ok2bclever
I Re Member
tie, you always ask stupid simplistic questions where you establish parameters you want and then declare yourself the winner. 
Seems like you are a little behind your normal pattern as you have started quoting yourself before calling yourself the undisputed champ like normal.
The estimate is perhaps as many as 300,000 dead Iraqi blamed on Saddaam over his entire reign.
We invaded already, so the answer must be a third of a million.
No wait, bush lied with the boogie man WMD excuse to get us to jump on Saddaam.
The estimate for children that died in Iraq from the sanctions imposed through the UN was 500,000.
So it appears sanctions against Saddaam killed considerably more than Saddaam himself did.
Guess we need to invade before sanctions are imposed.
Oh man, that is going to add a bunch of countries immediately.
You want to make invasion by the number of dead, by inhumane treatment of citizens?
Then we should invade China, Russia, Africa, etc.
Typical little tin god, always gung ho for sacrificing our young in meat grinders around the world, but never dirtying your own hands.
I think someone with such a brave mouth as yourself should pick a number, pick a country, shut your mouth, hitch a ride across the ocean and put your own lazy ess on the line instead of our valuable youth.
Seems like you are a little behind your normal pattern as you have started quoting yourself before calling yourself the undisputed champ like normal.
The estimate is perhaps as many as 300,000 dead Iraqi blamed on Saddaam over his entire reign.
We invaded already, so the answer must be a third of a million.
No wait, bush lied with the boogie man WMD excuse to get us to jump on Saddaam.
The estimate for children that died in Iraq from the sanctions imposed through the UN was 500,000.
So it appears sanctions against Saddaam killed considerably more than Saddaam himself did.
Guess we need to invade before sanctions are imposed.
Oh man, that is going to add a bunch of countries immediately.
You want to make invasion by the number of dead, by inhumane treatment of citizens?
Then we should invade China, Russia, Africa, etc.
Typical little tin god, always gung ho for sacrificing our young in meat grinders around the world, but never dirtying your own hands.
I think someone with such a brave mouth as yourself should pick a number, pick a country, shut your mouth, hitch a ride across the ocean and put your own lazy ess on the line instead of our valuable youth.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
ok2bclever said:
Lied? Matter of opinion and political belief/association I guess but Bush is publically admitting the issue of WMD was wrong.
Which ever, I'm glad to see that finally publically admitted as it was very obvious when you really looked at the facts as they've been building especially over the last many months. Now the great debate over motive will begin and that will become the one of real interest to watch IMO. I guess the Grand Poo-Bahs at AEI will begin to scramble for cover! Democrats could have the republicans on the ropes but they lack any positive message that would prevent such from happening again and again and again and ........ International Adventurism is cemented in policy but not by GW.
WW1 Wilson/Democrat
WW2 FDR/Democrat
Korea Truman/Democrat
Vietnam Kennedy/Johnson/ Democrats
Reagan had his adventures and so did Clinton and now it's GW's turn. Don't you guys see a pattern yet? IMO Iraq would have happened in some form no matter who was in there. Yeah, that really is MO. The American Military Industrial Complex wanted and needed it! They got it!
After finding no weapons and trying 3 different other ways to justify the war I find the reasoning weak. It's like being charged with rape and claiming all along it was consentual sex but when it's obvious no consent was involved, you claim you overheard the victim expressed a desire to be a mother and you just wanted to help her achieve that wish! Look, if you're wrong just admit it. People do make honest mistakes but trying to spin several cover stories (typical covert crap) to cover does give justice to those why say he lied. If Bush really was sincere in protecting America then tell the truth from the outset because now the American people aren't sure what to believe. I know what I believe based on the pattern of the last 100 to 150 years.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
wkmac,
bush is in campaign mode currently trying to raise his low national public esteem.
bush is only admitting that he has broad shoulders and the buck stops here (several years late) regarding the faulty intel.
He isn't admitting that the bush team spun/filtered the intelligence to favor the invasion.
I call that lying, but I guess a politician might define it as positioning for effect or some such.
tie, feel free to answer any stupid questions you come up with.
The answers are likely to be worth as much as your questions.
I already answered you that I don't believe the USA should have a policy of invasion set by a number of dead in another country, but feel free to continue to ignore it when you don't get the answer you wanted.
You like to try to set up the "By the way have you stopped beating your wife and children, Yes or No?" type of questions.
And I know how frustrated you get when your set up questions fail.
I do believe in using invasion of a country to stop an imminent WMD attack on our country.
In fact, I did agree with that, which is why I am so pissed at bush for convincing us of that lie, errr, positioning for effect.
Not that it is a factor in the invasion, but I am wondering where you get the figure about 100,000 WMD Iraqi deaths by Saddaam that you keep repeating?
It is reported that mustard gas and some nerve gas was used by both sides in the Iraq/Iran war against each other (with alledged tactical approval of none other than the current bush team member, rumsfield, go figure) and perhaps directly afterward against villages in the Kurdish territory when Saddaam moved to stop the kurd revolt although the facts are conflicting.
If you are saying that is the reason for the invasion, we were a few decades late invading.
The fact is you personally trumpeted the WMD cry here, even months after the facts showed they never existed.
And now you are trying to spin a justifiable reason for the continuing deaths and maimings of all our brave soldiers after your precious WMD story fell through.
bush is in campaign mode currently trying to raise his low national public esteem.
bush is only admitting that he has broad shoulders and the buck stops here (several years late) regarding the faulty intel.
He isn't admitting that the bush team spun/filtered the intelligence to favor the invasion.
I call that lying, but I guess a politician might define it as positioning for effect or some such.
tie, feel free to answer any stupid questions you come up with.
The answers are likely to be worth as much as your questions.
I already answered you that I don't believe the USA should have a policy of invasion set by a number of dead in another country, but feel free to continue to ignore it when you don't get the answer you wanted.
You like to try to set up the "By the way have you stopped beating your wife and children, Yes or No?" type of questions.
And I know how frustrated you get when your set up questions fail.
I do believe in using invasion of a country to stop an imminent WMD attack on our country.
In fact, I did agree with that, which is why I am so pissed at bush for convincing us of that lie, errr, positioning for effect.
Not that it is a factor in the invasion, but I am wondering where you get the figure about 100,000 WMD Iraqi deaths by Saddaam that you keep repeating?
It is reported that mustard gas and some nerve gas was used by both sides in the Iraq/Iran war against each other (with alledged tactical approval of none other than the current bush team member, rumsfield, go figure) and perhaps directly afterward against villages in the Kurdish territory when Saddaam moved to stop the kurd revolt although the facts are conflicting.
If you are saying that is the reason for the invasion, we were a few decades late invading.
The fact is you personally trumpeted the WMD cry here, even months after the facts showed they never existed.
And now you are trying to spin a justifiable reason for the continuing deaths and maimings of all our brave soldiers after your precious WMD story fell through.
tieguy
Banned
ok2bclever said:wkmac,
bush is in campaign mode currently trying to raise his low national public esteem.
bush is only admitting that he has broad shoulders and the buck stops here (several years late) regarding the faulty intel.
He isn't admitting that the bush team spun/filtered the intelligence to favor the invasion.
I call that lying, but I guess a politician might define it as positioning for effect or some such.
Yes and to continue to make this assinine point you have to continue to make the point that congress was either also lying or that congress was easily duped into believing this lie which means they chose to ignore their own intelligence sources that come straight to them with no presidential editing applied. Could you be so kind as to clarify your position in this regard?
"tie, feel free to answer any stupid questions you come up with."
Its clear you're too stupid to be able to do so
The answers are likely to be worth as much as your questions.
worth much more than your constant crying when I easily trump your ill thought wisdom.
I already answered you that I don't believe the USA should have a policy of invasion set by a number of dead in another country, but feel free to continue to ignore it when you don't get the answer you wanted.
Yes and this is to be expected. You will dodge the number issue as a dodge to answering a fundamental question. How much brutality , how many WMD's does hussien have to use how much before you feel the cause is justified?
"You like to try to set up the "By the way have you stopped beating your wife and children, Yes or No?" type of questions."
No That issue has not been raised. Another tap dance on your part.
And I know how frustrated you get when your set up questions fail.
No I really don't expect you to answer any of the tough questions. The liberal tends to be critical of us policy without offering any viable solutions. The liberal would never take a stance on principle other than to take no stance at all. That one principle is near and dear to the liberals heart.
I do believe in using invasion of a country to stop an imminent WMD attack on our country.
Ok . A little progress. So if the nukes are locked and cocked and pointed at Detroit michigan and Habib is lighting the fuse then it may be time to start mobilizing a defense. Anything short of that would not. A physical demonstration showing a leader has the WMD's and likes to use them is not a factor in that decision?
ok2bclever
I Re Member
I really wish you would learn to use the quote system right.
As often as you quote yourself you would think you would get it down, but no, you keep screwing it up.
It makes me wish I had never taught you to try to use the enhanced mode.
You do give new meaning to "he loves to hear himself talk" with the frequency you quote yourself.
I saw where you quoted yourself back to back in another thread.
If you would learn to spell and use the correct tense for the situation it would make you sound more intelligent than you are and you could use all the illusion you can manage.
You call me stupid and we both know that if I challenged you to a battle of wits or whit you would misspell both, even after looking them up in the dictionary to figure out the difference.
I bet you were a boor as a child too.
I do not believe it is bush's job to invade every country that mistreats it's people, let alone the one's whose scum leader called his daddy a bad name.
The world is too big and the USA has too few people to be able to become the world wide dictator or empire to run the world.
Bush Sr realized this, alas, if only his son was more like the father.
Who says the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
You ignored my question on why the US waited for over two decades if the reason bush invaded Iraq was for alleged use of WMD on their own people.
Of course, that was your runner up reason after you finally gave up on anyone believing you about the imminent WMDs Iraq didn't have aimed at us.
Heck, you stuck with that longer than bush.
So why are you stating something that happened over two decades ago is the reason bush invaded Iraq?
Why weren't you pushing for this invasion back then?
Got it, you would have been liable for military duty at that time.
What was the matter, didn't think you could get one of those nifty bush buddy deferrals?
"no presidential editing applied. Could you be so kind as to clarify your position in this regard?"
You are dense.
I realize it doesn't matter how many times I state the bush team filtered the data they used in their PR invasion presentations as you do not want to hear it. . .
Speaking of which, I see where Congressional Research Service http://tinyurl.com/e4a6b a very respected nonpartisan organization identified nine key U.S. intelligence "products" that aren't generally shared with Congress. These include the President's Daily Brief, a compilation of analyses that's given only to the president and a handful of top aides, and a daily digest on terrorism-related matters.
The CRS yesterday stated President Bush and top administration (you know, rummy, cheney, etc, aka: the bush team) officials have access to a much broader range of intelligence reports than members of Congress do, raising questions about recent assertions by the president.
I know, why don't you call them "liberal".
Everytime you pout its,liberal this and liberal that.
As often as you quote yourself you would think you would get it down, but no, you keep screwing it up.
It makes me wish I had never taught you to try to use the enhanced mode.
You do give new meaning to "he loves to hear himself talk" with the frequency you quote yourself.
I saw where you quoted yourself back to back in another thread.
If you would learn to spell and use the correct tense for the situation it would make you sound more intelligent than you are and you could use all the illusion you can manage.
You call me stupid and we both know that if I challenged you to a battle of wits or whit you would misspell both, even after looking them up in the dictionary to figure out the difference.
I bet you were a boor as a child too.
I do not believe it is bush's job to invade every country that mistreats it's people, let alone the one's whose scum leader called his daddy a bad name.
The world is too big and the USA has too few people to be able to become the world wide dictator or empire to run the world.
Bush Sr realized this, alas, if only his son was more like the father.
Who says the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
You ignored my question on why the US waited for over two decades if the reason bush invaded Iraq was for alleged use of WMD on their own people.
Of course, that was your runner up reason after you finally gave up on anyone believing you about the imminent WMDs Iraq didn't have aimed at us.
Heck, you stuck with that longer than bush.
So why are you stating something that happened over two decades ago is the reason bush invaded Iraq?
Why weren't you pushing for this invasion back then?
Got it, you would have been liable for military duty at that time.
What was the matter, didn't think you could get one of those nifty bush buddy deferrals?
"no presidential editing applied. Could you be so kind as to clarify your position in this regard?"
You are dense.
I realize it doesn't matter how many times I state the bush team filtered the data they used in their PR invasion presentations as you do not want to hear it. . .
Speaking of which, I see where Congressional Research Service http://tinyurl.com/e4a6b a very respected nonpartisan organization identified nine key U.S. intelligence "products" that aren't generally shared with Congress. These include the President's Daily Brief, a compilation of analyses that's given only to the president and a handful of top aides, and a daily digest on terrorism-related matters.
The CRS yesterday stated President Bush and top administration (you know, rummy, cheney, etc, aka: the bush team) officials have access to a much broader range of intelligence reports than members of Congress do, raising questions about recent assertions by the president.
I know, why don't you call them "liberal".
Everytime you pout its,liberal this and liberal that.
Last edited:
tieguy
Banned
ok2bclever said:I really wish you would learn to use the quote system right.
As often as you quote yourself you would think you would get it down, but no, you keep screwing it up.
It makes me wish I had never taught you to try to use the enhanced mode.
Notice the pattern. First he starts with some filler and to fire a few shots at me.
You do give new meaning to "he loves to hear himself talk" with the frequency you quote yourself.
I saw where you quoted yourself back to back in another thread.
If you would learn to spell and use the correct tense for the situation it would make you sound more intelligent than you are and you could use all the illusion you can manage.
Then some more.
You call me stupid and we both know that if I challenged you to a battle of wits or whit you would misspell both, even after looking them up in the dictionary to figure out the difference.
Then an accusation where he whines about me calling him stupid and totally ignores that he took us down this road by using the word first.
I bet you were a boor as a child too.
Some more filler. Uses the word boor to show what a distinguished gentlemen he is.
I do not believe it is bush's job to invade every country that mistreats it's people, let alone the one's whose scum leader called his daddy a bad name.
The world is too big and the USA has too few people to be able to become the world wide dictator or empire to run the world.
And then finally a post where he starts to get on subject.
Bush Sr realized this, alas, if only his son was more like the father.
Who says the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.You ignored my question on why the US waited for over two decades if the reason bush invaded Iraq was for alleged use of WMD on their own people.
Now after all this postering on his part he now gets to a pont where he proves he did not read and comprehend my point. In this case he is acting as if he thinks I said the reason we went into Iraq was because Saddam used WMD's two decades ago. In fact he made the point that Saddam had no WMD's and that we manufactored possession of WMD's as a reason for invading Iraq. My point in rebuttal has been that we did not manufactor this reason since Saddam has already proven possession of WMD's and a willingness to use these weapons as demonstrated against the Kurds. I also highlighted the point that congress had access to the same intelligence from thier own sources that was not edited or tampered with by the president and that they congress came to the same conclusion.
Since we know Saddam has them, has used them and we now have new intelligence that told us he had them still in violation of UN Sanctions then the question is how do we respond. Do we wait until they are loaded and pointed at us and about to be fired before we react or do we recognize another another violation of un sanctions and go in now which we did.
Of course, that was your runner up reason after you finally gave up on anyone believing you about the imminent WMDs Iraq didn't have aimed at us.Heck, you stuck with that longer than bush.
And again he shows he did not pay attention and has now run completely off track.
Why weren't you pushing for this invasion back then?
Got it, you would have been liable for military duty at that time.
In fact I was aware of the using of WMD's on kurds at the time and I was for our stepping in at the time. And yes I knew any conflict could drag me back into the military at the time. I hope that does not throw off your cheap attempt to now try to paint me as some kind of coward.
Look Okie Dokie. If you and your flaming liberal sister want to question my intelligence or whatever trait of mine you think needs attacking at the time feel free. But concede the point that I served my country and that being assigned to an airborne unit as part of the then rapid deployment force that I fully understood my risks and liabilities in the combat theator. I'm not a hero. But I put my but on the line and I fully understood the possible consequences of doing so. For you to try to throw that into this discussion is a very low blow even for you. Really dissapointing in fact. I have been very animated in making the points I make but I have never dropped down to such a dismally disgusting level as you just tried to take me.
What was the matter, didn't think you could get one of those nifty bush buddy deferrals?
And here you again make assumptions about my background and character in what appears to be another attempt to paint me as some type of coward. In fact I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth. My parents were dirt poor when they grew up. I served my country and did so proudly. See if you can lift this discussion up a little before you completely fall into the sewer you are presently headed for. I don't expect you to kiss my ass for serving my country but respecting the service and leaving the issue alone should be the least you can do.
You are dense.
Thats a little better than being a coward , I guess.
I realize it doesn't matter how many times I state the bush team filtered the data they used in their PR invasion presentations as you do not want to hear it. . .
And then the point about why you fail to understand congress can get thier own intelligence and does not need to rely on anything the president feeds them. Congress has an intelligence oversight committee that is very capable when it comes to analyzing information.
I
Last edited:
ok2bclever
I Re Member
I really don't have much time to waste reading the drivel, but what is a "pont"? 
And I see you still cannot get that quote thing down.
Truly incompetent.
Do they let you have a drivers license in your state?
"Thats a little better than being a coward , I guess."
Ok, now that is accurate as I do consider you little better than a coward as most bullies are that way.
"he made the point that Saddam had no WMD's"
I did not say that and quit trying to tell people what I say, they can read it for themselves and the vast majority can comprehend it better than you as well.
Even if they agree or don't agree with me pretty much everyone here can understand english better than you.
If you cannot understand what the CSR has stated I understand, but it doesn't change the facts.
And I see you still cannot get that quote thing down.
Truly incompetent.
Do they let you have a drivers license in your state?
"Thats a little better than being a coward , I guess."
Ok, now that is accurate as I do consider you little better than a coward as most bullies are that way.
"he made the point that Saddam had no WMD's"
I did not say that and quit trying to tell people what I say, they can read it for themselves and the vast majority can comprehend it better than you as well.
Even if they agree or don't agree with me pretty much everyone here can understand english better than you.
If you cannot understand what the CSR has stated I understand, but it doesn't change the facts.
tieguy
Banned
Look Okie Dokie. If you and your flaming liberal sister want to question my intelligence or whatever trait of mine you think needs attacking at the time feel free. But concede the point that I served my country and that being assigned to an airborne unit as part of the then rapid deployment force that I fully understood my risks and liabilities in the combat theator. I'm not a hero. But I put my but on the line and I fully understood the possible consequences of doing so. For you to try to throw that into this discussion is a very low blow even for you. Really dissapointing in fact. I have been very animated in making the points I make but I have never dropped down to such a dismally disgusting level as you just tried to take me.
What was the matter, didn't think you could get one of those nifty bush buddy deferrals?
And here you again make assumptions about my background and character in what appears to be another attempt to paint me as some type of coward. In fact I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth. My parents were dirt poor when they grew up. I served my country and did so proudly. See if you can lift this discussion up a little before you completely fall into the sewer you are presently headed for. I don't expect you to kiss my ass for serving my country but respecting the service and leaving the issue alone should be the least you can do.
Okie I tried to shorten it for you to help your limited attention span. Hope that helps.
What was the matter, didn't think you could get one of those nifty bush buddy deferrals?
And here you again make assumptions about my background and character in what appears to be another attempt to paint me as some type of coward. In fact I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth. My parents were dirt poor when they grew up. I served my country and did so proudly. See if you can lift this discussion up a little before you completely fall into the sewer you are presently headed for. I don't expect you to kiss my ass for serving my country but respecting the service and leaving the issue alone should be the least you can do.
Okie I tried to shorten it for you to help your limited attention span. Hope that helps.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
Thanks tie for shortening the drivel up, much appreciated.
Ok, lets see, you lie about so much that I cannot truthfully put any credence in any claim you make, but it truly isn't important.
You want to talk about low after PMing me about "how you took comfort in your foxhole friend'n my whore mother" . . .
Sorry coward, we both know you would never have the guts to say that to my face or my mother's.
And as far as your intelligence, there are no questions there.
You are a cesspool of hatred that occasionally tells us about what a wonderful teddy bear boss your underlings think you are.
Every now and then you sound human and I realize how you are still on the UPS payroll.
Deceit.
Ok, lets see, you lie about so much that I cannot truthfully put any credence in any claim you make, but it truly isn't important.
You want to talk about low after PMing me about "how you took comfort in your foxhole friend'n my whore mother" . . .
Sorry coward, we both know you would never have the guts to say that to my face or my mother's.
And as far as your intelligence, there are no questions there.
You are a cesspool of hatred that occasionally tells us about what a wonderful teddy bear boss your underlings think you are.
Every now and then you sound human and I realize how you are still on the UPS payroll.
Deceit.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
tieguy said:
Very predictable and it's receive.
I hear UPS took you into management to stop the stereotypical dumb truck driver image you were fostering by being out on the street.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
ok2bclever said:
I just saw this after my last post and I wanted to comment. Tie, my kidding you 2 was just in fun because quite frankly I think "WE'VE" all gotten way to serious on a number of topics concerning politics, etc. and we need to laugh and lighten it up once in awhile. But if what is stated above is true and in fact you did do this, pal I got absolutely ZERO respect for you now. That is crossing the line big time. I have my disagreements politically, etc. with OK and you and I disagree but I'd never PM you nor for that fact say something like that even publicly to you. ALL FAMILY is off limits ALL THE TIME. PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!
First off, you should apologize to OK and if OK has done anything of this nature he should too. Both of you need to cool it bigtime if this in fact is what has happened. JMHO.
mac
wkmac
Well-Known Member
tieguy
Banned
Wkmac,
I also have to wonder about the timing of your response.
We had a lively debate last year over the elections.
Ok has never been able to let it go.
He has obsessively hounded me since then.
An objective look on your part would have seen there were times I responded to his obsessive attacks. And many other times where I choose to ignore any return of fire and simply answered the gist of his post. There were times when I would copy his quote and highlight the constant attacks he was making.
There were many times when Susan and I were going back and forth and ok would jump in with his obsessive , arrogant sarcastic attacks when I had not said a thing to him to initiate these unprovoked attacks.
This you did not step in and object to.
I'm a big boy. I choose to ignore alot of it. Some of it I would joke about without responding in kind. When the attack then focused on my military service he stepped under the line into a new low.
Again you choose to not step in and object then.
As I have said before I am no hero.
But I did serve my country.
I did serve my country in a unit that is the absolute first one to go during a time of conflict. 18th Airborne corps which contains the 82nd airborne along with other units is an integral part of the rapid deployement force and consistently the first deployed in times of conflict.
I have been there and therefore I feel I have earned the right to speak on military issues that affect this country.
I don't expect anyone to thank me. I do expect them to respect my service to my country and that I willingly put my but on the line. Take me out of the picture. Anyone who attacks a veteran of this country and not only tries to deny his service to this country but then tries to further deny that persons service by accusing him of being a coward is as immoral as they can get. There is nothing lower in my book.
If Ok is upset about my response then perhaps Ok should never have stepped into that gutter.
Joking around about this being a love match is an overstatement in absurdity. To do so you choose to ignore that about 75 percent of the "love" has come from one side.
Ok is by all definition an obsessive flamer and should lose all rights to this board.
I also have to wonder about the timing of your response.
We had a lively debate last year over the elections.
Ok has never been able to let it go.
He has obsessively hounded me since then.
An objective look on your part would have seen there were times I responded to his obsessive attacks. And many other times where I choose to ignore any return of fire and simply answered the gist of his post. There were times when I would copy his quote and highlight the constant attacks he was making.
There were many times when Susan and I were going back and forth and ok would jump in with his obsessive , arrogant sarcastic attacks when I had not said a thing to him to initiate these unprovoked attacks.
This you did not step in and object to.
I'm a big boy. I choose to ignore alot of it. Some of it I would joke about without responding in kind. When the attack then focused on my military service he stepped under the line into a new low.
Again you choose to not step in and object then.
As I have said before I am no hero.
But I did serve my country.
I did serve my country in a unit that is the absolute first one to go during a time of conflict. 18th Airborne corps which contains the 82nd airborne along with other units is an integral part of the rapid deployement force and consistently the first deployed in times of conflict.
I have been there and therefore I feel I have earned the right to speak on military issues that affect this country.
I don't expect anyone to thank me. I do expect them to respect my service to my country and that I willingly put my but on the line. Take me out of the picture. Anyone who attacks a veteran of this country and not only tries to deny his service to this country but then tries to further deny that persons service by accusing him of being a coward is as immoral as they can get. There is nothing lower in my book.
If Ok is upset about my response then perhaps Ok should never have stepped into that gutter.
Joking around about this being a love match is an overstatement in absurdity. To do so you choose to ignore that about 75 percent of the "love" has come from one side.
Ok is by all definition an obsessive flamer and should lose all rights to this board.