 sj |
||
|
||
War (against countries that support terrorism)
|
|
|
Subject: WAR......... From: GUEST,X-Ed Date: 13 Sep 01 - 02:01 PM I don't need any politician to tell me this is an act of war. They have been asking for this for 35 years. I think we should give it to them. TOTAL WAR. Against all nations that have supported terrorism. TOTAL WAR just like against Nazi Germany & Imperial Japan. Enough is enough. Cut them at the roots. Unleash our fury and bring them to their knees. They can surrender the moment we hit the ground. The Arabs are good at surrendering. The peoples and governments of these countries can aid us in shutting down all terrorist camps and operations. We can have world peace in a year. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: kendall Date: 13 Sep 01 - 02:03 PM ...did you really believe that a war could end war... Eric Bogle |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,X-Ed Date: 13 Sep 01 - 02:13 PM Plato: "The only ones that have seen the end of war are the dead." X-Ed: "Kill your enemies before they kill you and your loved ones." |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: The Shambles Date: 13 Sep 01 - 02:20 PM The Seeds Of More I suspect the best responce to our GUEST is to send him a personal message and let this thread die? |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Hawker Date: 13 Sep 01 - 02:33 PM "Oh young men, don't you see now why they lied?" - Bogle L:0( |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: DougR Date: 13 Sep 01 - 03:34 PM Hmmm. Kendall, I think maybe he "gotcha!" :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST Date: 13 Sep 01 - 03:55 PM Song of Choice, by Peggy Seeger. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Troll Date: 13 Sep 01 - 04:14 PM So what would you prefer, sitting and waiting until YOUR loved ones are killed? Because this is not the last time this will happen if we don't put a stop to it now. We could have done it years ago but...no. I won't go there. Might-have-beens won't ever bring back our slaughtered countrymen, but we CAN see to it that no more of our people die, sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. troll |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST Date: 13 Sep 01 - 04:55 PM Who are "them" - Where are "their knees" - Which countries?? "Total War" was a comic book printed by Gold Key comics back in the '60's. It was a lot easier then. The enemy wore uniforms. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: reynardyne Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:09 PM 'Who are "them"?' - why, people with swarthy skin and funny names like Mohammed and Jabbar and such. Troll & X-Ed : You really think blinkered nationalism is going to make things better? Listen to me: THIS IS NOT A GAME! Nobody ever wins a war, except perhaps arms manufacturers. Don't allow yourself to be drawn into this vortex of insularity and hate by the people who stay in the bunkers while 'the people' go out to die in the mud. You may have lost friends and relatives, but so have many others. If you'd payed any attention to events in the Middle East lately, 'My friend, you would not tel with such high zest/To children ardent for some desperate glory/The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est/Pro patria mori' |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: reynardyne Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:09 PM 'Who are "them"?' - why, people with swarthy skin and funny names like Mohammed and Jabbar and such. Troll & X-Ed : You really think blinkered nationalism is going to make things better? Listen to me: THIS IS NOT A GAME! Nobody ever wins a war, except perhaps arms manufacturers. Don't allow yourself to be drawn into this vortex of insularity and hate by the people who stay in the bunkers while 'the people' go out to die in the mud. You may have lost friends and relatives, but so have many others. If you'd payed any attention to events in the Middle East lately, 'My friend, you would not tell with such high zest/To children ardent for some desperate glory/The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est/Pro patria mori' |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: reynardyne Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:11 PM sorry for posting twice; I noticed a spelling mistake just after I clicked 'submit'. See if you can spot it. Answers on a postcard, please |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Troll Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:11 PM Still sniping from the safety of the bushes, eh GUEST? Well, I would too if I were afraid that someone would find out who I really was and what I really thought. Newbern Winfield Johnson aka troll |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: InOBU Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:12 PM Hey guys! Let me tell ya something from New York! WE ARE THE FRONT LINES HERE! And we hope all you guys out in the mid west calling for reprisals, where living here instead! STOP THE NONSENCE! War is not the answer. Its here, not there, they are not going to bomb Nebraska! We don't want the damn reprisals. From downtown New York City, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Bill D Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:23 PM ....that sort of 'war' is better know as 'lynching'....but even today, there are those who would form a lynch mob on a moments notice. I knew they'd show up here eventually. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:54 PM Yep. "Strange fruit", isn't it? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Butch Date: 13 Sep 01 - 05:59 PM I'm glad yopu know enough that they will not bomb Nebraska. You have talked to the terrorists and they told you this? The reason this happened is simple. We allowed it to happen. We failed to get serious about this back in the Carter admin, we failed again in Bush I and again in Clinton I and II. But look at Libia. I live near DC. My friends are in the Pentagon right now some with hoses, some with body bags. I am on the front line too. I want to fight. Not for revenge but for an end to all of this.
|
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Sorcha Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:01 PM I'm not exactly "fed up" but I am emotionally exhausted and tired of the war-mongering, hate mongering, trolling and flaming. Not only here on Mudcat, but also in the media.
I have heard all the news reports and recieved all the e mails I want on the subject for a few days-- I need space to think and I can't do that when the subject is worn out until we have hard news. I am tired of hash and re-hash just for something to say. I am tired of being emotionally and visually assaulted by something I have done everything I can do about. If you don't hear much from me for a few days, go look in the Lyr Req threads. That is where I will be. Not in any of these others. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Kim C Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:04 PM I don't want a war. But I don't know what the answer is. I fear that fighting an ongoing "war on terrorism" would be about as effective as the so-called "war on drugs." I just don't know. The only thing I do know is, I do not want my good friend the Sergeant, or anyone else, going anywhere in a body bag. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,Jean-Luc Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:07 PM ...I have made to many comprimises already, to many retreats they envade our space and we fall back, they assimilate entire worlds and we fall back. But not again, the line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done! |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,Hille Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:13 PM It's a convoluted theory of mine but perhaps if there wasn't so much money in the Middle East to fund terrorist activities there would be less of them? Perhaps the Western world should start thinking about guzzling less oil and putting money into the pockets of multi-millionaires like Bin Laden? Perhaps, unlike Mr Bush who wants to build so many power stations, we could try solar power, eg: 49 solar installations in the UK are generating 6,000KW hours of electricity a year, adding up to a 4,200 kg reduction of carbon dioxide a year. That means 2 tonnes per year of carbon can stay in the ground instead of being released into the atmosphere.
|
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Amos Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:29 PM Hear, hear. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: catspaw49 Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:29 PM There may come a time for fighting but we exact a terrible toll. Old men make wars where young men die. Maybe we always need to keep that thought first and foremost and be very sure.....VERY SURE ..... that when we send our young into the great maw, that hte end result will be more than just revenge and retribution..... Jimmy Clay
So as you walk down the street who will talk to you
With your rifle on your shoulder as you walk alone
Now you're alone Jimmy Clay
Do you remember New York Town, good old New York Town
Do you remember Alice Faye, good old Alice Faye
Now you're alone Jimmy Clay
Now as you lie there in the mud who will talk to you
And your face will grown mouldy when they've kissed your cheek
Now you're alone Jimmy Clay ********************************************************** Spaw
|
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:34 PM Try to remember the kind of September When life was slow and oh, so mellow Try to remember the kind of September When grass was green and grain was yellow Try to remember the kind of September When you were a tender and callow fellow Try to remember and if you remember then follow Try to remember when life was so tender That now one wept except the willow Try to remember when life was so tender That dreams were kept beside your pillow Try to remember when life was so tender That love was an ember about to billow Try to remember and if you remember then follow Deep in December it's nice to remember Although you know the snow will follow Deep in December it's nice to remember Without a hurt the heart is hollow Deep in December it's nice to remember The fire of September that made us mellow Deep in December our hearts should remember and follow... |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: kendall Date: 13 Sep 01 - 06:56 PM Doug, who "got me"? Kill your enemies before they kill you... How about we just stop making enemies? |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Murray MacLeod Date: 13 Sep 01 - 07:06 PM Hille, I don't think your theory holds up. The reason there isn't even more backlash against the West is because we DO pump millions into the Middle East. God help the West if the Saudi Royal Family ( much as I detest them), and Kuwait and Egypt ever get taken over buy the fundamentalists. Murray |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Gloredhel Date: 13 Sep 01 - 07:22 PM Thankx to Spaw and others for already making this point, but war is hell. I'm too young to remember any other wars, but I remember seeing a high school graduation picture circa WW2 where three of the graduates were in uniform. Please, please, I don't want to see any uniforms in my graduation picture that don't include sweaters with the school logo. War may be inevitable, but fanaticism is not the answer. War is not something to cheer about. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: toadfrog Date: 13 Sep 01 - 07:42 PM As a lawyer, I find all these pronouncements about war very interesting. Apparently, Our Leader wants a declaration of war against John Doe and Richard Roe, and then He will decide whom he wants to attack. Probably right, somebody should Do Something, but shouldn't we first reach a consensus on what to do? If it is war against a foreign power, we should be real sure what we are doing; we do not need any more unnecessary enemies. And if it is a War Against Terrorism, it suffers from the same deficiency as the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs. Those are the "wars" that can't be won, and go on forever and ever. In other words, if it's a real war, we should be careful about whom we attack. And if it's a rhetorical "war," it is a kind of rhetoric that becomes self-defeating. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 13 Sep 01 - 07:52 PM Spelling mistake in first posting is tel, do I get a prize? If so send it to-John in Hull, Yorkshire, UK. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,COMMUNISTIC SOCIALIST FELLER Date: 13 Sep 01 - 08:19 PM FUCK AMERICA THE CAPITALIST SCUM FUCKERS !, Arab nations whos relegion has been pissed on by Americans inter fearing in there holy war has resulted on a military strike against America , THESE TARGETS WERE NOT CIVILIAN BUT MILITARY TARGETS * PENTAGON " EVEN THE WORLD TRADE CENTER IS A LEGITIMATE MILITARY TARGET COZ THEY FUND THE POLOTITIANS , arabs cant fly there war planes into american air space or fire rockets so the only way to attack back is like this AMERICA ASKED FOR IT |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: DougR Date: 13 Sep 01 - 08:20 PM Hmmm. Definitely an American. Can't spell. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST Date: 13 Sep 01 - 08:28 PM FUCKIN ARAB CURRY EATING ANUS |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: kendall Date: 13 Sep 01 - 08:50 PM dont feed it, it might follow you home |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: CarolC Date: 13 Sep 01 - 09:31 PM TOTAL WAR. Against all nations that have supported terrorism. GUEST X-Ed, I hope you understand that you condemn the US with that statement, because our government has supported terrorism when it has suited its purposes. Should we be wiped out, too? |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST Date: 13 Sep 01 - 10:07 PM Plato and toadfrog have said all I wanted to say, but I must say I find the third and fifth posts above very refreshing. It's nice to know that such cogent and well thought opinions can be so freely expressed. I'm minded of a device introduced to me some fifty odd years ago, consisting of three columns from which one selected at random two adjectives and a noun to produce a totally meaningless but resounding phrase, the developers have I believe gone on to found the whole acedemic study of business. Pete M |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Troll Date: 13 Sep 01 - 10:59 PM That's "SCUM SUCKERS" you twit. Sheeesh!!! troll |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,petr Date: 13 Sep 01 - 11:08 PM This is not an attack on America, its an attack on Western Civilization. Look at the symbolism of the targets. The seeds are in the colonial past and in the Crusades. Granted that the US foreign policy was sometimes the politically expedient thing rather than in support of democracy. But its not just US policy that is the reason, for the attacks it is the West itself, the WOrld Trade Center held the offices of many international companies. The problem is that the US never finishes what it starts. BUsh Seniors greatest mistake was not finishing of Saddam. They practically allowed the Republican Guard to escape unharmed. They allowed the Iraqis to outnegotiate them after the war - when the no-fly zone was imposed the Iraqis asked can we fly helicopters, sure those are ok, can we fly ARMED helicopters, yeah I guess so. (According to Norman Schwarzkopf) This allowed the Iraqis to destroy the Kurds (they were only used by the US as a political football anyway) and who were the only credible threat to Saddam. The US never really understood what they were getting into by propping up dictatorships in the past - such as Iran. Kissinger shares a great deal of the blame for this. (if we were the Democratic world why did we not encourage it in these countries instead of turning a blind eye to oppression) The list goes on - in 1982 when Israel invaded Lebanon a US warship bombed the Palestinian training camps in the Shouf mountains in the jokingly titled OPERATION Reach Out and Touch someone, but the results were the embassy bombings and the marine bldg. Which were totally unprotected at the time. Clinton thought he would punish Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden after the East Africa embassy bombings by lobbing a few cruise missiles, at Afghanistan - and now we are probably seeing the results. Im not saying that we should have nuked the rogue states that support terrorism - but the US and its allies have a comprehensive policy and understanding of the root causes of this.
|
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,Pete M at work Date: 13 Sep 01 - 11:57 PM Sorry just realised that my counting could be misconstrued, I was referring to the lucid contributions 3 and 5 ABOVE mine, not the third and fifth. Apologies also for missing entering my name in the "From" box. Pete M |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Justa Picker Date: 14 Sep 01 - 12:06 AM The U.S. did not have a mandate to go to Bahgdad. Yep, alot of us would have loved to have Stormin' Norman go in there and kick his ass. But, cooler heads prevailed, and most of the alliance members remained happy. I am counting on those same "cooler heads" to ensure that no matter what retaliatory action is taken, that under no circmstances will nukes be used, because, if they are, it's all over Kids. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Troll Date: 14 Sep 01 - 12:12 AM I don't know about "cooler heads" but you're right Picker. Our mandate was to free Kuwait and that's all. It's not OUR nukes that I'm afraid of. troll |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: DougR Date: 14 Sep 01 - 01:51 AM Nope, toad, our leader wants a war against Terriorism. The Terriorists declaired it though. Don't you think? That's pretty clear isn't it? I've listened to a lot of TV over the past four days, and I haven't heard John Doe or Richard Roe mentioned one time. DougR
|
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: katlaughing Date: 14 Sep 01 - 03:24 AM This is chilling, esp. this quote: ``Now that war has been declared, we will lead the world to victory,'' Bush said. He makes it sound like a done deal, when Congress has't even decided yet. I know he means the terrorist, but he makes it sound like somehting he's just been wiating for. In this article, they are also talking about taking years to accomplish this; which raises the spector of "W" getting re-elected.
Pentagon Mulls Activating Reserves WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States will launch sustained military strikes against those behind the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington as well as their support systems, a senior Pentagon official said Thursday. In the most explicit description yet of the Bush administration's intentions, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said the military retaliation would continue until the roots of terrorism are destroyed. ``One has to say it's not just simply a matter of capturing people and holding them accountable, but removing the sanctuaries, removing the support systems, ending states who sponsor terrorism,'' he told a news conference in a Pentagon briefing room that still smelled of smoke and soot. Other defense officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration was considering options that included the use of air, sea and land forces over a lengthy period. They said it was clear the administration would go well beyond the limited strikes of recent years against Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan. ``This is not going to be a short program,'' said Navy Secretary Gordon England. President Bush was considering a request by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to call several thousand members of the National Guard and Reserve to active duty in the next few days, a defense official said. The last presidential call-up was in January 1991 when 265,322 reservists were federalized for the Gulf War. The military's fleet of sophisticated radar planes - called AWACS - have been ordered to stop flying missions over the nation's airspace, Rumsfeld said Thursday night on CNN's ``Larry King Live.'' The decision coincided with the resumption of commercial airline flights Thursday morning. Rumsfeld also noted that combat planes continue to fly over the New York-Washington corridor. He said he has not decided when those flights should stop. ``And we do have interceptors on 15-minute alert across the country on some 26 bases,'' Rumsfeld told CNN. Air National Guard reserve pilots have been used to supplement American forces in military emergencies on many occasions. In comments at the White House, Bush was less explicit than Wolfowitz about the military's role but emphatic that action would be taken in response to attacks that he has called acts of war. ``Now that war has been declared, we will lead the world to victory,'' Bush said. Wolfowitz made clear the administration was not thinking of a limited response. ``One thing that is clear is you don't do it with just a single military strike, no matter how dramatic,'' he said. A senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Bush is planning a sweeping campaign against terrorist groups that could last several years. The official seemed to be bracing the public for the likelihood that, although Bush may not act quickly, he will act forcefully with a series of strikes. The Navy has two aircraft carrier battle groups - each with 75 warplanes aboard - in the vicinity of the Arabian Sea, said Adm. Vern Clark, the chief of naval operations. That is twice the usual number for that part of the world. The USS Enterprise, which was due to return home after being relieved earlier this month by the USS Carl Vinson, has been ordered to remain in the area indefinitely. Those battle groups normally include cruisers and submarines, which could be used to launch long-range cruise missile strikes, perhaps as part of a prelude to attacks by manned aircraft such as B-2 stealth bombers or B-1 Lancers. There were no indications Thursday of a buildup of American forces in the Middle East or elsewhere. Neither Wolfowitz nor other defense officials hinted at when the United States might begin military strikes. On Capitol Hill, some lawmakers urged the administration to gather more information about the perpetrators of Tuesday's attacks and their supporters. ``This has got to be a very sophisticated inquiry,'' said Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Lugar was asked whether he believed the United States should launch a massive military response. ``There's no way of being able to decide that prior to knowing how extensive the harboring or aiding and abetting and organizing is,'' he said. ``That is why I would counsel that we'd better know that before we begin suggesting particular tactics of retaliation.'' Wolfowitz said part of the emergency funds the president is seeking from Congress will be used to strengthen U.S. military readiness for the fight against terrorism. On Wednesday, Rumsfeld said in a message to U.S. troops worldwide that some among them would be called to join the battle against ``powerful and terrible enemies.''
|
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Pete M Date: 14 Sep 01 - 05:54 AM I think that it is just possible, if the world is willing, to fight an effective 'war' against terrorism. It would not be a war involving expensive hardware however, nothing could be less effective. The kind of approach that needs to be taken is to hunt down and destroy ALL links to ANY terrorist organisation, those whose cause we support as much as those who hate us. Make no mistake that all these groups are interwoven. We need to strangle them by destroying their finances. We (our countries) could start, by preventing people from buying diamonds from UNITA or the Sierra Leone rebels, arresting people who support NORAID and other overt support organisations, confiscating the assets and bank accounts of any person or company however legitimate, that sells or deals with these groups, the process would be incredibly complex and time consuming, but I think it has the potential to work. My main doubt is that our Governments have the guts to do it, dropping a few tons of bombs on other innocents in the hope of killing a few is so much easier and more palatable electorally. Pete M |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Troll Date: 14 Sep 01 - 08:22 AM Declare any nation that deals with or harbors terrorists an outlaw nation and withdraw all recognition from them. Fine ANY US company that does ANY kind of business with them or with any country that does business with them. Make the banks account for WHERE large deposits come from. If they can't, they must refuse them. If the bank refuses to cooperate, close them down and transfer their assets to other banks that are compliant. Draconian? You betcha! Politically explosive? Absolutely. We may be left standing all lone? Possibly. But we wouldn't be putting American lives on the line in an interminable war. Think about it. troll |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: katlaughing Date: 14 Sep 01 - 09:54 AM Thank you troll and PeteM. Both ideas sound a lot better to me than what Bush is talkng about. kat |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: Mrrzy Date: 14 Sep 01 - 10:05 AM I'm afraid. I"m very afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST Date: 14 Sep 01 - 10:24 AM Wasn't it during Reagan's Reign of Error that the oxymoron 'Bombs for peace' was coined? |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Sep 01 - 10:28 AM I have to agree that both Pete and troll have ideas that would be far more effective than the "kill 'em all and sort it out later" approach. Kat, I am slightly encouraged though that Bush, while still holding on to the retaliation with brute force idea, is at least making some good noises toward forming coalitions and pressuring supportive governments........It's a start. What I think that Colin Powell may understand and is seemingly trying to transmit to Bush, is that a war on terrorism is a marathon and not a sprint. Any fighter knows that the way to win is to weaken your opponent's body with great body punches and not by only shots to the head. Even Ali, the greatest headshot artist of all, weakened his opponents in body first by either dancing or the infamous "Rope-A-Dope." I hear members of Congress and the cabinet makong the right sounds in that direction. They biggest job may be in selling the American people that a retaliatory "blast" will be far less effective than a campaign against the heart of the beast. There was talk on another thread about Truman and the bomb. It's true that one of his reasons for using it was that he believed it would result in fewer American (and Japanese) soldiers killed. But another was that he knew the US citizens would likely react badly to the knowledge that he could have ended the war with the bomb and didn't. The point here is that all political animals always have that political interest in mind even in the worst of times. I hope that enough time will pass that Bush will get the message that what we really want is an end to terrorism and not just revenge........and I hope the American citizens will see the benefit fo the marathon. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: GUEST,bluebird Date: 14 Sep 01 - 10:41 AM These attacks were criminal attacks and you don't apprehend criminals by bombing cities or countries. That is just what these people want holy people who want a wider holy war. |
|
Subject: RE: WAR......... From: vindelis Date: 14 Sep 01 - 03:51 PM I believe that, among British troops, this was the most requested song during the war in Kuait. I just hope and pray that it remains that way. Peace please. FROM A DISTANCE (Julie Gold) From a distance the world looks blue and green and the snow capped mountains white, From a distance the ocean meets the stream and the eagle takes to flight, From a distance there is harmony and it echoes through the land It's the voice of hope, it's the voice of peace, it's the voice of everyman. From a distance we all have enough and no one is in need, There are no guns, no bombs, no disease and no hungry mouths to feed, From a distance we are all instruments marching in a common band, Playing songs of hope, playing songs of peace, they're the songs of everyman. Chorus: God is watching us, God is watching us, God is watching us from a distance From a distance you look like my friend eventhough we are at war, From a distance I can't comprehend what all this war is for, And from a distance there is harmony and it echoes through the land, It's the hope of hopes, it's the love of loves, it's the heart of everyman. Chorus: God is watching us, God is watching us, God is watching us from a distance It's the hope of hopes, it's the love of loves, it's the heart of everyman.
|
| Share Thread: |
