An Intreasting Email @ Iraq

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/11/2005 11:46:29 AM
Author: movie zombie
this thread reflects exactly how deeply divided this country is. any evidence that the US has participated in immoral and illegal behavior always devolves into the pro-iraq war community accusing the other side of being anti-jew, anti-US, etc.

too bad: if we can''t communicate with one another, how do we think we''re ever going to help others?!

No, this thread does not reflect how divided we are. It reflects a willingness IN EACH AND EVERY CASE (not just this thread) to find total fault and blame on our every actions. The negativity is deafening. That''s why I''m not LISTENING to communication of such passionate hatred of everything we, the U.S., seems to do - or for that matter any individual. Every behavior is deemed as immoral and illegal. The outright indignation is amazing. That''s not communication. We, as humans, are flawed. Our Government is flawed. Every thing is flawed.

It is quite clear to me in the undertones, that somehow we deserve to be hated & executed. I, for one, don''t feel that way. And, for each and every person from other nations who think our government fails us, there is an equal amount of amazement and wonderment of how we do live.

I just can''t stand the negativity. I''m not sticking my head in the sand. The bitterness towards this country & it''s govenment is unhealthy.

 

[AGBF]

fire&ice-

I believe that the ability for self-observation, and even self-criticism, is far from negative. Remember: "The unexamined life is not worth living"?

Deborah

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/11/2005 12:15:37 PM
Author: widget

Author: fire&ice
Again, my check as well.

What started as something positive has to be disenigrated to pieces

F&I:

I hope that this comment doesn''t mean you''re quitting the thread. I have really appreciated your thoughtful input...and learned some things.

Is this thread a mess? Indeed it is....but then passion is messy.

I just checked, and here are things I''ve googled since I started reading this thread: ''Neocon'', ''downstreet memo'', ''wolfowitz'', ''clinton impeached'', ''british mandate''.

As a result of this thread, I''m thinking more, and learning a few things.

I think that''s positive.

widget

Yes, passion is messy. But, the negative spin put upon everything is beyond my ability to contribute in a rational manner. We are in Iraq. It''s our reality. Matatora posts an email that says something good is happening. It''s completely poo-pooed & then the thread turns into how absolutely evil we are, citing bad thing after bad thing. It''s a pattern. Heck, one can''t even admire an individual without somehow vilifying a person - and in the end comparing the individual to Hitler.

In the end, I am sure I will be accused of sticking my head in the sand.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/11/2005 12:42:27 PM
Author: AGBF
fire&ice-

I believe that the ability for self-observation, and even self-criticism, is far from negative. Remember: ''The unexamined life is not worth living''?

Deborah

What is negative is always finding the negative. The disconnect is that one can''t possibily look at self observation from only a negative point of view. We would be miserable if we did.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 6/10/2005 11:35:49 PM
Author: MINE!!
I would like to post these sites...

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/saddam/photo2.html

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/saddam/photo4.html

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/saddam/photo9.html

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/KO%20News/18-12-03-halabja-people-want-saddam-killed.html

And most importantly... Here is another group of pictures

http://www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html

These are pictures that we all need to look at too.

I''ve already seen those pictures. And so let me make one statement that I think all of us can agree on: Saddam was an evil bastard who certainly has earned his place in hell. Okay? Now let''s move on to the big question, which as I see it is:

If we resort to lying (to the US public), cheating (Halliburton), stealing (looting of Iraq''s wealth), poisoning (depleted uranium), torture (Abu Ghraib) and murder (according to the Lancet, over 100,000 have been killed in this war) in our efforts to remove evil, have we become evil ourselves?

I have never suggested that this is a black-and-white issue. We agree on Saddam. But I have never had a response to my question before, which was at what point do we acknowledge that our own leaders can also do evil and at what point do we decide they no longer deserve our support? Where is the evidentiary bar placed? What goods would you need on a Kissinger, a Bush, a Rumsfeld, a Cheney before you could say that you''ve changed your mind, you no longer support them?

Would a memo from the head of British intelligence reporting back to the Blair cabinet be enough? A memo that says that the Bush administration was "fixing the intelligence" as a justification for going to war? A memo that said they hoped Saddam would not let inspectors in so they could use that as an excuse for going to war? A memo that said the case against Saddam was "...thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."

Now at least Steve had the decency to ask about the reliability of the memo. Was it real? Apparently it is. Another poster suggested that the memo was simply an opinion from the Brit intel chief, and that Bush can say his opinion was wrong. True enough. But if we look at this along with all of the other stuff we''ve learned, a picture begins to emerge. In my mind, the picture is one of an administration that is willing to resort to lying, cheating, stealing, torturing, poisoning and murder to further its goals. And so we are back to the original question. In countering evil, what level of evil is justified? At what level is the bar placed?

 

[movie zombie]

Date: 6/11/2005 12:50:15 PM
Author: fire&ice

Date: 6/11/2005 12:42:27 PM
Author: AGBF
fire&ice-

I believe that the ability for self-observation, and even self-criticism, is far from negative. Remember: ''The unexamined life is not worth living''?

Deborah

What is negative is always finding the negative. The disconnect is that one can''t possibily look at self observation from only a negative point of view. We would be miserable if we did.

that''s one perspective. another is that never finding the negative is even more negative. growth and change only comes from self-examination. those that don''t go through the process stay stuck. countries are much the same way. we are a young country. we''re going to make mistakes. but if everytime a mistake is made, it is white washed, then no growth can be made.

richard has posed a legitimate question.

peace, movie zombie

 

[MissAva]

Date: 6/11/2005 12:33:53 PM
Author: fire&ice

Date: 6/11/2005 11:46:29 AM
Author: movie zombie
this thread reflects exactly how deeply divided this country is. any evidence that the US has participated in immoral and illegal behavior always devolves into the pro-iraq war community accusing the other side of being anti-jew, anti-US, etc.

too bad: if we can''t communicate with one another, how do we think we''re ever going to help others?!

No, this thread does not reflect how divided we are. It reflects a willingness IN EACH AND EVERY CASE (not just this thread) to find total fault and blame on our every actions. The negativity is deafening. That''s why I''m not LISTENING to communication of such passionate hatred of everything we, the U.S., seems to do - or for that matter any individual. Every behavior is deemed as immoral and illegal. The outright indignation is amazing. That''s not communication. We, as humans, are flawed. Our Government is flawed. Every thing is flawed.

It is quite clear to me in the undertones, that somehow we deserve to be hated & executed. I, for one, don''t feel that way. And, for each and every person from other nations who think our government fails us, there is an equal amount of amazement and wonderment of how we do live.

I just can''t stand the negativity. I''m not sticking my head in the sand. The bitterness towards this country & it''s govenment is unhealthy.

I am glad to know that I am not the only one who veiws the thread in this way. I wanted post something positive but I wont be started anymore threads like this. Negetivity eats at people. And to be blunt if you think there is another country better then the USA why stay here? I love my country and I wake up every day grateful that I was born here, does that mena i am blind to its faults? Nope, I see the good and the bad but I still believe, that there is more good then bad. I am sorry that this turned into such a mess.

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/11/2005 5:24:27 PM
Author: Matatora

Date: 6/11/2005 12:33:53 PM

Author: fire&ice

Date: 6/11/2005 11:46:29 AM

Author: movie zombie

this thread reflects exactly how deeply divided this country is. any evidence that the US has participated in immoral and illegal behavior always devolves into the pro-iraq war community accusing the other side of being anti-jew, anti-US, etc.


too bad: if we can''t communicate with one another, how do we think we''re ever going to help others?!

No, this thread does not reflect how divided we are. It reflects a willingness IN EACH AND EVERY CASE (not just this thread) to find total fault and blame on our every actions. The negativity is deafening. That''s why I''m not LISTENING to communication of such passionate hatred of everything we, the U.S., seems to do - or for that matter any individual. Every behavior is deemed as immoral and illegal. The outright indignation is amazing. That''s not communication. We, as humans, are flawed. Our Government is flawed. Every thing is flawed.


It is quite clear to me in the undertones, that somehow we deserve to be hated & executed. I, for one, don''t feel that way. And, for each and every person from other nations who think our government fails us, there is an equal amount of amazement and wonderment of how we do live.


I just can''t stand the negativity. I''m not sticking my head in the sand. The bitterness towards this country & it''s govenment is unhealthy.

I am glad to know that I am not the only one who veiws the thread in this way. I wanted post something positive but I wont be started anymore threads like this. Negetivity eats at people. And to be blunt if you think there is another country better then the USA why stay here? I love my country and I wake up every day grateful that I was born here, does that mena i am blind to its faults? Nope, I see the good and the bad but I still believe, that there is more good then bad. I am sorry that this turned into such a mess.

I agree Matata.. Bravo for starting the post and trying to be positive. Your facts were wonderful and I agree with you 100%. Thank you!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/11/2005 5:24:27 PM
Author: Matatora
And to be blunt if you think there is another country better then the USA why stay here?

Criticizing my country is not saying I like another one better. On the other hand, I can say I like another one better and still stay here. Why stay here? How about because it is my choice and my right? And if you look back you can see that my forefathers also shed their blood for the United States. Not that one should have to have such lineage to be able to speak out!!!! I find being told to get out of town rather "negative", actually.

Deborah

 

[Jennifer5973]

I have stayed out of this thread becasue I don't need to get beaten up (again) on an Internet forum, but wanted to add my sincerest thanks and gratitude to Tawn and her family, and all the other men and women who are serving our country in Iraq, and aorund the globe.

I come form a family of veterans, police officers and fire fighters and have a deeply rooted respect for all those whose mission it is to "serve and protect" in one way or another.

And one other thing, regardles--no matter what, everyone should VOTE. Period. I don't even have kids in the schools and I vote in the school board elections becasuse it affects how my tax dollars are spent.

 

[movie zombie]

jennifer, very well stated regarding everything.

personally, i find it rude, offensive and down right un-American to be ''invited'' to leave the country because i exercise my rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights. i ''invite'' both Matata and Mine to read both.

i defend your right to disagree with me. i defend your right to speak out. why is it you can''t do the same?!

it seems that you prefer a country in which there is no dissent nor freedom of speech. why is it that when you can''t get me to agree with you, you pretend to be more patriotic than i am?!

i''ll make sure to mention to my ex-Marine father that this is what he almost died for in WWII....i don''t think he''ll be impressed by either of you.

peace, movie zombie

ps if you don''t want feedback when you make a post, then don''t post.

 

[MissAva]

I did not invite anyone to leave, do not put words in my mouth its rude. And I am not saying dont speak out, all the males in my family have served several died that way. It was their choice and their honor. And MZ please read the part about personal attacks becuase I dont like the way you put that. I have not said anything that would cause someone to be ashamed of me and I dont like how you put that.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 6/11/2005 9:03:12 PM
Author: movie zombie
Jennifer, very well stated regarding everything.

Personally, i find it rude, offensive and down right un-American to be ''invited'' to leave the country because i exercise my rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights. i ''invite'' both Matata and Mine to read both.

I defend your right to disagree with me. I defend your right to speak out. Why is it you can''t do the same?

It seems that you prefer a country in which there is no dissent nor freedom of speech. why is it that when you can''t get me to agree with you, you pretend to be more patriotic than i am?!

I''ll make sure to mention to my ex-Marine father that this is what he almost died for in WWII....i don''t think he''ll be impressed by either of you.

peace, movie zombie

ps if you don''t want feedback when you make a post, then don''t post.

Movie Zombie,

Thanks so much for stating the obvious, something that is increasingly obscure in today''s America. Reading so many of these posts I feel like some think I''m some kinda traitor for bringing up events that are so inconvenient to certain theories and belief systems. For those who see this in my posts, please re-read them. And check yourself. I''m as American as you, by virtue of my birth. Nothing can change that.

If you cannot see the difference between support for a political administration and support for a country, then heaven help us all.

And while I''m at it, Steve, this one''s for you. Take a look:

Rumsfeld and Saddam

Nothing is quite as simple as it seems. While Saddam was killing those Kurds and so many others, the US administration was marching in lockstep with him, providing Saddam with equipment, intelligence, etc. Where were your protests then?

Steve, you have correctly cited a number of Saddam''s crimes. But just like the original post on this thread, you have failed to provide the historical perspective (Did you know...?)

The entire list at the head of this post comes from the US DoD. 47 nations have established embassies in Iraq. How many nations had embassies before the war? The Iraqi govt. employs 1.2 million people. How many did it employ before the US invaded? 25 Iraqi students have been given US scholarships. Did the US allow Iraqis to receive these scholarships prior to the invasion? There is some serious delusion going on here. I am not ashamed to call it by its true name: propaganda.

The fact is that while Saddam was killing the Kurds and his own people, the US govt. was willingly selling him weapons and providing him with intel. And following the first Gulf War, Saddam was neutered.

Steve, virtually all of the crimes that you have mentioned occurred prior to or in the immediate aftermath of the first Gulf War. Terrible, yes, but they were largely stopped by the oversight and miitary patrols following the that war.

Again, Steve, I''ve always respected your posts. But I sense something personal here. No different than when Christopher Hitchens went awol on Iraq. If you''ve got a personal stake in this, tell us about it. I promise I will reign in my sarcasm.

 

[widget]

Author: movie zombie

ps if you don't want feedback when you make a post, then don't post.

Wow...mz...where did that venom come from? Who on earth would want "feedback" like the stuff you just dished out to Matatora?

It's no wonder lots of people stay away from threads like this!

widget

 

[MissAva]

After rereading my post I am still not sure why it was taken the way it was. But that is I suppose what makes forums interesting. However I am sorry for what I posted originally. I had noticed with other topics that when the lead off was negative then the thread was heated and people were less then polite. I though if something started off in a positive manner then the replies would be written in a less heated tone. That was faulty logic I see. Still I have learned a valuable lesson and MZ is right. I won’t post anymore topics that I think will start controversy. I wanted to give thumbs up to those who are trying to help others and are serving two countries at once. It did not work out that way and I am sorry for that. Please accept my sincere apoligies for getting everyone riled up, truthfully I did not want to start anything.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/11/2005 10:23:53 PM
Author: Richard Hughes

Date: 6/11/2005 9:03:12 PM
Author: .

Reading so many of these posts I feel like some think I''m some kinda traitor for bringing up events that are so inconvenient to certain theories and belief systems. For those who see this in my posts, please re-read them.

Did anyone call you a traitor? I read your posts. And, your comment about your posts (of course as being FACTUAL ACCOUNTS OF "EVENTS") being "inconvient" to listen is to the core of the issue. DO YOU GET YOUR ARROGANCE from that statement? You think you post as fact & it''s just "INCONVENIENT" for me to digest what you are saying? But, then I''m still rolling my eyes to your insinuation that Steve has something PERSONAL at stake.

It is very sad that Matatora feels *she* has to apologize for posting something POSITIVE. It is not Matatora that should apologize.

 

[MINE!!]

Good GOd Matatora.. do not stop ''exercising'' your right to post something you think highly of just so not to bring the venom of MZ and others that agree with her. When one gets frustrated that is when they lash out. You have every right to stand up for what you beleive in and how you feel.. and MANY people DO agree with you.

I have a friend that gets angry and insults people when she feels that someone does no agree with her opinion. When she lashes out.. she in essense beleives that she has somehow.. ''won'' which encourages her behavior the next time around. Without realizing it is just because no one feels like dealing with it anymore.

You have NOTHING to apologize for. Everyone posts some things in emotion, some maryterdom and others ignorance. I am guilty of it, just as everyone else on this board is as well.. though some my see fit to deny it.

You have EVERY right to the opinion that you have and you ARE not alone on your opinion either. We have to continue to speak our mind... even when we become disgusted.. this is your RIGHT.

DO not give to the people that yell louder than you do... evenutally those are people that lose their voices quicker....
You have nothing to apologize about.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/12/2005 12:06:54 PM
Author: MINE!!
Good GOd Matatora.. do not stop 'exercising' your right to post something
...
Everyone posts some things in emotion, some maryterdom and others ignorance. I am guilty of it, just as everyone else on this board is as well.. though some my see fit to deny it.

Matatora, I agree you should not stop posting. I agree you should say what you want. I am one of the people guilty of posting thoughtlessly when angry. I try to apologize whan I attack someone, but I am sure I sometimes fail to do so because I remain unaware of what I did. I'm not sure if EVERYONE posting here has said something in anger, but a lot of us have, and, I reiterate, I am certainly amongst them!

Not ONLY would I like you to feel free to post what you wish, but I hope I will not attack you or anyone else personally when you do...and that people posting here will remind me I am becoming personal if I do attack you (or anyone else) personally.

Deb

 

[rubydick]

Now that we''ve got the personal problems ironed out, perhaps some would like to see the latest leak from Britain.

Minsters Were Told of Need For Gulf War ''Excuse''

Note that the paper leaking this, the London Times, is owned by that rabid lefty, Rupert Murdoch. For those out of the loop, he also owns Fox News. Here''s a brief quote:

"MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it legal.

"The warning, in a leaked Cabinet Office briefing paper, said Tony Blair had already agreed to back military action to get rid of Saddam Hussein at a summit at the Texas ranch of President George W Bush three months earlier.

"The briefing paper, for participants at a meeting of Blair’s inner circle on July 23, 2002, said that since regime change was illegal it was “necessary to create the conditions” which would make it legal.

"This was required because, even if ministers decided Britain should not take part in an invasion, the American military would be using British bases. This would automatically make Britain complicit in any illegal US action."

I''ve got news for all. If we can believe a press report out of Australia, the decision to invade Iraq took place long before even the date mentioned in the above news report.

The Road to War

I read it over two years ago. Of course this piece also never got any coverage in the US.

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/12/2005 5:47:41 PM
Author: Richard Hughes
Now that we''ve got the personal problems ironed out, perhaps some would like to see the latest leak from Britain.

I can feel the sincerity...

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/12/2005 5:47:41 PM
Author: Richard Hughes
...perhaps some would like to see the latest leak from Britain.
Minsters Were Told of Need For Gulf War ''Excuse''

That is pretty damning evidence that the supposed cause of war was cooked up, false, a lie. The problem is that it is only being published by the mainstream press now. Most Americans have forgotten why we invaded Iraq in the first place and thus do not give a darn.

Had this been known before Congress voted to send troops, they would never have been sent. Now, however, people have moved on and found other reasons why it is good that we are there.

Deborah

 

[widget]

Date: 6/12/2005 7:16:53 PM
Author: AGBF

Most Americans have forgotten why we invaded Iraq in the first place and thus do not give a darn.

I''m not sure I agree with this. I suspect a lot of Americans DO remember and DO give a darn; but perhaps question the wisdom of pursuing this "water under the bridge" now that we''re there, committed, embroiled, and our young people are in harms way.

I''m conflicted, anyway...

widget

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/12/2005 8:07:28 PM
Author: widget

Date: 6/12/2005 7:16:53 PM

Author: AGBF

Most Americans have forgotten why we invaded Iraq in the first place and thus do not give a darn.

I'm not sure I agree with this. I suspect a lot of Americans DO remember and DO give a darn; but perhaps question the wisdom of pursuing this 'water under the bridge' now that we're there, committed, embroiled, and our young people are in harms way.

The reason I do not think as you do (that Americans know we were blatantly lied to, but think we must make the best of it) is that being lied to by our President should provoke outrage and I see none. I think that BELIEVING a President made up a lie to start a war would provoke even more outrage than believing a President lied about oral sex in the Oval Office.

Deborah

 

[MissAva]

Date: 6/12/2005 5:47:41 PM
Author: Richard Hughes
Now that we''ve got the personal problems ironed out, perhaps some would like to see the latest leak from Britain.

Minsters Were Told of Need For Gulf War ''Excuse''

Note that the paper leaking this, the London Times, is owned by that rabid lefty, Rupert Murdoch. For those out of the loop, he also owns Fox News. Here''s a brief quote:

''MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it legal.

''The warning, in a leaked Cabinet Office briefing paper, said Tony Blair had already agreed to back military action to get rid of Saddam Hussein at a summit at the Texas ranch of President George W Bush three months earlier.

''The briefing paper, for participants at a meeting of Blair’s inner circle on July 23, 2002, said that since regime change was illegal it was “necessary to create the conditions” which would make it legal.

''This was required because, even if ministers decided Britain should not take part in an invasion, the American military would be using British bases. This would automatically make Britain complicit in any illegal US action.''

I''ve got news for all. If we can believe a press report out of Australia, the decision to invade Iraq took place long before even the date mentioned in the above news report.

The Road to War

I read it over two years ago. Of course this piece also never got any coverage in the US.

Not to point out the obvious but just becuase something is in the paper does not make it true. Think The New York Times. It is dangerous to belive soemthing that is only in there once a story that big would have made it here....if they could back it up with facts and not just slander. JMO

 

[fire&ice]

I would like to point out that British law on slander and libel is VERY lax.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/13/2005 10:31:14 AM
Author: fire&ice
I would like to point out that British law on slander and libel is VERY lax.

fire&ice,

Have you read anything credible that says the DSM is a forgery or a fake? I have not. The law may be lax, but is the government even claiming that the memo is not real?

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/13/2005 8:59:56 AM
Author: Feydakin
I believe that the UN created this situation just as the 1919 Treaty of Versailles helped to lay the groundwork for WWII..

Hi, Steve-

I do read every word you write. I read through your posting once and was just going through it again when this analogy stopped me short. How is the Treaty of Versailles analogous to UN activity (presumably the weapons inspectors sent to Iraq prior to the US invasion) in Iraq?

Deborah

PS-Since our long phone call I feel I know you much better. Don't play games with me by trying to throw me off track. I told you how crazy that makes me! Be serious and explain what it is about the Versailles Treaty that could possibly be analogous!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/13/2005 8:52:52 AM
Author: Matatora
...just becuase something is in the paper does not make it true. Think The New York Times. It is dangerous to belive soemthing that is only in there once a story that big would have made it here....if they could back it up with facts and not just slander. JMO

First, you are right that JUST being in the paper does not make something true. BUT, has anyone in the British government denounced this memo as a fake? If not, we are dealing not only with a memo that was published in a paper, but a memo that was published (and republished and republished) and that no one has denied is true. I respectfully submit that that is far more evidence than "just being in the paper".

Second, you wrote, "Think The New York Times". Obviously you mean that they print falsehoods and do not bother to retract them if they find they have written in error. I see constant retractions in "The New York Times" over even the slightest errors. Do you have an example of an error made by "The New York Times" that it did not retract?

I do not understand the third sentence you wrote.

I have raised questions about your posting, but I hope I have stuck to the topic and been courteous. Please do not be afraid to reply for fear I will attack you personally. I will not.

Deborah

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/13/2005 11:13:51 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/13/2005 8:52:52 AM

Think The New York Times''.

She probably is thinking about the guy who wrote for months who just made the stories up w/ quotable quotes from non-existent sources. Pretty damning stuff. Yes, they did find out about him - but he was posting away for quite a while.

Also, retractions don''t make front page.

Regarding the Brit Gov. not denying the whatever is written - they would have to have a full time staff to do that. Have you seen some of the stuff the British papers publish - on any topic? I became quite familiar with British libel & slander laws when I was named in a *supposed* suite. My attorney, who had practiced on the other side of the pond, laughed - especially because what was named was true. He was the one that told me to read the British papers. I have and find them very entertaining; but, not credible.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/13/2005 11:38:23 AM
Author: fire&ice
She probably is thinking about the guy who wrote for months who just made the stories up w/ quotable quotes from non-existent sources. Pretty damning stuff. Yes, they did find out about him - but he was posting away for quite a while.

Also, retractions don't make front page.

OK. That episode was certainly incredible!!! On the other hand, when the paper did find out they certainly went ballistic! And I *think* retractions are on page 2 (just inside page 1). I always see them, but then that is one of my "stops" when I get my hands on "The New York Times". There isn't one in the house now to check out!

Deb