Do you think the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over?"60% of Americans say "No

On Aug 27, 4:57 am, The Idiot Evleth unwisely
wrote to usenet:
n a USA TODAY Poll, 60% of Americans say "No," when asked "Do you think the
situation in Iraq was worth going to war over?" Similar majorities either
felt that the war did not make the USA safer from terrorism or made no
difference. The same was said of whether the political situation in the
Middle East is more stable.




As usual Evleth pastes poll results he likes but then will castigate
the wisdom of Americans polled taking positions the idiot Evleth
doesn't agree with.

A more interesting poll would be on how American really feel about the
USofA going to war with Germany in WWII.


http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/chamberl.html
..
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin (no right wing zealot by any stretch)


Excerpt:


"..A president who cannot entrust the people with the truth betrays a
certain lack of faith in the basic tenets of democracy. But because
the masses are notoriously shortsighted and generally cannot see
danger until it is at their throats, our statesmen are forced to
deceive them into an awareness of their own long-run interests. This
is clearly what Roosevelt had to do. ..".


Read "The Fifties" by David Halberstam, also no right wing zealot by
any
stretch. .


On page 9 Halberstam says in describing the political scenario in
1948


"..many thought Roosevelt had dragged us "into the wrong war: wrong
allies, wrong enemies, wrong outcome". A peace that permitted Soviet
hegemony over Eastern Europe was unacceptable to many Americans.."

http://sangha.net/messengers/roosevelt.htm


FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL


"Lend-Lease


Following his reelection in 1940, President Roosevelt moved ahead
with
the dual policy of building up U.S. defenses while giving assistance
to
those countries resisting the aggression of Germany, Italy, and
Japan.
The major legislation was the Lend-Lease Act of March 1941, passed
over
the bitter opposition of the isolationists in Congress and their
national organization, the America First Committee. The Lend-Lease
Act
authorized the president to transfer to victims of aggression such
military equipment (a term interpreted to include food and clothing)
as
could be produced in the United States and acquired by the
government.
This act, which was destined to be extended for the length of World
War
II, began with an appropriation of $7 billion. It was an emphatic
announcement of support for the hard-pressed British. When Germany
attacked the USSR in June 1941 and British Prime Minister Winston
Churchill welcomed the Soviets as allies, Roosevelt extended the
privileges of lend-lease to the USSR. Thus, the United States was
virtually at war in the spring and summer of 1941, sending aid to
Britain and the USSR and even patrolling the Atlantic Ocean with the
U.S. Navy."


Former Congresswoman Clare Boothe Luce found the right expression
when
she charged Roosevelt with having lied us into war: "....Franklin
Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the American people during the period
before Pearl Harbor ... "


AND FROM THE "CINDY SHEEHAN", JOHN MURTHA, JANE FONDA OF HIS DAY,
JOSEPH KENNEDY NOT ONLY
ROOSEVELT'S AMBASSADOR TO THE UK BUT ALSO THE FATHER OF PRESIDENT
JOHN
F. KENNEDY, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND SENATOR
ROBERT F. KENNEDY, AND THE FORMER SENATOR FROM MA EDWARD M. KENNEDY.


'Harry, (Truman) what the hell are you doing campaigning for that
crippled son-of-a-bitch that killed my son Joe?' [Joseph P.] Kennedy
said, referring to his oldest son, who had died in the war. Kennedy
went on, saying Roosevelt had caused the war. Truman, by his later
account,..."
-- "Truman," by David McCullough, Page 328

Of course for Leftism WWII is uniquely described as a "good war" but
only because we saved the asses of their beloved Bolsheviks in the
process.

In 1963, as the Soviet General Zhukov stated :

"It is now said that the allies never helped us........ However, one
cannot deny that
the Americans gave us so much material, without which we could not
have formed our
reserves and could not have continued the war." "And today it seems
as though we had all this ourselves in abundance".

(From the Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, Sept.
1994, pp567-586

It was NOT a war. It was an illegal INVASION and OCCUPATION ordered
by a war-criminal, George Bush.

"GLOBALIST" wrote in message
...
It was NOT a war. It was an illegal INVASION and OCCUPATION ordered
by a war-criminal, George Bush.

It was ill advised and costly, without a real reason for being, IMO.
Hans Blix told them repeatedly there were no weapons of mass destruction.

Still, there are days when your adversary just goes a step further than you
can abide, and you whip his ass up to his ears. I think this is perhaps
the
real scenario.

"GLOBALIST" wrote in message
...
It was NOT a war. It was an illegal INVASION and OCCUPATION ordered
by a war-criminal, George Bush.

All in the name of his daddy's New World Order.

On Aug 27, 4:29*pm, PJ Himselff wrote:
On Aug 27, 4:57 am, The Idiot Evleth unwisely
wrote to usenet:

n a USA TODAY Poll, 60% of Americans say "No," when asked "Do you think the
situation in Iraq was worth going to war over?" Similar majorities either
felt that the war did not make the USA safer from terrorism or made no
difference. The same was said of whether the political situation in the
Middle East is more stable.

As usual Evleth pastes poll results he likes but then will castigate
the wisdom of Americans polled taking positions the idiot Evleth
doesn't agree with.

A more interesting poll would be on how American really feel about the
USofA going to war with Germany in WWII.

http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/chamberl.html
.
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin (no right wing zealot by any stretch)

Excerpt:

"..A president who cannot entrust the people with the truth betrays a
certain lack of faith in the basic tenets of democracy. But because
the masses are notoriously shortsighted and generally cannot see
danger until it is at their throats, our statesmen are forced to
deceive them into an awareness of their own long-run interests. This
is clearly what Roosevelt had to do. ..".

Read "The Fifties" by David Halberstam, also no right wing zealot by
any
stretch. .

On page 9 Halberstam says in describing the political scenario in
1948

"..many thought Roosevelt had dragged us "into the wrong war: wrong
allies, wrong enemies, wrong outcome". A peace that permitted Soviet
hegemony over Eastern Europe was unacceptable to many Americans.."

http://sangha.net/messengers/roosevelt.htm

FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL

"Lend-Lease

Following his reelection in 1940, President Roosevelt moved ahead
with
the dual policy of building up U.S. defenses while giving assistance
to
those countries resisting the aggression of Germany, Italy, and
Japan.
The major legislation was the Lend-Lease Act of March 1941, passed
over
the bitter opposition of the isolationists in Congress and their
national organization, the America First Committee. The Lend-Lease
Act
authorized the president to transfer to victims of aggression such
military equipment (a term interpreted to include food and clothing)
as
could be produced in the United States and acquired by the
government.
This act, which was destined to be extended for the length of World
War
II, began with an appropriation of $7 billion. It was an emphatic
announcement of support for the hard-pressed British. When Germany
attacked the USSR in June 1941 and British Prime Minister Winston
Churchill welcomed the Soviets as allies, Roosevelt extended the
privileges of lend-lease to the USSR. Thus, the United States was
virtually at war in the spring and summer of 1941, sending aid to
Britain and the USSR and even patrolling the Atlantic Ocean with the
U.S. Navy."

Former Congresswoman Clare Boothe Luce found the right expression
when
she charged Roosevelt with having lied us into war: "....Franklin
Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the American people during the period
before Pearl Harbor ... "

AND FROM THE "CINDY SHEEHAN", JOHN MURTHA, JANE FONDA OF HIS DAY,
JOSEPH KENNEDY NOT ONLY
ROOSEVELT'S AMBASSADOR TO THE UK BUT ALSO THE FATHER OF PRESIDENT
JOHN
F. KENNEDY, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND SENATOR
ROBERT F. KENNEDY, AND THE FORMER SENATOR FROM MA EDWARD M. KENNEDY.

'Harry, (Truman) what the hell are you doing campaigning for that
crippled son-of-a-bitch that killed my son Joe?' [Joseph P.] Kennedy
said, referring to his oldest son, who had died in the war. Kennedy
went on, saying Roosevelt had caused the war. Truman, by his later
account,..."
-- "Truman," by David McCullough, Page 328

Of course for Leftism WWII is uniquely described as a "good war" but
only because we saved the asses of their beloved Bolsheviks in the
process.

In 1963, as the Soviet General Zhukov stated :

"It is now said that the allies never helped us........ However, one
cannot deny that
the Americans gave us so much material, without which we could not
have formed our
reserves and could not have continued the war." "And today it seems
as though we had all this ourselves in abundance".

(From the Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, Sept.
1994, pp567-586

Then the vast majority of Americans at the time should have listened
to the 80% of British who didn't want Blair to join Bush in invasion
(including 65% of Blair's own party).

On 28 Aug, 09:16, Surreyman wrote:
On Aug 27, 4:29*pm, PJ Himselff wrote:



On Aug 27, 4:57 am, The Idiot Evleth unwisely
wrote to usenet:

n a USA TODAY Poll, 60% of Americans say "No," when asked "Do you think the
situation in Iraq was worth going to war over?" Similar majorities either
felt that the war did not make the USA safer from terrorism or made no
difference. The same was said of whether the political situation in the
Middle East is more stable.

As usual Evleth pastes poll results he likes but then will castigate
the wisdom of Americans polled taking positions the idiot Evleth
doesn't agree with.

A more interesting poll would be on how American really feel about the
USofA going to war with Germany in WWII.

http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/chamberl.html
.
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin (no right wing zealot by any stretch)

Excerpt:

"..A president who cannot entrust the people with the truth betrays a
certain lack of faith in the basic tenets of democracy. But because
the masses are notoriously shortsighted and generally cannot see
danger until it is at their throats, our statesmen are forced to
deceive them into an awareness of their own long-run interests. This
is clearly what Roosevelt had to do. ..".

Read "The Fifties" by David Halberstam, also no right wing zealot by
any
stretch. .

On page 9 Halberstam says in describing the political scenario in
1948

"..many thought Roosevelt had dragged us "into the wrong war: wrong
allies, wrong enemies, wrong outcome". A peace that permitted Soviet
hegemony over Eastern Europe was unacceptable to many Americans.."

http://sangha.net/messengers/roosevelt.htm

FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL

"Lend-Lease

Following his reelection in 1940, President Roosevelt moved ahead
with
the dual policy of building up U.S. defenses while giving assistance
to
those countries resisting the aggression of Germany, Italy, and
Japan.
The major legislation was the Lend-Lease Act of March 1941, passed
over
the bitter opposition of the isolationists in Congress and their
national organization, the America First Committee. The Lend-Lease
Act
authorized the president to transfer to victims of aggression such
military equipment (a term interpreted to include food and clothing)
as
could be produced in the United States and acquired by the
government.
This act, which was destined to be extended for the length of World
War
II, began with an appropriation of $7 billion. It was an emphatic
announcement of support for the hard-pressed British. When Germany
attacked the USSR in June 1941 and British Prime Minister Winston
Churchill welcomed the Soviets as allies, Roosevelt extended the
privileges of lend-lease to the USSR. Thus, the United States was
virtually at war in the spring and summer of 1941, sending aid to
Britain and the USSR and even patrolling the Atlantic Ocean with the
U.S. Navy."

Former Congresswoman Clare Boothe Luce found the right expression
when
she charged Roosevelt with having lied us into war: "....Franklin
Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the American people during the period
before Pearl Harbor ... "

AND FROM THE "CINDY SHEEHAN", JOHN MURTHA, JANE FONDA OF HIS DAY,
JOSEPH KENNEDY NOT ONLY
ROOSEVELT'S AMBASSADOR TO THE UK BUT ALSO THE FATHER OF PRESIDENT
JOHN
F. KENNEDY, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND SENATOR
ROBERT F. KENNEDY, AND THE FORMER SENATOR FROM MA EDWARD M. KENNEDY.

'Harry, (Truman) what the hell are you doing campaigning for that
crippled son-of-a-bitch that killed my son Joe?' [Joseph P.] Kennedy
said, referring to his oldest son, who had died in the war. Kennedy
went on, saying Roosevelt had caused the war. Truman, by his later
account,..."
-- "Truman," by David McCullough, Page 328

Of course for Leftism WWII is uniquely described as a "good war" but
only because we saved the asses of their beloved Bolsheviks in the
process.

In 1963, as the Soviet General Zhukov stated :

"It is now said that the allies never helped us........ However, one
cannot deny that
the Americans gave us so much material, without which we could not
have formed our
reserves and could not have continued the war." "And today it seems
as though we had all this ourselves in abundance".

(From the Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, Sept.
1994, pp567-586

Then the vast majority of Americans at the time should have listened
to the 80% of British who didn't want Blair to join Bush in invasion
(including 65% of Blair's own party).

But Blair had no choice but to join in, otherwise he would have been
demoted in Daddy's New World Order.

Demoted from Almost Nobody, to Definitely Nobody, and "Almost" is as
high as anyone has reached since Churchill rose to The Nobody Who
Cries A Lot.

On Aug 28, 9:49*am, sutartsorric wrote:
On 28 Aug, 09:16, Surreyman wrote:



On Aug 27, 4:29*pm, PJ Himselff wrote:

On Aug 27, 4:57 am, The Idiot Evleth unwisely
wrote to usenet:

n a USA TODAY Poll, 60% of Americans say "No," when asked "Do you think the
situation in Iraq was worth going to war over?" Similar majorities either
felt that the war did not make the USA safer from terrorism or made no
difference. The same was said of whether the political situation in the
Middle East is more stable.

As usual Evleth pastes poll results he likes but then will castigate
the wisdom of Americans polled taking positions the idiot Evleth
doesn't agree with.

A more interesting poll would be on how American really feel about the
USofA going to war with Germany in WWII.

http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/chamberl.html
.
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin (no right wing zealot by any stretch)

Excerpt:

"..A president who cannot entrust the people with the truth betrays a
certain lack of faith in the basic tenets of democracy. But because
the masses are notoriously shortsighted and generally cannot see
danger until it is at their throats, our statesmen are forced to
deceive them into an awareness of their own long-run interests. This
is clearly what Roosevelt had to do. ..".

Read "The Fifties" by David Halberstam, also no right wing zealot by
any
stretch. .

On page 9 Halberstam says in describing the political scenario in
1948

"..many thought Roosevelt had dragged us "into the wrong war: wrong
allies, wrong enemies, wrong outcome". A peace that permitted Soviet
hegemony over Eastern Europe was unacceptable to many Americans.."

http://sangha.net/messengers/roosevelt.htm

FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL

"Lend-Lease

Following his reelection in 1940, President Roosevelt moved ahead
with
the dual policy of building up U.S. defenses while giving assistance
to
those countries resisting the aggression of Germany, Italy, and
Japan.
The major legislation was the Lend-Lease Act of March 1941, passed
over
the bitter opposition of the isolationists in Congress and their
national organization, the America First Committee. The Lend-Lease
Act
authorized the president to transfer to victims of aggression such
military equipment (a term interpreted to include food and clothing)
as
could be produced in the United States and acquired by the
government.
This act, which was destined to be extended for the length of World
War
II, began with an appropriation of $7 billion. It was an emphatic
announcement of support for the hard-pressed British. When Germany
attacked the USSR in June 1941 and British Prime Minister Winston
Churchill welcomed the Soviets as allies, Roosevelt extended the
privileges of lend-lease to the USSR. Thus, the United States was
virtually at war in the spring and summer of 1941, sending aid to
Britain and the USSR and even patrolling the Atlantic Ocean with the
U.S. Navy."

Former Congresswoman Clare Boothe Luce found the right expression
when
she charged Roosevelt with having lied us into war: "....Franklin
Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the American people during the period
before Pearl Harbor ... "

AND FROM THE "CINDY SHEEHAN", JOHN MURTHA, JANE FONDA OF HIS DAY,
JOSEPH KENNEDY NOT ONLY
ROOSEVELT'S AMBASSADOR TO THE UK BUT ALSO THE FATHER OF PRESIDENT
JOHN
F. KENNEDY, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND SENATOR
ROBERT F. KENNEDY, AND THE FORMER SENATOR FROM MA EDWARD M. KENNEDY.

'Harry, (Truman) what the hell are you doing campaigning for that
crippled son-of-a-bitch that killed my son Joe?' [Joseph P.] Kennedy
said, referring to his oldest son, who had died in the war. Kennedy
went on, saying Roosevelt had caused the war. Truman, by his later
account,..."
-- "Truman," by David McCullough, Page 328

Of course for Leftism WWII is uniquely described as a "good war" but
only because we saved the asses of their beloved Bolsheviks in the
process.

In 1963, as the Soviet General Zhukov stated :

"It is now said that the allies never helped us........ However, one
cannot deny that
the Americans gave us so much material, without which we could not
have formed our
reserves and could not have continued the war." "And today it seems
as though we had all this ourselves in abundance".

(From the Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, Sept.
1994, pp567-586

Then the vast majority of Americans at the time should have listened
to the 80% of British who didn't want Blair to join Bush in invasion
(including 65% of Blair's own party).

But Blair had no choice but to join in, otherwise he would have been
demoted in Daddy's New World Order.

Demoted from Almost Nobody, to Definitely Nobody, and "Almost" is as
high as anyone has reached since Churchill rose to The Nobody Who
Cries A Lot.

Precisely why he forced it through, against the wishes of the populace
and his own party.
He was thus promoted to puppy dog.
Totally shameful then, and even more so in retrospect.

On Aug 28, 2:38*pm, Donna Evleth the self proclaimed 'historian'
pontificated her nonsense to usenet as follows::
.. *America is
not a dictatorship, and Bush let his emotions rule him. *The original
premise was "WMD", then when there weren't any, it was time to go in for
family vengeance. *Which he did, with a vengeance. *It was simple. *It was
wrong.

Donna Evleth


President Clinton claimed Iraq had WMDs in order to get unanimous
support for his
Iraq Liberation Act
HR.4655

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Enrolled Bill (Sent to President))
Oct 7, 98:

Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.

The Democrat Madeline Albright claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Sandy Berger claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Sen Boxer claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Sen Levin claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Sen Daschle claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Sen Kerry claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Congresslady Pelosi claimed Iraq had WMDs in '98
The Democrat Madeline Albright again claimed Iraq had WMDs in '99
The Democrat Sen Levin again claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat former Presidential candidate Gore claimed Iraq had
WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Kennedy claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Byrd claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Kerry again claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Rockefeller claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Hillary Clinton claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Feinstein claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Graham claimed Iraq had WMDs in '02
The Democrat Sen Kerry claimed Iraq had WMDs in '03
The Democrat former Secretary of State Madeline Albright claimed
Iraq had WMDs and was surprised that no WMDs were found in Iraq in
'03
Here's what Congress itself of Democrats said in October 2, 2002 in
passing a joint
resolution (HJ Res 144) justifying and authorizing war against Iraq
which included a majority of Democrats in the Senate:

Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces
Against Iraq

"Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national
security of the United States and international peace and security in
the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable
breach
of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing
to
possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons
capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and
supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability
and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other
nations and its own people;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility
for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests,
including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known
to
be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international
terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the
lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001,
underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of
weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use
weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime
will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against
the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to
international
terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that
would result to the United States and its citizens from such an
attack,
combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself; ...
"

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...oll_call_vote_...

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the
direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114

Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United
States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Vote Counts: YEAs 77
NAYs 23

Did Iraq pose a serious threat to our national security? Yes. Did
Congress believe Iraq posed a serious threat? Yes. Did Iraq have or
seek to obtain weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Those are the facts

On Aug 28, 1:31*pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself"
wrote:
.. . .

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the
direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114

Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United
States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Vote Counts: YEAs 77
NAYs 23

Did Iraq pose a serious threat to our national security? Yes. Did
Congress believe Iraq posed a serious threat? Yes. Did Iraq have or
seek to obtain weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Those are the facts

If it had been up to the Democrats, there would have been no Iraq war.
The resolution was approved by Democrats in the Senate, but the
majority of Democrats voted against it in the House.

"mg" wrote in message
...
On Aug 28, 1:31 pm, "O'Donovan, PJ, Himself"
wrote:
. . .

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the
direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114

Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United
States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Vote Counts: YEAs 77
NAYs 23

Did Iraq pose a serious threat to our national security? Yes. Did
Congress believe Iraq posed a serious threat? Yes. Did Iraq have or
seek to obtain weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Those are the facts

If it had been up to the Democrats, there would have been no Iraq war.
The resolution was approved by Democrats in the Senate, but the
majority of Democrats voted against it in the House.



I can't believe that fool, O' Donovan is still pushing Bush's old tired lies
about why we went to war in Iraq. Hasn't all of that pretty much been
proven to be wrong by now?

I didn't see the original post, probably because I have him killfiled.

--
Best Regards,
Evelyn

In the stony fastness of the mountains there is a strange market, where one
may barter the vortex of life for boundless bliss. - Milarepa