Call it what you will, but the gov. is finally admitting 5 years later what eye-whitnesses experienced first hand.
http://www.supportthetruth.com/hill.php
Associate Member
Call it what you will, but the gov. is finally admitting 5 years later what eye-whitnesses experienced first hand.
http://www.supportthetruth.com/hill.php
Anabolic Member
dont post the left wing bullshit here ............. this is nothing but another "911 conspiracy" promotion .............. take this shit somewhere else
Anabolic Member
Cool. I'll vote for him if he's on my ballot.
Associate Member
Im not left wing. I'm not right wing, but do you remember how the use of explosives was denied completely by the government?
There you have it. President Bush had admitted what the eyewitnesses reported on 9-11; that there were bombs inside the World Trade Towers.
Of course, Bush pins the blame for the bombs on Al Qaeda, which is sort of accurate when you consider that most of Al Qaeda is a creation of US and Israeli intelligence.
But in trying to explain away the eyewitness reports of bombs, Bush has dug himself into a deeper logic hole. How did these "Al Qaeda" bombers manage to spend at least a week (according to witnesses who heard and saw them) working inside the buildings under the noses of Bush's cousin and brother, who were in charge of security for the World Trade Center? Security at the towers was tight following the 1993 attempted bombing. You could not simply walk into an elevator unless you could document employment or a meeting. Yet as one can tell from the tell-tale marks left by the cutter charges, these preparations took a great deal of time and materials to carry out.
Why did these "Al Qaeda" bombers go to the extra effort to drop all three buildings straight down instead of toppling them sideways, maximizing the damage?
If Al Qaeda succeeded in bombing the buildings, why bother with the airplanes? Why bother hiding the bombing itself, if it was truly the work of terrorists out to make a statement?
In admitting the bombs, Bush has opened up the inquiry to include the very great amount of incriminating evidence found near the airplanes linking the attacks to Arab nations, versus the total absence of any such evidence near the bombs. This contrast is ONLY explained if the evidence left with the airplanes was planted, to frame someone.
Why did it take 5 years for the government to admit what was obvious to everyone right from the start; that explosives were used to bring down the buildings, unless the original plan was not to admit to the bombs in the first place?
Dubya, in his pathetic attempt to pin the blame for the now-admitted bombs on Al Qaeda, has created far more logical problems then he has solved. I support no-one affiliated with Neo-cons or a leftist/marxist point of veiw.
Anabolic Member
i dont get it...
Associate Member
Thats cool? 3000 American's murdered for a war in the middle east? Plus more slaughtered and crippled in battle?Originally Posted by 63190
Banned
this has always intrigued me...Quite frankly i think there is a lot not being told about 9/11 (do you honestly believe the plane was brought down by passengers in PA, or do you believe a commercial airliner crashed into the pentagon when no evidence of one could be found?)...I saw an excellent documentary about all the things that dont add up or make sense...I'll try and find the link in a lil bit. The explosions were one of the main points documented in the video.
I'm not going to take one side over another but I feel an important aspect of being a citizen of the US is not taking everything your government tells you to be the absolute truth. Questioning things our government says about certain events is part of our basic freedoms, and is one that should not be taken for granted.
Associate Member
Too many coincidences
That George Bush's brother Marvin sat on the board of the Kuwaiti-owned company which provided electronic security to the World Trade Centre, Dulles Airport and United Airlines means nothing more than you must admit those Bush boys have done "alright" for themselves.
That Jonathan Bush’s Riggs Bank has been found guilty of laundering terrorist funds and fined a US-record $25 million must embarrass his nephew George, but it's still no justification for leaping to paranoid conclusions.
That George Bush found success as a businessman only after the investment of Osama’s brother Salem and reputed al Qaeda financier Khalid bin Mahfouz is just 'one of those things' - one of those crazy things.
That Osama bin Laden is known to have been an asset of US foreign policy in no way implies he still is.
That al Qaeda was active in the Balkan conflict, fighting on the same side as the US as recently as 1999, while the US protected its cells, is merely one of history's little aberrations.
The claims of Michael Springman, State Department veteran of the Jeddah visa bureau, that the CIA ran the office and issued visas to al Qaeda members so they could receive training in the United States, sound like the sour grapes of someone who was fired for making such wild accusations.
~ Vet~ I like Thai Girls
Sigh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How does anyone blow up a building that size and hide it ? Just watch what they have to do to blow up buildings, miles of cabling, drilling of holes etc . Complete bullshit
Associate Member
Bullshit on you, people reported strange workers in the building for weeks. how do you explain the power down called for by the port authority/ also controlled by the bush brother's!! You want the evidence? you want to call me bullshit??
Associate Member
Zero radiation tactical hydrogen nuke used to blow the core/ which explains the pools of molten steel, and the fallout from the collapse.
VET Retired
Associate Member
Furniture and airplane fire did that^^^LOL
Junior Member
lets not forget about the 2 giant airplanes that also hit the buildings..it wasnt only bombs
Senior Member
It does make you think though..
Associate Member
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/coinc...e15aug04.shtml
Senior Member
i totally agree with you way too much thats not explained.Did you see how much was edited out of the 9-11 reports.If u dont have nothing too hide why edit out 65% of the document.I know.conspiracy,conspiracy,conspiracy.lol
Associate Member
The real conspiracy is the official story friend, The ZOG empire that controlls this country, and foreign affairs i s beginning to crumble!!
The Real Deal - AR-Platinum Elite- Hall of Famer
The movie Loose Change explains it all, google it and watch it you'll understand whats going on.
The Real Deal - AR-Platinum Elite- Hall of Famer
Our country needs war in order for us to keep building our army. China spends 2/3's of their national income on their army, if we dont have war we cut Army funding. Loose Change explains it.
The Real Deal - AR-Platinum Elite- Hall of Famer
Fuc I dont know how to make a link.
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=7866929448192753501&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed>
Cut and paste this , it goes right to the video.
Last edited by BG; 11-03-2006 at 08:29 PM.
Associate Member
Yes my friend, but LOOSE CHANGE does not explain how "LUCKY LARRY SILVERSTIEN" took out a $7,000,000,000 insurance policy aginst terrorist acts 2 moths before 911, or explain how both towers needed dismantling to rid them of azbestos and other building hazzards, dismantling would cost a proposed $12,000,000,000.
The Real Deal - AR-Platinum Elite- Hall of Famer
He was in on it.Dont you think if they didnt cover him he would make such a big stink??? He would have lost his ass.
Senior Member
u laughing at me?I was agreeingThe real conspiracy is the official story friend, The ZOG empire that controlls this country, and foreign affairs i s beginning to crumble!!
Associate Member
not really, I laugh at no one, considering our gov. murdered 3000 people in our own country!!! THEY WILL HANG FOR THIS!!!
Senior Member
your kinda scaring me now.lol
AR-Elite Hall of Famer~
and the news story is?????
The answer to your every question
Rules
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted
to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially
one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
If you get scammed by an UGL listed on this board or by another member here, it's all part of the game and learning experience for you,
we do not approve nor support any sources that may be listed on this site.
I will not do source checks for you, the peer review from other members should be enough to help you make a decision on your quest. Buyer beware.
Don't Let the Police kick your ass
Anabolic Member
Crack Heads theory! Straight from Utah! Can't believe any one would
even entertain such BS>
Anabolic Member
Crack Heads theory! Straight from Utah! Can't believe any one would
even entertain such BS>
Associate Member
LISTEN TO THIS..........
http://www.supportthetruth.com/hill.php
REMEMBER, JET FUEL BROUGHT DOWN WTC IN A PANCAKE COLLAPSE THAT DEFIED ALL PHYSICS!!
Associate Member
You want to debate it "crackhead?"
than shut up!! and listen to our president!!
Associate Member
Quote:
Deal of the Year: World Trade Center, New York, NY
'Weighing in at $3.2 billion, the acquisition of the 99-year leasehold of the World Trade Center was the largest of the year. "Notwithstanding the emotional difficulty of celebrating anything related to the World Trade Center is the fact that upon completion of its acquisition by Larry Silverstein, it was clearly the deal of the year for the industry, and now more than ever, a deal of [a] lifetime for Silverstein" said Ken Zakin, managing director at Insignia/ESG.'
Quote:
WTC Owner May Make a
Huge Profit off of 9/11 Attacks
Six months before the attacks on the World Trade Center, the World Trade Center was "privatized" by being leased to a private sector developer. The lease was purchased by the Silverstein Group for $3.2 billion.
But the World Trade Towers were not the real estate plum Silverstein Group might have been led to believe. The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. Other New York developers had been driven into bankruptcy by the costly mandated renovations, and $200 million represented an entire year's worth of revenues from the World Trade Towers.
The attacks on 9/11 changed the picture. Instead of renovation, Silverstein is rebuilding, funded by the insurance coverage on the property which 'fortuitously' covered acts of terrorism. Even better, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy, based on the two, in Silverstein's view, seperate attacks. The total potential payout is $7.1 billion, more than enough to build a fabulous new complex and leave a hefty profit for the Silverstein Group, including Larry Silverstein himself.
As reported in The Washington Post, the insurance company, Swiss Re, has gone to court to argue that the 9/11 disaster was only one attack, not two and that therefore the insurance payout should be limited to $3.55 billion, still enough to rebuild the complex.
The destruction of the World Trade Towers may make Silverstein one of the wealthiest men alive.
Quote:
Israeli magnate insured WTC retail space against terrorism
An Israeli businessman from Australia, Frank Lowy, had recently acquired the 99-year lease for the 425,000 square foot retail portion of World Trade Center before the WTC attacks of Sept. 11, reported The Jerusalem Post on Sept. 12.
Lowy is chairman and founder of Westfield Holdings, and the manager of Westfield America Trust, which has a 57 percent stake in Westfield America Inc. In April 2001, Westfield America agreed to pay $400 million for the lease on the complex though only $133 million was paid; the rest was to be made in ground lease payments.
Westfield was insured against terrorist attacks and its earnings will not be materially affected.
In a statement to the Australian Stock Exchange the retail chain said that "investment in the retail component of the World Trade Center is fully insured for both capital and loss of income," adding "the insurance coverage includes acts of terrorism".
Quote:
THE WORLD TRADE CENTER: OBSOLETE AND PLAGUED WITH PROBLEMS
Those who thought the World Trade Center comprised some of New York's most desirable office space may have been mistaken.
In "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," author John Perkins reflects on a walk he took through lower Manhattan shortly after 9/11:
"I recalled reading that the World Trade Center was a project started by David Rockefeller in 1960, and that in recent years the complex had been considered an ALBATROSS. It had the reputation of being A FINANCIAL MISFIT, unsuited to modern fiber-optic and Internet technologies, and burdened with an inefficient and costly elevator system. Those two towers once had been nicknamed David and Nelson. Now the albatross was gone." [3] [with emphasis added]
More detail comes from Rowland Morgan and Ian Henshall in their new book, "9/11 Revealed":
"The WTC began in disaster, just as it ended. A grossly misconceived Soviet-style land-development catastrophe...[it] was OBSOLETE LONG BEFORE IT WAS FINISHED. ...The oversized...site destroyed swathes of human-scale streetscape...the towers...stole light from buildings all across Manhattan. Their exterior-frame structure maximized interior space while minimizing views and making office workers depressed [the windows were barely wider than the 16"-wide steel exterior columns]. Space-saving on elevators that involved two changes up and down made for lengthy journey times. ...It would take a full two hours to evacuate everybody in a fire." [4] [with emphasis added]
Morgan and Henshall go on to note that BY 2001, MUCH OF THE TOWERS' OFFICE SPACE WAS EMPTY. The towers were due for a "mid-life rehab," but building codes would have REQUIRED REMOVAL OF THE ASBESTOS FIREPROOFING lining the towers' ceilings and steel framework. According to Morgan and Henshall, "Such a job would have been unrealistically expensive and physically impractical, with no gain in [rental] revenues." [5] [with emphasis added]
(In spite of these problems, it's worth remembering that given the proximity of major airports, the towers were DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND THE CRASH OF A FULLY LOADED, FUEL-FILLED BOEING 707--a large, four-engine airliner. This has been reported in numerous books and articles
Quote:
A LENGTHY, PRE-9/11 LEGAL BATTLE OVER THE WTC'S ASBESTOS PROBLEMS
The WTC's original owner, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, had been concerned about asbestos-abatement issues for many years prior to 9/11.
According to Karl Schwarz [6] and other writers, the Port Authority in 1991 filed suit in U.S. District Court against insurers in the hope of recovering funds to help pay for needed asbestos-abatement work at the WTC and one of the region's airports. In the suit, "Port Authority of NY vs. Affiliated FM Insurance Co.," the Port Authority sought between 500 million and 1 billion dollars from the insurers.
Note that this suit was filed TWO YEARS BEFORE the first so-called "terrorist attack" on the WTC; the truck-bomb explosion in the Center's underground parking garage in 1993.
Schwarz reports that the U.S. District Court judge ruled against the Port Authority as of May 14, 2001.
Less than three months later, the Port Authority transferred ownership of the WTC buildings to private investors
Quote:
THE WTC'S CHANGE TO PRIVATE OWNERSHIP--JUST WEEKS BEFORE 9/11
On July 24, 2001, private investors (Silverstein Properties, with minority partner Westfield America, Inc.) took control of the WTC under a 99-year lease.
In "Waking Up From Our Nightmare," Paul and Hoffman note that the WTC's estimated value at the time was 8 billion dollars. [8]
According to professor of economics Michel Chossudovsky, the lease called for payments to the Port Authority "amounting to 3.2 billion dollars in installments" payable over 99 years. With several hundred million dollars being provided by mortgage holders, Mr. Silverstein put just 14 million dollars of his own money into the deal. [9]
Quoting from a May 20, 2002 article in The New Yorker, Chossudovsky notes that "Explicity included in the [lease] agreement was that Silverstein and Westfield 'WERE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO REBUILD THE STRUCTURES IF THEY WERE DESTROYED.' " [9] [with emphasis added]
Paul and Hoffman add that "Quoting the British Financial Times of September 14, 2001, the American Reporter wrote that 'THE LEASE HAS AN ALL-IMPORTANT ESCAPE CLAUSE: IF THE BUILDINGS ARE STRUCK BY "AN ACT OF TERRORISM," THE NEW OWNERS' OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LEASE ARE VOID. As a result, the new owners are not required to make any payments under their lease, but they will be able to collect on the loss of the buildings...destroyed and damaged in the attacks.' " (The American Reporter's article was titled "No Fraud, but Huge Profits Seen in World Trade Center Attacks.") [8] [with emphasis added]
It's also reported that Mr. Silverstein is "a large contributor to Democrat and Republican office-holders."
Quote:
HAVE PRIVATE PROFITS BEEN REALIZED IN THE WAKE OF 9/11?
Many writers have addressed this question--and the question of whether insurance companies (and courts) would regard the 9/11 events at the WTC as a single incident or would regard each "attack" on a WTC tower as a separate incident for insurance purposes.
Paul and Hoffman report that as of 2004, "Silverstein Properties [was] still contesting the amount of [insurance] pay-out due for destruction of the Twin Towers--$3.55 billion for one 'occurrence' or $7.1 billion for two 'occurrences.' " [8]
A March 28, 2006 "Reader Rant" posting at http://www.capitolhillblue.com/ offers the following update, quoting from press reports: "In late 2004, [Mr. Silverstein was] tentatively awarded $2.2 billion, double what insurance companies offered to pay him. (UPI, 12/6/04) A judge also [made] a ruling that keeps open the possibility [Silverstein] could eventually receive as much as $6.4 billion. (Associated Press, 12/7/04)." [10]
As for Building 7, Paul and Hoffman note that unlike the rest of the WTC, this building was originally developed by Silverstein Properties, and Silverstein Properties was its leaseholder as of 9/11. They write that "About $386 million had been invested in WTC7 before its destruction," and that Silverstein Properties and Building 7's mortgage holders "received a court-awarded amount of $861 million dollars from Industrial Risk Insurers in February 2002." [8]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusions:
See it from the perspective of Mr. Silverstein, there were 2 (or better 3) options for him:
1. Renovate and fix the problems with Tower 1 +2, store by store, which would be extremely difficult, costly and long lasting...beside that customers
would be bothered for years with ongoing "dirty" construction work in the buildings.
And if you hammer and drill in such a building, think of the clouds of asbestos
that would be set free, possibly followed by an unprecendet number of individual lawsuits against the owner and the Port Auhority.
A "Garden Eden" so to say for "environment- and health- lawyers", maybe thousand of lawsuits , as it is in the financial district of NYC, many would use that oppurtunity to sue him on millions.
2."Urban renewal" by bringing the towers down. An "Expertise" of this was done in 1999 by the specialist "Controlled Demolition Inc" , contracted by the
Port Authority (Mr.Eisenberg) , on "how it could be done without harming
neighbouring buildings too much", confirmed by "Controlled Demolition" CEO
J. Mark Loizeaux.
Problem here for the Port Authority: Lawsuits, see above. Millions if not billions
to pay out to individuals , because of the gigantic asbestos-cloud the demolition would produce, and that again in: Manhattan.
3. "Terrorists","Al-Quaeda" and or "Osama bin Laden" would destroy the buildings.
Advantage: same effect as in 2) , minus the lawsuits (Who would in Manhattan sue Osama because of the asbestos cloud?).
Further benefit: The isurance payout would secure a solid financial stock to
reconstruct the site on modern and much more profitable standarts.
Anabolic Member
Bush says all sorts of dumb things. You do to!
Associate Member
The destruction of the World Trade Towers may make Silverstein one of the wealthiest men alive.
Associate Member
The Ground Zero here is in the original sense of word, a nuclear blast site. The thermal energy may absorb heat at a rate of 10 E 23 ergs / cm2 sec and near the bomb all surfaces may heat to 4000 °C or 7200 °F igniting or vapourizing violently. Source: US Department of Defense & US Department of Energy, Glasstone – Dolan: 'The Effects of Nuclear Weapons' (1980).
The thermonuclear bomb used was a 'pure' hydrogen bomb, so no uranium or plutonium at all. The basic nuclear reaction is Deuterium + Tritium > Alpha + n. The ignition of this is the fine part, either with a powerful beam array or antimatter (a very certain way to get the necessary effect of directed energy in order not to level the adjacent blocks of high-rise buildings, as well).
Orthodox Jewish men were involved: Rabbi Dov Zackheim with Flight Termination Systems and System Planning co. Michael Chertoff who let the Mossad go. Both these men are Orthodox Jews, both were involved in the systems and operations that were likely connected to the WTC's orchestration and collapse.
Observations Suggesting the Use of Small Hydrogen Bombs
1) The concrete pulverized into fine dust, 70…300 micron particles (just this could take more energy than the total gravitational energy available).
2) Very energetic – hot – dust after the explosions. (Demolition charges would produce white clouds of dust, which would not move much, and a gravity-driven collapse would produce much less and more coarse dust.)
3) Brown shades of color seen in the air – these are produced by nuclear reactions of a thermonuclear device. The reactions use (gamma radiation caused by free neutrons, N2, O2, H2O > nitrid acid, NO2, NO3). These clouds soon get their usual white color after some minutes as the heat and fast movement of the clouds cease becoming ordinary clouds with some water.
4) Superheated steel objects, disintegrating into steel vapour. Molten ponds of steel were found in the elevator shafts. There were lots of burned cars in the parking areas of the towers. The fire department did not announce until 12/19/2001 that the fires under the WTC rubble have been distinguished (more than 3 months after the incident). For more, see
That kind of evidence brings the theory of the planes to a kindergarden level. It also shows that the majority of people's heads are at the same level else they couldn't convince so many with such a childish explanation.
Associate Member
Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also served. [Utne]
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."
The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."
Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.
The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.
Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.
As Black points out, "when you [a company] have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything." And if another company is linked with the security company, then "What's on your computer is on their computer." [American Reporter]
Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted
The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY NewsDay]
Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower." [WingTV]
Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11
Associate Member
In video tapes taken of the so-called collapses of the WTC, more explosions of these cutting charges can be seen. The explosions advance quickly, with a gap of a couple of floors, cutting the strong steel pillars in the outer wall. The explosions are timed so that it appears that the tower collapses occur in the same timing as in a gravitational collapse. The explosions are not completely synchronized in timing, probably a few charges are triggered by radio, and other charges explode out of the impulses of one of these charges (infrared, pressure wave).
More challenging problems to the demolition men, however, were the central cores of the buildings and the 47 steel pillars more robust than the ones on the outer rounds. The pillars of the central cores were made of steel even 100 + 100 mm thick, thicker than the side armours of a battle tank. Cutting those, even with explosives, is extremely difficult. One would need to surround the whole pillars, every single pillar on every floor intended to get blasted, with powerful cutting charges. These charges would have needed to be placed in such a way that the users of the skyscrapers could not notice these preparations.
As seen in the following pictures, the cores of the towers were not distracted by thousands of powerful cutting charges but by a modern thermonuclear explosive, a small hydrogen bomb. In the picture below, a hydrogen bomb explosion, the bomb having been placed in the cellar and directed to the core, has reached the roof of the tower and the upper parts of the outer walls. On its way up the waves of fire pressure partially penetrated about 100 floors of concrete and steel. Over ten million degrees of heat caused by a hydrogen bomb sublimised all water within the concrete in a moment. Water exploded extremely quickly into 1000-fold volume and totally pulverized the concrete. Even people and computers that were in the buildings disappeared turning into heat and light. That is why almost nothing of them was found in the ruins.
Burning radiation is absorbed in steel so quickly that steel heats up immediately over its melting point 1585 °C (approx. 2890 °F) and above its boiling point around 3000 C (approx. 5430 °F). In the pictures down below, super hot groups of steel pillars and columns, torn from wall by pressure wave, are sublimized. They immediately turn into a vaporized form, binding heat as quickly as possible. Bursts upwards, even visible in the picture below, are not possible for a gravitational collapse or for cutting charges which are used horizontally.
CHEMICALLY ENGINEERED
We need to tie Bush to a nuke and send it over to the middle east.
Then we can get 1 with his daddy and send it over to north korea.
Associate Member
Him, Lucky Larry Silverstein, Rudolph Giulianni, Michael Chertoff should be tried for the MURDER of 3000 Americans.
CHEMICALLY ENGINEERED
lol and his daddy.
i dont like that guy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote