Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on January 13, 2009, 03:43:47 PM
-
These people never learn. More wasted tax dollars on partisan witch hunts. ::)
Jan 13, 5:47 PM EST
Democrats seek criminal probe of Bush 'abuses'
By LARRY MARGASAK
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The incoming Obama administration should launch a criminal investigation of Bush administration officials to see whether they broke the law in the name of national security, a House Democratic report said Tuesday. President-elect Barack Obama has been more cautious on the issue and has not endorsed such a recommendation.
Along with the criminal probe, the report called for a Sept. 11-style commission with subpoena power, to gather facts and make recommendations on preventing misuse of power, according to the report by the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee.
The report covers Bush administration policies that Democrats have protested for some time. Among them: interrogation of foreign detainees, warrantless wiretaps, retribution against critics, manipulation of intelligence and political dismissals of U.S. attorneys.
The White House was asked for comment on the report Tuesday, but did not immediately respond.
However, in an interview this month with The Associated Press, Vice President Dick Cheney said, "I can't speak for everybody in the administration, but my view would be that the people who carried out that program - intelligence surveillance program, the enhanced interrogation program, with respect to al Qaeda captives - in fact were authorized to do what they did ... ."
Cheney said legal opinions supported the officials.
"And I believe they followed those legal opinions and I don't have any reason to believe that they did anything wrong or inappropriate," the vice president said.
Obama said last week in a television interview, "We're still evaluating how we're going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions and so forth. And obviously we're going to be looking at past practices and I don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards."
Obama said intelligence officials were "extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don't want them to suddenly feel like they've got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering."
Obama said he has not made a final decision about a Sept. 11-type commission.
The criminal probe may need a special prosecutor named by the attorney general, the report said.
An alternative would be expansion of an existing investigation into the CIA's alleged destruction of a tape or tapes showing harsh interrogation methods against a prisoner.
The criminal investigation would include issues apart from national security, such as whether laws were violated in the politically inspired firing of U.S. attorneys.
Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said his staff has met with the Obama transition officials on the report. The president-elect's transition team has not endorsed it.
The congressionally appointed commission should have subpoena power, the report said. It suggested the new president order "full cooperation by all present and past federal employees with requests for information."
Conyers already has introduced legislation to form the commission.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEMOCRATS_BUSH?SITE=HIHAD&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
-
If they think they could pin him for the shit he's done than great.
-
Libs will never get it.
-
If they've been doing things like wire tapping American citizens without a warrant they need to pay big time.
Do you disagree Coach?
-
O will pardon bush
-
Can anyone name a person that has been illegally wiretapped by order of the Bush administration??
-
Can anyone name a person that has been illegally wiretapped by order of the Bush administration??
Are you fucking stupid? ???
-
P.S. Always sickening to see people like you flying the flag of another country. :-X
(http://media.indypgh.org/uploads/2006/05/mexican_flag.jpg)
-
Are you fucking stupid? ???
Your intelligence is overwhelming. I'm impressed.
Now, do you care to answer the question or would you rather continue acting like a child??
-
Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the "terrorist surveillance program",[1] the NSA is authorized by executive order to monitor, without warrants, phone calls, e-mails, Internet activity, and text messaging,
-
If they think they could pin him for the shit he's done than great.
More than anything else, the illegal alien invasion this disgrace put on us is his biggest crime.
The Bailout next.
-
P.S. Always sickening to see people like you flying the flag of another country. :-X
(http://media.indypgh.org/uploads/2006/05/mexican_flag.jpg)
These people need to go home. I am sick of these cry baby illegal alien invaders.
-
More than anything else, the illegal alien invasion this disgrace put on us is his biggest crime.
The Bailout next.
You're right, but disregarding the constitution is also a giant one. :-X
-
These people need to go home. I am sick of these cry baby illegal alien invaders.
invaders is right
>:(
-
Ok, so you can't name anyone. That's fine, it's ok to admit it.
You're right, but disregarding the constitution is also a giant one. :-X
How have your rights been affected?? Be specific.
-
I've been screaming about this for years...name me some law abiding citizen who was harmed...name them...point to the law suit and then we can debate it. What camps have been set up, who's being tortured, who's an American....NOBODY.
-
You're correct.
I'm sure the debate will end here.
-
I've been screaming about this for years...name me some law abiding citizen who was harmed...name them...point to the law suit and then we can debate it. What camps have been set up, who's being tortured, who's an American....NOBODY.
this whole torture debte is very idiotic. Recruits in Marine Boot Camp go through far worse.
I did not even mention what Navy Seal Recreuits go through in BUDS.
-
Buds, SEAR school.....Dive School.....plus the general level of misery that's Ranger school. These bastards play soccer and have access to great medical care, clean room, books, music etc etc.
-
And these bastards are also being released...
http://www.newsobserver.com/nation_world/story/1365348.html
-
Buds, SEAR school.....Dive School.....plus the general level of misery that's Ranger school. These bastards play soccer and have access to great medical care, clean room, books, music etc etc.
The military should say that these clowns are being transfered to San Diego and will get to "work out" with the BUDS recruits.
-
Libs will never get it.
get what?
the white house?
control of congress?
82% support for obama?
-
get what?
the white house?
control of congress?
82% support for obama?
GWB had higher approval ratings after 9/11
-
get what?
the white house?
control of congress?
82% support for obama?
I think ur knowledge and understanding of the 2006/2008 election is about an inch deep. If u look at the majority of those elected in 2006, many of them were conservative or middle of the road dems and not Libs. Take Webb, the Repubs already had their guy, so he "became" a Dem. Nobody mistakes Webb for a Lib. In 2008 it was all about anybody but Bush. U guys have ur Hil faction and ur Obama faction. They will try and get him back in line. If Obama thinks he has an unshakable mandate to push us left, ur completely wrong.
-
Can anyone name a person that has been illegally wiretapped by order of the Bush administration??
Mightymooooussse. :) Welcome back. :)
-
Are you fucking stupid? ???
No. He's much smarter than you. :)
-
Ok, so you can't name anyone. That's fine, it's ok to admit it.
How have your rights been affected?? Be specific.
He didn't answer your question? What happened? Here is the answer: none. A lawsuit filed over wiretapping was dismissed because they couldn't find a single person who claims to have been the subject of wiretapping:
Lawsuit Against Wiretaps Rejected
Case's Plaintiffs Have No Standing, Appeals Court Rules
By Amy Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 7, 2007; Page A01
A federal appeals court removed a serious legal challenge to the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program yesterday, overruling the only judge who held that a controversial surveillance effort by the National Security Agency was unconstitutional.
Two members of a three-judge panel of the Cincinnati-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ordered the dismissal of a major lawsuit that challenged the wiretapping, which President Bush authorized secretly to eavesdrop on communications involving potential terrorists shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The court did not rule on the spying program's legality. Instead, it declared that the American Civil Liberties Union and the others who brought the case -- including academics, lawyers and journalists -- did not have the standing to sue because they could not demonstrate that they had been direct targets of the clandestine surveillance.
. . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/06/AR2007070600779.html
-
No. He's much smarter than you. :)
What up beach!! ;D
You see what happens! I make one post on my return and I'm already being flogged.
-
I think ur knowledge and understanding of the 2006/2008 election is about an inch deep. If u look at the majority of those elected in 2006, many of them were conservative or middle of the road dems and not Libs. Take Webb, the Repubs already had their guy, so he "became" a Dem. Nobody mistakes Webb for a Lib. In 2008 it was all about anybody but Bush. U guys have ur Hil faction and ur Obama faction. They will try and get him back in line. If Obama thinks he has an unshakable mandate to push us left, ur completely wrong.
So far, I've only been able to see where Obama has been pretty much talking down the middle... So far he hasn't sounded "left" at all.
If it happens, I'll be sure to bitch about it.
-
What up beach!! ;D
You see what happens! I make one post on my return and I'm already being flogged.
lol. That's what you get for asking commonsense questions. :D
-
lol. That's what you get for asking commonsense questions. :D
That's the usual way to do it.
Back 'em into a corner. The less effort and uncomplicated you make your point, the more foul language and name calling you'll recieve.
BTW, nice find with the Washington Post article.
-
It's as simple as this; if we knew specifics there would be no reason to launch a criminal investigation.
When you violate the rights of one American you violate the rights of all Americans.
Hang em high! ;D ;D
(http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/nuremberg_trials.gif)
-
No. He's much smarter than you. :)
I'm guessing he voted for Palin.
'nuff said
-
if we knew specifics
Exactly.
If you knew specifics you would certainly be discharging them here all day long. Wouldn't you?
It would come easy for you. We would have post after post after link after link.
But you can't because there are none.
But it is easy for you to dribble on your keyboard about crap that you have no clue on whether it's true or not.
-
If you knew specifics you would certainly be discharging them here all day long. Wouldn't you?
It would come easy for you.
You're not understanding chaverah. It's not my job to "discharge" them. On top of that there would be no need to investigate if we already knew the facts. It's possible that the Bush administration is innocent in this respect. We don't know, it looks like they've abused their power.
Let's just hope justice is served!
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/442011538_cb0bfce6fc.jpg)
-
T-T-T-TODAY JUNIOR! ;D ;D ;D
-
I'm guessing he voted for Palin.
'nuff said
No one voted for Palin. But don't try Decker's "everyone who votes for McCain is stupid" argument. That one doesn't work.
-
No one voted for Palin.
;D
-
You're so articulate my Israeli friend. The way you express your thoughts so quick and clearly. ;)
-
You're not understanding chaverah. It's not my job to "discharge" them. On top of that there would be no need to investigate if we already knew the facts. It's possible that the Bush administration is innocent in this respect. We don't know, it looks like they've abused their power.
Let's just hope justice is served!
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/442011538_cb0bfce6fc.jpg)
You're missing the point. Here was the exchange:
Can anyone name a person that has been illegally wiretapped by order of the Bush administration??
Your response was:
Are you fucking stupid? ???
You called him "f-ing stupid" for asking a very reasonable question. In reality, you can't name a single person affected by this and that's the reason the lawsuit was dismissed.
-
Libs will never get it.
Kind of like the Clinton BJ thing huh...like witch hunts like that?
-
You're missing the point. Here was the exchange:
Your response was:
You called him "f-ing stupid" for asking a very reasonable question. In reality, you can't name a single person affected by this and that's the reason the lawsuit was dismissed.
No you're missing the point as usual. His reply to a thread about a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION on abuses was:
Can "anyone name a person that has been illegally wiretapped".
If that information was known we wouldn't need to investigate.
-
You two aren't for investigations until you first know the outcome?
ass backwards
ROFL
-
You two aren't for investigations until you first know the outcome?
ass backwards
ROFL
what reason do you have for investigation?
-
what reason do you have for investigation?
T-T-T-TODAY JUNIOR! ;D ;D ;D
-
No you're missing the point as usual. His reply to a thread about a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION on abuses was:
If that information was known we wouldn't need to investigate.
You're still missing the point. You called him stupid when he asked a commonsense question. You couldn't answer his question. I was kind enough to do it for you.
-
You two aren't for investigations until you first know the outcome?
ass backwards
ROFL
::)
-
what reason do you have for investigation?
Maybe it's all those people who subject to warrantless wiretaps. (No one can find them.)
-
what reason do you have for investigation?
"Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the "terrorist surveillance program",[1] the NSA is authorized by executive order to monitor, without warrants, phone calls, e-mails, Internet activity, and text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S."
-
You're still missing the point. You called him stupid when he asked a commonsense question. You couldn't answer his question. I was kind enough to do it for you.
That is the exact opposite of a commonsense question. No one would call for an investigation if we already knew of specific people who's rights had been violated. I can't make that more clear for you.
-
::)
I expect nothing more from a man like you.
-
"Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the "terrorist surveillance program",[1] the NSA is authorized by executive order to monitor, without warrants, phone calls, e-mails, Internet activity, and text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S."
and im guessing its your belief that this goes against the constitution?
-
it will be the only good thing democrats have done if they charge bush and cheney wih crimes
-
and im guessing its your belief that this goes against the constitution?
Yes, if they did it to American citizens without a Warrant.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The courts haven't always agreed on that, I know.
-
Yes, if they did it to American citizens without a Warrant.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The courts haven't always agreed on that, I know.
How do you know there where unreasonable searches? or what makes you think there where unreasonable searches?
-
How do you know there where unreasonable searches? or what makes you think there where unreasonable searches?
The only people that know if the 4th Amendment was violated are probably the violators themselves. There is evidence that Bush and Co. did some things they shouldn't have. That's why it should be investigated.
-
The only people that know if the 4th Amendment was violated are probably the violators themselves. There is evidence that Bush and Co. did some things they shouldn't have. That's why it should be investigated.
what evidence is what im getting at?
-
what evidence is what im getting at?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/
-
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/
no where in there that i read did it say or imply that there where unreasonable searches...this doesnt say much about giving cause to initiate a criminal investigation. Sorry but NO
-
no where in there that i read did it say or imply that there where unreasonable searches...this doesnt say much about giving cause to initiate a criminal investigation. Sorry but NO
From the article.
President Bush took aim at the messenger Saturday, saying that a newspaper jeopardized national security by revealing that he authorized wiretaps on U.S. citizens after September 11
Bush gave the National Security Agency license to eavesdrop on Americans communicating with people overseas
If you can't see how that could be construed as a violation of our fourth amendment rights I can't explain it any further.
-
Yes, if they did it to American citizens without a Warrant.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The courts haven't always agreed on that, I know.
when they were talking to ppl overseas, police dont need a warrant when they have probable cause if ppl where talking to known terrorist or ppl with ties with terrorist i would say that would be probable cause would you not?
If you believe that to be a violation of the 4th amendment rights of these ppl why does there need to be an investigation at all he already says that he did it?
-
when they were talking to ppl overseas, police dont need a warrant when they have probable cause if ppl where talking to known terrorist or ppl with ties with terrorist i would say that would be probable cause would you not?
You need a Warrant to wire tap American citizens. It's that simple.
If you believe that to be a violation of the 4th amendment rights of these ppl why does there need to be an investigation at all he already says that he did it?
That's not the only area a possible Investigation would cover.
-
You need a Warrant to wire tap American citizens. It's that simple.
That's not the only area a possible Investigation would cover.
thats not what i got from that but again if it is then there is no need for an investigation b/c he openly admits it so it should if it has traction that is go straight to prosecution. At any rate i agree with what he has done although i actually do believe that it is a violation of the constitution certain things need to be done its just the simple fact of the matter. freedom isnt free
-
At any rate i agree with what he has done although i actually do believe that it is a violation of the constitution certain things need to be done its just the simple fact of the matter. freedom isnt free
I appreciate your honesty sir. 8)
-
You two aren't for investigations until you first know the outcome?
ass backwards
ROFL
I guess anyone that calls themselves 'Ron Paul Fan' I would expect a comment as quoted above.
In my line of work you investigate because there is evidence of a crime. The crime, 99.9% of the time, comes first. And then you investigate to obtain more evidence to control the outcome in your favor.
You, on the other hand, seem to already know the outcome of a crime of which there is no evidence.
You would suck as a criminal investigator, so don't quit your day job.
I'm sorry if I had to put it in grade school terms but I think you may need it that way, RP Fan
BTW, here is a quote from you on another thread.....
It's really sickening how you act like it's your team against their team. We're all Americans.
You seem awful eager to villify the POTUS, if for absolute no reason at all, to justify you hatred for him and then you make a comment like that!
Aren't we all Americans? Aren't we on the same team?
-
I guess anyone that calls themselves 'Ron Paul Fan' I would expect a comment as quoted above.
In my line of work you investigate because there is evidence of a crime. The crime, 99.9% of the time, comes first. And then you investigate to obtain more evidence to control the outcome in your favor.
You, on the other hand, seem to already know the outcome of a crime of which there is no evidence.
You would suck as a criminal investigator, so don't quit your day job.
I'm sorry if I had to put it in grade school terms but I think you may need it that way, RP Fan
BTW, here is a quote from you on another thread.....
You seem awful eager to villify the POTUS, if for absolute no reason at all, to justify you hatred for him and then you make a comment like that!
Aren't we all Americans? Aren't we on the same team?
I thought destroying 3 buildings by unnatural means WAS a crime... Hence, why you would investigate.
-
I thought destroying 3 buildings by unnatural means WAS a crime... Hence, why you would investigate.
actually, all 7 of the WTC buildings came down. easier on the insurance forms, ya know.
-
To quote Harry Carey: "HOLY COW!!"
I am amazed this 9/11 stuff is still on here.
Haven't either of you gone to therapy for your "condition"??
Let me guess.....have the Loose Change kids changed their documentary again?
-
To quote Harry Carey: "HOLY COW!!"
I am amazed this 9/11 stuff is still on here.
Haven't either of you gone to therapy for your "condition"??
Let me guess.....have the Loose Change kids changed their documentary again?
What condition is that?
You disagree that 3 buildings being destroyed by unnatural causes is criminal?
-
What condition is that?
You disagree that 3 buildings being destroyed by unnatural causes is criminal?
he doesnt care.
-
What condition is that?
You disagree that 3 buildings being destroyed by unnatural causes is criminal?
OK, I may have misunderstood you so let's go back to your original statement.
Are you stating that G.W. Bush is the cause of the unnatural destroying of WTC's??
If you answer yes to that then, you do have a condition.
If I misunderstood you and the answer is no. Then I apologize.
Now, to answer your first question. This is why you investigate a crime:
And then you investigate to obtain more evidence to control the outcome in your favor.
-
OK, I may have misunderstood you so let's go back to your original statement.
Are you stating that G.W. Bush is the cause of the unnatural destroying of WTC's??
If you answer yes to that then, you do have a condition.
If I misunderstood you and the answer is no. Then I apologize.
Now, to answer your first question. This is why you investigate a crime:
No... I didn't say G.W. Bush caused anything.
I said that 3 buildings fell down by unnatural causes and that is generally suspicious enough to require an investigation.
I didn't say any single person did anything... I merely commented on this:
I guess anyone that calls themselves 'Ron Paul Fan' I would expect a comment as quoted above.
In my line of work you investigate because there is evidence of a crime. The crime, 99.9% of the time, comes first. And then you investigate to obtain more evidence to control the outcome in your favor.
Hence why I think you could validate an investigation.
-
he doesnt care.
You're right.
I don't care what you think happened. You're so freakin' warped in your mind set that it's laughable what you think.
I'm still waiting on this evidence that's been coming out for years.
-
No... I didn't say G.W. Bush caused anything.
I said that 3 buildings fell down by unnatural causes and that is generally suspicious enough to require an investigation.
I didn't say any single person did anything... I merely commented on this:
Hence why I think you could validate an investigation.
It's called The 9/11 Commission Report.
I believe there's a book out.
-
It's called The 9/11 Commission Report.
I believe there's a book out.
Aren't there people on the commission who want another investigation though?
-
That is the exact opposite of a commonsense question. No one would call for an investigation if we already knew of specific people who's rights had been violated. I can't make that more clear for you.
The lawsuit was dismissed because there isn't a single American who claims the government listened to their conversations.
There will be no legitimate criminal investigation because Bush et al. followed the advice of their legal counsel when they used warrantless wiretaps. When he was checked by the courts, he followed the court's decision. Case closed. I can't make that more clear for you.
Any “investigation” will be a partisan witch hunt.
-
I expect nothing more from a man like you.
::)
-
To quote Harry Carey: "HOLY COW!!"
I am amazed this 9/11 stuff is still on here.
Haven't either of you gone to therapy for your "condition"??
Let me guess.....have the Loose Change kids changed their documentary again?
lol. The kooks are still here. :)
-
It's called The 9/11 Commission Report.
I believe there's a book out.
hamilton and kean, the 2 co-chairs of this commission, have both said in light of new evidence that a 2nd investigation is needed.
One of the members of the commission called it a 'whitewash'
another went on cnn and slipped and said a missile hit the pentagon.
Your thoughts?
-
Aren't there people on the commission who want another investigation though?
I believe there probably are. 240 can probably give you names and addresses of those individuals.
A good example can be Kennedy's assassination.
It's been investigated numerous times and...............nothin g. There are therories and it makes for a nice discussion.
Same thing with 9/11.
If private firms want to delve into 9/11 every year, I don't care. Just don't waste my tax money on it to come up with the same conclusions.
Besides, if government did investiagate it again, the CT'ers would still cry foul.
BTW....Popular Mechanics did a report on the 9/11 conspiracy therories. Google it.
Not sure if you already knew that....just thought I would pass that along.
-
hamilton and kean, the 2 co-chairs of this commission, have both said in light of new evidence that a 2nd investigation is needed.
One of the members of the commission called it a 'whitewash'
another went on cnn and slipped and said a missile hit the pentagon.
Your thoughts?
Then let a private firm investigate. Like I just said, you being a mindless CT'er, you DON'T want the gov't to investigate again.
My thoughts??
Cynthia McKinney.
Now there is your run-of-the-mill CT nut.
lol. The kooks are still here. :)
Yeah, I see not much has changed.
-
wasn't popular mechanics' editor a cousin to michael chertoff?
didn't they claim to have evidence that no one else was allowed to see (a felony), and when cornered on a radio interview, stopped doing interviews?
didn't they battle those loose change kids on a video/radio NPR interview - and after about 30 seconds, the PopMech guys were relegated to blaming the 911kids for "Holocaust denial", while the 911 kids wanted to discuss the sience of burning jet fuel and 6-ton engines evaporating?
Please don't cite pop mechanics. They got on the radio and said they independently verified that all 10 NYC hijackers' DNA was tested and proven by the 9/12 11am dossier release with all 10 ID's and pictures. Then when asked how the govt managed to pull dna from a building that was still being hit with hoses, they said they saw evidence no one else was able to. yes, a magazine editor saw secret evidence in violation of federal law that the rest of us cannot see. Imagine if some relative of Alex Jones wrote a newspaper article claiming scientific impossibilies proven only by 'secret evidence only i was allowed to see'.
oh brother. the world knows it was an inside job. let it go.
-
I believe there probably are. 240 can probably give you names and addresses of those individuals.
A good example can be Kennedy's assassination.
It's been investigated numerous times and...............nothin g. There are therories and it makes for a nice discussion.
Same thing with 9/11.
If private firms want to delve into 9/11 every year, I don't care. Just don't waste my tax money on it to come up with the same conclusions.
Besides, if government did investiagate it again, the CT'ers would still cry foul.
BTW....Popular Mechanics did a report on the 9/11 conspiracy therories. Google it.
Not sure if you already knew that....just thought I would pass that along.
I did see the Popular Mechanics report... I've also seen other reports bunk that one.
I'm not jumping up and down myself, I personally don't think something THIS big could be kept a secret this long.
The whole thing about Kennedy still makes me ? some things, mostly because of different bullet trajectories... That's the only thing I think makes it at least more than 1 shooter.
-
how did this thread deteriorate into another 9/11 ct thread ::)
-
how did this thread deteriorate into another 9/11 ct thread ::)
Because certain people around here cant let go of wild fantasies and chasing windmills.