-paraphrased form) to a member of congress.
What you've left out of your single-sentence analysis of the situation is that the US's decision not to pay its dues might have something to do with the manoeuvering of influential members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (read: JESSE HELMS) and others responsible for appropriations and other decisions of financial and geopolitical import.
2) PatelsCornerShop --
Are you a proponent of any strategy to remove the Taliban from power? If so, what kind of strategy should be employed, who should implement it, and how should they do it?
1) Otto -
While arguably accurate, your incessant references to the ideological homogeneity of urban75 are wearing a bit thin. You have not taken any time to examine the content, most of which has nothing to do with the World Trade Center or the present military intervention, of urban75. You haven't contributed significantly to other threads. In short, your claim that urban75 isn't a paragon of political diversity may be correct, but you're not arguing it from a well-informed position.
2) Otto (again!) -
"grasshopper, the US stopped paying UN dues because because we got tired of financing a bunch of ridiculous ingrates."
Your statement implies either that the US government's neglect of UN dues is a response to an imagined expression of public opinion on the legitimacy of the UN ("we got tired…" [although not tired enough to abandon the Security Council seat]) or that you mistakenly failed to substantiate the claim by attributing it (in its original, non-Otto-paraphrased form) to a member of congress.
What you've left out of your single-sentence analysis of the situation is that the US's decision not to pay its dues might have something to do with the manoeuvering of influential members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (read: JESSE HELMS) and others responsible for appropriations and other decisions of financial and geopolitical import.
2) PatelsCornerShop --
Are you a proponent of any strategy to remove the Taliban from power? If so, what kind of strategy should be employed, who should implement it, and how should they do it?
PatelsCornerShop
watching you watching me
Otto,
Who said that I was taking Dalrymple's comments as ANY depiction of what is going on in the US? Dalrymple certainly isn't. He is just pointing out a few home truths.
I ask this because it seems to me that you can't see the world outside the United States. There is a world out there you know. Have you travelled beyond your country's borders? If so, it doesn't show.
Seeing that Dalrymple is highly respected, and travelled all over the world with first-hand knowledge of what he writes about, I'd take his comments as very credible indeed.
His are not the only comments. There are a number of respectable US commentators too. Chomsky, Edward Said and so on.
And just because you see an article on MSNBC that you happen to agree with, doesn't invalidate what anyone else says. To say that simply makes you out to be narrow-minded. If being narrow-minded is what you want to depict yourself as on these boards, then you've certainly made a lasting impression.
[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
Who said that I was taking Dalrymple's comments as ANY depiction of what is going on in the US? Dalrymple certainly isn't. He is just pointing out a few home truths.
I ask this because it seems to me that you can't see the world outside the United States. There is a world out there you know. Have you travelled beyond your country's borders? If so, it doesn't show.
Seeing that Dalrymple is highly respected, and travelled all over the world with first-hand knowledge of what he writes about, I'd take his comments as very credible indeed.
His are not the only comments. There are a number of respectable US commentators too. Chomsky, Edward Said and so on.
And just because you see an article on MSNBC that you happen to agree with, doesn't invalidate what anyone else says. To say that simply makes you out to be narrow-minded. If being narrow-minded is what you want to depict yourself as on these boards, then you've certainly made a lasting impression.
[ 09 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
D: If you are waiting for "racist redneck scum" PCS (as his buddies call him ) to answer your question about the kind of strategy required to remove the Taliban or indeed to deal with any terrorists, you had better grab a chair, it could take a while...they don't have one that I can tell of... 
) to answer your question about the kind of strategy required to remove the Taliban or indeed to deal with any terrorists, you had better grab a chair, it could take a while...they don't have one that I can tell of... 
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
Yeah, grab a chair...
*yawn*
Your pathetic attempts to drive a wedge between regular posters is weak, man.
A scary thought... how many Americans have the steel to die for the USA compared to the thousands and thousands of Muslims prepared to die in the name of Islam.
*yawn*
Your pathetic attempts to drive a wedge between regular posters is weak, man.
A scary thought... how many Americans have the steel to die for the USA compared to the thousands and thousands of Muslims prepared to die in the name of Islam.
J
johnwisehammer
Guest
Scarier: how many Muslims are the US willing to let die for the USA?
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
And how many Muslims are living in America waiting with boxcutters for the next opportunity.
Leaves me cold.
Let there be no mistake, what happened on Sept 11th was pure evil.
But an over-the-top-gung-ho-cavalier-go-get-em attitude typical of US Army will achieve NOTHING!
Kill the Taliban leaders, and stick Bin Laden's head on a stick, I don't care about him, but the longer he lives the stronger his martyrdom.
I wouldn't be surprised to see him as a world leader in the future.
You don't believe me?? We'll see....
Leaves me cold.
Let there be no mistake, what happened on Sept 11th was pure evil.
But an over-the-top-gung-ho-cavalier-go-get-em attitude typical of US Army will achieve NOTHING!
Kill the Taliban leaders, and stick Bin Laden's head on a stick, I don't care about him, but the longer he lives the stronger his martyrdom.
I wouldn't be surprised to see him as a world leader in the future.
You don't believe me?? We'll see....
pk, i'm sorry, i've missed some irony somewhere, or you're in two minds (or bodies) 
D - rather than argue against someone who will disappear shortly back to where ever - what's your take on what is happening, and what the alternative can be?
Also - for a confused newcomer - what is the usual range of opinions on the boards?
assuming Otto and friends aren't usually around?
pcs -
D - rather than argue against someone who will disappear shortly back to where ever - what's your take on what is happening, and what the alternative can be?
Also - for a confused newcomer - what is the usual range of opinions on the boards?
assuming Otto and friends aren't usually around?
pcs -
PatelsCornerShop
watching you watching me
To rasrave and other less-enlightened people:
To answer D's question, it certainly wouldn't involve funding them with weapons, something that America found highly profitable, even just a few weeks back, when Bush donated $43 million to them.
Imagine. Some of that money could even have been used to bomb the WTC. Ironic that your own hard-earned (assuming that any of you lot actually do any real work) tax dollars could have been used against your own people, eh?
The answer is simple. If you're serious with dealing with terrorism then you have to look at your own back yard. You simply have to stop funding it. So you stop funding Israel with arms and money, which this seems to be the root cause of, judging by what Bin Laden has actually said. Stop funding the Taliban regime. Refuse to trade with them. Refuse to trade with anyone who deals with them. If the American dollar is almighty, the effects will be felt sooner or later.
At the same time, give the Taliban an incentive to change. Promise them cash if they follow progressive policies then sanctions will not only be lifted, but that they might get some sort of a Marshall Plan to get the country on it's feet again. Remember that after 20 years of war and famine, they simply have no incentive to stop what they see as working for their country.
All this has got to be done with the international community, or it won't work.
But of course this is not going to happen. The US simply has too much to lose by people becoming progressive and having actual power to decide things for themselves. Imagine if Middle Eastern countries suddenly got democratic. They might decide to impose an oil embargo to protest against American support of Israel. That would never do. And imagine if Afghanistan actually became a powerful economic and free nation. It's people might decide the same. They might stop a proposed pipeline through Afghanistan with access to cheap Central Asian oil.
So it doesn't suit America to do anything to the Taliban, apart from replace it with another equally tyrannical regime - the Northern Alliance. This will be done with missiles and bombs. It will breed resentment and hatred. One day that resentment and hatred will again turn on the Americans. As we've already seen.
But at that point Americans will simply have brought that resentment and terror upon themselves. Because they created and funded it. Not for nothing will they be termed 'uppity' again as they manufacture shock and horror at the purported outrage of it all.
To answer D's question, it certainly wouldn't involve funding them with weapons, something that America found highly profitable, even just a few weeks back, when Bush donated $43 million to them.
Imagine. Some of that money could even have been used to bomb the WTC. Ironic that your own hard-earned (assuming that any of you lot actually do any real work) tax dollars could have been used against your own people, eh?
The answer is simple. If you're serious with dealing with terrorism then you have to look at your own back yard. You simply have to stop funding it. So you stop funding Israel with arms and money, which this seems to be the root cause of, judging by what Bin Laden has actually said. Stop funding the Taliban regime. Refuse to trade with them. Refuse to trade with anyone who deals with them. If the American dollar is almighty, the effects will be felt sooner or later.
At the same time, give the Taliban an incentive to change. Promise them cash if they follow progressive policies then sanctions will not only be lifted, but that they might get some sort of a Marshall Plan to get the country on it's feet again. Remember that after 20 years of war and famine, they simply have no incentive to stop what they see as working for their country.
All this has got to be done with the international community, or it won't work.
But of course this is not going to happen. The US simply has too much to lose by people becoming progressive and having actual power to decide things for themselves. Imagine if Middle Eastern countries suddenly got democratic. They might decide to impose an oil embargo to protest against American support of Israel. That would never do. And imagine if Afghanistan actually became a powerful economic and free nation. It's people might decide the same. They might stop a proposed pipeline through Afghanistan with access to cheap Central Asian oil.
So it doesn't suit America to do anything to the Taliban, apart from replace it with another equally tyrannical regime - the Northern Alliance. This will be done with missiles and bombs. It will breed resentment and hatred. One day that resentment and hatred will again turn on the Americans. As we've already seen.
But at that point Americans will simply have brought that resentment and terror upon themselves. Because they created and funded it. Not for nothing will they be termed 'uppity' again as they manufacture shock and horror at the purported outrage of it all.
PatelsCornerShop
watching you watching me
Oh, and one the other most fanatical regimes after Afghanistan is Saudi Arabia. They don't treat their women well either. And Osama, a fellow Saudi, is a veritable angel compared to some you'll come across.
However, the Saudi regime is protected and supported by the good 'ol U S of A. They're so close that I'm sure Bush would bend over for a good rogering if one of the House of Saud wanted to pass time between playing the card version of poker in one of their many casinos in the States.
Since Bush probably uses Saudi oil as lube, he probably wouldn't say too much about the appalling human rights abuses in Saudi at the moment, or the fact that Saudi riches fund terror groups that we're all supposed to be so much against. Because otherwise he'd very definitely be fucked.
However, the Saudi regime is protected and supported by the good 'ol U S of A. They're so close that I'm sure Bush would bend over for a good rogering if one of the House of Saud wanted to pass time between playing the card version of poker in one of their many casinos in the States.
Since Bush probably uses Saudi oil as lube, he probably wouldn't say too much about the appalling human rights abuses in Saudi at the moment, or the fact that Saudi riches fund terror groups that we're all supposed to be so much against. Because otherwise he'd very definitely be fucked.
O
Otto
Guest
D, So I'm right, just not for the right reason? How do you know what else I read on this board? The fact is I can only debate so many nitwits at once. If I were to respond to every misguided, uninformed twit here, I'd spend my whole day typing. I'd have no time to dedicate to the advancement of capitalism and globalism. Besides, rasrave seems to be holding up fine under the usual lefty pacifict squall on other threads.
As much as I dislike having to say I agree with Jesse Helms, someone has to stand up and say NO to finacing a boondogle like the UN. If Jesse will take the heat for it, more power to him.
PCS, you have to be the pettiest, most argumentative fucker I've ever had to deal with. You just wear me out. Despite your denials, the implications of your referencing the Darymple article are clear. I simply wanted to make clear that the US media has been scrupulous about not casting ethnic aspersions. Something I figured you might appreciate. Can't even throw you a bone without you complaining.
Yes, I've travelled quite extensively outside the US, and I'll put my list of passport stamps up against yours any day. Presumptuous jerk.
The point of the Newsweek MSNBC reference was to note to a source of information that had immediate relevance to the conversation and included a great deal of historical context clearly unknown to the posters here. And that it came from the usually banal Newsweek/MSNBC.
And please don't say Noam Chomsky or Edward Said in the same breath with the words "repectable" or "commentator". It does violence to the language and might give the impression that either of those two blowhards have the slightest idea what the fuck they are talking about. Both are so consistently proven dead wrong (although for the right reasons) that I can't fathom why we have to sacrifice trees to print their shit. But, I guess the first amendment has to apply everyone, no matter how stupid. If you want liberal rambling, try Christofer Hitchens, at least he's funny.
As much as I dislike having to say I agree with Jesse Helms, someone has to stand up and say NO to finacing a boondogle like the UN. If Jesse will take the heat for it, more power to him.
PCS, you have to be the pettiest, most argumentative fucker I've ever had to deal with. You just wear me out. Despite your denials, the implications of your referencing the Darymple article are clear. I simply wanted to make clear that the US media has been scrupulous about not casting ethnic aspersions. Something I figured you might appreciate. Can't even throw you a bone without you complaining.
Yes, I've travelled quite extensively outside the US, and I'll put my list of passport stamps up against yours any day. Presumptuous jerk.
The point of the Newsweek MSNBC reference was to note to a source of information that had immediate relevance to the conversation and included a great deal of historical context clearly unknown to the posters here. And that it came from the usually banal Newsweek/MSNBC.
And please don't say Noam Chomsky or Edward Said in the same breath with the words "repectable" or "commentator". It does violence to the language and might give the impression that either of those two blowhards have the slightest idea what the fuck they are talking about. Both are so consistently proven dead wrong (although for the right reasons) that I can't fathom why we have to sacrifice trees to print their shit. But, I guess the first amendment has to apply everyone, no matter how stupid. If you want liberal rambling, try Christofer Hitchens, at least he's funny.
PatelsCornerShop
watching you watching me
Pettiest?
Surely you mean 'Prettiest'...
I'm sorry that I've worn you out. Perhaps it is what your lil 'ol tired out brain actually needs - a refreshing change of perspective.
Sometimes reality does hit hard and it takes time to digest. But I daresay one day it'll happen. Just keep on treading these boards and exercising...
[ 10 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
Surely you mean 'Prettiest'...
I'm sorry that I've worn you out. Perhaps it is what your lil 'ol tired out brain actually needs - a refreshing change of perspective.
Sometimes reality does hit hard and it takes time to digest. But I daresay one day it'll happen. Just keep on treading these boards and exercising...
[ 10 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]
K
kissthecat
Guest
PCS, you have to be the prettiest, most argumentative fucker I've ever had to deal with. You just wear me out
---------------
NO, NO, NO! It's me! Doh, wrong bloke that was another redneck please forgive me.
----------------
Yes, I've travelled quite extensively outside the US, and I'll put my list of passport stamps up against yours any day. Presumptuous jerk.
teehee
[ 10 October 2001: Message edited by: kissthecat ]
---------------
NO, NO, NO! It's me! Doh, wrong bloke that was another redneck please forgive me.
----------------
Yes, I've travelled quite extensively outside the US, and I'll put my list of passport stamps up against yours any day. Presumptuous jerk.
teehee
[ 10 October 2001: Message edited by: kissthecat ]
Similar threads
