Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Benghazi now longest Congressional Investigation in history (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Benghazi now longest Congressional Investigation in history
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The House committee investigating the Benghazi attacks is now the longest congressional investigation in history, committee Democrats announced today.

As of Monday, the House Select Committee on Benghazi, has been active for 72 weeks -- surpassing the record previously held by the Watergate Committee in the 1970's.

link
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ridiculous.
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It will only get worse with Boehner gone. It amazes me to think that he was too cozy with Democrats from the fringe's perspective. Whitewater, anyone?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by scifibum:
Ridiculous.

It really is. The game of deny, delay and destroy evidence has drug this out far longer than it ever should have been. Hillary's game has been to drag it out so long that everyone just forgets or gets tired of it. Obviously this type of defense works with her dedicated apologists and the defenders that see the ends justifying the means.

But what do we really know about Benghazi?

quote:
In March, an investigation by ProPublica and Gawker revealed that a "secret spy network" that was not on the State Department payroll, run by longtime Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal, was "Funneling intelligence about the crisis in Libya directly to the Secretary of State’s private account starting before the Benghazi attack." Now the WEEKLY STANDARD has learned that Tyler Drumheller, the former chief of the CIA's clandestine service in Europe who was working directly with Blumenthal as a member of Clinton’s spy network, was concurrently working as a consultant to CBS News and its venerable news program 60 Minutes.

According to WEEKLY STANDARD sources, Drumheller was active in shaping the network's Benghazi coverage. His role at the network raises questions about what went wrong with the retracted 60 Minutes report on Benghazi that aired in October 2013. Despite his former life as a high ranking CIA official, Drumheller was laden with political baggage, making him a curious choice to be consulting with a major news operation--especially so given that he was working directly with Sidney Blumenthal, whose primary occupation appears to be manipulating media coverage on behalf of the Clintons.

So we have a Sec of State running a personal intelligence agency that has hooks into the mainstream media covering her actions in order to shape the story. That's some full on, real deal, dystopian totalitarian bull**** right there. The only thing really missing is secret police "disappearing" people.
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But Rafi, a well run secret police wouldn't be any good if it wasn't "missing". [Smile]
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Since 2000 we've seen the longest wars in the nation's history, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and now the longest pointless congressional investigation in history.

We're on a roll, sort of. But, we haven't really hit the good times, yet. That may start on October 8 when the House elects someone even further to the right than Boehner to steer the ship.

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Any idea what the odds are on getting the longest shutdown?
Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today?"
—

Republican House majority leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy, candidate for House Speaker

Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That was a direct quote kmbboots? >_<
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
That was a direct quote kmbboots? >_<

From the Washington Post

Video from the interview with Sean Hannity

Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"I give you credit for that," said Hannity. "I'll give you credit where credit is due."
Wow...
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If she hadn't been so unwise as to attempt such a poorly considered end-run around FOIA requests with her private server, her numbers would be fine.
Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If that's what it was. I'm not really sure at this point if it might have been naivete or hubris, which in this case are pretty much the same thing.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not sure it even matters anymore after that statement. If it was just stalling tactics, I think she just won.
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow. That shift was head-spinning. When presented with an admission that Republican leadership exploited a tragedy for political purposed at the taxpayers expense it took less than half a dozen posts to change the conversation.
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's not like the admission tells us anything new. We already knew they were shameless opportunists and that the Benghazi committee was pure theatre. At most it tells us the Republicans are aware of the farce; which allows they have some self-awareness but not necessarily a lot.
Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Kmbboots, we live in a post-reality world and have been watching this show and its reruns for almost 20 years. Him opening up is like a demented interview snippet from "In the Republican's Studio".
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Wow. That shift was head-spinning. When presented with an admission that Republican leadership exploited a tragedy for political purposed at the taxpayers expense it took less than half a dozen posts to change the conversation.

Well, you selectively quoted what was said. Let's take Take The whole statement:
quote:
"Everybody though Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?" McCarthy asked. "But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she's untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought."
So it's not what you say it is unless you spin and twist it, ironically in an effort to exploit the tragedy for political gain. All he's saying is Hillary almost got away with it but they fought for the truth to come out.
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
All he's saying is Hillary almost got away with it but they fought for the truth to come out.
Where does he say that?
Rather, he is saying that they put together a special committee to make her numbers drop.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My point was that she's "unstrustable" for reason that have SFA to do with Benghazi.
Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Because she's untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought."
All things considered, if he is at all honest he had to be smiling to himself guiltily as he said that. Why do you believe such transparent self-serving talking points?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Where does he say that?
Rather, he is saying that they put together a special committee to make her numbers drop.

He didn't say that either, you're reading in intent that isn't present in the words.

Seems like an occasion where rational people would ask for clarification, does it not? Of course, clarity helps no one in a political sense as much as one sided interpretation and blasting a sound bite.

Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Seems like an occasion where rational people would ask for clarification...
So you believe that a rational person would contact the majority leader of the House and ask him to confirm that he was indeed saying -- in a situation where he did not realize he was likely to be caught on the record -- that House Republicans deliberately ginned up investigations against a likely presidential candidate to reduce her popularity? On the grounds that a rational person would expect him to answer honestly?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well it's more like this.
WE know she is untrustworthy. We had to form this committee to show everyone else that.

He COULD believe either she is guilty of wrong doing OR that she is just untrustworthy and the smear is an ends justify the means situation.

Neither of those are cold, “We have to trash her numbers at any cost, let’s try this!”

I believe the last, but he didn’t hand over a smoking gun confirming it. He just said something incredibly dumb that’s going to put his party’s sincerity in (into further?) question regarding Benghazi.

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Was it a Benghazi FOI request that made the State Department take formal notice of how many emails they didn't have?

Ironically, pulling the trigger on this now likely helps Clinton since by the time primary season really kicks off, not to mention the general election, this will be old news. It's possible the full implication of the private server wouldn't have been made public until a year from now which would have been gold for the GOP.

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
These days the meaning of one's words can never be pinned on the person speaking them. "We fixed it" could mean it was broken and now works, it's rigged so we'll get it, don't worry about him talking to the cops anymore, or it's now attached to the gizmo at the back of the frammis. What McCarthy is saying is that they fixed it.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Being the longest running investigation is hardly a suprise, since back in April, the committee chairman had already decided it wouldn't be done (coincidently) until just before the next election. [Roll Eyes]

It's going to be milked to the last possible political drop, regardless of what is found. And guess who's paying for the milking? [Wink]

[ October 01, 2015, 10:34 AM: Message edited by: Wayward Son ]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Can we get an acknowledgment now from anyone here who ever defended the Benghazi investigation as being about genuine concern with events in Benghazi? Because those of this who called this a fraudulent basis for investigation from the start were right, and those who promoted alternate conspiracy theories were wrong. Again.

[ October 08, 2015, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Greg Davidson ]

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seriati
Member
Member # 2266

 - posted      Profile for Seriati         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Greg Davidson:
Can we get an acknowledgment now from anyone here who ever defended the Benghazi investigation as being about genuine concern with events in Benghazi? Because those of this who called this a fraudulent basis for investigation from the start were right, and those who promoted alternate conspiracy theories were wrong. Again.

What a nonsensical read of reality. One quote, by one guy, that doesn't actually say what you want to pretend it says, that's been clarified, and you think everyone else has been refuted? You have to be kidding me. You keep overreaching the actual facts.
Posts: 2309 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
What a nonsensical read of reality. One quote, by one guy, that doesn't actually say what you want to pretend it says, that's been clarified, and you think everyone else has been refuted?
Hey, in related news, do you still think there's a great reason out there to investigate Planned Parenthood?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Seriati:
quote:
Originally posted by Greg Davidson:
Can we get an acknowledgment now from anyone here who ever defended the Benghazi investigation as being about genuine concern with events in Benghazi? Because those of this who called this a fraudulent basis for investigation from the start were right, and those who promoted alternate conspiracy theories were wrong. Again.

What a nonsensical read of reality. One quote, by one guy, that doesn't actually say what you want to pretend it says, that's been clarified, and you think everyone else has been refuted? You have to be kidding me. You keep overreaching the actual facts.
The justification for the investigations has always been to "find the truth" about "dead Americans". The truth about that was found, immediately. The rest of it is a fishing expedition trying to embarrass Obama or Clinton. [And keep the base well fed with red meat.]

If the true purpose is to show that the event was abused by the administration for political purposes, then the people in charge have been lying about what they are doing. Understandably, since that would mean their purpose is also political.

Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, no. The nonsensical read of reality is that the investigations are searching for the truth about dead Americans.

I think your mistake is that you have long ago accepted that the purpose of the investigations was to uncover intentional manipulation of the media - but that's not the stated purpose of the investigation.

Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshCrow
Member
Member # 6048

 - posted      Profile for JoshCrow   Email JoshCrow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Some interesting news on this today.

quote:
A former investigator with the House Select Committee on Benghazi is accusing the Republican-led panel of carrying out a politically motivated investigation targeting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton instead of the thorough and objective fact-finding mission it was set up to pursue.

Major Bradley Podliska, an intelligence officer in the Air Force Reserve who describes himself as a conservative Republican, told CNN that the committee trained its sights almost exclusively on Clinton after the revelation last March that she used a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state. That new focus flipped a broad-based probe of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, into what Podliska described as "a partisan investigation."

Podliska, who was fired after nearly 10 months as an investigator for the Republican majority, is now preparing to file a lawsuit against the select committee next month, alleging that he lost his job in part because he resisted pressure to focus his investigative efforts solely on the State Department and Clinton's role surrounding the Benghazi attack. He also alleges he was fired because he took leave from the committee to fulfill his military service obligations, which would be an unlawful firing.

"I knew that we needed to get to the truth to the victims' families. And the victims' families, they deserve the truth -- whether or not Hillary Clinton was involved, whether or not other individuals were involved," he told CNN in an exclusive TV interview that will air Sunday on "State of the Union." "The victims' families are not going to get the truth and that's the most unfortunate thing about this."

Podliska told CNN that the committee, which has spent $4.6 million so far and is chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-South Carolina, pulled resources away from probes of other individuals and agencies to focus almost exclusively on Clinton and the State Department she helmed for four years. Clinton will testify before the committee for the first time Oct. 22 and the committee is set to release the findings of its investigation next year, in the heat of the presidential race.

Podliska alleges that the committee's staff director told him he was fired for three reasons: using work email to send a social invitation to colleagues, assigning an "unauthorized project" to an intern, and allegedly putting classified information on an unclassified system. Podliska, an intelligence officer who was hired for his expertise with the intelligence community, strongly denies the latter. He also disputes the legitimacy of the other two reasons cited to him by the committee, in particular assigning any "unauthorized projects" to interns.

A committee spokesperson "vigorously" denied Podliska's allegations about why he was fired and defended the objectivity of the panel's investigation.

"We are confident that the facts and evidence give no support to the wild imagination fueling these and any future allegations, and the Committee will vigorously defend itself against such allegations. The Committee will not be blackmailed into a monetary settlement for a false allegation made by a properly terminated former employee," the committee spokesperson, who declined to be named, told CNN in a statement.

The committee statement also accused Podliska of his own bias in his work on the committee, a claim the former staffer's lawyer firmly denied.


The statement added that Podliska had never previously accused the committee of conducting a biased investigation targeting Clinton, although Podliska said he repeatedly made the case to his superiors that the committee's work should be more all-encompassing.

Podliska said he decided to come forward because the committee's skewed focus is detracting from the objective of uncovering the truth surrounding the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. "What happened was wrong," Podliska said.

"I'm scared. I'm nervous. I know that this is, you know, I'm going up against powerful people in Washington. But at the end of the day I need to live with myself," he said. "I told my wife, I will view myself as a coward if I don't do the right thing here."

He insisted that his claim is not politically motivated, explaining that he has long been a conservative Republican -- "more on the libertarian side" -- and plans to vote for the GOP nominee in 2016.

"I am going to vote for the Republican nominee in 2016. I do not support Hillary Clinton for president," he said.

It takes guts to whistleblow on your own party, but I'm glad there somebody who'll do it. Of course, one could always call this 'sour grapes', but then again if he's right about the reason for his dismissal it looks bad for the committee regardless.

[ October 10, 2015, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: JoshCrow ]

Posts: 2281 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Still waiting for one of you who thought this investigation was legitimate to acknowledge your error. But also in recognition that to be a Republican today requires a significant level of faith-based belief in an imaginary world, and a stubborn refusal to admit when you are shown to be wrong (see Obamacare discussion, below, with one exception of one person here who did have the integrity to acknowledge his earlier error)
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
JoshCrow,

thanks for the information, curious how it will pan out.

Greg,

I'm not sure what you think you will accomplish with your attempts to get people to 'confess', especially when you include gratuitous insults.

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ornery is not the court of public opinion, so the House will not be saved from spiraling into chaos by anyone's admission here, there or anywhere. I doubt even FOX could stop it if they cared to try, which they don't.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Wow. That shift was head-spinning. When presented with an admission that Republican leadership exploited a tragedy for political purposed at the taxpayers expense it took less than half a dozen posts to change the conversation.

in your cosmos Sean H speaks for Republican Congress?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It wasn't Hannity's quote that was the issue, Pete.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Wow. That shift was head-spinning. When presented with an admission that Republican leadership exploited a tragedy for political purposed at the taxpayers expense it took less than half a dozen posts to change the conversation.

in your cosmos Sean H speaks for Republican Congress?
If you were responding to what you quoted, I assumed that NobleHunter was speaking for NobleHunter. At least in my cosmos. [Roll Eyes]
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1