The San Bernardino mountain fires have not only wiped out nearly a thousand
homes and killed four people, the burn area impacts nearly 50% of the jeep
trails in the San Bernardino National Forest. These trails will soon be
officially closed for several years while the forest regenerates, just like the
recently reopened White Mountain trail was closed after the fire there several
years ago.

Responsibility for the overgrowth and the infestation of the bark beetle which
exacerbated this inferno lies at the feet of the environmentalists, not any
perceived delay in obtaining federal funds for clearing dead trees.

It is well documented that at the early stages of the bark beetle infestation,
which began near Lake Arrowhead (where enviromentalist generated restrictions
on tree cutting increased the forest density from the normal 30-40 trees/acre
to 250-300 trees/acre),treatment with insecticides would have been tremendously
effective. However, outside pressure from the Sierra Club, Center for
Biological Diversity and other eco-groups, and inside pressure from enviro-
indoctrinated career foresters during the Clinton years, resulted in a Forest
Service prohibition of the use of those insecticides.
The environmentalists will never take responsibility for their part in creating
a bark beetle infestation that nearly killed an entire forest and created so
much fuel for the fire. Instead, they will be the ones blaming President Bush
for not providing enoungh money fast enough to cut down the dead trees before
they caught fire.

Wongheaded enviromentalism is ultimately the cause of the California wildfires
and a $2 billion loss to the local economy. We simply cannot afford the
greenies anymore

It is time for every one of us to support the Bush administration's Healthy
Forest Initiative in any way we can. Write to your senators and representatives
in Congress. Enlist the support of your friends and everyone you meet on the
trail. Donate money to the legal defense funds at the Blue Ribbon Coalition,
California Association of 4WD Clubs and CORVA. The survival of the forests
depends upon it, and so does our sport.

Robert Bills
Orange County CA

Jerry Bransford wrote:
>It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
>cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
>since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The outcome
>would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
>involved.

 

"Kevin in San Diego" <kevin_hedstrom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:xeKob.129000$gv5.40444@fed1read05...
> I blame the lack of rain and the windy conditions. Finger pointing shall
> begin though, no matter what. I can only hope it turns out that we get a
> better system in the long run. Thank god my family survived. I truly feel
> sorry for the people who have lost property and even worse, loved ones.
All
> the finger pointing in the world wont change that.

You're absolutely right. In reality the only thing that will end the West's
extreme fire danger and slow down the beetle infestations is an end to the
drought through sustained moisture. West of here in pinion & juniper country
over 80% of the trees are already dead in some places. Mesa Verde Natl Park
has had four years of successive, lightning sparked fires and the
devastation is incredible.

Frankly, I'm not sure how one would go about clearing all these trees.
There's a couple out West of here that have taken extreme measure to save
the pinions on their B&B ranch, but its' a full time job for both of them.
Not enough people or resources to do the job, so let's pray for rain.

 

"Kevin in San Diego" <kevin_hedstrom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:xeKob.129000$gv5.40444@fed1read05...
> I blame the lack of rain and the windy conditions. Finger pointing shall
> begin though, no matter what. I can only hope it turns out that we get a
> better system in the long run. Thank god my family survived. I truly feel
> sorry for the people who have lost property and even worse, loved ones.
All
> the finger pointing in the world wont change that.

You're absolutely right. In reality the only thing that will end the West's
extreme fire danger and slow down the beetle infestations is an end to the
drought through sustained moisture. West of here in pinion & juniper country
over 80% of the trees are already dead in some places. Mesa Verde Natl Park
has had four years of successive, lightning sparked fires and the
devastation is incredible.

Frankly, I'm not sure how one would go about clearing all these trees.
There's a couple out West of here that have taken extreme measure to save
the pinions on their B&B ranch, but its' a full time job for both of them.
Not enough people or resources to do the job, so let's pray for rain.

 

"Kevin in San Diego" <kevin_hedstrom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:xeKob.129000$gv5.40444@fed1read05...
> I blame the lack of rain and the windy conditions. Finger pointing shall
> begin though, no matter what. I can only hope it turns out that we get a
> better system in the long run. Thank god my family survived. I truly feel
> sorry for the people who have lost property and even worse, loved ones.
All
> the finger pointing in the world wont change that.

You're absolutely right. In reality the only thing that will end the West's
extreme fire danger and slow down the beetle infestations is an end to the
drought through sustained moisture. West of here in pinion & juniper country
over 80% of the trees are already dead in some places. Mesa Verde Natl Park
has had four years of successive, lightning sparked fires and the
devastation is incredible.

Frankly, I'm not sure how one would go about clearing all these trees.
There's a couple out West of here that have taken extreme measure to save
the pinions on their B&B ranch, but its' a full time job for both of them.
Not enough people or resources to do the job, so let's pray for rain.

 

I am not an apologist for any extremist, be he environmentalist or
anything else. You make some good points, and I will accept your
assertions as facts. In fairness, though, I think you have to include
century-old policy of stopping every fire in its tracks, no matter how
remote from human habitation (Were the Smokejumpers ultimately a good
idea, romantic as they are?). Then, homebuilders have kept encroaching
on wildlands, bringing their powerlines, cigarettes, lawnmowers, and
carelessness. Folks who live in forested rural areas have wanted their
beautiful settings preserved, no matter what.
I would like to hear your thoughts about the President's forest
protection plan. The criticism I keep hearing is that it really just
means letting the logging companies loose to take what they want. And,
the argument goes, the loggers will only want the biggest, best and
healthiest that the forest has to offer. Undergrowth and immature trees
have no commercial value, so will not be a priority; their only removal
would occur as a result of clear-cutting to get at the "good" trees. If
Bush's plan somehow provides some guarantees against that general
scenario, I would appreciate hearing them, because I haven't studied the
plan.

Robert Bills wrote:

> The San Bernardino mountain fires have not only wiped out nearly a thousand
> homes and killed four people, the burn area impacts nearly 50% of the jeep
> trails in the San Bernardino National Forest. These trails will soon be
> officially closed for several years while the forest regenerates, just like the
> recently reopened White Mountain trail was closed after the fire there several
> years ago.
>
> Responsibility for the overgrowth and the infestation of the bark beetle which
> exacerbated this inferno lies at the feet of the environmentalists, not any
> perceived delay in obtaining federal funds for clearing dead trees.
>
> It is well documented that at the early stages of the bark beetle infestation,
> which began near Lake Arrowhead (where enviromentalist generated restrictions
> on tree cutting increased the forest density from the normal 30-40 trees/acre
> to 250-300 trees/acre),treatment with insecticides would have been tremendously
> effective. However, outside pressure from the Sierra Club, Center for
> Biological Diversity and other eco-groups, and inside pressure from enviro-
> indoctrinated career foresters during the Clinton years, resulted in a Forest
> Service prohibition of the use of those insecticides.
> The environmentalists will never take responsibility for their part in creating
> a bark beetle infestation that nearly killed an entire forest and created so
> much fuel for the fire. Instead, they will be the ones blaming President Bush
> for not providing enoungh money fast enough to cut down the dead trees before
> they caught fire.
>
> Wongheaded enviromentalism is ultimately the cause of the California wildfires
> and a $2 billion loss to the local economy. We simply cannot afford the
> greenies anymore
>
> It is time for every one of us to support the Bush administration's Healthy
> Forest Initiative in any way we can. Write to your senators and representatives
> in Congress. Enlist the support of your friends and everyone you meet on the
> trail. Donate money to the legal defense funds at the Blue Ribbon Coalition,
> California Association of 4WD Clubs and CORVA. The survival of the forests
> depends upon it, and so does our sport.
>
> Robert Bills
> Orange County CA
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
>>It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
>>cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
>>since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The outcome
>>would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
>>involved.
>
>
>

 

I am not an apologist for any extremist, be he environmentalist or
anything else. You make some good points, and I will accept your
assertions as facts. In fairness, though, I think you have to include
century-old policy of stopping every fire in its tracks, no matter how
remote from human habitation (Were the Smokejumpers ultimately a good
idea, romantic as they are?). Then, homebuilders have kept encroaching
on wildlands, bringing their powerlines, cigarettes, lawnmowers, and
carelessness. Folks who live in forested rural areas have wanted their
beautiful settings preserved, no matter what.
I would like to hear your thoughts about the President's forest
protection plan. The criticism I keep hearing is that it really just
means letting the logging companies loose to take what they want. And,
the argument goes, the loggers will only want the biggest, best and
healthiest that the forest has to offer. Undergrowth and immature trees
have no commercial value, so will not be a priority; their only removal
would occur as a result of clear-cutting to get at the "good" trees. If
Bush's plan somehow provides some guarantees against that general
scenario, I would appreciate hearing them, because I haven't studied the
plan.

Robert Bills wrote:

> The San Bernardino mountain fires have not only wiped out nearly a thousand
> homes and killed four people, the burn area impacts nearly 50% of the jeep
> trails in the San Bernardino National Forest. These trails will soon be
> officially closed for several years while the forest regenerates, just like the
> recently reopened White Mountain trail was closed after the fire there several
> years ago.
>
> Responsibility for the overgrowth and the infestation of the bark beetle which
> exacerbated this inferno lies at the feet of the environmentalists, not any
> perceived delay in obtaining federal funds for clearing dead trees.
>
> It is well documented that at the early stages of the bark beetle infestation,
> which began near Lake Arrowhead (where enviromentalist generated restrictions
> on tree cutting increased the forest density from the normal 30-40 trees/acre
> to 250-300 trees/acre),treatment with insecticides would have been tremendously
> effective. However, outside pressure from the Sierra Club, Center for
> Biological Diversity and other eco-groups, and inside pressure from enviro-
> indoctrinated career foresters during the Clinton years, resulted in a Forest
> Service prohibition of the use of those insecticides.
> The environmentalists will never take responsibility for their part in creating
> a bark beetle infestation that nearly killed an entire forest and created so
> much fuel for the fire. Instead, they will be the ones blaming President Bush
> for not providing enoungh money fast enough to cut down the dead trees before
> they caught fire.
>
> Wongheaded enviromentalism is ultimately the cause of the California wildfires
> and a $2 billion loss to the local economy. We simply cannot afford the
> greenies anymore
>
> It is time for every one of us to support the Bush administration's Healthy
> Forest Initiative in any way we can. Write to your senators and representatives
> in Congress. Enlist the support of your friends and everyone you meet on the
> trail. Donate money to the legal defense funds at the Blue Ribbon Coalition,
> California Association of 4WD Clubs and CORVA. The survival of the forests
> depends upon it, and so does our sport.
>
> Robert Bills
> Orange County CA
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
>>It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
>>cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
>>since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The outcome
>>would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
>>involved.
>
>
>

 

I am not an apologist for any extremist, be he environmentalist or
anything else. You make some good points, and I will accept your
assertions as facts. In fairness, though, I think you have to include
century-old policy of stopping every fire in its tracks, no matter how
remote from human habitation (Were the Smokejumpers ultimately a good
idea, romantic as they are?). Then, homebuilders have kept encroaching
on wildlands, bringing their powerlines, cigarettes, lawnmowers, and
carelessness. Folks who live in forested rural areas have wanted their
beautiful settings preserved, no matter what.
I would like to hear your thoughts about the President's forest
protection plan. The criticism I keep hearing is that it really just
means letting the logging companies loose to take what they want. And,
the argument goes, the loggers will only want the biggest, best and
healthiest that the forest has to offer. Undergrowth and immature trees
have no commercial value, so will not be a priority; their only removal
would occur as a result of clear-cutting to get at the "good" trees. If
Bush's plan somehow provides some guarantees against that general
scenario, I would appreciate hearing them, because I haven't studied the
plan.

Robert Bills wrote:

> The San Bernardino mountain fires have not only wiped out nearly a thousand
> homes and killed four people, the burn area impacts nearly 50% of the jeep
> trails in the San Bernardino National Forest. These trails will soon be
> officially closed for several years while the forest regenerates, just like the
> recently reopened White Mountain trail was closed after the fire there several
> years ago.
>
> Responsibility for the overgrowth and the infestation of the bark beetle which
> exacerbated this inferno lies at the feet of the environmentalists, not any
> perceived delay in obtaining federal funds for clearing dead trees.
>
> It is well documented that at the early stages of the bark beetle infestation,
> which began near Lake Arrowhead (where enviromentalist generated restrictions
> on tree cutting increased the forest density from the normal 30-40 trees/acre
> to 250-300 trees/acre),treatment with insecticides would have been tremendously
> effective. However, outside pressure from the Sierra Club, Center for
> Biological Diversity and other eco-groups, and inside pressure from enviro-
> indoctrinated career foresters during the Clinton years, resulted in a Forest
> Service prohibition of the use of those insecticides.
> The environmentalists will never take responsibility for their part in creating
> a bark beetle infestation that nearly killed an entire forest and created so
> much fuel for the fire. Instead, they will be the ones blaming President Bush
> for not providing enoungh money fast enough to cut down the dead trees before
> they caught fire.
>
> Wongheaded enviromentalism is ultimately the cause of the California wildfires
> and a $2 billion loss to the local economy. We simply cannot afford the
> greenies anymore
>
> It is time for every one of us to support the Bush administration's Healthy
> Forest Initiative in any way we can. Write to your senators and representatives
> in Congress. Enlist the support of your friends and everyone you meet on the
> trail. Donate money to the legal defense funds at the Blue Ribbon Coalition,
> California Association of 4WD Clubs and CORVA. The survival of the forests
> depends upon it, and so does our sport.
>
> Robert Bills
> Orange County CA
>
> Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
>>It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
>>cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
>>since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The outcome
>>would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
>>involved.
>
>
>

 

I just read a story on one of the news pages where someone was raising
hell about the lack of response by air tankers. According to the
story, a police chopper spotted the Cedar fire when it was still a
small outbreak. He called for an air drop but the drop was refused
because the tankers had just been grounded due to winds. The
implication was that the rules should have been ignored and the drop
made anyway. People who think like that should have to fly with those
guys on the drop runs!

Watch the videos of some of those tanker runs and see if you think
those jockeys would be scared off by 'just a little wind" or poor
visibility. The air tanker crews are the "real jeepers" among pilots
- talk about off-road challenges! Anytime you see accidents where the
pilots pull the wings off you know they have modified the cockpits
with extra room for the ***** they sport. Asking them to fly when
conditions are beyond what THEY consider safe would border on
criminal.

OK, you can have the soap box back - rant over.

On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 08:34:34 UTC "Kevin in San Diego"
<kevin_hedstrom@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I blame the lack of rain and the windy conditions. Finger pointing shall
> begin though, no matter what. I can only hope it turns out that we get a
> better system in the long run. Thank god my family survived. I truly feel
> sorry for the people who have lost property and even worse, loved ones. All
> the finger pointing in the world wont change that.
> KH
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@mecox.net> wrote in message
> news:XgJob.128996$gv5.11564@fed1read05...
> > It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
> > cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
> > since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The
> outcome
> > would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
> > involved. It's asinine and ridiculous to think they could have cut down
> > millions of dead trees in that time frame. Even if it had been approved,
> > Davis or some other bureaucrat would have likely either dragged their feet
> > starting the clearing or hijacked the money to give to some other pet
> > project.
> >
> > Don't try some lame attempt to blame Washington D.C. on the outcome of the
> > fire.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> >
> > "Lon Stowell" <LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> wrote in message
> > news:sTEob.73049$HS4.635988@attbi_s01...
> > > Approximately 10/31/03 18:21, Will Honea uttered for posterity:
> > >
> > > > We have a C-130 reserve outfit here in Colorado Springs with something
> > > > like 6 birds equipped with drop kits and crews trained to handle them.
> > > > There are 2 problems that need to be kept in mind, tho. The first is
> > > > that the local fire commander has to request them - that's a human
> > > > problem with no ready solution. The other problem is a 1930's era
> > > > federal law that prohibits the use of militarty resources until all
> > > > civilian commercial resources are exhausted. Talking to some of the
> > > > pilots here, that seems to be a huge problem. The time for a request
> > > > to clear the buracracy seems to be measured in days while the response
> > > > time of the crews and the equipment was something like 4 hours from
> > > > 'Go' in Colorado to dropping retardant in California. One more way
> > > > your friendly government looks out for you...
> > >
> > > Latest is that copies of the written request to the fed gov't to
> > > allocate FEMA funds to get rid of the massive dead trees in a
> > > couple of the fire areas *before* the fires started are now
> > > surfacing. A mere few hundred million in FEMA funds allegedly
> > > could have prevented a few billion in damages, plus unfortunately
> > > the deaths.
> > >
> > > --
> > > My governor can kick your governor's ***
> > >
> >
> >
>
>


--
Will Honea <whonea@codenet.net>

 

I just read a story on one of the news pages where someone was raising
hell about the lack of response by air tankers. According to the
story, a police chopper spotted the Cedar fire when it was still a
small outbreak. He called for an air drop but the drop was refused
because the tankers had just been grounded due to winds. The
implication was that the rules should have been ignored and the drop
made anyway. People who think like that should have to fly with those
guys on the drop runs!

Watch the videos of some of those tanker runs and see if you think
those jockeys would be scared off by 'just a little wind" or poor
visibility. The air tanker crews are the "real jeepers" among pilots
- talk about off-road challenges! Anytime you see accidents where the
pilots pull the wings off you know they have modified the cockpits
with extra room for the ***** they sport. Asking them to fly when
conditions are beyond what THEY consider safe would border on
criminal.

OK, you can have the soap box back - rant over.

On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 08:34:34 UTC "Kevin in San Diego"
<kevin_hedstrom@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I blame the lack of rain and the windy conditions. Finger pointing shall
> begin though, no matter what. I can only hope it turns out that we get a
> better system in the long run. Thank god my family survived. I truly feel
> sorry for the people who have lost property and even worse, loved ones. All
> the finger pointing in the world wont change that.
> KH
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@mecox.net> wrote in message
> news:XgJob.128996$gv5.11564@fed1read05...
> > It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
> > cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
> > since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The
> outcome
> > would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
> > involved. It's asinine and ridiculous to think they could have cut down
> > millions of dead trees in that time frame. Even if it had been approved,
> > Davis or some other bureaucrat would have likely either dragged their feet
> > starting the clearing or hijacked the money to give to some other pet
> > project.
> >
> > Don't try some lame attempt to blame Washington D.C. on the outcome of the
> > fire.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> >
> > "Lon Stowell" <LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> wrote in message
> > news:sTEob.73049$HS4.635988@attbi_s01...
> > > Approximately 10/31/03 18:21, Will Honea uttered for posterity:
> > >
> > > > We have a C-130 reserve outfit here in Colorado Springs with something
> > > > like 6 birds equipped with drop kits and crews trained to handle them.
> > > > There are 2 problems that need to be kept in mind, tho. The first is
> > > > that the local fire commander has to request them - that's a human
> > > > problem with no ready solution. The other problem is a 1930's era
> > > > federal law that prohibits the use of militarty resources until all
> > > > civilian commercial resources are exhausted. Talking to some of the
> > > > pilots here, that seems to be a huge problem. The time for a request
> > > > to clear the buracracy seems to be measured in days while the response
> > > > time of the crews and the equipment was something like 4 hours from
> > > > 'Go' in Colorado to dropping retardant in California. One more way
> > > > your friendly government looks out for you...
> > >
> > > Latest is that copies of the written request to the fed gov't to
> > > allocate FEMA funds to get rid of the massive dead trees in a
> > > couple of the fire areas *before* the fires started are now
> > > surfacing. A mere few hundred million in FEMA funds allegedly
> > > could have prevented a few billion in damages, plus unfortunately
> > > the deaths.
> > >
> > > --
> > > My governor can kick your governor's ***
> > >
> >
> >
>
>


--
Will Honea <whonea@codenet.net>

 

I just read a story on one of the news pages where someone was raising
hell about the lack of response by air tankers. According to the
story, a police chopper spotted the Cedar fire when it was still a
small outbreak. He called for an air drop but the drop was refused
because the tankers had just been grounded due to winds. The
implication was that the rules should have been ignored and the drop
made anyway. People who think like that should have to fly with those
guys on the drop runs!

Watch the videos of some of those tanker runs and see if you think
those jockeys would be scared off by 'just a little wind" or poor
visibility. The air tanker crews are the "real jeepers" among pilots
- talk about off-road challenges! Anytime you see accidents where the
pilots pull the wings off you know they have modified the cockpits
with extra room for the ***** they sport. Asking them to fly when
conditions are beyond what THEY consider safe would border on
criminal.

OK, you can have the soap box back - rant over.

On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 08:34:34 UTC "Kevin in San Diego"
<kevin_hedstrom@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I blame the lack of rain and the windy conditions. Finger pointing shall
> begin though, no matter what. I can only hope it turns out that we get a
> better system in the long run. Thank god my family survived. I truly feel
> sorry for the people who have lost property and even worse, loved ones. All
> the finger pointing in the world wont change that.
> KH
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@mecox.net> wrote in message
> news:XgJob.128996$gv5.11564@fed1read05...
> > It's ridiculous... truly ridiculous... to think California could have
> > cleaned out those millions of dead trees in the couple of months it was
> > since the request for funding to do so was sent to Washington. The
> outcome
> > would have been the same had it been approved because of the short time
> > involved. It's asinine and ridiculous to think they could have cut down
> > millions of dead trees in that time frame. Even if it had been approved,
> > Davis or some other bureaucrat would have likely either dragged their feet
> > starting the clearing or hijacked the money to give to some other pet
> > project.
> >
> > Don't try some lame attempt to blame Washington D.C. on the outcome of the
> > fire.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > To email, remove 'me' from my email address
> > KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
> >
> > "Lon Stowell" <LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> wrote in message
> > news:sTEob.73049$HS4.635988@attbi_s01...
> > > Approximately 10/31/03 18:21, Will Honea uttered for posterity:
> > >
> > > > We have a C-130 reserve outfit here in Colorado Springs with something
> > > > like 6 birds equipped with drop kits and crews trained to handle them.
> > > > There are 2 problems that need to be kept in mind, tho. The first is
> > > > that the local fire commander has to request them - that's a human
> > > > problem with no ready solution. The other problem is a 1930's era
> > > > federal law that prohibits the use of militarty resources until all
> > > > civilian commercial resources are exhausted. Talking to some of the
> > > > pilots here, that seems to be a huge problem. The time for a request
> > > > to clear the buracracy seems to be measured in days while the response
> > > > time of the crews and the equipment was something like 4 hours from
> > > > 'Go' in Colorado to dropping retardant in California. One more way
> > > > your friendly government looks out for you...
> > >
> > > Latest is that copies of the written request to the fed gov't to
> > > allocate FEMA funds to get rid of the massive dead trees in a
> > > couple of the fire areas *before* the fires started are now
> > > surfacing. A mere few hundred million in FEMA funds allegedly
> > > could have prevented a few billion in damages, plus unfortunately
> > > the deaths.
> > >
> > > --
> > > My governor can kick your governor's ***
> > >
> >
> >
>
>


--
Will Honea <whonea@codenet.net>