Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Thu Aug 21, 2014 8:09 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little" 
Author Message
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1686
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
I've had a few days to ponder, and I've come to the following conclusion:

The events of September 11th, 2001 were meaningless.

The terrorist attacks gave us a real opportunity to examine some uncomfortable truths about our nation, most notably our militaristic and imperialistic ways overseas. It gave us an opportunity to have a real debate as to how we spend our money overseas, how we treat other nations, why the Islamic world holds such animosity toward us, and how we could proceed to make not just our country, but perhaps the world, better.

We failed in every way possible. With this opportunity, we made the world more hostile toward us, become more imperialistic, and we've hardly become a better nation because of 9/11. All the memories of those attacks do is provide a little tingling feeling for TV specials and remembrances, and that is all. Otherwise, those who died on that day died for nothing. I find it very saddening to write this.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:43 pm
Profile
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Dragonbeard wrote:
nologo wrote:
The more I look back on that year the more I am convinced if Gore had won 9/11 might have never happened.


As much as I dislike Bush, I'm convinced that the attack was being planned long before he came to power.

Also, would you (the states) really have been happier with Al Gore as president? Pardon me but the guy is a tosser. All he managed to do with 'Truth was open people's eyes... to how manipulation is a two way street.

Gore wouldn't have been perfect, but he would've been better then Bush in every way, for one thing we wouldn't have been wasting our money and resources on a war that nobody asked for.


Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:15 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Vexer wrote:
Dragonbeard wrote:
nologo wrote:
The more I look back on that year the more I am convinced if Gore had won 9/11 might have never happened.


As much as I dislike Bush, I'm convinced that the attack was being planned long before he came to power.

Also, would you (the states) really have been happier with Al Gore as president? Pardon me but the guy is a tosser. All he managed to do with 'Truth was open people's eyes... to how manipulation is a two way street.

Gore wouldn't have been perfect, but he would've been better then Bush in every way, for one thing we wouldn't have been wasting our money and resources on a war that nobody asked for.


No instead you'd be wasting money on legislation in the name of 'fighting climate change', Al Gore's imaginary arch nemises ;)

Sexual Chocolate wrote:
I've had a few days to ponder, and I've come to the following conclusion:

The events of September 11th, 2001 were meaningless.

The terrorist attacks gave us a real opportunity to examine some uncomfortable truths about our nation, most notably our militaristic and imperialistic ways overseas. It gave us an opportunity to have a real debate as to how we spend our money overseas, how we treat other nations, why the Islamic world holds such animosity toward us, and how we could proceed to make not just our country, but perhaps the world, better.

We failed in every way possible. With this opportunity, we made the world more hostile toward us, become more imperialistic, and we've hardly become a better nation because of 9/11. All the memories of those attacks do is provide a little tingling feeling for TV specials and remembrances, and that is all. Otherwise, those who died on that day died for nothing. I find it very saddening to write this.


Controversy time on my part; there is little that can be done about religious extremism (not singling out any forms in particular) in this day and age, especially as our governments continue to bring in legislation that selectively protects and imposes on a whole load of 'rights' that we never had to begin with.

A prime example in Europe recently; John Galliano gets a suspended fine for anti-Semitic remarks yet the extremists in London who burned an American flag outside the USA Embassy get to act openly and without so much as a passing mention in the news.

Also I agree that death on such a scale seems futile.


Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:39 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Dragonbeard-You don't even live in the U.S., so why would you care if Gore was elected or not?


Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:42 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Vexer wrote:
Dragonbeard-You don't even live in the U.S., so why would you care if Gore was elected or not?


I don't particularly. Just saying that if it had been in the UK, I'd have spoiled my ballot I think.


Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:46 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Vexer wrote:
Dragonbeard-You don't even live in the U.S., so why would you care if Gore was elected or not?

U.S. policy does affect the rest of the world, and it most certainly affected the U.K. more directly than it did other nations. This is because the U.K. have been one of the staunchest supporters of the U.S. in their War on Terrorism since 9/11.


Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:09 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Dragonbeard-You don't even live in the U.S., so why would you care if Gore was elected or not?

U.S. policy does affect the rest of the world, and it most certainly affected the U.K. more directly than it did other nations. This is because the U.K. have been one of the staunchest supporters of the U.S. in their War on Terrorism since 9/11.


And is possibly the reason why people dislike the UK so much in some countries!


Thu Sep 15, 2011 6:19 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Dragonbeard-You don't even live in the U.S., so why would you care if Gore was elected or not?

U.S. policy does affect the rest of the world, and it most certainly affected the U.K. more directly than it did other nations. This is because the U.K. have been one of the staunchest supporters of the U.S. in their War on Terrorism since 9/11.


And is possibly the reason why people dislike the UK so much in some countries!

Well, there is a reason that the U.K. has suffered terrorist attacks by Muslim groups in recent years, if not nearly on the same scale as 9/11.


Thu Sep 15, 2011 6:51 pm
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Dragonbeard wrote:
nologo wrote:
The more I look back on that year the more I am convinced if Gore had won 9/11 might have never happened.


As much as I dislike Bush, I'm convinced that the attack was being planned long before he came to power.

Also, would you (the states) really have been happier with Al Gore as president? Pardon me but the guy is a tosser. All he managed to do with 'Truth was open people's eyes... to how manipulation is a two way street.


The planning had a lot of sloppy intelligence following it, and you may be right. But I laid out specifics as to why, I believe, under a very different administration, the warnings may have been looked at more closely. I've always maintained the reason almost everything went wrong under Bush wasn't just because he was anti-intellectual or a puppet, but because everyone he wanted in his administration was dogmatic, hostile, power hungry, and xenophobic to Clinton hold overs. Paul O'Neal, Clarke et al. Serious people who worked with rationale and bi-partisanship and took their jobs serious. Gone. Demoted. Ignored. In almost every instance...

We all know it. It was a massive failure. There is no caveat. There is no, "we couldn't see this coming"....they did. They knew it. They had warnings. He fished. I don't know why this is always dismissed as some kind of partisan attack, or blaming the victim....they spend hundreds of billions on security, a lot of it a state secret (wheres the tea party on that) and instead of clamping down when warnings are being sounded off all over the world, they think intelligence pissing contests are fine. Counter Terrorism should be slashed without review, grudges trump action, hiring ONE Arabic translator during the most heated terrorism chatter ever (good god) go fishing...it's all too irresponsible and reckless. To say Gore would have been the same is ignoring the rest of the Bush admins failures on top of 9/11...

Gore was painted many shades of hate by the right. The pejoratives thrown at him are pathological in nature. Bush was hated, but he was hated for very ugly things. Torture, cronyism, extreme conflicts of interest, contractor corruption, unconstitutional signing statements, things both sides can even agree on, and have! Gore just wants to curb emissions, by every expert scientific assessment all over the world by very credible and serious people think it should be done immediately, and in my view doing so can make the world better. And yet he is vilified for it as if this is some get rich scheme. Pure pathological hate for no reason, and in the face of facts and the 200 years old scientific method of blind studies and the peer-review verification process that has worked out pretty good for us so far, which says more about his opponents than him.

The US has a lot more problems than "who" the president is, but in my view, as we have seen over the Bush years, an administration can seriously run the world off a cliff quickly, and should be held accountable for it. Instead of this partisan shit show of dismissal. It's all theatre.


Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:41 pm
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Quote:
No instead you'd be wasting money on legislation in the name of 'fighting climate change', Al Gore's imaginary arch nemises ;)


More fear mongering....

More money has been wasted in one year on terrorism than decades of education, healthcare for all americans, rebuilding a crumbling infrastructure, taking care of veterans, aid to disasters. And it is money that can never be slashed because the right has made such a mockery out of politics the last decade if any President were to slash counter terrorism and an attack occurred, forget about it, that party would never be elected again.

Even if there were no ways to prevent an attack. The ads write themselves for this lot of douchebags

In all the planned attacks in the last decade, not one of the 17,000 contracted security companies under the state secret DHS offices stopped one.

Not one.

So, a revenue-neutral carbon tax that has proven to work and in cases like the BC carbon tax actually made companies a PROFIT, and is doing something to slow down our dirty co2 output that IS causing climate change....that's bad....spending trillions on a false security blanket that has not stopped one of the few attempted terrorist attacks on america....good. Cause Gore is a tosser.... :roll:


Mon Sep 19, 2011 2:00 pm
Profile
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Boy nologo...what colour is the sky in your world? You must sleep really well knowing that everything conservatives do is evil douchebaggery and everything from the left is sunshiney goodness. Add some shades of gray, will you? I don't think Gore would've been able to stop 9/11; we'll never know, but just because saying Bush didn't automativally means that Gore would have is pretty lame. As has been noted, that operation was years in the planning under both clinton and bush.


Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:52 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
nologo wrote:
And yet he is vilified for it as if this is some get rich scheme.


Maybe because he "got rich" telling everybody to reduce their "carbon footprint" while he did nothing to reduce his own.

And even if the US did wreck its economy with these schemes, it won't matter a spit in the wind when you have "emerging" economies like China and India spooling up cars and power plants left and right. Does that mean throw in the towel? I'd hope not. But this has to be a global effort and I don't think China gives a crap about CO2 emissions right now.


Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:56 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
@Nologo - yes Bush definitely did know and it's entirely possible that Mr Blair did as well (a whole tin packing plant of worms there!).

There is a sort of conflict of interest here in that the same argument seems to work both ways without changing the wording. Al Gore is also a fear-monger. Some observations:

- If people like Gore and the UK Labour party really thought there was a credible threat to the human race as caused by ourselves, they wouldn't simply have imposed taxes all over the place. The truth is that there is no imminent threat to anybody, at least that is man made.

- Climate cycles can occur over a couple of thousand years. The 'data' that we are going by only records the past 150 years or so, which is a poor representation of a large scale cycle. Coincidentally, 150 years ago is roughly when people began to mechanise industry and so by recording data over that exact period of time, you will certainly observe an appropriately dramatic but entirely meaningless anomaly.

- CO2 is an inefficient greenhouse gas. It's capacity to contain solar rays is dwarfed by the likes of both water vapour and methane. In fact water vapour contributes about 96% of the planet's greenhouse effect (an effect that we actually need to not die). Because the solution to this would be to dry out the planet and kill most living things, or at least living things that produce methane as a byproduct (so humans and cows for a start), it doesn't make good politics. Maybe for our good friend Bush ;)

- When the world's atmosphere first became oxygen based, the 1.5% CO2 content was several times what it is today however the planet was cooling rapidly.


Now I'm aware of the way the media views climate change and those who oppose what is being done however I find this to be as judgemental and offensive as any other kind of prejudice, only this kind seems to be socially acceptable. Not that it matters if people presume me to be 'right wing' or 'conservative' or whatever the buzz word is today. I know the world is not that simple and that people aren't just 'right or left'. What I DO support is the burden of proof, and not being lied to by people who wish to protect me from 'lies'.


Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:02 pm
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
johnny larue wrote:
nologo wrote:
And yet he is vilified for it as if this is some get rich scheme.


Maybe because he "got rich" telling everybody to reduce their "carbon footprint" while he did nothing to reduce his own.

And even if the US did wreck its economy with these schemes, it won't matter a spit in the wind when you have "emerging" economies like China and India spooling up cars and power plants left and right. Does that mean throw in the towel? I'd hope not. But this has to be a global effort and I don't think China gives a crap about CO2 emissions right now.


And what scheme would wreck the economy specifically?

He didn't reduce his carbon footprint?...oh, so I guess you know the amount he has spent on offsets and advocacy. I guess you have the figures in hand on how rich he got off the issue and how much he "hasn't" donated to raising awareness...I would "guess" you do, because once pressed, denialists and his detractors have such a hard time producing the numbers...but they might bring a blog post...evidence...right...just further pathological hatred and slander, even if he did live like the right proclaims, this automatically makes the science wrong and the issue tied to one person?...please...

And more fear mongering on the China/India bs. China is doing more than the US embracing new technologies and increasing many standards and regulations making the US look like a backwater 3rd world country in comparison. While a US president rips the solar panels off the white house roof....


Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:44 pm
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
johnny larue wrote:
Boy nologo...what colour is the sky in your world? You must sleep really well knowing that everything conservatives do is evil douchebaggery and everything from the left is sunshiney goodness. Add some shades of gray, will you? I don't think Gore would've been able to stop 9/11; we'll never know, but just because saying Bush didn't automativally means that Gore would have is pretty lame. As has been noted, that operation was years in the planning under both clinton and bush.


White noise. This point has already been raised and addressed


Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:45 pm
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Dragonbeard wrote:
@Nologo - yes Bush definitely did know and it's entirely possible that Mr Blair did as well (a whole tin packing plant of worms there!).

There is a sort of conflict of interest here in that the same argument seems to work both ways without changing the wording. Al Gore is also a fear-monger. Some observations:

- If people like Gore and the UK Labour party really thought there was a credible threat to the human race as caused by ourselves, they wouldn't simply have imposed taxes all over the place. The truth is that there is no imminent threat to anybody, at least that is man made.

- Climate cycles can occur over a couple of thousand years. The 'data' that we are going by only records the past 150 years or so, which is a poor representation of a large scale cycle. Coincidentally, 150 years ago is roughly when people began to mechanise industry and so by recording data over that exact period of time, you will certainly observe an appropriately dramatic but entirely meaningless anomaly.

- CO2 is an inefficient greenhouse gas. It's capacity to contain solar rays is dwarfed by the likes of both water vapour and methane. In fact water vapour contributes about 96% of the planet's greenhouse effect (an effect that we actually need to not die). Because the solution to this would be to dry out the planet and kill most living things, or at least living things that produce methane as a byproduct (so humans and cows for a start), it doesn't make good politics. Maybe for our good friend Bush ;)

- When the world's atmosphere first became oxygen based, the 1.5% CO2 content was several times what it is today however the planet was cooling rapidly.


Now I'm aware of the way the media views climate change and those who oppose what is being done however I find this to be as judgemental and offensive as any other kind of prejudice, only this kind seems to be socially acceptable. Not that it matters if people presume me to be 'right wing' or 'conservative' or whatever the buzz word is today. I know the world is not that simple and that people aren't just 'right or left'. What I DO support is the burden of proof, and not being lied to by people who wish to protect me from 'lies'.


Wow...a lot of denialist myths there to contend with...

Saying that Al Gore hasn't come up with THE solution so the problem isn't real, is beyond my scope of thought....carbon taxes work. Period. They are revenue neutral, and if you look at BC, companies are making a profit.

trace gases have an enormous impact. fact. go to the bar and test what trace alcohol in your system does...

it's simple. carbon gases absorb long wave radiation, they vibrate, this causes friction in the atmo and generates heat. water vapor has a very short lifespan from a few hours to a few days. carbon can sit in the air for centuries...and we have almost doubled the amount of co2 in the atmo in less than a century. So your "solution" is moot and not at all what is proposed. As WV is not the culprit...

The most common denialist myth, being that it's a natural cycle, is seriously beyond my patience at the moment. Every respectable science journal in the world has debunked this ad nauseum and I find it massively irritating to respond to...Said with the utmost respect. :)

This issue, isn't buried in some mythological science vault. It is all over the net, published, BLIND STUDIED, peer reviewed literature for all to see. Some just refuse to look and instead put their energies into PR funded campaigns, frauds to science, and paid denialist drivel that doesn't stand up to an ounce of scrutiny....while the science stands up in spades. And even addresses all these other theoretical causes denialists push, as if science ignores them. When they have spent BILLIONS looking into every other alternative source of forcing...and found that the culprit, is us


Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:04 pm
Profile
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
nologo wrote:
johnny larue wrote:
nologo wrote:
And yet he is vilified for it as if this is some get rich scheme.


Maybe because he "got rich" telling everybody to reduce their "carbon footprint" while he did nothing to reduce his own.

And even if the US did wreck its economy with these schemes, it won't matter a spit in the wind when you have "emerging" economies like China and India spooling up cars and power plants left and right. Does that mean throw in the towel? I'd hope not. But this has to be a global effort and I don't think China gives a crap about CO2 emissions right now.


And what scheme would wreck the economy specifically?

He didn't reduce his carbon footprint?...oh, so I guess you know the amount he has spent on offsets and advocacy. I guess you have the figures in hand on how rich he got off the issue and how much he "hasn't" donated to raising awareness...I would "guess" you do, because once pressed, denialists and his detractors have such a hard time producing the numbers...but they might bring a blog post...evidence...right...just further pathological hatred and slander, even if he did live like the right proclaims, this automatically makes the science wrong and the issue tied to one person?...please...

And more fear mongering on the China/India bs. China is doing more than the US embracing new technologies and increasing many standards and regulations making the US look like a backwater 3rd world country in comparison. While a US president rips the solar panels off the white house roof....


See....I'm not sure what your credentials are, but I'm not a "climate scientist"...and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are not either. I am not sold on "climate change" one way or the other; I'm open to both arguments. I take offense to people who come in and start barking around and telling other people what to do even though, despite what Al Gore says, the science is NOT settled. I agree that green technology is great; I recycle, I have (some) CFL's. But in many cases, its costs outweigh the benefits. If it was so great, we wouldn't need government subsidies all over the place to institute it.

So I'm not going to go through a point-by-point attempt to refute your previous message because, frankly, I don't give enough of a crap to. When Mr. Gore moves into a 750 sq foot efficiency home and starts flying coach, or riding horseback, or whatever, I'll do the same.

Here's a couple of fun links. Maybe you can spend the evening debunking them.

climatechangefacts.info
China And CO2 Emissions

EDIT: Oh...and since this IS a movie site, I've often enjoyed this lecture from Michael Crichton
Aliens Cause Global Warming (the dangers of "consensus science")


Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:08 pm
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
What makes me a 'denialist'? I'm offering 'reasonable doubt' to an issue that seems to think it has superseded such burdens as proof.

I do worry that rather soon, climate change denial will be treated the same as holocaust denial. People seem to have the same passion on both issues!


Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:05 pm
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Dragonbeard wrote:
What makes me a 'denialist'? I'm offering 'reasonable doubt' to an issue that seems to think it has superseded such burdens as proof.

I do worry that rather soon, climate change denial will be treated the same as holocaust denial. People seem to have the same passion on both issues!


When you say Al Gore's arch nemesis is....what then?

What reasonable doubt are you offering then is my question. All the points you raised have been refuted. All the points you raised have millions of points of data in dozens of different fields by tens of thousands of scientists in the largest collaboration of empirical evidence and reason in the world disputing that doubt. If something is now settled, why ignore the body of evidence. I'm not sure I understand where this "doubt" comes from. Even the most skeptical, serious, credible, scientists on the issue have concluded that the science is sound. Which, proves, this really isn't about Gore. This is about politics and a pathological hatred towards one man for denialists. OR "doubters"

watch all of the scientific journalist - Potholer54 - youtube videos on the subject. He doesn't waste his time with parroting Gore's slideshow. He checks sources. He'll take the media hype, dissect it's source and find where in the scientific literature the arguments, or distortions arise. Very enlightening and I have to /hat tip his hard work putting together his vids. Great for the doubters and even the skeptics out there....

Climate change denial is the most well funded propagandist PR campaign in history. Watch those videos. I think we'd all be a bit smarter to treat it as the same as any denial of reality...


Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:27 pm
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:16 am
Posts: 115
Post Re: September 11, 2011: "The Day that Changed Little"
Quote:

See....I'm not sure what your credentials are, but I'm not a "climate scientist"...and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are not either. I am not sold on "climate change" one way or the other; I'm open to both arguments. I take offense to people who come in and start barking around and telling other people what to do even though, despite what Al Gore says, the science is NOT settled. I agree that green technology is great; I recycle, I have (some) CFL's. But in many cases, its costs outweigh the benefits. If it was so great, we wouldn't need government subsidies all over the place to institute it.

So I'm not going to go through a point-by-point attempt to refute your previous message because, frankly, I don't give enough of a crap to. When Mr. Gore moves into a 750 sq foot efficiency home and starts flying coach, or riding horseback, or whatever, I'll do the same.

Here's a couple of fun links. Maybe you can spend the evening debunking them.


EDIT: Oh...and since this IS a movie site, I've often enjoyed this lecture from Michael Crichton


See...it's about Gore. Not the science.

I'll take the 200 years old scientific method of blind studies and the peer-review verification process. I'll let the centuries plus old understanding of co2 and how it behaves in our atmosphere when we pump 30 billion metric tons in it a year have significance. I'll take the tens of thousands of scientists in dozens of different fields and millions of points of data rather than a denialist funded "skeptic" (Spencer) who commits fraud by skewing NASA's data. Or Carter who draws lines through graphs (lol). I'll take the scientist behind the CERN study who STATED he has no conclusive evidence that cosmic rays are remotely behind the current warming trend instead of right wing propaganda sites that twisted the study to fit their narrative saying it does....

It's interesting. You hold Gore to a standard you wouldn't remotely hold to denialists, while chucking measurable science aside because Gore is a supposed hypocrite not living like the amish...

I don't need credentials to understand the acquisition of knowledge based on inquiry, empirical and measurable evidence subjected to stringent principals of reason are a much better source than Crichton's direct assault on science where he has been proven to distort and cherry pick his fiction ironically not even using science, but analogies...

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/michael-crichtons-state-of-confusion/

wattsupwiththat....are you even serious? lol...ya right, you are "open" to the other side....your links have been debunked, again, ad nauseum. Read any counter argument to denialist drivel first before posting them...

Anyways, I'm out. I see we have our own little ahmadinejad's of the denialist movement here whose pathological hatred for one man trumps reality in the guise of "doubt" and "shades of grey"....because he uses a house...with WALLS! and owns a toaster!

good grief


Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:52 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr