re: second link?

Current Events » in reply to Does anyone know what house resolution this was?

re: second link?

Raoul — 4/27/2004 4:23:16 PM (archived)

You mean about the washington times article? It's probably something we have to give our email to if we want to read. I must have done some time ago. I don't know.

Raoul

The whole thread (18 posts)

Attack averted - Raoul - 4/27/2004 5:49:00 AM
- Does anyone know what house resolution this was? - alcaray - 4/27/2004 3:58:46 PM
  - re: Does anyone know what house resolution this was? - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2004 4:31:51 PM
    - can't get your link to work. - alcaray - 4/27/2004 5:34:05 PM
      - Try this Acrobat file - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2004 6:58:32 PM
        
        Thank you! You are a goooglin' genius! - alcaray - 4/27/2004 10:00:39 PM
        
        No problem. A few comments-- - Tom Brosz - 4/28/2004 2:57:15 AM
  - re: second link? - Raoul - 4/27/2004 4:23:16 PM
- re: Attack NOT averted - Buck Galaxy - 4/27/2004 6:16:20 AM
  - Buck, please post WARNINGS for those kinds of posts. - Justin Kelly - 4/27/2004 6:33:33 AM
    - Certainly - Buck Galaxy - 4/27/2004 6:40:54 AM
      - If you include an explanation of what the pix show, - alcaray - 4/27/2004 3:50:36 PM
        
        Good point. The title should have read: Chemical Attack NOT Averted (WARNING PICS) (n/t) - Buck Galaxy - 4/27/2004 4:48:13 PM
        
        You really don't recognize those shots, do you? - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2004 4:22:33 PM
        
        Sorry, I did not. Thanks for the info. (n/t) - alcaray - 4/27/2004 5:36:11 PM
  - Before anyone starts getting huffy about the pictures... - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2004 6:22:29 AM
- re: Attack averted - Tom Brosz - 4/27/2004 6:14:53 AM
  - re: Attack averted - Raoul - 4/27/2004 4:11:29 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (18 posts)