|
|
|
lpetrich
Skeptic Friend
USA
74 Posts |
 Posted - 11/03/2001 : 05:53:33 [Permalink]
|
First off, I wish to ask if it is unpatriotic and traitorous and "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" to complain about paying taxes to the US government. This is because denying it tax revenue means that it will not be able to do such things as fight the Forces of Evil.
Rubysue:
Greetings! Rubysue the insane ranter is back to annoy everyone with a new, VERY LONG, rambling politically incorrect diatribe! ...
LP:
I do agree that Noam Chomsky does go to excess, and I certainly don't agree with his continual implication that the US government is the cause of all the trouble in the world. Here's an example of something that his universal-imperialist hypothesis does not explain:
Support of both Israel and friendly Arab countries. Support for friendly Arab countries is understandable, because that support keeps the oil flowing. However, support for Israel does no such thing, because Israel not only has no oil, it is hated by many Arabs, for reasons both good and bad.
A real imperialist tries to prevent squabbles among subjects; such squabbles get in the way of imperialism. Consider the sort of peace that many empires have known, such as the Ottoman and Soviet empires. But the US has had only a limited amount of success in getting Israel and the Arab nations to make peace with each other.
Rubysue:
... and Zinn has kept classrooms full of privileged brats spellbound with his lectures at Boston University and his books are standard issue at every major University.
LP:
So they have the "wrong" class origins? Who would you take seriously, rubysue?
rubysue:
[Zinn's _magnum opus_...] After I gagged up a hairball reading his outdated socialistic tripe, I then spent time studying the socialist/anarchist ravings of Professor Chomsky ...
LP:
Whatever "socialism" is supposed to be; that word is often used as a content-free dirty word.
Rubysue:
Since the atrocities of September 11, it has become very clear to me that individuals like Chomsky and Zinn belong to that elite covert group known as the “Fifth Column” (go look it up yourselves, folks; I'm not going to do all the work).
LP:
They may be silly, but has anyone ever shown that they are in the pay of Al Qaeda?
rubysue:
[Noam Chomsky quote]
"Wealth and power tend to accrue to those who are ruthless, cunning, avaricious, self-seeking, lacking in sympathy and compassion, subservient to authority and willing to abandon principle for material gain, and so on."
LP:
There are legions of examples of that; is rubysue denying that?
rubysue:
... Gee, I wonder what Chomsky does with his honorariums and book earnings and lecture fees and MIT professor's salary and movie residuals? Gives it all away, I'm sure (this little detail of his life is quite invisible after extensive web searches, so who knows? I would bet the farm, though, that ol' Noam lives pretty high on the hog, in a covert way). Chomsky has also garnered a lot of influence and power due to his viewpoints and writings, so do the descriptions in this quote also apply to him?
LP:
One can certainly ask where the money goes; it may go where Ralph Nader's money goes to: to his causes and to investments in businesses that he considers virtuous. Ralph Nader, despite his personal wealth, lives very frugal life.
And the last I saw, NC does not control any big corporate empires or lobbying organizations.
rubysue:
... Oh, goody, yet another tired collectivist utopian vision of a world where we all get to vote on absolutely everything and wear little matching ugly brown suits and drive hideous Trabants or Yugos.
LP:
From a grove of birch trees it came.
rubysue:
In our capitalistic society (something that ol' Noam despises but certainly takes advantage of) we already have freedom of choice in just about every decision that we make (barring criminal behavior), such as choosing a bank or buying a car (or not).
LP:
However, one can only choose what the producers decide to produ |
 |
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 06:05:53 [Permalink]
|
LP,
That's a bit confusing. Um, some of the things you seem to attribute to rubysue are quotes she pulled from Chomsky and some are quotes you pulled from rubysue. Maybe some clarification between rubysue and Chomsky?
It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those threeunspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudencenever to practice either of them. -Mark Twain |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 07:08:22 [Permalink]
|
LP, I'd be the last to say that either Chomsky or Zinn or flawless. Actually, next to last. They'd be the last. However, you accuse Chomsky of excesses, and you have engaged in a pretty good one by saying that Chomsky blames the U.S. for every problem in the world. That's ridiculous. I think what Chomsky does is try to put what the U.S. does in some kind of reasonable context. Terrorism, for instance, is terrorism only when certain people do it in the minds of many. That's just a for instance. These kinds of things are insults to people like Rubysue, who confuse anger with reason and think mindless devotion to the state is a virtue.
I don't have any real problem with the Chomsky quotes, but the one about wealth and avariciousness doesn't sound like Chomsky and it seems like it was taken out of context. I'll try to look into that one if I can. Chomsky is out of the country for a couple of months, or I'd try to ask him.
I'll get back to you on the Faurisson and Khmer Rouge thing.
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa - Cat Stevens |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 07:26:06 [Permalink]
|
I thought that I found a better, more recent article on Faurisson, but this one will have to do.
faurisson
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa - Cat Stevens
Edited by - Gorgo on 11/03/2001 07:27:57
Edited by - Gorgo on 11/03/2001 07:29:32
Edited by - Gorgo on 11/03/2001 07:31:19 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 08:40:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Gee, I wonder what Chomsky does with his honorariums and book earnings and lecture fees and MIT professor's salary and movie residuals? Gives it all away, I'm sure (this little detail of his life is quite invisible after extensive web searches, so who knows? I would bet the farm, though, that ol' Noam lives pretty high on the hog, in a covert way). Chomsky has also garnered a lot of influence and power due to his viewpoints and writings, so do the descriptions in this quote also apply to him?]
I have no idea of the extent of Chomsky's wealth or what he does with it. He has made no bones about the fact that he lives in at least relative luxury, and again, if you knew much about Chomsky, you would know that that has nothing to do with anything. Again, I would question the source of that quote, but have no way to confirm or deny at the moment. If you could come up with the book, speech or article that it came from, that would help.
quote:
"If the Nuremberg laws were applied today, then every Post-War American president would have to be hanged."
[Source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/3345/chomsky.html. The sophistry of this statement is utterly painful and it is an outrageous insult to American citizens with any moral integrity (something that Noam lost in the linguistics woods a long time ago); it also dishonors the memory of those who were victims of the Third Reich. Of course, I have a dirty secret I've uncovered about Noam that is coming up soon in this diatribe that might explain why he would casually make such a vicious statement!).
Again, if you knew anything about Chomsky, you would know that it is not a casual statement. You've not done anything so far to refute any of the evidence (good or bad) that Chomsky has to back up anything that he's said. Somehow you think because you're insulted (which you seem to be about just about most of reality) it must be wrong.
quote:
"Democracy requires dissolution of private power. As long as there is private control over the economic system, talk about democracy is a joke. You can't even talk about democracy until you have democratic control of industry, commerce, banking, everything..."
[Source: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~anow/ppl/rev/chomsky/quote.html. Oh, goody, yet another tired collectivist utopian vision of a world where we all get to vote on absolutely everything and wear little matching ugly brown suits and drive hideous Trabants or Yugos. In our capitalistic society (something that ol' Noam despises but certainly takes advantage of) we already have freedom of choice in just about every decision that we make (barring criminal behavior), such as choosing a bank or buying a car (or not).The ashes of collectivism can be seen all over the world – it doesn't work, so get over the Marxist love affair!].
Blah blah blah. Talk about buzzword generators. You associate democracy with voting. There is plenty of voting in Cuba.
quote:
" The U.S. will not permit constructive programs in its own domains, so it must ensure that they are destroyed elsewhere to terminate " the threat of a good example".
[Source: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/Chomsky_quot |
|
|
|
lpetrich
Skeptic Friend
USA
74 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 10:22:10 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo:
LP, I'd be the last to say that either Chomsky or Zinn or flawless. Actually, next to last. They'd be the last. However, you accuse Chomsky of excesses, and you have engaged in a pretty good one by saying that Chomsky blames the U.S. for every problem in the world. That's ridiculous. I think what Chomsky does is try to put what the U.S. does in some kind of reasonable context. ...
LP:
However, he concentrates almost exclusively on US-government villainy -- at least on what a left-winger would consider villainous.
I think that it would be fun to imagine what Noam Chomsky would have thought about the attack on Pearl Harbor had he been living and working back then -- he would have claimed that it's all the fault of US policy in the western Pacific, a result of the US interfering with Japan's legitimate quest to build its "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere". And given his track record with the Khmer Rouge massacres, he might have found it hard to take seriously such atrocities as the Nanjing massacre.
Gorgo:
... These kinds of things are insults to people like Rubysue, who confuse anger with reason and think mindless devotion to the state is a virtue.
LP:
Which is why I asked about taxes. Simply mentioning taxes makes a lot of "patriots" go "But... but... but...".
Also, I think that a special Air Force squadron ought to be created for jingoistic "patriotic" jerks (they know who they are). A squadron to be called the "Divine Wind Special Attack Squadron".
Translate that into Japanese, at least the "divine wind" part, and you'll get the idea of what kind of missions it will be flying.
Edited by - lpetrich on 11/03/2001 10:27:36 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 10:34:17 [Permalink]
|
You really don't need to guess what Chomsky says about Pearl Harbor. I think Parenti has some interesting things to say as well. I think both would say that the attack on Pearl Harbor was both criminal and stupid, as was the attack on New York and Washington. The idea that it's "anti-American" when some suggest we need to start looking at the terrorism of U.S. foreign policy is insane.
quote:
Gorgo:
LP, I'd be the last to say that either Chomsky or Zinn or flawless. Actually, next to last. They'd be the last. However, you accuse Chomsky of excesses, and you have engaged in a pretty good one by saying that Chomsky blames the U.S. for every problem in the world. That's ridiculous. I think what Chomsky does is try to put what the U.S. does in some kind of reasonable context. ...
LP:
However, he concentrates almost exclusively on US-government villainy -- at least on what a left-winger would consider villainous.
I think that it would be fun to imagine what Noam Chomsky would have thought about the attack on Pearl Harbor had he been living and working back then -- he would have claimed that it's all the fault of US policy in the western Pacific, a result of the US interfering with Japan's legitimate quest to build its "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere". And given his track record with the Khmer Rouge massacres, he might have found it hard to take seriously such atrocities as the Nanjing massacre.
Gorgo:
... These kinds of things are insults to people like Rubysue, who confuse anger with reason and think mindless devotion to the state is a virtue.
LP:
Which is why I asked about taxes. Simply mentioning taxes makes a lot of "patriots" go "But... but... but...".
Also, I think that a special Air Force squadron ought to be created for jingoistic "patriotic" jerks (they know who they are). A squadron to be called the "Divine Wind Special Attack Squadron".
Translate that into Japanese, at least the "divine wind" part, and you'll get the idea of what kind of missions it will be flying.
Edited by - lpetrich on 11/03/2001 10:27:36
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa - Cat Stevens |
|
|
|
lpetrich
Skeptic Friend
USA
74 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 10:36:29 [Permalink]
|
Noam Chomsky:
"If the Nuremberg laws were applied today, then every Post-War American president would have to be hanged."
LP:
I wonder what he might possibly be referring to. Has he ever explained?
|
|
|
|
rubysue
Skeptic Friend
USA
199 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 10:37:38 [Permalink]
|
Good morning -
A few comments are in order after seeing the expected and unexpected reactions to this diatribe.
First, thanks for the nice comments from many of you on this research. I worked on this for several days, roaming across the Internet at will and am currently compiling my evidence against the minds of Zinn and Clark.
1) The reference that Chomsky made about the Jewish mayor in New York was done during the Ed Koch era. Guiliani is, indeed, Italian by background.
2) For those confused about the origin of the Chomsky quotes (other than the evidence about his anti-semitism and denial of the extent of Khmer Rouge atrocities) I retrieved the quotations from the following sources, all considered "pro-Chomsky". Many of the quotes were referenced in more than one source.
http://www.zmag.org/quotes/search.htm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/Chomsky_quotes.html
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/3345/chomsky.html
http://burn.ucsd.edu/~anow/ppl/rev/chomsky/quote.html
3) To Ieptrich - Thank you for your comments. I disagree with most of them, as you might expect. I did not write this dissertation with the expectation that everyone would admire my diatribe and agree with my research. Chomsky and Zinn themselves have long advocated a system of anarcho or democratic socialism, as originally defined by Marx. If you don't believe me, then go do your own research. I will be examining Zinn's ideas next and his expositions are loaded with classic socialism. I do NOT want a socialistic system as a form of government and will "do battle" with the minions who do advocate such a form of government. I believe that some of the most evil words ever written in the history of humanity are: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". The "privileged brats" comment is entirely reasonable; both Chomsky and Zinn have taught at Universities that cost a BUNDLE to attend, unless you are fortunate enough to have been given a grant or scholarship. Their political stance and opinions intend to cast shame on the privileged class origins of their students, so that they will rise up against the "propagandistic ruling class." (This comment was meant as sarcasm, by the way, an intellectual tool that is completely misunderstood by the earnest revolutionary).
A "Fifth Column" is defined as follows (I have to do all the work after all); from Britannica.com:
"clandestine group or faction of subversive agents who attempt to undermine a nation's solidarity by any means at their disposal. The term is credited to Emilio Mola Vidal, a Nationalist general during the Spanish Civil War (1936–39). As four of his army columns moved on Madrid, the general referred to his militant supporters within the capital as his “fifth column,” intent on…"
Chomsky is not necessarily in the employ of the Al Qaeda (although there is growing evidence of a possible clandestine link between neo-Nazi groups and Islamist terrorist organizations; see the link below for open evidence of such a link.) He has the right to his opinions, of course, but the rest of us also have the right to public discourse condemning those opinions and trying to set the record straight.
Oh, and by the way, I didn't say that the rest of humanity was "evil and subhuman"; you are putting words in my mouth that are not there. As a point of interest, a LEFTIST publication has this to say about the varied contributions of the Third World versus the West:
http://www.consider.net/forum_new.php3?newTemplate=OpenObject&newTop=200110290021&newDisplayURN=200110290021
Oh, and also by the way, among the most vicious arbiters of "power and wealth" in history were the elite in the Soviet Communist Party. Capitalists have had their share of complete bastards, but to paint them with such a broad brush as Chomsky does is fallacious in the extreme.
4) To Gorgo: Your reaction is completely expected. I did not once resort to anger in my diatribe and challenge you to show me where it resides (you seem to confuse anger with sarcasm and wit). I have attacked your demigod and you can't stand it, so you resort to the typical belittling arguments. My freedom of speech is acceptable, apparently, but only if it falls in line with the orthodoxy and political correctness of the left. Once I go "outside the boundaries", then I should be silenced through the clever trick that you have of posting response after response after response.
Chomsky's defense of Faurisson is cleverly devious (what else is new for the master linguist?) and completely misleading. Faurisson is an ACTIVE Holocaust denier, as evidenced by this vile website and his partnership with the Radio Islam network. He is on the active hate and extremist "watch list" of the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Elie Wiesenthal organiation.
http://abbc.com/revisionism/english.htm
I do understand lots and lots of big words and ideas, but I prefer them to be put together in ways that are compelling and interesting. I don't have "blind devotion" to the state, just "blind devotion" to driving you nuts. 
Good day...
rubysue
If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun.
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:40:51
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:42:17
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:43:53
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:48:54 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 11:01:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Good morning -
Good morning
quote:
1) The reference that Chomsky made about the Jewish mayor in New York was done during the Ed Koch era. Guiliani is, indeed, Italian by background.
Any help with a source on this? From the way that whoever brought this up talked, that this was an anti-semitic remark?
quote:
4) To Gorgo: Your reaction is completely expected. I did not once resort to anger
It was you that brought up anger, and your obvious emotional reaction to Zinn and Chomsky have more to do with your fears than anything that exists in reality.
quote:
in my diatribe and challenge you to show me where it resides ( you seem to confuse anger with sarcasm and wit). I have attacked your demigod and you can't stand it,
On the contrary. I would love some reasonably presented information. I haven't seen it yet. It would be nice to find out that God is in his heaven that Jesus really does save and that George Bush is a hero, and that I no longer have to wonder why people like you seem to love lies. That would make my life so much easier. Please, please try to inform me as much as you can about the flaws of my "demigods." That is not sarcasm at all. Somehow because you need to worship nonsense, you think everyone else does. I don't.
quote:
so you resort to the typical belittling arguments. My freedom of speech is acceptable, apparently, but only if it falls in line with the orthodoxy and political correctness of the left.
I have not belittled people, I have simply shot holes in your worthless "arguments." I have repeatedly said that I have no problem with you. Your problems are with yourself. In the midst of all your emotional rants, I may learn something.
quote:
Chomsky's defense of Faurisson is cleverly devious (what else is new for the master linguist?) and completely misleading. Faurisson is an ACTIVE Holocaust denier, as evidenced by this vile website and his partnership with the Radio Islam network.
http://abbc.com/revisionism/english.htm
Oh, and also, also by the way, I do understand lots and lots of big words and ideas, but I prefer them to be put together in ways that are compelling and interesting. I don't have "blind devotion" to the state, just "blind devotion" to driving you nuts.
Good day...
rubysue
If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun.
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:40:51
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:42:17
Edited by - rubysue on 11/03/2001 10:43:53
Good. Please continue. Is anyone asking you to stop?
I am not clear on Chomsky's comments about Faurisson not being anti-Semitic and those comments may be irrelevant and even stupid. However, it is completely illogical to assume that because someone is a Holocaust denier that that automatically makes them anti-Semitic or pro-Nazi. Chomsky's "support" of Faurisson, however, is limited to his freedom of speech, and as far as I know does not agree with Faurisson in any way. The lies about his support of Pol Pot are just cheap shots from nowhere and it does your cause no good to continue to promote such obvious smears.
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa - Cat Stevens |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 11:13:28 [Permalink]
|
From an interview with "Rage Against The Machine"
"Well, with Truman you could start with, shortly after he entered office there was the bombing of Hiroshima, which maybe one could give an argument for -- well, I don't think so -- but it is almost impossible to give an argument for the bombing of Nagasaki. That was mostly just trying out a new weapon to see if it would work. Then there was an utterly gratuitous bombing, a one thousand plane raid at the end of the war -- right in fact after Japan surrendered -- called the "finale," the grand finale. Then comes, for example, the support for the brutal counter-insurgency campaign in Greece, which killed about 150,000 people to basically restore Nazi collaborators and demolish the resistance. And then we could go on from there.
Eisenhower. The Eisenhower administration, the Truman and Eisenhower administration, the bombings -- whatever you think about the Korean War, and there is a pretty complicated story when you really look at it, but nevertheless the bombings in North Korea in 1951 and 1952 was just an outright war crime. You can read in the Air Force history about how in the Eisenhower years they had nothing left to bomb, everything was flat, so they just bomb dams, which they exalt how wonderful it was to see the water flooding down and killing people and wiping out the crops and so on. Well people were hanged for that, for less than that. They were hanged for opening dikes in Nuremberg. And then again we can proceed with what happened in
Guatemala and elsewhere where it was a terrible crime in the Eisenhower years.
Kennedy is not even worth discussing. The invasion in South Vietnam -- Kennedy attacked South Vietnam, outright. In 1961-1962 he sent Air Force to start bombing villages, authorized napalm. Also laid the basis for the huge wave of repression that spread over Latin America with the installation of Neo-Nazi gangsters that were always supported directly by the United States. That went on and in fact picked up under Johnson.
In the Nixon years, for example, the bombing of inner Cambodia in 1973 was a monstrous crime. It was just massacring peasants in inner Cambodia. It isn't much reported here because nobody paid attention, but it was quite a part in helping create the basis for the Khmer Rouge. Well, the CIA estimate is that 600,000 people were killed in the course of those US actions, either directed or actually carried out by the United States.
In the Carter years there were major crimes, for example the Indonesian invasion of East Timor, which happened to start under Ford and led to the nearest thing to genocide since the holocaust, maybe 1/3 or 1/4 of the population has been slaughtered. That was using 90% US arms. In the Carter years, when the Indonesians were actually running out of arms in their attack on this country, Carter actually increased the flow of arms in 1978, which was the worst peak of the slaughter. Carter was backing Somoza and his national guard, openly and with direct military and diplomatic support at a time when they had
killed about 40,000 people in the terror of the last days of their regime. Again, that's a sample.
Going on to the Reagan years, its not even a question. In fact the US was condemned by the World Court during the Reagan years for its "unlawful use of force," meaning aggression in Nicaragua. In Central America alone, maybe 200,000 people or so were slaughtered in a very brutal fashion by US run programs. In southern Africa about 1.5 million people were killed and over $60 billion of damage were done according to the UN commission which reviewed it later from 1980 to 1988. That's from South African atrocities that the US was directly supporting. Then, again we could go on. Well Bush, we've already talked about him, but the invasion of Panama for example was simply outright aggression. It was condemned internationally -- the US was able to veto the security counsel condemnations, that doesn't change the fact that they were there.
When we move on to the Clinton years, one of his first acts within a few months was to send missiles to bomb Baghdad. Well, he didn't kill a huge amount of people, only I think 8 or so. But there was absolutely no pretext, there wasn't even a pretext. I
mean it was to show what a tough guy he is. In fact the pretext was so ludicrous, it's embarrassing to repeat it. The pretext was
that this was self defense against armed attack, because two months earlier there had been a failed attempt by someone who might or might not have been Iraqi, no one knew at the time, to kill Bush or something like that. I mean, it's just ridiculous.
About half of military aid and training to Latin America under Clinton was going to Columbia, which has absolutely the worst
human rights record in the hemisphere, killing thousands of people in a horrifying fashion. These are all crimes. I don't think it's hard to set up a bill of indictment if somebody wants to."
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa - Cat Stevens |
|
|
|
Kaptain K
New Member
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 11:36:40 [Permalink]
|
Good job Lisa. Not only entertaining and thought provoking, but worth it just for the knee jerk response(s) it provoked from Gorgo.
|
|
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 11:44:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Good job Lisa. Not only entertaining and thought provoking, but worth it just for the knee jerk response(s) it provoked from Gorgo.
Whoops! You've mixed me up with Rubysue. I agree with her 100% by the way. She writes so much better than I do that anything I could add would be superfluous.
Lisa
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room.
Edited by - Lisa on 11/03/2001 11:45:08 |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 11/03/2001 : 12:23:55 [Permalink]
|
Belately joins the applause, and standing ovation for rubysue..,  then realizes me sense of ti-ti-timing has failed me again, sits down very quickly. 
Just admire your patientence in finding and posting, your sources, rubysue. Would hope those attempting to refute your position, will take the time to post their sources as well. Will have to mull over for a bit, all you've had to say, should me even have anything to contribute, this is my first reading. But know we are in the same corner as to the reaction to 911, and knowing what is to be done about them. You go girl!
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -Voltaire |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
