welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Occupy Wall Street Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21, 22  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CTrees



Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 3772

PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What, you don't remember the Million Worker March in DC in October of 2004? The one that had an estimated 10,000 protesters marching?

More seriously, doing a cursory search I can find some massive anti-war protests in CA (which have amounted to nothing, and not gained support outside of CA), a lot that had participants in the hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands, and a fair handful that had estimates that were "between 50k and 300k participants" or similar (funny that, the estimates varying SO BROADLY).

Now, yes, there were ridiculously massive protests outside the US (a >1mil protest in Madrid, for instance), but that makes as much difference as a fart in the wind. In the US? Yeah, there was fuckall that mattered, Him. A lot of people didn't/don't like the wars, public opinion polls show that, and yet... when it came to voting, that wasn't born out, and the massive protests weren't there to back it up, either.
_________________
“Yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation”
yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6040
Location: California

PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Besides which, at their outsets, the wars were actually popular. It was only after it became flagrantly apparent that Afghanistan was a hopeless quagmire and Iraq was a hopeless quagmire based on a series of lies that the public turned against them--and even then, like I said, that's only when the public remembers that they're still going.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tinkeringIdiot



Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 1057

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I keep hearing people state that the Occupy movement is not a movement because they have no leader, no consolidated list of demands, no power within the current system, no coffee mugs...etc. The first claim seems to be the most common and is at the same time the most baffling to me.

Why does a movement need a leader in order to be legitimate? A group of people with an idea need only a means of making decisions to generate movement based that idea. One way is certainly to give one bloke the keys to the empire and have everyone else follow him; that's the way we've done things for a long long time. But that isn't the only way to do it.

Naturally, a leaderless movement would have to use a very different system for decision making. In the case of this Movement, decision making is distributed and by direct consensus. This phenomena leads to the second two claims in that list: distributed decision making tends to produce a large number of issues and demands, and this method of movement makes absolutely no sense when viewed through the lens of "traditional" American political practice. Neither of these mean that the movement lacks legitimacy and in fact may be the true source of power within the movement. For an example of the efficacy of this method, I point you to this. An excerpt from the linked post:

Tom Atlee wrote:
After a period of confused anger and upset, protesters chant "Who do you serve? Who do you protect?" (since many police departments have "serve" and "protect" in their mottos). Then they chant "Shame, shame!" then "Shame on you!!" The tension between the police and crowd grows palpable. The police become nervous, raising their pepperball guns protectively and threateningly. Things are about to get very ugly. And then suddenly - at 6 minutes 13 seconds into the video - someone in the crowd yells "MIC CHECK!" and the crowd yells back "Mic Check!" They say it again. The scene goes into a surreal suspended animation as the unknown initiator calls out a wisdom that the crowd had not possessed moments before, but now recognizes and follows:

WE ARE WILLING (we are willing)

... The police look around at each other. They aren't sure what's going on....

TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF MOMENT (to give you a brief moment)

... The police start to lower their guns...

OF PEACE (of peace)

YOU MAY TAKE YOUR WEAPONS (you may take your weapons)

AND OUR FRIENDS (and our friends)

AND GO (and go)

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN (please do not return)

WE'RE GIVING YOU A MOMENT OF PEACE (we're giving you a moment of peace)

WE'RE GIVING YOU A MOMENT OF PEACE (we're giving you a moment of peace)

YOU CAN GO (you can go)

WE WILL NOT FOLLOW YOU (we will not follow you)

YOU CAN GO (you can go)

YOU CAN GO (you can go)

YOU CAN GO (you can go)


Who was the unknown instantaneous leader? It doesn't matter. The same voice will speak from a different throat at a different time and have the same effect.

(I suggest you read the whole post at the link above as it offers and interesting, well-articulated view.)

This movement is effective already in pointing out fundamental, structural flaws within the American political system and bringing them to the attention of a large segment of the population, despite completely forgoing traditional information distribution networks (ie: tv, radio, newspaper). Concrete demands are emerging, but you will not find them in a press packet along with your complimentary breakfast at the Holiday Inn; you have to know how to tap into the decision making system and ask for them. And why would this movement - which is engaged in pointing out deep, fundamental problems with our very system of governance - even WANT to go through one of the parties to change that system? The democrats are just as scared of these people as the republicans. They are scared of their own people.

As for the protests "inconveniencing" you, or making you "hate" the OWS movement, and being "ineffective" as a result of that...perhaps Huxley was right.

Though the point about the coffee mugs may have some merit.

I would very much enjoy hearing views on the necessity of individual leaders from you guys.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6040
Location: California

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My problem with Occupy is that it's aiming at entirely the wrong thing. It's trying to call attention to the unfairness of the system--but everyone has lost faith in the system already. Government, business, the media, the public's trust in all these institutions is at all-time lows. Occupy is preaching to the choir.

What they're not doing, though, is making the public care enough to get off their asses and do something about it. Evidently, they're doing just the opposite. So when they do stuff like block you from getting to work or fuck up your commute home, yes, that is a very bad thing for them--because not only do they become preachers to the choir, but they become preachers to the choir that are actively screwing you over in immediate ways.

And since Occupy is not engendering a public backlash towards anything but itself, the powers against which Occupy protests can simply sit back and wait for the protests to run out of steam. They don't pose a threat to the establishment.

Leaders, organization, a concrete agenda, all those things could give these protests a direction that can turn them into an actual threat to the establishment. Right now it's just an outpouring of rage at the unfairness of the system--to which the system can simply say "cool story bro" and wait and/or send the police to crack skulls, and to which the public can say "yeah, I agree, now get out of my way."

If Occupy wants to become a threat to the powers that be, it has to start actually going after the sources of the system's power. Things like the Bank Transfer Day earlier this month, where everyone was supposed to transfer their money to a credit union, are a great place to start. Bank of America can ignore the tens of thousands of people protesting outside its office, but it can't ignore tens of thousands of people closing their accounts and taking their money elsewhere.

Protesting is for proving your numbers and calling attention to issues that don't get enough attention. But the American public has lost faith in the system and everyone knows it. Occupy would be better off doing something other than occupying--because, after all, to occupy is to just take up space.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ShadowCell wrote:
My problem with Occupy is that it's aiming at entirely the wrong thing. It's trying to call attention to the unfairness of the system--but everyone has lost faith in the system already. Government, business, the media, the public's trust in all these institutions is at all-time lows. Occupy is preaching to the choir.

What they're not doing, though, is making the public care enough to get off their asses and do something about it. Evidently, they're doing just the opposite. So when they do stuff like block you from getting to work or fuck up your commute home, yes, that is a very bad thing for them--because not only do they become preachers to the choir, but they become preachers to the choir that are actively screwing you over in immediate ways.

And since Occupy is not engendering a public backlash towards anything but itself, the powers against which Occupy protests can simply sit back and wait for the protests to run out of steam. They don't pose a threat to the establishment.

Leaders, organization, a concrete agenda, all those things could give these protests a direction that can turn them into an actual threat to the establishment. Right now it's just an outpouring of rage at the unfairness of the system--to which the system can simply say "cool story bro" and wait and/or send the police to crack skulls, and to which the public can say "yeah, I agree, now get out of my way."

If Occupy wants to become a threat to the powers that be, it has to start actually going after the sources of the system's power. Things like the Bank Transfer Day earlier this month, where everyone was supposed to transfer their money to a credit union, are a great place to start. Bank of America can ignore the tens of thousands of people protesting outside its office, but it can't ignore tens of thousands of people closing their accounts and taking their money elsewhere.

Protesting is for proving your numbers and calling attention to issues that don't get enough attention. But the American public has lost faith in the system and everyone knows it. Occupy would be better off doing something other than occupying--because, after all, to occupy is to just take up space.


Preaching to the choir? Really? Everyone I've spoken to so far that oppose OWS oppose it simply because they believe OWS protesters want everything handed to them on a silver platter, handouts from the government and to build a socialist utopia. They believe the protesters are just lazy and that they should stop whining. Not to mention those who consider themselves part of the 51% (or whatever) seems to think the system is fine. I wouldn't exactly consider that "preaching to the choir."

Besides, isn't the whole point of OWS to create a momentum that's built up for years -- decades, even -- that most people in America would normally just shrug off or silently complain about to their mates?

How do you think people felt about most protest movements in history? It's not like there were "millions of people" on the streets during the Civil Rights era either. Or the anti-war protests during Vietnam, Korea, and so on.
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3315

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To quote a facebook friend re: occupy portland

"When did the police are part of the 99% turn into, lets throw bricks at the cops, od on heroin and make downtown portland stink worse than it already does"

Eventually movements like this attract the douchebag contigent. The douchebag contigent just makes a lot of people trying to make ends meet hate whatever movement they attach themselves to. In this case its the portland street kids and anarchists filling the douchebag contigent.

When confronted by the concept of using Oregon's initiative system to implement changes in the states law that work against things like corporate personhood the response on the occupy portland page was: "Initiatives cost a lot of money"

Given that the biggest problem in our system is the pathetic lack of participation, such a response pretty much shows the lack of drive of that particular branch of the movement. So...fuckem, I'll keep encouraging people to switch to credit unions and actually vote, if others think that squatting in a park and making the other schlubs just trying to make ends meet get annoyed with the inconvenience they present to joe american (cause really they don't present much of one to the people they're protesting right now) that's their perogative, but much like the flotilla to gaza...this isn't changing shit in its current form.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
To quote a facebook friend re: occupy portland

"When did the police are part of the 99% turn into, lets throw bricks at the cops, od on heroin and make downtown portland stink worse than it already does"


What? The parsing threw me off, but the only "legitimate" complaint your friend has is throwing stones on cops. The other two are circumstantial, and what does people ODing on heroine have to do with the police? Or more specifically, OWS?

Quote:
Eventually movements like this attract the douchebag contigent. The douchebag contigent just makes a lot of people trying to make ends meet hate whatever movement they attach themselves to. In this case its the portland street kids and anarchists filling the douchebag contigent.


Every movement in the history of ever has attracted a "douchebag contingent" in one way or the other. That doesn't delegitimize the entire group. And how much of this is actually true? Googling Occupy Portland and throwing stones on cops turns up nothing, as does anarchists. The protests doesn't seem to be anything but peaceful, except for when the police comes in with riot gear and seemingly false rumours.

The Detroit Free Press wrote:
Mayor Sam Adams had ordered that the camp shut down Saturday at midnight, citing unhealthy conditions and the encampment's attraction of drug users and thieves.


Who's telling the truth, I wonder?

Quote:
When confronted by the concept of using Oregon's initiative system to implement changes in the states law that work against things like corporate personhood the response on the occupy portland page was: "Initiatives cost a lot of money"


I'm unfamiliar with the "iniative system" of Portland. Mind giving me the low down on that?

Quote:
Given that the biggest problem in our system is the pathetic lack of participation, such a response pretty much shows the lack of drive of that particular branch of the movement. So...fuckem, I'll keep encouraging people to switch to credit unions and actually vote, if others think that squatting in a park and making the other schlubs just trying to make ends meet get annoyed with the inconvenience they present to joe american (cause really they don't present much of one to the people they're protesting right now) that's their perogative, but much like the flotilla to gaza...this isn't changing shit in its current form.


You really like playing that "it won't matter anyway" card, don't you? And well played bringing the flotilla into it. Nice touch.

Who's to say people at OWS or Occupy anywhere aren't encouraging to switch to credit unions, and aren't themselves switching to credit unions? Do you know for sure? Is it a deliberate attempt to stain the movement by baseless accusations?
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3315

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

double post
_________________


Last edited by Monkey Mcdermott on Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:50 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3315

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
To quote a facebook friend re: occupy portland

"When did the police are part of the 99% turn into, lets throw bricks at the cops, od on heroin and make downtown portland stink worse than it already does"


What? The parsing threw me off, but the only "legitimate" complaint your friend has is throwing stones on cops. The other two are circumstantial, and what does people ODing on heroine have to do with the police? Or more specifically, OWS?


When you OD in the OWS camp it has a lot to do with that contigent of the occupy movement. Are you not getting that the strength of any political movement has a LOT to do with presenting a positive image to the rest of the country? Stuff like that plays directly into the storyline the people who enjoy the status quo want to write regarding this movement. It erodes support from the rest of the populace around them, which is the one thing any movement needs to actually accomplish anything.
Guest wrote:

Quote:
Eventually movements like this attract the douchebag contigent. The douchebag contigent just makes a lot of people trying to make ends meet hate whatever movement they attach themselves to. In this case its the portland street kids and anarchists filling the douchebag contigent.


Every movement in the history of ever has attracted a "douchebag contingent" in one way or the other. That doesn't delegitimize the entire group. And how much of this is actually true? Googling Occupy Portland and throwing stones on cops turns up nothing, as does anarchists. The protests doesn't seem to be anything but peaceful, except for when the police comes in with riot gear and seemingly false rumours.

The Detroit Free Press wrote:
Mayor Sam Adams had ordered that the camp shut down Saturday at midnight, citing unhealthy conditions and the encampment's attraction of drug users and thieves.


Who's telling the truth, I wonder?


I've been there, its full of drug users and thieves. The mayor is telling the truth. Local news

Guest wrote:

Quote:
When confronted by the concept of using Oregon's initiative system to implement changes in the states law that work against things like corporate personhood the response on the occupy portland page was: "Initiatives cost a lot of money"


I'm unfamiliar with the "iniative system" of Portland. Mind giving me the low down on that?


Its of oregon, 186k signatures and you can put a state constitutional amendment on the ballot in the next election, doesn't have to be proposed by a representative, just goes on the ballot and the state votes on it. We actually have a method of redress to our grievances in oregon that bypasses a large chunk of the system.

Guest wrote:

Quote:
Given that the biggest problem in our system is the pathetic lack of participation, such a response pretty much shows the lack of drive of that particular branch of the movement. So...fuckem, I'll keep encouraging people to switch to credit unions and actually vote, if others think that squatting in a park and making the other schlubs just trying to make ends meet get annoyed with the inconvenience they present to joe american (cause really they don't present much of one to the people they're protesting right now) that's their perogative, but much like the flotilla to gaza...this isn't changing shit in its current form.


You really like playing that "it won't matter anyway" card, don't you? And well played bringing the flotilla into it. Nice touch.

Who's to say people at OWS or Occupy anywhere aren't encouraging to switch to credit unions, and aren't themselves switching to credit unions? Do you know for sure? Is it a deliberate attempt to stain the movement by baseless accusations?


Well, when I see people utilizing tactics that ultimately will not implement the change they seek, yeah I tend to comment on the futility of the action. As for the flotilla? Big grand gesture that will get a lot of media time and ultimately institute no significant change. Fits pretty well with the occupy movement at this point.

As for the credit union thing? Fuck if I know or care, its the method that attacks the corporations that I take particular offense to where it might actually cause some hurt. That was just a statement on what I believed is one of many more effective tactics than "occupying".
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6040
Location: California

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
Preaching to the choir? Really? Everyone I've spoken to so far that oppose OWS oppose it simply because they believe OWS protesters want everything handed to them on a silver platter, handouts from the government and to build a socialist utopia. They believe the protesters are just lazy and that they should stop whining. Not to mention those who consider themselves part of the 51% (or whatever) seems to think the system is fine. I wouldn't exactly consider that "preaching to the choir."


And yet do they think the American political, social, and economic system is fair? Do they think it's working? Do they still have faith in its institutions?

Because that's precisely the problem. Everyone already knows that the stuff Occupy is protesting is a problem. But they hate Occupy anyway precisely because, instead of doing anything about it, they're just pointing it out again and making themselves a nuisance. It's not the fat-cat CEO who loses work days or has to make do on less sleep or gets home hours later than he should because of Occupy; it's the working Joe that Occupy says it wants to help. So, well, no wonder the working Joe hates Occupy. Occupy means his life gets harder. And once you hate them, it's all too easy to believe stuff about how they're all lazy rich kids who want handouts. You certainly won't think they're on your side.

This is why I suggested that Occupy should turn from occupation and towards things like Bank Transfer Day. It doesn't hurt the people Occupy says it wants to help if they transfer their money to a credit union--but enough people doing it definitely hurts the big banks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10682
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've lost track of what you guys are even arguing about.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 10657

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We were arguing about whether or not you'd lost track yet.

I totally won.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10682
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Milgram! *shakes fist*

Wait, is this an extension of Gary's "is Dogen a douche" experiment? Because, if so, #iamnotamused.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lasairfiona



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9702
Location: I have to be somewhere? ::runs around frantically::

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ShadowCell wrote:
And yet do they think the American political, social, and economic system is fair? Do they think it's working? Do they still have faith in its institutions?

Because that's precisely the problem. Everyone already knows that the stuff Occupy is protesting is a problem. But they hate Occupy anyway precisely because, instead of doing anything about it, they're just pointing it out again and making themselves a nuisance. It's not the fat-cat CEO who loses work days or has to make do on less sleep or gets home hours later than he should because of Occupy; it's the working Joe that Occupy says it wants to help. So, well, no wonder the working Joe hates Occupy. Occupy means his life gets harder. And once you hate them, it's all too easy to believe stuff about how they're all lazy rich kids who want handouts. You certainly won't think they're on your side.

This is why I suggested that Occupy should turn from occupation and towards things like Bank Transfer Day. It doesn't hurt the people Occupy says it wants to help if they transfer their money to a credit union--but enough people doing it definitely hurts the big banks.

Now I don't get out much but everyone I have talked to have supported the Occupy movement when they actually heard what they were trying to do (protest unfairness, draw attention to it, and try a different approach to coming up with solutions and that they don't have it quite figured out yet). It is much like the healthcare issue - once people got proper information about it, they supported it. Occupy seems to be trying a more organic approach to developing a movement and I honestly hope it works. A new approach in media, politics, and business is sorely needed. Even if it eventually fails, I hope it makes it long enough to show that other methods are viable to people that may have a more concrete approach to things. More power to them I say.

Do they need to come up with more concrete strategies for the masses to do (since the masses don't have time for an extended protest on their own)? Yes. Do they need to have a better media profile? It might be useful but it may also be counter productive to the movement. Do they need mugs and pamphlets? Again, it may be counter productive considering the organic system.

Is it bringing up issues that were previously hidden or only bitched about around the water cooler? I think so. If they keep succeeding with that, I will be a happy camper.

I don't have to deal with Occupy everyday since it isn't my city. Sure the movement needs some more coordination to make sure they are communicating with Average Joe and not _just_ inconveniencing Average Joe. But sometimes Average Joe need some inconveniencing. Not that Average Joe wants to be inconvenienced but sometimes it moves Average Joe into Curious Joe.

_________________
Before God created Las he pondered on all the aspects a woman might have, he considered which ones would look good super-inflated and which ones to leave alone.
After much deliberation he gave her a giant comfort zone. - Michael
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darqcyde



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 10284
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Las: Wow you're being nice! Average Joe just doesn't need inconveniencing, he needs his life personally affected before he's even willing to care.

YA know what was one of the nicknames for the 80's? It was the ME GENERATION. Big Government and Big Corporations have done exceedingly well at causing people to not care for much beyond their own immediate life and surroundings. We have a country full of people who have also grown up modeling their lives based upon media characters that were reflections of society--characters that were never meant to be models for people's lives but somewhere along the way Art stopped reflecting life and started influencing it, think Jersey Shore and Ed Hardy, only it's been going on way longer. Or hell, Tim Allen's character on Home Improvement, he started out as a caricature from Allen's stand-up routines and became an icon and something american middle class males aspired to be like as the shows popularity rose and seasons continued on.

Why do I bring this up? Because the entertainment industry is a HUGE part of why people don't care in the US. Most of it is low brow is some form and caters to whatever will keep eyeballs fixed to the screen the longest. (TruTV anyone?) Like how the manufacturing revolution changed the focus of product production from quality to profitability our entertainment system has become equally callow and shoddy (Thank you Stephanie Meyer) It's the reason why shows with moral ambiguity like Breaking Bad and Dexter will always be relegated to a semi-cult status: they require a lot of mental activity on the part of the viewer, something that more and more people seem unwilling to offer or use.

tl;dr there is no tl;dr, America is breaking down as a society based largely upon having to deal with the repercussions from BAD decisions made by previous generations WHICH many of the current generation hold as being some combination of infallible and/or sacrosanct.
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://12ozlb.blogspot.com Now in book form: http://amzn.to/14E6OFy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21, 22  Next
Page 20 of 22

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group