Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Paving the way for a dictatorship?

Paving the way for a dictatorship?
Thread Tools
Rumor
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 07:35 PM
 
New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power

Unless I am reading this wrong, this is a bit frightening. It will allow the President complete control over any and all government activities until the "emergency" is declared over. Also worrisome, is the vague definitition of an emergency.

"any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."
This bypasses Congress and the National Emergency Act, which requires that such proclamation "shall immediately be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register."

A Congressional Research Service study notes the National Emergency Act sets up Congress as a balance empowered to "modify, rescind, or render dormant" such emergency authority if Congress believes the president has acted inappropriately.

But the new directive appears to supersede the National Emergency Act by creating the new position of national continuity coordinator without any specific act of Congress authorizing the position.

More can be found here and here.

This flew right under the radar of the most large news organizations. How could that happen?
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 07:37 PM
 
Yep. The US is screwed.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 07:46 PM
 
I saw that a few days ago and wondered about it as well. I certainly hope Bush doesn't think he can get away with this, if he feels like trying to act on it.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 07:48 PM
 
Given how congress and the media are rolling over to get their tummy patted, I'm sure he feels he can get away with it.
     
Rumor  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 07:56 PM
 
I wasn't going to point the finger at Bush. This directive could sit unused for years before it sees light.

However, it is already signed, sealed and delivered. So in effect, he has "already got away this", it just hasn't seen use yet.
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 08:59 PM
 
Absolutely. Bush is frightening on so many levels, but any President with unfettered power is likely to abuse it sooner or later.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 09:58 PM
 
You know what brought this on, don't you?

All the hand-wringing and accusations that Bush didn't do enough before and following Katrina, while he followed the laws requiring Nagin and Blanco to formally request assistance.

So now the problem is remedied and the President has the power to step in and avoid all the accusations Bush endured.

Be careful what you wish for when you ask for government to do more for you.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 10:00 PM
 
Yes. There is no phrase in the English Language more frightening than "I'm from The Government. I'm here to help."
     
Rumor  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 10:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
You know what brought this on, don't you?

All the hand-wringing and accusations that Bush didn't do enough before and following Katrina, while he followed the laws requiring Nagin and Blanco to formally request assistance.

So now the problem is remedied and the President has the power to step in and avoid all the accusations Bush endured.

Be careful what you wish for when you ask for government to do more for you.
There is quite a difference between cutting through a little red tape to help provide natural disaster relief sooner and bypassing everything to lay numerous powers in the hand of one individual.
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
faragbre967
Senior User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe, MI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2007, 10:57 PM
 
Ya, I'm gonna go with vmarks on this one. This is not some conspiracy to seize power as a dictator; it's to make sure there's effectiveness from the federal government when dealing with natural or unnatural disasters like Katrina or 9/11. It would make things smoother and probably save lives to not have to go through any bureaucracy whatsoever during a disaster.

That said I think it's very important that Congress be required by law to review the use of such power within 48 hours and to then decide whether the President should be allowed to continue wielding such control. And just to make sure after it gets through Congress it should go through the Supreme Court to make sure that no one is losing constitutional rights without justified due process.
...
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 12:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Rumor View Post
There is quite a difference between cutting through a little red tape to help provide natural disaster relief sooner and bypassing everything to lay numerous powers in the hand of one individual.
You're not supposed to point out the obvious here
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 12:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
You know what brought this on, don't you?

All the hand-wringing and accusations that Bush didn't do enough before and following Katrina, while he followed the laws requiring Nagin and Blanco to formally request assistance.

So now the problem is remedied and the President has the power to step in and avoid all the accusations Bush endured.

Be careful what you wish for when you ask for government to do more for you.
You keep right on believing that.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 12:17 AM
 
Read it carefully and it is an executive order response to a very massive catastrophe such as a nuclear attack. Since there won't be an attack like that any time soon or ever, it's safe to say Bush won't be around if there's ever a need to execute this legislation.

But hey, let's have another field day attacking a Texan village idiot.

Bush is frightening on so many levels
Unbelievable how anyone can find him frightening. As for rule by decree or dictat, Bush has exercised his power of veto less than any US President in the last 30 years so it's not easy to pin undemocratic behavior on him.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 12:57 AM
 
At least you got the part about the idiot in Texas right.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Captain Obvious
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 01:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
Read it carefully and it is an executive order response to a very massive catastrophe such as a nuclear attack.
You assume most of the people here read things written at above a 6th grade reading level. Note the links posted are to blogs and sham news outlets who pretend to have real reporters with degrees in journalism. The actual text of what's being talked about is far too "wordy" for most people here.
They lose attention after the first paragraph so they have to rely on someone else to tell them what it means.

National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive
( Last edited by Captain Obvious; May 31, 2007 at 01:24 AM. )

Barack Obama: Four more years of the Carter Presidency
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 01:22 AM
 
That is very clearly NOT what it says. "any incident, regardless of location, that results in ... disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."
A stock market crash would do.
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 01:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by peeb View Post
That is very clearly NOT what it says. "any incident, regardless of location, that results in ... disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment (WTF, peeb), economy, or government functions."
A stock market crash would do.
You cut out the part about mass casualties.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 01:36 AM
 
What's interesting about this is that George W. Bush is apparently the first U. S. President to figure out that, up until this directive, there have never been plans in place to cover all these emergencies and contingencies. Maybe he's not the village idiot after all.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 02:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by KarlG View Post
What's interesting about this is that George W. Bush is apparently the first U. S. President to figure out that, up until this directive, there have never been plans in place to cover all these emergencies and contingencies. Maybe he's not the village idiot after all.
He is a village idiot, and even if John Kerry were in charge right now there would be no difference. FEMA and Executive Orders have been around for ages and have been moving towards cutting down bureacracy and red tape for a good while now.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 04:43 AM
 
Oh yeah, John Kerry might have done something!

Hey, and Clinton got a blowjob!



Stick to the ****ing topic. Neither Kerry nor anybody else have anything to do here.
     
Cipher13
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 04:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
You know what brought this on, don't you?

All the hand-wringing and accusations that Bush didn't do enough before and following Katrina, while he followed the laws requiring Nagin and Blanco to formally request assistance.

So now the problem is remedied and the President has the power to step in and avoid all the accusations Bush endured.

Be careful what you wish for when you ask for government to do more for you.
Hardly... this is a mad grasp for power.
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Neither Kerry nor anybody else have anything to do here.
Yes they do. They all support the expansion and amendment of the Executive Orders and FEMA grew more powerful under Clinton than Bush. This paving the way for dictatorship idea is ludicrous.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
You cut out the part about mass casualties.
This is what it says in the original document:

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, OR DISRUPTION severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;
Caps and emphasis mine.

Yes, that would mean a stock market crash would do. "Mass casualties" are NOT prerequisite to declaring a catastrophic emergency.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
Yes they do. They all support the expansion and amendment of the Executive Orders and FEMA grew more powerful under Clinton than Bush. This paving the way for dictatorship idea is ludicrous.
Absolutely not.

It is completely irrelevant whether you personally believe Bush could or would abuse this. Fact is, the potential is there, and if it's there, somebody WILL abuse it, whether next month or 150 years down the line.
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Absolutely not.

It is completely irrelevant whether you personally believe Bush could or would abuse this. Fact is, the potential is there, and if it's there, somebody WILL abuse it, whether next month or 150 years down the line.
They won't. I'll stick to that position because I know how much Americans value their freedoms. It would be an impossible task for any politician who wanted to be a dictator to convince any government department, political party or business elite that he should rule by decree. Not only will he have to fear Americans taking up arms en masse but he will have to fear every person he thought of as an ally or friend. Americans from the richest to the poorest aren't going to give up their freedom for dictatorship under any circumstances.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:42 AM
 
It's nice that you "know how much Americans value their freedoms."

It's rather shocking how willingly and freely they have been giving them up, though, and if you look at people like Buckaroo, it's quite obvious that many have no idea what that "freedom" actually means or demands from them, and would sooner rescind it than assume responsibility for it.
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
It's nice that you "know how much Americans value their freedoms."

It's rather shocking how willingly and freely they have been giving them up
They haven't. What's rather shocking is your inability to read Rice's statement on Rendition that you linked to.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 06:33 AM
 
Wrong thread, OW.
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 06:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Wrong thread, OW.
Don't care. You spread lies so now you're going to be chased down.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 08:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
You cut out the part about mass casualties.
I did, because the fact that there is an OR in there means that mass causalities are not required.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 08:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
They haven't.
Wow - where have you been the last 6 years? Americans have been handing over their freedoms and constitutional protections so fast it's hard to keep track.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 08:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
Don't care. You spread lies so now you're going to be chased down.
That's one of the stupidest things you've posted. And I have read a lot of stupid things you've posted.
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 08:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by peeb View Post
That's one of the stupidest things you've posted. And I have read a lot of stupid things you've posted.
Your opinion (any idiot can post "Hey you are stupid because I said so"), and since you spread lies about government policies your opinions don't hold much water.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 08:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
Your opinion (any idiot can post "Hey you are stupid because I said so"), and since you spread lies about government policies your opinions don't hold much water.
OK, I notice that you have not responded to any of the issues of substance that you've been proved wrong on, but I'll bite. I'm calling you on that particular piece of horseshit. Which 'lies' about government policy have I spread?
( Last edited by peeb; May 31, 2007 at 08:45 AM. )
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 08:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
As for rule by decree or dictat, Bush has exercised his power of veto less than any US President in the last 30 years so it's not easy to pin undemocratic behavior on him.
You don't think the fact that for 6 years he had a Republican controlled congress had anything to do with that?
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
You don't think the fact that for 6 years he had a Republican controlled congress had anything to do with that?
Not really. The democrats were hardly different. They did after all vote for the war too.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 11:28 AM
 
Well gee, if the only thing Bush had to worry about vetoing is support for a war he started no wonder...
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 11:33 AM
 
They did vote for the war, but you really don't think a compliant congress reduced the number of vetoes a president will use?
     
Obi Wan's Ghost
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 11:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by peeb View Post
They did vote for the war, but you really don't think a compliant congress reduced the number of vetoes a president will use?

I can't answer right now. I'm looking for some white people to blame my problems on. And some Jews too.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 11:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
I can't answer right now. I'm looking for some white people to blame my problems on. And some Jews too.
Ah yes. Every time you are confronted with facts, change the subject with an offensive remark.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 11:38 AM
 
Wow, what a total dodge.
     
Rumor  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 01:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Captain Obvious View Post
You assume most of the people here read things written at above a 6th grade reading level. Note the links posted are to blogs and sham news outlets who pretend to have real reporters with degrees in journalism. The actual text of what's being talked about is far too "wordy" for most people here.
They lose attention after the first paragraph so they have to rely on someone else to tell them what it means.

National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive
The first two links had direct links to the White House website. Without bringing any points of your own and only making derogatory comments about others, did you even read the directive?

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
Yes they do. They all support the expansion and amendment of the Executive Orders and FEMA grew more powerful under Clinton than Bush. This paving the way for dictatorship idea is ludicrous.
Hence the question mark at the end.

Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Absolutely not.

It is completely irrelevant whether you personally believe Bush could or would abuse this. Fact is, the potential is there, and if it's there, somebody WILL abuse it, whether next month or 150 years down the line.
As I mentioned before.

Originally Posted by peeb View Post
They did vote for the war, but you really don't think a compliant congress reduced the number of vetoes a president will use?
Agreed. Why veto something if it is within the same mindset.

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost View Post
I can't answer right now. I'm looking for some white people to blame my problems on. And some Jews too.
You are not as agile as you think you are.
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
moodymonster
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:03 PM
 
I'd have thought those kind of powers have been around longer than Bush has - he's just renewing them.

Back in the eighties the US gov't did rex 84, for example.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:11 PM
 
Au contraire.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:14 PM
 
Execute Executive Order 66.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
moodymonster
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:34 PM
 
I remember reading something a little while ago about Alberto Gonzales being very interested in the UK's offical secret act with regard to press control.

A British civil servant who attended told me “it was quite amazing really. Gonzales was obsessed with the Official Secrets Act. In particular, he wanted to know exactly how it was used to block newspapers and broadcasters from running news stories derived from official secrets and how it could be used to criminalise persons who had no formal duty to maintain secrets. He saw it as a panacea for his problems: silence the press. Then you can torture and abuse prisoners and what you will—without fear of political repercussions. It was the easy route to dealing with the Guantánamo dilemma. Don't close down Guantánamo. Close down the press. We were appalled by it.”
"The Plot Against the First Amendment" by Scott Horton (Harper's Magazine)

so they could enact these kind of things and silence anyone who tried to report it. You'd never know until they wanted you.
     
moodymonster
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:36 PM
 
with regard to the original topic though, I recall reading something about Tommy Franks (ret. US Gen.) saying how a major catastrophe would mark the end this experiment in democracy.
     
peeb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 05:37 PM
 
Freedom in it's purest form. I really believe the current administration views democracy as a temporary thing that the nation is experimenting with, and that can be shut down. They've certainly done pretty well.
     
Rumor  (op)
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 06:14 PM
 
I received this in an email the other day regarding Democracy.


About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government."



"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."



"From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."



"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years."



"During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage"



Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, S t. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:



Number of States won by: Gore : 19; Bush : 29

Square miles of land won by: Gore : 580,000; Bush : 2,427,000

Population of counties won by: Gore : 127 million; Bush : 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore : 13.2; Bush : 2.1



Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."



Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
moodymonster
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2007, 06:36 PM
 
so I'm guessing two states went to independents?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum 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
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:39 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,