Kevin Shasteen

Mike, The issue isnt what I think nor what you think. What either of us think is completely immaterial. What matters is "What did happen?" Only when you can offer a forum where the NYFD survivors can speak openly w/out threat of jail or loss of job will we then be able to form an educated opinion. As of now they, the NYFD survivors can not speak openly due to the Gag Order forced upon them. You still have not commented on how Commander Carr was able to predict how WWIII would begin and be played out way back in the early 1950's...back when the only "Enemy" of America was Communism. Which is interesting that he would make such a comment because his info was obtained from copying a letter Albert Pike wrote back in the 1800's....where he outlined not just how WWIII would begin but also how the previous WWI and WWII would play out & their purposes. If these "wars" occur on their own accord then how was it that not only Albert Pike was able to comment on them back in the 1800's and if Albert Pike's assumed letters were fraudulent - What about Commander Carr's books where he posted said info back in the 1950's....long before the Arab Terrorists connection was even on the radar screen? Hmmm? Please explain this because I would love for someone to rationilize these issues away. I guess those who are prone to asking questions for real answers will continue asking questions while those who arent interested in asking questions for real answers will accept the status quo.. BTW: I do believe those that once believed the world was flat made up a majority...and as my history has proved - they were wrong. Let us also not forger Einstein's theory of relativity. When Einstein was preparing to go public w/said theory the "Respected & Majority" of physicist got together and produced a book, "1000 Reasons Why Einstein is Wrong"...some 100 or so respected physicist signed the book. When Eisnstein did go public with his theory, his speach was entitled, "Why 100 Physicist are Wrong"..something like that - I dont have the source handy so I paraphrased here. So just because you believe what you believe - and said belief may be the majority - doesn not mean you are right. FWIW: I do believe the terrorist threat is real and that sleeper cells are here. I have been telling people this for the last 10 years. Imagine if you can the response your giving me now for my beliefs: they paled in comparison to the responses I got 10 years ago when I was telling people about said sleeper cells. The responses I always got were, "Well if that is so why arent we hearing about this on TV?" People are so dumbed down they cant think for themselves unless some puppet on a string, on some late night news program, tells them it is so! I will always question what I am hearing regardless if it is from the left, middle, or right. Regardless of who is behind the terrorism is academic and in the end who knows how much it will really matter. What matters is that our way of life is about to get really ugly. This is the slippery slope to which we are not going to return from. Again, we are danged if we do nothing - things will just get worse, and we are danged if we do what we have to do.. I've said enough - so I will quit from here on out. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Well its not the price of freedom...its the price of social, technical, commercial advancement. But this is the slippery slope we face. We are danged if we do nothing and we are danged (privacy changes forever) if we do what we have to do. Johnc...Forgive me for pulling your chain. I do read both sides of an issue and only posted for the sole purpose of creating open dialogue: and to get the point across that decisions (opinions) made w/out full disclosure should be hightly suspect. I'm not for envasion of one's privacy - but as others have said already, with the advent of technology: what else can you do? This is the extremely tantamountingly dangerous slippery slope to which we, IMHO, will not return. For those that believe we will return do you honestly believe that technology is going to reverse itself and the terrorist, regardless of whom you believe they are, will simply apologize and go home? Of course not. America is transitioning into a new horizon. The old ideological freedoms once enjoyed are being sold down the river in exchange for safety and the 9/11 event was the spark that lit the fire. It is going to be very interesting how it will all play out after it is all said and done. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Perhaps you should re-listen to that Nova program. His words were, "We CHOSE to pull the building"...not "We WILL pull the building once the thing cools off". My opinion, yes I know it differs from others - but is still my opinion. BTW, I can post a dozen links to each one of your links stating the contrary to which you will then post a dozen links to counter my links - so the links from individuals that didnt have 1st hand knowledge, yet rely on heresay, dont mean that much to me. I'm only interested in those with 1st hand knowledge, like the NYC firemen...oh wait - they were forced to sign gag orders preventing them from speaking openly...I'm sure that was for the name sake of National Security and had nothing to do with the FACT they were claiming, those that did make it out alive, they had heard dozens of secondary explosions seconds prior to the building coming down. I'm sure the NYF know the difference between beams snapping loose and explosions...so why not let them speak? And no - I dont want links I would like some commen since responses. The bottom line is we all have our opinions and these opinions will differ. I will listen to all sides - but if one side is kept from me regardless of the reason then I am highly suspect. The only Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Ditto that, Pete, I never said I or all of us needed "Complete Disclosure". The point I was making is w/out said complete disclosure - you do not have the comlete story. As a result you can not make a correct assumption w/o said full disclosure - therefore, your opinion is limited (compromised) and if you blindly accept this compromise w/o questioning it then you are subject to being manipulated regardless of how blindly patriotic your opinion may be. That is all I've been trying to say. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

I do believe that police and court rooms everyday dismiss unsubstantiated allegations based on unproven facts or close files that cant be concluded because of a lack of facts. So I would argue that you do not have to go w/what you know...unless what you know is "COMPLETE" or complete enough. I would agree that something can be proven w/out a doubt and still not have all the facts...yet look at this thread, Do you honestly believe that the issues we have discussed are beyond a shadow of doubt? Hardly. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

John, Your are missing the point. The point isnt if you can prove something beyond an assumption or not. The issue is that your thinking involves an assumption that leads to your decision as "being correct". I am not claiming that there is no right or wrong. I am not being philosophical. I am attempting to proclaim that when full disclosure is not given you cant simply make a conclusion w/the compromised-condensed evidence...instead you should cry and scream "FOUL" and demand full disclosure...otherwise you can not reach the "correct conclusion". I am claiming that when you use an assumption to reach a conclusion that is not substantiated - then it is not necessarily correct: what it is is a justification that because I cant come up with any other answer, and I dont have access to full disclosure - well then, doe-ti doe-ti do, I guess I have to accept this as my aswer and therefor this answer must be the correct one (which isnt always correct). Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Regarding the debt..dont simply look at the Federal Debt - look at the entire picture. I found an interesting story that takes the bigger picture into mind: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/12/MNG2S8NO121.DTL This is the link but it doesnt appear to work..so hear is the article -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Speeches ignore impending U.S. debt disaster No mention of fiscal gap estimated as high as $72 trillion Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau Sunday, September 12, 2004 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Washington -- The first of the 77 million-strong Baby Boom generation will begin to retire in just four years. The economic consequences of this fact -- as scary as they are foreseeable -- are all but ignored by President Bush and Democratic challenger John Kerry, who discuss just about everything but the biggest fiscal challenge of modern times. Yet whoever wins the 2004 race will become the first U.S. president to confront what sober-minded experts across the political spectrum describe as an impending "fiscal catastrophe" lying right around the corner. Astronomical federal debt, coming due as the Baby Boom generation collects Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, is enormous enough to swamp the promises both candidates are making to voters, whether for tax cuts, health care, 40,000 more troops or anything else. "Chilling" is the word U.S. Comptroller General David Walker uses to describe the budget outlook. "The long-term budget projections are just horrifying," added Leonard Burman, co-director of tax policy for the Urban Institute. "I've got four children and it really disturbs me. I just think it's irresponsible what we're doing to them." What these numbers portend are crippling tax increases on workers, slashed benefits for retirees, gutted budgets for homeland security, highways, research and everything else, and an economic decline or a financial collapse that devastates the middle class, as happened recently in debt-strapped Argentina. Eventually, analysts insist, someone -- today's children or tomorrow's elderly or both -- will pay this debt. Traditional budget measures used by politicians and the press give what Walker and many others call a highly misleading view of the U.S. debt. These focus on publicly held debt already incurred, now at $4.5 trillion, or 10-year budget forecasts like the one released last week by the Congressional Budget Office showing a record $422 billion deficit this year and a $2.3 trillion 10- year deficit. 'Fiscal gap' in the trillions But these figures, worrisome enough, are deceptive because they ignore future liabilities such as Social Security and Medicare payments to the Baby Boomers. An array of government and private analysts put the actual U.S. "fiscal gap," which means all future receipts minus all future obligations, at $40 trillion (Government Accountability Office) to $72 trillion (Social Security Board of Trustees). These are not sums, but present-value figures, heavily discounted to show in today's dollars what it would cost to pay off the debt immediately. The International Monetary Fund estimates the gap at $47 trillion, the Brookings Institution at $60 trillion. "To give you idea how big the problem is," said Laurence Kotlikoff, economics chairman at Boston University, who has written extensively on the subject, to close a $51 trillion fiscal gap, "you'd have to have an immediate and permanent 78 percent hike in the federal income tax." These obligations are not imaginary. And unlike the 1980s and 1990s, economic growth cannot bail out the government because the Baby Boom retirement is at hand. Those born in 1946 will reach age 62 in 2008, allowing them to take early retirement and receive Social Security benefits. "It's a number that's so large that people find it implausible, and so they don't think about it," said Alan Auerbach, a UC Berkeley economist who studies the issue and consults for the Kerry campaign. "But it's based simply on the projections we have for Social Security and Medicare. People aren't making these numbers up." A pathbreaking study by Jagadeesh Gokhale of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland and Kent Smetters, a former deputy assistant secretary at the Treasury -- commissioned by former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill -- estimated a $44 trillion fiscal gap. It laid out a few painful options on how to meet the liabilities: -- More than double the payroll tax, immediately and forever, from 15.3 percent of wages to nearly 32 percent; -- Raise income taxes by two-thirds, immediately and forever; -- Cut Social Security and Medicare benefits by 45 percent, immediately and forever; -- Or eliminate forever all discretionary spending, which includes the military, homeland security, highways, courts, national parks and most of what the federal government does outside of the transfer of payments to the elderly. Such corrective actions grow more severe each year. Waiting just until 2008, the end of the next presidency, would mean raising the payroll tax to 33. 5 percent instead of 32 percent, the study found. Gokhale said that fresh numbers from the Medicare trustees show the fiscal gap has since grown to $72 trillion, $10 trillion of that for Social Security and an astonishing $62 trillion for Medicare, the government health care program for the elderly. "The long-term picture is pretty bad," Gokhale said. Election's absent issue These numbers are seldom discussed, least of all in the 2004 presidential race. Ironically, as the Baby Boom retirement has neared -- and the remedies grow more painful -- political discussion has faded. Gone is Ross Perot's anti-deficit crusade. Gone is Newt Gingrich's call for Medicare restraint. Gone is Al Gore's "lockbox" for the Social Security surplus. Instead, Kerry and Bush promise only to halve the current deficit in four years -- "both (of them) relying on pretty imaginative accounting to get there" said Burman -- while promising more spending and more tax cuts. Yet today's deficit is a tiny fraction of the government's actual liabilities, which are so daunting they promise to make Bush's tax cuts a distant memory and Kerry's health care plan a fantasy. While Bush and Kerry propose to address parts of the problem, "the numbers don't add up on either side," Walker said. Medicare makes up the bulk of these liabilities, driven mainly by the expanding elderly population and rapidly rising health costs. Social Security, more often discussed as a looming problem, actually accounts for far less in future debt. While Congress squabbles over whether the administration hid the new prescription drug benefit's 10-year cost -- pegged by the White House at $534 billion versus CBO's $395 billion -- the actual liability incurred by the new drug benefit is estimated at $8 trillion to $12 trillion. Kerry and Democrats call the drug benefit inadequate. They would do little to restrain Medicare costs other than allowing the importation of price- controlled drugs from Canada. Bush and Republicans added the drug benefit along with costly subsidies to providers. Even optimists do not expect their modest market reforms to cut costs. Promises, promises Kerry has promised not to cut Social Security. "I will not cut benefits," he said recently. "I will not raise the retirement age." Democrats generally cite "trust fund" numbers that show Social Security - - and Medicare to a lesser extent -- remaining solvent for decades, even though government officials repeatedly call the numbers an accounting fiction. CBO director Douglas Holzt-Eakin last week said the funds contain nothing but "electronic chits" that measure government obligations to itself. Bush proposes adding private accounts to Social Security for younger workers, which could reduce future government obligations, but would do so by diverting a portion of the payroll tax, adding $1 trillion to the short-term deficit. That might have been feasible when Bush took office in 2000 facing a projected $5.6 trillion surplus, but the surplus is gone. Similar plans in Congress that instead rely more on benefit cuts have gone nowhere. "The country's absolutely broke, and both Bush and Kerry are being irresponsible in not addressing this problem," Kotlikoff said. "This administration and previous administrations have set us up for a major financial crisis on the order of what Argentina experienced a couple of years ago." If this sounds far-fetched, former Bush Treasury Undersecretary Peter Fisher and former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin both alluded to such a scenario at a June budget forum in Washington. "Having been involved in markets for a long, long time," Rubin said, "I can tell you these things can change unexpectedly and without warning," referring to potential financial market reactions to the U.S. fiscal position. Fisher warned of a "pivot point" when "the collective wisdom of bond traders thinks that the deficit horizon has turned," adding, "Both Bob and I are nervous." The world has seen fiscal imbalances of this sort before, in Asia and Russia in the late 1990s and more recently in South America. Such financial panics can be triggered by any number of events -- a flight from Treasury bonds by the foreigners who buy much of the U.S. debt, for example -- if investors' views of the market, which are focused on the short term, suddenly change. "If you look at financial crises, they occur seemingly overnight," said Kotlikoff. "More and more pieces of straw drop on the camel's back, and all of a sudden, the camel collapses. ... Nobody knew exactly what day Argentina was going to go south or exactly what day Russia was going to default. The timing is up for grabs." But early signs of a problem are now appearing, analysts said, starting with the mounting deficits under Bush caused not just by the recession and terrorist attacks, but also by enormous spending increases and tax cuts. The brief window of surpluses that appeared during the late 1990s economic boom offered a chance to address long-range liabilities, but those surpluses now are gone. "Maybe the public doesn't want to hear it," Kotlikoff said. "Maybe politicians think ... the American public can't understand the truth or hear the truth or bear the truth. I think this is garbage. I think that people care about their kids and grandchildren and need to know the dangers facing them -- and us." E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com. But I'm sure they dont know what they are talking about and this debt is just a figment of all our imaginations. I'm sure that the job thing will get better even tho Ross Perot's "swoooooshing" continues thanks to all those Repbulicans & Democrats that do know what is best for us - you know who I am talking about, the politicians that voted for NAFTA. I'm sure the debt doesnt mean anything...who cares if it's 1 trillion or 1 million trillion....debt doesnt meany anything so who cares (right?..right ) Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Pete I have no problem w/your reasoning. Technology has changed the way the entire world does things. That is the intriguing ...I'm searching for a word here.., paradox(?) or slippery slope if you will, that we are on. How the Patriot Act will be utilized in its full capacity remains to be seen - just one more 911 like event or a 911^3 event here in the States and I personally believe you can kiss all our privacy goodbye. With Putin caving in to the Old-School Russia (hard liners) recently; things could really get interesting if we threw that variable in the equation(?). Down the slippery slope we go, where we stop no one knows. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

thanks for the links Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

That is exactly why Barrel-Key locks fall under the heading of "Mini-me WMD" and are under close scruitny by Homeland Security .., sorry for the lame comment. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Now I know why the sky seemed a little blue'r today and the air seemed a little fresher - thanks for the reminder. 8) Anyone have any idea when the next gun show will be in the Dallas/Fr.Worth/Mesquite area? Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

. Wheelman Wheelman, Feel free to pick away for that is the only way we can have real intelligent conversations regardless of my opinion or your opinion we should all be able to put forth our opinion freely. I hate to bust your bubble but the govt doesnt go by your defintion. "Your words" as you put it dont address Sovereignty. In the quest for understanding Sovereignty you have to understand the Public Sector subject to the explicit regulations, duties, responsibilities, and then there is the Private Sector not subject to the govt or anyone else unless under contract: unless you harm or injure another (social contract). This distinction was honored in the first 100 or 150 years of America's existance and still exits to this day but isnt being hononred in our current generation. The principle in law is still there, it is not a conspiracy, it is simply misunderstood because we are being dumbed down at every avenue of education. Upon the end of the civil war no slaves were freed, instead all people were presumed to be the newly claimed 14th Amendment US citizen: AKA...read the constitution and understand it. When you are asked if you are a US Citizen...what does that mean to you, better yet what does that mean legally? Pick up any USC (United States Code which is a fractional set of code books taken from the complete set of books CFR or, Code of Federal Regulations) where US is defined..if you wish to use your own words (huge mistake) then ignore what the real definition is. The USC and the CFR books dont apply to Sovereigns, they only apply to depts, and territories subject to the Federal Zone. The money issue - loss of hard currency whereby paper-debt instruments were implemented in its place is the root of our problems. If you dont do your own research into these issues then there is no reason to continue the dialogue much less complain about it - either it is important to you or it isnt. Perhaps again we should read the constitution and understand its vernacular...not our words but their words w/their defintions. Everyone wants to complain about the problem or they admit a problem exists but no one wants to know why the problem exists. You are not a US citizen by legal defintions: you are not Federal as you were not born in the Federal Zone. But if you sign a document that agrees you are a US citizen (federal)...well, then you just gave evidence that you are a US citizen and federal: by doing so you are subject to all the many 1000's of rules & reg's that are suppose to be checks-n-balances w/in the federal zone. Their rules are for them, it is Internal, not external to be applied to the Sovereign inhabitants of the states in the union. Yet if you read and understood the 14th Amendment you would see that the Federal Zone has the authority to tax their subjects that might be residing in one of the many sovereign territories. The fed's authorization to tax is their right to make decisions on their subjects. The constitution lays two rules down for taxing its citizen, State or Federal; they are Direct & Indirect. Can you or anyone else explain to me what the difference is between Direct & Indirect Taxation? If not then how can you have an opinion on the money issue? If you were born in one of the many states in the union then you are a State Citizen. If that is so why then was LBJ quoted as saying, "There are no more State Citizens?" LBJ saying this implies that at one time there were State Citizens. So what is the difference between a State Citizen -vs- a US Citizen? I'm sure it is nothing - here are my pepers please dont hurt me Mr. Homeland Security. LBJ said there are no more State Citizens simply because eveything has been Federalized. It is not a conspiracy it is factual, it is publicly there for anyone to see, if they wanted to. I hate to admit it but the Sovereignty of America was lost when we lost our ability to remain a State Citizen: this is the slippery slope that has led us to where we are today. Everyone wants to claim this constitutional right and that constitutional right yet no one wants to understand said constitution much less read it. The money issue and the 14th Amendment person are tied together. If you are a real sovereign, which none of us are due to the contracts we have signed implicating ourselves as a US Citizen, then you are not answerable to govt, rather they are answerable to you. But none of us are Sovereign anymore due to our ignorance in agreeing to be a US Citizen at all aspects. This is the slippery slope. The world of politics doesnt occur in a bubble by accident. America, as great as it once was, has fallen to the very ilk we attempted to break from the Brits...a global empire; it is the same ole story w/the War on Terror. Create some enemy and impliment some system that erodes the rights a little at a time. Each war against the created enemy leads to a little more eroded rights...one by one. Now after saying all that, if I had to be some National Citizen - as opposed to being a Texas Citizen - which is where I was born, I would rather be a US citizen over any other country in this world. I hace accepted the fact that we are no longer State Citizens - and I dont want to become some Global UN citizen...this alone is why I too am grateful that Bush is in the office as he, for now atleast, has thwarted the UN: which I dont beleive Kerry would have. I know IMHO that the Globalist, David Rockefeller & his puppets, dont like the Bush admin simply because David Rockefeller & his puppets were the first to begin hammering Bush. This tells me there is infighting between the globalists and their insiders. If I had to pick a dictator such as a globalist or a national money tycoon, such as the Bush family I would much rather have a national money tycoon than a total bought and paid for Globalist such as Kerry. I still have my doubts as to where we will end up, after all it was the Bush admin that created the Patriot Act which is an end run around the Bill of Rights - whether or not they will use that as an end run around the Bill of Rights is yet to be seen. But it is not a good sign when some legislation exists that actually can be used to usurp said Bill of Rights. Regarding your comment about changing the govt. According to the Patriot Act if you dont agree w/the govt then you are labeled a terrorist. So much for changing the govt! Does that mean we have lost it all...to use your words. As far as govt granting rights...this is the whole problem. No one understands that govt cant grant rights. If you are sovereign then you are born by rights granted to you by your creator. If govt has to grant you anything it implies you are a subject. The only thing govt can give you is benefits..not rights! I constantly told myself I was not going to get involved in this thread and here I am smack in the middle of it...agian. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

JohnC, good article - I always like both sides of the story and I have not seen that side yet...thanks for the heads up. What it does indicate is that there was a conspirator...be it FDR or Churchill or anyone else. I still dont like FDR do to his affiliations. Does that make the writer of this article a nut simply because he believes that Churchill was the conspirator (oh no he used the c word)? No, it doesnt make him a conspiracy nut, rather it makes him a good investigator. One thing I do like about one of the many FDR quotes, and that is, "Nothing in Politics happens by accident"...the word Nothing includes the modern day politics which voted for WTO, NAFTA, UN, Homeland Security, the Patriot Act(s), EEC, EU, and on and on and on the Global Theme goes. I still hold to the belief that we are being manipulated. Especially after having read Pawns in the Game by William Guy Car, R.D., Commander R.C.N. (ret'd). This book was written in the 1954. In that book he explained, "WWIII is to be fomented by using the differences the agentur of the Illumnati stir up between the Political Zionists and the leaders of the Moslem world. The war is to be directed in such a manner that Islam (the Arab World including Mohammedanism) and Political Zionism (including the State of Israel) will destroy themselves while at the same time the remaiing nations, once more divided against each other on this issue, will be forced to fight themselves into a state of complete exhaustion physically, mentally, spiritually, and economically. How could he make such a claim back in the 1950's unless he had access to prior knowledge...especially since the main and only threat at that time was supposedly Communism: ooh-those mean ole commies. Yeah, that our enemy-lets go get those mean ole commies. Now all of a sudden those mean ole commies are not our enemies, the middle eastern radical Islamist are our enemies(?). How did Commander Carr know this way back then? Does he have a crystal ball that no one else has? I dont think so. What he had was an upbringing and indoctrination into the Bolshevik ideology which is specific in its goals. Fortunately for us Commander Carr rejected that teaching. Interesting how he predicted how this "War on Terror" would begin way back in the 1950's...dont you think? Just remember that America is a Republic...not a Democracy. Dont let your hate, prejudice, or fears get the best of you. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Sorry for the typo in the title. Where it reads "&am" in the title of the post, "Matching Displacement, Cyl Heads, SCR & DCR-Duration &am" it should read "& RPM" as in, "Matching Displacement, Cyl Heads, SCR & DCR-Duration & RPM". Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

I have to agree w/Pop. Many say they are for the Patriot Act out of respect to those Americans that are dieing every day in Iraq so that their deaths are not in vain. What about all those that died leading up to and during the American Revolutionary War...are their deaths going to be in vain simply because so many are willing to give up what they fought & died for through fear of a boogie man terrorist behind every corner? I always find it rather comical (scaringly sad) that the people in public offices who do take oaths "To Uphold the laws of the Constitution" are always the ones who are so adamantly willing to violate that oath under the guise of "I was just following orders", hmm, where have we heard that cliche before? In order to be an American everyone should be taught in school (unfortunately the fool system er-uh the school system isnt teaching much these days) to understand that America IS NOT A DEMOCRACY, IT IS A REPUBLIC! How many of you even reading this thread understand the distinction between a Democracy -vs- that of a Republic? In a Republic each little chicken in the hen house has the right (authority) to tell the group of wolves outside, regardless of the wolves size or numbers, to GO TO HELL! That was the fundamental initial ideology that America was founded on. Govt IS NOT the boss, they are the Servant. Yet that relationship has been turned upside down and now everyone looks at govt as the Leader and the people as the Servant. America is broke and this "terrorism" through our fears will be the last nail in our spiritual coffin of freedom. In a real republic, if you wish to allow anyone to violate your privacy THAT IS YOUR RIGHT! It is not your right to expect everyone else to do the same! You do not have the right to give up someone else's right to make their own decision. The question at hand shouldnt be, "I have nothing to hide - so go ahead and violate my privacy" rather, in an honest Republic the issue at hand is, "Do you, enter public official XYZ's name here, even have the Authority to proport that I have something to hide?" If said XYZ official doesnt have sworn-written testimony backed by affidavits indicating 1st hand knowledge attached w/an order signed by A JUDGE, AND NOT A MAJISTRATE, that "I do have something to hide" then said XYZ official has no authority to make such claims...if he/she does not have said doc's in hand and still proceed against me- then they are acting outside of their sworn duties and responsibilities as well as their oath they took when they swore to uphold the laws of the constitution (bill of rights so attached). I, as an American would not say I have nothing to hide, rather I as a legitimate American would say that, "I DONT HAVE SQUAT TO SAY TO ANYONE UNLESS I CHOOSE TO SAY SQUAT" to anyone w/out said doc's and to be able to say it w/o repercusions providing I lived in a real America that still values its freedom and liberties. That is what it means to live in a Republic. This Hate and Prejudice founded in fear will be our nations undoing. Unfortunately evil is real and it is here in our nation regardless of who is behind it: as a result we are on a slippery slope. So define evil(?). Is evil some tubine-towel head in the middle east...or is it a political rep who sells his soul to big corp lobbyist who doesnt give a whoot about the common man and will sell the common man out in order to make a profit (outsoursing of America), or the Banker that criminally produces paper money at interest (unjust weights) using fractional reserve banking making all its citizens gaurantors to pay back that interest...so how is evil defined? Regarding the war in Iraq (and no - I dont have the answer), I just find it interesting that we, America, were manipulated into WWI w/the sinking of the Lucitania whose events leading up to that event are highly suspect. And the fact that the History Channel reports how Roosevelt, who did nothing, had prior knowledge of Japans fleet before the Pearl Harbour attack to which many of the Fleet Admirals adamantly objected to parking the USA fleet in a coke bottle harbour...to which the attack on Pearl Harbour was the initial reason for America getting involved in WWII. Now we have the 911 event where the Zogby poll indicates that 66% of the people in New York believe that the current administration had prior knowledge and allowed the event to take place...which resulted in "The War on Terror" and the Patriot Act 1,2 and how ever many more acts are needed to make us "SAFE". I dont have any answers. I just hate the sneaky inkling I have that we are being politically manipulated. I do know that if/when a dirty bomb or something else further alters the American way of life - then I would still prefer the Republic over the Police State...I may not get to keep my Republic...but I will still resist the Brittish Invasion, er-uh Nazi Germany, er-uh the Police State as much as I can up until it is becomes a harsh reality. Then, once it becomes a harsh reality all I can say is you better know if you can trust your neighbor! I am not a coward and I dont want some black booted thug telling me how I can or cant protect my family. NO ONE will tell me how I can or cant protect my family! I guess I have too much respect for the Republic (not Democracy) to agree w/a Police State. As far as the money issue and the debt is concerned you may want to read http://.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul124.html It is a speech by US House of Reps Ron Paul gave Sept.5,2003. It appears we are danged if we do-or danged if we dont do anything. Because of our ignorance/apathy in the past we are on a slippery slope - enjoy the ride Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

Nice to here he pulled over for ya to look each other's car over. 8) Just goes to show that not all exotic car owners are jerks! Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

I had an inkling the 4.11 would be too steep..however, I also beleive the 3.54 will have the same problem on the other end of the pendilum swing - as in too high of a gear and you wont be able to get into your full peak rpm as you cross the traps. BTW: what intake manifold did you end up going with? Going back to your 3.54's may require going back to an intake manifold with smaller ports just to keep airflow velocity up where it needs to be as you cross the traps. Kevin, (Yea,Still an inliner)

Another point in favor of FI over Carb is the fact that the FI system maintains as close as possible a 14.7:1 Air/Fuel Ratio: remapping the ECM not withstanding. The fact the FI system can do this whereas a Carb'd engine cant will ensure the cylinders are not fuel washed. Keeping the cylinders free of a richer fuel mixture, which carbs cant do, allows for cleaner oil over a longer period of time...and this leads to less wear-n-tear on all oil splashed/washed components as well as longer lasting spark plugs and this equates to a happier engine all around. Carb's are simple and equally as fun, just not as efficient if fuel mileage and longevity is an issue. Also, if you plan on taking a trip to higher elevations then a Carb'd engine will have a harder time adjusting to changes in elevation whereas the FI system will adapt. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

No "Probably" to it. Dont re-use an old dryer/accumalator. If the dessicant bag is partially or fully saturated and you re-use it, then the air will never get as cold as it should simply because of the old dryer can not pull any more moisture out of the system. Dont take a chance w/the old Dryer/Accumalators unless they are a unit whereby you can actually replace the old dessicant bag w/out damaging the housing. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)

I was jumping around on the radio and came across a talk show (?), dont know who it was but they read from some middle eastern source that 1000 arabs are coming across the boarder into Iran every night in anticipation for the American/British "Peace" troops in search of terrorists. Take it for what it is...just someone else's radio station reading from who knows what. I guess the only question remaining to ask is if the American/British forces go into Iran before the US Presidential Election or after the Presidential Elections. From all the talk about Syria and Iran...nothing would surprise me at this point. IMHO, if the Northern Alliance does invade Iran then the rumors of the Draft we've all been hearing will come true. The only difference this time w/the draft is it wont be for ages 18-24, rather it will be for ages from 18-35. Looks like the 100 Year War will be hitting its mark in a not to distant future. I'm sure the inlisted personal coming being pulled from Europe will be surprised when their new destination is Iran/Syria. PS: Not trying to start another political thread...just thought the report of 1000 Arabs pouring into Iran every day was an interesting one: regardless of its source. Kevin, (Yea,Still an Inliner)