[ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Photography Forum - Your Own Photos; Please Limit to 510 ... - Proclivities - Jun 23, 2018 - 3:54am
 
Trump - R_P - Jun 23, 2018 - 1:49am
 
illegal immigrants - kcar - Jun 23, 2018 - 12:15am
 
Things You Thought Today - Alexandra - Jun 23, 2018 - 12:08am
 
Live Music - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 11:47pm
 
M.A.G.A. - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 11:01pm
 
Name My Band - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 10:47pm
 
Regarding cats - BlueHeronDruid - Jun 22, 2018 - 8:11pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 8:04pm
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Jun 22, 2018 - 7:41pm
 
Trump Lies - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 7:28pm
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - Steely_D - Jun 22, 2018 - 6:08pm
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Antigone - Jun 22, 2018 - 2:40pm
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - 10180171 - Jun 22, 2018 - 1:59pm
 
What Makes You Cry :) ? - BlueHeronDruid - Jun 22, 2018 - 1:57pm
 
Great guitar faces - 10180171 - Jun 22, 2018 - 1:50pm
 
The Obituary Page - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 1:34pm
 
HomeKit HomePod AppleTV - Richard_Vignola - Jun 22, 2018 - 1:33pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - PoundPuppy - Jun 22, 2018 - 11:59am
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - PoundPuppy - Jun 22, 2018 - 11:49am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - SeriousLee - Jun 22, 2018 - 10:38am
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - Steely_D - Jun 22, 2018 - 9:47am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jun 22, 2018 - 9:25am
 
THE Question of Our Time - Red_Dragon - Jun 22, 2018 - 8:36am
 
Happy Solstice - oldviolin - Jun 22, 2018 - 8:24am
 
Old Time and Folk - rhahl - Jun 22, 2018 - 8:08am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jun 22, 2018 - 7:45am
 
Amazon Products (May Contain Spam) - Proclivities - Jun 22, 2018 - 6:48am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Proclivities - Jun 22, 2018 - 6:41am
 
New Music - sirdroseph - Jun 22, 2018 - 6:41am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - Proclivities - Jun 22, 2018 - 6:35am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - triskele - Jun 21, 2018 - 7:45pm
 
What makes you smile? - Antigone - Jun 21, 2018 - 4:45pm
 
Best Song Comments. - ptooey - Jun 21, 2018 - 2:26pm
 
Free Stuff & Swap - R_P - Jun 21, 2018 - 1:20pm
 
Middle-aged white Americans face declining life expectancy - R_P - Jun 21, 2018 - 1:10pm
 
Football, soccer, futbol, calcio... - aflanigan - Jun 21, 2018 - 12:40pm
 
Hockey + Fantasy Hockey - maryte - Jun 21, 2018 - 12:06pm
 
kurtster's quiet vinyl - SeriousLee - Jun 21, 2018 - 11:14am
 
Things that piss me off - spammer - Jun 21, 2018 - 10:19am
 
Advice? - Proclivities - Jun 21, 2018 - 10:11am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 21, 2018 - 9:10am
 
Marijuana: Baked News. - sirdroseph - Jun 21, 2018 - 1:36am
 
RP3 Beta Player - dlaumor - Jun 21, 2018 - 1:32am
 
World Music - R_P - Jun 20, 2018 - 8:34pm
 
Canada - jambo - Jun 20, 2018 - 7:07pm
 
Favorite Quotes - oldviolin - Jun 20, 2018 - 6:45pm
 
You might be getting old if...... - Coaxial - Jun 20, 2018 - 5:26pm
 
Delicacies: a..k.a.. the Gross Food forum - JrzyTmata - Jun 20, 2018 - 3:13pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 20, 2018 - 1:09pm
 
Progressive rock at morow.com - westslope - Jun 20, 2018 - 12:50pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Jun 20, 2018 - 11:58am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - BillG - Jun 20, 2018 - 10:09am
 
OUR CATS!! - Coaxial - Jun 20, 2018 - 6:02am
 
Play the Blues - rhahl - Jun 20, 2018 - 4:59am
 
Guns - R_P - Jun 19, 2018 - 5:26pm
 
Fake News*  ?  ! - R_P - Jun 19, 2018 - 5:20pm
 
Unattractive celebrities you'd date - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 19, 2018 - 4:29pm
 
Answers Only - aflanigan - Jun 19, 2018 - 3:11pm
 
What Makes You Sad? - Kev__P - Jun 19, 2018 - 2:01pm
 
Apple Watch Funtionality - pjjameso - Jun 19, 2018 - 1:43pm
 
Australia has Disappeared - Proclivities - Jun 19, 2018 - 10:51am
 
Even In The Quietest Moments - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 19, 2018 - 9:01am
 
Economix - R_P - Jun 18, 2018 - 11:38pm
 
Beer - Blackbirds - Jun 18, 2018 - 10:48pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jun 18, 2018 - 7:58pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - kurtster - Jun 18, 2018 - 5:48pm
 
Voter Registration Fraud - R_P - Jun 18, 2018 - 5:20pm
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 18, 2018 - 11:35am
 
Back to the 30's - R_P - Jun 17, 2018 - 4:37pm
 
Back to the 70's - R_P - Jun 17, 2018 - 2:33pm
 
What are you listening to now? - SeriousLee - Jun 17, 2018 - 8:51am
 
Cannot login with Android app - tortdog - Jun 17, 2018 - 6:06am
 
Google Home - jarro - Jun 17, 2018 - 1:38am
 
Celebrity Deaths - islander - Jun 16, 2018 - 1:40pm
 
Index » Regional/Local » Africa/Middle East » Iran Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45  Next
Post to this Topic
richskarma

richskarma Avatar



Posted: May 19, 2018 - 11:05pm

 R_P wrote:
The Phantom Menace: Fantasies, Falsehoods, and Fear-Mongering about Iran's Nuclear Program
(...) If these warnings are to be believed, Iran is only a few years away from unveiling a nuclear bomb...and has been for the past three decades. Fittingly, let's begin in 1984.

An April 24, 1984 article entitled "'Ayatollah' Bomb in Production for Iran" in United Press International referenced a Jane's Intelligence Defense Weekly report warning that Iran was moving "very quickly" towards a nuclear weapon and could have one as early as 1986.

In response, a U.S. Department of State spokesman was reportedly quick to point out the official government belief that "it would take at least two to three years to complete construction of the reactors at Bushehr," adding that the light water power reactors at the Bushehr plant "are not particularly well-suited for a weapons program." He also noted that "we have no evidence of Iranian construction of other facilities that would be necessary to separate plutonium from spent reactor fuel."

Two months later, on June 27, 1984, in an article entitled "Senator says Iran, Iraq seek N-Bomb," Minority Whip of the U.S. Senate Alan Cranston was quoted as claiming Iran was a mere seven years away from being able to build its own nuclear weapon.

In April 1987, the Washington Post published an article with the title "Atomic Ayatollahs: Just What the Mideast Needs – an Iranian Bomb," in which reporter David Segal wrote of the imminent threat of such a weapon.

The next year, in 1988, Iraq issued warnings that Tehran was at the nuclear threshold. (...) (...) (...)

And, Netanyahu warned the bomb is nearly ready ...     in 1992, 1996 and ...  https://theintercept.com/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-crying-wolf-iranian-nuclear-bomb/
 

R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: May 19, 2018 - 3:01pm

EU Blocks US Sanctions Against Iran

As had been previously reported, the European Commission on Friday enacted their “blocking statute,” which would forbid EU-based companies from complying with US sanctions against Iran. The statute also means EU courts will not recognize international claims related to those sanctions.

The commission aims to set the statute back into effect, but it won’t be formally done until at least 60 days from now. The US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal has a 90-day wind-down period, so theoretically there should be nothing to block until early August at any rate.

EU officials have been negotiating the matter all week, as an attempt to try to save the P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran after the US withdrew, and started reimplementing sanctions. EU leaders have agreed that the entire union will work together in protecting the deal.

Two major EU companies, Germany’s Siemens and France’s Total S.A. had previously indicated they’d stop Iran deals for fear of punishment from the US. With the law passed, they now have considerable protection, and would be violating EU law in refusing to do business over US sanction threats.

The US hasn’t yet responded to the move, but officials have indicated they are willing to directly target EU companies who keep trading with Iran. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says he expects EU nations to back the US in killing the deal.


R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: May 16, 2018 - 9:28am

The Phantom Menace: Fantasies, Falsehoods, and Fear-Mongering about Iran's Nuclear Program
(...) If these warnings are to be believed, Iran is only a few years away from unveiling a nuclear bomb...and has been for the past three decades. Fittingly, let's begin in 1984.

An April 24, 1984 article entitled "'Ayatollah' Bomb in Production for Iran" in United Press International referenced a Jane's Intelligence Defense Weekly report warning that Iran was moving "very quickly" towards a nuclear weapon and could have one as early as 1986.

In response, a U.S. Department of State spokesman was reportedly quick to point out the official government belief that "it would take at least two to three years to complete construction of the reactors at Bushehr," adding that the light water power reactors at the Bushehr plant "are not particularly well-suited for a weapons program." He also noted that "we have no evidence of Iranian construction of other facilities that would be necessary to separate plutonium from spent reactor fuel."

Two months later, on June 27, 1984, in an article entitled "Senator says Iran, Iraq seek N-Bomb," Minority Whip of the U.S. Senate Alan Cranston was quoted as claiming Iran was a mere seven years away from being able to build its own nuclear weapon.

In April 1987, the Washington Post published an article with the title "Atomic Ayatollahs: Just What the Mideast Needs – an Iranian Bomb," in which reporter David Segal wrote of the imminent threat of such a weapon.

The next year, in 1988, Iraq issued warnings that Tehran was at the nuclear threshold. (...) (...) (...)

R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Mar 7, 2018 - 2:47pm

New Findings on Clerical Involvement in the 1953 Coup in Iran
“Large Sums of Money” from U.S. Embassy Sent to “Influential People” in Tehran Prior to August 19, Declassified British Memo Alleges
Latest Declassification of Internal CIA History “The Battle for Iran” Adds More Detail to the Public Record
A passage from a recently declassified document on the 1953 coup in Iran alleges that senior Iranian clerics received “large sums of money” from U.S. officials in the days leading up to the August 19, 1953, overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq. The document is apparently British but was located by researchers in files at the U.S. National Archives. It is posted in full today for the first time by the nongovernmental National Security Archive, based at The George Washington University.

The September 2, 1953, British memorandum titled “Persia: Political Review of the Recent Crisis” first appeared in partially declassified form in 1989 in a volume of the State Department’s official Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series. However, that volume excised two key passages for security reasons. Tulane scholar Mark Gasiorowski and BBC correspondent Kambiz Fattahi each independently discovered the unexpurgated version at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland. (Both versions are available here for comparison.)

The exact role of the clergy in Mosaddeq’s ouster is one of the main unanswered questions still surrounding the decades-old coup. Previous accounts by American intelligence operatives and scholarly reconstructions have shown that the CIA planned to provide certain influential mullahs with funds to help organize street demonstrations, but it has never been known whether those payments reached their intended recipients – and if they did, whether the recipients knew the source. 

In general, eliciting facts and even reliable sourcing on the 1953 coup is notoriously difficult. The surviving record is far from complete, much of it having been destroyed; and in any case, contemporaneous reporting was spotty and frequently unreliable. This makes it a huge challenge to judge the accuracy of what is still available. In the case of the British memo posted today, even the State Department knows very little about it. A footnote in the FRUS volume reports there is no information about its source or how it reached the department. The most the FRUS editors could say was that it “resembles” a Foreign Office or British Embassy record.

From appearances, the memo, which may be a draft given the existence of several typographical errors, was probably written for a British government audience, though not one authorized to know the full details of the operation, often referred to by its British codename BOOT or its American codename TPAJAX. The document had Top Secret classification yet it omits any reference to U.K. assistance in planning the coup, which suggests its readers were not cleared for that information. It even avoids directly acknowledging other basic facts, such as the U.S. role in the operation, saying only that “sources” have pointed to Washington’s participation. The memo also does not name most of those sources, opting instead for euphemistic references to “reliable reports,” for example.

In recent years, new interpretations of the coup have called into question the accuracy of various U.S. archival records and first-person accounts, discounting the importance of the CIA and British intelligence role in the operation and casting doubt on any connection between Iranian clerics and the Western powers. The principal aim of the latter contention is to bolster the case that Iranians, including leading mullahs, acted essentially (if not entirely) on their own in bringing about Mosaddeq’s ouster. (...)


ScottFromWyoming
I eat pints
ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Pisces
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Apr 12, 2017 - 8:07am

Return of I'm a Dinner Jacket
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Aug 29, 2016 - 10:39am

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
Yes, but aside from the fact that imperial powers like the USA will use any pretext to start a war that it wants to start, this is different.

 
You see Iran, for a series of reasons, opposes the Israeli ethnic cleansing/nation building project.  For that reason, Iran cannot be America's friend.

Iran reminds us that Israel has a regional monopoly on nuclear weapons and the American commitment to non-proliferation is not credible.

Iranian troops could easily dislodge Dae'sh from Iraq but that is not consistent with American goals of settling the West Bank and Jerusalem.

As far as this incident reminding us that the USA has spent billions upon billions of dollars protecting the flow of oil out of the Strait of Hormuz, it should also remind us that American voters have always rejected the easy, ecologically responsible solution to energy security:  charge high excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel like the Nordic countries do.  

The Nordic countries are interesting because they typically have higher per capita incomes and a better quality of life than the USA.

The USA charges the lowest excise taxes on dirty petroleum products among the rich-OECD countries.  

It is interesting and rather alarming to what extent American conservatives, liberals and self-styled progressives are wed to the cheap energy entitlement — even if it means killing innocent civilians.   


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Aug 26, 2016 - 6:51am

Remember The Gulf of Tonkin?
R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Feb 27, 2016 - 10:42am

Iran elections: gains for Rouhani could help promote greater opening to the west

Early results in Iran’s hard-fought elections are showing strong gains for supporters of President Hassan Rouhani that could help promote greater opening to the west and limited political advances at home – and secure him a second term in office.

Friday’s polls for the parliament and the assembly of experts – its role is to choose the Islamic republic’s clerical supreme leader – were extended by nearly six hours due to a high turnout that was seen as likely to favour the reformist-moderate camp.

In one highly significant result, the former president, Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani – a key Rouhani ally – was leading the race for membership of the assembly in Tehran, the official IRNA news agency reported on Saturday.

The interior ministry said it had counted 33 million of 55 million votes by Saturday afternoon, though a final national tally is still unlikely to be known before Monday. The preliminary turnout figure was 60%, it said, less than the 70% that had been predicted.

Early returns showed that none of the competing factions would win a majority in the 290-seat majlis (parliament), but reformists and moderates appeared on track to win their strongest presence since 2004 at the expense of conservative “principalists”. Broader support in parliament would strengthen Rouhani’s hand – though under Iran’s hybrid political system key decisions still rest with the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Reports from the semi-official Fars and Mehr news agencies and a count conducted by the Associated Press showed the hardliners were the main losers of the vote. (...)

The result in Tehran – where, including the surrounding province, there are 36 majlis seats – will be closely watched because of its political importance. Nearly 5,000 candidates, including about 500 women, were competing.


sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Aug 25, 2015 - 12:00pm

I have actually changed my opinion on this so called deal, I support it.  Now, this has nothing to do with the deal itself, it is a joke as I said before we cannot stop Iran from eventually getting the bomb short of all out war and most sane people do not want that (unfortunately many of the insane are in positions of power{#Rolleyes}).  The reason I support it is that the Iraninan people support it because contrary to neocons and the Murica Toby Keith crowd, the Persians actually like our culture and long to reconcile our differences even some in the hardline government.  I have heard reports from Iran that the deal is all they want to talk about and are excited and more importantly emboldened to criticize their own hard line government now that they think we are trying to meet them half way.  This is far more valuable than centrifuges and inspections.  We are missing a golden opportunity to give the people of Iran hope which will hopefully light a fire under the resistance changing the government from within to something that is at least workable for a true relationship between our two countries.  {#Pray}  All those arguing for or against the deal based on the premise that Iran should never have nuclear weapons is completely missing the point imo.


sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Aug 12, 2015 - 6:02am


R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Aug 10, 2015 - 8:41am

 sirdroseph wrote:
That is a given and quite frankly irrelevant to stating this particular treaty has to be signed or we automatically have to capitulate to the neocons demands.  Have we really disintigrated that much that we have no choice anymore?  Sounds like the so called "progressives" are taking the same you are either with us or agin' us tone as the right wing neo cons and the with us is stopping Iran's nuclear weapon capability through treaties which is quite frankly not doable at this time.  US needs to change it's policy and behavior in regards to the Middle East as a whole, not push faux meaningless treaties for political points that change absolutely nothing regarding Iranian overall behaviour in opposing evertyhing the US stands for.  Until this is addressed, it is nothing but political posturing as Rome continues to burn.......
 
It's only irrelevant if you're willing to ignore the response of the (American) hardliners to the Iran agreement.

Uhm, it's been like that for a while... At least since 2003 (if not 2001). Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and as always the promise of the ultimate bellicose wet dream of them all, Iran.

Neocons are active in both parties. Hillary is just as hawkish.

Even Trump, the consummate bully, claims he would have gotten a better deal.
sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Aug 10, 2015 - 8:24am

 RichardPrins wrote:

You're conveniently leaving out that some of it is clearly a response to hawkish hardliners uttering threats.

 

That is a given and quite frankly irrelevant to stating this particular treaty has to be signed or we automatically have to capitulate to the neocons demands.  Have we really disintigrated that much that we have no choice anymore?  Sounds like the so called "progressives" are taking the same you are either with us or agin' us tone as the right wing neo cons and the with us is stopping Iran's nuclear weapon capability through treaties which is quite frankly not doable at this time.  US needs to change it's policy and behavior in regards to the Middle East as a whole, not push faux meaningless treaties for political points that change absolutely nothing regarding Iranian overall behaviour in opposing everything the US supports.  Until this is addressed, it is nothing but political posturing as Rome continues to burn....... 


R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Aug 10, 2015 - 8:19am

 sirdroseph wrote:
The fact that the supporters of the Iran nuclear deal are stating that the only alternative to the treaty is war is alarming to say the least, these are the antiwar people??  How about this alternative; do nothing in regards to sanctions or treaties and stop our damaging, meddling Middle East policy that has been ongoing since the late 40s regarding Israel and the support of despotic dictators who have little regard for their own people? Even Bernie Sanders is pushing this ridiculous notion. This particular deal or war?  That's it, huh?   Who made up the rules regarding who is allowed or not allowed nuclear weapons anyway?{#Rolleyes}
 
You're conveniently leaving out that some of it is clearly a response to hawkish hardliners uttering threats.
sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Aug 10, 2015 - 7:57am

The fact that the supporters of the Iran nuclear deal are stating that the only alternative to the treaty is war is alarming to say the least, these are the antiwar people??  How about this alternative; do nothing in regards to sanctions or treaties and stop our damaging, meddling Middle East policy that has been ongoing since the late 40s regarding Israel and the support of despotic dictators who have little regard for their own people? Even Bernie Sanders is pushing this ridiculous notion. This particular deal or war?  That's it, huh?   Who made up the rules regarding who is allowed or not allowed nuclear weapons anyway?{#Rolleyes}

Edit: for those who genuinely believe this deal prevents Iran from having a nuclear weapon, so sorry.  Iran is laughing at us now, they got their cake (removal of sanctions) and get to eat it too (continuation of nuclear weapon development).  My point is so what?  MAD has worked for years and even with North Korea, do we really think that Iranians are that hell bent on Israel's destruction that they will sacrifice themselves?  The whole thing is a joke.  

Proclivities
“If you can't control your peanut butter, you can't expect to control your life.
Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Aries
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Jul 28, 2015 - 12:41pm

 sirdroseph wrote:
I just think it is funny the Ayatollah is on Twitter!{#Lol}

 
You should see his restaurant reviews on Yelp.  The guy's merciless, especially when it comes to someone not making fried okra "just right".
sirdroseph
Endeavor to Perservere
sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Sagittarius
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Jul 28, 2015 - 11:55am

I just think it is funny the Ayatollah is on Twitter!{#Lol}

Tweet from Iran leader's account seems to show Obama with a gun to his head



R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 22, 2015 - 11:59am

I'll huff and I'll puff...
R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 4, 2015 - 5:12pm

On (more) war propaganda in that liberal rag...
The Factual Errors in John Bolton's "Bomb Iran!" Op-Ed in the New York Times – and Why You Should Care - The Intercept

Last week, at a crucial moment in nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, the New York Times published an op-ed by former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton titled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” As I pointed out at the time, the Times accidentally undermined him by linking one of his key claims to an explanation of why that claim was wrong. After I asked about it, the Times changed the link.

Bolton’s many other factual mistakes, detailed below, have also not been corrected — on top of which, Bolton failed to make a relevant disclosure about his paid work for a group that advocates the overthrow of the Iranian regime. It’s worth dwelling on these problems a bit given that Bolton’s perspective has a significant constituency in Congress — which could still derail the accord the White House is closing in on with the Iranians. (...)

Let's also not forget that anyone who'd dare say the same criminal nonsense about the US of A would likely end up on next Tuesday's kill list...
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Libra
Chinese Yr: Dragon


Posted: Mar 26, 2015 - 4:47pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:



 
You do know that Rush Limbaugh is behind Paul Shanklin, eh ?
R_P
Oînk, oînk, OÎNK!
R_P Avatar



Posted: Mar 26, 2015 - 4:33pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
 
{#Mrgreen}
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45  Next