I tend to agree with Mike Geary. Consider:- > "I'm honored to shake the hand of a brave Iraqi citizen who had his hand > cut > off by Saddam Hussein." â??George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., May 25, 2004 This is perfectly possible if the man had two hands and only one was cut off. Dubya does not say or imply that he is shaking the hand that was cut off - which would be gross - that is, "other hand" is the implicit meaning of the second "hand" in this sentence. But making this explicit would surely be tactless and tastless, a pointless exercise in pedantry. TRUE - he could have said 'I am honoured to shake the right hand of a brave Iraqi citizen who had his left hand cut off by Saddam Hussein". But is this any better? Ok a bit - but not enough to make it worthwhile. And then there is the question of defining left and right in this context, for what would be the man's right hand would be on Bush's left. Of course it is a lie to say that Saddam Hussein cut it off - his henchman did that. But even pointing this out is like giving ketamine to a toddler in the taste stakes. Some lies speak of a greater truth. Have no time to comment further except that I find mocking anyone's disability rather distasteful. That a disabled person, and not just physically but one severely mentally impaired, could make it to the highest office in the land must be a tribute to the country in which it happened. We will know we all live in a better world when that one-armed man is the leader in Iraq - then we will know it was all worth it. Til then Donal Coming down off drugs and being asked to come down off the top of a tall building England ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html