It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

100% conclusive evidence that a plane did hit the pentagon.

page: 24
24
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hijaqd
Well it's pretty clear that on either side of the debate that the event has been discussed so long and debated for so long that we all have indoctrinated ourselves to our own beliefs.

We can go on and on forever showing evidence each way, but that's the thing imo, there shouldn't be evidence to the contrary of the official story.


Not quite true. The conspiracy mongers are so much in love with the idea that there's some sinister secret conspiracy afoot that of course there's going to be evidence to the contrary- they're the ones who are manufacturing it all. Sterling cases in point-

-Cheney issued a stand down order. This came from Mineta's testimony that Cheney said "Do the orders still stand", and in the very next sentence Mineta confirms the order that still stands was a shoot down order. The conspiracy mongors change "do the orders still stand" into "stand down order" and clip off the testimony about the shoot down order to make it falsely appear liek Cheney issued a stand down order

-"Pull it" is lingo for controlled demolitions. This came from Silverstein's discussion with firefighter command to pull back the firefighter operations from WTC 7. The conspiracy mongors cite "pull it" from an interview with a secretary from a controlled demolitions company, but the very next sentence she states "pull it" was to pull a building down with cables. They snip this part off, completely ignore the discussions Silverstein had with firefighter command, and make it falsely appear like Silverstein gave an order to secretly blow up a building.

-WTC 7 looks like a controlled demolitions. This comes from the often referred to video of the WTC 7 collapse, but the conspiracy mongors always snip off the beginning portion of the video showing the penthouce collapsing into the interior of the building six econds before the rest of the building did, all so the conspiracy mongors can make it falsely appear like "witnesses heard explosions six seconds before WTC 7 collapsed"

-The hijackers are still alive. This comes from the early days of the investigation where several living people had the same names as some of the hijackers. This has all since been recanted, but the conspiracy mongors, pick up the story, snip off the part explainign these were cases of mistaken identity, erase the part showing this was later recanted, all to make it falsely appear liek the hijackers are still alive

-Trillions of dollars were missing after the Pentagon attack. This was due to accounting errors entirely on paper, so it wasn't missing- it was listed incorrectly. The conspiracy mongors erase the accounting errors admission and the fact that the errors were corrected all to make it falsely appear like big pallets of money have suddenly gone missing.

There are many, many other examples (I.E. Dylan Avery's "mysterious thing covered by a blue tarp being carried out of the Pentagon that was really a triage tent being brought into the Pentagon) but you get the idea. The conspiracy mongors have consistantly lied to everyone within earshot so many times that of course the rest of us are going to demand you people to back up your claims even if you said night was dark and water is wet.

It doesn't help you that that the conspiracy mongors constantly repeat the same tired "Cheney ordered a stand down" and "witnesses heard explosions six seconds before the WTC 7 collapsed" over and over, as if constantly repeating a falshood will somehow make it become the truth after some magical number of repetitions.




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


There were more than " a few fan blades " recovered from the Pentagon. You may be interested in this assessment of engine parts by aerospace engineers :-

www.aerospaceweb.org...


Actually there wasn't even 'a few fan blades' there was two rotor hubs and part of a combustion chamber, that makes the massive amount of three parts.

Where are the other rotor heads, approx 14 per engine? Where are the rotor shafts? Where are the engine cases?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


And where is the toilet seat ? It's an inside job !!!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Immortalgemini527
 


Man, you should really be slapped in the head for thinking this video is ANYTHING
worthy of a title that designates "PROOF" of anything other than YOU will grasp onto to
ANYTHING you think will support your case!



The animation that compares what they THINK happened versus what
was shown to happen do NOT add up. The resolution is so piss poor (much like your opinion)
that I don't even know if you can be taken seriously after thinking a rendering that attempts to match
shapes to (a landscape with trees) is the shape of the plane and it's rear wing portion?

You support a theory. Not a fact.


2nd, The 9/11 Commission report was so FOS: it tells everyone that a rendering cannot purport to be factual
just like a book that omits FACTS, supported or not by government officials is equally as true in a fairy tale world you seem to live in.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Let me tell you what I'm in love with: THE TRUTH, and why I value it more than anything in my life.

Since I've grown up around and have once become a scamming, lying cheating and deceitful piece of crap
with over 2 decades of experience telling people what they wanted to hear just so that *I* could
actually gain control over their feeble and weak minded-selves/lives for MY own benefit
without giving an ounce of crap after robbing them of their resources...

....I can tell you that what YOU cite as denigrating a group of people who can see the official story is FOS, much like your futile attempt at labeling the very same group of people who just want the truth but feel cheated from getting it from their own government.



Now, do I believe that there is a sinister conspiracy afoot? No, I do not. Why?
Not enough information to make that statement.

What I do know due to the exemplary tools I've honed and refined (and that I now use for the greater good)
The official story is full of #, and IF you beLIEve it too? You're opinion is just as full.




(1) Whether or not Cheney issued a stand down order: is irrelevant.
-What is relevant is the fact that our vast and superior air defense systems sucked so MUCH A.S.S that it
was able to be circumvented by the most dumbest and clumsiest "terrorists" ever known to American and International history, in the history of man since the advent of humanity's existence.


(2) Pull it.
-The only 2 theories I have read and researched about are:

(A) The pull it meant to evacuate the firefighters
(B) Conspiracy Theorists claim he meant to demolish the building by his own order.

So since I've never heard of your theory: please cite the source for this claim that you have made, thanks.
Since you know of this editing you must have seen the original uncut with the woman you had stated
somehow read Larry's mind and answers on his own behalf?

This link: www.prisonplanet.com...
summarizes the only piece of evidence that states what Larry had "meant" to say, a piece by Sam Smith.

He also DID NOT elaborate on what he meant when asked....
A conflict of interest (the silence) of the omission when Sam wrote the article arises especially given
Sam's tenure with the Murdoch owned paper...



(3) WTC7 "looks" like a controlled demolition...
-ALL 3 WTC towers fell as though they were demolished period.

The fact that another building had hit WTC7 does NOT make the building to fall just as it had done
due to a neighboring structure hitting it. The sheer fact that ANY building could just fall, as though it were made of sand with toothpicks supporting it should make you question its or ANY collapse!!!!



(4) Hijackers still alive:
-Please post your proof that, "oops" the investigations made booboos and thus, they were really dead, just
jumbled names because, "hey, their names all look alike!" right? -Where are the sources of recanting
and sources of misidentifying the hijackers who were pronounced DEAD.

While you are at it: Please tell me how or why a hijacker would carry a passport (because you know all
hijackers should be identified and stuff) and then tell me how the document was somehow made out of
fire retardant paper while all other more denser materials burned?


(5) Please cite the accounting errors that (according to you) were due to more of these government
"oops, I haz made a boobos" regarding oh, I don't know a few ZEROS when accountants are professionals
who do NOT make these kind of mistakes. Source please. I have never seen it.


(6) I don't need Loose Change to tell me what I already know:

The official story was written by a group of collaborative morons who couldn't count to potato
even if they had an abacus made out of anal beads.



You OMIT (intentionally) MANY MANY MANY factual events/observations
that you cannot explain yourself, as if your bullet points nullify their existence?

No sir.

Something is not right and your open and shut case point of view is part of the problem.



Our own government is capable of pulling off this kind of tragedy.
If you disagree, may I ask you:


What happened in the Gulf of Tonkin, Bay of Pigs?
I'm willing to bet you don't even know WHY you pay a federal income tax, AND don't even
know where THAT money goes?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Originally posted by userid1
Originally posted by DerekJR321
reply to post by userid1
 



That's a good site with a lot of information. Thanks for posting. The issue I still have is that, for the theory of that site to work, the plane would have to have been almost sliding on its belly. We know that couldn't have been the case, otherwise the engines would have dug into the ground. And a plane even slightly impacting the ground at those speeds would have caused bounce.



The following link shows what is believed to be damage caused by the jet engine approx



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   

edit on 24-6-2011 by userid1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
As I sit here, I'm shaking my head.

When I read the replies from the "it was not a plane" crowd, I can't help but wonder some things.

1. We know that the plane is gone, and that the passengers and crew are dead. We know that a hole slightly larger than the body of a 757 was in the Pentagon before everything collapsed. So, where do you people that think it wasn't a plane, think that the plane went? Did you see the crater that the United flight made when it spiraled into the ground? Notice that there were hardly any pieces of the plane left. Gee, I guess a plane going 500 MPH hitting the ground in a direct downward angle may in fact be like a plane going 500 MPH hitting a granite building!! Oh yeah, you don't think that was a plane either I bet, and those people who "died" were actually taken to the moon base by our alien friends before the aliens vaporized the aircraft.

2. We have seen post after post showing small aircraft pieces, and even have the flight data recorders. ANY object traveling at 400 to 500 MPH that impacts a granite structure like the Pentagon is going to be blown to smithereens. And yet, this evidence isn't enough. Hundreds of eyewitnesses place an American Airlines jet flying into the Pentagon. Yet, still not convinced.

Do you people still believe in Santa too?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chinesis
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Let me tell you what I'm in love with: THE TRUTH, and why I value it more than anything in my life.


Then would you mind telling me why the conspiracy theorists are clinging to established falsehoods with such militant fervor? I just gave you a list of established lies the conspriacy theorists are consciously spreading around as fact, and all it takes is a 30 second Google search to find that out for themselves, telling me they're so flipping intellectually lazy they don't even want to spend that much time in researching their claims.


(1) Whether or not Cheney issued a stand down order: is irrelevant.
-What is relevant is the fact that our vast and superior air defense systems sucked so MUCH A.S.S that it
was able to be circumvented by the most dumbest and clumsiest "terrorists" ever known to American and International history, in the history of man since the advent of humanity's existence.


You are absolutely right- our military command was slipping on banana peels and running around in circles in sheer incompetence during ther attack, which isn't surprising seeing that an administration that can't even hand out bottles of water to hurricane survivors in New Orleans without acting like the Three Stooges wil hardly be able to deal with a terrorist attack with any better efficiency.

Congratulations, you found the conspiracy: noone wants to admit they fouled up and caused the deaths of 3000 Americans. I have yet to find a single conspiracy mongor who'll accept this explanation, though- it isn't sinister sounding enough for them.



(2) Pull it.
-The only 2 theories I have read and researched about are:

(A) The pull it meant to evacuate the firefighters
(B) Conspiracy Theorists claim he meant to demolish the building by his own order.

So since I've never heard of your theory: please cite the source for this claim that you have made, thanks.
Since you know of this editing you must have seen the original uncut with the woman you had stated
somehow read Larry's mind and answers on his own behalf?


Easy. Here's a link that explains it better than I can- Alex Jones presents a video showing how wrecking companies are getting ready to "pull" building 6, but he doesn't actually show the demolitions. Why, because they pulled it down with cables

Alex Jones manufacturing his own evidence




(3) WTC7 "looks" like a controlled demolition...
-ALL 3 WTC towers fell as though they were demolished period.

The fact that another building had hit WTC7 does NOT make the building to fall just as it had done
due to a neighboring structure hitting it. The sheer fact that ANY building could just fall, as though it were made of sand with toothpicks supporting it should make you question its or ANY collapse!!!!


The problem for you is that no controlled demolitions on the face of the Earth has ever demolished a building from the inside out, as WTC 7 was. There was obviously massive interior damage that caused the internal structure to colalpse, and without a core to shore them up, the exterior collapsed. Randomly distributed fire induced damage would explain this. Controlled demoltions does not.



(4) Hijackers still alive:
-Please post your proof that, "oops" the investigations made booboos and thus, they were really dead, just
jumbled names because, "hey, their names all look alike!" right? -Where are the sources of recanting
and sources of misidentifying the hijackers who were pronounced DEAD.


The article that started all this was from the BBC reporting there were several cases of mistaken identity. Here's the original article, but at the end there's a link to an update- they didn't realize that hordes of conspiracy theorists were going to misquote the article so they issued a clarification. The conspiracy mongers ALWAYS quote the original article and NEVER the update:

Conspiracy theorists manufacturing their own evidence



While you are at it: Please tell me how or why a hijacker would carry a passport (because you know all
hijackers should be identified and stuff) and then tell me how the document was somehow made out of
fire retardant paper while all other more denser materials burned?


Don't know. If you're askign me to speculate, I'd say the FBI located Atta's apartment, barged in with guns drawn, and found the passport. Since this was a warrantless search it couldn't be used as evidence in a court of law so they came up with the cover story how someone found it on the street. It's just that the conspiracy theorists aren't going to accept this speculation because- you guessed it- it isn't sinister sounding enough for them.



(5) Please cite the accounting errors that (according to you) were due to more of these government
"oops, I haz made a boobos" regarding oh, I don't know a few ZEROS when accountants are professionals
who do NOT make these kind of mistakes. Source please. I have never seen it.


“It was always there and what the problem was was [sic] tracking it through the system. When I arrived at the pentagon and they told me they can’t track 2.3 billion [sic] dollars that had been accumulated over the period before I got there. It turns out there was not a legal problem or a loss. It was a matter of the complexity of the systems and tracking it all the way through.” -Donald Rumsfeld

So why do the conspriacy theorists always quote the original statement and never the clarification?


(6) I don't need Loose Change to tell me what I already know:

The official story was written by a group of collaborative morons who couldn't count to potato
even if they had an abacus made out of anal beads.


Baloney. There is no such thing as any "official story". The 9/11 commission report was an attempt to collect as many eyewitness accounts as they could to see how the story came together. NYC police and firefighters, NYPA security, FBI agenda, foreign intelligents, and even Atta's neighbors, were interviewed. It's ridiculous to claim they all lied becuase these are the very peopel the conspiracy people are relying on for their material (I.E. Norm Mineta).



You OMIT (intentionally) MANY MANY MANY factual events/observations
that you cannot explain yourself, as if your bullet points nullify their existence?


Would you mind terribly giving me an example? Everythign the conspiracy theorists are flouting are either outrageous lies they manufactured themselves, or ridiculous things that doesn't prove anything one way or the other.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Chinesis
 


I have participated in building demolitions, and yes I hold my type 33 user of high explosives license. A building of that size would take several weeks just to plan.

Once planned, all walls are removed. Without this, the demo is unpredictable and DANGEROUS.

Once all are removed, the lead operator selects his/her explosive of choice, and each support beam/pillar are carefully wrapped with explosives. The explosives MUST be directly attached to the beams or pillars.

This can take several weeks to accomplish, since the plans ALWAYS change during the setup and buildings the size of the towers would take a team of 30 people a LONG time to plant the needed charges. MONTHS.

There is NO WAY that ANYONE could plant the correct explosives in the right locations inside ANY of these buildings without someone "outside" of this "conspiracy" taking note of the activity.

Exposing the steel or concrete would NOT go un-noticed for WEEKS/MONTHS in advance. People would be bitching about their offices being destroyed to accomplish this.

Period, end of story..



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by matadoor
We know that the plane is gone, and that the passengers and crew are dead.


We also know that Whitey Bulger lived a jolly life for 15 years in Santa Monica, California with his "long-time girlfriend" without the help of a government cover up. Or so we're told. Amazing as that might seem in the shadow of an entire nation chasing one misogynist goatherd for a decade in Bafunkoolistan. People disappear with and without help. Now what?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hemisphere

Originally posted by matadoor
We know that the plane is gone, and that the passengers and crew are dead.


We also know that Whitey Bulger lived a jolly life for 15 years in Santa Monica, California with his "long-time girlfriend" without the help of a government cover up. Or so we're told. Amazing as that might seem in the shadow of an entire nation chasing one misogynist goatherd for a decade in Bafunkoolistan. People disappear with and without help. Now what?


Okay, wait a second. You are comparing a guy who stayed under cover to avoid being arrested for multiple murder charges, with a Boeing 757 crashing, and all of the passengers and crew (plus terrorists) being dead. I mean, the families of all of the victims know they are dead, and American is certainly short one rather large 757.

Just want to make sure I completely understand your argument.
edit on 25-6-2011 by matadoor because: To remove an extra f



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Even if the engines had failed after hitting the lightpoles, he still would have had enough speed to make it to his destination.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Interesting video. The only thing about the whole Pentagon thing that bothers me is how a guy who could hardly fly a SE Cessna managed to perform such accurate maneuvers and also fly a few meters off of the ground for such a long distance. It just doesn't make sense. If it actually was the terrorist flying the plane, he had the luck of "Allah" on his side that day because that is like a 1/1,000,000 shot right there.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
reply to post by HazyChestNutz
 


Please show ONE OUNCE OF PROOF, of the garbage that you just spewed... You can't, it doesn't exist, it's more made up delusions from the delusional!


Please show ONE OUNCE OF PROOF, of the garbage that you just spewed... You can't, it doesn't exist, it's more made up delusions from the delusional!

Right back at ya




posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Wow the trolls are out en masse on this topic. Its funny really, the op and that ridiculous video. Then, OBVIOUS trolls like SkepticAndBeliever and Immortalgemini527 elaborate on subjects they apparently DO NOT UNDERSTAND. Then theres GoodolDave and his baseless claims that all of the "truthers" are mislead and ill-informed, BUT he knows the real, yeah right Dave. Skeptic and Immortal your arguments are hilariously pathetic and lacking in reason and logic, utterly.
In the physical world, no plane could possibly have hit the pentagon, in the virtual world, anything is possible. The light posts could well have been knocked over by the sheer velocity of whatever did hit the pentagon, I am referring to the displacement of air, especially if it was travelling at close to the speed of sound, which a missile would.
The trolls keep talking about non-issues and misrepresenting the physical facts, while claiming the same of the "truthers", its really funny. Trolls, do you not realize, that, you are in no way as intelligent as those you debate with, and the only people who are swayed by your idiotic allegations are the simple minded, the truthers think that you guys are either unimaginably dull witted, or intentionally deceptive.
Here you are trolls, explain away these valid questions regarding the crash or whatever it was at the pentagon.
1) You guys claim a 757 or 767 full of passengers and crew, impacted the pentagon. If so, why was there the remnants of only one engine at the scene, that engine was not a Rolls Royce nor a Pratt and Whitney engine which are the only two engines outfitted on Boeing planes? Except for a rare General Electric model only found on some of the earlier produced models.
2) What happened to all of the bodies that were supposed to be on the "plane"? And NO, they did NOT "vaporize"...
3) What became of all of the luggage and seat cushions that were supposed to have been on the "plane"? Again these did not vaporize into nothingness...
4) What indeed happened to the AIRCRAFT WINGS which were supposed to be full of jet fuel??? They did not punch holes through the building walls, they did not fall off from impact with the walls, they did not vaporize aginst the wall and leave any kind of marking,
5) Why wont the FBI realease just ONE photograph or video clip that conclusively shows an airliner impacting the pentagon? Surely out of the 80+ confiscated recordings, there must be SOMETHING that doesn't prove that a missile or a drone actually impacted the pentagon. Or else we would have seen something other than 5 frames that DO NOT show an airliner about to impact the pentagon.

Please adequately explain these questions away for me, and I will hoist the Idiot Flag myself and proudly march with y'all...but I seriously doubt that you can. Good luck.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ANOK
 


And where is the toilet seat ? It's an inside job !!!


So you really think it's reasonable that all those engine parts were simply not photographed?

All those pics taken around the impact, and only three small engine parts ended up on film? Any reasonable person would find that a little odd.

Fire can not destroy a jet engine for obvious reasons.

No, it doesn't prove inside job by itself, but add the impossible physics and other anomalies...


edit on 6/25/2011 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by MACchine
and the black stuff behind it does NOT look like smoke, no way !


Congratulations Truther this time you are correct, it does NOT look like smoke.



What it looks like is oil vapour. As AA77 was approaching the Pentagon its starboard engine ingested the top portion of this tree:

(unless you think top secrete US government topiary agents trimmed it while no one was looking)


This would have lead an imbalance in the engine damaging the seals and allowing oil to exit the engine.

The trail behind the aircraft is white not black. Oil burns black but it steams (boils) white.

The trail left behind the aircraft is most likely oil vapour.

Here is an example of an oil trail exiting a damaged engine.



Here is another. Note the engine on the right is burning = black smoke The engine on the left is trailing oil vapour.


Here we can see whats left of the oil steaming out of the engine on Murry st.



Here is an excellent example of oil boiling out of a damaged engine Where is it coming from?



Here.


edit on 23-6-2011 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



NO, THAT IS NOT IT, and you got the wrong frame from the security video, that white thing could be a plane or it could be a freeway !?!?!?!?!

ALTHOUGH, you helped ME to solve it !!!

The dark tall shadow in the CORRECT frame of the security video, is the huge tail of a military jet, and white lines behind it that are TOO HIGH UP TO BE FROM A PLANE is the FREEWAY



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Banjamin Jefferson Madiso
Wow the trolls are out en masse on this topic.

Wow, it's really amusing to read posts by people who are so completely without self-awareness.


Its funny really...

You're right, but in the the way you imagine.,


In the physical world, no plane could possibly have hit the pentagon,

Your proof of this - and perhaps an explanation of your expertise as well?


Here you are trolls, explain away these valid questions regarding the crash or whatever it was at the pentagon.
1) You guys claim a 757 or 767 full of passengers and crew, impacted the pentagon. If so, why was there the remnants of only one engine at the scene,

Who says? Do you have any official report that states this?


that engine was not a Rolls Royce nor a Pratt and Whitney engine which are the only two engines outfitted on Boeing planes?

How do you know it wasn't a Rolls Royce?


2) What happened to all of the bodies that were supposed to be on the "plane"? And NO, they did NOT "vaporize"...

There are published reports from recovery personnel describing finding bodies still strapped in seats. Then there's the DNA matched remains for all the passengers and flight crew. Your evidence to the contrary?


3) What became of all of the luggage and seat cushions that were supposed to have been on the "plane"? Again these did not vaporize into nothingness...

Again, the eyewitness reports by recovery personnel of passengers still strapped into their seats...


4) What indeed happened to the AIRCRAFT WINGS which were supposed to be full of jet fuel??? They did not punch holes through the building walls, they did not fall off from impact with the walls, they did not vaporize aginst the wall and leave any kind of marking,

Can't say for a fact (but then neither can you), but I'd suspect that being relatively full of fuel, they suffered just a tinch of damage when the fuel ignited - sound logical?


5) Why wont the FBI realease just ONE photograph or video clip that conclusively shows an airliner impacting the pentagon? Surely out of the 80+ confiscated recordings, there must be SOMETHING that doesn't prove that a missile or a drone actually impacted the pentagon. Or else we would have seen something other than 5 frames that DO NOT show an airliner about to impact the pentagon.

"Surely there must be..." Pure supposition on your part - not a lick of evidence to support your position. What's anyone supposed to do with that? And in case you didn't know (and I'm sure you didn't) more than 5 frames of video tape has been released - all showing precisely nothing conclusive.

Now answer this - How can you explain over 100 witnesses that described a jet hitting the building - including at least 5 who eyeballed it right in? Just give me a REASONABLE explanation - not too much to ask considering your requests is it?
edit on 25-6-2011 by userid1 because: spelliing




top topics



 
24
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join