Juan,

First off, I give you the courtesy of addressing you by the name you go by
here. Please afford me that same courtesy.

Next, no, you did not SAY that they were Chucks, but the IMPLICATION was
certainly there... go back and read the definition of McCarthyism. I have a
good friend who is an attorney that I showed this whole thread to.
According to him, if this mess were in a print media, there would be great
grounds for a suit against you, and he would take that case in a blink. He
also stated that if it could be shown that these emails were on the
originating computer, that there might also be grounds for a suit, but that
electronic law was out of his area of expertise.

Finally, again, please afford me the courtesy I have afforded you. I have
as much right here as anyone else. Tell someone else to "shoo".

As I said in an earlier post, all about your tactics....

Red
"Juan.Jimenez" wrote in message
news:KeHlb.3241$Tr4.21142@attbi_s03...

"red12049" wrote in message
...
Juan

If you have proof that those children are Chuck's, please post it or
provide
a link.

Did I say they are Chuck's children? chuckle

If you do not, then this question is not germane to this thread, and is
a
Zoom tactic at its' finest.

ROFL! Let me clue you in on a little secret: I don't give a flying
intercourse what you think is germane or not, sonny. Shoo.