« previous   misc   next »

Democrats pitch Department of Peacebuilding


By zzyzzx   Follow   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 3:40am PST   717 views   40 comments
Watch (2)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/284879-dems-propose-department-of-peacebuilding

House Democrats led by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) have introduced legislation that would create a federal Department of Peacebuilding, which would be tasked with everything from finding ways to scale back U.S. military actions to ending bullying at schools.

Comments 1-40 of 40     Last »

zzyzzx   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 3:40am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (3)   Dislike     Comment 1

This has got to be one of the dumbest things ever proposed.

CaptainShuddup   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 4:00am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 2

Ooh OOh I want to be in the" Department of All up that ass" did they create it yet?

edvard2   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 4:32am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 3

Why is it dumb? Its not really that much of a stranger idea than having a department of defense. Its just the opposite.

CaptainShuddup   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 4:55am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (4)   Dislike     Comment 4

it's not dumb it's down right scary and dangerous.
Name one time ever America has succeeded in creating a climate of peace in any peace building endeavor? It's usually ends in Ironic results.

edvard2   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 5:14am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 5

CaptainShuddup says

it's not dumb it's down right scary and dangerous.

That's a little alarmist. The notion of the defense department is to.... defend, but to also help keep the peace. There's more than one way to keep the peace and this idea might be yet another. Sure- its got sort of a dumb name. But think about the functional aspects and possible positives of having a department that seeks peace: The amount of money saved by the American taxpayer would be enormous. The level of safety would be increased. The increased trade would also help businesses.

This idea's problem is that its sort of redundant. But that isn't to say its not worth considering something along these lines.

CaptainShuddup   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 5:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 6

yeah but the defense department isn't here to protect you from you from your neighbor. Any agency that is going to "Condition" our kids on "Bullying" and group them in the same category and agency that deals with Dictators and Oppressive leaders of foreign countries. Has fully run off the rails of what this country is all about.

Besides that's what we have NBC and "the more you know" campaign and the Ad Council for. They get gobs of money from the government to brainwash kids into proper behavior. But you know what the difference is?
I'm not in any danger of Madison avenue sending the Army National guard, come crashing through my front door, because Timmy Turner told his Mom that my kid bullied him because my kid didn't let him play marbles with him on the school play yard.

edvard2   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 6:01am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 7

CaptainShuddup says

Any agency that is going to "Condition" our kids on "Bullying" and group them in the same category and agency that deals with Dictators and Oppressive leaders of foreign countries.

Again- taking it a bit too far to one extreme. If you think back to 50-60 years ago, its rather shocking what was considered perfectly ok to say and do and how to treat people. Sure- perhaps one side of the argument is that Americans should learn to grow a thicker skin. But if the argument is that we should be wary of a government that implements laws and changes on our behalf, than its basically an argument against how the government in the US has functioned since it started. The government makes rules and laws that are in some cases in keeping with the constitution. So for example when we read the term that " All men are created equal", then how was is that 50 years ago, no- not ALL Americans were treated equal and a great many lacked even some of the basic rights guaranteed by the constitution, and hence came changes in laws that states and individuals had to abide by.

I'm not trying to equate bullying with this but the fact is that the general conversation never remains static and we are always in a steady movement towards progress and improvement.

leo707   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 6:17am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 8

CaptainShuddup says

Timmy Turner told his Mom that my kid bullied him because my kid didn't let him play marbles with him on the school play yard.

And you think this is the type of thing that is driving bullied kids to suicide?

CaptainShuddup   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 7:10am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 9

This is about suicide?
Everyone could say they felt bullied in their life.
If not a bully at school/work/home these same poeple would just as easy off them sleves over any of the thousands of life's failures that surely comes everyones way in their life time.

Loss of job, car repossessed, bad test scores, dumped by girlfriend.
Speaking of which are we going to criminalize people that break other people's hearts too. Broken hearts are the biggest reason for suicide out there. Though it is really more about depression than any excuse they use. But according to the letters left behind, a failed relationship is the biggest reason.

Also what about foreclosures, are we going to call banks bullies now for foreclosing on homes? Don't forget about all of those people with PTSD fresh out of the Army, will their former sergeants and superior officers be tried as bullies, when returning soldiers kill them selves. That's the third largest segment.

The amount of kids that kill them selves on Facebook and Liberal news like to sensationalize is only a fraction of the people that kills them selves. But typical Liberal fashion never let a good tragedy go to waste with out politicizing in some way that can criminalize people that are efficient and achievers.

Entitlemented   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 7:13am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 10

When I flew to France, the guy from Normandy thought the US Navy and Marines were the department of Peace.

For if we did not have the DOD, we would not have peace, Europe, or the USA.

leo707   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 7:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 11

CaptainShuddup says

But typical Liberal fashion never let a good tragedy go to waste with out politicizing in some way that can criminalize people that are efficient and achievers.

Funny straw man coming from someone who not only politicized the murdered Sandy Hook kids, but also endorsed another forum members molestation jokes about the tragedy, and promised to continue to make light of future events when kids were killed.

Well...not so funny as it is disgusting, and utterly morally depraved.

Every time this comes up you feign ignorance and claim not to have made the comments, so I will just go ahead and link to the last thread where we discussed this:
http://patrick.net/?p=1221889

CaptainShuddup says

Everyone could say they felt bullied in their life.

...these same poeple would just as easy off them sleves over any of the thousands of life's failures...

Loss of job, car repossessed, bad test scores, dumped by girlfriend.

...any excuse they use.

[Yadda, yadda, yadda...]

...Liberal...

[*YAWN*]

...sensationalize...

...Liberal fashion...

...politicizing...

That was a lot of words to explain that you have no idea what is at issue when people discuss the problems with bullying.

zzyzzx   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 8:43am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 12

edvard2 says

If you think back to 50-60 years ago, its rather shocking what was considered perfectly ok to say and do and how to treat people.

Yeah, things were a lot better back then with respect to these things.

edvard2   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 11:53am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 13

zzyzzx says

Yeah, things were a lot better back then with respect to these things.

Explain. Or did you just totally misunderstand what I said?

curious2   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 12:09pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 14

While I respect the laudable goals, I have to wonder about the means. We have a government fomenting war all over the world (DEA, "Defense", arms sales proudly promoted by the White House), so now the solution is to add a department of Peacebuilding? It sounds like the old woman who swallowed a fly, then a spider to catch the fly, etc. Why not start by eliminating the DEA, scaling back the DoD, and stop promoting arms sales?

Likewise bullying is a serious matter, but don't we already have a Department of Education and a Department of Justice? If all these departments are failing to do their job, what kind of mind thinks the solution is to add yet another department with overlapping mission?

Oh, yes, a federal capitol mind. Really, the goals are laudable, but the means sound like another boondoggle spending program. It would seem a lot better at least to start by scaling back the federal departments that are exacerbating these problems, before expanding the federal government even further.

CaptainShuddup   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 12:17pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 15

Give it a rest already, Leo spare us the Sandy hook lecture, the shooter killed him self, I didn't have anything to do with that event, other than in your demented mind. Speaking of suicides and bullies. He wasn't bullied, he scared the bullies.

lostand confused   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 12:50pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 16

Oh Great. Just what we need-another giant department with countless bureacrats sitting in meetings and doing powerpoint presentations on peacebuilding.

Then they all fly to Las vegas, attend conventions, enjoy at our dime and we pay their salaries, pensions, medical and all expenses.

JodyChunder   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 3:29pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 17

lostand confused says

Oh Great. Just what we need-another giant department with countless bureacrats sitting in meetings and doing powerpoint presentations on peacebuilding.

Then they all fly to Las vegas, attend conventions, enjoy at our dime and we pay their salaries, pensions, medical and all expenses.

I'm sold! Where do I apply?

thomaswong.1986   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 4:07pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 18

curious2 says

Likewise bullying is a serious matter,

You mean like the many terrorist organizations in Libya were bullied.. it wasnt until
the US Bombing which ultimately left Libya from supporting global terrorist
networks... not to mention their own Nuclear Bomb ambitions.

Seems to me Bullying does work.. and for good reasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disarmament_of_Libya

In October 2003, U.S. intelligence agencies raided a cargo ship and seized a consignment of centrifuge-related equipment bound for Libya in a northern Mediterranean port.[5] The U.S. investigations revealed that many of these components were manufactured by the Scomi Precision Engineering facility in Malaysia and were produced under the technical guidance of Dr. A.Q. Khan and various nationals from the United Kingdom, Germany and Switzerland.[5] After the news became public, Libyan nuclear ambitions were cooled and demoralized.

HEY YOU   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 4:26pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 19

Of course Obama/the leader of the Democratic Party is for Peacebuilding.

Muslims all over the earth are saying, "We be Loving us some drone strikes."

zzyzzx   Tue, 26 Feb 2013, 10:18pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 20

edvard2 says

zzyzzx says

Yeah, things were a lot better back then with respect to these things.

Explain. Or did you just totally misunderstand what I said?

Back in the old days, you could do things like beat your kids when they misbehaved and otherwise treat your kids as kids, and they behaved much better.

edvard2   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 12:23am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 21

zzyzzx says

Back in the old days, you could do things like beat your kids when they misbehaved and otherwise treat your kids as kids, and they behaved much better.

Baloney. I had a few friends who's parents were really strict with them and they wound up being having serious issues in school. My parents never did anything except ground me from stuff and somehow we all turned out just fine.

FortWayne   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 12:42am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 22

edvard2 says

zzyzzx says

Back in the old days, you could do things like beat your kids when they misbehaved and otherwise treat your kids as kids, and they behaved much better.

Baloney. I had a few friends who's parents were really strict with them and they wound up being having serious issues in school. My parents never did anything except ground me from stuff and somehow we all turned out just fine.

The big government mentality is one shoe fits all, especially if pandering with it gets them votes and political career. I think government needs to stop trying to protect childs selfesteem from their parents. Not every child will grow up normally without occasional punishment, we all are wired a little different in the head and for some little punishment goes a long way.

And another thing "the left" completely forgot. If a child doesn't get discipline from parents they'll not be ready for life which is a lot more harsh, a lot more bullied, and a lot more difficult. It's not just a liberal wet dream where everyone is running around happy care free in some bully free paradise. Life just doesn't work that way.

And these regulations really tick me off as a parent, they always have.

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 2:00am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 23

CaptainShuddup says

Leo spare us the Sandy hook lecture

So, reminding you of your past comments and promises is now a "lecture?"

CaptainShuddup says

Give it a rest already

Shuddup, you can choose to deny, and try and not take responsibility for your past statements, but my image of you is to be forever tainted by your unrepentant response to the mass murder of children. When you start throwing around accusations of politicization of course it is going to remind me of when you choose to politicize a tragedy, and I am going to call you on it. Also, it is not infrequent that you like to pretend that you are on some sort of twisted moral high ground. This also reminds me that you have made the most wantonly morally degenerate comments I have see on Pnet.

CaptainShuddup says

Sandy hook...I didn't have anything to do with that event...

Yes, and I have stated this in the past people who actually commit those acts I view as evil, and I hate them. You, Shuddup, I don't hate or view as evil. You, I just merely dislike and view with disgust. This is all just from my viewpoint of what you post in this forum. If I was to discover that your real-life actions are a direct reflection of the types of things you choose to post then, yes, I would grow to hate you and think of you as evil. Hopefully that day never comes. Until then, I assume that you are using this anonymous medium to vent your most depraved fantasies, and strike an impotent "blow" against the world that you have imagined has somehow wronged you. I assume that you choose to reflect any redeeming qualities you may have only in real-life.

But what do you, Shuddup, think about they type of person who, when faced with an event where children have been mass murdered, has the first reaction to make light of the tragedy and use it to attack people with whom they disagree with politically? Then their second response is a promise to make fun of similar tragedies in the future, and a wholehearted endorsement of others who make child molestation jokes about murdered kids?

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 2:03am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 24

curious2 says

While I respect the laudable goals, I have to wonder about the means. We have a government fomenting war all over the world (DEA, "Defense", arms sales proudly promoted by the White House), so now the solution is to add a department of Peacebuilding? It sounds like the old woman who swallowed a fly, then a spider to catch the fly, etc. Why not start by eliminating the DEA, scaling back the DoD, and stop promoting arms sales?

Likewise bullying is a serious matter, but don't we already have a Department of Education and a Department of Justice? If all these departments are failing to do their job, what kind of mind thinks the solution is to add yet another department with overlapping mission?

Yes, it would seem that if the goal is to try and get people to get along better adding another layer of bureaucracy is just going to complicate things. They should just change the mandates/missions of organizations already working in the areas they want to see more "peace."

CaptainShuddup   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 2:40am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 25

I'll take what you said for what it's worth.

You're either a cop wanna be, or an actual Cop that justified a murderous rampaging thug. I'm not sure with is more pathetic, but I wont waste half as much time worrying about it, as you seem to spend on me. Even if you're way off base with your assessment.

I just pointed out those whacky weirdos in the blue states, you manifested everything else. If you're outraged by the way I politicized it, then welcome to my world. There's not a topic in the press that is not Politicized Liberal BULLSHIT.
And to tell you the truth, glad I could make a difference.

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 2:54am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 26

CaptainShuddup says

I'll take what you said for what it's worth.

No you won't.

CaptainShuddup says

You're either a cop wanna be, or an actual Cop that justified a murderous rampaging thug. I'm not sure with is more pathetic, but I wont half as much time worrying about it, as you seem to spend on me. Even if you're way off base with your assessment.

I just pointed out those whacky weirdos in the blue states, you manifested everything else. If you're outraged by the way I politicized it, then welcome to my world. There's not a topic in the press that is not Politicized Liberal BULLSHIT.

And to tell you the truth, glad I could make a difference.

Other than an attempt at being insulting I am not sure exactly what your point is. Is your ignorance willful or genuine?

CaptainShuddup   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:01am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 27

LEO 707 = Law enforcement Officer from Santa Rosa

were you not in the tread on Droner praising his rampage, justifying his homicide?
It didn't bother me, I didn't agree with it, but I certainly don't feel compelled to chase you around every thread and call you out on it. How ever, if you're going to be all sanctimonious in the moral department. Then I'll serve you up a heaping helping of it.

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:22am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 28

CaptainShuddup says

were you not in the tread on Droner praising his rampage, justifying his homicide?

Nope, never praised Dorner's rampage.

I was kind enough to post a link to the thread that showed you making light of murdered children and promising to do it in the future.

Here are some things I posted in that thread, in your hurry to lash out at me with a desire to find posts of mine that equal yours in moral crapitude maybe you missed them.

leo707 says

Everyone he killed or shot was innocent, and did not deserve to die.

leo707 says

While I agree that he certainly over reacted

leo707 says

[On murdering family members as a way of getting revenge]

Horrible? yes.

Immoral? yes.

It is fair? no.

leo707 says

No, what he did was not "normal", but his feelings and the motivations that caused him to act seem within the "normal" realm. As I have made clear in my posts, this does not justify his actions or make them morally "right."

leo707 says

Dorner is--rightly so--very unpopular and a villain as such he is going to be vilified.

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:23am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 29

CaptainShuddup says

LEO 707 = Law enforcement Officer from Santa Rosa

Why did you pick Santa Rosa?

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:30am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 30

CaptainShuddup says

How ever, if you're going to be all sanctimonious in the moral department. Then I'll serve you up a heaping helping of it.

In an effort not derail this thread too much, would you mind serving me that heaping helping in the actual thread on Dorner?

http://patrick.net/?p=1222085

I would be happy to respond to your continued unfounded ramblings there.

CaptainShuddup   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:45am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 31

leo707 says

Dorner did not seem to have any desire to hurt anyone but his "high value targets."

The only danger faced by civilians was a hail of bullets, coming from police, if the civilian happened to be driving vehicle that kinda-sorta looked like it might be Dorners.

leo707 says

Not everyone who commits murder is crazy, unless you want to define murder as a crazy act. His manifesto was probably the most lucid and well reasoned manifesto that I have ever read--not that the bar was too high.

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 32

CaptainShuddup says

leo707 says

Dorner...

Thanks for putting in the effort, but neither of those quotes was "praising his rampage" or "justifying his homicide", as you accused.

The disagreement in that thread was if Dorner was mentally ill/psychotic or not. No one in that thread praised his rampage or seemed to feel it was justified--even me as you can see from the quotes I pulled.

Feel free to accuse me of thinking that Dorner was probably not "crazy", you will find plenty of quotes to back that up, and you certainly are welcome to disagree.

CaptainShuddup   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 3:58am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 33

leo707 says

Why did you pick Santa Rosa?

Because you don't strike me as a Napa wine sniffer.

leo707   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 4:03am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 34

CaptainShuddup says

leo707 says

Why did you pick Santa Rosa?

Because you don't strike me as a Napa wine sniffer.

Haha, I might end up at a wine tasting every year or two, but I much prefer whisky. However, Santa Rosa is still wine country.

edvard2   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 5:09am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 35

Yep. Santa Rosa is right next to Healdsburg and the Russian River area. very good wine area indeed.

Dan8267   Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 6:15am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 36

The most telling thing about this thread is that "conservatives" think it's a stupid idea for government have any department devoted to studying how to further world peace and decrease domestic violence. Those of us who are sane think that it's dumb that this has taken so damn long. This should have been a priority the moment the Manhattan project was completed.

The bill does not even mention bullying and that's conservative twisting of the truth to make a Straw Man argument. The bill does address school violence, which certainly would include all the school shootings that have plagued our nation recently. Specifically, the bill states:

(6) develop new programs that relate to the societal challenges of school violence, gangs, racial or ethnic violence, violence against gays and lesbians, and police-community relations disputes;
...
(8) assist in the establishment and funding of community-based violence prevention programs, including violence prevention counseling and peer mediation in schools;

Peer mediation can be interpreted broadly, but to suggest that this bill proposes that a federal department is sending in agents to stop bullying is ridiculous. At most, it would provide federal assistance (literature, study results, training, etc.) to help local schools build anti-violence education programs which may include non-violent conflict resolution, i.e., preventing children from becoming future criminals.

Not that this bill is perfect. I found one critical flaw in it with a cursory review.

(9) counsel and advocate on behalf of women victimized by violence;

This should read, "(9) counsel and advocate on behalf of persons victimized by violence;". There is absolutely no excuse for sexist wording in modern legislation. Men can be and are victims of domestic violence in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships. There is no justification for male victims to be considered any different than female victims and this obvious oversight does indicate narrow-minded thinking of the topic of domestic abuse.

If fact, laws should never have any gender-specific wording as doing so clearly violates the 14th Amendment.

That said, the intent and the general idea of the bill is a good one. Government should work to prevent crimes, violence, and wars. If for no other reason, it's way fucking cheaper than fighting wars and crime. So conservatives, don't think of this bill as a way to save black and Hispanic children from becoming murder victims or criminals. Think of it, instead, as a way of cutting government spending so that your taxes can go down. Because, that is, after all, all you give a damn about.

Dan8267   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 5:31am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 37

zzyzzx says

to ending bullying at schools.

If the bill did that, it would be a good thing.

12-Year-Old Victim of Bullying Dead After Being Attacked At School

curious2   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 5:53am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 38

Dan8267 says

The most telling thing about this thread is that "conservatives" think it's a stupid idea for government have any department devoted to studying how to further world peace and decrease domestic violence.

Dan, while I agreed with most of your comment, I grow weary of the tribal "liberal" vs "conservative" mutual demonization society. If the authors of the legislation want to evince seriousness of purpose in their stated goal, they should include eliminating the DEA and ending the drug war. That would make the legislation budget neutral, and it would cut gun violence in half. Instead they propose adding a new department, without cutting anything, which suggests the real goal may be to create patronage jobs thus expanding their own patronage networks. Is it liberal or conservative in this context to say that if we create this new government department, we should eliminate an old one that has proven counter-productive?

Dan8267   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 8:13am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 39

curious2 says

Is it liberal or conservative in this context to say that if we create this new government department, we should eliminate an old one that has proven counter-productive?

Neither. Liberalism is a social philosophy, not an economic one.

As far as what constitutes fiscal conservatism, that originally meant small, streamline government. By that definition, a fiscal conservative would want to create a small, effective agency using the best and only the best from the FBI, TSA, DHC, rather than having three agencies. And this new agency described in the original post would simply be part of the Department of Education and would draw it's funds from the DoEd. No net increase in funding. Liberalism and fiscal conservatism by this original definition were not opposites at all.

However, what constitutes fiscal conservatism as the modern GOP has redefined it is, don't spend anything on social programs, but give ample welfare to banks, multinational corporations, and the warfare industry. Remember, Dick Cheney said Reagan proved that deficits don't matter and for eight years the entire GOP agreed with him.

CL   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 8:53am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 40

Not to be outdone, the GOP is countering with a "Department of Warmongering"

zzyzzx is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net