salim Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Once they take the oath of office they are no longer servants of those who voted for them. When they take their chairs they must become bigger people and serve the nation as a whole. UIA has not done this I don't know how you get to this conclusion. May be based on the westren anti Iraqi freedom media or the continouing unproved allegations by some Iraqi sunni factionist political figures who try to mix papers after the real success of Iraqi army and police in fighting Sadimists and Alqaeda. Figures and facts deny this false accusation. Today, 80% of high officers of Interior ministery are sunnis. The minister of defence is sunni arab from Alnbar province, more that 50% of high ranking officers in the Aramy are sunnis. The army is controlling the west baghdad security. In forming the Jafaree current governemnt, the Shia and kurds waited for more than three months so that Sunni arab , though not have appropriat seats in the national council, to come up with their rep to the governement. I just want to draw your attention to some thing.. Before the Samaraa explosions, the ministry of interior was the main Iraqi appuratus to fight the Qaeda and Sadamist terrorist. We saw so much accusation and propaganda against the ministrey that was proven to be un true. then the Mehdi Army got his share in fighting back the killers of Iraqi people. We noticed same media and same figures turn to propaganda against it forgetting the minstery of interior. I think the idea is not if you Shia or not , it is related to if you are active in fighting the killer or not. I personally anti Alsader and never liked his attitude and radical mentatlity and used to say that this is another Shia talaban, but when my family and people get threatened by Qaeda thugs and their criminal sick mentality, and when the American fail and Iraqi government blocked to protect me from the every day killing and torturing, I find it much appropriat to let MY bad guys deal with the thugs as far as they don't show uncontrolled criminal activities. president Bush in his speach last week agreed that local poeple gurading their community might be a good idea. I think that it was the case in many other experiments, so why not in the Shia neighborhood? Happened in Alnbar province froming the tribal miltia , happened in kurdistan with Beshmeca miltia , so why not in alsader city which is facing the most brutal attack by alqaeda and sadamists ever known before. I fully agree with your point that Pm position should be for all Iraqis though , and that is why I think alawee is not suitable for the possition. at leat 50% of population thought he is against them! However i don't think it is the Pm and who is , it is more about the program and the constitution and the political process. Something that is realy happening and that is why you see much noise, just to diverage people from the big acheivments that Iraqis are doing with the great support and commitment of GREAT nation. I am sure that freedom lover in Iraq and USA will prevail and I am sure that we are just about to see it happening. let us wait and see, the history of the last three years great achievments proved that.. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/30/internat...ast/30iraq.html Beleaguered Premier Warns U.S. to Stop Interfering in Iraq's Politics By EDWARD WONG Published: March 30, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moron99 Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 The problem as I see it ... all those baathi and saddamme who used to live in control of money, politics, and power are being locked outside. There are many. In order to terrorize an entire country and operate a secret police with so many eyes you will need one in one hundred who are willing to be part of the oppression. In Iraq that is 250,000 people. Then for a government to survive it must have the tacit cooperation of at least 5%. That's another 1,250,000 million people. By locking them out the government is turning 1.5million against it. The queda could never have operated in Iraq if there were not Iraqis helping them. Those Iraqi who helped them did not (do not) see a future in democracy. There will be no peace until the cost of waging war is less attractive than the rewards of participation. Peace will be found more quickly by increasing the reward as well as the cost. Specifically, peace requires finding a way to bring the 1.5million baathi/saddamee back into your family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Moron99 I think you might be missing a central point. The question is not about ellemenating bathists, they are there all getiing their jobs and for those couple of thousands who had a hig rank of Samamist miltia "party" ,they were not even prosecuted for their crimes, they got their retirment "which by the way very appealing to Iraqi standards" . The question if we put the security files in their hands as Alawee is looking for under the Umberalla of being "experts".. Today The interior minster had very lenghty interview with Aliraqia TV talking about the Sadamist. He said that they cuaght a general in the police who is cooperating with terrorists. That general was a former Sadists officer who was returen to duty without checking by Alwaee governemnt. He said that the minstery expled 3000 police personals , 2200 of them on charges with links to terrorists. He said that there are other 4000 personals who also under suspect of having cooperation with terorists , but the ministery is blocked from doning any thing toward them because of sever pressure that this could be explained as a sectarian cleansing. I will comment on this interview later. You just had said that Alqaeda couldn't work freely without a help from Iraqis. Who are these Iraqis, I don't think that there is a doubts that they are former Security and Sadamist miltia members. So how it is possible to open the doors for those criminals to get hold of security files that is supposed to fight terrorists. In USA the deal to manage the ports with A UAE based company was cancelled just because there is a concern that there is some Emaratees who have sympathy with Alqaeda,. I don't want to argue this, but to give example of how a matured democracy deals with such concern. Just Imagine that a suadi comapny is managing USA security!!! Aljaafree today on a news confrence was calling to non secterian fugures to fill the position of the security ministers. That was the call of The EIU which was refused by Tawafuc sunni who want the security file under their appointee! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03/30/carroll/index.html Carroll walked unharmed into Sunni party office Ex-hostage says she was 'treated very well' during 3-month ordeal Thursday, March 30, 2006; Posted: 12:59 p.m. EST (17:59 GMT) Indeed this would raise more questions.. Why the kidnappers wanted to give previlages to islamic part rather than The Sunni scholar association this time. They kidnapping happened near to a Islamic party center, and the realse was to them. I think the kidnappers might be willing to point to the aprty as an assosiat to the terrorist. The Islamic party had palyed a key role in bringing the Sunni Arab to the political process, some thing that might make the sadamists and the Qaeda so ungry about.. It is just an idea that i have no evidence of. Congratulations to Carol and her family. Let us pray the Iraqi people get their freedom from the big kidnapping by the terrorists.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moron99 Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Salim, I respect your opinion enormously. You have shown great insight and understanding for as long as I have been reading your comments. But I have expressed myself poorly. Alawi is gone. He is not the right man for the job because he would alienate too many shia. The Shia are also equal as individuals and most important as a group. Alawi is not the right man for the job. But neither is Jafari. What I am meaning to say is that the UIA is not being responsive to the needs of all Iraqis and therefore not living up to their duty to the nation. Once the election is finished their loyalty is to Iraq first and those who voted for them second. Democracy does not work if leaders are more loyal to their party than to their nation. If I were to be specific then I would say that most Sunni arab do not have adequate representation in government. The sunni political parties are too closely tied to the old money and the old power brokers. That leaves 75% of the sunni arab having no one to speak on their behalf. It is the government's responsibility to protect them irregardless of voting numbers. UIA won the election and so it is now their job. If they truly want a democratic nation then they need to find a way to bring in that 75% ... even if it means sleeping with the devil. There will be no peace until that 75% trusts the government and wants it to succeed and prosper. When they feel that way, then they will start to report anyone who helps the terrorists. I believe it is the shortest road to peace and I believe that it means forgiving those who supported the baathi. The other road is to beat them into submission and then after they are peaceful reward them with representation. That will be a long and violent road. As I said earlier, if Iraqi choose that road then I'm not so sure that I support America spending more of her blood and money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Moron99 Thanks your patience reading my comments. I think such dialogs are great bidirectional learning channel. I don't think the issue with comming Iraqi governement is related to the person but to the program. Let me explain. I didn't mean that Alawee as person is not good for the position, I ment his agenda. I personally was a great fan of Alawee in first period, you can scan Baghdadee to see my comments. At that time with the absolute vacum of constitution and government berocratic structure, there was a need to some one to bring calm to baathist and sunni Arab that the new Iraq is not agaist them but just the criminals who commited crimes. Alawee was a right person though there was a mistakes that any one can run into. As for the Jaafree.. Let me be clear. I never voted for the coalition, I never thought Aljaafree as the right one for the post. However I think with all achieved by Iraqis and their supporters is simply the democratic architecture of the new Iraq and it's constitution. We need to stick to it.. According to the constitution the Coalition should come up with a candidate and the Perliment is the only body to accept or refuse.. Any one of us has idea about who should rule, but we need to agree to one unified mechanism.. That is why I fully respect the right the coalition to chose and other to refuse. As for your great detail of right way to deal with sunni arab issue, I would fully agree. there is only one small comment. I think the current crises and slow in the process is because all parties are working hard to fullfil this strategy of getting all on board.. I assume ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Today there was another milestone to cross. the the security file and it's managment.. After three days of very hard discussions, the political leaders came up with a final agreement that specify the details of the security file and how to manage it. there was an announcement about the agreement on Aliraqia, where the PM is the one to head the committe in addition to his debuty. Both Sunni and Shia reps agreed that what is left to to nominate the minsters, which should be another very hard milestone. A Shia Coalition member Qasim Daoud had called for Aljaafree to step down as a sign of unity. Dr. Qasim is a secular politician and ran the security minister position in Alawee government. Immediately another Coalition members , especially those of Aldawa and Alsader parties, had a hard statement that Aljaafre is still the only candidate. Nueclear scientist and head of non-patisim bloc in the Coalition, Dr. Alshahristani, announced that Dr. Qasim was expressing his personal opinion and this has nothing to do with the bloc that Dr. Qasim is blonging to. In very interstesting on Aliraqia, a very prominant leader of the SRCI and member of the perliment Dr. Akram Alhakim , told that he think others should respect any opinion but the coalition is still considering all options. he said that such calls should be internal and through the agreed mainframes inside the coalition.. My reading to his talk was that he is encouraging such call but due the sensativity of the issue he tried to be in the middel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airedale Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Now that Jill has left those criminal hostage taker gangs, she is saying they forced her to make statements against the US Jill Carroll's Statement ....... .... During my last night of captivity, my captors forced me to participate in a propaganda video. They told me they would be released if I cooperated. I was living in a threatening environment, under their control, and I wanted to go home alive. So I agreed. Things that I was forced to say while captive are now being taken by some as an accurate reflection of my personal views. They are not. The people who kidnapped me and murdered Alan Enwiya are criminals, at best. They robbed Alan of his life and devastated his family. They put me, my family and my friends _ all those around the world _ who have prayed so fervently for my release _ through a horrific experience. I was, and remain, deeply angry with the people who did this. I also gave a TV interview to the Iraqi Islamic Party shortly after my release. The party had promised me the interview would never be broadcast or aired on television, and they broke their word. At any rate, fearing retribution from my captors, I did not speak freely. Out of fear I said I wasn't threatened. In fact, I was threatened many times. Also, at least two false statements about me have been widely aired: One, that I refused to travel and cooperate with the U.S. military and two, that I refused to discuss my captivity with U.S. officials. Again, neither statement is true. ...... http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/01/D8GNF0B00.html More at the link. I wonder how many western MSM organizations will want to interview her after she renounced her criminal gang hostage takers? Maybe Jill will never speak out or invited by western media to do so after this last comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 I also gave a TV interview to the Iraqi Islamic Party shortly after my release. The party had promised me the interview would never be broadcast or aired on television, and they broke their word. At any rate, fearing retribution from my captors, I did not speak freely. Out of fear I said I wasn't threatened. In fact, I was threatened many times. I found this a non responsible act by the islamic party to take benefit of others suffering. It might be due the surprise and they want to clear their responsibilty. Any how they should air that video. it was a shame. I noticed CNN/US local version in it's reporting today, never mention Caroll's comment regarding the last video arranged by the islamic party while they were very detailed yesterday about that video.! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airedale Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 I also gave a TV interview to the Iraqi Islamic Party shortly after my release. The party had promised me the interview would never be broadcast or aired on television, and they broke their word. At any rate, fearing retribution from my captors, I did not speak freely. Out of fear I said I wasn't threatened. In fact, I was threatened many times. I found this a non responsible act by the islamic party to take benefit of others suffering. It might be due the surprise and they want to clear their responsibilty. Any how they should air that video. it was a shame. I noticed CNN/US local version in it's reporting today, never mention Caroll's comment regarding the last video arranged by the islamic party while they were very detailed yesterday about that video.! What I saw on western TV was a "silent shot" of who I suspect was an Iraqi Islamic Party official. What he was saying to her was never translated. He was opening up some sort of "gift" or "letter of recognition" and presenting it to her. I think she accepted it but the little exchange was never explained in the CNN or western MSM. Anybody know what that presentation of a gift was all about ? I think the party official really wanted the recorded presentation as a personal photo op for future political gain. What was the full text of the meeting ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 I didn't have the chance to watch that speach on Islamic party tv channe, but a friend told me that Mr. Alhashimi told reproters that Ms. caroll said that her kidnappers were very kind and they were "honest kidnappers" As he put it in Arabic "Khatifeen Umanaa". he also thank them for responding to his calls. Indeed this appreviation of "honest kidnappers" is irresponsible by a political leader of the Moslem Brotherhood party of Iraq. These are criminals who already killed her translator cold blodly. It was a new description that I never heard about. If she is innocent then why to kidnap her and kill her translator. ? There was some thing I failed to analyzie though. Ms. caroll was kidnapped after doing an interview with head of tawafuc sunni group , Dr. Adnan Aldulaimee, and near by to an islamic party well gaurded center. Then to be released to center of same party . I agree with Airdale that this was expected to be what might be considered as a political gain. It was an insult to Dr. Dulaimee in first place. Then on that political gain show, dr. dulaime not attending. Dr. hashimee was either brought on fly or was ready for. I think Islamic party had put themself in a very hard position and this incident might raise more question about the type of relations that their leaders keeping wit the "honest kinappers" ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hogan Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 I get more insight reading one days worth of your analysis about Iraq, Salim, than I get in a whole year watching our MSM. Thanks for your efforts. With the commitment to Iraq I see from insightful Iraqi's like yourself, I'm confident Iraq will be the most successful and proudest nation in the Arab world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 A friend of mine asked me why I am not so worried about civil war threat in Iraq. It was a question that might go both ways, either I don't care about Iraq or that I really don't think this a real possible scenario YET. While my personal commitment to follow Iraq daily progress might be convincing that I am not in the first category, what about the second. I believe that the civil war is a possible but it is not the right description to put the current situation under.. Why? First of all a civil war can happen any where. In Ireland between Protestant and Catholic. In USA between Afro american and whitees, In Quebec between french and british decedents . In egypt between Copts and Muslims. In pakistan In India , In China, Russia , any place you name it. The issue is always not about the possibility but about if there is enough public driving force to ignite and then naturally maintain such war. In Current Iraq there were a very huge efforts by some regional and international organizations to ignite such war.. However the natural force to maintain it is not available. The ALQaeda sick mind did all what any body can imagine to spark it, the western liberal propaganda harmonized by some Pan Arab factionist media tried their best to politicize such conflict. However there is no one sign till now that Iraqis are responding to such campaign on any measure.. all what is happening is that alqaeda operatives , supported by Sadamists, used some sunni arab factionist fears to legitimize the killing and terrorizing of Iraqi shia . Faced by a limited response by mainly Almehdi Army personals in areas of contact to protect Shia community after the large fail of the American and government to protect people. They attacked some who are thought to be terrorist or linked to .. There is still the big question, What is the percentage of alqaeda sympathizers in Iraq among sunni Arab? The other question is about if such fears reaction by Shia could be extended to include sunnis in general? To answer these two questions , let me claim that Wahabee sect, the qaeda nurturing school of thought, had never penetrated the Iraqi sunni community at any significant scale. That is very clear during secular saddam era who fought that ideology at the beginning then turn to allow it at later times and it is the case after the fall of the regime.. Any one can tour around sunni mosques in Iraq to find that there is very limited influence of wahabism thoughts ..Most Sunni Iraqis are hanafees, which are considered by salafees Jihadist as Kafirs , same as Shia. Indeed the main two mosques of Sunni Iraqis are the mosque of Abo Hanifa in Adhamia and Al Kailani in central baghdad, both of them where build beside the shrines of prominent Imams, some thing wahabees consider non Islamic. That is why they had attacked shia shrines in Kerbala and Najaf in the nineteen century and that is why they keep refusing shia calls and rights to rebuild the destroyed Shia imams shrines in Almadina in Saudi Arabia till today.. However the Sadamist Qaeda coalition had created a different short term mechanism that encouraged some Sunni arab to support Alqaeda missions in what they thought fighting back to the Shia domination.. But once they found such support had never succeeded to stop Iraqis and to be going to cost them the ultimate price of losing every thing by igniting a civil war in a place where they are minority, they immediately distant them self from that coalition and started other ways. Encouraged by the American smart policy of showing open hands that went so far to appoint a sunni Muslim American at the highest position in American embassy. In his letter Zarqawee was regretting such stand by majority of sunni Iraqis calling them "Murjia" that follow their easy materialistic interests. As a Jordanian he was very surprised by type of Sunni Iraqi mentality of conciliation with their cousins Shia Arab.. Coming from a narrow mind nomadic style society he was unable to realize that the Iraqi Arab society had ran into its own chance of historical hegemony despite all efforts by sunni state policies of keep the two sides a part, specially during the last thirty years. Indeed Alqaeda policy went to the worse of the interests of the Sunni Arab. It weakened their case and showed them as terrorists, it encouraged the shia arab widely divided groups to unite. On the other side, the fear feelings among Shia was not directed toward Sunni's , it was always toward those wahabist who legitimize Shia killings. There is no even one call by any Shia political or religious figure to retaliate on the Sunni broad bases. Indeed it is considered as a shame among Iraqis to call to other side by it's name. Iraqi Sunni who support Shia killing, call them persians. while Zaraqawee call them Shia rawafid. On the Shia side the call came under the name of Nawasib, which for some ignorant be interpreted as Sunni. Indeed the nawasib is a historical description to all those who hate Imam Ali, In Arabic " Nasab Ali Aledaa" while sunni are strongly believing in Imam Ali. For them He is the fourth Khaleef and the husband of Prophet daughter. Historically Nawasib was first used to call Khwarig who fought Imam Ali fourteen hundreds years ago. Khawarig are a very small sect of muslims who believe that all Muslims are kafirs as far as they don't strictly believe in their ways. A lot of Muslims today thought Salfee Jihadist as the new Khawarig.. So the Shia propaganda was never based on anti sunni banner . Indeed Muqtada who is using this naming is the one who keeps strongest calls to unity of Shia and sunni..Today a very common practice by Baathist propaganda machine, is to point to the current Iraqi security issues as a result of fight between the zarqawees and alsaderees.. As for the current crises of scattered killing on identity or very limited people cleansing. It is very clear this is happening in the regions where sadamists and jihadists keep a strong hold specially in the farming areas around baghdad where Sadam planted and encouraged some brutal sunni arab tribes to reside . Most of their adults were part of Sadam security apparatus. .. But we need also to not underestimate personal criminal motives.. a friend on mine told me in one incident that the owner of a house wanted to force a tenant to leave, Iraqi courts prohibits that, he recruited some one to send the tenant a letter threatening them to leave on faction bases. Nevertheless ,in west baghdad neighborhood where some shia cleansing is really happening, those who do it never claim these doing as against Shia but against government secret informative. In the east baghdad , where very rare Sunnis were forced to leave , those who do it claims the victims are Zarqawee supporters, never say they are sunni. I think the current escalation is partly a long term plan by Sadamists to ring Baghdad by a shia free islands controlling the main roads that connect the capitol.. They think that in the old believe that who ever controls Baghdad can control Iraq. They know that such control can't be granted with such large shia percentage of more than 75% and strong presence of Almehdi army in alsader city. The current Almostafa mosque unfortunate incident might be one sign of their penetration into the American army information collection process. By trying to misleading the Americans , they are leaving the hard job of fighting the almehdi army to the americans and to jump on later to collect the gains while they have the strong ring seal around baghdad, that is after the tired Americans ran away. I noticed in clear evidences that Sadamist propaganda machine after the Samara golden mosques bombing and the sudden emergence of the Mehdi Army as the real threats to any possible baathis return to power, , the Baathist focused their attention to warning from the Alsderes leaving their continual claims of Bader death Squads allegations. They even cooperated with some of their Sunni Arab politician allies to stand firm against Alsader ally Aljaafree at a time dropping Aljaafree would automatically bring in Dr. Abdul Mehdi, the BAder SCRI leader. !! Indeed the well done managed respose by Alsadrees to the Mustafa mosque incident was to show that they might be fully aware of such plans to drag them to clash with American Army. . Today Rice in her reply to question by a reporter about the American stand toward the militia, she was so smart to emphaziz that there is no place for any militia in a democratic country, however this need to be delt with after the government succeeded in fighting back the terrorist. I don't know if my interpretation to her comment was right though. There is no doubts that new Iraq need to be a country of law and orders with no place for any militia or race or factions based miltia.. Being Beshmerca, or bader or Mehdi or old Sadam miltia of baathists criminals. Any cleansing of Iraq from these miltia need to come through a well timely balanced managed program that is ran by the united national governemnt to assure rights of all. And not to the anti new Iraq groups timing .! Some one might reasonably feel this scenario to be based on very wide imagination and extra ordinary fears. However those who experienced sadamists recovery after the three fatal defeats in 82, 91 and 2003, can tell better about their plans. I am not trying to say that there is no possibility or to lessening civil war current threats, but to describe what is happening today as a civil war might be a another way to ignite it and not to pin point to it's threats .. On good intentions , such claims might be for serving a narrow political interests of some losers! Just to articulate my point .. Look around, Iraqis main demand today is security. No nation ran into civil war had security as THE main demand at the beginning of such war, it was always the call for revenge.. Something that no one can claim Iraqis are asking for on any significant dimension.. Even for Shia who paid the very high price , their open hand policy to the sunni side is amazing while killing to Alqaeda at same time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baghda Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 I ound the above reply as a very important to have it's seperate post.. Please find under hot topics http://baghdadee.ipbhost.com/index.php?sho...st=0entry6023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 to day on Alaalam Irianian satelite Tv channel, there was a talk show about the American interviening in Iraq Pm position nomination. As usuall the host had a very lenghty introductory linking the current visit by Rice and Stro as to block Aljaafree from the position, then some analysist from Baghdad got in and demonstrated all Aldawa party "Jaafree's party" points of why should jaafree should be the one. First because the Americans are trying to force his blocking and that there are some iraqis who failed to blocked him, had asked the Americans to come. Also that Aljaafree was nominated through a democratic process and it is non democratic to stop it.. He attacked the coalition members who call for Aljaafree to step down. Calling secular Dr. dawood as a non islamic member, and Shiekh Alsagheer as a non leader in the coalition. So the main idea was based on two points, Americans are interviening in the nomination, that is in a very clear tactic to semulate the patriotic Iraqi feelings. The other is that any reconsideration of the name would means that the whole Iraqi process is not valid. What was a mazing was two replies. The first was by Alsadree perliment member, Mr. bahaa Alaarajee. When asked of such intervien, he was very clear in denying such thing. he said that he is part of the current talks with Ms. rice and there absolutely no any comment or demand by the two visiting ministers regarding names and the only demand was the demand to expidiate the process which every one agree with. The host seems not expecting such reply from an Alsadree. he turned to a different subject. then a caller from Baghdad got on. He asked the host about the reason that he is going with the conspiracy theory of The analysist at a time a member of the talks is denying it. Also of how this insiting on Aljafree is serving the coalition and iraq at a time he might not get the 50% votes necessary by the perliment and why calling the right of refusing Jaafree as non democratic The line immediately broken.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.