o2 sensor location

From : therebel

Q: stephen harding wrote bush never claimed a tie between iraq and 9/11. right ... he did say there was a link between iraq and al qaeda. right ... who was behind 9/11 round and round we go ... craig c. .

Replies:

From : therebel

please explain its under wty let the dealer fix it i think he means that it is part of the emission system and is probably still under the emission warranty. roy .

From : roy

on thu 4 jan 2007 114403 -0500 roy roy@home.net wrote a couple of days ago there was talk about how we should or shouldnt be in iraq. anyway somebody and i i apologize cause i dont remember who were going back and forth about the amount of deaths that was visited upon the civilians by saddam. as to why we should stop him. i was watching discovery about two nuns who were put on trial for crimes against humanity in belgium for their actions in rwanda. a few things jumped out. evidence showed that the catholic church tried to derail the whole trial. but heres the part that got me that makes saddam a rank rookie when it came to mass murder. this was one tribe against another ethnic cleansing in the fast lane. in a period of 90 days over 1 million members of the tutsi were killed. documentation showed that in one 8 hour period over 65000 were killed. bear in mind that most of this was done mostly with machetes not machine guns. that is unbelievable. i read some years ago that there was a war going on but wasnt aware of this. im friggn well amazed at the numbers! these figures are crazy. no outside action by the un by the us nobody. actually the un pulled out then after a period of time talked about going back. this im sure doesnt matter in our discussions but the figures just blew me away. roy theyre not white so we look the other way. its really no different in our cities. beekeep .

From : tom lawrence

fuller rath wrote no the way it works moron is since you are making the claim you show the proof. jesus; you mouth breathers all have acute cranial rectitus! you like so many of your ilk will never define what proof is. you just rant with your rhetoric. in a court the burden of proof is on the accuser. in this case it was john edwards. he convinced a jury that had no medical background whatsoever. he never proved anything to the medical industry of his claims. ill side with the medical industry rather than a bunch of liberal scum lawyers who had only money on their minds and not anyones health. http//washingtontimes.com/national/20040816-011234-1949r.htm in 2003 the american academy of pediatrics and the american college of obstetricians and gynecologists published a joint study that cast serious doubt on whether events at childbirth cause cerebral palsy. the vast majority of cerebral palsy cases originate long before childbirth according to the study. http//www.cns.com/viewpolitics.asppage=%5cpolitics%5carchive%5c200401%5cpol20040120a.html the cause of cerebral palsy has been debated since the 19th century. some medical studies dating back to at least the 1980s asserted that doctors could do very little to cause cerebral palsy during the birthing process. two new studies in 2003 further undermined the scientific premise of the high profile court cases that helped edwards become a multi-millionaire and finance his own successful campaign for the u.s. senate. .

From : sqdancerlynn

xxxx .