Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 10:36 am Post subject: Indymedia censor discussion of 7/7 - again
I have sent the following to the Indymedia.uk mailing list after a post linking to July 7th was 'hidden' (effectively censored as it prevents further comment):
Quote:
I've just realised that another posting on Indymedia.uk has been hidden (censored).
Indymedia states: A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.
Are the events of 7th July in London unimportant?
Is the fact that independent researchers via blogs and grassroot investigation, who are challenging the MSM over their coverage (lip service) which to date has lacked any truly investigative journalism, unimportant?
A group of activists who recently attended the Stop the War March on 18/3 carrying a 20ft 'Who Really Bombed London?' banner, unimportant?
Whose leaflets asking if this was another miscarriage of justice along the lines of the Guilford 4 Birmingham 6, unimportant?
Whose leaflets met with a very open response, many people saying they didn't trust/believe the official version, unimportant?
If Indymedia's editorial policy is that they will not touch anything that actually challenges the MSM and/or the State, then please put this in your mission statement and start calling yourselves Notthatindependentindymedia which would at least be more honest,
_________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:23 pm Post subject: Indy?
Indy does not stand for independent, I hope.
When I wrote a factual article challenging the cancer racket, IndyMedia would not print it.
Dont waste your time with these Establishment-lackeys.
The one for this kind of thing would be imc-uk-features (this is where admins report which posts have been hidden and why) it might also make sense to copy the local list, imc-london in this case...
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 632 Location: London UK
Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 11:40 pm Post subject:
The thing is I never post on indymedia. It seems that interested people post articles and put links either to my blog or the July Seventh site, these posts then get censored.
I've heard that indymedia in the US won't touch anything that questions 9/11. _________________ 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought'. JFK
Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 377 Location: North West UK
Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:10 am Post subject:
Indymedia UK has been censoring articles for as long as I can remember, including topics which I feel strongly about and personally deem news worthy such as Bilderberg and the NWO agenda.
However after being angry with them for quiet a while, I can see (to some degree) as to why they impose this censorship.
Maybe they think this censorship is to 'protect' the activist movement (or their corner of) from being seen as crazy, paranoid or any other dergoatory term the mainstream likes to slap on us.
One thing I heavily disagree with (in all forms of progressive media) and Indymedia UK seem to do this, is keep the door closed as to why certain decisions are made, prefering to keep discussions out of view from the general public, so only a select few can make the sole choices for an entire movement - without taking into consideration the views of all involved.
This also creates a hierarchy - one of the very forms of control we are fighting against.
Of course Indymedia is just one of many groups who work in this way. I think we could name and shame all night long and still change nothing in the process. In my view, live and let live.. if a site or group works in ways I don't agree with then I just disconnect from that organisation and find (or start) one which works in the way I can be proud of. _________________ RINF Alternative News and Media Anti-Slavery International Movement for the Abolition of War SchNews
Action speaks louder than..
Joined: 05 Oct 2005 Posts: 480 Location: the beano
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:44 pm Post subject: indymedia
you may find the following website of interest;
www.indymediocre.co.uk _________________ "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" Martin Luther king
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:11 am Post subject: Have police got access to Indymedia IP addresses?
Activists arrested because of UK Indymedia secret IP logging
Despite claiming to never do it Indy UK logs your IP details when you post a comment or file a story. Never, never, never use your own machine only use a web cafe machine and pay cash for the use.
Several ALF people have already been nicked as a result of the Indy logging of IP details, stay safe.
The recent seizure of an Indymedia Server (SchNEWS 663 http://www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news639.htm ) and the subsequent arrest of the system administrator says more about the state of liberty than any convention. On Monday Kent Police arrested a man in Sheffield under the Serious Crime Act 2007 in relation to the recent Indymedia server seizure. His home was searched and computers despite having neither technical, administrative nor editorial access to the Indymedia UK website. All he did was host its server. Kent police claim that they are after the IP address (despite knowing Indymedia do not log IP addresses) of the poster of two anonymous comments to a report about a recent animal liberation court case, which included personal details of the Judge.
Joined: 26 Jan 2007 Posts: 173 Location: liverpool; the city that speaks out, always, scouseland, in the island formerly known as the UK
Posted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:24 pm Post subject:
yes, indymedia enforces strict censorship.
if you don't agree with the authotarian stance of the groups involved you're out!
no room for free thinkers at indymedia
just posted a notice about a chemtrail discussion in liverpool this wed and it was deleted. _________________ The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good people to do nothing.
Edmund Burke
Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.
Einstein
golden ratio
mass and gravity both exist only as a means to acheive mathematical self-embedding of everything.
yes, indymedia enforces strict censorship.
if you don't agree with the authotarian stance of the groups involved you're out!
no room for free thinkers at indymedia
just posted a notice about a chemtrail discussion in liverpool this wed and it was deleted.
It was probably deleted because speaker Andrew Johnson is a rabid disseminator of disinformation and completely lacking in respect for the scientific method.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:23 pm Post subject:
Related stuff from last month. Lots of shaking-down going on at Indymedia at the moment as well as server seizures for which they need our, and everyones' support.
I only hope the sneaky unaccountable hiders of posts are ousted and outed once and for all. The conjunction of anonymity with accountablility has always been a problem at UK IMC.
Seems this is a sensible decision by one Indymedia administrator. What's clearly happened is one of the admins has been caught hiding posts without giving any notice or reason. And also without percieving, in this case, that Nafeez is almost totally ostracised by the UK mainstream press.
anargeek chris at anargeek.net wrote:
> The hiding of this article by the admin who never reports his hides:
> Obama: Regime Rotation Nafeez Ahmed
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/420466.html
> Was the last straw for me -- this account has been disabled,
Naffez Ahmed (who writings are often repost on indymedia and dozens of
other places online) is hardly a grassroots activist and while no
doubt he and his institute produce important stuff its not really in
keeping with the spirit of either the editorial guidelines or the
indymedia mission statement. Admittedly it is a bit of a borderline
case due to the vague nature of the guidelines but I standby it...
Nafeez Ahmed is an academic whos papers are widely published and cited
in the mainstream media such as the Sunday Times, The Observer,
Vanity Fair, New York Observer, among others. He has written for the
Independent on Sunday and appeared as an expert commentator for BBC
News 24, BBC World Today, Channel 4, Sky News, C-SPAN, CNN, FOX News,
Bloomberg, and hundreds of other radio and TV shows in the USA, UK,
and Europe.
Not exactly a grassroots media activist, he is 'Executive Director' of
the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of 'The
London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry', and 'The War on Truth: 9/11,
Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism' , 'The War on Freedom:
How & Why America was Attacked, September 11, 2001', 'Behind the War
on Terror: Western Secret Strategy & the Struggle for Iraq' . His
research is widely cited in the peer-reviewed literature, and used in
several US and UK university courses, including the US Army Air
University.
Chris might like the authors work but personally I don't think the
indymedia newswire was set up to reproduce the efforts of dozens of
other sites by publishing the works of academics and published authors
and in this particular case I don't think the uk newswire needs yet
another reposted article about why the new american president is just
business as usual (like indymedia readers need to be told that).
Which brings me onto accountability and having my admin account
deleted...
Quote:
Everyone knows that I rarely post reports of my moderation activities to this list which is against agreed processes. However a full record of my activities is available through the admin interface and I
respond to queries when they are bought to my attention so it remains
transparent and accountable.
I'll remind people that several years ago
the UK collective agreed at a gathering that a new process would be
introduced in which moderation activities would be auto reported to
the list for the sake of full transparency but this has yet to be
implemented.
Personally I find it an outrageous abuse of super user privileges that
my admin account has been deleted without consultation or discussion.
There are way too few active admins working to keep the newswire in
good shape and it's a hard, tedious and thankless task. Now there is
one less.
Related stuff from last month. Lots of shaking-down going on at Indymedia at the moment as well as server seizures for which they need our, and everyones' support.
Their actions reveal they are controlled oposition. I wouldn't p155 on them if they were on fire. I've seen them plugged uncritically on the "British Bullsh1t Corp". Just like urban75.
Quote:
I only hope the sneaky unaccountable hiders of posts are ousted and outed once and for all. The conjunction of anonymity with accountablility has always been a problem at UK IMC.
What rank hypocrisy. You censor, alter, suspend and ban at your own capricious whim on this forum, and stand against internet anonymity (not that it exists for practical purposes). You are completely unaccountable yourself. When people challenge you by PM (as you insist they do, being afraid of debate) about your censorship, they are lucky to get any reply beyond brief SMS-speak, you simply refuse to engage with them.
Quote:
Seems this is a sensible decision by one Indymedia administrator. What's clearly happened is one of the admins has been caught hiding posts without giving any notice or reason. And also without percieving, in this case, that Nafeez is almost totally ostracised by the UK mainstream press.
I have no idea who Nafeez is or what he says, but anyone ostracised by the MSM journo-whores is surely more likely to be honest than those who suck on its poisonous tit. _________________ If you want to know who is really in control, ask yourself who you cannot criticise.
"The hunt for 'anti-semites' is a hunt for pockets of resistance to the NWO"-- Israel Shamir
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." - Heinz "Henry" Kissinger
Well said simplesimon, I was going to say the very same.
simplesimon wrote:
What rank hypocrisy. You censor, alter, suspend and ban at your own capricious whim on this forum, and stand against internet anonymity (not that it exists for practical purposes). You are completely unaccountable yourself. When people challenge you by PM (as you insist they do, being afraid of debate) about your censorship, they are lucky to get any reply beyond brief SMS-speak, you simply refuse to engage with them.
He's made a very good point Mr G, that demands your response . . . _________________ The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:49 am Post subject:
Slurs, mutiny?
Most people think I do a reasonable job - and surely you do too or you wouldn't bother to post here?
What system or who editing would you prefer?
If you've got any Ideas Id be pleased to hear them on the 'about this website' section.
Or by PM.
This discussion is about censorship on indymedia.
simplesimon wrote:
When people challenge you by PM (as you insist they do, being afraid of debate) about your censorship, they are lucky to get any reply beyond brief SMS-speak, you simply refuse to engage with them.
I have no idea who Nafeez is or what he says, but anyone ostracised by the MSM journo-whores is surely more likely to be honest than those who suck on its poisonous tit.
If I had bothered to read the rest of the post I would have seen:
Quote:
Nafeez Ahmed is an academic whos papers are widely published and cited
in the mainstream media such as the Sunday Times, The Observer,
Vanity Fair, New York Observer, among others. He has written for the
Independent on Sunday and appeared as an expert commentator for BBC
News 24, BBC World Today, Channel 4, Sky News, C-SPAN, CNN, FOX News,
Bloomberg, and hundreds of other radio and TV shows in the USA, UK,
and Europe.
So there it is. He's a whore who only a tool or a fool would give any credence to.
I don't know that I agree with everything Eustace Mullins says, but he's certainly correct when he says (essentially, paraphrasing) that anyone given exposure by the MSM is dishonest, and their honesty is inversely proportional to the exposure they are allowed:
I know that many here can't be bothered to watch lengthy videos, but I recommend this one wholeheartedly. The audio is the thing, you can leave it running in a minimised window.
Tony, I will post to "About This Website" regarding your censorship (attempted thought control) in the next few days. _________________ If you want to know who is really in control, ask yourself who you cannot criticise.
"The hunt for 'anti-semites' is a hunt for pockets of resistance to the NWO"-- Israel Shamir
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." - Heinz "Henry" Kissinger
Nafeez is absolutely not - he's a brave and brilliant truthseeker. You're trying to discredit him in rather a limp manner.
I certainly was not trying to discredit him in particular, that is I have no agenda regarding that individual. Before today I knew nothing about him except who gives him work, as below. My comments were based solely on:
Quote:
Nafeez Ahmed is an academic whos papers are widely published and cited
in the mainstream media such as the Sunday Times, The Observer,
Vanity Fair, New York Observer, among others. He has written for the
Independent on Sunday and appeared as an expert commentator for BBC
News 24, BBC World Today, Channel 4, Sky News, C-SPAN, CNN, FOX News,
Bloomberg, and hundreds of other radio and TV shows in the USA, UK,
and Europe.
In my view this justifies my comments. If he was honest, they simply wouldn't let him on the telly or in the papers.
So I stand by what I wrote, in general and regarding Nafeez in particular.
For the record, I have given serious consideration to whether I should apologise for my blunt and forthright comments, and am always willing to do so if I think I have made a mistake. I may yet be persuaded to do so, but after an hour perusing the IPRD website and his blog, think it unlikely.
He seems to be a "maybe LIHOP'ist". Extended limited hangout. It might be tempting to think that makes him more credible than most MSM "commentators", but I'm coming round to the view that in some ways "they" want folks (who think of themselves as "progressives", LMFAO) to doubt the OCT.
"His research on international terrorism was officially used by the 9/11 Commission in Washington DC, and on 22 July, 2005 he gave testimony in US Congress on the failure of Western security policies at the hearing, “9/11 Commission Report One Year Later: Did They Get it Right?”" (ZioWikipedia).
I could not find any suggestion that "international terrorism" is carried out by globalists via state agencies, not angry muslims in caves, but perhaps I didn't search long enough.
I was agreeably surprised to see that he talks of the banking scam, but can find only one brief mention, and he seems to suggest it's all a recent thing. Rather than explain that the banksters deliberately engineered the "global financial crisis" he's banging on about "global solutions".
And now I know a little more about him, that's my main beef. His site and blog REEKS of globalism. Global crisis. Global policy solutions. The "Iran Threat". "globalized and complex threats". Global warming. "multiple social and global crises" global schmobal global blah blah blah.
I think he is working for world government, and in my view that makes him the enemy. I know you won't agree.
Lastly, having looked at the website, it would seem reasonable to suppose that his "think tank" has a budget of several hundred thousand pounds per year. I'm sure the money isn't coming from paypal donations. Who is paying the bills, and why? _________________ If you want to know who is really in control, ask yourself who you cannot criticise.
"The hunt for 'anti-semites' is a hunt for pockets of resistance to the NWO"-- Israel Shamir
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." - Heinz "Henry" Kissinger
Nafeez is absolutely not - he's a brave and brilliant truthseeker. You're trying to discredit him in rather a limp manner.
I certainly was not trying to discredit him in particular, that is I have no agenda regarding that individual. Before today I knew nothing about him except who gives him work, as below. My comments were based solely on:
Nafeez Ahmed is an academic whos papers are widely published and cited in the mainstream media such as the Sunday Times, The Observer, Vanity Fair, New York Observer, among others. He has written for the Independent on Sunday and appeared as an expert commentator for BBC News 24, BBC World Today, Channel 4, Sky News, C-SPAN, CNN, FOX News, Bloomberg, and hundreds of other radio and TV shows in the USA, UK, and Europe.
In my view this justifies my comments. If he was honest, they simply wouldn't let him on the telly or in the papers.
I too knew nothing about Nafeez Ahmed. If, as:
simplesimon wrote:
His site and blog REEKS of globalism. Global crisis. Global policy solutions. The "Iran Threat". "globalized and complex threats". Global warming. "multiple social and global crises"
, then the guy is a shill and there can be no argument. Unless TG can produce anything to show otherwise and back up his
That's just the kind of response that has diminished my respect for you Tony. I spend an hour plus on reading and posting, and you do not engage. You censor, re-write or delete posts that people have put considerable effort into, and respond with text speak.
It's the same when people challenge you by PM.
You do not answer direct questions.
Who is paying for Nafeez's operation? Why?
You could have said "The staff and associates named on the website are working for nothing, and the central London office space is squatted". You could have said "The so-and-so foundation". You could even have said "I don't know and don't care".
We all have our "litmus tests". One of mine is whether people promote world government. I know you're seduced by this evil idea. You don't have to agree on what the litmus tests are, but I think you should tell members of the forum "which side you're on" on certain issues, particularly as you seem to regard yourself as a "leader".
For example, I have asked you twice (and Annie) whether you agree with this proposition:
"Forcible chip implantation is RAPE, and you would be morally justified in plunging a rusty dagger into the heart of anyone attempting to do it to you".
As to your question "who are 'they' ", a meaningful reply would take longer than I can be bothered with right now. Why should I sweat for at least an hour on that when you might re-write or delete it in a moment at your capricious whim? I'm just a poster. You are "The Editor". Snort.
Disco_Destroyer:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but he wants people to think that the REACTION is perpetrated by parties other than who caused the PROBLEM, and his SOLUTION is - well I couldn't find an overt call for world government, but I can smell it. I suggest that anyone spending more than a few minutes on his website would agree. global global schmobal global schmobal blah blah blah. _________________ If you want to know who is really in control, ask yourself who you cannot criticise.
"The hunt for 'anti-semites' is a hunt for pockets of resistance to the NWO"-- Israel Shamir
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." - Heinz "Henry" Kissinger
If you think Nafeez is the enemy you shouldn't be here.
Well I do, and I am.
Now you're suggesting that if I don't endorse Nafeez, who subject to learning more I think is a GLOBALIST SHILL GATEKEEPER LIAR, I "shouldn't be here".
I'm still ready to apologise if you (or he, or anyone else) can persuade me otherwise. I won't hold my breath. _________________ If you want to know who is really in control, ask yourself who you cannot criticise.
"The hunt for 'anti-semites' is a hunt for pockets of resistance to the NWO"-- Israel Shamir
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." - Heinz "Henry" Kissinger
Correct me if I'm wrong, but he wants people to think that the REACTION is perpetrated by parties other than who caused the PROBLEM, and his SOLUTION is - well I couldn't find an overt call for world government, but I can smell it. I suggest that anyone spending more than a few minutes on his website would agree. global global schmobal global schmobal blah blah blah
He says over and over in the 1st book he believes it to be an inside job (9/11) but doesnt say it is an inside job if thats what you mean?
I don't know him personally.
Everyone has an agenda whether well placed or not and thoughts and actions are manipulated along the way, but to suggest everyone is bad, or where does one draw the distinction?
I saw an interviewee ask Pilger what was his agenda?
I don't know the answer to that but he does come across more of a Humanist to those that he goes after? _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 Posts: 413 Location: South Essex
Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:40 pm Post subject:
It's been a couple of years since I read 'The War On Truth' by
NMA.
From a few notes at the time which covered various topics including US conspiracies to murder one's own subjects for geo-political/monitary gain
covering:
The Boston Massacre 1770
The Mexican-American war 1846
Sinking of the Maine 1898
" " " Lusitania 1915
Pearl Harbor 1941
(Operation Northwoods 1961? (plan rejected))
Gulf of Tonkin 1964
He comments that all these events allowed for major exacerbation of US aggression,the beginings,or widening of wars.
And within pages 368-9 under the sub-heading 'A Web of Terror' is found the words of former Secretary of State Colin Powell:
"Terrorism is part of the dark side of globalisation.It is part of doing business in the world,business we as Americans are not going to stop doing"
---------
Looking back and reviewing those books and dvd's, I cannot help noticing how they are all carefully structured around both demonising sovereign government actions,and at the same time perpetuating myth.
As "a point of order yer onar" there is nothing wrong questioning why this is the case,this is a big game plan is it not?
Thanks for the vid Stefan. Is that it? Is that the high water mark of his "truther"-ism?
I don't see anything in there that you can't find in, er...
Quote:
...Sunday Times, The Observer, Vanity Fair, New York Observer, among others. He has written for the Independent on Sunday ... BBC News 24, BBC World Today, Channel 4, Sky News, C-SPAN, CNN, FOX News, Bloomberg, and hundreds of other radio and TV shows in the USA, UK, and Europe...
Possibly excepting *"It's our governments that are endangering us", which is a bit "limp" and of course goes to globalism.
So let's see:
Whore (you know I meant intellectual whore right? I'm not suggesting he's poo-pushing for money.)
He actually confesses to this in the video above. Doesn't need much parsing.
Liar
He actually confesses to this in the video above. Doesn't need much parsing.
Perhaps you have a different definition of "Liar" than I. I include hiding truth. I would accept that lying to "them" is morally different to lying to real people, but somehow I don't think he will stop being booked by the lying whore "news" outfits listed above, having confessed to lying to them.
Shill
Insufficient data.
Who is paying the several hundred thousand pounds p.a. his operation (as described on his website) would appear to be getting through?
And why?
Gatekeeper comes out in the wash.
Globalist
This is imo the main thing. I refer you to his website, judge for yourself. If it wasn't for this, everything else he says might be in a completely different light.
I could go on. Rachel "nutjob" not-North. "...been going on for 10 years..." LMFAO. Look to the lawyers. No mention of "Israel". Use of the NLP-like anchor term "extremist".
I know it won't go down well with many here, but I think one of the biggest giveaways is talk of "movements" (titter)... "Movements" of any import, are ALWAYS infiltrated and controlled, as any fule kno.
I don't have time to expound on my idea that "they" want (certain) folks to doubt the OCT, but though I haven't seen it elsewhere, I feel sure I'm not the only one who suspects this.
Disco_Destroyer:
When I wrote "If he was honest, they simply wouldn't let him on the telly or in the papers.", I did think of Pilger as a possible exception, and actually expected someone to cite him. Well, he so rarely gets on the telly these days that you almost make my point for me. And I'm deeply suspicious of "humanism" (is he?) anyway. Having said that, and though I can't justify it here and now in the case of Pilger, I stand by what I said. When was the BBC formed? When was Bernays' "Propaganda" published?
As for Nafeez's books - I heard yesterday that 25% of typical speech consists of just 25 words. I would venture that in his books, word 26 is "global". While I'm at it, I suggest that anyone using the word "global" without quotes or disdain is basically hypnotised. Twenty or so years ago, it simpy did not appear in the media, and therefore not in public discourse. Now 11yr old kids use it in their dumbed down school essays. How do you think that happened?
Your search - "international banker" site:http://nafeez.blogspot.com/ - did not match any documents. However, the thought police have been notified, and you have just added points to your auto-generated dangerous subversive profile rating.
===================
*EDIT: and not a bad analysis of the term "conspiracy theorist" - but which he seems to want to abandon rather than "reclaim". _________________ If you want to know who is really in control, ask yourself who you cannot criticise.
"The hunt for 'anti-semites' is a hunt for pockets of resistance to the NWO"-- Israel Shamir
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..." - Heinz "Henry" Kissinger
Believing in Globalism doesn't necessarily mean you side with the current Empyrical Push for Globalisation by force see the David Ray Griffin interview. _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
More to the point what the hell are you trying to say I'm confused _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
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 You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
