"Badgeman" - assassin in the Grassy Knoll - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-17-2008, 06:44 PM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 01:51 PM
Dreadox what's your take on the release of info from Irish government records with regard to the death threats that were made against Kennedy while in Ireland during 1963?
__________________

financeguy is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 06:46 PM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy
Dreadox what's your take on the release of info from Irish government records with regard to the death threats that were made against Kennedy while in Ireland during 1963?
I need to read up on it. I am a little out of touch right now with the school year in full force.

I just read your article. I am pretty sure there were similar type threats when he visited Chicago.

Not much to say without more research than your article.
__________________

Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 06:50 PM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 01:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Do you have a link for me?
Here is one link. There was definitely also an article in the Irish Times in Winter 2006 but I think you have to pay to read their back articles.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...9/ai_n17092126
financeguy is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 06:52 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
See above:O)
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 06:54 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
It is interesting that Badge Man only appears in Moorman's photograph. Other photographs taken at apporximately the same time from other angles show a Coke Bottle on the fence.

Haha!!!!

And Dick Cheney's fishing pole looks like a naked lady in his glasses.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 07:04 PM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy


I wouldn't challenge any of that, but wasn't there evidence that he was a very poor marksman during his training?
Why thank you for bringing this up.

If we look at the distances mentioned above - he was not making a difficult shot. It was closer than the shortest qualification shot for the military.

Oswald qualified as a sharpshooter in the Marines. There is evidence of analysis of his shooting at pop up targets that Oswald was apparently more accurate the faster he had to fire at the targets. On slow fire his accuracy was 76% and on rapid fire his accuracy was 91%. This may explain why his first shot missed.
This phenomenon is explained by marksmen as coming from establishing a rythm. Maybe this is why the second and third shots hit the President.

Oswalds marine qualifications required him to shoot at targets 200, 300, and 500 yards.

Kennedy was basically a stationary target due to the angle, slope of the road, and the fact that he was moving in a direct line away from the target, the shot was EASY.

It is also most likely Oswald did not use the scope but the iron sights on the weapon.

The reason I believe he used the iron sights is it would have been more difficult for him to re aquire his target with the scope as the target was so close.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 07:07 PM   #27
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 01:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Why thank you for bringing this up.

If we look at the distances mentioned above - he was not making a difficult shot. It was closer than the shortest qualification shot for the military.

Oswald qualified as a sharpshooter in the Marines. There is evidence of analysis of his shooting at pop up targets that Oswald was apparently more accurate the faster he had to fire at the targets. On slow fire his accuracy was 76% and on rapid fire his accuracy was 91%. This may explain why his first shot missed.
This phenomenon is explained by marksmen as coming from establishing a rythm. Maybe this is why the second and third shots hit the President.

Oswalds marine qualifications required him to shoot at targets 200, 300, and 500 yards.

Kennedy was basically a stationary target due to the angle, slope of the road, and the fact that he was moving in a direct line away from the target, the shot was EASY.

It is also most likely Oswald did not use the scope but the iron sights on the weapon.

The reason I believe he used the iron sights is it would have been more difficult for him to re aquire his target with the scope as the target was so close.
Do you have any references, as this conflicts entirely with anything else I have read on the subject of Oswald's marksmanship.

Also..what was his motive?

And why did he describe himself as a patsy?
financeguy is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 07:23 PM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
I would say that Posner's Case Closed and Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History have plenty of evidence about Oswald's shooting abilities.

Motive - Good question - Why did he attempt to kill Edwin Walker? What was his motive there?

When I thought as you did, that he was a terrible shot, I wondered if he was trying to kill Governor Connely, who had changed his discharge from the marines to dishonorable when he was Secretary of Defense? Or was it Navy?

Why would he have killed the police officer if he was not trying to escape? Why would he have changed his pattern and visited his wife the night before the assasination? Why would he leave his wedding ring and money for his family the night before? The night before the assassination was the ONLY time he ever visited her unannounced. It was not the only time he left behind things for his family, he did act similarly the night he attempted to kill Edwin Walker.

Another misconception is that nobody has been able to duplicate the number of shots. All eleven marksmen contracted by the FBI were able to fire the three shots faster than was required by Oswald. They were all firing at a moving target of eleven miles per hour.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 07:40 PM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Motive - The question in my mind is this - Was Oswald working for our governement? Was Oswald a disillusioned Marxist, who found no satisfaction in Russia only to put his hopes on Cuba? Was he working for Cuba?

Why had he attempted to infiltrate anti-Castro Organizations when he lived in New Orleans? Organizations that were supplied and sponsored by the US Governmment.....Was he angry when he was not granted permission by the soviet governement to travel to Cuba in the weeks prior to the assassination?
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-18-2008, 01:23 PM   #30
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: turtle island
Posts: 22,245
Local Time: 08:51 AM
Dreadsox has pretty much blown this "Badge Man" bunko out of the water.
DaveC is offline  
Old 04-19-2008, 06:14 AM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Dave,

I was a firm believer in conspiracy. I am now a firm believer in the fact that much like 9/11 the governement knew the player involved, and someone somewhere screwed up.

The fact that almost fifty years later, with the files that have been relesed, more and more information leads me to believe he acted ALONE.

The man had contact with the CIA and the FBI - in the weeks prior to the assasination. Was he an agent? A Counter Agent?

I just think there is more to the story than is out there about Lee Harvey Oswald.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-20-2008, 01:14 PM   #32
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Vacation is here and I have some time.

Let's say we discount the Warren Commission - The House Committee on Assasintations - and the Church Committee.

Ramsay Clark, when he became attorney general conducted his own ivestigation. The review by the doctors that he used came to the following conclusion about the wounds suffered by Kennedy.

[Q]DISCUSSION

The information disclosed by the joint examination of the
foregoing exhibits by the members of The Panel supports the
following conclusions;

The decedent was wounded by two bullets, both of which
entered his body from behind.

One bullet struck the back of the decedent's head well above
the external occipital protuberance. Based upon the observation
that he was leaning forward with his head turned obliquely to the
left when this bullet struck, the photographs and X-rays indicate
that it came from a site above and slightly to his right. This
bullet fragmented after entering the cranium, one major piece of
it passing forward and laterally to produce an explosive fracture
of the right side of the skull as it emerged from the head.

The absence of metallic fragments in the left cerebral
hemisphere or below the level of the frontal fossa on the right
side together with the absence of any holes in it the skull to
the left of the midline or in its base and the absence of any
penetrating injury of the left hemisphere, eliminate with
reasonable certainty the possibility of a projectile having
passed through the head in any direction other than from back to
front as described in preceding sections of this report.


The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right
side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and
emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The
possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other
than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was
considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track
between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous
emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the
contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the
trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path
other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost
surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no
bony damage in the thorax or neck.

The possibility that the path of the bullet through the neck
might have been more satisfactorily explored by the insertion of
a finger or probe was considered. Obviously the cutaneous wound
in the back was too small to permit the insertion of a finger.
The insertion of a metal probe would have carried the risk of
creating a false passage in part, because of the changed
relationship of muscles at the time of autopsy and in part
because of the existence of postmortem rigidity. Although the
precise path of the bullet could undoubtedly have been
demonstrated by complete dissection of the soft tissue between
the two cutaneous wounds, there is no reason to believe that the
information disclosed thereby would alter significantly the
conclusions expressed in this report.[/Q]

The bolded section clearly demostrates why there within 100% certainty, could not have been a bullet fired from the grassy knoll. Badgeman could not have fired from the President's right side.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clark.txt
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-20-2008, 01:20 PM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
A great computer genrated layout of Deley PLaza. People on the overpass and Bowers in the stockyard had perfect views of the picket fence separating the knoll from the parking lot.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/plazao.jpg

WHn you click it zooms.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-20-2008, 01:27 PM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
[Q]In 1976, yet another shape materialized from the shadows in a Moorman blowup in Robert Groden's book JFK: The Case for Conspiracy. From the same image, Texas researchers Gary Mack and Jack White presented a shape they called "Badgeman" in the 1988 documentary "The Men Who Killed Kennedy." That same year, at NOVA's request, technicians at MIT analyzed the shape, concluding it "took some imagination" to render it into a human figure. [/Q]

Badge Man photographs....

hehe....

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/organ3.htm
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-20-2008, 01:33 PM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Some of the confusion as to the classification of witnesses hearing shots comes from shoddy reasearch done by people trying to prove their own hyposthesis.

Here is a list of how carious authors classisfied the same witnesses:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/earwitnesses.htm

It is no wonder why people think they came from the Knoll.

And a great article about the silliness of some researchers.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-20-2008, 01:47 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Jean Hill's every changing story. Jean was standing next to her friend Mary Moorman - who took the "Badge Man" photo.

Amazing how her story changed and changed.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jhill.htm
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-23-2008, 02:42 PM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Heheh!!!!!!!
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 08:34 PM   #38
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Some evidence to support my theory that Oswald was either working in an intelligence capacity......or players in our governement really dropped the ball"

[Q]The Mystery of Oswald's Contacts with the CIA in Mexico
By Jefferson Morley
Mr. Morley is the author of Our Man in Mexico City: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA, published by the University Press of Kansas. The October 10, 1963 cable and other documents reported in the book can be viewed at http://ourmaninmexico.com/documents.html.

A small group of senior CIA officers may have been running an authorized counterintelligence operation involving Lee Harvey Oswald six weeks before the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963.

That’s the controversial but conditional conclusion I reached while writing the biography of CIA spymaster Winston Scott, the agency’s top man in Mexico for more than a decade. Our Man in Mexico, argues that if there was an Oswald operation, Scott, a brash and brilliant spy, was not a participant. The CIA has never acknowledged the existence of such an operation, if there was one. Many historians will deny it. But the new JFK paper trail is clear: some of Scott’s CIA associates knew much more than they ever disclosed about the man who apparently went on to kill President Kennedy in Dallas.

Newly declassified records and interviews with retired CIA officials illuminate the JFK story as it has never been seen before: through the eyes of Win Scott, long a shadowy figure in the history of the agency who was renowned for the brilliance and diligence of his espionage. In 1963, Scott was serving as the chief of the CIA’s station in Mexico City. It was here his path intersected with Oswald’s.

In the summer of 1963, Oswald, a 23-year old ex-Marine with a Russian wife, leftist political views and a penchant for scheming, was living in New Orleans. In the course of the next 100 days of his life, he would come in contact with four CIA intelligence gathering programs. Two of the programs that Oswald encountered were run by Scott, who operated out of an office on the top floor of the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City. The other two were run by his colleague David Atlee Phillips, a highly regarded counterintelligence officer also stationed in Mexico City. Scott had a front row seat on the events that would culminate in the Dallas tragedy.

Such high-level CIA interest in Oswald does not necessarily mean that there was an operation involving Oswald, much less a CIA conspiracy. The evidence allows different readings. Win Scott himself did his own private investigation of Oswald a few years later and concluded the Soviets were likely behind the gunfire that killed Kennedy. David Phillips, who would go on to found the Association of Foreign Intelligence officers, a pro-CIA lobbying group, said late in life that he believed that JFK was killed by rogue U.S. intelligence officers. Win Scott’s son, Michael who spent more than 20 years sifting his father’s life story, thought Phillips was more likely right.

***

Winston Mackinley Scott was not one of those CIA men from the Ivy League. He came from rural Alabama, specialized in mathematics, joined the FBI, then the Office of Strategic Services then the CIA, where he became friends with all of the leading figures of the Agency’s halcyon early days: Allen Dulles, CIA director from 1953 to 1961, was a good friend. So was James Jesus Angleton, the legendary counterintelligence chief whose alcoholic brilliance and bitter decline have inspired a half dozen books and a couple of major motion pictures including Robert DeNiro’s CIA epic, The Good Shepherd.

When Oswald visited the Cuban and Soviet diplomatic offices In Mexico City between September 27 and October 1, 1963, Scott’s vast and efficient surveillance networks picked up on his presence almost immediately. Within a few days, the station had learned his name and Scott queried Washington asking for more information. The result was perhaps the single most important JFK assassination document to emerge in recent years. It is the fully declassified version of headquarter’s response to Scott’s inquiry. The cable, dated October 10, 1963--six weeks before Kennedy was killed--is not any sort of “smoking gun” proof of conspiracy so often sought by cable news producers and publishing houses.

But it does reveal some troubling facts:

A group of senior CIA officers were not only monitoring Lee Harvey Oswald’s political activities while President Kennedy was still alive. They were manipulating information about him.

Among those most deeply involved in the selective handling of information about Oswald were Angleton, the chief of the counterintelligence staff who died in 1986; Phillips, the chief of anti-Castro operations in the Western Hemisphere, who died in 1988; his boss Tom Karamessines, the deputy director of the clandestine service who died in 1976; and, possibly, Phillips’s subordinate, George Joannides, an up-and-coming undercover officer who was running psychological warfare operations out of Miami in 1963. Joannides died in 1991. (The exact nature of Joannides’s involvement is hard to discern because the CIA is fighting in federal court to block disclosure of virtually all records related to his secret operations in 1963.)

There is no evidence that any of these men were involved in a conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy. There is lots of evidence, however, that they were very discreet about what they knew of Oswald’s political activities, travels and intentions before Kennedy was killed. They certainly never cooperated with assassination investigators in any meaningful way.


In October 1963, senior officials at CIA headquarters deliberately cut Scott, the CIA’s top man in Mexico, “out of the loop” of the latest FBI reports on Oswald.


Scott rejected a key finding of the Warren Commission report on JFK’s murder. The Agency told the Commission that its personnel did not learn of Oswald’s contacts with Cuban embassy officials on September 27 1963 until after Kennedy was killed. Win Scott said that was not true--and the CIA’s own records confirm his point. In fact, Win Scott and David Phillips knew about Oswald’s contacts with Cuban consular officials within a few days of when the occurred and well before Kennedy was killed.
Does this curious paper trail signal the existence of intelligence activity that deliberately involved Oswald?

Between 1995 and 2007, three retired CIA officials involved in pre-assasination intelligence gathering on the accused assassin spoke to me. All three acknowledged an often under-appreciated fact: information about Lee Harvy Oswald circulated among a small group of senior counterintelligence operatives just a few weeks before Oswald allegedly killed Kennedy.

Jane Roman, William J. Hood, and Anne Goodpasture agreed in separate interviews that the October 10, 1963 cable reflected an unusual level of interest in Oswald.

“To me it's indicative of a keen interest in Oswald held on a ‘need to know’ basis,” said Roman, a longtime aide to CIA counterintelligence chief Jim Angleton, in an interview at her home in Washington in November 1994. I first published an account of Roman’s remarks in the Washington Post a few months later. Roman, who later regretted her remarks to me but did not recant them, said she did not know who was responsible for the final version of the misleading cable.

Hood, a longtime aide to Helms, discussed the Oswald cable at his home on Long Island last year. Still hale in his 80s, Hood reviewed a copy of the Oswald cable on which his own initials appear. He took care to express surprise that no fewer than six CIA component offices helped prepare the report on the itinerant ex-Marine.

“Jesus, it goes all over the place,” he whistled. “That’s a lot coordination.”

Hood denied the cable was evidence of a CIA operation involving Oswald. But his denial came with what I regarded as a significant loophole.

Was it possible, I asked Hood, that Tom Karamessines had not shared with Win Scott the latest information on Oswald because somebody at headquarters was running an operation involving Oswald and wanted to restrict the circulation of information about him so as to preserve confidentiality of an operation? Was information about Oswald being held on what Jane Roman called a "need to know basis"?

“Absolutely not,” Hood said. “There’s no reason to. If [the operation] was something at Helms’s level there would be a reason not to tell somebody in the field. But not at this level.”

I pointed out that the October 10 1963 cable on Oswald had almost reached Helms’s level: It was reviewed and approved by Helms’s top deputy, Tom Karamessines, who was known for his discretion and loyalty. The decision not to share Oswald information while JFK was still alive had been taken at the highest level, I said.

Hood blamed incompetence, not operational interest. “The information that is left out [of the cable to Win Scott] is pretty significant,” he conceded. “It really should have been sent in the cable. But I don’t find anything smelly in it.”

Anne Goodpasture, Win Scott’s longtime assistant, was more circumspect about the anomalies of the October 10 1963 cable. She did not agree that the involvement of many CIA hands in a misleading communication reflected an operational interest in Oswald. She did not deny it. “I really couldn’t say,” she said.

In my mind, all three former CIA hands had basically defaulted to the proverbial “non-denial denial,” a factually accurate statement, seemingly dispositive, that was actually paved with escape routes for those who preferred not to be pinned down about the agency’s sources and methods.

After the assassination of President Kennedy in Dallas on November 22, 1963, the story of the CIA’s machinations around Oswald instantaneously became one of the Agency’s most closely guarded secrets.

In Mexico City, Win Scott searched his files for reports, tapes, and possibly photos of Oswald. In Washington, the White House and the FBI sought to tamp down widespread fears of a conspiracy. In Cuba, Fidel Castro went on national television to insinuate there was a sinister plot from reactionary forces to blame the crime on his communist government.

In the weeks that followed, CIA officials privately denied any special pre-assassination knowledge of, or interest in, Oswald, a claim accepted by the Warren Commission investigating Kennedy’s murder. In September 1964, the commission concluded that Oswald had acted alone and unaided.

But Win Scott knew better than anyone there were problems with the Mexico City station’s handling of Oswald’s visit. He continued to collect reports from credible sources about Oswald’s contacts with Mexican communists that CIA surveillance seemed to have missed. He could never reconcile himself to the official finding about Oswald. In an unpublished memoir seized by the CIA after his death, Scott rejected the Warren Commission’s claim that the Mexico City station did not learn of Oswald’s contacts with Cuban officials until after Kennedy was killed. To the contrary, he wrote, Oswald, “was a person of great interest to us … reports were made on all his contacts with both the Cuban Consulate and with the Soviets.”

Scott didn’t say anything about an operation involving Oswald but he was a CIA loyalist who steadfastedly refused to reveal the agency’s sources and methods. Scott, however, did have a piece of evidence about Oswald that was relevant to the question of Oswald and U.S. intelligence: an audio surveillance tape containing his voice. The existence of an Oswald tape had long been promoted by JFK conspiracy theorists and denied by the agency. But Anne Goodpasture said under oath in a 1997 deposition that she gave a copy of an audio surveillance tape of the accused assassin to her boss in the panicky hours after Kennedy’s murder. Goodpasture repeated the story to me in a May 2005 interview. She said she assumed Scott stashed the tape in his home office safe.

The tape would have shed light on the nature of the CIA’s interest in Oswald. It might have settled the question of whether there was an Oswald operation or not. But the tape vanished. It was probably in the material seized by the CIA from Scott’s home after his death in 1971. The CIA never shared the tape with JFK assassination investigators. A CIA record destruction order found in the late 1990s disclosed that the material found in Win Scott’s safe was destroyed in January 1986.

In other words, the Agency concealed material evidence in the murder of a sitting president for 22 years and then destroyed it. Whether the Oswald tape was destroyed to hide incompetence or malfeasance is unknowable. The possibility that it was destroyed to hide evidence of the CIA’s operational interest in Oswald cannot excluded.
[/Q]

http://hnn.us/articles/49179.html

This to me points either to the fact that he was an involved in intelligence work, or.....

the agency REALLY fucked up.....causing them to cover ass.....causing conspiracy shite to pop up for the last 50 years.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 09:08 PM   #39
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,455
Local Time: 07:51 AM
http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/bush2.htm
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 10:17 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 07:51 AM
I think you have missed my other posts a few years ago about the Bush links.

George DeMonschildt - was a personal friend of Bush. He was also one of Oswald's friends. As a matter of fact, the famous photo of Oswald in the backyard with the rifle and pistol used to kill Kennedy and Officer tippet, was given to DeMonschildt and signed by Oswald shortly after he attempted to kill General Walker.

There are connections to Bush - Bay of Pigs - Operation Zapata (Name of Bush's Oil Company) and Barbara and Houston (Name of the two boats used to launch the invasion.


Nixon kept referring to the "Whole Bay of Pigs thing" during Watergate. I believe firmly that Operation 40 - I referred you to this in an earlier post - was somehow connected. They were connected to the Bay of Pigs. I do not believe Bush orchestrated it, but I believe he was connected to the players. He was most definitely in Dallas, there are CIA documents to back this up that have been revealed in the last fifteen years. I think he was attempting to figure out if it was agency people gone bad, specifically cubans.



Harry, I do not support the page you linked to in the sense that James Files story, has absolutely no credibility.
__________________

Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×