IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Nist Wtc7 Press Release Thurs. Aug. 21, NIST NCSTAR 1-9 & 1A

dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 12:27 PM
Post #21



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Turbofan @ Aug 21 2008, 10:11 AM) *
Gage discussing NIST report NOW:

http://www.noliesradio.com/

Kevin Ryan and Tony Szamboti are on Noliesradio panel right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 12:53 PM
Post #22



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Hopefully this isn't the last that we see of that "Q&A" session.

NIST pulling the plug


Led to:


What was it that Porky Pig said again?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Aug 21 2008, 12:56 PM
Post #23


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



WTC 7 Solved: It Was Ivins!

Diary Entry by George Washington
August 20, 2008 at 23:18:49

Following is a leaked version of NIST's August 21st announcement as to the cause of the collapse of World Trade Center 7 on 9/11.

The government destroyed the steel from ground zero, because we believed it might not have been allowed as evidence at trial.

However, we did ship one steel beam to someone, who sold it to a junk yard in China for scrap metal, which melted it down to make Olympic trinkets, one of which was shipped back to us yesterday.

After testing that steel using very secret, super-advanced, but Incredibly Accurate new methods, we have determined that residue on the steel matches certain aspects of Ivins' desk in his lab at Fort Detrick (true, it also matches the desks from at least 16 different laboratories throughout the world, but our super-advanced testing has shown that we do not need to talk to anyone at those other labs).

While previously, experts said that no modern steel-frame high-rise had ever collapsed due to fire alone, that the fires in building 7 were not that hot or widespread, that building 7 collapsed at virtually free-fall speed, and that the building must have been brought down by controlled demolition, government scientists now say that isn't true.

Government scientists now know that one disturbed individual (especially if he likes sorority girls), acting alone, can weaken thick core columns, melt (and even partially evaporate) structural steel, and cause molten steel to continue boiling for months afterwards simply by having bad energy (especially if he looks geeky).

Government investigators have created a new timeline showing that between the time Ivins created super-advanced weaponized anthrax all by himself without advanced equipment and the time he returned for a routine meeting at Ft. Detrick later that day, he drove to Manhattan and glowered with evil intent at building 7.

This case is now solved, and we our closing down our investigation.

Anyone who doubts our conclusion is a conspiracy theorist who should go look for anthrax spores on a grassy knoll.


http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=8737
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Aug 21 2008, 12:59 PM
Post #24


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



QUOTE (dMole @ Aug 21 2008, 09:53 AM) *
Hopefully this isn't the last that we see of that "Q&A" session.

Right down the memory hole eh. A googling shows no News results.

Probably some enterprising youngster thought to videotape the Q&A off their computer screen at least.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 01:00 PM
Post #25



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Turbofan @ Aug 21 2008, 10:58 AM) *
Does anyone else keep losing the audio stream?

I need to refresh at times, and now the server is not responding.

It's pretty shitty audio under WinAmp for me, and I've got a good high-speed connection. It hasn't dropped though. Maybe it's those electrons "north of the border" TF. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Aug 21 2008, 01:03 PM
Post #26


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,011
Joined: 16-October 06
From: arlington va
Member No.: 96



QUOTE (Turbofan @ Aug 21 2008, 12:58 PM) *
Does anyone else keep losing the audio stream?

I need to refresh at times, and now the server is not responding.


im using windows media player, and it keeps dropping every few minutes. just keep refreshing, it eventually comes back on...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post Aug 21 2008, 01:04 PM
Post #27





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ Aug 19 2008, 02:59 PM) *
Right down the memory hole eh. A googling shows no News results.

These b*stards can't even lie honestly!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rickysa
post Aug 21 2008, 01:04 PM
Post #28





Group: Contributor
Posts: 287
Joined: 18-February 08
From: USA: N.C.
Member No.: 2,762



QUOTE (Turbofan @ Aug 21 2008, 12:58 PM) *
Does anyone else keep losing the audio stream?

I need to refresh at times, and now the server is not responding.


"Listeners:
The Tele-Conference Dial-in # for listeners is (712) 432-1001
and the access code is: 442-618-649#
Call in at 12pm EDT
(Note that you will not be able to speak during the call)

(Panelists — you have been given a different access code)

You may also listen live to both press conferences at NoLiesRadio.com and possibly at WBAI Radio — NY"


From 911blogger


the phone connection is excellent...Rick

This post has been edited by Rickysa: Aug 21 2008, 01:06 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
maturin42
post Aug 21 2008, 01:07 PM
Post #29





Group: Core Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 18-February 07
From: Maryland, USA
Member No.: 633



Posted on the web site of my local paper:

If a building falls down in a way never before seen in history, engineers and architects have some explaining to do.

Despite many years of experience with high-rise steel-framed buildings and fires in that type building, no previous example can be found. This morning, 8-21-08, NIST Director of the Building and Fire Research Laboratory stood up on his hind legs and explained how WTC Building 7 fell down. It was ‘fire’ on the lower floors of the building.

That huge explosion you heard on the video didn’t happen. It wasn’t loud enough! I am not kidding. The refutation of the idea that explosives were present and used to bring down Bldg 7 is as follows: If enough explosive were put onto Column 79 (the key column) to cut it, it would have made a lot of noise. The explosions heard by many that presaged the collapse, wasn’t loud enough to be caused by a charge that could have cut that key column. End of explanation. The flows of pyroclastic clouds from the building were a figment of your imagination. Dr. Sunder stands up and tries to make the case that we now have to review our construction standards to cover this phenomenon. The emperor has no clothes, so now we must all strip and wear the same kind of new clothes if you want to live in NIST’s world.

In answer to repeated questions about why they ruled out the controlled demolition scenario, Dr. Sunder explained that it would have taken a lot of explosive to cut through that one main beam. It was the destruction of that one beam that caused the collapse. It happened because of thermal expansion, and he had drawings to “prove” it, showing beams distorting beyond recognition due to the fire.

Infowars reporter is asking a question and they are trying to cut his mike and move on. He wanted to know about the microspheres that appear in all the dust samples from the site, and yet NIST did not look for and miraculously did not find evidence of explosives. They did not retain steel samples.

“Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7” is a line from the report posted online by NIST. Notice that forensics have nothing at all to do with the findings. They still did not look at the steel, nor the dust, and, surprisingly, they also ruled out fuel oil from the generators, which had been at the heart of their previous fire-driven hypotheses. The bottom line with Dr. Sunder, in his summary, was that a single column gave way leading to the sudden, catastrophic collapse, and they have the computer model to prove it. Computers are great. If you tweak the parameters enough you can make them do almost anything - or at least SHOW anything. Whether it has anything to do with physics or reality, is another matter entirely.

1340 degree heat persisted in the pile of WTC 7 for weeks after the event, but Dr. Sunder did not address how that could have occurred in an ordinary office material fire. In addition, the severe eutectic corrosion, intergranular melting, and thinning in the steel girders was not explained. This appears in the FEMA report but is not addressed by NIST. Dr. Jones’ findings are similarly ignored.

So, ignore your lying eyes. Even though Danny Jowenko, one of Europe’s most qualified controlled demolition experts says that it is unquestionably controlled demolition, Dr. Sunder says no. It just LOOKS like it. It was just fire. Move along. Nothing to see here!

What a surprise!

NIST’s report can be found here: http://wtc.nist.gov/
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth [ ae911truth.org ] will be doing a detailed critique of the many fallacies contained in this document in their official comments .
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthseekers
post Aug 21 2008, 01:16 PM
Post #30





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 405
Joined: 15-October 06
From: Outside the sheep pen.
Member No.: 66



http://www.denverconstructionservices.co.u...n_services.html

QUOTE
Concrete bursting is a method of controlled demolition which once again is now widely used by Denver Construction Services. Bursting offers a noise free, quiet and efficient method of controlled demolition especially in confined space areas such as foundations, columns, beams and internal concrete walls. Holes are pre-drilled using non percussive diamond coring rigs (shown opposite) in the concrete structure to be demolished. On completion the burster head (which contains two pistons) is inserted into the required demolition grid hole.

Hydraulic pressure provided by 3 phase power, diesel or petrol power packs are then applied to the bursting head until such time as the build up of applied piston pressure inside the holes induces cracks in the concrete structure.The cracking itself follows the grid of weakness created by the previously drilled holes.

The bursting process continues and is repeated until such time that the entire structure has been fractured into smaller sections enabling debris removal to take place. Once again, with no hand arm vibration, bursting can eliminate any potential HAVS problems.


Well, thats shown the 'no demolition based on no sound' theory by the National Institute for sh*t Theories up for what it is. All one has to do, is wire the hydraulics to the power generator at WTC7, and small silent charges for the beams, and you have a quiet demolition at best.

http://www.archerusa.com/nonexplosivesblas...itionagent.html

Another site with link to silent demolition.

This post has been edited by Truthseekers: Aug 21 2008, 01:22 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 01:17 PM
Post #31



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



I'm not certain if this means NIST will re-webcast, have a download, or what (esp. will the FULL question set), but their site now says:

"This presentation will be available on August 22, 2008 at 01:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time."

http://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=117359&s...CA3CFB3EE5BDDA2

Has someone got means/equipment to record it if it's a webcast?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 01:30 PM
Post #32



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Here are links to the new-ish NIST material.

News Briefing
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/WTC7_News_Briefing_082008.pdf

WTC7 "Q&A"
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factshe..._qa_082108.html

Opening Statement
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/opening_remarks_082108.html

NIST NCSTAR1A (~8MB)
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_f...lic_comment.pdf

NIST NCSTAR1-9 Vol. 1 (Ch1-8) (20.1MB)
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1-9_...lic_comment.pdf

NIST NCSTAR1-9 Vol. 2 (Ch9-14, App. A-E) (44.6MB)
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1-9_...lic_comment.pdf

NIST NCSTAR1-9A (54.1MB)
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1-9A...lic_comment.pdf

Process for Submitting Comments
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/comments2008.html

Typical WTC7 floor diagram (2.6MB)
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/images/...x4Poster_HR.jpg

Thermal Expansion Graphic (29MB)
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/images/...nsionPoster.jpg

Webcast link (should be same as above ones)
http://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=117359&s...CA3CFB3EE5BDDA2
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JFK
post Aug 21 2008, 01:39 PM
Post #33





Group: Guest
Posts: 564
Joined: 2-June 08
Member No.: 3,485



QUOTE (dMole @ Aug 21 2008, 01:17 PM) *
I'm not certain if this means NIST will re-webcast, have a download, or what (esp. will the FULL question set), but their site now says:

"This presentation will be available on August 22, 2008 at 01:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time."

http://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=117359&s...CA3CFB3EE5BDDA2

Has someone got means/equipment to record it if it's a webcast?


I have the means/equipment, but alas I do not have the bandwidth required. sad.gif

The capture software is available for free here - http://www.orbitdownloader.com/index.htm

Under the tools menu use the "grab" tool. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 01:41 PM
Post #34



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Howard Stern interviewing Jesse Ventura on http://www.noliesradio.com right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Aug 21 2008, 02:01 PM
Post #35


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



First googlenewssearch article:

Feds: Fires took down building next to twin towers

By DEVLIN BARRETT
Thursday, August 21, 2008

Federal investigators said Thursday they have solved a mystery of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks: the collapse of World Trade Center building 7, a source of long-running conspiracy theories.

The 47-story trapezoid-shaped building sat north of the World Trade Center towers, across Vesey Street in lower Manhattan. On Sept. 11, it was set on fire by falling debris from the burning towers, but skeptics have long argued that fire and debris alone should not have brought down such a big steel-and-concrete structure.

Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology say their three-year investigation of the collapse determined the demise of WTC 7 was actually the first time in the world a fire caused the total failure of a skyscraper.

"The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," said Dr. Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator on the NIST team.

Investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in the bottom half of the building without water.

The building has been the subject of a wide range of conspiracy theories for the last seven years, partly because the collapse occurred about seven hours after the twin towers came down. That fueled suspicion that someone intentionally blew up the building in a controlled demolition.

Critics like Mike Berger of the group 9/11 Truth said he wasn't buying the government's explanation.

"Their explanation simply isn't sufficient. We're being lied to," he said, arguing that there is other evidence suggesting explosives were used on the building.

Sunder said his team investigated the possibility that an explosion inside the building brought it down, but found there was no large boom or other noise that would have occurred with such a detonation. Investigators also created a giant computer model of the collapse, based partly on news footage from CBS News, that they say shows internal column failure brought down the building.

Investigators also ruled out the possibility that the collapse was caused by fires from a substantial amount of diesel fuel that was stored in the building, most of it for generators for the city's emergency operations command center.

The 77-page report concluded that the fatal blow to the building came when the 13th floor collapsed, weakening a critical steel support column that led to catastrophic failure.

"When this critical column buckled due to lack of floor supports, it was the first domino in the chain," said Sunder.

The NIST investigators issued more than a dozen building recommendations as a result of their inquiry, most of which repeat earlier recommendations from their investigation into the collapse of the two large towers.

In both instances, investigators concluded that extreme heat caused some steel beams to lose strength, causing further failures throughout the buildings until the entire structure succumbed.

The recommendations include building skyscrapers with stronger connections and framing systems to resist the effects of thermal expansion, and structural systems designed to prevent damage to one part of a building from spreading to other parts.

A spokeswoman for the leaseholder of the World Trade Center, developer Larry Silverstein, praised the government's work.

"Hopefully this thorough report puts to rest the various 9/11 conspiracy theories, which dishonor the men and women who lost their lives on that terrible day," said Silverstein spokeswoman Dara McQuillen.

In discussing the findings, the investigator Sunder acknowledged that some may still not be convinced, but insisted the science behind their findings is "incredibly conclusive."

"The public should really recognize the science is really behind what we have said," he said, adding: "The obvious stares you in the face."


http://townhall.com/news/us/2008/08/21/fed...n_towers?page=2


EDIT: Right away this is picked up by AP ~

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isReaHA...J8_BvgD92MQLDG0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Truthseekers
post Aug 21 2008, 02:13 PM
Post #36





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 405
Joined: 15-October 06
From: Outside the sheep pen.
Member No.: 66



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4...feature=related

This was just a car back firing Dr Sham.

This post has been edited by Truthseekers: Aug 21 2008, 02:18 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 21 2008, 02:30 PM
Post #37



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Oceans Flow @ Aug 21 2008, 12:01 PM) *
Investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in the bottom half of the building without water.

The building has been the subject of a wide range of conspiracy theories for the last seven years, partly because the collapse occurred about seven hours after the twin towers came down. That fueled suspicion that someone intentionally blew up the building in a controlled demolition.
...
In discussing the findings, the investigator Sunder acknowledged that some may still not be convinced, but insisted the science behind their findings is "incredibly conclusive."

Umm, wouldn't the water MAIN be several feet underground? How did 'collapse debris' get to it/them? Mains are usually buried deep in cold climates (pretty sure the NE Atlantic coast qualifies there, last time I checked). Anyone care to look up the applicable NYC or NY state building code there? rolleyes.gif

Emotive/programmed language...

"incredibly conclusive" "expert" "science"- see immediately above, and at post #3:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10749868

EDIT: If the city main(s) were broken, presumably spraying/leaking water, then where the f*ck did all the dust come from? Why did that indeterminate metal stay molten until Dec 2001 at least?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Aug 21 2008, 02:41 PM
Post #38


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



dMole, did you read their Q&A page? It's an epic riot. laughing1.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post Aug 21 2008, 03:03 PM
Post #39





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



QUOTE (dMole @ Aug 19 2008, 05:30 PM) *
EDIT: If the city main(s) were broken, presumably spraying/leaking water, then where the f*ck did all the dust come from? Why did that indeterminate metal stay molten until Dec 2001 at least?

Was the Hudson River broken then?

Whatever I am pretty certain there is video of firecrews washing themselves down at a hydrant AFTER the disintigration of WTCs 1 & 2 and before the disintegration of WTC 7.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Aug 21 2008, 03:34 PM
Post #40


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



So now a search turns up 277 media articles. Here's the Propaganda of Record, the New York Times.


Report Says Fire, Not Explosion, Felled 7 W.T.C.

By ERIC LIPTON
Published: August 21, 2008

GAITHERSBURG, Md. — Fires in the 47-story office tower at the edge of the World Trade Center site undermined floor beams and critical structural columns, federal investigators concluded Thursday, as they attempted to curb still-rampant speculation that explosives or fuel fires were responsible for the building’s collapse of Sept. 11, 2001.

The long-delayed report by engineers here at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in suburban Washington is intended to solve one of still lingering central questions about the 2001 attacks: Why did 7 World Trade Center fall, if it was not hit by an airplane.

“Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail,” said Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator. “Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oils played a role in the collapse that brought the building down.”

No one died when 7 World Trade Center fell, nearly seven hours after the twin towers came down. But the collapse of the adjacent tower — once home to branch offices of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Secret Service and to the Giuliani administration’s emergency operations center — is cited in hundreds of books and Internet sites as perhaps the most compelling evidence that an insider secretly planted explosives, intentionally destroying the tower.

It is the first skyscraper in modern times to collapse primarily as a result of a fire.

Mainstream engineers and government officials have rejected the speculation as ridiculous. But national polls have shown that perhaps as many as 1 in 7 Americans believe that the destruction of the World Trade Center towers was an inside job.

The investigators determined that debris from the falling twin towers ignited fires on at least 10 floors at 7 World Trade Center, which was about 400 feet north of where the city’s two tallest buildings once stood. The blazes burned out of control for six hours, as the city fire department, devastated by the collapse of the twin towers, abandoned its efforts to extinguish the fire, and the sprinkler system was incapacitated.

The heat from these fires, the investigators said, caused the beams on the lower floors of the east side of the tower to expand, ultimately causing a girder on the 13th floor to disconnect from a critical interior column that supported the building’s long floor spans. Once the 13th floor gave way, a cascade of floor failures started down to the fifth floor, leading to the overall collapse of the tower.

Skeptics have questioned if explosives were planted at 7 World Trade Center, as well as the twin towers and the Pentagon, as the Bush administration was seeking a justification to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. What started as a small number of such conspiracy theorists has only ballooned into a movement of sorts, largely fed by Internet sites that promote the theories.

“Seven World Trade Center is one of the key points of evidence, one of the smoking guns,” said Richard Gage, a California architect who leader a group called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. “There have been much hotter, longer lasting and larger fires in skyscrapers that have not fallen down.”

The investigators said that if the city water main had not been broken during the collapse of the twin towers, the sprinkler system would likely have put out the fires at 7 World Trade Center, and the building would not have fallen.

The engineers also examined whether diesel fuel tanks in the building — to power the Giuliani administration’s emergency operations center and other government offices — might have been a fuel source that caused the collapse. The investigators determined, based in part on computer models and videos of smoke coming from the tower, that the heat generated from any fuel-fed fires would not have been enough to cause the collapse.

Dr. Sunder said the investigation pointed to how expansion that can occur in steel as it heats up in a fire needs to be considered to prevent skyscraper collapses.

“Our take-home message today is the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery,” Dr. Sunder said. “It did not collapse from explosives or fuel oil fires.”

A new, substantially different, 52-story 7 World Trade Center opened in 2006.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?em


Comments ~ http://community.nytimes.com/article/comme...n/22wtccnd.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th April 2014 - 09:01 AM