Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Main Forums > Chill Out Room > Anti War
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]   Last Thread   Next Thread
Share
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
RavingLunatic
crack addict



Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Zimbabwe

This is something someone sent me. just thought some people might like to read it.

>Subj: Enron-gate, and worse
>Date: Thursday, January 10, 2002 6:04:56 PM
>
>Please distribute this to everyone you know. It was written by William Pitt, a teacher in Boston (www.willpitt.com) and it describes two scandals which have the potential to uproot a certain noxious Bush now occupying the Oval Office.
>
>HELL TO PAY
>
>"Depend upon it, Sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully." - Samuel Johnson
>
>Some time just before January 7th, 2002, an asteroid capable of pulverizing a good-sized nation flashed through the void, passing perilously close to Earth. Had it struck our planet, the impact would have had global consequences. The energy of the strike would have been equivalent to the explosion of a number of large atomic weapons. From the media perspective, it would have been the biggest story since the extinction of the dinosaurs.
>
>At some point in the next six months, a small, darkened corner of George W. Bush's consciousness will wish the thing had hit us. The apocalypse he and his fundamentalist buddies have been waiting for would have been at hand, and a number of potentially calamitous questions about to be put to his administration would have been avoided.
>
>Sadly for him, the planet spins on. Beneath the unpierced stratosphere, the electronic beams of news agencies like CNN and the Associated Press have begun to spread like a widow's web from city to city and house to house. Carried on this invisible wind are rumors of doom, negligence and greed. Each and every one of these rumors lead inexorably back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, which will soon be issuing significant numbers of visitor passes to lawyers if the pattern holds much longer.
>
>Whichever part of the nation that never heard of the energy giant Enron Corporation has recently been introduced to the company in odious context. The story thus far is nothing less than astounding: Enron, a company valued in the billions on Wall Street, suddenly filed for the largest bankruptcy claim in the history of the known universe. 4,000 employees were abruptly shown the door after having been barred from dumping the company stock, meant to fund their retirement, while it was worth something. Meanwhile, Enron
>executives in the know were able to dump the stock, back when it was the gold standard on the Street, for a cool $1 billion.
>
>Apparently, Enron was ailing for quite a long time. The aforementioned executives were able to maintain the mirage of financial viability by
>stuffing the debt into what are called 'off-balance-sheet partnerships.' In essence, each of the executives built personal banking bunkers and hid what has been revealed to be staggering Enron debts within them, keeping fact that the company was hemorrhaging money off the publicly displayed balance sheets. This maintained the company's credit rating, and allowed it to continue doing business.
>
>This went on for four years, which means several things. It means most of the Enron executives were aware of and/or actively participating in this highly criminal and irresponsible activity. It means the stockholders, including 4,000 loyal Enron employees, were lied to. It probably means that the executives knew the stock value was doomed when they bailed out and cashed in several months ago. It means they let their employees lose the retirement funds they believed were growing within their Enron stock portfolios. It means a lot of people got screwed by a pack of sharp operators who didn't give a damn about anyone but themselves.
>
>All this could simply be chalked up as yet another story of corporate greed run amok, until the umbilical political and financial connections between Bush and Enron are illuminated. Enron's capo, Kenneth Lay, was perhaps the best financial friend George W. Bush has ever known. Lay and a number of Enron employees essentially bankrolled Bush's 2000 Presidential campaign, going so far as to lend Bush an Enron corporate jet for trips between whistle stops. Before Bush got White House stars in his eyes, he worked very closely with Enron on energy policy in Texas.
>
>This close connection led to the Bush administration's hiring of a number of influential individuals within Enron's orbit for important government positions:
>
>- Thomas E. White, Bush's Secretary of the Army, was once Vice-Chairman of Enron Energy Service, and held millions in Enron
>stock;
>
>- Presidential Advisor Karl Rove owned as much as $250,000 in Enron stock;
>
>- Economic adviser Larry Lindsay leapt straight from Enron to his current White House job;
>
>- Federal Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick did the same;
>
>- SEC Chairman Harvey Pitts was hand-picked by Kenneth Lay for the position, due to his notorious aversion to governmental regulation of any kind.
>
>There are some thirty one Bush administration officials who had a line item for Enron in their stock portfolio, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It is fair to say that the woebegone corporation held, and continues to hold, enormous influence over the day-to-day machinations of Federal government policy. One wonders if Bush's recent gutting of the Clean Air Act, a decision designed to improve the fortunes of companies like Enron, was the brainchild of people with deep connections to the energy industry.
>
>The trail of influence left by Enron leads also to the scabrous heart
>ventricles of Vice President Dick Cheney, who admitted recently to six separate meetings with Enron executives while formulating the Bush
>administration's energy policy. Cheney, a former executive of the Halliburton Petroleum interest, was in charge of creating this policy. For reasons soon to be exposed by subpoena, Cheney refused to detail the specifics of the creation of this policy, which included the multiple Enron meetings.
>
>The General Accounting Office was preparing to sue Cheney to reveal this information when the September 11th attacks took place. Those subpoenas may be dusted off and mailed within a month. In the meantime, the Justice Department is preparing a serious criminal investigation into the collapse of Enron. The democratically-controlled Senate is planning hearings on the matter as well. Columnist Robert Scheer has referred to the Bush administration's involvement in the Enron debacle as "Whitewater in spades." One wonders if "Watergate" would be a more appropriate comparison.
>
>Bush's own dealings within the energy industry carry a disturbingly familiar echo to the Enron situation: once upon a time, he was a high-ranking officer of a petroleum interest called Harken Oil. On June 22, 1990, Bush sold his Harken stock and made $848,560, earning him a 200% profit. One week later, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and its stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months. Bush made a bundle while the other investors lost millions. Harken was Enron in miniature, and might have served as a warning to the American people if the press had chosen to pay any attention to it during the 2000 Presidential campaign.
>
>There is a school of thought, espoused primarily by Republicans, that any investigation into potentially dishonorable or illegal actions by the Bush administration is tantamount to treason. We are at war, undeclared though it may be, and Bush must be free to prosecute this war vigorously, so as to defend our freedom and bring the murderers of American civilians to justice. If reports recently aired on CNN have any credence, however, Bush and his people may well have to answer for actions that make the Enron catastrophe look like a jaywalking offense, actions that led directly to the incredible carnage in New York and Washington, D.C.
>
>In 1998, during the Clinton administration, the U.S.-based energy concern Unocal canceled plans to exploit massive natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan. They had planned to run a pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, where the natural gas could have been processed for Asian and Western energy markets. The idea was scuttled after Clinton ordered the cruise missile bombing of Afghanistan in response to a terrorist attack upon U.S. embassies in Africa which were planned and executed by Osama bin Laden. The pipeline would have had to pass through Afghanistan, and Unocal was given the message in Technicolor by Clinton's people that Taliban-controlled Afghanistan was not to be given any sort of financial boon.
>
>Apparently, the Bush administration found no moral dilemma in dealing with the Taliban to get to the gas. Immediately upon their arrival in Washington, a vigorous courtship of the Taliban was undertaken by Bush's people. In fact, if former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler is to be believed, the Bush administration had a vested interest in strengthening and stabilizing the Taliban regime, because a stable regime would compel investors to revive the Turkmenistan natural gas pipeline deal.. The Taliban, demon of the moment, was the Bush administration's idea of a 'stable' government. Stable enough,
>anyway, to see the pipeline through.
>
>The connections between Bush and the Taliban became so close that the Taliban went so far as to hire an expert on U.S. public relations named Laila Helms, so as to smooth the way between the two regimes. Meetings between the two nations continued at a high level, the last of which occurred in August, scant weeks before the September 11th attacks. All of these actions were taken to exploit the vast energy reserves in Turkmenistan for the benefit of American energy corporations.
>
>The cozy relationship between Bush and the Taliban frustrated the
>investigative efforts of former Deputy Director of the FBI John O'Neill.
>O'Neill was the FBI's chief bin Laden hunter, in charge of the investigations into the bin Laden-connected bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, the destruction of an American troop barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the African embassy bombings in 1998, and the attack upon the U.S.S. Cole in 2000.
>
>O'Neill quit the FBI in protest two weeks before the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. He did so because his investigation was hindered by the Bush administration's connections to the Taliban, and by the interests of American petroleum companies. O'Neill was quoted as stating, "The main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it." After leaving the FBI, O'Neill took a position as head of security for the World Trade Center. He died on September 11th, 2001, trying to save people trapped by the attack, when the towers came down on top of him. The irony in this, simply, is horrifying.
>
>In essence, the Federal agent who knew more about bin Laden than any living American was kept from investigating terrorist threats against this country. He was hindered because the Bush administration was desperate to cultivate the favor of the Taliban, who held terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden in great esteem, so as to gain access to lucrative natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan.
>
>If these allegations prove true, Bush and his friends allowed this affinity to hamstring investigations that could have thwarted bin Laden's September plans. If these allegations prove true, everything since September 11th has been a massive cover-up operation in which American soldiers and thousands of Afghan civilians have died. If these allegations prove true, the Bush administration has the blood of thousands of American civilians on its hands.
>
>If these allegations carry even the faintest whiff of credibility, George W. Bush and members of his administration stand in taint of high treason and murder.
>
>On November 7th, 2000, a clear majority of Americans came to the conclusion that George W. Bush was unfit to govern this nation. For a variety of dark and controversial reasons, that conclusion was thrown over. Sometime soon, if the media's electronic web continues to carry these sordid stories of corruption, greed and death, the American people will come to fully understand the consequences of that failed election.
>
>It is one thing to coddle and court a corrupt energy company for political and financial gain. It is quite another to coddle and court a murderous terrorist-supporting regime, hindering anti-terrorism investigations in the process, for the purpose of exploiting valuable natural resources. The former cost a number of people their retirement funds. The latter has cost thousands of people their lives. One is criminal. The other is abominable. George W. Bush is deeply implicated in both. There will be hell to pay.
>
>

Old Post Jan-15-2002 22:24 
Click Here to See the Profile for RavingLunatic Click here to Send RavingLunatic a Private Message Add RavingLunatic to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
ABTsportsline
Disabled Veteran



Registered: May 2001
Location: Rural WA, USA

^^^^^^ YAWN!

dude, enough with your Anti-American BS.... I am all for free-thinking but this is ridiculous. All day long you crack on our president and blame the USA for everything that happens to it. There are some things i don't like, and you know what i do? I keep my nose out of it.

I voted for Bush, support him, and know that he is made out to be a lot worse than he really is. You seem to fail to grasp that there are reasons that decisions are made the way they are... there are issues and policies that you and myself probably couldn't grasp. It's not a simple black-and-white issue, the job of running the USA. Every decision that is made, every law or bill that is passed has to be accepted by the Congress as well... Ever heard of the system of Checks & Balances?

It's not like George Bush is single-handedly deciding and doing everything... fact is that most decisions are actually made by cabinet memebers and Congress... George just has to put his "OK" on it for it to go through. So when you verbally attack my president, you are attacking my government. If you attack my government you are attacking my country. I'm not down with that.

Its one thing to spread your opinions and belief, its another to post your anti-American BS all over this place. If you don't like us, then fine, stay off our soil.

(Apologies to everyone else, you can only take so much bashing of your own country...)

-ABT-


___________________
Peace.

Old Post Jan-16-2002 08:43  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for ABTsportsline Click here to Send ABTsportsline a Private Message Add ABTsportsline to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
rupert
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Aug 2001
Location: bris vegas

there is no way in the universe that George W Bush will ever get kicked out of office over the Enron scandal. The man cheated to get into office(Yes he did, this is a fact, Florida which is a state run by his brother had many thousands of people kicked off the electoral roll before the presidential election) This is an absolute fact. Dont flame me for saying this, it was widely reported in the non-US media.

My point, if he can get away with cheating to get into office (Kennedy also cheated to get into the Whitehouse, so the Republicans werent the first) then he can get away with a minor scandal like Enron. Besides what George W may or may not do is no worse than previous presidents who did far, far, far, worse and never lost office. Eg Ronald Reagans Iran_Contra scandal and Richard Nixons illegal bombing of Cambodia. If it took an enormous concerted effort to get rid of Nixon for Watergate, then I think George wont be going to the dole office anytime soon. Besides im sure plenty of Democrats got campaign finance from Enron as well.
Yes in reality the American president has less actual power than a prime minister in a Westminster style democracy, but has a great deal of moral authority being the Commander in Chief. To say that the Congress and Senate act as a check and balance to Executive power in america is true in theory, but not in reality. Both major political parties have in essence a very similar idealogy, because they both get their campaign finance from the same corporations and by the same methods. This is fundamental flaw of american democracy, campaign finance affects all other parts of the body politic, inevitably to its detriment. George W is merely a product of his environment.

My point is this, non-americans have an absolute right to criticise american politicians or the american government because in reality every decision that it makes affects the rest of the world.

Presidents Roosevelt and Truman knew this and used their power to help the world outside of its borders. American politics has a long history of isolationism, of actively sabotaging the United Nations etc, of turning their back on the rest of the world. This doesnt help the rest of the world and in the long run doesnt help america.

Old Post Jan-16-2002 10:10  Australia
Click Here to See the Profile for rupert Click here to Send rupert a Private Message Add rupert to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
ABTsportsline
Disabled Veteran



Registered: May 2001
Location: Rural WA, USA

jesus you're going to make me go into DETAIL??? ok, here comes the long post....

First off, I don't buy anything from that "article" that Raving Lunatic posted. It is not a reputable source, and for all we know it could just be more of that anti-war, anti-US propaganda that is all over the place on the internet. Unless its from the BBC online or CNN.com i am not going to believe it.

Now, the whole Enron issue. It is very unfortunate, yes. But it IS just another greed story. Has nothing to do with George. You think Bush kept tabs on their finances? no. George was simply accepting their donations. Could I blame *you* b/c you borrowed 10 bucks from your friend, who didn't have ANY money the following weekend? Come on, be realistic here. Don't take away his rights and privileges b/c he is the president. He is still a human being. Campaigns cost money, and you don't think Al Gore took money from some people?? The fact that Enron filed for Chapter 11 is unfortunate, but has nothing to do with George W.

I see you made a reference to George's old company, Harken Oil.... my friend did you not read about that ten years ago? Bush sold out of that b/c he was getting out of the company. Usually when the majority share-holder sells everything, the stock goes down. Simple economics, my friend. Large supply, small demand, yadda yadda yadda. This again has nothing to do with whats at hand. How can you hold something that happened 10 years ago against someone for something totally un-related? And what did you expect him to do with that stock? hold on to it until he dies? Its a traders' market, son.

Then Raving Lunatic mentions a couple of people that used to own stock in Enron NOW on the presidential cabinet/board.... gee, what a big fookin coincidence... Let me let you in on a little secret: Enron was one of the top 3 largest energy corporations in our country... half of people who own stock at all..... owned stock in Enron. Not to mention everyone he appointed is well qualified for their position... especially Thomas E. White (secretary of the Army).... he's a 2-star general. What do you think Rumsfield was doing before he became defense secretary? Pointing out that these guys owned the same stock before they got to where they were proves nothing. I used to have a small stock portfolio. I had the exact same stocks that my friends had - we all shared tips. So?

blah blah blah Watergate... blah blah blah.. rumsfied had meetings with Enron executives... blah blah blah..... what is this proving? How do you know that George W. had any knowledge of this? How is it George W's responsibility for this company's financial future? This company was on the downturn 6 years ago (not 4).... wayyyy before George's campaign began. George's campaign certainly didn't help Enron's finances but that is hardly George's fault, and its already kicking a dead horse.

...the "oil story" with Bush working with Taliban is unfounded. I have never heard of that or have seen that posted on any REAL news site (this does NOT include chain emails!)....

The FBI John O'Neill story is very touching, but again unfounded.... if that was true we would have heard about it on the news.. and he would have been the cover story of TIME.

quote:
Originally posted by Raving Lunatic
On November 7th, 2000, a clear majority of Americans came to the conclusion that George W. Bush was unfit to govern this nation. For a variety of dark and controversial reasons, that conclusion was thrown over.


Ok this really pisses me off. "Clear Majority????" yeah, that's why MORE electoral college votes (and popular vote too, by the way) went in George Bush's favor. They already went through all this, proved it, etc.... the Democrats just made a big stink to try to postpone things while they thought of a better way to change the answer... It's an example of lawyers gone berserk.

To everyone that says "oh its a hoax and it was already proven on non-us news stories": I LAUGH.... 1) give me a link to a reputable non-US news site that has a story on this, b/c i'd like to read 2) since when would NON-usa sources know more than USA sources on the subject of the USA presidential election? hmmm, would it have anything to do with the fact that there are so many USA-haters in those non-usa countries writing these news stories?? hmmmm..... PROPAGANDA people, open your eyes!

***and whoever wrote that article is an idiot for this reason also: whoever loses the election is NOT decided "unfit" to run a country... they just weren't the popular choice.... they were 2nd best.... DOES NOT EQUAL "unfit".

The choice of words alone by this "schoolteacher" in Boston should be a dead giveaway enough that this is pure trash/propaganda. "There will be hell to pay." yeah, here's some quality reporting for you. Renew my subscription, please!

...and rupert, i never denied non-american's right to criticize (key word there) the US government.... i am "denying" their right to spread this anti-US propaganda everyday on every single post. (not to single out one individual *cough*)

How would you like it if almost everytime you spoke to someone, all they ever talked about was how much a piece of shit your house was... how crappy your parents are... etc. Wouldn't you get tired of that too?

-ABT-


___________________
Peace.

Old Post Jan-16-2002 13:11  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for ABTsportsline Click here to Send ABTsportsline a Private Message Add ABTsportsline to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
RavingLunatic
crack addict



Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Zimbabwe

Oh boy, have you ever opened up a can of worms here pal.

look, I don't have time to do this here, nor the desire.
I am already engaged in a very good debate at another site, http://www.whatthefuck.com I really don't have time for another..

just a few things i'd like to make clear though..

you quoted ME in your response, and I did not write that article. I merely pasted it in. and I indicated that clearly at the top.

you say 2nd place is not unfit? I say neither is 1st, both the candidates who had any chance of winning were securely in the back pockets of the big corporations anyway, it doesn't really matter who wins, they are both corrupt. as far as I know, only man fit to run that country is Ralph Nader. and he'd probably be corrupt eventually too..

you say bush has no real power? it's the congress and other members of government? well guess what, they are all linked to big oil too.

you say i do this everyday in every post? well, your flat out wrong.
I particpate all over this board in many discussions.

and the bombs continue to fall..

Old Post Jan-16-2002 17:25 
Click Here to See the Profile for RavingLunatic Click here to Send RavingLunatic a Private Message Add RavingLunatic to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Ste
Planet Zogg Addict



Registered: Oct 2001
Location: Outer Dementia

war is good.

without war there would be no army. and the army gives school drop outs the chance to have a job


___________________
Fave Tune at the Moment: Mesmerizer - Taking Control

>>> Download my mix here <<< (Electro, Techno & Psy-Trance)

Old Post Jan-16-2002 17:37  England
Click Here to See the Profile for Ste Click here to Send Ste a Private Message Visit Ste's homepage! Add Ste to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
rupert
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Aug 2001
Location: bris vegas

with regards to sites about the election and the goings on in Florida try;

Tompaine.com and mediachannel.org, both i believe are american sites. Probably also the BBC's webpage if it has an archive section information on the election as well, i havent looked so can't say for sure. The issue was covered on BBC World but due to the September bombing it ceased being an important enough issue to get coverage.

I think that to say that the BBC, a non-US media would cover US politics less than objectively is a mistake. I get the BBC, CNN and FOX News, and I can say that without a shadow of a doubt the BBC is a better product than its american counterparts. CNN used to be okay before it got taken over by Time Warner, now its little better than Fox.

That something doesnt get reported in the media does not mean it didnt happen.

I would like to point out that many american states have laws which preclude people with felony convictions from voting at all. They are disenfranchised. So much for the land of the free. This is a fact. If you are a resident of Washington DC you cant vote for the president although you can vote for Congress, due to the Electoral college system. My point most people with felony convictions and the majority of the population of D.C. are African-American, who traditionally in large part for the Democratic party.

My point from my previous post is this; it doesnt matter who sits in the Whitehouse, who controls the Congress, who dominates the bench of the Supreme Court, until you deal with campaign reform, the system is fundamentally flawed. This is a problem in many other democracies(especially in Europe) as well but no where near as severe as in the United States.
Campaign finance reform was on the agenda but it seems to have been put in the too hard basket.

Old Post Jan-17-2002 09:46  Australia
Click Here to See the Profile for rupert Click here to Send rupert a Private Message Add rupert to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
RavingLunatic
crack addict



Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Zimbabwe

Okay..

the US (and canada) already help out developing countries a lot..

that's true, and it's good.

But they could do more. We could do more. I could do more. YOU could do more.

and the bombs are not helping!

So suppose we do send aid. allow me to ask a few questions here, that need to be answered.

You say there has to be strings attached? like for example, let us run a pipeline through afghanistan?

well, at first that seems to be, a false pretense for helping them in the first place, the oil will bring immense profit to america, more than what would be sent in aid. Is this really an altruistic act? it wouldn't seem so.

But then, i can see both sides, of course there should be strings attached, I mean, in a soup kitchen, they have requirements that you come in at least clothed, and not blasted out of your mind on heroin(another key export of afghanistan that the US would like to stop)

so then, the question becomes, what strings? an oil pipeline from turkmenistan to the afghan coast? a stable govt? stopping production of opium? disarmament of militant fundamentalist? the taliban ousted, and women rights protected?

and then the question is, are any of these things obtainable? somehow i doubt it.

If, a pipeline were to be built, they would never be able to defend that entire pipeline from being destroyed. one fundamentalist islamic father who had his son blown up could take a shotgun and shoot a hole in that thing. Take a look at the ecological and financial disaster in Alaska a few months ago for a good example of high pressure oil pipes being shot at by psychos..

so, they could bullet proof the pipe I guess.. but, at what cost? and the same question as before, if you have to make it bulletproof, should it be there in the first place? and of course, even making it bullet proof would not stop someone with a rocket launcher or grenade.

a stable govt? is that even possible in the region? who knows, we shall see how Hamid Karzai handles this. I hope for the best, but with all that bad blood between the tribes.. i don't think it will be easy.

stopping production of opium? this is the only livelihood of some afghan people.. take that away from them, and what do they have left? drug abuse is apparently not a problem in the country, only drug production.. now, to let them keep producing.. that's a dillema in itself, I don't have the answer to.

disarm the militant fundamentalists? a good idea, but can you ever find them all? probably not.

The taliban ousted and womens rights restored? well, that's effectively already been done. but, the laws on paper are different than real life. I bet the woman being beaten by her husband in afghanistan finds small comfort in the fact that the taliban is no longer in power.

so then, after you answer all these questions about strings and what they are tied to, the next question becomes, how do we deliver this aid?

it seems to me, that if we set up secure buildings, staffed with UN workers, and guarded by UN soldiers, instead of dropping packages from helicopters, the aid would have a better chance of getting to the right people.

in the past, UN workers have been attacked by the taliban, their food stolen. i don't think the taliban has enough strength left to mount any sort of attack now.

so in conclusion. it's a tricky situation, with a lot of variables, and a lot of unpredictability.

BUT

the way forward is not bombs, it's bread, strings attached or not.

Old Post Jan-25-2002 17:55 
Click Here to See the Profile for RavingLunatic Click here to Send RavingLunatic a Private Message Add RavingLunatic to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Main Forums > Chill Out Room > Anti War
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playback"party" dance song [2006] [2]

Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackMauro Picotto - Lizard (Picoto Mix) [2002]

Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread
Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:03.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
Support TA!