Some people push back - PbNation
Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

 
Archived Thread - Cannot Edit  
Old 05-12-2006, 03:06 AM #1
zack
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Some people push back

http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html

This is a truly fantastic article that you should really all read. I pose the following question to you folks: what does it mean to be innocent when our taxes buy bombs? When so many of us are the technocrats of empire? When, under our own rules of engagement, we are military targets? Does ignorance excuse guilt?
zack is offline  
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 05-12-2006, 03:14 AM #2
Jim96SC2
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by zack
http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html

This is a truly fantastic article that you should really all read. I pose the following question to you folks: what does it mean to be innocent when our taxes buy bombs? When so many of us are the technocrats of empire? When, under our own rules of engagement, we are military targets? Does ignorance excuse guilt?
Garbage article. Saddam was given ample amount of leeway in order to sell oil for foods and medicines outlines by the U.N., but since he'd rather build his palaces rather then take care of his people (mark of any good dictator). This OP-ED pieces portrayel of the strikes carried out ten years prior AT THE BEHEST OF A MUSLIM NATION when they Iraqi's had aggrssively taken over a neighboring country. Furthermore, the use of our attacks 10 years prior as a reason for 9/11 is the work of some left wing apologist who had better look around a bit further before writing this garbage.
Jim96SC2 is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 03:37 AM #3
zack
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
So because Hussein (a kinda crazy guy, I imagine) refused to take care of his people that somehow makes it acceptable for us to starve his people? And even prior to the aftermath of the war, we bombed the Iraqi "infastructure" (see: water treatment plants etc) into oblivion making it innevitable that people start dying from lack of food, water or whatever.

And I'm equaly confused by your emphasis on Kuwait's request for help. This isn't about whether the gulf war was a good idea, but about the barbaric tactics employed.

I'm again confused by the relevent of the length of time between the gulf war and 9/11/01. That only seems to prove the length of the US's war in the middle east and hint at just how much time we had to end the war before the violence came home to us.

Beyond that, there's still that little issue of, oh, say, Palestine? As well as about a dozen other incidents. Ultimately, the chickens really ARE coming home to roost. We've commited attrocities from the very begining of our nations existence and now we've found that the road goes both ways. We STILL owe the world for Vietnam, for Cambodia, for the Balkans...hell, we have yet to repay the millions of Native Americans that we brutally slaughtered through the deliberate spread of small pox and systematic marginalization and extermination. What have we given them? Nuclear material on the tiny reservations we've forced them onto. It's hard to say who the 9/11/01 hijackers spoke for, but they are heros for the fourth world, for those that don't even show up on the map, for those nameless, faceless millions whos blood oils empire. And they showed far more mercy than we've ever showed, far more restraint, far more courage and, most of all, far more humanity. We didn't get what we deserved, we got the very smallest fraction of it.

And what about the fact that, under our own rules of engagement, the twin towers and the pentagon were legitimate military targets (command and control)? You may say there were 'innocents' in both buildings (you'd be wrong about the pentagon, no one there was innocent) but the folks in the pentagon like to call those folks collateral damage.

Last edited by zack : 05-12-2006 at 03:48 AM.
zack is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 03:37 AM #4
$PJ$ (Banned)
 
$PJ$'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Earth
$PJ$ is a Supporting Member
Iraq invaded Kuwait because of the cross drilling into their oil fields.

We are the reason for the 9/11 attacks. Our foreign policy has seated us as the aim of the millions of people who we have stepped on.
$PJ$ is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 03:46 AM #5
zack
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
 has been a member for 10 years
Something else you should read (you can also download an mp3 of it from most p2p programs, I imagine) http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/silence.html
zack is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 03:48 AM #6
$PJ$ (Banned)
 
$PJ$'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Earth
$PJ$ is a Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by zack
Something else you should read (you can also download an mp3 of it from most p2p programs, I imagine) http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/silence.html
Very nice.

I am sure someone will now call you a commie.
$PJ$ is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 04:03 AM #7
Ford
☻♦♣b
 
Ford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Austin 49
Ford is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Communist!
__________________
"Originally posted by Bronk0
Everyone put something in your sig about it...

like PORN THREAD 10/24/04: I was there.
"
Ford is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 04:05 AM #8
Jim96SC2
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Quote:
So because Hussein (a kinda crazy guy, I imagine) refused to take care of his people that somehow makes it acceptable for us to starve his people? And even prior to the aftermath of the war, we bombed the Iraqi "infastructure" (see: water treatment plants etc) into oblivion making it innevitable that people start dying from lack of food, water or whatever.
WE didn't starve anyone. Hussein had the ability to get food and medicine into his country. He chose to squander it and do under-the-table deals with France and Russia. BTW, the U.S. is the most considerate of all nations when taking into account secondary targets and the aftermaths of the raids. We try to avoid civilian casulties more then any other nation in history.

Quote:
And I'm equaly confused by your emphasis on Kuwait's request for help. This isn't about whether the gulf war was a good idea, but about the barbaric tactics employed.
Perhaps you should figure that the majority of the "insurgents" and the "terrorists" are using the US's interference within the Muslim world (Bases in Saudi,etc) as a basis to justify their positons.

Quote:
I'm again confused by the relevent of the length of time between the gulf war and 9/11/01. That only seems to prove the length of the US's war in the middle east and hint at just how much time we had to end the war before the violence came home to us.
We were allowing those idiots at the United Nations to do the job. That worked real well, all talk no action. I wonder why *cough KICKBACKS cough*. PS: we weren't even at war with them, we were enforcing U.N. sanctions against Saddam.

Quote:
Beyond that, there's still that little issue of, oh, say, Palestine? As well as about a dozen other incidents. Ultimately, the chickens really ARE coming home to roost. We've commited attrocities from the very begining of our nations existence and now we've found that the road goes both ways. We STILL owe the world for Vietnam, for Cambodia, for the Balkans...hell, we have yet to repay the millions of Native Americans that we brutally slaughtered through the deliberate spread of small pox and systematic marginalization and extermination. What have we given them? Nuclear material on the tiny reservations we've forced them onto. It's hard to say who the 9/11/01 hijackers spoke for, but they are heros for the fourth world, for those that don't even show up on the map, for those nameless, faceless millions whos blood oils empire. And they showed far more mercy than we've ever showed, far more restraint, far more courage and, most of all, far more humanity. We didn't get what we deserved, we got the very smallest fraction of it.
WTF! Now it's time to put the crack pipe down, tell whoever is teaching you this to get out of the bong smoke and listen to what your saying. Palastine, we were never there. Vietnam, we came in to help defend an invasion from the Communist north vs. Democratic south. VIETNAM WASN'T LOST UNTIL A CEASE FIRE WAS BROKERED AND WE PULLED OUR TROOPS AS PER THE AGREEMENT. Cambodia, thats Pol Pot and his crew, not us. Balkans, thats the Serbs vs. Croats, not us. You seriously have an issue with truths in these areas, perhaps a few good factual books would help you. But apparently, judgeing by your writing, if they don't say "US is the worst thing on earth" you won't read it.

Indians: no taxes, reservations that they solely control for the most part. Yes it sucked what happened to them, but that was what, 150 years ago? In that case I'm waiting for my apology for the Muslim invasions of Northern Africa, western europe, etc.

As for the bolded section: killing a bunch of people at work is hardly restraint. You have issues, I suggest you deal with them.

Quote:
And what about the fact that, under our own rules of engagement, the twin towers and the pentagon were legitimate military targets (command and control)? You may say there were 'innocents' in both buildings (you'd be wrong about the pentagon, no one there was innocent) but the folks in the pentagon like to call those folks collateral damage.
No, the Twin Towers were a privately owned business. The Pentagon was a military target. Again, FACTS help.

In all, you need help. The U.S.A. is not some evil empire you think it is. Your parents really should check what your learning.
Jim96SC2 is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 06:08 AM #9
scumquat1
My friends call me Scum.
 
scumquat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In the Hole
 has been a member for 10 years
Ward C., one of my favorite deeeeep thinkers. Why does Mr. Churchill stay in this horrible nation that wantonly murders innocent brown people? Oh, I know.... because he can! Of course, by living here and paying his taxes, he's part of the problem. Yet, somehow I doubt his existence would be as comfortable in Syria, the Sudan, or Iran.
__________________
A is A. It is what it is.

"Racism is a doctrine of, by and for brutes. It is a barnyard or stock-farm version of collectivism, appropriate to a mentality that differentiates between various breeds of animals, but not between animals and men." - Ayn Rand.
scumquat1 is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 09:14 AM #10
sutcivnI (Banned)
 
sutcivnI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
sutcivnI is a Supporting Member
That article is about as unbiased as a white power speech at a Klan rally.
sutcivnI is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 10:21 AM #11
Rugrat
 
 
Rugrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Van by the river
 has been a member for 10 years
I wonder about our country when I read things like this. The thing that really gripes my *** to no end is the hypocracy and pure BS of these posts. People like Chruchill and our beloved Zack strut around saying we get what we deserve and yet they live just like everyone else, are just as guilty, and just as much of the problem. You're a part of the "We" slick.

I think it would be poetic justice if Zack's, or Mr. Chruchill's, family falls victim to a terrorist attack. They they would understand just what it means when they say "We get what we deserve".
__________________
CPPA #2701
Rugrat is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 10:34 AM #12
Deceptiwave
Built to Endure
 
Deceptiwave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: TITSMANIA
Victims. Aren't we all...
I too weep for the future of this country.
__________________
NW WOLVERINES!
To the Dedicated- "The squat rack is our church. The Deadlift platform our temple"
Don't Tread On Me.
God Bless The Man That Gets In My Way...
Lift Hard. Die Strong.
Deceptiwave is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 10:55 AM #13
I love Impulses
Brogrammer IV
 
I love Impulses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Happy Hour
I love Impulses is a Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
Okay, I am sitting at a school computer and that article is banned for "gambling" So, I can't read it.

From what I can see...
Sure we got into things that were wrong and supported "evil" regimes. Sure we shouldn't of bombed social structures in hindsight, but all those actions where taken in traditional philosophy of spheres of influence.

On to whether we "deserved" the attacks on 9-11, I say no. "Two wrongs don't make a right."

Sure, we are all an accesory to military and larger governmental action, but we as a nation are required to support monetarily. You cannot generalize that the whole nation supported the policy as they were all forced into it monetarily despite their individual beliefs.

The whole reparations thing is a joke. So you say that Indians around here who make 90g's a year without working 1 second from the casinos need more money? They are not the people of 150 years ago.
__________________
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Why We Drink

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I love Impulses is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 01:19 PM #14
Overbear
#2 Anti Stim Club Member!
 
Overbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Leandro, CA
Overbear is a Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by $PJ$
Iraq invaded Kuwait because of the cross drilling into their oil fields.

We are the reason for the 9/11 attacks. Our foreign policy has seated us as the aim of the millions of people who we have stepped on.

No PJ, the root cause is not us, or any other political thing. Its RELIGON, its the fact you have a religon (the jedao/christian, that includes muslums) that is CENTERED on control of others, spreaidng of misinformation, use of hate of outsiders as a key, and the absolute end result desired of all people being under one thing.

This alone is the cause of 9/11 and everything else thats happened.
__________________
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man - Thomas Jefferson

A democracy is, two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner.
A republic is, two sheep and a wolf voting on dinner.
A constitutional republic is, voting on dinner is expressly forbidden and the sheep are armed.

Armed gays don't get bashed - www.pinkpistols.org

ssgaR: 'faith is the path of least resistance'."

Rapier7: Don't be a douche
Overbear is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 03:32 PM #15
SlingerXL
Stands to reason
 
SlingerXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bloomington, IN
SlingerXL is a Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by scumquat1
Ward C., one of my favorite deeeeep thinkers. Why does Mr. Churchill stay in this horrible nation that wantonly murders innocent brown people? Oh, I know.... because he can! Of course, by living here and paying his taxes, he's part of the problem. Yet, somehow I doubt his existence would be as comfortable in Syria, the Sudan, or Iran.
So, what, because he wants the country to change he should leave? Again, not agreeing with him, but asking anyone who doesn't agree with what elected officials do with their power to leave the country is a rather tall order. It seems to me he will have more influence to change his own country when he's IN his own country.
SlingerXL is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 05:11 PM #16
LlamaRama
 
 
LlamaRama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zack
So because Hussein (a kinda crazy guy, I imagine) refused to take care of his people that somehow makes it acceptable for us to starve his people? And even prior to the aftermath of the war, we bombed the Iraqi "infastructure" (see: water treatment plants etc) into oblivion making it innevitable that people start dying from lack of food, water or whatever.

And I'm equaly confused by your emphasis on Kuwait's request for help. This isn't about whether the gulf war was a good idea, but about the barbaric tactics employed.

I'm again confused by the relevent of the length of time between the gulf war and 9/11/01. That only seems to prove the length of the US's war in the middle east and hint at just how much time we had to end the war before the violence came home to us.

Beyond that, there's still that little issue of, oh, say, Palestine? As well as about a dozen other incidents. Ultimately, the chickens really ARE coming home to roost. We've commited attrocities from the very begining of our nations existence and now we've found that the road goes both ways. We STILL owe the world for Vietnam, for Cambodia, for the Balkans...hell, we have yet to repay the millions of Native Americans that we brutally slaughtered through the deliberate spread of small pox and systematic marginalization and extermination. What have we given them? Nuclear material on the tiny reservations we've forced them onto. It's hard to say who the 9/11/01 hijackers spoke for, but they are heros for the fourth world, for those that don't even show up on the map, for those nameless, faceless millions whos blood oils empire. And they showed far more mercy than we've ever showed, far more restraint, far more courage and, most of all, far more humanity. We didn't get what we deserved, we got the very smallest fraction of it.

And what about the fact that, under our own rules of engagement, the twin towers and the pentagon were legitimate military targets (command and control)? You may say there were 'innocents' in both buildings (you'd be wrong about the pentagon, no one there was innocent) but the folks in the pentagon like to call those folks collateral damage.


woah zack zack, u know i love you and defend everything you say, but i think you went a little far here. you need to face facts that the middle blatantly sucks. these people are nameless because they live in god forsaken deserts where the only fun is jihad. yes, we have ****ed them up since the beginning of the 20th century with our blatant empire, but these people do not show compassion or love or restraint or any of that bull****. they murder each other left and right, and if they take a break from murdering someone the same color as them for believing the wrong type of islam, theyll murder us. they shun technology and advancement. they look back in relish of the days when they wiped their ***** with their left hands. the last time islam actually gave the world anything decent in the way of arts or science or anywhere else was over five hundred years ago.


btw: if anyone takes offense, well then you're plain ignorant of history.
__________________
I didn't know what I was doing
When I lift my head
And when I opened my eyes
I knew I was dead
After that first step
I knew I would fall
After that first breath
Was the end of it all.
LlamaRama is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 05:12 PM #17
LlamaRama
 
 
LlamaRama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overbear
No PJ, the root cause is not us, or any other political thing. Its RELIGON, its the fact you have a religon (the jedao/christian, that includes muslums) that is CENTERED on control of others, spreaidng of misinformation, use of hate of outsiders as a key, and the absolute end result desired of all people being under one thing.

This alone is the cause of 9/11 and everything else thats happened.

overbear shoots.

he scores!
__________________
I didn't know what I was doing
When I lift my head
And when I opened my eyes
I knew I was dead
After that first step
I knew I would fall
After that first breath
Was the end of it all.
LlamaRama is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 05:41 PM #18
Evilwombat
Damn noob 2k8er's
 
Evilwombat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Indiana
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overbear
No PJ, the root cause is not us, or any other political thing. Its RELIGON, its the fact you have a religon (the jedao/christian, that includes muslums) that is CENTERED on control of others, spreaidng of misinformation, use of hate of outsiders as a key, and the absolute end result desired of all people being under one thing.

This alone is the cause of 9/11 and everything else thats happened.
It's not just religion, but the fact that we are walking right into the image they are making for us. They try to portray us as devils, invading these poor defenseless countries, and killing the helpless. We played right into that. That is the main reason we are getting more attacks than other countries with similar religious beliefs.
__________________
Really, I'm too lazy for a lengthy sig.
Evilwombat is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 05:59 PM #19
scumquat1
My friends call me Scum.
 
scumquat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In the Hole
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingerXL
So, what, because he wants the country to change he should leave? Again, not agreeing with him, but asking anyone who doesn't agree with what elected officials do with their power to leave the country is a rather tall order. It seems to me he will have more influence to change his own country when he's IN his own country.
Churchill claims to be against everything this country stands for. He hates Capitalism and he hates the actions of our government. On the other hand, he supports the government by paying taxes and he also gets his salary from a state supported institution. I'm calling him a hypocrite... a living, breathing contradiciton. If he had any balls and any true sense of conviction when it comes to his hair-brained beliefs, he'd get the **** out of Dodge. He won't do that because he knows that almost anywhere else he goes, they'd throw his fake-Indian arse in prison to rot.

Frankly, I get a little sick of listening to people like Zack and Churchill prattle on about the banality of concepts like good and evil. They're beyond good and evil. Such ideas are meaningless, yet they certainly don't have a problem passing judgement on America. What a bunch of assclowns.
__________________
A is A. It is what it is.

"Racism is a doctrine of, by and for brutes. It is a barnyard or stock-farm version of collectivism, appropriate to a mentality that differentiates between various breeds of animals, but not between animals and men." - Ayn Rand.

Last edited by scumquat1 : 05-12-2006 at 06:01 PM.
scumquat1 is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 06:20 PM #20
SlingerXL
Stands to reason
 
SlingerXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bloomington, IN
SlingerXL is a Supporting Member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by scumquat1
Churchill claims to be against everything this country stands for. He hates Capitalism and he hates the actions of our government. On the other hand, he supports the government by paying taxes and he also gets his salary from a state supported institution. I'm calling him a hypocrite... a living, breathing contradiciton. If he had any balls and any true sense of conviction when it comes to his hair-brained beliefs, he'd get the **** out of Dodge. He won't do that because he knows that almost anywhere else he goes, they'd throw his fake-Indian arse in prison to rot.
Is every democrat that disagrees with the president's actions a living hypocrite? He disagrees with the government and is working towards change. That's about as American as it gets. By supporting America in taxes, etc, he's making the statement that he obviously thinks there's potential for change as there should be for any free society.
SlingerXL is offline  
Old 05-12-2006, 07:02 PM #21
Rugrat
 
 
Rugrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Van by the river
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingerXL
Is every democrat that disagrees with the president's actions a living hypocrite? He disagrees with the government and is working towards change. That's about as American as it gets. By supporting America in taxes, etc, he's making the statement that he obviously thinks there's potential for change as there should be for any free society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchill
As a whole, the American public greeted these revelations with yawns.. There were, after all, far more pressing things than the unrelenting misery/death of a few hundred thousand Iraqi tikes to be concerned with. Getting "Jeremy" and "Ellington" to their weekly soccer game, for instance, or seeing to it that little "Tiffany" and "Ashley" had just the right roll-neck sweaters to go with their new cords. And, to be sure, there was the yuppie holy war against ashtrays for "our kids," no less as an all-absorbing point of political focus.

In fairness, it must be admitted that there was an infinitesimally small segment of the body politic who expressed opposition to what was/is being done to the children of Iraq. It must also be conceded, however, that those involved by-and-large contented themselves with signing petitions and conducting candle-lit prayer vigils, bearing "moral witness" as vast legions of brown-skinned five-year-olds sat shivering in the dark, wide-eyed in horror, whimpering as they expired in the most agonizing ways imaginable.

Be it said as well, and this is really the crux of it, that the "resistance" expended the bulk of its time and energy harnessed to the systemically-useful task of trying to ensure, as "a principle of moral virtue" that nobody went further than waving signs as a means of "challenging" the patently exterminatory pursuit of Pax Americana. So pure of principle were these "dissidents," in fact, that they began literally to supplant the police in protecting corporations profiting by the carnage against suffering such retaliatory "violence" as having their windows broken by persons less "enlightened" or perhaps more outraged than the self-anointed "peacekeepers."
Not a hypocrite??? Working for change??? He's reamming his own side here for obeying the law and seeking peacefull means of protest against the Iraqi embargo, yet at the same time his sorry *** was sitting safe and sound behind his professors desk. I wouldn't call teh actions he is supporting "Working for change".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchill
They did not, for starters, "initiate" a war with the US, much less commit "the first acts of war of the new millennium."

A good case could be made that the war in which they were combatants has been waged more-or-less continuously by the "Christian West" now proudly emblematized by the United States against the "Islamic East" since the time of the First Crusade, about 1,000 years ago. More recently, one could argue that the war began when Lyndon Johnson first lent significant support to Israel's dispossession/displacement of Palestinians during the 1960s, or when George the Elder ordered "Desert Shield" in 1990, or at any of several points in between. Any way you slice it, however, if what the combat teams did to the WTC and the Pentagon can be understood as acts of war and they can then the same is true of every US "overflight' of Iraqi territory since day one.
Ok so he's saying that the attack on teh WTC, carried out by "Combat Teams" was justified. But lets jump back to Churchill's earlier statement...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Churchill
In trying to affix a meaning to such things, we would do well to remember the wave of elation that swept America at reports of what was happening along the so-called Highway of Death: perhaps 100,000 "towel-heads" and "camel jockeys" or was it "sand ******s" that week? in full retreat, routed and effectively defenseless, many of them conscripted civilian laborers, slaughtered in a single day by jets firing the most hyper-lethal types of ordnance.
So lets get this straight.. According to Churchill its ok to fly civillian airplanes, packed full of defenceless civilians, in to unarmed civillian buildings but the US attacks CONSCRIPTED (meaning they where in the military) Iraqi troops, soldiers for christ sakes, is a crime against humanity and shame on us? How more hypocritical you want.
__________________
CPPA #2701
Rugrat is offline  
 




Posting Rules
Forum Jump