![[mccookgazette.com]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/nameplate31.png)
|
|
Fair ~ High: 87°F ~ Low: 57°F Wednesday, May 16, 2012 |
|
The Torture QuestionPosted Thursday, April 23, 2009, at 2:07 PM
And it wasn't to attempt to get information about possible future attacks on America but to try to prove a link between Saddam's Iraq and al Queda. Of course the information was not what the Bush Administration wanted to find out, but then again there was no link to begin with. So what all this increasingly begins to look like is torture for political gain, which is sad in the worst case scenario. The question then is, "Does torture even work?" Well if past studies have shown us anything it's that torture usually provides false information and not usable information. If what we saw during the United States' failed torture policy that seems to hold up. When two seperate men are tortured over 300 times and it gives us no new information then something is not surprisingly wrong. As Shepard Smith said on Fox News the other day, "We are the United States. We do not torture. It doesn't matter if it's right or wrong. We do not torture." I had to do some editing on that one because he was upset and letting some words you can't say on television slip. Over the last couple of days, several former Bush aids and VP Cheney have said releasing this information puts us at risk. That of course is a red herring. It does nothing but informs the American people that yes for at least six years the Bush Administration was torturing in our name while telling us they weren't. Torture, no matter how you try to spin it and change the name of it, is illegal in the United States under OUR laws and illegal in the world, under the Geneva Convention Acts. Now, the whole issue with water boarding. Several of you on the boards here, have been following the talking points to a tee when you claim that water boarding is not torture. Unfortunately, that is something that your own government has not always agreed with you on. In the 1970s, several members of the Khmer Rouge in Southeast Asia were convicted of torture, by the United States, for performing water boarding on their captives. What has changed from then to now? Nothing, except we had a bunch of cronies in the Bush Administration that refused to stand up and tell them that under no certain terms does the United States torture. Cheney, of course, says that torture does work and has worked and wants those files released. Since hearing him say that I still have moments when I sit there and remember all the times during the Bush Administration when they had a chance to release this information and they refused, now all of a sudden they want another administration to release THEIR memos. And to his other claim that by using torture they kept America safe for seven years? That's a bunch of hogwash. Just because something doesn't happen doesn't mean we are safer. In fact, I believe that because our country used these "enhanced interrogation techniques" that our enemies won't even think twice about doing the same to our men and women. This country used to be a beacon for freedom and hope around the world, and that image was nearly destroyed in the eight years under the Bush presidency. The Obama presidency is working and working hard to restore that beacon to what it once was.
As a final adendum, I'm sure there will be a few posters on here that will undoubtedly criticize me for living in the past. They seem to think, at least in my case, that forgetting that past is the best option. Well I live by the creed, "Those who forget the past, are damned to repeat it." Also, many of these same posters are the same ones that will call Clinton a traitor for having an affair in the White House, yet give Bush a pass on just about everything. Clinton had many faults everyone knows that and he did lie and kept getting caught in those lies. But what he did do was boost our economy which had sputtered after 12 years of trickle down economics. He also managed to put our country in the first surplus that we had seen in years. He also for the most part kept our men and women out of harms way for eight years. Okay I have gotten off the course. So I will stop at this point. Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Hot topics A Case Against Merit Pay(12 ~ 6:08 PM, Mar 2)
Hot Springs, America's First National Park
President Obama's Speech
A Most Disgusting Lie
Republicans and the Far-Right Have Hit Rock Bottom
|
Email link
Read comments (48)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
G5,
You are missing the point in my opinion. Torture does not keep america safe. It never has. It never will.
Do you think waterboarding an individual in some Afghani desert would've stopped 9/11?
Torture has been proven time and time again as ineffective. Theoretically, let's say you are arrested by some Obama secret agents.
They take you, put you in a cellar and begin questioning you about the Sri Lankan incident. You know nothing about the incident. Yet they're pretty sure you do.
They begin to torture you. You still tell the truth, pleading with them to let you go. They then ask you who was behind it. Again, you tell them you have no idea.
As time goes on you are put throw unimaginable mental and physical pain. Finally one asks you if guy x was behind it. You think about your situation silently. They now put a gun to your head and ask you again. You still have no idea what they are talking about, but now you know what they want you to say. You say, "Yes. It was guy X."
That is why torture doesn't keep anything safe.
Mike, you have written a well versed, but objectionable article, above. I am sorry, but my Conservative mind disagrees with the 'slant' of your offering, more than your words.
I, too, do not like the idea of torture. More than that, though, I hate the idea of being nice to an enemy that loves to kill every Christian, and Jew they see (All Americans, are considered to be Christian. 75% claim to be). Rather than debate my belief system, with your belief system, I would prefer to address but one thing you said:
"This country used to be a beacon for freedom and hope around the world, and that image was nearly destroyed in the eight years under the Bush presidency. The Obama presidency is working and working hard to restore that beacon to what it once was."
This country still is a 'beacon.' Consider all the people legally entering, plus all those illegally entering for the definition of 'beacon.' You call for the restoration of that 'destroyed' beacon to what it once was. Over the past few decades, people who hate this nation, and people, have taken to using that 'beacon' to be the center of the bulls-eye, in the target they see painted upon our chests (yes, even yours). If we have slipped from being Angels, shame on us, but then, in my fifty plus years of Foreign associations, American's were never seen as Angels by our allies. The term 'Ugly American,' was coined long before you were born.
Your opinions, and right to voice them, I support, no matter how wrong I feel you may be. I can only pray that you look at the whole picture, and then make wise determinations. Sadly, in my opinion, you still have not been able to garner that capacity, no matter the extent of higher education you have.
Respect to you, at least, for having the character to stand at the fore-deck, and take as well as give.
In Messiah. Arley Steinhour
It seems to me that obama believes in torture he sure likes to torture all the people of the UNITED STATES
One key detail is missing in the CIA's release of the Los Angeles story. Before ever interrogating the man in custody, there protocal says they must have valid information correlating with a possible impending attack. So before the man was waterboarded, the CIA already knew there was an impending attack, they simply did not know the name. Or maybe they did, and they just needed confirmation. So the CIA must have ways of finding legitimate information aside from torture.
I will admit, it seems that waterboarding saved lives in this instance. But even a broken clock is right twice a day.
And in no way have I ever "carried water" for a terrorist G5. I simply don't like your generalizations. I have defended muslims, not terrorists. Until you can differentiate, you are in my opinion ignorant.
I'm sorry to say, I have to take G5's side on this one. When I was a wee lad my older sister would harrass and pick on me. I would hit her in the arm or give her a charly horse for the harrassment I endured. My sister would tell my mother about my hitting her and I would get a lecture from my mother. When I protested my mom would say "two wrongs don't make a right". Well, now its official two wrongs DO make a right. We can torture them because they behead people. I can't wait to see my dear ole mum and tell her she was wrong for all of those years.
The best part is when someone cuts in line in front of me I can smack them in the nose now. Cut off in traffic, pull your six shooter out and let them have it. Talking in the movie theater? Not anymore, I will pour my coke on you and give you a wedgie. All within my rights, since we now know for sure, two wrongs make a right.
"and eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"
Ghandi
Can we have sources and links? This is the digital age, right?
Okay here's the point. And this is nothing that is new. All the credible information that we got from the mastermind of 9/11 occurred on the timeline months before he was waterboarded. After the waterboarding started we got nothing.
And as far as the law is concerned. Waterboarding has been ruled as torture and therefore illegal in the world for at least 50 years and in the United States for at least 111 years. Case in point. Two soldiers were court martialed after the Spanish-American War for waterboarding Filipinos in the Philipines.
Think it just goes for the military? Wrong. In 1983 a sheriff and two deputies in Texas were imprisoned for performing waterboarding on inmates trying to get information out of them. The sherriff later appealed his case to then governor George W. Bush. Bush did nothing.
It is a proven, undeniable fact that waterboarding has saved us from nothing. This attack that was planned for Los Angeles that the right likes to claim was put off by torture? Not even close. Torture was authorized in August of 2002. The Los Angeles attack was found out in May of 2002 well before the torture started.
As for G5 he or she is nothing more than an inflamer. His/her only goal is to try to goad people into a fight with him by saying inflammatory things. His/her posts mean nothing and I will no longer respond to him and I encourage the rest of you to do the same.
Geneva convention?? We are talking about people that would put up a wall of their own women and children to keep themselves safe, people that target non-combatants in other coutries, and people that will send a 12 year old out with a bomb strapped to his chest. I dont think the geneva convention applies here. Personally, I dont care if we water boarded a few of them. I have not ever water boarded anyone, but I have been trained to do so. During my time in the army, I had the opportunity to talk to several soldiers that have had a lot worse than some water dumped on their face.
So seentoomuch because they don't honor the Geneva Convention, that gives us the right to do the same?
That is NOT the American way. For over 200 years we have upheld our moral, freedom, and liberty ideals in the face of the other side doing things the other way. Yet suddenly you want me to believe that torture is somehow not the American way. I don't think so.
As Shepard Smith said (and yes I think it needs to be said again) "We are America, we do not torture!"
On another note, I've noticed that since these memos have been released Republicans of all shapes and sizes have dropped the notion of trying to convince the rest of America that there was no torture in Bush's Administration. Now they are trying to justify it. Even John Boehner in a press statement called it torture.
I'm glad you all have taken the first step and admitted to the torture.
Second, I would love to know how you sleep at night after spending an entire day defending torture as hard as you have.
nate, how many links does mike post?
Thank you Steffanie for proving mine and everyone who is against torture's point.
Torture does not get reliable information
You come at me with a bic lighter and some vice grips you know what information you will get out of me? You'll get whatever it is I think you want to hear, and it won't be reliable because I would be doing it to get you to stop.
So again thank you Steffanie for proving my point.
After doing some more research, I must agree w/ ekimsitruc.
In no way can you say waterboarding stopped the terrorist attack on Los Angeles. This is not a matter of right vs left opinion. Look at the facts given. It simply makes no sense.
When the mention of the declassification of cia files was first leaked it was when Cheney was defending waterboarding. He said the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed stopped a planned 2002 Los Angeles attack. That is from the original fox news story.
Of course, all defenders of torture said, "oh yeah. We told you so!" Here's the problem. No one looked at the declassified information.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/...
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/so...
I never was good at math but there is one big problem here.
Cheney encouraged the CIA to leak the info that waterboarding Khalid stopped a 2002 planned attack. Khalid was arrested by us in early march 2003. Hmmmmmm. At first I thought I was lied to by my agenda-driven government. But I knew that couldn't be possible.
So I figured out what happened... After the 2003 terrorist attack actually happened in LA we got a hold of Khalid and waterboarded him over 150 times as many as 12 times a day. (That part really is confirmed) Khalid then finally told us how he did it. Then Cheney knew what he had to do. He sent a terminator back to the year 2002 to stop the terrorist attack.
So its like the movie the Terminator, but luckily unlike John Connor, fox news doesn't check their sources.
ekimsitruc; honoring the geneva convention has killed countless American men and women. That would appear to be the American way. We target only military targets while the enemy hides like cowards amongst civilians, we refuse to shoot into civilian areas while the enemy hides behind and picks us off. The enemy sends their children out with bombs to die and take a few of us with them. All because of people like you that refuse to stop playing with these people and just do what our military is capable of and mow them all down.
Water boarding is not torture, I dont care what anybody thinks. They are not harmed, they get to live to play another day. I have some friends; Korean and Vietnam vets that can give you some first hand information on what torture really is, and show you the scars to prove it.
I guess we can just continue to line up our troops, who are somebodies father, brother, mother, sister, or child, so the enemy can just shoot them while they hide behind civilians, because that is the American way.
Seentomuch,
"All because of people like you that refuse to stop playing with these people and just do what our military is capable of and mow them all down."
This is what is so twisted in so many people's minds today.
Do you realize you are talking about 'mowing down' innocent people to get the terrorists hiding behind them? There is WORTH to human life, American or otherwise. It is unjust to sacrifice THEIR innocent civilians so that OUR innocent soldiers/civilians can live.
I understand that it may be more 'effective', but it's not right. Sacrificing innocent people for the sake of your own citizens is most certainly not the 'American way'. It is unjust.
Now I would not fault a soldier at war who killed civilians with collateral damage. It's a horrible thing. But sometimes accidents happen, or hard decisions must be made. But to encourage it as the military POLICY, to 'mow them all down', is unjust and simply wrong.
Oh jeez how could I forget that the torture first crowd doesn't consider it torture unless someone dies. Sorry, my bad.
Steffanie, if you believe that by torturing over and over again gets real results then why have we not gotten real results. The terrorists already know they are going to be tortured over and over again so why would they even bother to give real information.
Oh one more thing water boarding is torture and I think the reason a lot of people have gotten confused on this is because for years the Bush White House and Fox News fed us with the line that water boarding is nothing more than giving the person the idea that they are drowning. This is NOT the case. A military person who was actually trained in water boarding techniques put it this way. Water boarding is actul drowning giving the person the idea that they are going to die.
There goes G5 again this time copying word for word something he found on Foxnews. Kudos. Hey G5 other than the occassional racial epitat that you like to throw everyone's way do you have any original ideas? This isn't the first time you have copied line for line someone else's material.
One more question for the torture crowd. How do you square this away with your christian beliefs?
Jhat, I stand corrected, you are right that it is not justified to mow them all down. Now that I think about it, it was a very poor choice of words on my part. But I do think that we could take things a little further than we do. A few innocent lives will be lost, but a whole lot more will be saved.
Of course not you fool Guillermo.
We all know, if America does something, it is automatically right. If another country does it, they are godless animals who are culturally backwards.
When japan bombed pearl harbor they were crazy demons who wanted to see us die. When we dropped nuclear bombs on japan, we were doing the right thing because they acted first. Plus, japanese people aren't white. So obviously God doesn't care about them.
CNN ironically just ran the story about the LA terror plot about 2 minutes ago.
In no way did waterboarding prevent the attack.
Now with the morality of torture aside, will those of you for the use torture at least admit that since Khalid was arrested and in captivity a yr after the plot was stopped proves that waterboarding did not stop the attack?
Whether you are for or against torture, you must realize that Dick Cheney blatantly lied about this.
Wow this has just gotten absurd. Yet another person not to respond to on here. Steffanie I am now convinced more than ever that you are not and adult or even a female. If I had to guess you are a 12-15 yr old boy who has nothing better to do but try to flame people.
Words can hide a lot. "Waterboarding," for instance, is a convenient euphemism for forced suffocation through the pouring of water into our breathing passages. Essentially, one is made to "dry drown." No one knew what "waterboarding" meant when it was first used by the NY Times on May 13, 2004. The use of this label led many people to believe that this was a benign procedure, void of pain, terror, and ultimately, death. The Spanish Inquisition used it, so it's a well-known and old torture procedure, but with a new name (similar to "surfboarding"), it loses its potential to horrify us and to warn us of its inhumane and disastrous consequences. "Waterboarding" is a misleading label. Are we humane and/or civilized if we enact the reality of suffocating people, possibly to their deaths? I would not wish "waterboarding," and the suffering that results from it on ANYONE.
Res Just
Actually I don't smoke pot.
No matter how you look at it forced drowning (ie waterboarding) is torture. It doesn't matter if it is the lesser of all evils it is still torture and America does not torture, period. It is illegal and those that ordered it need to be brought to justice and those that performed it do as well. America made the point during the Nuremburg trials (you remember, when we tried a whole group of Nazis that put a lot of people to death that were innocent citizens?)the old line "I was following orders" is not a valid defense.
I find it real sad to read the hate online from so many people. I do believe we have the freedom to say what we feel, but such hate. Was it wrong to torture....yeah. It is very hard to say yes to this but it is wrong. I see the U.S. going in a negative direction from both sides. The words cut deep and it has divided us to the point I feel of no resolution. We stand divided and on no terms do we agree. We shout hate so we can get our point out. We hate everything the right or left stand for. It will be what brings us down. There are few morals, ethics, honor or even forgiveness in us these days. If there are any of these out there they need to come out. We sit back and take pot shots at people and what they stand for but over one issue after another. What is moral, ethical, HONOR and forgiveness?
well posted lawbreaker
G.I. point of clarification. At 1:27 p.m. on Friday, April 24, '09, the last part of the last sentence states, in part, "the torture or even waterboarding of anyone". The "or even" could lead some to believe that you do not consider waterboarding to be torture. That surely is not true.
I just watched a half hour long interview with Robert Baer.
Baer was a long time former CIA officer who himself was tortured, and witnessed over 200 torture sessions.
Since leaving the CIA he has been vehemently against torture. He says that aside from the morality in question, torture is simply ineffective.
He witnessed the waterboarding of KSM. He said as soon as the man was waterboarded he began telling the CIA everything about everyone he ever met. When the CIA went to check the data, none of it was accurate. He also said when he was tortured he told his captives what he thought they wanted to hear. And it was not the truth. He claims that torture has never once been effective. He says that police work stops terrorism not torture.
And in the case of waterboarding. He says that it is without a doubt torture. TO those of you saying it does no harm. He says many people have died during waterboarding. Now I know this former CIA agent and torture expert won't have the expertise as some posters on this board, but he says that when your brain thinks its drowning your heart races. Many people have died of heart attacks while being waterboarded. And to those of you who simply think water is poured on someone's head, you are wrong. THe person is drowned for roughly 40 seconds. And this happened to KSM 6 times a day for weeks. Obviously it was not effective, because the cia never claimed to get valid information from the man, only Cheney claims this.
G.I. thanks again for your response. I have no idea which side of the abortion issue you are on (and yes, this is off subject)(and I wont ask your position) but how do the liberals justify their position on that issue? And before anyone flames me, I am one of those conflicted conservatives who doesnt believe in abortion but believes in a womans right to choose. What a conundrum!
No, thank you, G5, I don't think anyone should water board me. I don't want irreparable damage to my lungs and brain, and I'd rather not drown in the hands of a torturer like you. No one does because it's inhumane, unethical, and the product of the worst social and political practices in history. You and Steffanie can play asphyxiation games once you're married since you're both inclined toward such pleasures.
I want to say thank you to lawbreaker for his words. He is absolutely right. I know that from time to time I descend to the level of division (unfortunately it is the way today's America is set up). I try to stay away from it because my best points are made when I use simply my mind and my heart together instead of letting my heart get in the way. But on certain issues (torture being one) my heart takes over and yes I do get mean. And for that I apologize.
Doodle,
"I am one of those conflicted conservatives who doesnt believe in abortion but believes in a womans right to choose."
I don't think this position is as "conflicted" as you think. It's actually very close to my position.
Essentially, I would not counsel someone to get an abortion, or get one myself (were I a woman). In that sense, I am "anti-abortion". But I also believe that I don't have the right to make that choice for anyone else. I have met many liberals who hold this same position. By the way many conservatives talk, it seems like all of us liberals think abortion is this amazing thing that everyone should try. But that's not how most of us feel (in my experience).
Being pro-choice doesn't mean you are pro-abortion. It just means that you support other people's choices rather than wishing to impose your own choice on them.
jhat and doodle
I completely agree with you. I abhor the idea of abortions but at the same time I believe that choice to be between a woman, her doctor, and her god. The rest of us have no right to tell anyone what to do. That is why most liberals and I think a large portion of moderate conservatives are pro-choice. To be honest I have never come across anyone who is simple pro-abortion. To elaborate on an earlier point. If the government completely outlawed abortion again it wouldn't stop women from getting the procedure illegally and dangerously.
Oh joy here we go again with the lie that we firebombed the people in Waco. It never happened. the people inside lit the fire.
g5, you have some valid ideas and valid points. Can you not couch them in more civil tones? You just give the left more ammunition to throw at you and the rest of us conservatives.
Actually it is you G5 who are rewriting history. The Branch Davidians were the ones that endangered those women and children, many of those children who were forced into marriage and rape with their "leader" David Koresh. There is no reason what-so-ever they needed an arsenal of guns. That's why the government went in, was to get the ILLEGAL guns.
But the Branch Davidians, the adult men, are the ones who are responsible for getting those women and children killed, not to mention the ATF agents.
And Koresh? He took the cowards way out of it, much like (I suspect) as your hero, Adolf Hitler, when he put a bullet through his head.
I know you have watched the video with the tank and swear up and down that there is fire coming out of it. But you like so many others are confusing fire with a piece of the building. Every real expert that has looked at it has said that it is most likely siding and doesn't even begin to look like fire.
I get the feeling that all the people that died in Oklahoma City probably deserved it don't you?
G5,
You do realize you don't have to be homosexual to contract HIV and aids right? According to you the hiv and aids epidemic is caused solely by gay immigrants? That's funny.
Look at the African aids rates. Now look at how low the percentage of homosexuality is.
In no way am I saying hiv is not high in the homosexual population, but to blame the contraction of the disease on homosexuals alone is inaccurate.
I believe there have been a few, some from the other posts. I detest cherry picking, but for the sake of argument I will pick one statement from g5's last post (although I know you and I will probably disagree on it, too). The next to last paragraph.
ABC News Exclusive: Torture Tape
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?...
He uses an electric cattle prod against the man's testicles and inserts it in his anus.
At another point, as the man wails in pain, the Sheikh pours lighter fluid on the man's testicles and sets them aflame.
Then the tape shows the Sheikh sorting through some wooden planks. "I remember there was one that had a nail in it," he says on the tape.
The Sheikh then pulls down the pants of the victim and repeatedly strikes him with board and its protruding nail. At one point, he puts the nail next to the man's buttocks and bangs it through the flesh.
...
The final scene on the tape shows the Sheikh positioning his victim on the desert sand and then driving over him repeatedly. A sound of breaking bones can be heard on the tape.
In comparison:
Under a strict set of rules, every pour of water had to be counted -- and the number of pours was limited.
Also: Waterboarding interrogation sessions were permitted on no more than five days within any 30-day period.
No more than two sessions were permitted in any 24-hour period.
A session could last no longer than two hours.
There could be at most six pours of water lasting ten seconds or longer -- and never longer than 40 seconds -- during any individual session.
Water could be poured on a subject for a combined total of no more than 12 minutes during any 24 hour period.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q...
The US does not use torture. At MOST, we could SCARE THEM.
correct paragraph G.I.
I keep forgetting MrsSmith that for some of you it can only be considered torture if it lasts more than a certain amount of time and isn't governed. Apparently simply drowing a person over the course of two hours with the water measured isn't considered torture. Thank you for clearing that up
MrsSmith,
So we can do whatever we want as long as it's not as bad as our enemies? No one is arguing equivalence between how we treat prisoners and how they treat prisoners. But THEIR atrocities do not give US the right to torture people. We have to draw the line OURSELVES, not based on what our enemies do.
Here's something good about America. After spending eight years constantly being scared through the use of scare tactics from the Bush Administration and Republicans, the people of this great country through the Republicans out of Congress and elected a president who will get things done. We also elected someone who is eloquent and intelligent and doesn't look like a dear caught in the headlights when asked a question.
Something bad about our enemies? They are torturers who don't care about guilt or innocence they just kill to kill. And now that we actually have an administration that will go after them they will be brought to justice.
WHEN IT MEANS "IT IS", THE WORD IS "IT'S".
IT'S "BACHELOR'S DEGREE"!!!!!
How you made it past potty-training is beyond me.
The only incorrect spelling I will give you is dear. Yes I goofed that. Holy crap I'm not perfect, so sue me. Better yet never mind you may do it.
And it isn't "threw". We as Americans were not throwing anything. So I believe my use of the word "through" is correct.
But once again Steffanie thanks for proving my point. You had no defense of what I said so you decided to pick on my spelling. So sorry to misspell words in your presence.
I is laffing at thuh debait ahn propper grammer. Will thuh englesh teecher in thuh rume pleez stand up. Now goe bak two class and teech sumone hoo can yuse it. We are just hopeless bloggers. Its to lait for us.
So let me get this straight. I am attacked for proper usage of grammar. I defend myself on one point and therefore I'm the evil one. Got it. Just making sure I'm still the bad guy.
Mike, I don't know why you think that was aimed at just you. If you want to be drawn into a debate on grammar then great. I'll watch you guys go at each other but don't expect me to hold back any humor I find in it. Evil? Bad guy? I really think you read too much into things. You are debating grammar on a blog about torture. How do I abstain from the inevitable laughter regarding such a trivial thing?
If it were me, I would've just laughed it off. Of course, you deal with things your way and I deal with things my way but I just think your way, Steffanie's way, G.I.'s way and billy's way is a lot more humorous, that's all. Of course, I'm the real sucker here because now, I'm discussing it as well. I just didn't want you to think I was singling you out. Oh well, let's call a grammatical truce, guys and gals and we can all move on. Ideas are much more interesting than words, anyway.
McCook1 I apologize I believed that post to be targeting me and I was wrong. Truth is I do laugh off most of what steffanie says but I couldn't resist pointing out that she had wrongly corrected me on spelling.
But here I go again talking about spelling.
Back to torture