Current Events » in reply to re: Attack NOT averted

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