Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   New Book: Kerry ‘Unfit for Command’
ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5956 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 511 of 612 (139794)
09-04-2004 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 510 by RAZD
09-03-2004 11:34 PM


Re: but aren't you concerned?
C'mon. There are liberal and conservative groups that spin news to their views. So, no I am not concerned about this. Besides, the story is just beginning.
With 200 vets discounting Kerry's version of events, I don't doubt that they may be onto to something. With Kerry not releasing records, and more and more Navy leaders speaking up, I suspect he is hiding something.
I suspect the Democrats will pressure Bush to stop any investigation. Unfortunately, I suspect he will, since he is leading in the polls.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 510 by RAZD, posted 09-03-2004 11:34 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 512 by RAZD, posted 09-04-2004 12:53 AM ThingsChange has replied
 Message 516 by crashfrog, posted 09-05-2004 4:26 PM ThingsChange has replied
 Message 520 by patriot0717, posted 09-06-2004 1:20 AM ThingsChange has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 512 of 612 (139797)
09-04-2004 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 511 by ThingsChange
09-04-2004 12:28 AM


Re: but aren't you concerned?
This is orchestrated just as the SBV was to distract people's attention from the fact that Bush has no program for the future other than to give away more money from the treasury.
The innuendo is enough for their purposes, they don't need to prove the case or take it to fruition, and letting bush appear magnanomous about stopping the investigation would just let it fester without the final word that would show it to be false.
I repeat -- doesn't it disturb you that such tactics are being used? Do you want someone for president that needs that to win?
This is more than spinning news, this is evil.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 511 by ThingsChange, posted 09-04-2004 12:28 AM ThingsChange has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 562 by ThingsChange, posted 09-07-2004 10:14 PM RAZD has replied

ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5956 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 513 of 612 (139801)
09-04-2004 1:07 AM
Reply to: Message 509 by nator
09-03-2004 8:06 PM


Re: Interpretation of events
You did not prove that Bush lied. Your evidence indicates he was misinformed, as were the Intelligence gurus he depended on. That's not intent to deceive. You want to think the worst, and I give him the benefit of doubt because there is no reason for him to deceive.
I tried to explain why Bush downplayed the Osama hunting. I was addressing the quotes without specifically referring to them. You just don't see or want to believe the strategy.
I don't see abuse of Patriot Act. I think it is worth it to battle terrorism, which you still don't seem to think is a big threat.
I am not going to recite all the evidence from news reports over the last year that reveals Al Qaida planning a more massive attack.
They are not stupid. They know it's hard to pull-off attacks, so they must be high-impact when they do work. That was why they chose airplanes on WTC. One wish intercepted by CIA is for a dirty bomb to put Manhattan inactive for 10,000 years.
Our difference seems simple: You don't perceive a real threat that warrants the Patriot Act, but I do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 509 by nator, posted 09-03-2004 8:06 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 514 by RAZD, posted 09-04-2004 11:47 AM ThingsChange has replied
 Message 515 by nator, posted 09-04-2004 5:42 PM ThingsChange has replied
 Message 522 by patriot0717, posted 09-06-2004 1:52 AM ThingsChange has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 514 of 612 (139856)
09-04-2004 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 513 by ThingsChange
09-04-2004 1:07 AM


Re: Interpretation of events
I don't see abuse of Patriot Act. I think it is worth it to battle terrorism, which you still don't seem to think is a big threat.
quote:
"Anyone who gives up rights in exchange for security deserves neither" -- Benjamin Franklin
The threat of terrorism is not as great as shrub and his cohorts would like to terrify you into believing so you will re-elect him. It is real, no question, but the FIRST time they attacked us on American soil, the republican party told Clinton to back off.
Their analysis of what is going to be a threat has been consistently wrong. When there is information on what a target would be it is one they have not anticipated. The recent information on the targeting of the stock exchange makes my point here, while they have been saying it will be large gatherings of people.
One can be used to terrorize a population by the politicians who want to get re-elected, the other by people who want to damage the US economic system that is impacting their country.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by ThingsChange, posted 09-04-2004 1:07 AM ThingsChange has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 572 by ThingsChange, posted 09-08-2004 12:08 AM RAZD has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 515 of 612 (139928)
09-04-2004 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 513 by ThingsChange
09-04-2004 1:07 AM


Re: Interpretation of events
quote:
You did not prove that Bush lied. Your evidence indicates he was misinformed, as were the Intelligence gurus he depended on. That's not intent to deceive.
First of all, you did not address my point about the poll in which the majority of US citizens believed that the nationality of the WTC terrorist bombers were Iraqi, not Saudi, because the Bush Administration repeatedly made the connection between 9/11 and invading Iraq in speeches and in the media in the run up to the war.
Where do you think the public got that idea?
Please answer that question this time instead of avoiding it.
Second of all, I also showed you that he was informed by the international weapons experts that there was no evidence of Iraq having WMD. That makes them liars.
Like I said, they listened to the "gurus" which told them what they wanted to hear, and ignored Hans Blix, the expert head of the international weapons inspectors who was actually inside Iraq, inspecting all of the sites.
At the very least, Bush and his staff were grossly incompetant and were engaging in active self-delusion for ignoring Blix and taking as truthful Chalabi, now shown to be a corrupt con man, a single obviously forged document stating that Iraq was trying to secure enriched uranium, and several Iraqi defectors.
I can't help but notice that you did not comment upon the 9/11 commission saying that there is no evidence that Iraq and Al Qaida were connected.
Are you just going to ignore that?
Let's also remember that Bush and Cheney strenuously resisted the 9/11 investigation and dragged their feet as much as they could in providing documents. Bush even refused to testify, and he wouldn't even talk to the commission without Cheney there.
Let's also remember Richard Clarke, Bush's former counter-terrorism coordinator who said that Bush et. al. blatantly used 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq:
Former terrorism aide charges Bush manufactured case for Iraq war - World Socialist Web Site
Clarke’s interview and book are a scathing attack on the entire national security leadership of the Bush administration. I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that he’s done such great things about terrorism, he said. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11.
According to Clark, in the initial discussions after September 11, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld called for bombing Iraq rather than Afghanistan, declaring that there were no good bombing targets in Afghanistan. Clarke wrote: I realized with almost a sharp physical pain that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were going to try to take advantage of this national tragedy to promote their agenda about Iraq.
Bush deserves no credit for his conduct in the weeks after September 11for which he received the adulation of the American mediaClarke said. Any leader whom one can imagine as president on September 11 would have declared a ‘war on terrorism’ and would have ended the Afghan sanctuary by invading, Clarke wrote in his book. What was unique about George Bush’s reaction was the decision to invade not a country that had been engaging in anti-US terrorism, but one that had not been, Iraq.
There is also the former Bush speech writer, Frum, who says that the intent for the Bush administration to attack Iraq was in place long before 9/11.
quote:
You want to think the worst, and I give him the benefit of doubt because there is no reason for him to deceive.
He wanted to go to war in Iraq long before 9/11. He used 9/11 to do that.
There is no connection between 9/11 and Iraq. Iraq didn't have any WMD this time and was never, ever a threat to the US.
Are you going to address the specific evidence I have provided over two posts now, or are you just going to ignore it?
quote:
I tried to explain why Bush downplayed the Osama hunting. I was addressing the quotes without specifically referring to them. You just don't see or want to believe the strategy.
What evidence do you have to show that much or any effort to find bin Laden is currently being undertaken.
As of last February, there were only 11,000 American troops in Afghanistan, and only one special forces unit is set to the task of finding bin Laden's support network and dismantling it.
Here is a crucial bit of perspective for you. Emphasis added:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/29/international/...
{Shortened display form or URL, to restore page width to normal - AM}
Much of the timing now is driven by the weather: as winter snows melt, troops can navigate in the high mountain passes and trails where many Qaeda and Taliban members are believed to be hiding. When that moment arrived last year, many of the forces and American intelligence operatives now engaged in Afghanistan were tied up in Iraq.
quote:
I don't see abuse of Patriot Act. I think it is worth it to battle terrorism, which you still don't seem to think is a big threat.
Answer me one question, TC.
Do you think the United States government should have the right to arrest you, detain you indefinitely without making any charges, notifying your family, lawyer, or the media, and anyone subpoenad in connection with your case is subject to prison time if they complain to congress about any abuses they suffer at the hands of law enforcement?
Did you know that the Justice Department as requested that their biggest convictions, to date, connected to the "war on terror", be overturned, because new evidence has come to light which shows these people to be innocent of the charges?
If the govenment can't get it right here, why do you want to give them the KGB-type powers you think are perfectly OK in a supposedly free society?
We're free, except if we read certain library books?
We're free, except if we are made to "disappear", taken away by the government with no due-process whatsoever?
quote:
I am not going to recite all the evidence from news reports over the last year that reveals Al Qaida planning a more massive attack.
THEN WHY AREN't WE CONCENTRATING ON AL QAIDA?
Why are we wasting billions of dollars, killing tens of thousands of people, in a war that is only good for oilmen and anti-American extremist recriters?
quote:
Our difference seems simple: You don't perceive a real threat that warrants the Patriot Act, but I do.
If the terrorists have made you so afraid that you are willing to live in an increasingly facist, less-free country, then they have already won.
This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 09-04-2004 05:03 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by ThingsChange, posted 09-04-2004 1:07 AM ThingsChange has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 596 by ThingsChange, posted 09-08-2004 2:39 PM nator has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 516 of 612 (140112)
09-05-2004 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 511 by ThingsChange
09-04-2004 12:28 AM


With 200 vets discounting Kerry's version of events, I don't doubt that they may be onto to something.
How many of those 200 were present for the events that they dispute?
How many of the versions of events offered by the Swift Boaters are contradicted by record, testimony of other vets, and earlier testimony by the vets themselves?
200 liars are still liars; moreover, you can't substantiate stories that you weren't there for. Most of the vets didn't actually serve with Kerry; O'Neill didn't even arrive until after Kerry had left.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 511 by ThingsChange, posted 09-04-2004 12:28 AM ThingsChange has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 565 by ThingsChange, posted 09-07-2004 10:24 PM crashfrog has replied

patriot0717
Inactive Member


Message 517 of 612 (140180)
09-05-2004 9:49 PM
Reply to: Message 504 by ThingsChange
09-03-2004 2:20 PM


Re: Interpretation of events
quote:
You liberals are lying about this claim that Bush lied.
There you go again. You liberals this, and you liberals that. You can dodge, you can ignore and you can rant and rave, but you can't turn a serial liar like George Bush into respectable presidential candidate. Calling liberals liars doesn't make George W. Bush honest. Calling John Kerry's honored Viet Nam record a fraud doesn't make George W. Bush honest. And not even George W. Bush saying "Honest" can make George W. Bush honest.
George W Bush is:
a military dropout,
a failed business man,
an opportunist who profited from his father's presidency
    with questionable business associates,
cheated to claim victory illegitimately in the 2000 election,
lied to garner public support for the Iraq War,
has told too many other lies to list!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by ThingsChange, posted 09-03-2004 2:20 PM ThingsChange has not replied

patriot0717
Inactive Member


Message 518 of 612 (140182)
09-05-2004 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 510 by RAZD
09-03-2004 11:34 PM


Re: but aren't you concerned?
quote:
This whole concept doesn't give you some misgivings, some concerns? That a "conservative legal watchdog group" (run by? funded by?) wants to launch a legal investigation by people under the administration against his opponent?
As a matter of fact, it is even more scary than you describe. Not only is a right-wing group asking a rightwing attorney general to investigate his right-wing boss' political opponent, but with the new [anti]Patriot Act, the right-wing attorney general can label the political opponent a terrorist because of his "anti-American" statements to Congress and use wiretapping and other electronic surveillance including monitoring emails without so much as asking a judge's permission.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 510 by RAZD, posted 09-03-2004 11:34 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 519 by RAZD, posted 09-06-2004 12:53 AM patriot0717 has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 519 of 612 (140210)
09-06-2004 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 518 by patriot0717
09-05-2004 10:05 PM


Re: but aren't you concerned?
Try this on for size, received in e-mail:
The 14 Defining Characteristics Of Fascism, by Dr. Lawrence Britt
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made ore rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
It takes people with intentional blinders to ignore this trend.
I would say "enjoy" but this is not for pleasurable thinking.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 518 by patriot0717, posted 09-05-2004 10:05 PM patriot0717 has not replied

patriot0717
Inactive Member


Message 520 of 612 (140220)
09-06-2004 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 511 by ThingsChange
09-04-2004 12:28 AM


Re: but aren't you concerned?
quote:
With Kerry not releasing records, and more and more Navy leaders speaking up, I suspect he is hiding something.
I can't believe that you really believe what you are writing. Kerry has released every document relating to his military service. Bush has many missing documents. You can see both of their records at Findlaw.com
But, really, do you think it is more important to allow ourselves to be distracted by John Kerry's well documented Viet Nam heroism when we have Americans dying everyday in Iraq today while the federal budget spirals out of control. If you believe that reelecting George W Bush at any cost is more important than having a democratic debate about legitimate issues facing America, then I suppose the Swift Distraction "makes sense" to you.
But just remember, when your children are paying off the war debt that Bush promised us would be only $1 Billion dollars and is now over $200 billion, that it was all worth it.
PS: Do you really like being lied to that much?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 511 by ThingsChange, posted 09-04-2004 12:28 AM ThingsChange has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 567 by ThingsChange, posted 09-07-2004 11:00 PM patriot0717 has replied

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 521 of 612 (140226)
09-06-2004 1:41 AM


If the Navy never has issued the Silver star with the combat V, then this is fraud for Kerry to say he recieved something that no one in the Navy has ever recieved, how can you believe anything on Kery's site, if Kerry simply refuses to release his complete service and medical records, etc...
Page Not Found
Senator Kerry’s DD Form 214 (a Defense Department form detailing a veteran’s service upon separation from the military) lists his Silver Star with Combat ‘V’ and is posted on the Internet at JohnKerry.com. The Combat V device is never awarded with the nation’s third highest award for heroism.
And, of course, John Kerry may answer many of these questions by authorizing the release of all his service and medical records,
This message has been edited by whatever, 09-06-2004 12:42 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 523 by patriot0717, posted 09-06-2004 2:18 AM johnfolton has replied
 Message 525 by Minnemooseus, posted 09-06-2004 2:46 AM johnfolton has not replied

patriot0717
Inactive Member


Message 522 of 612 (140230)
09-06-2004 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 513 by ThingsChange
09-04-2004 1:07 AM


Re: Interpretation of events
I don't see abuse of Patriot Act. I think it is worth it to battle terrorism, which you still don't seem to think is a big threat.
And I suppose you think exporting American jobs is good for the economy, too?
The Patriot Act is a return to McCarthyism, pure and simple. Already, thousands of political activists in Colorado have been watched and had files maintained on them because they chose to exercise their first amendment right to protest against the actions of their government. This surveillence was carried on under the auspices of the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) of the federal government. Colorado sued by the ACLU for violating their first amendments rights and in a settlement, agreed to purge the files of all activists who were not engaged in illegal activity.
Honestly, ThingsChange, can't you see the problem with giving government unlimited power with no checks and balances? If not, why do you think it was so important to our founding fathers?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by ThingsChange, posted 09-04-2004 1:07 AM ThingsChange has not replied

patriot0717
Inactive Member


Message 523 of 612 (140234)
09-06-2004 2:18 AM
Reply to: Message 521 by johnfolton
09-06-2004 1:41 AM


If the Navy never has issued the Silver star with the combat V, then this is fraud for Kerry to say he recieved something that no one in the Navy has ever recieved, how can you believe anything on Kery's site, if Kerry simply refuses to release his complete service and medical records, etc...
Page Not Found
I just visited this site and to my amazement, I found another candidate for the "How low will they go?" department! The officialdom and detail with which they attack the truth is almost compelling. I had to go back to the Kerry records and verify that I had actually witnessed his citation from the U.S. Navy for his Silver Star.
But this raises a larger question. If this sort of deception can be so effective with the people in this forum, can it also work on a national scale? Is it possible these orwellian tactics can actually fool most of America? This is a very scary thought.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 521 by johnfolton, posted 09-06-2004 1:41 AM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 524 by johnfolton, posted 09-06-2004 2:36 AM patriot0717 has replied

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 524 of 612 (140242)
09-06-2004 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 523 by patriot0717
09-06-2004 2:18 AM


Does the records you read just agree he recieved the Silver Heart, the question does it mention the combat "V". If not then how did it get into Mr. Kerry's DD 214.
'V' for valor or Kerry's version? - Washington Times
Over at JohnKerry.com, the Navy citation for Mr. Kerry's Silver Star does not mention the combat "V". It appears, then, that the Navy didn't mistakingly grant a "V" with Mr. Kerry's Silver Star. So, how did it get into Mr. Kerry's DD 214?
This is more serious than one would think. In Title 19, U.S. Code, Section 1001, the law states: "Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States, knowingly and willfully ... makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both."
This message has been edited by whatever, 09-06-2004 01:40 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 523 by patriot0717, posted 09-06-2004 2:18 AM patriot0717 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 526 by patriot0717, posted 09-06-2004 3:06 AM johnfolton has replied

Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3945
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 525 of 612 (140245)
09-06-2004 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 521 by johnfolton
09-06-2004 1:41 AM


While I'm not going to debate the validity of their case against Kerry, I do note that judicialwatch.org (by their own admission a conservative organization) are not strictly liberal bashers.
From Page Not Found , and expanded on at Page Not Found (which also has further links):
92. Stephen S. Stephens v. Richard B. Cheney, et. al. - Judicial Watch has filed a shareholders suit in Dallas, Texas, against Vice President Dick Cheney and the other involved directors of Halliburton, as well as Halliburton itself, for alleged fraudulent accounting practices which resulted in the overvaluation of the company’s shares, thereby deceiving investors and others.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 521 by johnfolton, posted 09-06-2004 1:41 AM johnfolton has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024