An Open Letter To The Hollywood Bunch

[Boedy]

Ok let’s just say for a moment you bunch of pampered, overpaid,
unrealistic children had your way and the U.S.A. didn’t go into Iraq.

Let’s say that you really get your way and we destroy all our nuclear
weapons and stick daisies in our gun barrels and sit around with some
white wine and cheese and pat ourselves on the back, so proud of what
we’ve done for world peace.

Let’s say that we cut the military budget to just enough to keep the
National Guard on hand to help out with floods and fires.

Let’s say that we close down our military bases all over the world and
bring the troops home, increase our foreign aid and drop all the trade
sanctions against everybody.

I suppose that in your fantasy world this would create a utopian world
where everybody would live in peace. After all, the great monster, the
United States of America, the cause of all the world’s trouble would
have disbanded it’s horrible military and certainly all the other
countries of the world would follow suit.

After all, they only arm themselves to defend their countries from the
mean old U.S.A.

Why you bunch of pitiful, hypocritical, idiotic, spoiled mugwumps.
get your head out of the sand and smell the Trade Towers burning.
Do you think that a trip to Iraq by Sean Penn did anything but encourage
a wanton murderer to think that the people of the U.S.A. didn’t have the
nerve or the guts to fight him?

Barbra Streisand’s fanatical and hateful rankings about George Bush
makes about as much sense as Michael Jackson hanging a baby over a
railing.

You people need to get out of Hollywood once in a while and get out into
the real world. You’d be surprised at the hostility you would find out
here.
Stop in at a truck stop and tell an overworked, long distance truck
driver that you don’t think Saddam Hussein is doing anything wrong.

Tell a farmer with a couple of sons in the military that you think the
United States has no right to defend itself.

Go down to Baxley, Georgia and hold an anti-war rally and see what the
folks down there think about you.

You people are some of the most disgusting examples of a waste of
protoplasm I’ve ever had the displeasure to hear about.

Sean Penn, you’re a traitor to the United States of America. You gave
aid and comfort to the enemy. How many American lives will your
little, ”fact finding trip“ to Iraq cost? You encouraged Saddam to
think that we didn’t have the stomach for war.

You people protect one of the most evil men on the face of this earth
and won’t lift a finger to save the life of an unborn baby. Freedom of
choice you say?

Well I’m going to exercise some freedom of choice of my own. If I see
any of your names on a marquee, I’m going to boycott the movie. I will
completely stop going to movies if I have to. In most cases it
certainly wouldn’t be much of a loss.

You scoff at our military who’s boots you’re not even worthy to shine.
They go to battle and risk their lives so ingrates like you can live in
luxury.
The day of reckoning is coming when you will be faced with the
undeniable truth that the war against Saddam Hussein is the war on
terrorism.

America is in imminent danger. You’re either for her or against her.
There is no middle ground.

I think we all know where you stand.

What do you think?

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels
[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[RvW]

Despite my liberal slant, I cant stand to hear the holllywood crowd speak out on anything!

Who needs the advice of people who are paid tremendous amounts of money to PRETEND they are someone else?

Wheres this countries priorities at?, pay the teachers and the police and the firefighters instead of the darn actors and atheletes.

Two thumbs up for Jack Daniels!...oops I mean Charlie

[ 03-05-2003, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

But they have such talent

[speyfly]

Personally I believe that all should have freedom of speach including you too Boedy.

[CATCH AND EAT]

Mugwumps, I love that word. :grin: . For a minute the I thought I might be reading a Michael Savage transcript.

While many in Hollywood sicken me there are the exceptions that we cannot lump in with the rest. Sela Ward, James Woods just to name a couple.

I would have to agree with Charlie on Sean Penn though. What a pathetic effort and waste of TV time this boy is.

Definitly way far right of my position and I cannot agree with much of his thinking. Mostly of which is inflamatory. Yet, much of what hollywood does is inflamatory so I guess Hollywood and Charlie are even. :tongue:

BTW, I will never watch a Sean Penn or Susan Sarandon movie again. They are both terrible anyways.

Also, Hollywood alway like to ruin a perfectly good movie by lambasting the republican party. Take "Sneakers" for example. Great movies.

Heck, maybe Pam Anderson will start a PETA project to free enslaved Camels.

[ 03-05-2003, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: CATCH AND EAT ]

[crabbait]

Ok, I read Charlie's rant twice. Just exactly what is his point?

That anyone who does not agree with him is an idiot?

That there is a lot of misguided hostility in the working class?

That the only way to live in this world is to ensure that everyone alse in it is afraid of your jack-booted military might?

Smell the towers burning yourself, Charlie Daniels, it is exactly this arrogant thinking that causes people to get a box knife and hijack an airplane so they can show us that we do not own the world.

By the way, Boedy's post quoting Charlie Daniels is a perfect example of the kind of mindless rant that we do not need. He makes no arguement for why his thinking is correct, just calls anyone who thinks otherwise names.

Take a good look. What do you think Charlie was trying to do with this drivel? Convince the Hollywood types that he is correct? Or is he feeding his own ego by putting other people down? This diatribe has one aim: To inflame those who do not agree.

Charlie Daniels - Go back to the bottle. Your music was much better and you do not have the intelect to argue politics.

[ 03-05-2003, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[Jennie@ifish]

I began reading with interest until he stooped to name calling.

Anyone that has to stoop to name calling immediately loses my attention and respect.

I just don't think it takes much intelligence, if you have to resort to that to make your point.

It's kind of like potty humor. If you have to stoop to include feces or urine in your joke just to make someone laugh, it kind of proves that you aren't funny, otherwise.

It's kind of like writing a really long essay to make a point, when, if you had the proper talent, you could speak your thoughts in one sentence and make a huge impact.

We can all aspire to do these things. Only a few will succeed.

Jen

[kisutch]

Here's my take (not that anyone asked - I'm just flexing my First Amendment right [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] ):

I don't give a hoot what the Hollywood bunch (or any celebs for that matter) do when it comes to politics. Doesn't mean they shouldn't. They have as much right as anybody to fire off their mouths.

I do think that it is arrogant to tell them to shut up because of their celebrity status. Sure, I think it's rather foolish appearing for entertainers to be taking part in such serious issues. But they also lend their voices to other causes - literacy, abuse prevention, etc. So should they stop those campaigns too? I don't think so. There's nothing wrong with them trying to use their place in society to voice their opinions, as much or as little as we agree them. It's their right, how they use it is up to them.

If you don't like it, don't pay attention. :grin:

[Silver Hilton]

Originally posted by Boedy:


America is in imminent danger. You're either for her or against her.

There is no middle ground.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well, unfortunately for his simple mind, while America may be in imminent danger, the evidence is quite clear that Iraq is not the source of that danger, as witnessed by the recent arrest in PAKISTAN.

It is also a small minded person that can't find at least three options in most situations, an approach that doesn't seem to have been thought through here.

[speyfly]

Boedy, I am compelled to post the other side of the story. Here ya go.....

Peace Takes A Bullet
In which the Bush Doctrine means never having to say, sorry about all the warheads and death

By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist

These are the final days of peace in America. Please remember to turn off the lights and lock up when you leave.

These are the last days of relative calm before we start bombing and massacring hundreds of thousands of people and in so doing enter into what many believe will a very long, drawn-out, insanely expensive, volatile, destabilizing, completely unwinnable war against a cheap thug of an opponent who has negligible military might and zero capacity to actually harm the U.S. in any substantive way. U-S-A! U-S-A!
This will not be Desert Storm. This will not be quick and painless. This will be 3,000 guided missiles launched on the first day of the war, 10 times that of Desert Storm, turning Iraq into an instant wasteland. This is already a minimum of $200 billion, with an additional $50 billion to try and bribe Turkey alone, just to begin with. This is total unabashed war gluttony.

Some estimates put the total cost of this war, when all is said and done which it never will be, at $1 trillion. Enjoy that recession, kids -- it's gonna be here a while.

And say good-bye to your sons and daughters, too. Bush's own decorated army generals have said this invasion and occupation will require hundreds of thousands of American GIs -- quite possibly our entire enlisted force, all mobilized to one region, much of it for years to come, even after Saddam is ousted -- in an attempt to control and stabilize an extremely volatile and irate and terror-ready region. Do we know this?
Oh but there is so much more to it than that. For these are also the final days before this country lunges down a wholly new and wickedly aggressive path.

It cannot be overstated: Shrub's war marks a momentous shift in our society, a huge political and philosophical sea change, as we move from a unified coherent defensive posture to an aggressive, roguish, preemptive-strike attitude, kill first and ask questions never.
It is called the Bush Doctrine, a.k.a. Shut the Hell Up You Durn Foreigners and Eat Our Might, and it is in flagrant defiance of not just the U.N. charter and international law but also every moral and philosophical tenet America itself was founded on.

This is the thing about ultraviolent preemptive attacks on whatever petty little nation we choose -- it sort of makes us the world's bully. It sort of goes against our fundamental notions of justice and fairness.

We are soon to be the world's only superpower that will attack anyone we deem might be a potential threat to our interests, immediate provocation notwithstanding, immediate danger irrelevant. This means anyone. This means Syria. North Korea. Iran. Anyone. To say this is a radical and vicious new twist in American policy is glaring understatement. Have we frequently fabricated and inflated our justifications to attack, to go to war? Have we even invented them from scratch? Of course. But this takes America's thuggish audacity to an entirely new level, one that changes our relationship to the global community in a very bleak and desperate manner.

You think those other countries are sitting idly by, waiting to see who's next on America's hit list? Or do you think they're cranking up their nuke factories and inciting their terrorist cells and marshaling their armies right this minute, for the day when Rummy points his crooked little finger their way? Let's ask North Korea. Whoops, too late.

Perhaps we do not understand the weight of this. Perhaps we don't fully comprehend how profoundly this shift affects our standing in the world, our cultural complexion, our tenuously held respect among our wary allies.
Perhaps we do not understand how much it thoroughly and completely annihilates any remaining shred of international compassion or support we garnered as a result of 9/11. There is none. Two weeks ago, over 11 million people in more than 600 cities staged what is now considered the biggest anti-war protest in world history, all against Shrub's war. No matter.

America will never be the same, everyone said just after 9/11, and meaning it with all their heavy hearts, signifying that America might now have to reevaluate its international standing and its aggressive foreign policy, might have to reexamine its core values, seriously scrutinize capitalism's more dire effects on the world community.

We had two choices: stop Osama and take measure of our nation's heart, its shockingly hate-inducing policies abroad, strengthen our ties with allies and the countless other sympathetic nations that were offering support and alliance, leverage that bitter sadness into resolve and temerity and a new vision of what role our nation plays in the world.

Or, we could go aggro. Get all Bruce Willis on 'em. Still stop Osama, but and then get all macho and war hungry and exterminate everyone we deem a potential threat, no matter how remote. War uber alles. This was fed to us as the only truly patriotic response. This is where we are now. We are told war and aggression was the only possible response. It wasn't. It still isn't.

Here are the words you will never hear from Dubya: We have won the war on terror. Never will you hear this, because the battle is, by definition, unwinnable; you can't win a war on terror any more than you can win the war against racism, or ignorance, or drugs, or cutesy boy bands or sunlight. Terrorism is as much a concept as a force, an idea as a scattered, well-organized, global network we can't possibly pinpoint.

It is ongoing. It is never-ending. This is the Dubya plan. Perpetual war, perpetual fear, perpetual massive profits for a large handful of high-powered Bush-friendly CEOs and military contractors and petrochemical execs, long after Saddam is gone, especially after Saddam is gone. Who's next on the hit list?

They don't really care. War is at hand. America is about to turn a corner, sharp to the right. These are the last days of peace in America as you know it. And we will never be the same.

[ 03-05-2003, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: speyfly ]

[Boedy]

I am curious what you think is to be gained by turning the other cheek and taking a pacifist stand on the war on terror? Do you think by not attacking on a clear threat such as Iraq we will gain some moral high ground that the terrorist can not climb? Do you really believe we have no option but withdraw inside our borders and hope that they have had there fill of innocent American lives? This column offers no alternative to the war rather they simple states that war is bad and people will hate us if we act to protect ourselves.

He says,

“Here are the words you will never hear from Dubya: We have won the war on terror. Never will you hear this, because the battle is, by definition, unwinnable; you can't win a war on terror any more than you can win the war against racism, or ignorance, or drugs, or cutesy boy bands or sunlight. Terrorism is as much a concept as a force, an idea as a scattered, well-organized, global network we can't possibly pinpoint.”

He seems to say we can’t win so we shouldn’t try, that instead we should capitulate and just hope that we are not attacked again. It is amusing to me to read titrates from the likes of this author and how they are so quick to lay down and await the next attack. They offer nothing in the way of a alternative instead they take Saddam’s side and say he doesn’t pose a threat to us based on everything they have seen on CNN and the rest of their beloved media.

He acts as if he knows 100 percent that Saddam is contained and that there is no way he could get WMD to a terrorist. I wonder where he gets his facts I wonder where all of you left leaning individuals gained such a vast knowledge of the real threat that Iraq poses to the USA. Are you all just better informed then the president? Do you know some information that could lead the mighty UN inspectors to the remains of all of the Iraqi WMD I am sure they would be most appreciative if you could shed some light on the whereabouts’ of the missing VX never gas that you are so sure doesn’t exist.

By the way the UN is not some unbiased organization that is looking out for the good of mankind. It is nothing more the a political circus everyone is looking after their own interest and right and wrong do not play a factor to most if not all of the UN. Russia stands to lose the oil that Saddam sells them on the cheap and France supplies Iraq with most of their goods and doesn’t want to lose that income. It’s sad to think that anyone would be willing to believe the UN’s stand as anything but self-serving.

I sometimes think that the left is willing to await another attack rather then to act to prevent it. If GW has the ability to reduce the threat then he is duty bound to eliminate said threat. At the moment he feels that Iraq is enough of a threat to act so he is going to take action to lessen that threat.

Second guessing and playing armchair president is easy to do but someone has to make the real decisions regarding our safety and I think GW is right and is acting to insure it.

Are you willing to hold your breath and hope that you are right about the threat Saddam Hussein poses not only to us but to the rest of the world. Are you willing to except the blood of more Americans if you are wrong? Have you stopped to think of what the consciences are if you are wrong? a Chem. / Bio or God forbid nuclear attack on the USA? GW can’t take that risk he must act to prevent it if he can and thank god he is going to do just that.


The author’s hatred of the President is rivaled only by your own Spyfly but I guess that is to be expected from a newspaper like the SF gate.

Conspiracy theories aside what do you think the correct course of action should be? Wait and see or act and be sure?

[ 03-05-2003, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: Boedy ]

[crabbait]

We don't take a pacifist stand on terror. We continue to root out known terrorists and use them to gain information on the rest of the network. We then systematically eliminate them.

We also take action against any nation that we can prove are helping terrorists. We seize assets, we freeze accounts, we boycott, we embargo.

We continue to gather allies who are also not willing to allow terrorists free rein in the world.

We seek justice. Not revenge.

[ 03-06-2003, 12:42 AM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[Boedy]

What kind of proof do you think would be adequate to prove that Iraq supports terrorist crabbait short of a smoking gun?

[kisutch]

Hate to be on topic, but this may be of interest...
BBC: Do stars' views on Iraq matter?

[kisutch]

Originally posted by Boedy:
What kind of proof do you think would be adequate to prove that Iraq supports terrorist crabbait short of a smoking gun?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Up until this point, I've not commented on this mess we call war (perhaps uncivil civil war is a better term), since I am a new poster and I don't want to be an impolite guest, however I just have to say...

[and this is not directed at Mr. Boedy or any one individual - perhaps it should be considered a plea to the Almighty]

Any proof would be a good starting point!

Seriously, this is beyond ridiculous.

I'm an American. I was born in this country, I was raised here, and I've developed a great appreciation for American and world history. Never in my life or worst nightmares have I seen such foolish behaviour on the part of any country. To my complete horror and utter embarrassment, it is that of my own beloved homeland.

I fear. For those abroad, for those at home, for the old, the young, the unborn... not because of foreign terrorists. I fear ourselves. I fear this government, who, under the guise of patiotism, is taking away our rights.

Please, don't play the military card on me. Our forefathers established this country, died for this country so that we could have those !@#$%^ rights. And who, some coke-snorting, [fill-in-the-blank], son of aaaaa president, presidential-figure is going to take that away? Where is the outrage there? Were the lives of those past wars given in vain? Is my father, a Vietnam vet and a man with whom, until now, I've seldom seen eye-to-eye with - is he some kind of abomination because he isn't some flower-child hippie yet he too abhors this war?

At this point, it may be too late. The forces are in place. The plans have been made. We appear to be committed. To turn back now would look weak. But in the end I'd rather look weak than prove to be the greatest fools in all of history - if there is a history to record.

I'm sorry if my passion overwhelms me at times. I mean no disrespect. I just feel very strongly that this nation is on a perilous course and it's very frustrating and unsettling.

[Flatfish]

I work in the fumigation business and have a fair understanding of how a bio attack works- chemical wise-. You are a very brave soul to state a career politician is betting his future on skimpy information. He may not be able to go public with what he has. But he aint stupid.If Saddam does indeed have these weapons( and the U.S.A is the most probable target) you had better pray that they skip the NW. It is not pretty stuff folks. Do not be lead down the path of partisan politics. Focus on the objective.

If one of these weapons is touched off here, 9-11-01 will look mild. It only takes a small amount to create mass problems.

GW wants to be re-elected. If we are attacked again, he will not get re-elected. If he saves an attack on the U.S and does not get re-elected, at least he can sleep well.

The only thing that makes me sadder than the country being split like this, is we voted in a dope smoking draft dodging, womanizer followed by a crackhead daddys boy.We elected these folks. You have nobody to blame but yourself.

Mark.

[Boedy]

Here is a starting point Kisutch:

I wonder what you call Saddam’s payment to the families of the Suicide bombers in Israel?

Or the chemical training that Iraq supplied to Al Queda?

Or the 707 they use to train terrorist on that is parked on an Iraqi air force base.

How about the fact that he is giving Terrorist safe haven inside his country.

Or the meeting between a senior Iraqi and Mohammad Atta who was one of the 9-11 terrorist.

You can’t seriously believe that Saddam doesn’t support Terrorist can you? I bet you think he doesn’t have any WMD ether.

Are any of these things a good enough starting point or are you just going to bury your head in the sand and pretend that there is no threat. Are you so blinded by your ill-informed hatred of President Bush that you only belive what the left puts out.

I am not willing to hide in the corner and hope that nothing happens I would rather the President take the action that is needed to safeguard this country even if you think it is unwarranted.

Originally posted by kisutch:
“Please, don't play the military card on me. Our forefathers established this country, died for this country so that we could have those !@#$%^ rights. And who, some coke-snorting, [fill-in-the-blank], son of aaaaa president, presidential-figure is going to take that away?”

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">What rights has President Bush taken away from you?

[ 03-06-2003, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: Boedy ]

[The Fishing Geek]

Sorry, Charlie. While I agree that some of the pontificating by Hollywood celebs can be a bit over-the-top, I refuse to buy into the extremely tenuous link between Saddam and Osama. Prior to 9/11, it was well-known to experts in that region that these two did NOT like each other. If Saddam was to use WMDs, he'd use it against the Taliban.

The War on Terror is as undefinable as the War on Drugs, War on Crime, and any other undefinable "War of the Week". The "Terror" that we are going to War against does not conveniently wear a unique uniform. They do not paint red circles on their vehicles, nor do they pin Swasticas on their uniforms. They can be anyone, but that does not give us the right to bomb impoverished countries into a fine red mist because they just happen to live in a country who's already opressed by a tyrannical leader.

Charlie is right about one thing: if you interview a largely-uneducated slice of America, they will tell you that Iraq should be nuked for what they did to the WTC. This is the same population that believes that the network news is the only source of news that they will ever need, and gets riled up with every forwarded piece of propaganda that they get in email. To heck with the facts, as those are for the smart folks to sift through.

Charlie Daniels is the ignorant man's hero.

[kisutch]

Originally posted by Boedy:
Here is a starting point Kisutch:

I wonder what you call Saddam’s payment to the families of the Suicide bombers in Israel?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">No, I had not heard of this. Could you provide me with a link? I would be happy to read it. And what do you mean by "in Israel"? He paid them in Israel? They're really secretly Israeli terrorists? :whazzup: Huh?

Not that you care, but I'm really not some leftist freak (not that that is a bad thing - "it take all kinds" my gramma used to say). I just want answers. And until I get them, I am not getting on the bandwagon.

[qb]Or the chemical training that Iraq supplied to Al Queda?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I'm wouldn't be surprised if they did. The USA, Saudia Arabia, France, and I'm sure countless others have provided training or financial support as well. What shall we do about that?

Or the 707 they use to train terrorist on that is parked on an Iraqi air force base.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">And what kind of war are we going to wage against Nintendo? The terrorists practiced flying planes on video games. Should we have the manufacturers investigated and imprisoned?

[qb}How about the fact that he is giving Terrorist safe haven inside his country.[/q]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">And Pakistan, Iran, Saudia Arabia, UK, France, Spain, Germany, Belgium, India... do I really need to list every nation on earth? Because, undoubtedly, they all harbor terrorists.

Or the meeting between a senior Iraqi and Mohammad Atta who was one of the 9-11 terrorist.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I'm not going to question that though I'd like more details. 1) I'd like to know how that is the "smoking gun" 2) Once again, like other al-Qaeda officials didn't meet with other high ranking officials of other countries.

You can’t seriously believe that Saddam doesn’t support Terrorist can you? I bet you think he doesn’t have any WMD ether.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Without a doubt, Saddam does support terrorism. Thanks for the vote of confidence. It would be nice to think that all the anti-war people sit around burning nag champa and chanting, but most of us are just regular folks who think for themselves. And, uh, weapons of mass destruction... do I really need to start peeling off who else has those? And, say, that pesky little neighbor of South Korea - they don't happen to have WMDs pointed at us right now? While our illustrious GW is [fill-in-the-blank-with-that-charming-quote-about-shooting-something-up-a-camel's-rear-end], how long do you think it will take that warhead to reach home sweet home? Got your duct tape and gas mask yet?

Are any of these things a good enough starting point or are you just going to bury your head in the sand and pretend that there is no threat.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">No and no. No, it's not a good enough starting point. Not nearly. I don't see anything there worth going to war over. And no, I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and pledge allegiance to GW.

Are you so blinded by your ill-informed hatred of President Bush that you only belive what the left puts out.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">My vision is impaired but I wear contact lenses. If ony they were available in the figurative sense - we'd all be so wonderfully insightful it'd be sickening. :grin:

While I may be left-leaning in this matter, I will say this (don't know why because I shouldn't have to explain or justify myself but FYI) - I'm not a Democrat, never will be. Once upon a time when I was a young thing in high school, I founded our school's chapter of the Young Republican's Club. I also snuck home to watch Rush's TV show. :shocked: (horrifying to admit now) Then I started thinking for myself and now I don't give a damn about party lines, I just go with what I believe is right. And this war, as far as I can tell, is not. Far from it.

Also, I should note this: I used to live in Texas. Actually I was there when the Gov was elected Prez (and, no, I did not vote for him). It's a great state, great people, and I didn't have a problem with his governorship (though I did question his, ahem, ability to be President). I'm sure he's probably a semi-decent individual. Doesn't mean I trust him or his cabinet's judgement, though I hope to God they are right if they do go forward with this.

I am not willing to hide in the corner and hope that nothing happens I would rather the President take the action that is needed to safeguard this country even if you think it is unwarranted.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Likewise, I am not going to hide in the corner and pretend he knows what action to take when has not demonstrated otherwise. I don't mean that as disrespect to you or "the other side". You're free to do that and that's fine - but my conscience will not allow me that faith in the President. It's nice that you're comforted by his actions, but I am not.

What rights has President Bush taken away from you?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Ever heard of that piece of legislation called the USA PATRIOT Act (I'm not shouting - it's an acronym) that knee-jerk post-9/11 creation?

[ 03-06-2003, 10:36 PM: Message edited by: kisutch ]

[kisutch]

Sorry about the bold and big letters. I have to figure out how to fix that. I thought I had it but alas...

[crabbait]

And now a word from one of our moderators:

Welcome aboard, Kisutch. Looking forward to your story on the fishing side of the forum. :smile:

[ 03-07-2003, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[Finschnitzel]

OUCH !! Political talk hurt brain. Must find happy place :depressed: :depressed: