The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 04, 2020, 02:17:41 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 17 Print
Author Topic: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread  (Read 57480 times)
entangle
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


View Profile
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #30 on: July 04, 2004, 10:40:08 pm »

"America is NOT a democracy it is a republic."

I would just like to point out that democracy and republic are not two mutually exclusive terms. You're not one OR the other.

Republic: A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.

So in other words, the counterpart to a republic is a monarchy, like England is, that has a queen.

Democracy: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.

So as you can see USA is both a democracy and a republic.

Now you might want to argue that the process of selecting these representatives might or might not be to your liking but that doesn't change whether it's a democracy or not.

Entangle
Logged
Shiver
Guest


Email
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #31 on: July 05, 2004, 12:06:53 am »

I was off visiting some people for the last couple days, so I seem to have missed a few things.

Quote
I will not allow personal attacks. This is a volatile enough discussion as it is without flame wars.
I have deleted Shiver's "stay out of the no spin zone", "Smarter then you"'s posting, and "OMG Moronic Maria"'s response to that.


Clearing up flame wars is nice, but I disagree with that course of action in my case. No Spin Zone is a funny catch phrase. It was not meant to be particularly insulting to anyone. If a pro-Bush person did a good immitation of Michael Moore, John Kerry or some other liberal type, I probably would've snickered at it and posted "Touche". So maybe Bioslayer didn't think much of that joke but does that ruin his whole day? Of course not. I truly doubt the hyper-sensitive moderators agree with me in the least bit but I should be allowed to criticize.
Logged
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #32 on: July 05, 2004, 01:52:24 am »

Quote


Ok, so we had torture, now where are the lives that were saved thanks to it?
I'm not asking for  35 milion. 100 people will be fine. Too much? how about 50? ... 25?

In the example that you provided torture would be justified because it saved many people. But torturing Iraqis didn't accomplish anything.


the military has not released the information exctracted from all the prisoners, so in all reality we wont know how many lives were indead saved. I believe that the infomation gained most likely saved more then the amount you requested.

Quote

Also I noticed that you keep evading harder questions. Could you please state your opinion about the Department of Homeland Security, the PATRIOT Act and (allow me to add something from meself) the "Free Speech Zones"?


the PATRIOT Act just makes it so law inforcment can do there jobs better. It does not require more spending.

Department of Homeland Security mostly is just a reorganization of quite a few agencies too make them more effeciiant at fighting terrorism. the spending required is worth the return.

Free Speech Zones are not all that new of a concept. by law if you were going to protest you would have to file a request, and then the city says where you can protest and at what time. this was done way before bush was in office. the idea behind this is most protests disrupt most poeples dayly lives. its freedom of speech not freedom of being a roadblock.



Quote

As professional interrogators have said since the Spanish Inquisition, torture is not a reliable means of extracting information from suspects or prisoners.  People will gladly tell you anything you want to know if you torture them enough, regardless of whether it's true or not.  People who actually know what they are doing will use more proven methods of getting people to talk; and in the case of finding out where the hypothetical 6 megaton nuclear device is located, I'd want that information to be as accurate as possible, especially if the clock is ticking.


Its not that i agree with the naked parading, seems pointless to me. What i am saying is there is a very real need to extract information from poeple who do not wish to give it out, the term "torture" has usaly been used to describe the process to extract the information. if you want we can start being PC by saying "Information Extraction Techniques" or IET's instead of "torture".
« Last Edit: July 05, 2004, 02:31:11 am by BioSlayer » Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
meep-eep
Forum Admin
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2847



View Profile
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #33 on: July 05, 2004, 02:02:00 am »

Do you really think the moderators are hyper-sensitive? How often do things get deleted around here, or threads get locked or people get banned?

By saying "this is a no spin zone" you're actually saying "you're spinning the story", without giving any arguments. This only acts as flame-bait, especially if you don't specify your name.

This is exactly the sort of thing we don't need in a thread about a controversion topic like this. I would probably have allowed it in a quiet thread, but in this case, I wanted to intervene before things got out of hand.

If you further want to discuss the actions of the moderators (this is just me really), feel free to open a new thread.


P.S.  My deleting these notes seemed to have caused a problem preventing new postings from being seen in the thread (though you could see it in the "reply" window). It should be OK now.

Logged

“When Juffo-Wup is complete
when at last there is no Void, no Non
when the Creators return
then we can finally rest.”
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #34 on: July 05, 2004, 02:19:36 am »

Quote

America is NOT a democracy it is a republic. so you can get killed by speaking your mind in the wrong place, to the wrong crowd, at the wrong time. ( i know its a childish reply to a childish remark.)

its seems that everyone has to come out and debate this point. when I posted it I posted it as a jest, thinking everyone whould disregard it as a joke. so you dont have to come out and tell me that:
Republic = Representive Democracy.
I knew this when I posted it in hope lightening the mood.  
Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
Ivan Ivanov
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 296


Internet Piracy


View Profile
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #35 on: July 05, 2004, 03:13:38 am »

Quote
the military has not released the information exctracted from all the prisoners, so in all reality we wont know how many lives were indead saved. I believe that the infomation gained most likely saved more then the amount you requested.


You *belive* that it *most likely* saved more lives then the amount I requested. That's nice, but faith rarely has anything to do with reality, and even if it does, it's by pure chance.


Quote
the PATRIOT Act just makes it so law inforcment can do there jobs better. It does not require more spending.

Department of Homeland Security mostly is just a reorganization of quite a few agencies too make them more effeciiant at fighting terrorism. the spending required is worth the return.

Free Speech Zones are not all that new of a concept. by law if you were going to protest you would have to file a request, and then the city says where you can protest and at what time. this was done way before bush was in office. the idea behind this is most protests disrupt most poeples dayly lives. its freedom of speech not freedom of being a roadblock.


As for the Free Speech Zones:
What you described has nothing to do with the them.
Yes, you have to file a request if you want to protest, but that's because, you said it yourself, the authorities don't want the city's life to be disrupted too much.
The problem with the Free Speech Zones by Bush is that there already is something that disrupts the city's life - Bush himself. So I hardly belive that he is conserned with the city's traffic, espacially that:
a) People can protest, but they need to be a few miles away from Bush, wich means that even a larger part of the city is blocked.
b) The Free Speech Zones are only applied when Bush comes to town, it's OK to protest any other politcian.

As for the all 3 altogather:

I could agree with what you said about the Deprartament, and the Patriot Act, but don't you think that the price for your fictional security is a little bit too high?
I mean, every time I hear a debate about the War On Terror(tm) somebody says "the terrorists hate us because of our freedoms!"
Oh? You mean that thing that you're flushing down the toilet? Don't worry, if you're right, they'll soon stop hating you.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2004, 03:20:21 am by Ivan_Ivanov » Logged

Your bruises are reminders of naivete and trust
0xDEC0DE
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 175



View Profile WWW
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #36 on: July 05, 2004, 05:01:38 am »

So, you're against "big government", but you openly support (and even praise!) the most massive consolidation of government power in history, expansion of government powers, and curtailing the free speech rights of the citizenry?  Do you not see the blatant contradiction there?

I'd like to continue this conversation, in the hopes of sparking some manner of self-examination amongst the contributors, but it is rapidly becoming obvious that to do so would be wholly unproductive.  I'm out.  Take care.
Logged

"I’m not a robot like you. I don’t like having disks crammed into me… unless they’re Oreos, and then only in the mouth."  --Fry
Zeep-Eeep
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 917


Good Grief


View Profile WWW
Where are the weapons?
« Reply #37 on: July 05, 2004, 05:52:10 am »

To help this thread get even further off track from John Kerry,
I would like to bring back the topic of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) that was raging a little while back.

Some of you may remeber that right before the invasion by
American and British forces, the USA set out to prove to
the UN that they had found WMD in Iraq. They even
provided pictures of the weapons, factories, etc. Now,
it strikes me as odd, that since the invasion, no WMD
have been turned up. Okay, so Fox claims they found one.
_ONE_. The US claimed they new the location of hundreds
of the things, claimed to know where they were made, yet
a month later they can't find any?

I think two of the greatest problems with North American
democracy are that, one, the People here don't respect
what they have. Two, we're a flickle bunch, far too
easily controled by our media.
Logged

What sound does a penguin make?
entangle
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


View Profile
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #38 on: July 05, 2004, 08:42:24 am »

Since this is a debate about Kerry I sat down and tried a game. http://www.bushgame.com is the link. Of course the game itself is just a big joke, but the inbetween facts presented are quite interesting. I'm not american myself so if anyone wants to check it out and comment about the 'facts' there I would be interested in seeing what you have to say. Have to say that if this is for real it's something that at least would make me think twice about who to vote fore.

Entangle
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3619


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: John KerryQu
« Reply #39 on: July 05, 2004, 12:46:32 pm »

For an example on how to keep a discussion on War civilised, all you new people might want to read this . That's how we handled things back in the old days. Try and keep an civilised tone during serious discussions please. And Maria, this isn't the SC boards. We don't have as flamboyant peronalities over here, andthe arrogance level tends to be lower, even if the stupidity can go way higher. So keep that in mind whilst posting here, especially in sensitive topics. I hope you'll stick around though, you'll actually bring some life to this place Wink

Now, a few questoins for Bio to begin with.

Question one. Do you truly believe, that despite the fact that whilst claiming to know the location of hundreds of biological weapons, and stating that Saddam could deploy them in 45 minutes, the finding of one old empty missile case implies that all these weapons were there? If so, why haven't the others een found? The US have controlled Iraq for over a year, yet that horde of weapon has disappeared. Do you seriously beleive that Bush was tellign the truth, even though the CIA has admitted to flawed intelligence themselves?

Question two. Please give your opinion on why Iraq was invaded, bearing in mind that there are several other parts of the world where people are treated a lot worse (Sudan to name a currrent one, but people are dying and having their human rights trampled all over the place). If you in your answer point out the threat Iraq makes, please consider your answer to question one, and explain why countries like North Korea, who are actually openly threatening to invade their neighbours and start nuclear wars weren't a higher priority than a starved out country in the middle east. If you in you answer point out any relation between Al-Qaeda and Saddam, please take note of the fact that no links between the two have ever (to my knowledge) been proven, and that bin Laden never was a big fan of Saddams secular personal cult, being a islamic fanatic himself.

Question three: Do why do you keep referring to the torture of prisoners as naked parading, when every source speaks of killings, homosexual humiliation and other unpleasantries. Are you trying to make light of their plight? Also, do you really believe that "Well it's war" justifies torture in any way?

Question four: If you were about to do something that your friend thought was ill advised, then would you stop having him as a friend? The French and German were not so sure about Iraqs weapons, and did not feel that a war was justified. If they don't immideatly agree with you, does that mean their your enemies. Do your friends always follow you mindlessly, without ever questioning what you do? Isn't an allys DUTY to point out when he fears his ally is about to do somethign rash and foolish.

And now to some points I'd like to make as well.

The torture thing. Justifying someing like that is like saying, "Well this guy behind me in the ATM queue looked like a robber, so I socked him one because I was scared. A soldiers job is to fight wars, take risks and be ready to die for his country. This in no way gives him any right to take out his frustration on POW's. We strive to eliminate things like these from everey war out there, sharply condemning it when it happens somewhere else. So why should the US army be any different? In my mind, that's the problem with having a merc. army rather than a drafted one. You get a larger percent of the wrong people.

Also, perhaps DJ would care to give us an insight on how Mossad do these things? I beleieve I've heard that they sometimes resort to violent methods to find out the location of a planned suicide strike, but I doubt they do it to ebveryone that gets caught, just in case.

And as was already stated. That you beleive the torture may haver helped is just faith. In all probability, that'd already have been used by the US as an excuse to justify, if it were the case
And IMO, the claim that "Well, Europe were already cheat-trading with Saddam!" Carries about as much weight as "OMG! Teh Bush just want's oil and his dadis teh jealous cuz his invasion went pee pee!!!!1!" Both could certainly be true, but without persuasive proof, I'd be minded to think both are just propaganda in the works.

Razing the prison is viewed by most, not as an attempt to mark a new period in Iraq, but as an empty gesture, just like banning cameraphones. Neither the phones or the prison tortured anyone. It's the soldiers that are the problem.

I'll stay out of Homeland security and the likes, since I know very little about internal US affairs.
Logged

What's up doc?
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #40 on: July 06, 2004, 02:33:34 am »

Reply to Question one:
already asked and answered.

Reply to Question two:
"becuase bush one day got up and wanted to be called evil, wanted to ruin the name of the US, since every country out there loved America to begin with, especially france, wanted to alienate all other countries, wanted to get oil which he could more easily get from Alaska, by assassinating a few senate members, and ruin the lives of arabs since he is obviously racist" is that what you want me to say? becuase if you believe that load of crap there is no hope for you. otherwise already asked and answered.

when it comes to stopping Mass murders in Sudan that should be the UN's job but what country was just elected to the Human Rights Commission? none other then Sudan
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/9cf3278be796f15bc1256e910043b302?OpenDocument
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0405/S00056.htm
so i have as much faith in the UN as you do in Bush

Reply to Question three:
Killings? if you actualy read the reports most of the prisoners who died were somehow involved with the CIA, at the time. or died while trying to escape, or solders responsable are now under investigation. but most of the tortue was indeed just naked parading. also i dont agree with the pointless embarasment of those poeple. what i agree with is all of the IET's that were approved by the bush administartion. john kerry most likely would not have allowed any IET's which means alot more solders would be dieing.

Reply to Question four:
do you really believe that America, at least my corner of it, has ever considerd france a friend, in the past 10 years? if you think bushes viewed them all as enemies that he would ask for help from them? when kerry says he will "try to go back to the UN" he means he will grovel and crawl, which no president should ever do.


Quote
"Well, Europe were already cheat-trading with Saddam!" Carries about as much weight as "OMG! Teh Bush just want's oil and his dadis teh jealous cuz his invasion went pee pee!!!!1!" Both could certainly be true, but without persuasive proof, I'd be minded to think both are just propaganda in the works.

you want proof? LOL  just search the web. LOL just talk to solders like I have. LOL "made in france" is on to many of the weapons found in Iraq.


NOW LISTEN TO THESE WORDS:
This thread is about John Kerry, please post accordingly
« Last Edit: July 06, 2004, 01:21:43 pm by BioSlayer » Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
Culture20
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 917


Thraddash Flower Child


View Profile
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #41 on: July 06, 2004, 04:48:10 am »

But Bio, it's hard to talk about someone we know so little about.   Cool
Logged
Shiver
Guest


Email
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #42 on: July 06, 2004, 01:00:38 pm »

From my understanding, the coming election is really more of a Bush vs. himself kind of thing. All re-elections tend to be like that. So it was really no surprise to see this topic spiral into an argument about Bush instead.
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3619


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #43 on: July 06, 2004, 03:51:11 pm »

Ok, lets try this again.

Question one. No it isn't. So far we've got:

Bio: Well, there were WMD's that had to be found and destroyed. Look here! There's proof.

Several other people: Um, no. That's just one old shell that was probably UN taged. This is your article, and this is ours, saying that isn't evidence.

Bio: Haha! You linked to my article, this proves that there were WMD's.

That wasn't the intent on the other posts, and if you'll look closely, you'll see that the article he linked to doesn't make any claims about these being the famous 45-min WMD's. This isn't a question of everything and nothing, we knew he had Sarin cause he gassed the Kurds, and we were fairly sure that most of it had been destroyed. And what do you know? Just one case seems to have remained.. Hardly enough to launch an attack.

Since you responded in such an illogical manner, I was unsure wether you actually read the second article, or wether you just meant to say that you felt that "one found piece is enough". If the latter, then fine. That's your opinion. But it's not based on extensive proof.

For your reference, from the article:

Quote
The accounting for sarin was one of a dozen remaining disarmament tasks that inspectors submitted to the U.N. Security Council in March 2003, said Ewen Buchanan, a spokesman the U.N. inspectors.

"Iraq was known to possess a lot of this material, and there were questions about the accounting," Buchanan said.


We knew about the gas. We were attempting to inspect it. We didn't believe there were the insane amounts you claim. And no insane amounts have been found. Of course, if they find a huge desert hangar full of the stuff tomorrow, I'll apologise nicely, but since it's been a year without them turning up I find that very unlikely.

As for question two, how about you just try and answer it? What I am genuinely curious to know is how you rationalise it. WHY do you feel Iraq was the biggest threat out there, compared to other threatening countries. IN which way were they so much more dangerous than anyone else? I know all the counterarguments arguments about oil and such, but I've yet to hear anything else than defense against those from you. It's all good that you can say, "No, it wasn't for this and this and this reason", but you should then also be able to say "We did it for this and this and this reason. And this is why we thought Saddam was more dangerous than anyone else." For the record "He was a bad man" Is not a valid answer unless you can tell me why he is badder than anyone else.

As for when it comes to Sudan, yes I've noticed you don't trust the UN. That's not the point though. My question, if you would care to actually read it pertained to why you would break UN rules in one case and invade, whereas you wont interfere in another, obviously failining UN project. After all, if you can handle things that much better once, surely the Coalition should be continuiing their good work? Or are only certain projects important enough to break the rules?

As for three, first off, would this qualify as proof? Or maybe this? Pay special attention to

Quote

The developments in Britain came as the United States admitted two Iraqi prisoners were murdered by Americans and that 23 other deaths are being investigated in Iraq and Afghanistan.


But those are mostly just about people being wrongfully killed.

Perhaps [ulr=http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1228666,00.html]this[/url]?
Or this?
And this

Also,the New Yorker really pointed out

Quote
Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.


I'd also like to point out, seeing as the "naked parading doesn't seem to distrub you very much that:

Quote
Homosexual acts are against Islamic law and it is humiliating for men to be naked in front of other men, Bernard Haykel, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at New York University, explained. “Being put on top of each other and forced to masturbate, being naked in front of each other—it’s all a form of torture,” Haykel said.


I'm not homophobic myself, but had it been me in that situation, I'd have found it a tad more than "unneccessary". So please, stop belittling the torturing.

Question four. Well, again you didn't actually answer the question. I know that europe has considered the US an ally for quite some time, and being an ally means you speak your mind. So bearing that in mind, do you think it's anti american if soemone doesn't want to join the US in a war that they do not believe is justified? Please just answer the question.

Also, paraphrasing another board member, it might do you some good to find out what other countries complain about when it pertains to the US. Don't just say "Well ,any criticism is due to them being jealous and us right" Ask yourself, WHAT are they complaining about, and is there any validity in it?

Regardign the whole trading thing, the way a debate works Bio, you get to prove your own points. Please come up with something a bit more believable than "one Peugeot found in desert" though. Alternatively I remember C20 mentioning this as well a while back, perhaps you'd be kind enough to link? I'm not beyond admitting fault when I'm wrong, and this is an issue I'm not entirely sure about.

However, as a mental excercise, imagine you are right and I am wrong. France and Germany was trading illegally with Iraq. Wait. Why was it illegal again? Oh, because the UN didn't allow it. The US however, invaded Iraq without UN approval. Doesn't that make the invasion illegal then? If it's alright to break UN rules, then the invasion was just fine. But that means it's alright to break them to trade too doesn't it? So either the invasion is illegal, or the trading wasn't! Feel free to point out flaws if you wish.

As another mental excersise, the US really didn't need to invade Iraq because of oil. Fine, I'll buy that, there are plenty of other places to get it. But by the same logic, wouldn't that indicate that France and/or Germany could get their oil/trade somewhere else? I don't see them going bankrupt just yet, so I suppose they must have had other trading partners than Iraq. Which renders the whole argument null and void in a fashion. Again, feel free to nitpick.

Also, "just talk to soldiers" is not a good debating point. That like me saying, "Well, I know a few Brit soldiers, and they said the americans were torturing people in iraq. They even said they did it themselves." Now while this may be true, it's hearsay and not fact. When you argue, you use facts that can be backed up.

All in all, chill a little bit Bio. Rememeber the whole talking pet argument? This is just like that. There's no need to start hyperventialting and yelling.

As for the topic, it's Shivers topic. If he thinks we're drifting too far, then he'll tell us, and we'll stop. He could even ask a moderator to interfere, but somehow I doubt Shiver would do that Wink

Concerning Kerry, the anyone can talk about him. Anyone that knows anything. As I've stated, I know very little of any domestic American issues. Do feel free to give us your opinions C20. Wink
« Last Edit: July 06, 2004, 04:28:39 pm by Lukipela » Logged

What's up doc?
Shiver
Guest


Email
Re: John Kerry
« Reply #44 on: July 07, 2004, 02:10:30 am »

Quote
As for the topic, it's Shivers topic. If he thinks we're drifting too far, then he'll tell us, and we'll stop. He could even ask a moderator to interfere, but somehow I doubt Shiver would do that


Oh man, you'd be surprised what kind of stuff I'd let slip if I were mod. We probably should keep even Off Topic family friendly, though.


I have a little news regarding senator Kerry. He's chosen John Edwards, one of his rivals from the democratic primaries to be his running mate: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5365307/

My problem with Bush is... well, I have a lot of problems with Bush. For one thing, his speeches are blatantly stupid. Here's a few sites full of his many embarassing slip-ups:
http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/quotes/georgewbush.html
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm
http://www.speedygrl.com/bushquotes.html

Besides that, he constantly tries to invoke nationalism in every speech, most likely to cover up the fact that his administration doesn't benefit most people in the least bit. Those in support of him probably just like his war policy and see him as a great man taking a stand. Wake the fuck up people, any president would have had the sense to go to war with Afghanistan after that September 11th incident. Intense patriotism in this country is actually oxymoronic; we're supposed to qualify our leaders carefully, not pledge blind loyalty to them.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 17 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!