The Letter The President Won't Send

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran two days ago sent to President Bush a 17 page letter to which the White House has chosen not to respond.

Had the President asked the Mighty Sicilian Eagle to draft such a response,here is what it would look like:

Dear President Ahmadinejad ;

Please be advised that I am in receipt of a letter from you delivered to me through diplomatic channels.

I apologize that Secretary of State Rice was so abrupt in handling the response to this matter,and I now want to take this opportunity to write to you myself,Head of State to Head of State.

While our views differ on many issues raised in your letterr,I applaud your effort to open a dialogue with the American people.The Dhali Lama once said "A journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step".

I consider your letter that first step.

However,I must comment on several of your observations:

Regarding your comment that Democracy has failed,that the invasion of Iraq has failed and that support for Isreal cannot be reconciled with Christian values:

Freedom means many different things to many different people.

Here in America,this "noble experiment" as Benjamin Franklin called it,is still in its infancy...barely two hundred and fifty years old.Along the way,as our form of governance evolved,our nation made many tragic mistakes.

However,America learned from its mistakes and as the years and decades passed developed a maturity and a wisdom not know since the dawn of mankind.America not only has grown to be today's example of what is right in the world,but throughout recent history has been the beacon,the savior that the world has turned to in times of peril and crisis.

One of our core freedoms is the freedom to practice the religion of our choice.To us this means that no matter how much we disagree with our fellow citizen's choice of his Creator,he has the right to practice that belief unfettered and with peace of mind.

It is my understanding that you religious philosophy brands as infidel those who not believe in your particuliar view of the Prophet (Blessed Be His Name).

One only has to look at the centuries old diispute between the followers of Ali and what you call the infidel today,those known as Sunni ,to realize that our fundamental view of the word "freedom" cannot fit into your defination of that word.

We also have fundamental differences over the intrepretation of other concepts such as freedom of speech,equality between male and female,the sanctity of the freely elected ,freedom of the press and media and host of other differences that give us the view that our defination of "freedom" is indeed vast and profoundly different from yours.

Nevertheless,our cultural and philosophicial differences should not preclude us from peacefully existing in this world.

While you urge America to turn to religion,rest assured that this nation is founded on basic and fundamental religious beliefs.

Our core values are based on the Creator and the inalieable rights that He bestowed upon us.However,as a nation we have concluded to seperate Church and State...a right that those truly free can chose to do.

You mention Moses in your letter to me.

Moses was a Jew.

Thus a central figure in your religion is a person whose decendants you have publicially said you want eliminated.

Moses freed his people from oppression and led them to the Promised land.

This is a central tenant in both my religion and yours.

The Prophet (Blessed be His Name) while in exile prior to the fall of Mecca,instructed his followers to pray facing EAST...toward Jerusalem,and once he occupied Mecca destroyed all religious figures except those of Jesus and his mother.

Surely this meant something to the Prophet (Blessed be His Name)...and it should to you as well.

Thus,our religions have a common source...and one upon which we can build .

Putting aside our past difference and in the true spirit of Allah,let our two great nations prosper together and resolve to solve any any all issues that stand in the way.

Sincerely yours,

George W. Bush
United States of America

Posted by Sicilian Eagle at May 10, 2006 5:26 PM
Comment #147143

Hey Siciliano:

I could not have said that betterer.

Next time Dubya says Islam is a religion of peace, I want all knowledgeable people who have actually studied the Koran and the Hadith to throw up collectively and then call the White House to come and clean up.

Stupid Dhimmmis indeed.

Posted by: Krishan Kumra at May 11, 2006 4:29 AM
Comment #147148

What’s with the “blessed be his name” crap? Bush isn’t a muslim.

Posted by: traveller at May 11, 2006 7:03 AM
Comment #147150

He must show respect. Right traveller?

I find it amazing that the man in Iran can write a letter, Bush says he won’t respond (which I believe is a mistake), and the oil prices go up a couple dollars a barrel.
Talk about the power of the pen.
The Iranians are enjoying every minute of the power they have over the oil markets. They know they are effecting the whole world every time they go to the microphone.
Besides the destruction of Israel, what is it they truely want from the rest of the world so we can live without the constant threat of war?
Why should they give up the power they have to effect the oil markets?
If we had that power, we would not give it up easily.

Posted by: dawn at May 11, 2006 7:47 AM
Comment #147155


Good start, but you’re writing in a sermon form to convince Americans of how superior we are to the narrow minded Iranians. Now let’s try it for the intended audience, the Iranians.

IMHO this religio-ethno-culture-geocentric hubris is what led Bushie down his indulgent and selfdestructive path to begin with.

Posted by: Dave at May 11, 2006 8:30 AM
Comment #147156

Sic Eagle, if only the President had the wherewithall to have seen the trap being laid for him and his administration and responded as you would have. If only…

There is no hindsight here either, I am just a regular bloke with a B.A. in psychology. Yet, when I wrote about Iran’s letter well before there was any response from Condi or the President about it, I wrote that this was a trap, and I suspected the President would walk right into it. He did. I expect my President to be more knowledeable and informed and prepared to deal with such events than I - that is why Bush will never again be my President, though he will suffer us to remain our nation’s president for at least another year.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 11, 2006 8:34 AM
Comment #147166

David et al:

I guess I wrote this piece in order to show all of us (read:myself)that maybe we better start learning the Muslim mind much more that we do and maybe stop throwing our weight around so much.

There are a couple views here:Sun Tzu,in his Art Of War wrote 2500 years ago :”In order to defeat the enemy you must become him”…that’s what we have to do…understand how the Shia mind operates from a Mid-Eastern viewpoint and not from a Western viewpoint.

Another view from my Sicilian countrymen:”Keep your friends close,your enemies closer”…while it worked in the Godfather,it cannot stand alone here and it wouldn’t be a bad idea to merge this one with Sun Tzu”s above.

Still another one: “Let them hate…so long as they fear” Cicero. Of course Cicero ended up beheaded and had his hands cut off and his tongue ripped out by Manc Anthony followers,so this one works but only to a point.

If push came to shove,I guess I would favor a merger of all three…that is learn the Muslim mind,anticipate their thought,try to peacefully co-exist,but have the sword under the tunic drawn…just in case.

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 9:13 AM
Comment #147189


“I guess I wrote this piece in order to show all of us (read:myself)that maybe we better start learning the Muslim mind much more that we do and maybe stop throwing our weight around so much.”
Excellent point. I could not agree more.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at May 11, 2006 10:23 AM
Comment #147210


“Still another one: “Let them hate…so long as they fear” Cicero. Of course Cicero ended up beheaded and had his hands cut off and his tongue ripped out by Manc Anthony followers,so this one works but only to a point.”

Doesn’t sound like that one worked at all.

Why is it that the right feels that the world should fear America?

Respect that comes from fear only assures constant turmoil. Sooner or later somebody will take a real swing at America, and even if they miss, the fear we have engendered will continue to embolden those that fear us for the next time and then the next.

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 10:58 AM
Comment #147221


That was the point about Cicero.While sheer brutality may have some short-term effect,throughout history it ultimalely fails over time.

By the way,the latin phrase “oderint dum metuant” is what Cicero said in referance to the Gauls that Rome was in the process of destroying.

Old Cicero was a typicial politician…playing both sides against the middle,until ultimately it was his undoing.He backed initially Pompey but after Ceasar kicked Pompey’s butt,he fell in line with him.However,when Ceasar was assassinated,Macr Anthony,who had no use for such a forked tongue gave hime a haircut at the shoulders.His golded tongue was nailed to the door of the senate,as were his hands.

Cicero would do much better today,I think.

Roman justice.

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 11:17 AM
Comment #147228


Seems like everybodys saying it.

“oderint dum metuant:
Let them hate so long as they fear. - Lucius Accius - Roman tragic poet (170 BC)
Believed to be a favorite saying of Caligula. Also translated as “let them hate us, so long as they fear us”. Cicero said it.
Seneca rebuked Cicero for saying it
Here is another good one by William Shakespeare, Cymbeline (Posthumus at II, v)
Yet ‘tis greater skill
In a true hate to pray they have their will;
The very devils cannot plague them better.”

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 11:31 AM
Comment #147231

Sicilianeagle: All in all, I think your draft is one that would be acceptable to most Americans.

If I could add something to it, I think I would mention that Americans also have the right not to believe in a God or a religion if we so choose.

While I think it is acceptable to mention the rift in Islams past that divided them, I would have also pointed out that there was a time when Islam was the most enlightened society in Europe and that western civilization owes Islam a profound gratitude for preserving much of our culture during the dark ages.

While I believe this letter would seem appropriate to most Americans, I think that the fundamentalist Shia controlling Iran would see it as proof that we are the great satan. They would say that we have subjugated God to the laws of Man rather than subjugate man to the laws of God.

Posted by: jlw at May 11, 2006 11:38 AM
Comment #147233

Yep, sooner or later someone may take a real swing at America. 9/11-the USS Cole-Tanzania-the first trade center bombing, those weren’t real enough? What about Somalia, Lebanon? What fear have we engendered towards a population? I see only a strong stance against despots and murderers and crackpots. Those who want to do us harm do it because of various ideologies, be they religious or ethnic or governmental, the “your government is the cause of our attacks on you” nonsense is a smoke screen. When we are now begged by the left to hurry up because we’re wasting time in the UN gotta send in the Marines to Darfur, hurry! - while simultaneously being ridiculed by the left for acting “unilaterally” in Iraq, without the consent of the world at large what are we to believe? Iraqis’ whose daily lot in life was to be tortured, maimed, raped and murdered by Saddam at his whim now fear us for saving them? But those victims in the Sudan we are now asked to deliver from evil will not fear us? The only fear we engender is toward leaders who know that we and our allies are the only thing keeping them from total control of their oppressed citizenry or region in the world or perhaps, as the Jihadist, insist the whole world. Standing up and saying no to terrorism, murder in the name of the state or some false god who needs dead unbelievers and dead believers to be a “true god?” is not bullying, acting before being acted upon is not saber rattling, it’s common sense.

Posted by: JR at May 11, 2006 11:45 AM
Comment #147240


You make my point for me.

Each one of the incedents you cite shows an escalation in the violence against us.

I asked this question in another thread;

If we were truely interested in “saving” those that were oppressed, why did we pick Iraq first?
It would seem that the most good would have been served by dealing with Darfur first.

Is the genocide being perpetrated against those folks any less heinous than that practiced by Saddam?
Or is it that they didn’t have the natural resources we crave?

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 12:04 PM
Comment #147259


Let me put a finer point on it.

If we were truely invading Iraq to “free the Iraqis”, and then turn over the “democraticly elected” government to the Iraqis and leave, why are we spending hundreds of billions of dollars constructing “enduring bases”?

Didn’t the Iraqis have bases of their own BEFORE we invaded?

This doesn’t seem to have a humanitarian ring to it.

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 12:33 PM
Comment #147261


That’s what I was trying to say but you said it well, thanks.
I’m trying, but unable, to limit display of my blantant distaste for BushII and return to a more eloquent discourse. But it is can be so very hard…

Posted by: Dave at May 11, 2006 12:35 PM
Comment #147263


Cicero’s saying is quoted by many indeed.Caligula,of course,was of the Julian line(Ceasar’s) and came years afterward,,,after Augustus’ as a matter of fact.He was the guy who had his horse elected consul.Gotta love it.

All terrific points.Sometimes if our leaders would get off their high horses maybe something Could be done.Saying that,I don’t the Iranians as far as I can throw them.
The point is that we as a nation have to understatd that mindset.They certainly understand ours.

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 12:51 PM
Comment #147266

In each case we cut and ran! No strong response means we are weak in their eyes, so why not hit us again and again. We have to make choices that are uncomfortable, to you, to me and to the world at large. Darfur is a type of region that not long ago we were admonished to leave alone, “don’t get involved in someones civil war”. I know the storm that will follow my next remarks, but here goes; The same fears we had about Iraq in 2003 we had during Clintons presidency. He was as worried about WMD and human rights abuses as Bush. Then 9/11 happened. Do we really just embed our heads in the UN morass? We tried, they dallied. We do whatever it takes to be certain we will have a country to call our own in the next 5-10-20 years. We rushed into Somalia as aid workers, trying to save a starving population. One bad engagement militarily and Clinton calls the troops home. Does that appease terror? No, but it left a starving population at the hands of a man willing to let them die rather than give up his own power. It also sent a message to the terrorist, again, hit them hard and they will run. Darfur is a tremendous tragedy, but we do what the world community asks and plunge into the UN sewer to try to end it “with diplomacy” and what? We are decried for our lack of compassion. We are told we can’t be the police force for the whole world. OK, we’ll just worry about our own safety first. We are thoughtless, selfish, whatever. Tough choices, tough times demand tough leadership. While I already know where you stand in regards to the Bush presidency, no matter how much you dislike the man his ideology or his decisions you have to admit that we have not been attacked at home since his decision to take the war to those who would destroy us. Can’t the Germans, French, Spanish or even Russia stop the carnage? No because they don’t care or won’t care, they protect their own interests first. If we simply give in to terror, how long would it be before Darfur looks like a fistfight in the school cafeteria? If we are not strong now, we will never again have the choice of helping the oppressed, we’ll be too busy dying here at home!

Posted by: JR at May 11, 2006 1:03 PM
Comment #147283


” you have to admit that we have not been attacked at home since his decision to take the war to those who would destroy us.”
No true.
We could have focused our mission on capturing Bin Laden in Afganistan, still luring insurgents to fight us in the Middle East and not here. Not killing our world opinion because the mission would have been just and we could have rid the world of the man who attacked us.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at May 11, 2006 2:12 PM
Comment #147288


You know, you’re right.

Since we started patting down blue haired grandmas and guys in $1000 suits at the airports, I feel much safer.

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 2:19 PM
Comment #147308

JR said “No strong response means we are weak in their eyes, so why not hit us again and again.”

Poppycock, JR. Only idiots would ignore the fact that we have nuclear weapons and we are the only nation on earth to have used them to settle a war. When one is confident, one has no need to run around proving it. Doing so is a sign of weakness and belies the appearance of confidence. Truman (I think it was) was right, speak softly, and carry a big stick. No one has a stick bigger than ours. And no one with any education at all in history could fail to notice we aren’t afraid to use it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 11, 2006 3:44 PM
Comment #147310


“Truman (I think it was) was right, speak softly, and carry a big stick.”

Teddy Roosevelt.

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 3:59 PM
Comment #147312


It was Teddy Rossevelt

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 4:00 PM
Comment #147313


It was Truman that had the plaque on his desk that said “The Buck Stops Here”.

Well, for Mr. Bush, the buck hasn’t even slowed down.

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 4:04 PM
Comment #147316

Truman said:

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand.

He also said:

When you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship.

Although in the second quote he neglected to say not all dictatorships are efficient. Or that not every Republican knows one when he sees one.

Posted by: Dave at May 11, 2006 4:12 PM
Comment #147320

This is my response to several things mentioned in several posts.
I thought this was a middle to the right blog. It sounds like theres a lot of tree hugging going on.
Then someone mentions Iran has control over the world with their oil. I say if tree huggers would let refineries get built and we drill for our own oil, yes the US has its own oil. Then we could have lower oil prices. Also the remark about understanding the muslim mind, Thats easy, they say they`re about peace, but they`re the most extremist, radical and violent religon on earth. Beheadings, Killing their own, treating women like dogs. No one gets to vote. Then someone says that they speak for most Ameriicans by saying most Americans wouldn`t have a problem with Sicilian Eagle`s letter. I say you don`t know most Americans, They would have a problem with their president talking such wimpy crap. Then somone mentions we should cut and run but will look weak in their eyes. We look weak because tree huggers keep making us look bad because they`re wanting to ass kiss the people who want to kill us. I noticed that someone is still focusing on capturing one man instead of defending our country. If you really think that capturing one man will stop the rest of the crazy extremist religous fanatics, It won`t. The fact is Iran is out of control and wants war on the west and all its allies, or anyone who has an opinion different from their`s. Not one mention, that if you don`t stop the nuke program, the world will make you stop. Dialog is fine if people are on the same page. I`m suprised he didn`t mention that the corrupt UN will let them do whatever they want as long as they get their kick backs and money to piss away on gambling, hookers and underaged girls. Did I forget to mention the oil for food money they skimmed. I think that if popular opinion was in favor of Bush, or his polls were higher, and he did everything right. There would still be these bitter and upset people who hate him just because hes got old school values and doesn`t have that tree hugger anything goes mentality. Thats the real reason the muslims hate us is because of all the tree hugging, ass kissing and anything goes mentality. No moral values

Posted by: John at May 11, 2006 4:24 PM
Comment #147331


“I thought this was a middle to the right blog. It sounds like theres a lot of tree hugging going on.”

Well, it would appear that you were wrong, and from the tennor of your post I am not supprised.

Wow, “tree huggers”, should I feel insulted?


Out of the millions of Muslims in America, when do you think the last beheading took place?

“Killing their own,”

Obviously you’ve never been to South Central L.A.

“treating women like dogs”

Never been to Asia either.

“No one gets to vote”

Do you assume that every culture is a Democracy?

Shall we invade every country that isn’t a Democracy?

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 4:54 PM
Comment #147341


I wish I had a nickel every time I have been called a neo-con this last year.

I am a moderate to conservative Republician…and proud of,I may add.

What I am not,however is someone who doesn’t try to gey the lay of the land prior to battle.

Here:Let me give you a pop quiz:Name the 5 pillars of Islam without resorting to a Google search.

If you cannot name them off the top of your head and understand their ramifications,I think that you need to do so prior to intelligent discourse on Islam,and the geo-politicial issue presented in the Middle East.

To defeat an enemy,you must become him…that means you must understand him…anticipate his moves,think like him and immerse yourself in his being in order to crush him.

Now,if you excuse me,I gotta boot some tree-huggers away from my Eagle’s Nest…..

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 5:30 PM
Comment #147343


Another thing.

Had the president sent a letter even a little resembling my fantasy letter,oil prices would have gone down 5 buck a barrel overnight.Today they increased by $1.74/barrel,and the market tanked 150 points instead.

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 5:33 PM
Comment #147381


I am a moderate to conservative Republician Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 05:30 PM
Now this is a much more accurate assesment of your politics than your first claim to centrism. You are center/right of people who are already pretty much to the right. When people such as yourself can recognize that theft of terminology perpetrated by Ronnie boy, then we can have an honest discussion. Posted by: Dave at May 11, 2006 8:11 PM
Comment #147382


“Now,if you excuse me,I gotta boot some tree-huggers away from my Eagle’s Nest”

You know, with out those “treehuggers”, your cousin the Bald Eagle would have already passed into extinction.

Posted by: Rocky at May 11, 2006 8:16 PM
Comment #147420

I hope he doesn’t send this letter. They already think we are pansies, no need to prove it.

Posted by: David C. at May 11, 2006 9:49 PM
Comment #147422


Actually I consider myself a bit to the right of center on a lot of issues,but does it really matter?Whether a person is left,center or right is immaterial,I think.If someone can justify their point of view,so be it.


Actually the bald eagle was declared an endangered species in 1967 under the Johnson administration.He wasn’t a tree-hugger,he was a Texan.Those terms are mutually exclusive. :)

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 9:56 PM
Comment #147447

“sicilianeagle” warned us:

Now,if you excuse me,I gotta boot some tree-huggers away from my Eagle’s Nest…

Hey, StephenColbertArchetypeWannabe, do you know who coined the phrase “Eagle’s Nest” as his Home / Castle / Place-Of-Power?

Link To The Eagle’s Nest

Still, it’s nice to see you embracing such a Typical Conservative Role-Model…

Posted by: Betty Burke at May 11, 2006 11:33 PM
Comment #147474


“Actually the bald eagle was declared an endangered species in 1967 under the Johnson administration.He wasn’t a tree-hugger,he was a Texan.Those terms are mutually exclusive.”

Are you aware that hunters are one of the largest single group of environmentalists?
Do you have any idea how many hunters there are in Texas?
(And I don’t mean the Dick Cheney type)

Posted by: Rocky at May 12, 2006 12:48 AM
Comment #147498

Betty Burke fails to mention that ol’Hitler (Eagle’s Nest Reference) was a socialist. All of the Nazi’s were socalists and a plank in their platform was nationalized healthcare (now where have we heard that mentioned lately?), and he was hardly the first to use “Eagle’s Nest as reference to his home. More than a few german princes during the middle ages “coined” the phrase, there are also more than few “eagle’s nests to be had in Italy, dating back to roman times. Typical ignorant liberal, thinking you are scoring cheap points while merely demonstrating a lack of historical knowledge. Do you always have to demonstrate for the whole world an unwholesome stereotype? History does begin before the moment of our births, not that with the American school system anyone would know that.

Posted by: HardHatHarry at May 12, 2006 2:08 AM
Comment #147534

Talk about “ignorant” and “lack of historical knowledge!”

To call the Nazis “socialists” because they incorporated a Word into their party name is like calling North Korea a Democratic Republic run by The People!

After all, it is the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.”

So where does that leave your argument, Mr. Mad Hatter?

You cannot have it both ways: either What’s In A Name means that whatever someone calls their Dictatorship is what is actually is - or it is entirely irrelevant what tyrants choose to call their regimes.

Which is it? If the Latter is true, your rebuttal loses all meaning and falls apart; if the Former is true, you have shown yourself to be undiscerning and ignorant. So please, do tell: which is the case?

I’m waiting…

Posted by: Betty Burke at May 12, 2006 3:56 AM
Comment #147541

Regardless of the content of the letter it is an insult and irresponsible for the President not reply diplomatically to this first formal communication in two decades. What form of diplomancy is that?

Posted by: Hermes Trismegistes at May 12, 2006 4:35 AM
Comment #147545

Betty Burke

Now now.

MY Eagle’s Nest is named after the famed snack bar at Boston College…you know..the Boston College Eagles….where you can get a delicious hamburger and beer while watching BC beat up on SEC foes.

Historicially,the Roman battle standard was an Eagle too,Betty.

Plus,those little green pieces of paper in your wallet have eagles on them.if you so aghast at eagles my suggestion would be to place them all in an envelop (may as well check your bank too) and send them all to be for proper disposal. :)

Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 12, 2006 6:46 AM
Comment #147546

Betty Burke

err…..that’s send them to “me”….I was chuckling so hard that a tear was in my eye..such is the Eagle’s wit….

Yes I agree about Texas hunters…and hunters as a gruop too….

Posted by: at May 12, 2006 6:50 AM
Comment #147631


Whether a person is left,center or right is immaterial,I think.If someone can justify their point of view,so be it.
Posted by: sicilianeagle at May 11, 2006 09:56 PM
Where you are in the political specturm makes all the difference, and I will provide three examples:
I am social-left. I think giving women the right to reproductive choice is justified. The religious right does not.
I am fiscal-right. I think deficit spending and relying on the national debt to sustain the economy while promoting tax cuts is awful fiscal policy and not justified. Trickle-downers think it is.
I am an American. I think the bill of rights, in this case the right to privacy, are key elements in maintaining what we view as the freedoms for which we are being called to fight. I do not think the potential and marginal protections we get from domestic spying are even remotely justified. While many rightwingers do.

So, where we are in the spectrum determines what is “justified” Trying to claim “middle ground” despite your significantly right leaning beliefs is simply tactical, not accurate.

Posted by: Dave at May 12, 2006 12:29 PM
Comment #147686

You all made me go look it up. Theodore Roosevelt. Right. Exact quote of Roosevelt was: “I have always been fond of the West African proverb: ‘Speak softly and carry a big stick, you will go far’. “

Thanks for the correction. I knew my memory was foggy on that quote, which is why I qualified it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 12, 2006 3:15 PM
Comment #147719

“sicilianeagle” posted:

… if you so aghast at eagles …

Actually, I love Eagles… (And I was merely Poking you for your Colbert-like Bombast and Pomposity with the “Eagles Nest” thing - quite obvious, I thought; and obviously you at least, took it that way: my respect for that.)

As a reward, here’s the Best Thing I have seen on Eagles - ever:


Posted by: Betty Burke at May 12, 2006 5:02 PM
Post a comment