(OT) The Plot Thickens
doc
I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
inevitable.
Artificial insemination, gay couples, mother's rights, gay marriage, child
support, who's who, and what's next?
Gay rights just went down the tubes with this one, no matter who wins. The
only solution is no children for gay couples, which not only makes
biological sense, but legal sense as well.
Homosexuality is a dead end for procreation of the species. Regardless of
anyone's opinions on gay rights, if you support gays you support the
elimination of the human race.
Men injecting their sperm into the mouths of either sex or into the rectums
of other men, or women refusing an injection of sperm into their vaginae is
an implicit and explicit declaration that the continuation of the species
is second to their own sexual pleasures.
If everyone is homosexual, gay boys will have to jerk off into a tube so
that the lesbian girls can get pregnant.
Is that the future of the human race? Mandatory masturbation and mandatory
insemination?
doc
Anopheles
"doc" wrote:
>
> I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
> inevitable.
I can't ignore this crap, Doc. It is hateful, misinformed and just plain
stupid. You're much better that that sort of bullshit. Whether you hate
gays on religious grounds or on a latent fear of it enroaching on your
own version of masculinity, the facts are gays are part of the natural
process. Life is linear not digital. There are no cutoff points, just a
progression from one thing to another with all shades in between. The
fact that most of the gifted of artists are from this segment of society
should give you a clue.
But there are many others who would kill every one of them in the name
of something or other, or just deny them the same rights that "normal"
guys like you have. When they were done, they'd be looking around for
some other group. How are you going to feel when the cross is burning
outside your fucking door?
Anopheles
Rule Rattray
news:20070326001547.542$g...@newsreader.com...
> http://tinyurl.com/346vl3
>
> I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
> inevitable.
>
> Artificial insemination, gay couples, mother's rights, gay marriage, child
> support, who's who, and what's next?
>
> Gay rights just went down the tubes with this one, no matter who wins. The
> only solution is no children for gay couples, which not only makes
> biological sense, but legal sense as well.
>
> Homosexuality is a dead end for procreation of the species. Regardless of
> anyone's opinions on gay rights, if you support gays you support the
> elimination of the human race.
>
> Men injecting their sperm into the mouths of either sex or into the
> rectums
> of other men, or women refusing an injection of sperm into their vaginae
> is
> an implicit and explicit declaration that the continuation of the species
> is second to their own sexual pleasures.
Whatcha goin' after next, doc?
Nocturnal emisssions?
> If everyone is homosexual, gay boys will have to jerk off into a tube so
> that the lesbian girls can get pregnant.
>
> Is that the future of the human race? Mandatory masturbation and mandatory
> insemination?
How silly. But why don't you write a story about it? That's what we do here.
Rule
>
> doc
Alaric
"Rule Rattray" <ruler...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cIydnZhW341Mu5Xb...@comcast.com...
Mandatory masturbation?
You mean it isn't?
That's the excuse gone, Barry.
Heh!
Anopheles
I told you before, you don't need an excuse, just lots of Bandaids. But,
anyway, stop thinking about yourself and consider the effect on others.
Take Superman, he has one jerkoff and there's Supersperm flying off at
the speed of light in tangents, penetrating walls, buildings and ovaries
until all life is extinct. And you're worried about an excuse?
Anopheles
Alaric
"Anopheles" <hi...@coolcats.net.au> wrote in message
news:56rn6hF...@mid.individual.net...
Well, I was actually thinking about you.
So the Superman parallel doesn't really work, Angel.
See how I did that.
Decaying Atheist
"doc" <docfa...@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:20070326001547.542$g...@newsreader.com...
> http://tinyurl.com/346vl3
>
> wins. The
> only solution is no children for gay couples, which not only makes
> biological sense, but legal sense as well.
How is a gay couple raising a child any more of a legal issue than a
straight
couple doing the same?
Adoption for one thing allows the continuation of the species and
allowing gay couples
to adopt allows one more human to enter the world of procreation (when
of age).
You could make a case that a straight couple would adopt the child,
but how many children go
through the system each year with no hope for adoption. Children that
may be adopted by
gay couples, if they were just given a chance.
A popular belief is gay couples raise gay children. As being gay seems
to be a biological
situation and not one of choice, it is hard to assume that gay couples
could "convert" a child.
Many gay couples, that I know, are just interested in raising the
child and not interested in
demanding that the child become "gay."
The only true choice in the gay/straight issue is how you choose to
participate in your
biological urges. Abstainace, whether gay or straight, is the only
means of keeping
the sexual desires in a place where they could cause no "harm."
> Homosexuality is a dead end for procreation of the species.
> Regardless of
> anyone's opinions on gay rights, if you support gays you support the
> elimination of the human race.
So is casual sex using protection or pulling out or other means of
avoiding
procreation but those are almost never counted when practiced by
straights
What we all forget is gay people are just that people. While it is
common for certain
religious groups to claim the sex without procreation is bad no matter
who you are,
why is it suddenly worse if it is two men or two women?
I support the elimination fo the human race, honestly. How many
children are born
each year in conditions that cause their death by the age of 5? How
many children
are forced in live in environments that are filled with physical,
emotional, and sexual
abuse? How many women are forced to live with partners who are nothing
less than shit?
These examples don't just apply to straight couples, they apply to all
of humanity.
The myth that being raised by a gay couple makes you gay only serves
to make stronger
villians of the homosexual community. Your comment only servers to
fuel this fire more.
Why? Because you focus your fire on the gays while the exact same
thing can be said
about straights.
> Men injecting their sperm into the mouths of either sex or into the
> rectums
> of other men, or women refusing an injection of sperm into their
> vaginae is
> an implicit and explicit declaration that the continuation of the
> species
> is second to their own sexual pleasures.
Humans have a series of needs from top to bottom, they strive to
satisfy the basic
needs first and work out if their environment can sustain the ability
to meet the next
tier of needs Pleasure is a driving force because it brings comfort,
happiness
and fills the need for safety. Sex also allows for a connection, even
for a brief moment.
It dulls the ache of lonelyness.
Sex isn't just about procreation, hasn't been for a long time. It
seems to be you
are suggesting the only time for sex is for procreation, no matter who
you are.
If that's true at least you are applying this rule to both sides of
the coin. If that is the case,
this is no longer a gay issue, but a humanity issue.
> If everyone is homosexual, gay boys will have to jerk off into a
> tube so
> that the lesbian girls can get pregnant.
Where does this come from? How is everybody homosexual? There are tons
of
heterosexuals out there. It is a long jump to go from some homosexuals
to everybody
is a homosexual.
Straight men jerk off into tubes so straight women can get pregnant
now. So why not
let the gay folk, who are just people anyway, do the same?
It is a form of procreation used to continue humanity. Just because
two gay people
have a child doesn't mean that child will be gay. Just because two gay
people raise a child
doesn't mean their gay will rub off on the child. While this is not
always the case, the people
I know that were raised by gay couples seem to be a little more open
minded when it
came to evaluating people. But as I said this isn't always the case.
> Is that the future of the human race? Mandatory masturbation and
> mandatory
> insemination?
>
> doc
The future of the human race is utter destruction, as is the future of
all beings.
A group of creatures can only survive for so long before it declines.
That is the true
future. As for insemination and masturbation, it may get their even
without
"help" from the gays. Science is already looking toward engineering
humanity and normal procreation is too random and chaotic for that.
If given a chance scientist will remove sequences that account for
deadly
diseases. The end of cancers, alzhiemers, parkinson's, alcoholism,
drug addiction,
could all take place by the manipulation genetic materials. Designer
babies
blond hair, green eyes, blue eyes, no freckles, slight coloration to
the skin,
male, or even female. All of this is being talked about on one level
or another.
If it is possible the only answer will be mandatory masturbation and
insemination.
DA
Anopheles
I was fabulously impressed. My eyes lit up (200W at least) and my nose
twitched. I know I erred with the Superman reference. It's Wonderwoman,
isn't it? I was simply trying to get to the root of your problems
without resorting to paleoanthropology. Silly notion, I know.
As for me, well, I can sleep well knowing you have finally managed to
read the title. It's a champion start.
Meanwhile, at the bottom of the rabbit hole, I'm being tormented by an
insidious trojan, one who never met a Greek. I've tried four different
"can't fail" programs and all, well, failed. I've been on this for four
days and sanity is a distant drum.
Aren't worms nice to eat?
Anopheles
Alaric
I usually do a System Restore - back, say, 7 days.
Anopheles
Yes, this I have been known to do as well. However, with my usual flair,
I turned off System Restore when I got rid of the nasty buggers then
turned it back on. I did this as a usual practise because it is a well
known haunt for "nasty buggers". It is also a good way to delete your
past restore points. It didn't take long for said NBs to sneak back out
from behind the pixels they were using as a cover.
Anopheles
Alaric
uninstall so it doesn't conflict with your existing a-v.
"Anopheles" <hi...@coolcats.net.au> wrote in message
news:56sjqqF...@mid.individual.net...
Anopheles
"Alaric" wrote:
> Have you tried the free avg anti-virus. Download it, run it on scan
> then uninstall so it doesn't conflict with your existing a-v.
AVG (Free Version) is my scanner of choice and it updates once or twice
a day. Others have said that it isn't as good as the paid types yet it
has done a good job-- up till now. But then, trojans are not viruses.
I've also tried PC Tools, both the virus and trojan programs; Webroot
Spy Sweeper; Trend, Sysmantec, as well as others. None address the root
cause, the seeder hiding probably in memory. I'm aftaid the onlt way
forward is to reformat.
Anopheles
Alaric
Detection - How to find a Trojan.
By their very nature trojan horses are difficult to find. Unlike viruses
they won't corrupt files or delete things you might notice, they do their
best to stay out of sight and avoid detection. That said, they are pieces of
software and no software can run on any computer without leaving some trace
of it's existance. Below I'll cover three basic tools that will uncover the
presence of the majority of trojan horses.
None of these costs any money, in fact two of them are already installed on
every windows computer! The Task List You may be familiar with the Task List
that appears if you press CTRL+ALT+DEL within windows. This is supposed to
be a list of all the programs running on your computer at the second you
pressed those keys - it's not. For reasons best known to themselves
Microsoft hid a great many processes from display in the task list, possibly
to avoid confusing novice users.
In doing this, they gave trojan writers the perfect tool to hide their own
creations from your view as well. Less well known is the System Information
Utility (msinfo32.exe) that hides in the C:program filescommonmicrosoft
sharedmsinfo folder on your disk. This tool can uncover almost every process
that's running on any windows system, even those that are 'hidden' from the
task list. Better yet, on windows 98 & ME the same tool provides an easy way
to selectivly disable any suspect processes at the next reboot.
To use this when hunting for trojans, look down the task listings for
running tasks & services for any which you don't recognise. Check the paths
and filenames. Check the file properties and run the executable or .dll
through your virus scanner. If you find nothing but still aren't sure, use
the Startup Programs editor in the tools menu to disable the process then
reboot your machine (make a backup of your system files first!). If nothing
complains, leave the process disabled for now and carry on looking at the
others. Eventually you'll have only those processes you really need running
on your machine which will have the benefit of not only killing off any
trojans but also making your PC seem more responsive and generally quicker
to start up. Netstat All trojans need to communicate. If they don't do that
they are useless for their intended purpose.
This is the second major weakness of most trojan horses, their communication
leaves a trail you can follow. The Netstat command lists all the open
connections to and from your PC. To use it, open a DOS box and enter the
command netstat -an this will list all the open connections to and from your
PC, along with the IP address of the machines on either side. If you see a
connection you don't recognise, you need to investigate it further and track
down the process that's using it. For this you need the third tool in the
armoury, TCPView. TCPView TCPView is a free utility by Sysinternals which
not only lists the IP addresses communicating with your computer, it tells
you what program is using that connection.
Armed with this information you can locate whatever program is sending data
out of your machine and deal with it. I recommend renaming the offending
file then rebooting - that way if you make a mistake you can put it right
easily. Removing a Trojan Horse Trojans often modify the startup files of
your computer, add or change lines in the system registry and even overwrite
system files to make sure they are run every time you boot up. For that
reason, removing them by hand takes time, patience and an understanding of
what you are doing. It's fraught with dangers, including trashing your
registry or loosing the ability to run programs so it's definatly not for
everyone - even those who know exactly what they are doing often prefer to
use automated tools when removing a trojan horse.
Each trojan has it's own specific removal routine, see the Cleaners & Fixes
pages for details on those. They do however all conform to the same basic
patterns : They usually insert a line in the run, run once or run services
keys in the system registry. This is the principal startup method of most
trojans including Back Orifice & Sub7. Removing the line from the registry
and rebooting usually stops the trojan loading. Some alter Win.ini,
system.ini or plae themselves in the 'Startup' folder. Again, removing the
offending line usually stops the trojan running. Some alter or replace
system files. These need careful handling and are best left to experts or
automated tools. One in particular can modify a certain setting in the
registry, causing it to be executed before ANY program you run. removing
this line stops you running ANYTHING!
Again, this is best left to experts or automated tools to deal with. The
steps involved in removing a trojan are simple : Identify the trojan horse
file on your hard disk. Find out how it is being started and take the
necessary action to prevent it being restarted after a reboot. Reboot your
machine and delete the trojan horse. See the Recovering from a System
Compromise pages for more in-depth help on what else you may need to do.
Anopheles
BitPoet
Maybe http://ubcd4win.com/ is also worth a look. I haven't tried it
myself, but it should circumvent the in-memory malware problem
by running its own Windows from the CD. The iso image is about
175 MB.
-Chris
Anopheles
Anopheles
doc
> "doc" wrote:
> >
> > I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
> > inevitable.
>
> I can't ignore this crap, Doc. It is hateful, misinformed and just plain
> stupid. You're much better that that sort of bullshit. Whether you hate
> gays on religious grounds or on a latent fear of it enroaching on your
> own version of masculinity, the facts are gays are part of the natural
> process. Life is linear not digital. There are no cutoff points, just a
> progression from one thing to another with all shades in between. The
> fact that most of the gifted of artists are from this segment of society
> should give you a clue.
For what it's worth--and it's apparently not worth much--my liberal
credentials have been fairly well established over the last half century.
I'm not smart, but being "plain stupid" is preferable to being plain
ignorant.
You decided to attack me rather than my message. That's typical of
ignoramuses throughout history.
Tell me one redeeming feature of the article I posted and commented on.
Tell me why homosexuality is a positive step forward in the evolution of
the human race.
Best,
doc
Anopheles
"doc" wrote:
> "Anopheles" <hi...@coolcats.net.au> wrote:
>> "doc" wrote:
>> >
>> > I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
>> > inevitable.
>>
>> I can't ignore this crap, Doc. It is hateful, misinformed and just plain
>> stupid. You're much better that that sort of bullshit. Whether you hate
>> gays on religious grounds or on a latent fear of it enroaching on your
>> own version of masculinity, the facts are gays are part of the natural
>> process. Life is linear not digital. There are no cutoff points, just a
>> progression from one thing to another with all shades in between. The
>> fact that most of the gifted of artists are from this segment of society
>> should give you a clue.
>
> For what it's worth--and it's apparently not worth much--my liberal
> credentials have been fairly well established over the last half century.
> I'm not smart, but being "plain stupid" is preferable to being plain
> ignorant.
Your 'liberal' views on tolerance need revision. I can't argue with the last
sentence. It takes a good dollop of ignorance to post what you did in a
writing group.
> You decided to attack me rather than my message. That's typical of
> ignoramuses throughout history.
That's rather glib, Doc. When you post what you did, you and the post are
one and the same. Even an ignoramus knows that. In fact I said you were
better than the way you appeared in that post. I believe that blows your
argument out of the water.
> Tell me one redeeming feature of the article I posted and commented on.
> Tell me why homosexuality is a positive step forward in the evolution of
> the human race.
You missed the whole point. It's a puerile question. The only way to stop
homosexuality is to wipe out the human race. But then it goes on in every
species. Whoa! Better wipe out all life. Ah, that's better. So much nicer
without those nasty poofs.
I can't tell you not to post this crap here, Doc, but you are the senior
member and you do claim you care about the group. I believe that you do care
even though you don't like how it compares to the early days. I don't know
if you're right or wrong. I do know what you're posting now isn't helping
AFO in anyway. You still have a huge pool of respect in the group. I for one
would not want that tarnished.
Anopheles
doc
> "doc" wrote:
> > "Anopheles" <hi...@coolcats.net.au> wrote:
> >> "doc" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
> >> > inevitable.
> >>
> >> I can't ignore this crap, Doc. It is hateful, misinformed and just
> >> plain stupid. You're much better that that sort of bullshit. Whether
> >> you hate gays on religious grounds or on a latent fear of it
> >> enroaching on your own version of masculinity, the facts are gays are
> >> part of the natural process. Life is linear not digital. There are no
> >> cutoff points, just a progression from one thing to another with all
> >> shades in between. The fact that most of the gifted of artists are
> >> from this segment of society should give you a clue.
> >
> > For what it's worth--and it's apparently not worth much--my liberal
> > credentials have been fairly well established over the last half
> > century. I'm not smart, but being "plain stupid" is preferable to being
> > plain ignorant.
>
> Your 'liberal' views on tolerance need revision. I can't argue with the
> last sentence. It takes a good dollop of ignorance to post what you did
> in a writing group.
Liberalism has nothing to do with tolerance; you know that.
>
> > You decided to attack me rather than my message. That's typical of
> > ignoramuses throughout history.
>
> That's rather glib, Doc. When you post what you did, you and the post are
> one and the same. Even an ignoramus knows that. In fact I said you were
> better than the way you appeared in that post. I believe that blows your
> argument out of the water.
Which is how you justify your own intolerance, n'est pas?
> > Tell me one redeeming feature of the article I posted and commented on.
>
> > Tell me why homosexuality is a positive step forward in the evolution
> > of the human race.
>
> You missed the whole point. It's a puerile question. The only way to stop
> homosexuality is to wipe out the human race. But then it goes on in every
> species. Whoa! Better wipe out all life. Ah, that's better. So much nicer
> without those nasty poofs.
No, Barry, I didn't miss the whole point and it isn't a puerile question.
Avoiding the question with sarcasm still begs the question. But, are you
saying that anything that's accepted in other species should be accepted by
humanity? Cannibalism, for example? Random violence? Rape? Infanticide?
Patricide? Matricide? Gericide? All of them can be found as accepted
behavior among various species, and more. So, it's pick-and-choose time,
right? Hmmm, what's the fashionable belief-of-the-day that I should throw
my lot in with?
> I can't tell you not to post this crap here, Doc, but you are the senior
> member and you do claim you care about the group. I believe that you do
> care even though you don't like how it compares to the early days. I
> don't know if you're right or wrong. I do know what you're posting now
> isn't helping AFO in anyway. You still have a huge pool of respect in the
> group. I for one would not want that tarnished.
I post off-topic crap to this NG because that's what everyone wants. See my
survey results. They want that and chat. Well, chat is brainless. If the
brain-dead majority of AFO would rather read stories and post reviews, then
they would have said so. They didn't.
Sorry, Barry, but you can't have it both ways: you can't condemn me for my
views while you preach tolerance and you can't post crap while telling me
not to. That's hypocritical.
I don't see any evidence that you have any long-held values or beliefs;
like the mighty willow, you bend with every breeze. Who knows what you'll
believe tomorrow?
doc
Anopheles
"doc" wrote:
> "Anopheles" <hi...@coolcats.net.au> wrote:
>> "doc" wrote:
>> > "Anopheles" <hi...@coolcats.net.au> wrote:
>> >> "doc" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > I find it hard to believe that gays couldn't see this coming; it was
>> >> > inevitable.
>> >>
>> >> I can't ignore this crap, Doc. It is hateful, misinformed and just
>> >> plain stupid. You're much better that that sort of bullshit. Whether
>> >> you hate gays on religious grounds or on a latent fear of it
>> >> enroaching on your own version of masculinity, the facts are gays are
>> >> part of the natural process. Life is linear not digital. There are no
>> >> cutoff points, just a progression from one thing to another with all
>> >> shades in between. The fact that most of the gifted of artists are
>> >> from this segment of society should give you a clue.
>> >
>> > For what it's worth--and it's apparently not worth much--my liberal
>> > credentials have been fairly well established over the last half
>> > century. I'm not smart, but being "plain stupid" is preferable to being
>> > plain ignorant.
>>
>> Your 'liberal' views on tolerance need revision. I can't argue with the
>> last sentence. It takes a good dollop of ignorance to post what you did
>> in a writing group.
>
> Liberalism has nothing to do with tolerance; you know that.
Well, no, I didn't know that.
>>
>> > You decided to attack me rather than my message. That's typical of
>> > ignoramuses throughout history.
>>
>> That's rather glib, Doc. When you post what you did, you and the post are
>> one and the same. Even an ignoramus knows that. In fact I said you were
>> better than the way you appeared in that post. I believe that blows your
>> argument out of the water.
>
> Which is how you justify your own intolerance, n'est pas?
I am intolerant only for intolerance.
>
>> > Tell me one redeeming feature of the article I posted and commented on.
>>
>> > Tell me why homosexuality is a positive step forward in the evolution
>> > of the human race.
>>
>> You missed the whole point. It's a puerile question. The only way to stop
>> homosexuality is to wipe out the human race. But then it goes on in every
>> species. Whoa! Better wipe out all life. Ah, that's better. So much nicer
>> without those nasty poofs.
>
> No, Barry, I didn't miss the whole point and it isn't a puerile question.
> Avoiding the question with sarcasm still begs the question. But, are you
> saying that anything that's accepted in other species should be accepted
> by
> humanity? Cannibalism, for example? Random violence? Rape? Infanticide?
> Patricide? Matricide? Gericide? All of them can be found as accepted
> behavior among various species, and more. So, it's pick-and-choose time,
> right? Hmmm, what's the fashionable belief-of-the-day that I should throw
> my lot in with?
Yes, you missed it by a country mile, Doc. The above proves it. You can't
distinguish between a biological fact and a choice of behaviour.
>
>> I can't tell you not to post this crap here, Doc, but you are the senior
>> member and you do claim you care about the group. I believe that you do
>> care even though you don't like how it compares to the early days. I
>> don't know if you're right or wrong. I do know what you're posting now
>> isn't helping AFO in anyway. You still have a huge pool of respect in the
>> group. I for one would not want that tarnished.
>
> I post off-topic crap to this NG because that's what everyone wants. See
> my
> survey results. They want that and chat. Well, chat is brainless. If the
> brain-dead majority of AFO would rather read stories and post reviews,
> then
> they would have said so. They didn't.
>
> Sorry, Barry, but you can't have it both ways: you can't condemn me for my
> views while you preach tolerance and you can't post crap while telling me
> not to. That's hypocritical.
>
> I don't see any evidence that you have any long-held values or beliefs;
> like the mighty willow, you bend with every breeze. Who knows what you'll
> believe tomorrow?
Perhaps you should take the blinkers off. If my values are not plain to see,
then that's too bad. I'm done here. This is not what this group should be
about. Your opinion of AFO is well established now.
Anopheles
Alaric
> Your opinion of AFO is well established now.
Sadly so.
doc
> Yes, you missed it by a country mile, Doc. The above proves it. You can't
> distinguish between a biological fact and a choice of behaviour.
But your biological fact doesn't make sense, does it? How does any species
gain from homosexuality? Unless there's a biological, evolutionary
advantage to same-sex behavior, it's a dead end.
Look, Barry, quit beating up on the messenger. If you have a point to
prove, prove it. Why is homosexuality a Good Thing? What does it contribute
to the preservation of a species? What's the advantage?
> Perhaps you should take the blinkers off. If my values are not plain to
> see, then that's too bad. I'm done here. This is not what this group
> should be about. Your opinion of AFO is well established now.
You pathetic little loser, blaming me for your responses to an argument you
started which you can't possibly win when you had no argument to begin
with.
Is this the new intellectualism? Believing with all one's heart without a
shred of evidence?
Yeah. Go away and take your liberal, pseudo-intellectuals with you. Duck
and cover, boys and girls.
Best,
doc
Bart
Good to see some things never change, I suppose.
Check in, check out the top thread, and . . . this.
I'll dig through a couple more threads, then.
Hi all.
Bart
Anopheles
Good heavens, look what the cat dragged in.
This isn't usual, so don't think it hasn't changed.
I got up Doc's nose and he's poking me with a stick.
PLL
Wind River
>
> Good to see some things never change, I suppose.
>
> Check in, check out the top thread, and . . . this.
>
> I'll dig through a couple more threads, then.
>
> Hi all.
HI BART!!!!!!
Sue Two
Patrick
"Bart" <bart_...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:1176632341.9...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Hiya, Bart!
Pat two(oh, wait, that doesn't have the same ring, does it?)
Alaric
Give the place a chance. Read the AFOC stuff.
"Bart" <bart_...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:1176632341.9...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...