Andy Mcnab
Forum
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 ... 297
"Civilians wash their hands of the military (Vietnam) when it suits them and then applaud its heroes the next because they need something to cling to". SP10122 for the majority that is right, without wanting to sound patronising. But why is that? Where do we the lowly civilian get our information from? The press. And who releases the information and decides what we are allowed to know? MoD and government. There are very few who can claim to have real insider knowledge we are all victims of spin, hype and skewed stories. But, some of us can find our way through the mess (often with a little help from people pointing it out) and read through lines.
As for your example of Vietnam, well nobody likes to read of 58,000 dead Americans and near enough 1 million dead Vietnamese, it's bad publicity so yes it gets swept under the carpet and glossed over because who wants to sit down and think about why those men/women (PC!!) died it is easier to ignore it. And yes we applaud our heroes because as Brits we love nothing better than being able to shoot them down in flames afterwards.
Sorry SP10122 I'm quoting you again (I should be paying royalties!)
"What has ultimately really upset people (rightly so) is that he's given away detailed SOP's and procedures and not just talked generally (as DLB did) about his experiences". One more quote and then I promise I'll stop copying everyone else! One of the replies to that was "And if people in the know are so upset because he's letting out their trade secrets, it implies he speaks with some accuracy" (Dare). If after ten years in the SAS he didn't speak with accuracy I'd dread to think what kind of soldier he would have been. I've made this point before (I think at the time it was mostly directed at Ryan) you can argue he is not writing fiction. He takes one mission he remembers well, changes some names, makes up a few places, fantasises a few sex scenes, pads it out a bit, and there you have it instant best seller. Anyone can do that and that is my point he has proved that anyone can do it. I know writer's should stick to what they know to give it realism but both McNab and Ryan stretch that to breaking point. It's an Andy life history in Nick Stone's name. So yes I can see why people in the know are very upset about what is or has been written - they probably know the real story behind it.
Hypocritically I like to read the NS life history and really I don't care if AM is just copying out of his diary I'm only a civilian! But I do agree without B20 and IA and the profile they gave him his fiction would have disappeared without a trace. That sounds harsh and no doubt I'll be told off for saying it (I'm ducking already!!) but you can't compare him to Clancy or Forsyth the real master writers (in a literary sense now).
I guess I'll need my running shoes again, damn it where did I leave them….
>>By Bethan (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 13:56)
Short note:
The strength of McNab, Ryan, Spence and other ex Reg authors is their level of credibility (as far as authenticity goes for technical details). They've been in the thick of it, and can draw on their personal experiences and inside knowledge.
As far as I know, neither Clancy of Forsyth has spent much of their time pinned down by enemy 7.62 rounds zinging into their sangar...
>>By ortlieb (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 14:08)
Ortlieb what's a sangar? To me a sangar is a sandwich and I'm guessing you don't mean they're having their lunch shot at!
>>By Bethan (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 14:44)
One last thing, lets be realistic here the strength of McNab et al isn't just their authenticity which you can't deny but that they've hit on a niche market. Us Joe Public love these SAS stories now, its getting our adrenaline hit without leaving our comfy chairs but once that market dries up how many would bet money on any of the lads changing tack and writing a different type of best seller? I'm not trying to take away their success, whatever people think about their motives, they have worked hard and they deserve what they have got through it. But everyone should be honest about their limits. I'm a good scientist but I'll never win a Nobel Prize and I'm no Einstein either. Yes McNab is a good story teller but without B20 would any publisher have touched him? Ask the many struggling writers for that answer. Don't get me wrong I love his books a lot but he's not the best writer out there.
>>By Bethan (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 15:04)
Forgetting about booksales/vocabulary/literary prizes I think a writer is a good writer if the reader thinks he is. If he provides a need/joy for that reader. No matter his choice of words.
>>By Lynn (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 15:12)
Don't duck on my account, Bethan...
As to Frederick Forsyth's experience at being shot at, well, take a look at his bio, chances are he might have missed out on action:
>>Frederick Forsyth was born in August 1938 in Ashford, Kent, England, and was educated at Tonbridge school, and later Granada University, Spain. He started work as one of the youngest pilots in the RAF at the age of 19, serving from 1956 to 1958. For the next three and a half years he worked as a reporter for the Eastern Daily Press in Norfolk, before becoming a correspondant for Reuters in 1961, first in Paris, at the age of twenty-three, and then in East Germany and Czechoslovakia, locations which provided him with information for his first books. Returning to London in 1965, he worked as a radio and television reporter for the BBC. As assistant diplomatic correspondent, he covered the Biafran side of the Biafra-Nigeria war from July to September 1967, and this provided him with knowledge of international politics, and the world of mercenary soldiors. It was this work and related research that interested him with historical truth. In 1968 he left the BBC to return to Biafra, and he reported on the war, first as a freelance and later for the Daily Express and Time magazine.
In 1970, after nine years of an intense journalistic career, he decided to write a book using the research methods he had learnt while a reporter. This book, The Day of the Jackal, became an instant success, and spawned a career of many successful books.
Frederick Forsyth speaks fluent French, German and Spanish, and has travelled widely in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and these experiencies can be seen in the authenticity of his books.<<
Spanish University? But, then, he does have a right-wing fascist attitude...
-------------------------------------------------
Now take a look at Tom Clancy's bio:
>>If you ask people 'Have you heard of Tom Clancy?' many just shake their head in bewilderment. But when you mention some of his novels, titles such as Hunt for Red October and Patriot Games, they know - if not for the novels then for the movies.
full name is Thomas L. Clancy, Jr. He was born on 12 April 1947. He majored in English at Baltimore's Loyola College, and worked as an insurance broker in Maryland. In college he dreamed of writing a novel. In 1984 his dream came through and he got his first novel published, The Hunt for Red October (HFRO). What inspired him was a story about a Soviet frigate's failed attempt to defect to Sweden and a deep interest in naval history. Consequently HFRO became the first book with the main character Jack Ryan, former stockbroker and CIA employee. Ryan has until now appeared in seven books, the latest titled Executive Orders.<<
Yep, not a whisper of real-life fear under fire...
------------------------
So, as corny as this may read, in that many of you think I've attacked AM too much on occasion, it has to be said he's done extremely well on the book front, in the main because he didn't get a good start in life (educationally, though anyone can excel in studies even at a local comp, if they want to - easier said than done for adventurous youths) and it is that past added to his success that makes him a hero in a way that Forsyth & Clancy could never understand or describe no matter how hard they might try...
>>By buddy (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 17:05)
Meant to add: I believe AM could write a wonderful bestseller with absolutely no ref to military doings, why do I say that? Because he knows what hurt is all about, knows how to hurt, (breathes it, feels it, every day) and maybe, one day, (when he stops jumping off sofas and leaping out of windows) he'll reveal his ever growing talent in a new light...
>>By buddy (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 17:20)
You needn't run on my account, Bethan. I agree with you -- at least 99 and 44/100ths of the way. Lynn has again captured my same feelings about writers and why they become our favourites. I have long been an avid fan of Clancy and Forsyth and loads of other authors in their genre -- that's why I picked up B20 in the first place. But you got me thinking whether I would have been so keen on AM had I read any of his fiction first.
Although I know I'm not impartial -- and here's the 56/100ths -- I honestly think I would have been drawn to AM's writing, regardless. There is a unique "realness" (it is the quality to which I believe Ortlieb is referring) in his stories which I find so intriguing. His stories have a very definite "been there/done that" voice -- and it is most definitely a soldier's voice (vs "officer's"). What pleases me most is that I am finding so many similar soldier voices (although not quite as satisfying, I must say) in the other books I have begun to read by other ex-SAS (and ex-US SF, too). Technically (writing style, structure, grammar, techno-info/research, etc.) TC, FF et al, can run rings around AM, CR, MC and the rest (well, not Ken Connors maybe). But my reason for reading TC, FF et al is different from WHY I read these ex-SF men's stories -- it's about WHAT I want to get out of them. I read these SF stories for the human factor, not for the techno-knowledge, tradecraft, or complicated plot lines.
For Sp10122 and others who have complained about SOP's and tradecraft being given away in these SF books, well, to me that's just -- hmm... how would AM say it? -- a load of ol' bollocks! TC, FF, etc. go into just as much detail, if not more, but because they use "technical advisors" (who for the most part remain nameless to the public), their technical information is seen as acceptable FACTion.
If you really, really think hard, what specifics does AM reveal? Not a lot. He gives loads of common-sense, real-world, you-could-figure-this-out-for-yourself-if-you-really-thought-about-it stuff, but that's what I really enjoy! It's a reality I might not normally have considered or thought about. It's a practical approach to problems that are so very, very fundamental but yet are so very, very critical to successfully doing the job. (Can you tell I was never into scouting or camping as a child?) Cling-film, plastic bottles, gortex, soft (quiet) food, constructing a blind, the versatility of condoms, polaroid cameras, egg cartons and cheap clocks, safety pins 101, room/house clearing procedures, the joys of archery, the shock value of Zapzillas, climbing hooks from wood and nails, how to fly comfort-less baggage class, become a whole "new you" courtesy of a gay barman -- an endless list, yes, but traitorously specific secrets? If cling-film, condoms, safety pins, and spam are security secrets, we're in trouble! Of course, secretly, I think it's terrific knowing that I, too, can soften the PE in outdated landmines in the privacy of my own bathroom! Sheesh! That really comes in handy in my real-life world -- not! But in book-world, SAS-book-world-land, yes, I do like learning about such things.
Oh, and as a tangent but supportive aside, much as I am fascinated by AM using fact-based info for his fictions (Op Flavius, Sunburn missiles, Echelon, etc.), one of my favourite Forsyth books, Fist of God, does the exact same thing. And most interestingly of all, FF's technical advisor was Charles Bruce (aka Nish, "Nosh" in IA, and Tom Read, CB's pen name for Freefall):
Beginning premise for Fist of God:
"In 1985, in the closing days of the Iraq-Iran War, Saddam hired the super gun’s inventor, Canadian astrophysicist Gerald Bull, arguably the most prominent scientist of the day in the missile and artillery field, to construct a 424 mm cannon that could fire quarter-ton shells more than 1,700 miles.
Bull was murdered in Brussels in 1990. Newspaper reports claimed Israel’s Mossad killed him to foil the super gun project. Another theory said he fell victim to Iraqi intelligence assassins because of Saddam’s suspicion that he was cooperating with Israel through South African contacts. The real story is still unknown. After Bull’s death, Iraq was left with the scientist’s plans but without the manpower or technical know-how to complete the project."
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=123
(This is actually an interesting site if you have a few minutes to look around.)
Sangar: defensive earthwork around hollow: a small low temporary defensive work, usually built of stone around an existing hollow in the ground. (www.onelook.com/)
In IA, AM describes Baruki sangar in Crossmaglen: "Named after a paratrooper called Baruki who got blown up, the sangar was a big corrugated iron and steel structure. Inside were three GPMGs, an M79 grenade launcher, smoke dischargers, radios, and, most important, flasks of tea and sandwiches, because we were up there forever. There was one electric heater. ..."
Hmmm... now, does that information constitute secrets? I'd think any resident of XMG, let alone seasoned PIRA operatives, would have worked out the approximate weaponry long before IA came out. Oooh, wait! Unless they didn't know about the space heater... ;o)
>>By am-i-binned (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 17:25)
Ooops, cross-posting with you again today, Buddy! Very TZ!
>>By am-i-binned (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 17:35)
Random question, if you don't have 100% perfect eyesight, can you be in the Regiment?
>>By Ignaty (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 22:29)
Suppose if Clarence-Daktari-the lion could be a tv-star....
(sorry)
>>By Lynn (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 23:28)
Commendable argument, Am-I-Binned, on the safety pin front gratis WalMart.
How do Americans, (Europeans, rest of world, plus ignorant Brits) acquire such "indepth" knowledge of the SAS (?) - displayed in posts here at Gnod - if as you say, AM has not contributed anything of value, beyond that of good story telling. Yes, many biographies and autobiographies were written about the SAS before B20, yes the Brecon Beacons were featured, but Wales is primarily a mountainous region throughout and consists of "ranges" of mountains. In fact, the SAS and other elite forces have just about tread most of them at some time or another, and yes Salisbury Plain, Bodmin Moor, Dartmoor (England), and Scottish sites, to name but a few more were given precedence in earlier memoirs, but earlier writers avoided specifics of "training grounds" as grid map refs found in recent SAS books...
Damn it all, Stirling Lines to many people (for years) remained merely a myth (which it is/was) - few people in the UK had a clue as to where it was actually located or what constituted the term Stirling Lines. There was a time, not so long ago when the SAS and those who served in it were elitist in every way: as in secretive to the n'th degree...That cannot be said of AM/CR with their B20 versions - blatant write up of a mission and all the tactical logistics involved in that mission hardly before the dust had settled post war in Iraq...
Frederick Forsyth Wrote the "Day of the Jackal" when CB was still cutting his military teeth, and when CB provided knowledgeable input for FF at a later date, the difference was that people reading it thought of it as merely a piece of "fiction". Had CB put his name to that book it would have provided the very same "credibility factor" to the general readership, which is exactly the case you point out as a mark of AM et al's credibility factor'.
I have to say, it does p**ss me off some, when you hail the IRA (PIRA) as on a par with MI6 (SIS) with vast intelligence structures. PIRA consists of ordinary people, (your next door neighbour) people who learned/researched their subject matter the hard way (before hackable eletronic databases). Months went into the planning of bombing sessions and days of checking and rechecking logistics for raids on British military sites, and why did the IRA pick on soft targets of civilians (Omah, and the pub bombings in England, etc., (?) because the IRA didn't have access to enough info on where certain troops were stationed, (often moved from home bases on account of known IRA activity) so what did the IRA do, picked on soft military targets like the Royal Household cavalry horses in London, etc. Oh yes, it gave the IRA publicity/notoriety with dead and maimed horses all over the thoroughfare, but the IRA were also out to get at the SAS/SBS, and the Parachute Reg...They became #1 targets, and it didn't matter if their wives and kids were blown to hell either...It didn't happen though, did it, but it could now, couldn't it in these unsettling times? Who doesn't know in the Middle East where the SAS hangs out, and likely schools where SAS kids are in attendance?
Are Americans (Europeans, rest of world, plus formerly ignorant Brits) who've read SBS books, as familiar with the SBS home base (?) as they are at present in respect of the SAS & Hereford and surrounding area...? Do Americans (Europeans, rest of world, plus formerly ignorant Brits) know where the Parachute regiment is based, now?
OK, so AM/CR et al, are safely out of the forces, now, but you can see why so many left in the Reg at the time B20 hit the bookstands, and those in it now, are inclined to say AM started a landslide of information no one can stop!!!!!!!!!
I think everyone here should go read Chris Ryan's "Greed". It shows what happens when Temptation is dangled under the nose of an ex SAS trooper and it spells money, money, money!!!!
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 02:24)
AIB Thank you for the sangar explanation!
"But my reason for reading TC, FF et al is different from WHY I read these ex-SF men's stories -- it's about WHAT I want to get out of them."
That sentence says it all for me and you have hit the nail on the head. I've nearly finished Up Country by Nelson Demille fantastic book, really makes you feel like you're there as a spectator but with McNab you feel like you're actually doing it too. I stand by what I said before but as Buddy pointed out writing is FF and TC's number one profession not something they fell into (not the right phrase!) so maybe it was unfair to directly compare them all, I should have been comparing AM with say CR or JTCH.
Did anyone see SAS The Real Story last night? For those that get Channel 4 it'll be on again next week (Monday 9pm). Last night was desert warfare mostly Oman and Dhofar - B20 only got mentioned for about two minutes at the end. Peter Ratcliffe was on and he made the statement that if they had taken a vehicle then everyone would have got back okay, it's a bit late for what ifs. They had comments from many sources Barry Davies, Lofty Large and his mate Jimmy, Ratcliffe and others who remained in shadow. Is that acceptable to those who don't approve of AM/CR spouting off about SAS missions? Next week is jungle warfare (Borneo).
>>By Bethan (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 09:37)
So Bethan, please do compare AM with CR and JTCH...
I have never read any JTCH, reading CR's Land of Fire at the moment (and have read all CR's before, except the children's book, didn;t even know they existed). How's JTCH doing compared to
CR and AM?
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 10:07)
Oh, another question: What is a DF1 test, and what's the difference between DF1, DF2, DF3, DF4. Are there more DF's?
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 12:20)
Lynn, Land of Fire (not bad) one can hear the regret in his not having done in B20 what his lead character does in LoF...
JTCH, was recommended as officer class material, and I can see why from just reading his books. He comes across as no less your typical rough neck yahooing SAS/SBS guy, but you can see he looks beyond his own personal aura (a very serious side!!) Yes, there will always be officers who were born with silver spoons in their mouths who do the Sandhurst route as part of family tradition, but some of the best officers are those who come from the ranks (recommended for officer training), and often as not they are the ones least respected by some of their former mates/buddies, yet reverred by new recruits...
Having said that, and although I'm no fan of RSM Ratcliffe, he was "reverred" by more of the men who served alongside AM/CR than you all here might imagine. He was a good soldier and not afraid of being in the thick of any action. He was reckoned a hero as well....
Where all the arguments fall down on AM's case for his not having spilt tactical/logistic information in his books, lies heavily on his having said too much "off the record" to his one-time matey News of the World journalist friends (two-page spread articles/features about the SAS, and their having embellished those off the record comments)...
Subsequently, all the books before B20 had passed off virtually unseen in bookstores as anything more than fiction, except for officer memoirs, until one or two hit the headlines as "Author Fraud - never served in the SAS" like "The Nemesis File" etc.
The strange thing is: those writers may not have officially served in 22 SAS, but one or two had served in 21 (TA) SAS, and as for Michael Asher, he did serve the SAS (if not served with) for he was often allocated duties of playing the enemy on exercises with the SAS, and it must be remembered that he did do the selection course. It is also worth remembering AM got through selection, not by the grace of god, but because the selection officer liked his face!
On occasion, mock enemy troops have been known to capture SAS troopers whilst on exercises, but then, sometimes the mock enemy have been RTU'd Paras...Being RTU'd is not always because a soldier coudn't hack the SAS, or failed any courses, it happens too when men are destined to go up the promotional ladder: opportunity of rank above sergeant is few and far between...
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 12:22)
Damn, missed last few words of last paragraph...
Being RTU'd is not always because a soldier coudn't hack the SAS, or failed any courses, it happens too when men are destined to go up the promotional ladder: opportunity of rank above sergeant is few and far between in the SAS...
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 12:26)
The selection officer liked God's face?
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 13:58)
Sorry, meant to say:
Ratcliffe, if I recall right, was still with the Reg (but would leave soon) when they had to sign the (in)famous agreement, but he refused.
What was said about that 'inside' ?
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 14:05)
Recipes for making bombs/explosives with common household-equipment has existed on the Internet for years (example; Terrorists Handbook etc).
Just a short note. Haven't got much time to post lenghty essays, I'm afraid. ;)
>>By ortlieb (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 14:21)
In relation to your subject..better a short note than a short fuse..
(I think it's time that punishment hat came out of the closet)
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 14:33)
Oh absolutely, Ortlieb, but maximum effect comes down to where it is placed, ie; destructive properties, and social horror, the result of preparatory work and well-planned op of walking away unseen...
Unless of course, you're talking about random suicide bombers.
9/11, however, was a prime example of suicide mission based on Osama bin Laden's knowledge of civil engineering, plus a well thout out plan of action...
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 14:44)
damn the brain being way ahead of fingers: thought.
Lynn, Ratcliffe and infamous aggreement: it didn't matter what was said, he was a senior NCO and on his way out...There's no denying he was well-respected by many of his men, and those same men saw the chance of him putting the B20 fiasco into some sense of proportion, as in making it known that others carried out successful missions, which he did...
Hey, and God is not as important as the Goddess...Read The Da Vinci Code...Man has spent his life trying to be more important, and still he can't do or concentrate on more than one job at a time (ha ha), when he does he falls down on not remembering where he started and on which job..
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 14:56)
Ooops! I must be a man!
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 15:10)
Oh no AIB, you stay just right where you belong..with other Goddesses like me and Buddy.. ;o)
You know, I ran into Nick Stone last night and he was complaining about George and Valentin and the other old fellas from his past. He ran into them at every wedding he attended and each time they punched him 'friendly' and said: next time it's your turn son!! I asked what he did and he said "Well, finally they stopped when I told them the same at every funeral"
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 15:30)
There's a challenge Lynn.
Since I'm just starting Direct Action I won't comment on JTCH just yet but so far so good. So that just leaves my boys! Where do I start? Okay….
To be fair I'll only consider the first four of Ryan's books not the stand-alone stories, I'd hate to make the same mistake as last time! First off Sharp vs Stone. Not to discredit Ryan but he hasn't made me feel as attached to any of his characters as McNab has with Nick Stone. How many of you would care if Geordie Sharp got a double tap to the head? I wouldn't, but when or if McNab finishes Stone off I'll be gutted. That sounds so sad! But isn't that what writing is all about? The character is everything, you could have a stunning plot with an amazing ending but if you can't believe or relate to the character that book will always miss something. Sharp is more two-dimensional there's not much of the 'I am human after all' (although I liked the Sharp-Whinger aspect) maybe that's what men like him are like in real life (Comment Buddy?) and maybe McNab is only keeping us, his female audience happy by making him more 'tree-hugging' but it's working and it makes a better story.
For me the McNab books move a lot quicker probably because most of the tension comes from you actually 'doing it' with him (ha ha no funny comments!) whereas Ryan tends to use a more storyteller this is what happened rather than this is what we do. But one thing in Ryan's favour his twists and turns are more unexpected and often make the book (think Watchman who saw that coming?). For example, I was finding Tenth Man Down really dull until the Nunnery and then the whole thing picked up and I really enjoyed the last half. McNab isn't as good at that. He starts off at pace and keeps that up throughout the whole book (with the exception of Last Light I thought, I didn't enjoy that one as much).
I would love to read a McNab that wasn't Nick Stone, can he create another character that doesn't contain too much of his own personality? Ryan has seemed to be able to do that (much prefer Temple and Black to Sharp). So if you ever read this Andy give us another hero to worship, but one that still isn't too perfect, a protégé perhaps?
What do you all reckon? It's not a very comprehensive review but I'm trying to fit this in around my bloody open day presentation, think of it as a starter just something to wet the appetite ha ha.
>>By Bethan (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 15:46)
Ooooh, that reminds me -- I have a smattering of other "when I met Nick" comments... should I post while we wait for Part Three from Paul R?
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 15:47)
re: things that go boom in the night...
we built pretty deadly claymores, although not as accurate as the real ones, with pretty much the same idea as AM in b20... take 2 'soapbars' (200g of PE in form of a 5x10x2 cm block), and strap nails with black ducttape on one side... we had big cotton sheets and balloons placed in the range of fire, and clicked it off... apart from destroying a wrist sized tree, there were pieces of molten nails 2-300 yards away...
(i assume that using ice-cream containers makes it more of a directed blast, functioning a bit like a barrel... correct me if i'm wrong)
other good handmade bombs include mortar shells, that you put PE on and a det.. strap it to a tree, with a wire going across to another, and bob's your uncle... (be careful, you might also trip)
the railings that prevent your car from going of the road... great things to rig up, a good portion of the railing comes off and goes into the lucky bastard that happens to be cruising peacefully with his jag...
all these things have been succesfuly tested against our dear neighbours in previous wars, made up in lack of the 'real thing' (not coca-cola)... get something that blows up, something to blow it up with, a bit of imagination, and sky's the limit.
-trident
>>By trident (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 16:00)
(Ooops! Sorry, Bethan -- another cross-post...)
I like your book review, Bethan! And although I have only read two CR's to date, I already understand the "attachment" quality -- I found that to be true for me even with TOTGA. My only objection to your comments: Don't you dare go talking about killing off NS! -- or you will be needing those running shoes, pronto! -- and I don't think I'll be the only one after you! LOL!!!
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 16:04)
Sheesh, Trident! I'm gonna be more careful in the future -- you got me worried about cross-posting with you! LOL!!! :oD
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 16 Sep 2003 16:07)
Pages: 1 ... 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 ... 297
The discussion board is currently closed.
|
DISCOVER NEW BOOKS