A 9/11 Victim's Family Member Asks for Help

Originally posted by EvilAxis
Five degrees of separation are not required. Bush's grandfather's business dealings with the Nazis, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, are a matter of public record.

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power The Guardian, Saturday 25 September 2004

[edit on 23-2-2010 by EvilAxis]

It wasn't "Bush's company". It was a bank that Prescott Bush worked for, which was owned by a Dutch conglomerate, which was owned by a German industrialist, who once gave money to the Nazis before being thrown into a concentration camp himself. It wasn't even "Bush's assets were siezed" either. The assets siezed were of a legitimate German shipping company that was being used by the Nazis behind the scenes, that had made deposits at his bank. Not that it matters, becuase all of this happened BEFORE BUSH 43 WAS EVEN BORN.

Thank you, EvilAxis, for proving everything I just said about the desperation of the conspriacy fetishists in deliberately perverting everything under the sun into some sinister sounding conspiracy or another. That other poster who claimed noone ever tried to link Bush to the Nazis is now eating crow thanks to you.

Originally posted by impressme

I total disagree with Deputy Chief Vincent Dunn and here is why: there were no buildings in New York City ever design in the likeness of the over “engineered WTC 1 & 2,” they were built to handle multiple impacts, by Boeing 707 fully loaded with jet fuel slamming into the WTC at top speeds of 600 knots.

Statements by Engineers
Engineers who participated in the design of the World Trade Center have stated, since the attack, that the Towers were designed to withstand jetliner collisions. For example, Leslie Robertson, who is featured on many documentaries about the attack, said he "designed it for a (Boeing) 707 to hit it." 2 Statements and documents predating the attack indicate that engineers considered the effects of not only of jetliner impacts, but also of ensuing fires.

FIRST, you're quoting Robertson out of context to deliberately misrepresent what he really said just like you conspiracy fetishists always do. The "attack" you're referring to was the WTC bombing in 1993. I know that becuase that statement was made with John Skilling in the Seattle Times back in 1993. SECOND, Leslie Robertson admitted in 2006 that his assessment didn't apply to the 2001 attack. His subsequent statement is-

"I support the general conclusions of the NIST report. The [WTC] was designed for the impact of a low flying slow flying Boeing 707. We envisioned it [to be like] the aircraft that struck the Empire State building [during] WW II. It was not designed for a high speed impact from the jets that actually hit it. Yes there was a red hot metal seen [in the WTC rubble] by engineers. "Molten" means flowing. I've never run across anyone who has said that they had in fact seen molten metal, or by the way if they had seen it, if they had performed some kind of an analysis to determine what that metal was."

This was during an interview with your messiah Alex Jones so there's no way it can be considered fake. Go to your Prison Planet website and check on it if you don't believe me, becuase that's where I got the quote. So now we have TWO authorities- a fire chief with years of expertise on fire damage, as well as the actual designer of the WTC- both saying your conspiracy stories are hogwash. Dunn is a deputy fire chief and I dare say he knows a hell of a lot more about fire damage than you do, and Robertson openly *agrees* with the NIST findings and I dare say he knows a hell of a lot more about his building than you do.

Now, go ahead and accuse Dunn and Robertson of being secret gov't disinformation agents. I double dog dare you.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

I'm tired of placating your standards of acceptability becuase it's obvious you don't have any, so it's high time that you accept mine. YOU asked for a web site that contained truthful information and I gave you one. It is now YOUR responsibility to explain why the assessment of Fire Chief Dunn is incorrect. Your making up arbitrary rules that never apply to yourself only makes your own credibility suffer, not mine.

Today jet fuels burn at about 1800 degrees and have a high flashpoint of 120 degrees. This means that when a person is refueling an aircraft, even on the hottest summer day, it would be difficult to ignite the fuel. This has increased the safety of the operation enormously and allowed the use of some 60 billion gallons of the fuel to be used worldwide per year.
www.airportjetfuel.com...

What's the melting point of steel?

Steel is just the element iron that has been processed to control the amount of carbon. Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750�F). ... – Read More...

www.businessonlineindia.com...

Wrong again Dave…
Dave, jet fuel burns at 1800 degrees, steel melts at C (2750F)

This is what happens when you read opinions from those damn fools firemen opinions conspiracy websites.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

FIRST, you're quoting Robertson out of context to deliberately

Dave, your really loosing it, go back and read the article “AGAIN” and you show me where I misquoted anyone?

Please post this quote from Robertson? Come one Dave you are accusing me of deliberately lying now show it (Oh, that’s right you can’t!) Because it is YOU, that have taken quotes out of contexts trying to disprove my honest presentation. Same on you.

Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 6 Demartini had first worked at World Trade Center when Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage from the truck bombing in 1993.

Like All Skyscrapers, the Twin Towers Were Over-Engineered
One aspect of engineering that is not widely understood is that structures are over-engineered as a matter of standard practice. 7 Steel structures like bridges and buildings are typically designed to withstand five times anticipated static loads and 3 times anticipated dynamic loads. The anticipated loads are the largest ones expected during the life of the structure, like the worst hurricane or earthquake occurring while the floors are packed with standing-room-only crowds. Given that September 11th was not a windy day, and that there were not throngs of people in the upper floors, the critical load ratio was probably well over 10, meaning that more than nine-tenths of the columns at the same level would have to fail before the weight of the top could have overcome the support capacity of the remaining columns.
There is evidence that the Twin Towers were designed with an even greater measure of reserve strength than typical large buildings. According to the 1964 white paper cited above, a Tower would still be able to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind after all the perimeter columns on one face and some of the columns on each adjacent face had been cut. 8 Also, John Skilling is cited by the Engineering News Record for the claim that "live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2000% before failure occurs." 9

911research.wtc7.net...

reply to post by impressme


Could you, please "impressme" NOW, for once, expiain what YOU think happened???

So far, you bring stuff, and start threads....based on OTHER PEOPLE's opinions....

Have yet to see YOUR explanations, can't even figure out your stance, except for the nebulous "Bush and Cheney Did It", but that is still a shaky leg to stand on, based on the PREPONDERAMCE of other evidence.

OK, one more comment.... (or two or three....)

The Bush Administration was GOING TO INVADE AFGHANISTAN, and Iraq, regardless whether 9/11 happened, or not!!!!

It is pretty evident, by now, based on documents being made public, after the NEW Administration has control....

IF 9/11 HAD NOT EVER HAPPENED, the BUSH ADMINISTATION would have gone into Iraq, regardless....!!!!!

LOOK AT THE HISTORY!!!!!

FAKE 'evidence' from the country of Niger....(yellow cake) THIS was faked well before 9/11!!!!

The claim of 'WMD' in Iraq....still, compiled well before 9/11....it was going to happen, irrespective!!!!

Wake up, and look at the facts!!!!!

[edit on 23 February 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by GoodOlDave


You don't contradict any of the facts laid out in the balanced and carefully researched Guardian article (which I would recommend to anyone seriously researching this matter) - but you do a good job of trying to spin them.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
It wasn't "Bush's company". It was a bank that Prescott Bush worked for,

Well yes you could say he just worked for UBC - if you wanted to hide the fact that he was a founding member, shareholder and one of its seven directors. It was set up by his father-in-law to provide a US bank for the Thyssens - at the time Germany's most powerful industrial family. Prescott continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
which was owned by a Dutch conglomerate

That's the shell game. As John Loftus puts it, "The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen. At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn't until the Nazis took over Holland that they realised that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely bely that, it's absolute horse#. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were."

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
which was owned by a German industrialist, who once gave money to the Nazis before being thrown into a concentration camp himself.

That would be Fritz Thyssen of the Thyssen dynasty, major contributors to Germany's first world war effort. Like many others who crossed swords with Hitler, he spent the war imprisoned (not the fate of most Jews who were "thrown into a concentration camp"). Prior to this he joined with other industrialists in signing the letter that urged Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as chancellor and became one of the leading financial backers of the Nazi Party. To his credit he resigned as state councillor in protest against Crystal Night.

Prescott Bush was also a director and shareholder of a number of other companies involved with Thyssen.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Not that it matters, becuase all of this happened BEFORE BUSH 43 WAS EVEN BORN.

Bush senior or junior cannot be blamed for what their forebears did, but how the family made it's considerable fortune is a matter of public interest and it's remarkable how many of the facts around this have been covered up for so long.


(apologies for going down this derailment - had to untwist the spin)



[edit on 23-2-2010 by EvilAxis]

reply to post by weedwhacker

www.youtube.com...

Please watch this video in its entirety before posting.

My question is, do you all believe that WTC 7 was demolished by a controlled demolition, is there enough evidences to support it?

Do most of you think the WTC 1 & 2 where blown in to a powder instead of a dust?

I agree with this Engineer to his claims
For those Trusters, here is a prime example of “victim’s of family members” reaching out and asking for help into getting to the truth.
Even they know the government lied, and the OS is a fraud.

Different of opinions are welcome.

Could you, please "impressme" NOW, for once, expiain what YOU think happened???

I have already explained in my OP what I think. Where you hoping I was going to post that invisible nuclear bombs being shot from blue space aliens in flying saucers then landed on earth, hide all the evidences, and kidnap George Bush and Dick Chenney and made pod people out of them and stuck them under airplane pods….. I mean weed do you Trusters really believe that everyone who questions the events to 911 ALL wear tin foil hats and are all idiots with an IQ of 60 and all live in mommies basement.
Did that impress you?

So far, you bring stuff, and start threads....based on OTHER PEOPLE's opinions....

Wrong! However that is YOUR opinion, right?

Have yet to see YOUR explanations, can't even figure out your stance, except for the nebulous "Bush and Cheney Did It", but that is still a shaky leg to stand on, based on the PREPONDERAMCE of other evidence.

I have given my stance in the OP.

The Bush Administration was GOING TO INVADE AFGHANISTAN, and Iraq, regardless whether 9/11 happened, or not!!!!

Where is your sources for this information?

It is pretty evident, by now, based on documents being made public, after the NEW Administration has control....

WHAT??? What document has the Obama administration released proven the Bush administration did not have anything to do with 911.
Please do enlighten us weedwhacker to these new documents we are eager to see them.

IF 9/11 HAD NOT EVER HAPPENED, the BUSH ADMINISTATION would have gone into Iraq, regardless....!!!!!

FAKE 'evidence' from the country of Niger....(yellow cake) THIS was faked well before 9/11!!!!

The claim of 'WMD' in Iraq....still, compiled well before 9/11....it was going to happen, irrespective!!!!

Wake up, and look at the facts!!!!!

My thread and OP is not about “AFGHANISTAN, and Iraq” so let stay on topic.

Wake up, and look at the facts!!!!!

Perhaps, that what you need to do, wake up.

Do most of you think the WTC 1 & 2 where blown in to a powder instead of a dust?

You never answered my OP questions.

reply to post by impressme

Where you hoping I was going to post that invisible nuclear bombs being shot from blue space aliens in flying saucers then landed on earth, hide all the evidences, and kidnap George Bush and Dick Chenney and made pod people out of them and stuck them under airplane pods….. I mean weed do you Trusters really believe that everyone who questions the events to 911 ALL wear tin foil hats and are all idiots with an IQ of 60 and all live in mommies basement.

No.

Actually, IF we ever met in real life, we'd be able to communicate better than in this forum, but for now, this is the best we can do....




[edit on 23 February 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by impressme

My thread and OP is not about “AFGHANISTAN, and Iraq” so let stay on topic.

Well, then I apologize for conflating many of your OTHER statements, that I have perceived, based on your written opinions, from OTHER threads....

...BUT, your stance is pretty well known, based on your history of thread creation....

I am trying to tell you that you should take a deep breath, step back and take time to READ what others provide, in various threads, whether YOURS, or those that you merely post in.

PLEASE.

I may have come of as too arrogant, at times....and that's part of my personality.

BUT, many of the "TM" come off as equally 'arrogant'....so, let's slow down, and think.....

"The Bush Administration was GOING TO INVADE AFGHANISTAN, and Iraq, regardless whether 9/11 happened, or not!!!!"

www.thenews.com.pk...

"Former foreign secretary Niaz A Naik was found dead in mysterious circumstances at his residence in Sector F-7/3 on Saturday, police said. He was 82."

The above former Pakistani Government Official blew the whistle on plans being drafted prior to 9/11 for the invasion of Afghanistan. He ended up tortured and dead.

Since allegedly these invasions were planned prior to 9/11, what was the real reason for invading Afghanistan and Iran? Why did the Government use the bogus excuse of hunting down Bin Laden and his sinister cave dwelling associates?

Furthermore, why did the American Government allegedly deceive the American public about these invasions? If one really has noble intentions, being dishonest is not an option.

Let's face it, the American public bought the 9/11 bag job hook, line and sinker. Hopefully, next time they won't be as naive nad gullible in their beliefs.

reply to post by ImAPepper

I was asking Dave, not you.


This is an open forum. You don't like my answers? Ignore me.

I know you are too young to understand this but children like some posters and some people I am trying to communicate with make to much noise to ignore.

I have, and I recommend that YOU read the NIST report of the WTC demolition.

Further proof that you haven't.

Another opinion by ImAPepper.

You mean these Structural Engineers do not have a website?

Not sure what you're saying here?

Stop cherry picking quotes and spinning them into something else! Lets put the whole question and quotes in here, so everyone can see how deceptive you are being.

What you don't understand, you find someone that does. Structural Engineers can be found at any University.

You mean these Structural Engineers do not have a website?

What part of “You mean these Structural Engineers do not have a website?” did you not understand?

You mean they have and “can prove” that NIST pseudo is in fact not phony science?


Did I say that? I asked that you read the NIST report. You are obviously not a SE so my recomendation to you was if you had questions, there are forums that have Engineers that may answer the questions you have.

Well ImAPepper I have went to Engineers forums, and asked questions.

www.ae911truth.org...

Perhaps you should do the same instead of believing in “hearsay information” from our lying media and reading one-sided stories being told from the gov.org websites that have mostly been proven lies by real sciences

Tell you what, why don’t YOU give us a website of “Engineering professionals” that Proves NIST report is scientifically correct and shows where A&E have disputed NIST findings are all wrong?

I bet you can't!

I was right,you could not produce any. You could not produce any website, or real scientist that has discredited A&E scientific findings, I love it!

The JREF forum has ongoing discussions regarding the collapses.

We really are not interested in what a bunch of amateur bloggers given their opinions to what happened on 911 have to say. We get enough of that in here don’t you agree?
We are only interested in discussing the facts and sciences that proves the truth.

I never asked you to go to a website to get "proof" but to ask questions you may have regarding the NIST report.

I have. www.ae911truth.org...

There have, however been MANY documents written in support of it.

In support of what? What is, in support of it?

MANY peer reviewed. How many have the truth movement put out?

Many peer reviewed what? How many have the“Trusters movement” put out?

1. Destruction.....

One of his former members, Greg Urich wrote an open letter to Mr. Gage. I think it's been a year now and Richard has ignored it. Why? I personally gave Gage a copy of it last fall asking for a response. Richard even acknowledges this on his website. He says a response is forthcoming.

Read the letter here:
www.cool-places.0catch.com...

Reading someone’s “rants and opinions” about Mr Gage work does not interest me We all know that you have a personal ax to grind against Gage.

EXPLOSIVE NEWS

www.washingtontimes.com...

Oh my, Richard Gage, getting mainstream Press Oh my! Oh my G-d he going to tell the truth and too many people will here his questions.

You will have to stop him at all cost, hurry up before your to late.

www.youtube.com...

Please watch this video in its entirety before posting.

My question is, do you all believe that WTC 7 was demolished by a controlled demolition, is there enough evidences to support it?

Do most of you think the WTC 1 & 2 where blown in to a powder instead of a dust?

Now back on topic, how about answering the question?





[edit on 23-2-2010 by impressme]

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


I'd love having an adult discussion with you, Sir or Madam, but when you write this'..

....what was the real reason for invading Afghanistan and Iran?

I know, it's only ONE letter that separates the name of the country of "IRAN" and "IRAQ".....but that is a pretty glaring error to make, on your part, dontcha think????

reply to post by weedwhacker

I am trying to tell you that you should take a deep breath, step back and take time to READ what others provide, in various threads, whether YOURS, or those that you merely post in.

PLEASE.

I, like everyone else on this thread we are entitle to our own beliefs.
Perhaps, you should take a step back and take a deep breath, and take the time to read what others have provided in various threads.
Perhaps, the government may have made a mistake.
Perhaps, they lied.
Perhaps, they overlook something.
Perhaps, they are ashamed.
Perhaps, people in our government did it.
Perhaps, you are wrong.
Perhaps, there were explosives in the WTC.
Perhaps, there were no explosives in the WTC.
Perhaps, we are all wrong about the events of 911.
Perhaps, the Truth movements are right.
Perhaps, not all Truthers wear tin foil hats.
Perhaps, many Truthers are highly educated.
Perhaps, many Truthers are government employees.
Perhaps, many Truthers are working in our military.
Perhaps, sciences have proved the OS is a lie.
Perhaps, NIST lied.
Perhaps, the 911-commission report is a lie.
Perhaps, space aliens did 911.
Perhaps, I am right.
Perhaps, I could be wrong.
Perhaps, a plane didn’t hit the pentagon.
Perhaps, a plane did hit the pentagon.
Perhaps, a bomb was fired in the pentagon.
Perhaps, a plane did crash in Shanksville PA.
Perhaps, a plane did not crash in Shanksville PA.
Perhaps, the plane really landed elsewhere.
Perhaps, bone yard debris were dump in the hole.
Perhaps, there was nano Thermite in the WTC.
Perhaps.
Maybe.
Could be.
Lets all stick with the sciences that can and does take out all the perhaps, maybe, could be, we assume, our opinions, our speculating, our belief systems.






[edit on 23-2-2010 by impressme]

reply to post by impressme


WOW!!!!!

Someone gave you a star for that post???

You should thank your fan base....

I don;t even know WHERE to start on that post, so I won't even try....you are all over the map.

Still, thanks for trying.

reply to post by weedwhacker

Do most of you think the WTC 1 & 2 where blown in to a powder instead of a dust?

You never answered my OP questions.

You still can’t answer a simple question.
Was it dust?
Was it powder?
To scared eh?

I don;t even know WHERE to start on that post, so I won't even try....you are all over the map.

Still, thanks for trying.

Oh, thanks for the jab.

One only needs to look at all of your posts on this thread, you certainly were all over the world.

You didnt even watch the OP video on this thread, you didnt even discuss the contents of the video. If you are not interesting in discussing my OP topic, then what are you in here for?







[edit on 24-2-2010 by impressme]

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

FIRST, you're quoting Robertson out of context to deliberately

Dave, your really loosing it, go back and read the article “AGAIN” and you show me where I misquoted anyone?

Don't even try to play this game, Impressme. I said you were misquoting him OUT OF CONTEXT, as in intentionally separating a sentence from the point he was making to give the appearance he said something entirely different. Robertson SPECIFICALLY said when he made that estimate he was basing it upon the type of plane that had hit the Empire State building rather than with modern jets, and he SPECIFICALLY said he concurs with the NIST report. This SPECIFICALLY overrides the obsolete 1964 and 2003 estimates you're using as a crutch to prop up your conspiracy claims. If you in any way, shape or form are attempting to claim the designers even remotely agree with your conspiracy stories...and we both know you are...you are LYING.

You're certainly not stupid so you certainly have to know what it is you're doing.

Please post this quote from Robertson? Come one Dave you are accusing me of deliberately lying now show it (Oh, that’s right you can’t!)

LIE[2] vi. lied, ly'ing
1. a) to make a statement that one knows is
false, esp. with intent to deceive b) to make
such statements habitually
2. to give a false impression; deceive one
[statistics can lie]

Your penchant to artfully misrepresent material that refutes your conspiracy stories to give the false impression that it supports them is LYING, regardless of whatever pretty name it is you want to refer to it by.

Unless you wish to concur the rubbish you're spreading isn't coming from you, but rather, from those damned fool conspiracy web sites you frequent...?

Originally posted by impressme
Lets all stick with the sciences that can and does take out all the perhaps, maybe, could be, we assume, our opinions, our speculating, our belief systems.

The problem here is that the conspiracy fetishists can and do force science to conform with a preconceived position, rather than letting science suggest a viable scenario. Despite our differences, I think even you can agree that Dr. Judy Wood's scientific assessment that the WTC was destroyed by laser beams from outer space is a case in point.

How do you suggest we determine whether science is telling the truth or whether someone is using science to lie?

reply to post by GoodOlDave

The problem here is that the conspiracy fetishists can and do force science to conform with a preconceived position, rather than letting science suggest a viable scenario.

The problem here is that the Trusters fetishists can and do force science to conform with a preconceived position, rather than letting science suggest a viable scenario such as the NIST report which most academics now reject.

Despite our differences, I think even you can agree that Dr. Judy Wood's scientific assessment that the WTC was destroyed by laser beams from outer space is a case in point.

Dave, most people do not support Dr. Judy Wood's work, and YOU know that.
We know you associate the truth of 911 with space beam little green men wearing tin foil hats and living in mommies basement flying around in their invisible flying saucers.

How do you suggest we determine whether science is telling the truth or whether someone is using science to lie?

Wow, Dave perhaps you should try to use your noggin and stay away from Dr. Judy Wood's work to start with.
Dave I find it quite amusing that you cannot distinguish the different between disproven sciences such as Judy Wood, NIST, and Steven Jones work of nano Thermite.
Which two scientific reports were proven false by science? Think Dave.

Originally posted by impressme

The problem here is that the Trusters fetishists can and do force science to conform with a preconceived position, rather than letting science suggest a viable scenario such as the NIST report which most academics now reject.

Who are the "most academics" that now reject the NSIT report? I already told you the designers of the WTC towers support the NIST findings so I don't have to tell you this trumps your religious professor pretending to be a materials engineer and your college kids making internet videos in their dorm room.

...and what the heck is a "truster fetishist"? You conspiracy people are really starting to go overboard with these words you're making up as you go along (I.E. OANYA).

Dave, most people do not support Dr. Judy Wood's work, and YOU know that.We know you associate the truth of 911 with space beam little green men wearing tin foil hats and living in mommies basement flying around in their invisible flying saucers.

No, actually, I associate the 9/11 truther movement with know it all high school and college kids who think they're being sophisticated and oh so wise and in the know by spouting the antiestablishment rubbish they read on those damned fool conspriacy web sites. When you posted this "9/11 victim's family member asking for help" who started up his own damned fool conspiracy web site repeating the same rubbish all the other damned fool conspiracy web sites do, except for the "college kids" part you haven't exactly shown me the statement is incorrect.

Dave I find it quite amusing that you cannot distinguish the different between disproven sciences such as Judy Wood, NIST, and Steven Jones work of nano Thermite.
Which two scientific reports were proven false by science? Think Dave.

Technically neither, since neither uses any real science to prove their claims to begin with. One person shows a bunch of photos and yells "Lasers from outer space", and the other sets fire to some dust someone mailed him and makes up words like "Thermitic".

reply to post by GoodOlDave


G.O.D. ---- may I refer to you as "Dave"???

you know I love you to death....will hug you and pet you and....oops, channeled some book by some author of reknown...something about men and mice...EWWWW!

Oh, nevermind....

Please do NOT fall into the trap that is being set by this person.

Your post:

...and what the heck is a "truster fetishist"?

You kinda/sorta coined a similar term, I think....in another post in this thread...."Truther Fetishist"....I could be wrong, but I think it was YOUR idea, and an ATS member took it, and spun it back on ya!!!

So, slow down, take several deep breaths (ALL of us....) relax, and THINK about this again, logically and rationally....

'thank you berry much', as the late, great Andy Kaufman's character used to say...

(RIP Andy Kaufman...we miss you!!!)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDIT for typos, typpos typos!!!! LOKL!!! stet, and stet!!!!

My KINGDOM for a spellcheck device, if only some one would invent such a thing!!!!

And, a POX on my horribly fat fingers, and this small keyboard, that I am unfamiliar with!!!

Dash you to Heck!!!!!



[edit on 25 February 2010 by weedwhacker]