Somehow I feel today's anticipated strike won't be a slap on the wrist for Hussein. I'm also worried that this event will be the initial catalyst for firing up all the EOs The Man has queued up. Is this just a distraction, or A Big Event?

-- Lisa (nomail@work.com), December 16, 1998

Answers

The world's been about-to-strike Iraq again for so long! And ppl will always wonder if it's Wag The Dog. But if it's true Iraq is hiding all sorts of deadly weapons, we'd better eliminate them before our military can no longer function due to computer-jinxed breakdown. Wish there was a propaganda-meter so we could get the real picture. Lisa, you feel it may be today?

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), December 16, 1998.

I vote for Wag the Dog. Seems like every time things really get tough for Slick Willie, something blows up somewhere.

-- Vic Parker (rdrunner@internetwork.net), December 16, 1998.

Could be within hours, according to CNN's coverage.

-- Lisa (nomail@work.com), December 16, 1998.

Vic, I understand you position but perhaps your missing something.

The perception that Iraq and Hussein may have at this time is that the President is weak and because of the "wag the dog" issue we will not strike.

Just a few weeks ago we pulled away from an attack which would have come at a much better time than today because of another move in the "cat and mouse" game by Saddam. I think that was THE last straw. Also, the gulf forces and ALL U.S. personal and citizens were put on high alert for possible terrorist attacks before this most recent crisis came up. This was directly related to Bin Ladin and his network.

So, the "wag the dog" theory doesn't hold up.

And, now that the move toward impeachment has picked up steam, the President should act without any concern of opposition by those who wish to oust him. The politics of the impeachment issue are already well known and I'm fairly sure it's a done deal.

I'd look for Al Gore to make a statement directly related to Iraq very shortly.

I'm also with Lisa in thinking that this will not be a pretty or concise statement. I think there are serious reasons why action must be taken now to oust Saddam and take control of Iraq. This may be a drown out engagement and I don't think any President would act differently.

It's just common sense. Saddam has just put the last straw on his camel.

Mike =======================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

I have a question for the "wag the dog" theorists.

If President Clinton is responsible for his own actions and his own demise (an argument I agree with) then why isn't Iraq held to that same standard?

Mike ===================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

Only way they join is as a glass-paved parking lot for NYC.

-- NOPE (NOT@THIS.TIME), December 16, 1998.

The propaganda machine is a monster in disguise, with censured news that explains the reality that America *is* a weapon of mass destruction. In the seven year economic embargo, since the gulf war in 1991, UNICEF reports that 1/3 of children under five are suffering chronic malnourishment, stunted growth, and more then a tenth are acutely malnourished. A 300% increase since 1991. Ask how you would feel if your child was starving. Then ask how you could support American manufactured genocide.

gopher://gopher.unicef.org/00/.cefdata/.ar98/me%26na.txt

-MC

-- MC DAVEY (UFOSKYBLEW@AOL.COM), December 16, 1998.

Some basic thoughts to take issue with Michael Taylor.

First, this Administration has been playing "If you don't behave we're gonna attack - we're not gonna attack...." for over FIVE years. You folks need to read up on Scott Ritter's assesment of how this administration has been playing footsie with Sadaam, by telling the world one thing, but telling the arms inspectors another. Scott Ritter is the US/UN Arms Inspector that resigned after 4 years of pulling his hair out because of this administration. If you remember, Clinton's White House TRASHED Scott Ritter, much the same way they trash anyone who opposes this President.

We needed to have a policy of "If you block access to our inspectors, we will blow it up in 60 minutes". Clinton flatly refused that policy in 1994, after he was told that we had that right under the Terms of Surrender signed by Iraq at the end of the Gulf War.

But some basic logic here, if we need to bomb Iraq, why today or tomorrow at the hour of the impeachment vote? Why not this weekend, why not last weekend? Why not wait two weeks from now as Clinton did 4 weeks ago before deciding to put our forces on alert?

THIS Administration is the one that ordered the arms inspectors out of Iraq yesterday. Sadaam didn't kick them out as I'm hearing some Democrats saying on the tube. The fact folks are wondering if this is another "Wag the Dog" scenario proves this President has no credibility, and needs to be removed from office based on the fact - can ayone trust him?

It all boils down to this President WILL DO ANYTHING to stay in office, to bide his time until he can fully ensconce himself permanently in power. At least that's the way I see it at the moment...

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

MC -

YOU ARE A STUPID RAVING IDIOT!!!!!! A TRAITOR! How dare you blame America as a "weapon of mass destruction". The blame lies squarely at the feet of Sadaam Hussein! As with almost ALL of modern famines in this century, they are the result of despots and dictators that are using famine as a weapon against insurgents in civil wars. Sadaam is NO different.

The UN resolution you Pinko Communist Bastard, is to lift the embargo when Iraq complies with ALL the resolutions including unrestricted inspections to detect TRUE weapons of mass destruction (ie: nerve gas, Anthrax bombs etc.)

Sadaam LOST the war, he agreed to the terms of surrender. He hasn't abided by them. The embargo stays, the suffering of his people is HIS fault not OURS you shithead!!! He started all of this with the invasion of Kuwait. Regardless of your opinions of the legitimacy of our involvement, charging this nation with genocide because we won't give into a tyrants desires shows what an absolute imbecile you are. The likes of idiots like you sickens me.

I imagine your views on the bombing of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end WWII and save American lives was genocide as well?

Idiot.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

It could be so many things: a short-term prop-up of oil prices, it may be that the new Iraqi govt. is assembled and ready to install, might be that we have to take Iraq before Russia does. It would be strange if he ordered a strike so close to tomorrow, unless he cares absolutely nothing about what remains of his credibility. So surreal. Maybe he knows somehow that the Senate won't take him down, in exchange for Saddam's head. I give.

-- Lisa (nomail@work.com), December 16, 1998.

INVAR,

Sorry, friend, but you obviously have no grasp of the workings of geopolitics. Remember - Saddam was armed by the west. He invaded Kuwait because he thought Bush nodded his head yes. He's a pawn in the "balance of power" game in that region, a game to keep Iran reasonably neutralized, a game to keep the Arab world splintered. And he's pissed about it. It's the same game that's kept Israel a pawn also. The US never gave a rat's ass about a "Jewish Homeland," and doesn't give a damn about "peace in the Middle East." It's always been a ploy to keep the Arabs distracted so as to prevent a resurgence of Arab Nationalism so that another Ottoman Empire would be impossible. That way, the multinationals get control of the oil resources.

George Bush (a former oilman whose father was instrumental in arming the Nazis) could have gotten rid of Saddam, but he didn't want to because that would have led to a bigger Kurdish rebellion and the Turks were screaming about that one. Saddam didn't lose the "war." He didn't lose anything. He doesn't give a shit about "his people" and neither do "we."

Sounds like you've probably been duped about the causes and effects of WWII also...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), December 16, 1998.

Lisa and others,

This thread is off-topic for this forum. It should be posted in another forum such as The Government of the United States forum.

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), December 16, 1998.

The impeachment vote has been cancelled for tomorrow. Slick Willie wins for now.

-- Anti-Chainsaw (Tree@hugger.com), December 16, 1998.

For a listing of the other www.greenspun.com discussion forums, see Welcome to LUSENET.

The Government of the United States forum is here.

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), December 16, 1998.

Pshannon-

Yeah, so???

I have an excellent understanding of geopolitics. I've a History Major. I look at the geopolitical stage through the benefits to, safety of and security of The United States Of America.

If a destablizing doctrine in the mid-east to prevent another "Ottoman Empire" that may hurt our interests (mainly the flow of oil at market prices in that region, which is the ENGINE of our industrialized economy), so be it. My loyalty is to the United States, not global fairness because that fantasy has never existed in man's history. We are not part of a Global Government, we are a sovereign nation, surrounded by jealous nations that would TAKE from us as opposed to trade if given the choice.

Yes we armed Sadaam, to destabilize a dangerous threat posed by Iran during their war with Iraq. This was during the 1980 hostage crisis. Once Iraq crossed the line and threatened the stability of the region is why we went over there. You are WRONG to claim President Bush nodded his head at Iraq's plans to invade Kuwait. Putting the West's economy at risk of an Iraqi oil conglomerate in order to "test" our military is absurd. So is equating Bush's ancestors as Nazi sympathizers. Would you also define Neville Chaimberlain as a Nazi or simply a fool? Whatever your views on WWII- we won - at great sacrifice.

Geopolitical doctrines, however they are instituted, that benefit the people of the United States is my only concern in a world that would - if given the opportunity- wipe us out of existance in an instant. Whether cheap gas, abundant food supplies, massive industry and commerce that make us a strong nation and peace from outside threats is what was our national priority. You have enjoyed that priority for over 50 years. So have we all.

We are not dependant on other nations to survive.

We have however become intertwined in a global economy that threatens our hurt own economy. However I'm not an Isolationist. Global trade is required for prosperity and stability in a free-market system.

We have also become dependant on a fragile technological infrastructure that may easily be destroyed by Y2K.

That is our own fault, but another thread altogether.

We have enjoyed the privelege of being the single-most powerful and influential nation in the history of mankind. We have by-in-large done this through God's blessings, and by the experiment of Freedom.

I'm an American first and foremost. The geopolitical balance played to ensure our security both economic and physically is of no moral consequence to me. Call it selfish if you like, but that's how we got to be as great a nation as we have.

For the record, we have been the example of prosperity and achievement for the world. Despite our wealth, we are the most giving nation in the history of the world. We rebuilt our former WWII enemies, fed the globe - AND STILL want to aid the people of Iraq and other despotically governed peoples. It's THEIR leaders that have caused the misery of starvation and depravation. We have always been willing to aid a nation when called upon.

Case-in-point: Honduras after Hurricane Mitch.

Enuf said.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

The only reason that we (USA) give a crap about that part of the world is because we have such a thirst for oil.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), December 16, 1998.

Which is why I'm kinda hoping we can take the place this time. Yes, I'm prepared to burn in hell for that, but reality's reality. We have one year to secure SOME source of petroleum.

-- Lisa (nomail@work.com), December 16, 1998.

It's all pretty moot because now at 2pm pacific time the dog is being wagged in Baghdad (or at least the anti-aircraft positions are flexing themselves). If this US attack happened in January 2000 those cruise missiles would probably not work due to embedded chip and gps problems - anyone have any detailed knowledge on this topic?

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 16, 1998.

Uh... Gang... The bombs are flying NOW. As for the missiles, I have also heard that they wouldn't work due to embedded chips after the rollover but was never sure if it was just a rumor or not. Prez due up soon.

-- Rob Michaels (sonofdust@net.com), December 16, 1998.

Desert Fox has started.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), December 16, 1998.

In the spirit of friendly and lively debate, I'd like to address some points in INVAR's last posting. My comments are in parentheses. I left out a few things, mainly stuff I agreed with. To those of you who think this is off-topic, ignore it and go to another thread...

INVAR sez:

I have an excellent understanding of geopolitics. I've a History Major. (and maybe that's why you don't know what's REALLY going on. You've been "brainwashed") I look at the geopolitical stage through the benefits to, safety of and security of The United States Of America. (Aahhh, the "patriotic" myopia. Unfortunately, it's really the multinationals that run the show. Welcome to the United Civilization of Corporatia.)

If a destablizing doctrine in the mid-east to prevent another "Ottoman Empire" that may hurt our interests, mainly the flow of oil at market prices in that region, which is the ENGINE of our industrialized economy, so be it. My loyalty is to the United States, not global fairness because that fantasy has never existed in man's history. We are not part of a Global Government, we are a sovereign nation, surrounded by jealous nations that would TAKE from us as opposed to trade if given the choice.

(these nations are "jealous" because we've hit them over the head with the club of hegemony. Why shouldn't another nation be "jealous" if we make the profits from their resources and labor and take those profits out of that country? A hegemon can never survive.)

Once Iraq crossed the line and threatened the stability of the region is why we went over there.

(And it was a false stability. Saddam, like Quaddafi before him, had dreams of reuniting the Arab world so that it WOULD be more stable. On their own terms. Mr. Hegemon won't allow that.)

You are WRONG to claim President Bush nodded his head at Iraq's plans to invade Kuwait.

(I said that Saddam THOUGHT that Bush nodded his head yes. And he may have.)

Putting the West's economy at risk of an Iraqi oil conglomerate in order to "test" our military is absurd. (it's their oil)

So is equating Bush's ancestors as Nazi sympathizers. (know anything about the Harrimans?)

Would you also define Neville Chaimberlain as a Nazi or simply a fool? (Nazism was always irrelevant. Hitler was simply a willing dupe.)

Whatever your views on WWII- we won - at great sacrifice. (We who? Other than the human cost, which is really the only thing that matters, we sacrificed nothing. It got us out of the depression and won us global hegemony)

Geopolitical doctrines, however they are instituted, that benefit the people of the United States is my only concern in a world that would - if given the opportunity- wipe us out of existance in an instant. (Because we are the "Ugly American.")

Whether cheap gas, abundant food supplies, massive industry and commerce that make us a strong nation and peace from outside threats is what was our national priority. You have enjoyed that priority for over 50 years. So have we all. (that's what the hegemon always says. what do the people of nations the hegemon exploits say? Isn't their perspective relevant?)

We are not dependant on other nations to survive. (but the multinationals are)

We have enjoyed the privelege of being the single-most powerful and influential nation in the history of mankind. ( Why is that somehow, by its very nature, a good thing? Why is that a privilege?)

I'm an American first and foremost. (I'm a human being first and foremost.) The geopolitical balance played to ensure our security both economic and physically is of no moral consequence to me. (Why not?)

For the record, we have been the example of prosperity and achievement for the world. (and we've built an unsustainable system as a result) Despite our wealth, we are the most giving nation in the history of the world. We rebuilt our former WWII enemies, fed the globe - AND STILL want to aid the people of Iraq and other despotically governed peoples. It's THEIR leaders that have caused the misery of starvation and depravation. We have always been willing to aid a nation when called upon. (I won't defend tyrants. But we've set up and bolstered most of the tyrants in this century.)

Case-in-point: Honduras after Hurricane Mitch. (if we don't rebuild their infrastructure, how we get all that coffee that we don't depend on?)

Enuf said. (OK!)

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), December 16, 1998.

Uncle Deedah,

You're right. The only reason we care about the area is oil--but that's a pretty good reason. In 1990, Iraq with 10% of the world's oil annexed Kuwait, which also has 10% of the world's oil. Total to this point: 20%.

Then Iraq started heading for Saudi Arabia and its 30% of the world's oil. If we hadn't of "drawn a line in the sand", Iraq would have ended up with control of 50% of the world's oil.

If that 50% had been cut off to the West, we would have had TEOTWAWKI in 1990. Does anyone disagree with this?

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), December 16, 1998.

Pshannon,

To the victor goes the spoils.

It's the way the real world works.

If you don't like it, too bad.

You sound like a card-carrying Communist (humanist if you will). If you dislike this nation so, why enjoy the benefits this nation has provided? Go live in another nation that more closely resembles your ideology, or start your own island nation somewhere.

This nation is not perfect. Neither is any man. Up to this point in recorded history this has been the best-last hope of self governance.

But if it fails, as Socialism has - it will prove out once again that man is incapable of governing himself.

We need God.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

Nope Kevin, I agree with you.

One quick point to the "Wag the Dog" theorists...

If anyone believes that Joint Chiefs and Defense Secretary William Cohen (a republican) would go along with the decision to strike based on political motivation to put off the impeachment vote is delusional.

I haven't heard a call for a delay of the impeachment vote from Mr. Clinton and I would think that there is no reason to delay such a vote at this time if that is what must be done.

James Baker, former Secretary of State to George Bush, said today that this action had to be taken. I think even George Bush would say this same thing.

Set your political ideology aside and consider the larger picture. There are issues bigger than partisan bickering and action should have been taken long ago to oust Saddam.

Regarding the children who are suffering in Iraq. Currently, the UN is working to help with this situation. They began to do so directly after the money that was suppose to be used to help the Iraqi people (oil for aid) was used by Saddam to further along his military agenda. Get real and understand that this man is evil and those children you care about mean nothing to him.

Even more so, what are you doing to help the children in THIS country that go hungry, are homeless, or who kill each other daily on the streets? What has the 105th Congress done to help these children who suffer in the U.S.?

Personally, I hate politics. I want action.

Mike ======================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

Invar:

Thanks for the kind words! Have you any direct relation to the late Joseph McCarthey. It's okay if you played a few games of pool with good ol' Joe. Nothing like a fat game of stick to black ball all those pink commie bastards. The cold war is over Invar, wake up and get with the picture. Look! Turn on your television we're bombing the shit out of Iraq!

"Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods in school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool." -Plato

-MC

-- MC Davey (Ufoskyblew@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

Not only Clinton is not calling to postpone the impeachment, but he also pointed out that Saddam is/was counting on the current bi-partisant turmoil not to pay heed to the warning.

I guess the US proved Saddam wrong eh? Talk about surprise tactic ;)

I myself would like to see the impeachment process postponed until the bombs have stoped and Saddam's regime was definitely squashed. A nation needs to be united and focused to win a war.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), December 16, 1998.

This might be the most historic day of my life thus far...and nobody out there seems to be aware of it...they're walkin' around gawking at the goods for sale in the temple...hospital dramas and cheap sitcoms on TV...wait, there it is...Dan Rather on CBS brought to you by American Express...oh, and INVAR...

I just realized that we were on different pages and I want to apologize for being abrupt. I realized that you and I were defining "we" differently. By "we" you appeared to mean "We Citizens of the United States" and I meant "We Members of the "Civilized" World." And that crosses borders. (this is where it becomes Y2K relevant) There are many layers to citizenship. I have a US passport, but I'm also a global citizen, a member of an ethnic group, part of a church, a member of the community, part of a family, a small cog in the economy, and a regular guy.

History can sit on shifting sands. Perspective on events can change as time goes by and understanding of those events deepens. However, one must keep in mind that things are not necessarily polarized into either-or. You said:

"This nation is not perfect. Neither is any man. Up to this point in recorded history this has been the best-last hope of self governance."

And that's probably true up to this point. Of course if we could ask the average citizen of Ancient Greece, they might have said the same about their civilization. Or an Aztec. A Sioux warrior or Phonecian merchant might have believed the same about where they were.

"But if it fails, as Socialism has - it will prove out once again that man is incapable of governing himself."

That's not necessarily true...something else will emerge. Unfortunately, I think it will be lots of local strongmen on one layer, and a global corporate empire on another layer. Relations between nations will be altered and may falter. (jeez, did I really just write that?)

"We need God."

.

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), December 16, 1998.

Or we need to be patient with one another while we evolve even higher as a species. It's a long process. So far we've made it out of the cave and onto the moon. Lots of bumps in the road along the way, some minor and some big enough to throw the car into the ditch. The car is headed for the ditch once more now, but I'm confident that it can be fixed and put back on the road, working better than it did before.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), December 17, 1998.

I imagine your views on the bombing of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end WWII and save American lives was genocide as well?

Of course they were, get a hold of your mind. My views are so anti-communist that you are a "pinko" in comparison.

The bombing was simply to kill civilians of already defeated nations rather than attack miltary targets.

Churchill and who was it Roosevelt were just as bad as Hitler, look at the way they sold out East Europe to Stalin at Yalta, set the scene for 45 years of Communist totalitarianism.

-- Richard Dale (rdale@figroup.co.uk), December 17, 1998.

RD, I'm not sure who you are addressing...

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also a show for the Russians so that they would know that we had and were willing to use the atom bomb.

Remember also that Churchill and Roosevelt were representatives of the global power elite, and the cold war was a "good" engine for business and innovation.

What's all this talk about "pinkos" and "communists?" Is that still relevant? Isn't Y2K teaching us, among other things, that more coordination when building systems that peoples' lives depend on may be desirable? That maybe the "free market" may not be the most efficient mechanism for that coordination? Not to suggest that "socialism" (whatever that particular buzzword means) is the only alternative, but maybe there are many shades and colorings between the extremes?

The individualists talk a good talk about the sanctity of the individual, but when someone suggests that ALL individuals deserve that sanctity, out comes the "pinko" label. It's like "Sheeple" and "Trolls." It's designed to set us apart from and against each other. Is that necessary to be an individualist? Can't one be an individualist inside of a community? (I believe the answer is yes) I know this all seems to be completely off-topic for both this forum and this thread, but if things get to the point where we have to build a new civilization, who's to say that there are only two alternatives? Might we not find a new way of thinking about society and each other? As someone on another thread suggested, shouldn't we attempt to "think outside the box?"

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), December 17, 1998.

Pshannon,

Your grasp of history and the machinations of the global elite is spot on.

INVAR I would recommend that you read "And the truth shall set you free" by David Icke - he explains in great detail with laborious references the origins of WW I and II, how the FED was illegally created, the controlling influence of the British, even today, in the USA (ever wondered why we Brits always support the USA in any skirmish?), who the elite are, their agenda, how their game is played (basically divide and rule), etc. etc. I would suggest that your History degree, in whatever field it may be, is skewed, if your posts above on current affairs are anything to go by. This is no offence against you, you are just a prime example of power of the embedded systems in the USA. Never take things at face value, ask yourself WHY certain things happen when they do, what is the underlying agenda...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 17, 1998.

pshannon, Andy, Well put.

It's naove to not realize and acknowledge the numerous layers of influence behind current events, much less the fact they extend beyond our sphere of awareness, and are either hidden or impossible to see. In the big picture, Occam's razor supports the assertion that there is a global elite. And players in the world-class power arenas know better than to show their hands (from the lesson Intelligence 101).

Embedded systems exist at many levels, not only firmware, os, and app, but the embedded belief systems and conventional mythologies of the subcultures lived in. The embedded beliefs are like role models or scripts that are programmed into the citizen throughout grade school. This includes many programs to follow: patriotism, capitalism, consumerism, colonialism/imperialism, and more recently multinationalism. Lots of debugging to do.

The hidden parts of the global elite are described by William Cooper in Behold a Pale Horse, also Holy Blood, Holy Grail has scholarly info, and even more remote history is found in the Zecharia Sitchin books.

How does this relate to y2k: Besides giving consideration to how the energy and power distribution infrastructure will sustain operations amid computer failures, equal concern is with how the superstructure (the geopolitical power structure) will operate administrative functions (what are they going to do and how are they going to do it) and what kind of political impact (on the average person) may be expected in terms of the government as well as the economy. Everybody wants freedom and money, the main question is how much will be obtained and how available is it.

-- Jon (jonmiles@pacbell.net), December 17, 1998.

Reading INVAR's posts I saw a vision of the wrestler Corporal Kirshner, beating up the Iron Sheik and Nicholai Volkov because they weren't gOd-fearing 'mericans. Although I get the suspicion that INVAR might lack the requisite intellectual power to step into the squared-circle. His kind of patriotism is poisonous, no matter what state it finds itself attached to. He hasn't got a clueth. Thank G. pshannon an E Coli have an advanced understanding of this sorta thing, or else these kinda threads might be tickertape "USA! USA!.." typa dealies. I have to warn against reading the works of Icke, Sitchin, and especially Cooper, coz they're all a little screwy,( but none devoid of value. ) Try Chomsky, Parenti and Quigley instead.

-- humptydumpty (no.6@thevillage.com), December 17, 1998.

...or try 'em all and throw in some Gurdjieff, old Rolling Stones records and Green Bud. Read the financial pages every day and follow the current gladiatorial contests. Then come to your own conclusions...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), December 17, 1998.

Humpty - as for reading - whatever - all good reading fodder for the grey matter - I like the No. 6 handle, I'm a big Prisoner fan too -

Be seeing you.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 17, 1998.