Milosevic

[elijahcraig]

I am most disturbed by the hightened and growing support of this man. Especially on Socialist Front. I do not support this man; I have a friend who used to live there (during the committed war crimes), who I trust more than a few 14 or 12 year olds who listen to Rage Against the Machine and saw an unreliable article or whatnot on some bias site.

I have also noticed, alongside the support of Milosevic, many supporting the former Communist dictator of Romania.

What are your thoughts on these things?

[Vinny Rafarino]

I'm sorry but anyone who supports Milosevic is not thinking clearly.

Let's not forget that there have been other useless leaders like Milosevic that sang the red flag for a spell and then subsequentially proved by their actions that they are simple crack-pots.

[Saint-Just]

You've always been against Milosevic, I've always been for him.

Although I do take a balanced stance. What I would suggest is that the question of war crimes is a cloudy one. There are certainly a lot of false accusations from the U.S. and Germany about him and the reasons for U.S. intervention were not justified.

I've never heard anything bad at all about Ceaucescu though.

[monkeydust]

Chairman Mao:

The issue of War crimes may indeed be 'cloudy' there may also, and probably are many false accusations and exaggerations of atrocities.

Yet would you deny that Milosevic is at least in part responsible for the unneccesary deaths of great number of people? Or repsonsible any form of Islamic persecution?

Do you really believe he was ustified in his actions?

Don't think I'm criticising you here, I'm merely interested to know why you are 'for' him.

[LuZhiming]

Although I do take a balanced stance. What I would suggest is that the question of war crimes is a cloudy one. There are certainly a lot of false accusations from the U.S. and Germany about him and the reasons for U.S. intervention were not justified.

Human Rights reports mentioned instances of Milosevic massacering about two thousand people. The amount of people that were forced to flee, was much larger. Now of course, after the U.S. bombing which directly was ruthless enough, the atrocities really picked up. Robert Fisk is no fan of U.S. policy, and he reported an instance where Milosevic purposely used civillians and human shields and put tanks into civillian areas. The evidence for Milosevic is simply overwhelming.


I've never heard anything bad at all about Ceaucescu though.

:huh: Really? The amount of evidence for Ceaucescu's atrocities is simply anywhere. Virtually any international or Romainian Human Rights group had very revealing reports about Ceaucescu's bruality. One person who was reporting on atrocities in Nicarauga under Somoza, actually compared the two dictators in terms of cruelty. Ceaucescu has always been well known for using very violent methods of torture. This guy was extremely cruel. He was very much like the Somoza's of Nicaragua or Mobutu of Zaire.

[elijahcraig]

Really? The amount of evidence for Ceaucescu's atrocities is simply anywhere. Virtually any international or Romainian Human Rights group had very revealing reports about Ceaucescu's bruality. One person who was reporting on atrocities in Nicarauga under Somoza, actually compared the two dictators in terms of cruelty. Ceaucescu has always been well known for using very violent methods of torture. This guy was extremely cruel. He was very much like the Somoza's of Nicaragua or Mobutu of Zaire.


Plus the fact that he lived in a palace while many people starved.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I am most disturbed by the hightened and growing support of this man. Especially on Socialist Front. I do not support this man; I have a friend who used to live there (during the committed war crimes), who I trust more than a few 14 or 12 year olds who listen to Rage Against the Machine and saw an unreliable article or whatnot on some bias site.

I have also noticed, alongside the support of Milosevic, many supporting the former Communist dictator of Romania.

What are your thoughts on these things?



I think its wrong for you to just put people in groups like this.I think I am decently studied on the subject of Yugoslavia.I have read three books on the subject,two being from the main western view point and the other being from the pro-Yugoslavia,anti-Nato war crimes view point.However,as much as RAF or anyone else here hates Milosevic I respect them for taking a more non-dogmatic attitude to the subject.Elijah,however,has the testimony of one friend,and thats all he has as evidence,thats how learned he is on the subject.And he refuses to learn more.As Mao put it,"Dogma is as useful as bullshit".

[elijahcraig]

I think its wrong for you to just put people in groups like this.I think I am decently studied on the subject of Yugoslavia.I have read three books on the subject,two being from the main western view point and the other being from the pro-Yugoslavia,anti-Nato war crimes view point.However,as much as RAF or anyone else here hates Milosevic I respect them for taking a more non-dogmatic attitude to the subject.Elijah,however,has the testimony of one friend,and thats all he has as evidence,thats how learned he is on the subject.And he refuses to learn more.As Mao put it,"Dogma is as useful as bullshit".

I'm not sure what you mean by "dogma". It is usually used in reference to an ideology, which I am not using in viewing Milosevic.

If you knew the man I do, who was their amidst the atrocities, you would not base your views on any other "information".

I also see you have based your support of the Romanian dictator on a poll in which 25% of Romanians liked Romania better when he was in power.

To base any opinion on a poll which is taken of a select few, and then has a minority viewpoint, is just stupid.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I'm not sure what you mean by "dogma". It is usually used in reference to an ideology, which I am not using in viewing Milosevic.



No.I think you have a dogmatic attitude and outlook on the situation.



If you knew the man I do, who was their amidst the atrocities, you would not base your views on any other "information".



The Serbs no doubtly committed atrocities.No one completly denies this.But you can't neccasserily say this is Milosevic's fault,and you also can't believe the way they have been demonized in the press.Especially about the civil war there.Its ridiculous how they act like the Serbs committed millions of atrocities,and the Croations And Muslims,who were also fighting,were completly innocent.



I also see you have based your support of the Romanian dictator on a poll in which 25% of Romanians liked Romania better when he was in power.

To base any opinion on a poll which is taken of a select few, and then has a minority viewpoint, is just stupid.


You don't know anything about this.I will PM you with some info.

[elijahcraig]

No.I think you have a dogmatic attitude and outlook on the situation.

If you mean “Is my mind made up?”—yes, it is: I don’t usually call my friends liars.


The Serbs no doubtly committed atrocities.No one completly denies this.But you can't neccasserily say this is Milosevic's fault,and you also can't believe the way they have been demonized in the press.Especially about the civil war there.Its ridiculous how they act like the Serbs committed millions of atrocities,and the Croations And Muslims,who were also fighting,were completly innocent.

I’m not saying it is black and white. But to act as if Milosevic is a hero of oppressed peoples is just insane.


You don't anything about this.I will PM you with some info.

Right…

[Comrade Ceausescu]

If you mean “Is my mind made up?”—yes, it is: I don’t usually call my friends liars.

I am not calling you're friend a total liar.But I still think that its wrong to base you're whole opinoin on this,without doing further reasearch.

[Y2A]

I think it is obvious that his support is part of an international conspiracy backed by evil cannibalistic capitalists of which includes Mel Gibson, Karl Rove, the Skull and Bones society, Wall Street, The KGB, Lee Harvey Oswald, aliens from mars that landed in Roswell, New Mexico which was covered up by the evil totalitarian capitalist secret police, and halliburton. Anyone who denies this has been brainwashed by evil capitalist propaganda.

[Guest1]

Shutup Y2A

As for people who support Milosovic and Ceausescu, I was once as excited about Syrian and Iraqi "Socialism" as they are now about these guys.

I once saw Hussein and Assad as champions of Arab "Socialism".

Then I realized they were nothing but nationalist, tyrannical fucks.

Eventually, they'll discover this about their nationalist heroes too.

[__ca va?]

I live in a country (Hungary) which has a border with Romania Serbia and Croatia also. I can tell you Milosevic was not a hero but an asshole: he wanted to massacre croatians because they declared independence from Yugoslavia and bosnian moslimes because of their religion. This racist animal turned the Balkans into an inferno. Before the collapse of communism Yugoslavia was the freest and most prosperous country in the eastern block. Some 3 years ago I went on holiday to Croatia and everywhere in the villages and the cities I found so many destroyed houses! Don't tell me Milosevic was an angel! Many people here in Hungary are convinced thet if we didn't enter nato in 1999 he would have attacked us also, like the albanians in kosovo. I hope this ethnic cleaner will be punished well! How could anyone declare a person like him a hero? Haven't you heard about the massacres at Srebrenica?

Ceaucescu is his pair! He demolished a whole district in Bucharest to build his palace! Not everything that the U.S. press tells is a lie! Don't think that because they tell something the opposite is true!

[mia wallace]

i'm glad that at liest a part of you think miloševiæ isn't a saint.
miloševiæ surely isn&#39;t inocent. he&#39;s a bustard and because of him lots of people died inclouding some of my beloved ones. <_<
maybe he didn&#39;t done all the things but he did a great part of them. croatia wanted to become indepandet cause great part of the money went to beograd, so croats lived badly, while the serbs were having a good time with the money croats earn (of course there were some more reasons, but this is the one that bothered people the most). miloševiæ defenitely didn&#39;t started the war because he thought it would be for greater good or i don&#39;t know what, he simply needed croatia; in that way he&#39;d have workers, extra money and the sea. the reasons were quite selfish.
and now - croatia is recovering, but there is still chaos in quite in few places places.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 27 2004, 07:50 AM
Shutup Y2A
They got to you to eh? You&#39;ve been brainwashed by propaganda, there is no hope for you now.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I live in a country (Hungary) which has a border with Romania Serbia and Croatia also. I can tell you Milosevic was not a hero but an asshole: he wanted to massacre croatians because they declared independence from Yugoslavia and bosnian moslimes because of their religion. This racist animal turned the Balkans into an inferno. Before the collapse of communism Yugoslavia was the freest and most prosperous country in the eastern block. Some 3 years ago I went on holiday to Croatia and everywhere in the villages and the cities I found so many destroyed houses&#33; Don&#39;t tell me Milosevic was an angel&#33; Many people here in Hungary are convinced thet if we didn&#39;t enter nato in 1999 he would have attacked us also, like the albanians in kosovo. I hope this ethnic cleaner will be punished well&#33; How could anyone declare a person like him a hero? Haven&#39;t you heard about the massacres at Srebrenica?

Ceaucescu is his pair&#33; He demolished a whole district in Bucharest to build his palace&#33; Not everything that the U.S. press tells is a lie&#33; Don&#39;t think that because they tell something the opposite is true&#33;

Heh.I have heard all the lies about Milosevic you speak of.Yet people like you refuse to look at the other side of things.And about Ceausescu,"His palace"?It was going to be a government building-it is today.He demolished a whole district,yes,a district that was warn down.He built new apartments with better living standards for the people who lived there.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 27 2004, 09:43 PM

I live in a country (Hungary) which has a border with Romania Serbia and Croatia also. I can tell you Milosevic was not a hero but an asshole: he wanted to massacre croatians because they declared independence from Yugoslavia and bosnian moslimes because of their religion. This racist animal turned the Balkans into an inferno. Before the collapse of communism Yugoslavia was the freest and most prosperous country in the eastern block. Some 3 years ago I went on holiday to Croatia and everywhere in the villages and the cities I found so many destroyed houses&#33; Don&#39;t tell me Milosevic was an angel&#33; Many people here in Hungary are convinced thet if we didn&#39;t enter nato in 1999 he would have attacked us also, like the albanians in kosovo. I hope this ethnic cleaner will be punished well&#33; How could anyone declare a person like him a hero? Haven&#39;t you heard about the massacres at Srebrenica?

Ceaucescu is his pair&#33; He demolished a whole district in Bucharest to build his palace&#33; Not everything that the U.S. press tells is a lie&#33; Don&#39;t think that because they tell something the opposite is true&#33;

Heh.I have heard all the lies about Milosevic you speak of.Yet people like you refuse to look at the other side of things.And about Ceausescu,"His palace"?It was going to be a government building-it is today.He demolished a whole district,yes,a district that was warn down.He built new apartments with better living standards for the people who lived there.
Saddam bettered the life of the Sunni Muslims, as did Hitler to the Germans.

[Soviet power supreme]

I do not support the man but I think like Chairman Mao said there are false accusations about Milosevic in Haag&#39;s trial.NO.Im not saying that he nor serb troops are "saints".

I have heard that lots of Romanians miss the sosialistic era.Could you Comrade Ceaucescu give some statistics,numbers,figures on this?

[Y2A]

The economy was devestated after the fall of the Soviet Union, no one really denies that.

[Politrickian]

Originally posted by mia [email protected] 27 2004, 10:43 AM
croatia wanted to become indepandet cause great part of the money went to beograd, so croats lived badly, while the serbs were having a good time with the money croats earn (of course there were some more reasons, but this is the one that bothered people the most).
The accusation about the money being sent to beograd is probably one big fat lie used by Tudjman and the likes to get some support for the nationalist cause. Living conditions in Croatia weren&#39;t much different from those in Serbia.

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 09:59 PM
Saddam bettered the life of the Sunni Muslims, as did Hitler to the Germans.
Actually, whenever people didn&#39;t speak out against him, Saddam bettered the lives of all Iraqi&#39;s. Not that I&#39;m defending him, but this discrimination of Saddam&#39;s should not be exagerated. Sunni Muslims weren&#39;t treated much differently, they were just more willing to be collaborators.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by LuZhiming+Feb 27 2004, 10:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LuZhiming @ Feb 27 2004, 10:20 PM)
[email protected] 27 2004, 09:59 PM
Saddam bettered the life of the Sunni Muslims, as did Hitler to the Germans.
Actually, whenever people didn&#39;t speak out against him, Saddam bettered the lives of all Iraqi&#39;s. Not that I&#39;m defending him, but this discrimination of Saddam&#39;s should not be exagerated. Sunni Muslims weren&#39;t treated much differently, they were just more willing to be collaborators. [/b]
It was in response to the post made by CC saying that Milosevic bettered the lives of the Serbs.

[mia wallace]

Originally posted by Politrickian+Feb 27 2004, 11:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Politrickian @ Feb 27 2004, 11:12 PM)
mia [email protected] 27 2004, 10:43 AM
croatia wanted to become indepandet cause great part of the money went to beograd, so croats lived badly, while the serbs were having a good time with the money croats earn (of course there were some more reasons, but this is the one that bothered people the most).
The accusation about the money being sent to beograd is probably one big fat lie used by Tudjman and the likes to get some support for the nationalist cause. Living conditions in Croatia weren&#39;t much different from those in Serbia. [/b]
it isn&#39;t a big fat lie. it may not be true in whole, but a part surely is. i was told bout that by my parents, and they know what the conditions were like. i personally don&#39;t fancy tuðman, nor do my parents. he was alright in the begining but later he did some geally shitty stuff only cuz of money and if he didn&#39;t died when he did, the state would probably be ruined by now.
anyway, the point was that milosevic has a really bad side, he not only good.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

It was in response to the post made by CC saying that Milosevic bettered the lives of the Serbs.

I was talking about Ceausescu originally.Though I do think the same about Milosevic.


I have heard that lots of Romanians miss the sosialistic era.Could you Comrade Ceaucescu give some statistics,numbers,figures on this?

Yes,I will PM you with some if you like.

[__ca va?]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 27 2004, 10:43 PM
Heh.I have heard all the lies about Milosevic you speak of.Yet people like you refuse to look at the other side of things.And about Ceausescu,"His palace"?It was going to be a government building-it is today.He demolished a whole district,yes,a district that was warn down.He built new apartments with better living standards for the people who lived there.
Heh. I think it is you who are not informed well. I think I&#39;ll have to tell you the story of the Romanian revolution. In 1989 "communist" regimes were overthrown in whole Eastern-Europe, except of Romania. He was isolated from both western and eastern countries. The revolution began when the government wanted to deport the reformed hungarian pastor of Temesoara, László Tõkés, who was exlaiming against the opression. Many people gathered together to protest and soon this became a demonstration against the government. This encouraged other people to raise a protest against the Ceausescu-regime.
In 10 days time, on the 25th of december he and his wife were caught and executed after a short trial.
Haven&#39;t you ever asked of yourself why this happened if the people had been so happy?
Yes, he demolished run-down rural buildings (he wanted to destroy around 5000 villages in Transsylvania and other parts of Romania) and he surely replaced them... with run-down barracks (his idea was to resettle these people in cities). Well, he is your hero.. even the army and the Securitate culdn&#39;t save him from his people who "loved him so". In the 60&#39;s ans 70&#39;s Romania had a good agriculture and a good economy. Since he became the "conducator" Romania was ruined.
And what kind of other side are you talking about related to Milosevic? That croats also killed serbs? It&#39;s easy to massacre after your relatives/friends were shot into a common grave. The Slovenians for example didn&#39;t kill Serbs because they hadn&#39;t killed them.

[Politrickian]

Originally posted by mia wallace+Feb 27 2004, 11:42 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mia wallace @ Feb 27 2004, 11:42 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 11:12 PM

mia [email protected] 27 2004, 10:43 AM
croatia wanted to become indepandet cause great part of the money went to beograd, so croats lived badly, while the serbs were having a good time with the money croats earn (of course there were some more reasons, but this is the one that bothered people the most).
The accusation about the money being sent to beograd is probably one big fat lie used by Tudjman and the likes to get some support for the nationalist cause. Living conditions in Croatia weren&#39;t much different from those in Serbia.
it isn&#39;t a big fat lie. it may not be true in whole, but a part surely is. i was told bout that by my parents, and they know what the conditions were like. i personally don&#39;t fancy tuðman, nor do my parents. he was alright in the begining but later he did some geally shitty stuff only cuz of money and if he didn&#39;t died when he did, the state would probably be ruined by now.
anyway, the point was that milosevic has a really bad side, he not only good. [/b]
My parents lived in Croatia, and we fled from there after the war.

My dad worked in the military and he was stationed all around the country so he saw the differences with his own eyes.

Customs were different, Language too sometimes, but the economical situation was never really different, of course minor differences, but never too big.

The big thing with this whole stuff is that I disagree about(which is the popular opinion among many croats) is that all their money was sent to the serbs, it was sent to the guys in charge so they could have nice villa&#39;s in the country side.

And of course Milosevic has a bad side, under his command the Yugoslavian military murdered a whole lot of people, and it&#39;s impossible to convince me that he didn&#39;t have the knowledge about them, if not the power to stop the murders from happening.

[mia wallace]

Originally posted by Politrickian+Feb 28 2004, 11:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Politrickian @ Feb 28 2004, 11:29 AM)
Originally posted by mia [email protected] 27 2004, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 11:12 PM

mia [email protected] 27 2004, 10:43 AM
croatia wanted to become indepandet cause great part of the money went to beograd, so croats lived badly, while the serbs were having a good time with the money croats earn (of course there were some more reasons, but this is the one that bothered people the most).
The accusation about the money being sent to beograd is probably one big fat lie used by Tudjman and the likes to get some support for the nationalist cause. Living conditions in Croatia weren&#39;t much different from those in Serbia.
it isn&#39;t a big fat lie. it may not be true in whole, but a part surely is. i was told bout that by my parents, and they know what the conditions were like. i personally don&#39;t fancy tuðman, nor do my parents. he was alright in the begining but later he did some geally shitty stuff only cuz of money and if he didn&#39;t died when he did, the state would probably be ruined by now.
anyway, the point was that milosevic has a really bad side, he not only good.
My parents lived in Croatia, and we fled from there after the war.

My dad worked in the military and he was stationed all around the country so he saw the differences with his own eyes.

Customs were different, Language too sometimes, but the economical situation was never really different, of course minor differences, but never too big.

The big thing with this whole stuff is that I disagree about(which is the popular opinion among many croats) is that all their money was sent to the serbs, it was sent to the guys in charge so they could have nice villa&#39;s in the country side.

And of course Milosevic has a bad side, under his command the Yugoslavian military murdered a whole lot of people, and it&#39;s impossible to convince me that he didn&#39;t have the knowledge about them, if not the power to stop the murders from happening. [/b]
i didn&#39;t know that it was the same everywhere... tnx for that ;)
well, i knew that most of the many was given to the guys in charge but i thought the life in serbia was better, that it all was a kind of centralization. :ph34r:

[Soviet power supreme]

Yes,I will PM you with some if you like.

Yes please.

And what I know that Milosevic is in Haag because he is blamed for the Racak Massacre.But I have read that many sources claim that there is no consensus about who is resbonsible of Racak massacre.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 10:45 PM
Chairman Mao:

The issue of War crimes may indeed be &#39;cloudy&#39; there may also, and probably are many false accusations and exaggerations of atrocities.

Yet would you deny that Milosevic is at least in part responsible for the unneccesary deaths of great number of people? Or repsonsible any form of Islamic persecution?

Do you really believe he was ustified in his actions?

Don&#39;t think I&#39;m criticising you here, I&#39;m merely interested to know why you are &#39;for&#39; him.
I wouldn&#39;t deny it, but I would strongly question it and from what I know I believe there is a good chance he is innocent. What happened was clearly not a case of mass ethnic cleansing. I would not defend Milosevic because I thought what he was accused of doing was actually the correct thing to do, I do not hold the same kind of mentality that Milosevic is accused of possessing.

As I said above, and from looking at his trial I believe that many of the acts committed may not necessairly have been the responsibility of Milosevic and indeed that he would condemn certain things that happened.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Heh. I think it is you who are not informed well. I think I&#39;ll have to tell you the story of the Romanian revolution. In 1989 "communist" regimes were overthrown in whole Eastern-Europe, except of Romania. He was isolated from both western and eastern countries. The revolution began when the government wanted to deport the reformed hungarian pastor of Temesoara, László Tõkés, who was exlaiming against the opression. Many people gathered together to protest and soon this became a demonstration against the government. This encouraged other people to raise a protest against the Ceausescu-regime.
In 10 days time, on the 25th of december he and his wife were caught and executed after a short trial.
Haven&#39;t you ever asked of yourself why this happened if the people had been so happy?
Yes, he demolished run-down rural buildings (he wanted to destroy around 5000 villages in Transsylvania and other parts of Romania) and he surely replaced them... with run-down barracks (his idea was to resettle these people in cities). Well, he is your hero.. even the army and the Securitate culdn&#39;t save him from his people who "loved him so". In the 60&#39;s ans 70&#39;s Romania had a good agriculture and a good economy. Since he became the "conducator" Romania was ruined.
And what kind of other side are you talking about related to Milosevic? That croats also killed serbs? It&#39;s easy to massacre after your relatives/friends were shot into a common grave. The Slovenians for example didn&#39;t kill Serbs because they hadn&#39;t killed them.


Not worth my time to respond to this.

[__ca va?]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 1 2004, 12:57 AM
Not worth my time to respond to this.
Yeah, of course... :P

[mia wallace]

Originally posted by __ca [email protected] 28 2004, 09:36 AM
Heh. I think it is you who are not informed well. I think I&#39;ll have to tell you the story of the Romanian revolution. In 1989 "communist" regimes were overthrown in whole Eastern-Europe, except of Romania. He was isolated from both western and eastern countries. The revolution began when the government wanted to deport the reformed hungarian pastor of Temesoara, László Tõkés, who was exlaiming against the opression. Many people gathered together to protest and soon this became a demonstration against the government. This encouraged other people to raise a protest against the Ceausescu-regime.
In 10 days time, on the 25th of december he and his wife were caught and executed after a short trial.
Haven&#39;t you ever asked of yourself why this happened if the people had been so happy?
Yes, he demolished run-down rural buildings (he wanted to destroy around 5000 villages in Transsylvania and other parts of Romania) and he surely replaced them... with run-down barracks (his idea was to resettle these people in cities). Well, he is your hero.. even the army and the Securitate culdn&#39;t save him from his people who "loved him so". In the 60&#39;s ans 70&#39;s Romania had a good agriculture and a good economy. Since he became the "conducator" Romania was ruined.
And what kind of other side are you talking about related to Milosevic? That croats also killed serbs? It&#39;s easy to massacre after your relatives/friends were shot into a common grave. The Slovenians for example didn&#39;t kill Serbs because they hadn&#39;t killed them.
i&#39;ve just read what _ca va? had written and i think he really has the point. if the serbs&#39;d acted differently, croats woudn&#39;t kill those they have.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Yeah, of course


I have responded to about 1000 posts exactly like yours at this and other forums.Its not in my interestes to respond to it.Why?Because when you have less then an hour on the computer a day,you have to prioritize.