Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member CCUSA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    7,746

    New Bill: IRS To Confiscate Guns At Will!

    IRS To Confiscate Guns At Will!

    IRS to Confiscate Guns At Will!

    Infowars.com
    Wednesday, April 25, 2012

    A new bill set to pass Congress would give the IRS the unconstitutional power to take guns from law abiding Americans for any reason without trial.

    VIDEO ON LINK AT TOP.


    RELATED: Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth
    RELATED: Bank of America’s War on the Second Amendment

    Similar/Related Articles



    1. Video: National Guard Helping Confiscate Guns in New York State
    2. Foreign Troops Training To Confiscate Guns of Americans
    3. Oath Keepers Proves That There WERE Troops Who Refused to Confiscate Guns During Katrina
    4. NRA official: Obama wants to outlaw guns in 2nd term

  2. #2
    Administrator ALIPAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    52,493
    Blog Entries
    1
    Can someone investigate and confirm this? We need to see the actual text of the bill. Infowars is a very reliable and trusted source, but we need ALIPAC activist verification here please.

    W
    Click here to learn more about William Gheen President of ALIPAC

  3. #3
    Super Moderator working4change's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    15,662
    See related threads

    Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth

    There are two attacks on gun ownership in this bill. The text of the bill, all 1676 pages of it, can be found HERE.
    The first attack on the right to bear arms is found on page 1323.
    The Secretary may modify, suspend, or terminate a special permit or approval if the Secretary determines that—(1) the person who was granted the special permit or approval has violated the special permit or approval or the regulations issued under this chapter in a manner that demonstrates that the person is not fit to conduct the activity authorized by the special permit or approval; or (2) the special permit or approval is unsafe.
    In the ambiguous language that the Congress so loves to employ in all things unconstitutional, we can translate that to the parental favorite, “Because I said so.”
    The second attack on gun ownership is more subtle.



    S. 1813: MAP-21 (On Passage of the Bill)
    Number:
    Senate Vote #48 [primary source: senate.gov]
    Date:
    Mar 14, 2012 (112th Congress)
    Result:
    Bill Passed
    Related Bill:
    S. 1813: MAP-21
    Introduced by Sen. Barbara Boxer [D-CA] on November 7, 2011
    Current Status: Passed Senate

    This was a vote to approve or reject a bill or resolution.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/s48
    The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. Plato

  4. #4
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    21,741
    Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth




    Daisy Luther
    Infowars.com
    April 24, 2012

    It looks like the power of the IRS to revoke passports is merely a drop in the tyrannical bucket.

    The Senate has voted to approve Bill 1813, which is now on its way to the House. The insidious bill has so many attacks on freedom that the most serious one has been largely overlooked.


    There are two attacks on gun ownership in this bill. The text of the bill, all 1676 pages of it, can be found HERE.



    The first attack on the right to bear arms is found on page 1323.
    The Secretary may modify, suspend, or terminate a special permit or approval if the Secretary determines that—(1) the person who was granted the special permit or approval has violated the special permit or approval or the regulations issued under this chapter in a manner that demonstrates that the person is not fit to conduct the activity authorized by the special permit or approval; or (2) the special permit or approval is unsafe.
    In the ambiguous language that the Congress so loves to employ in all things unconstitutional, we can translate that to the parental favorite, “Because I said so.”


    The second attack on gun ownership is more subtle.
    There is a stream of logic that you have to follow.


    First, if this bill passes, the IRS will have the authority to take away the passports of those whom they say owe more than $50,000 in taxes. (The tax debt doesn’t have to be proven, mind you, the IRS simply has to accuse you of owing the money.) You can find this section on page 1447 of the Bill.


    When your passport is revoked by the government, you are suddenly on the “no-fly list”.


    Membership in the no-fly club puts you on yet another list, as a potential domestic terrorist.


    Domestic terrorists are not allowed to have guns.


    Don’t believe me? Listen to Raul Emanuel gloat of it. He eloquently states “If you are known as maybe a possible terrorist you cannot buy a handgun in America.” (1:13 of the video)


    Emanuel, the Mayor of Chicago and former Obama Chief of Staff, makes the top of my personal treason list for this statement. In his own words, “maybe a possible terrorist” means you shouldn’t be allowed the rights guaranteed to you as an American. No proof necessary.


    Bill 1813, ”Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act”, is chock full of new ways to take away our personal freedoms. The bill would require “stalker boxes” on our vehicles, puts a huge number of restrictions on travel and transportation within the US, allows the government to revoke documents and licenses in ambiguous language and is, in essence, nearly 1700 pages of new restrictions. (You can find a summary HERE if you don’t want to read all 1676 pages).


    A Call to Action
    Did your Senator vote for this bill? There’s a good chance he or she did, as only 22 Senators voted against it. You can find out how your senator voted HERE.


    The bill was sponsored by Barbara Boxer (California) and co-sponsored by Max Baucus (Montana), James N. Inhofe (Oklahoma), and David Vitter (Louisiana). For your convenience, I’ve included links to the contact information for each of these Senators. Be sure and send an email to let them know how you feel about this new attack on freedom.


    Email your Representatives and make it very clear that you consider this Bill an act of treason against the Constitution. This directory contains email addresses and contact information for all members of Congress.


    Every bill that goes through Congress right now appears to hold another threat to the Constitution (if not multiple threats). Every word needs to be carefully analyzed so we can fight these attacks.
    » Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!


    I must be missing something...

    Page 1320
    21 ‘‘(2) FIREARMS.—This chapter and regulations
    22 prescribed under this chapter do not prohibit—
    23 ‘‘(A) or regulate transportation of a fire24
    arm (as defined in section 232 of title 1, or

    page 1321
    1 ammunition for a firearm, by an individual for
    2 personal use; or
    3 ‘‘(B) transportation of a firearm or ammu4
    nition in commerce.
    5 ‘‘(g) LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY.—Unless the Sec6
    retary decides that an emergency exists, a person subject
    7 to this chapter may only be granted a variance from this
    8 chapter through a special permit or renewal granted under
    9 this section.
    10 ‘‘(h) APPROVALS.—
    11 ‘‘(1) FINDINGS REQUIRED.—
    12 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may
    13 not issue an approval or grant the renewal of
    14 an approval pursuant to part 107 of title 49,
    15 Code of Federal Regulations until the Secretary
    16 has determined that the person is fit, willing,
    17 and able to conduct the activity authorized by
    18 the approval in a manner that achieves the level
    19 of safety required under subsection (a)(1).
    20 ‘‘(B) CONSIDERATIONS.—In making a de21
    termination under subparagraph (A), the Sec22
    retary shall consider—
    23 ‘‘(i) the person’s safety history

    (in24
    cluding prior compliance history);
    VerDate Mar

    Page 1322
    1 ‘‘(ii) the person’s accident and inci2
    dent history; and
    3 ‘‘(iii) any other information the Sec4
    retary considers appropriate to make such
    5 a determination.
    6 ‘‘(2) REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION.—When ap7
    plying for an approval or renewal or modification of
    8 an approval under this section, the Secretary shall
    9 require the person to submit an application that con10
    tains—
    11 ‘‘(A) a detailed description of the person’s
    12 request;
    13 ‘‘(B) a listing of the persons current facili14
    ties and addresses where the approval will be
    15 utilized;
    16 ‘‘(C) a safety analysis prescribed by the
    17 Secretary that justifies the approval;
    18 ‘‘(D) documentation to support the safety
    19 analysis;
    20 ‘‘(E) a certification of safety fitness; and
    21 ‘‘(F) the verification of registration re22
    quired under section 5108.
    23 ‘‘(3) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this sub24
    section may be construed to require the release of
    25 information protected by law from public disclosure.


    Page 1323
    1 ‘‘(i) NONCOMPLIANCE.—The Secretary may modify,
    2 suspend, or terminate a special permit or approval if the
    3 Secretary determines that—
    4 ‘‘(1) the person who was granted the special
    5 permit or approval has violated the special permit or
    6 approval or the regulations issued under this chapter
    7 in a manner that demonstrates that the person is
    8 not fit to conduct the activity authorized by the spe9
    cial permit or approval; or
    10 ‘‘(2) the special permit or approval is unsafe.
    11 ‘‘(j) RULEMAKING.—Not later than 2 years after the
    12 date of the enactment of the Hazardous Materials Trans13
    portation Safety Improvement Act of 2012, the Secretary,
    14 after providing notice and an opportunity for public com
    15ment, shall issue regulations that establish—
    16 ‘‘(1) standard operating procedures to support
    17 administration of the special permit and approval
    18 programs; and
    19 ‘‘(2) objective criteria to support the evaluation
    20 of special permit and approval applications.
    21 ‘‘(k) ANNUAL REVIEW OF CERTAIN SPECIAL PER22
    MITS.—
    23 ‘‘(1) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall conduct an
    24 annual review and analysis of special permits—

    Page 1324

    1 ‘‘(A) to identify consistently used and long2
    standing special permits with an established
    3 safety record; and
    4 ‘‘(B) to determine whether such permits
    5 may be converted into the hazardous materials
    6 regulations.
    7 ‘‘(2) FACTORS.—In conducting the review and
    8 analysis under paragraph (1), the Secretary may
    9 consider—
    10 ‘‘(A) the safety record for hazardous mate11
    rials transported under the special permit;
    12 ‘‘(B) the application of a special permit;
    13 ‘‘(C) the suitability of provisions in the
    14 special permit for incorporation into the haz15
    ardous materials regulations; and
    16 ‘‘(D) rulemaking activity in related areas.
    17 ‘‘(3) RULEMAKING.—After completing the re18
    view and analysis under paragraph (1) and providing
    19 notice and opportunity for public comment, the Sec20
    retary shall issue regulations, as needed.’’.
    21 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The analysis for
    22 chapter 51 is amended by striking the item relating to
    23 section 5117 and inserting the following:
    ‘‘5117. Special permits, approvals, and exclusions.’’.
    VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:06 Mar 19, 2012 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 01324 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6211 E:\SENENR\S1813.ES S1813 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-1...112s1813es.pdf

  5. #5
    Super Moderator working4change's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    15,662
    S.B. 1813; U.S. House of Reps Revises Bill that Would Confiscate Your Passports & Place Privacy Intrusive Black Boxes in all Vehicles; Tell Your Congress People Now “No Way, or Else!”

    S.B. 1813; U.S. House of Reps Revises Bill that Would Confiscate Your Passports & Place Privacy Intrusive Black Boxes in all Vehicles; Tell Your Congress People Now “No Way, or Else!”
    By Marc Chamot


    Senate Bill 1813, specifically the section, is giving the IRS power to revoke your Passports.
    “An amendment has been tacked onto a Federal highway construction bill. Senate Bill 1813, proposed by Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, includes an amendment that would prevent any American citizen from leaving the country based upon a determination by the IRS that you owe the government back taxes.
    The amendment, Section 40304, was written by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and would authorize the State Department to revoke, your passports for anyone the IRS certifies as having “a delinquent tax debt in an amount in excess of $50,000.”
    Constitutional Attorney Angel Reyes says that’s a violation of due process and is unconstitutional.
    “It takes away your right to enter or exit the country based upon a non-judicial IRS determination that you owe taxes,” Reyes told FOX Business. “It’s a scary thought that our congressional representatives want to give the IRS the power to detain US citizens over taxes, which could very well be in dispute.”
    Financial Adviser Clark Hodges says the measure is especially concerning given the high number of taxpayers it could affect.
    “There are so many people that fall into that situation, and I think that’s too invasive. Especially coming out of a bad economy there are a lot of people behind on a lot of things,” he told Fox Business.
    Still, the “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” or “MAP-21″ passed the Senate in a vote of 74-22, and is now headed for the GOP-controlled house where it’s expected to meet stronger opposition.”
    And; Senate bill 1813, known as MAP-21, that calls for the Secretary of State to revoke or deny a passport to any US citizen that the IRS Commissioner deems as having 'seriously delinquent tax debt', also calls for, section 31406 of the bill, the mandatory installation of 'blackbox' event recorders to be installed in every new passenger vehicle startingwith model year 2015:

    SEC. 31406 of Senate Bill 1813. VEHICLE EVENT DATA RECORDERS. (a) Mandatory Event Data Recorders-

    (1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall revise part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to require, beginning with model year 2015, that new passenger motor vehicles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder that meets the requirements under that part...

    (d) Revised Requirements for Event Data Recorders- Based on the findings of the study under subsection (c), the Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to revise part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The rule--

    (1) shall require event data recorders to capture and store data related to motor vehicle safety covering a reasonable time period before, during, and after a motor vehicle crash or airbag deployment, including a rollover;

    (2) shall require that data stored on such event data recorders be accessible, regardless of vehicle manufacturer or model, with commercially available equipment in a specified data format;

    (3) shall establish requirements for preventing unauthorized access to the data stored on an event data recorder in order to protect the security, integrity, and authenticity of the data; and

    (4) may require an interoperable data access port to facilitate universal accessibility and analysis.
    (e) Disclosure of Existence and Purpose of Event Data Recorder- The rule issued under subsection (d) shall require that any owner’s manual or similar documentation provided to the first purchaser of a passenger motor vehicle for purposes other than resale--
    (1) disclose that the vehicle is equipped with such a data recorder...
    (f) Access to Event Data Recorders in Agency Investigations- Section 30166(c)

    (3)(C) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting ‘, including any electronic data contained within the vehicle’s diagnostic system or event data recorder’ after ‘equipment.’

    This is serious violations of our privacy. This could lead to carbon use and costly toll road taxations in the future, and with GPS devices that could track down our every move around the country, and they could cut off our engines whenever they see fit!

    Get hold of your congressmen now, and tell them no on SB 1813 or else, you’ll vote them out of office!
    If any Republican, and Tea Party or anybody else votes for this freedom-intrusive bill, they’ll be dealt with severely at the ballot box.


    The Marc Chamot Report: S.B. 1813; U.S. House of Reps Revises Bill that Would Confiscate Your Passports & Place Privacy Intrusive Black Boxes in all Vehicles; Tell Your Congress People Now “No Way, or Else!”
    The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. Plato

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Northern Arizona
    Posts
    535
    Everyone out there had better make sure this doesn't pass the House!

    http://www.alipac.us/f9/congressiona...atives-248063/

    Privacy Intrusive Black Boxes in all Vehicles???

    Attacks on gun ownership???

    IRS authority to revoke Passports????


    Barbara Boxer should be recalled for this and so should every Senator who voted yes!

  7. #7
    Super Moderator working4change's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    15,662
    See how your senators voted on SB1813
    S. 1813: MAP-21 (On Passage of the Bill) -- GovTrack.us
    The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. Plato

  8. #8
    Super Moderator working4change's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    15,662
    Moving to Other topics
    The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. Plato

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by ALIPAC View Post
    Can someone investigate and confirm this? We need to see the actual text of the bill. Infowars is a very reliable and trusted source, but we need ALIPAC activist verification here please.

    W
    From the NRA on this Bill 1813:

    "Reports have been circulating regarding S. 1813--a highway bill recently passed by the U.S. Senate. The story goes that this bill would allow the IRS to seize your passport and your guns if you owe more than $50,000 in back taxes. The claims are totally bogus.
    Although the bill is certainly long and complex, those who suggest that the bill is anti-gun are totally misreading it.
    The only firearms-related language in this bill is part of a lengthy provision on hazardous material transportation. The language (see bottom of page 1320) makes clear that the personal transportation of firearms and ammunition isn't regulated or prohibited by the federal hazardous material transportation laws, and commercial transportation isn't prohibited by those laws. This is a pro-gun, rather than anti-gun, provision.
    Some reports claim the bill would allow the government to revoke gun permits. However, the "permits" referred to (on page 1323 of the bill) are "special permits"related to hazardous material transportation, and have nothing to do with firearms. This section of the bill begins on page 1314 of the bill, which provides citations to the relevant sections of Title 49, U.S. Code, none of which relates to firearms.
    All of this is also completely unrelated to the bill's provisions on revocation of passports for people with unpaid taxes. Those provisions appear in a separate part of the bill. Contrary to some reports, the revocation of an individual's passport does not prohibit the person from possessing firearms."

    NRA-ILA | Rumor Control=


  10. #10
    Super Moderator working4change's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    15,662
    As U.N. Finalizes Arms Trade Treaty, Opponents Warn of Global Gun Grab
    By Patrick Goodenough
    July 5, 2012


    Kalashnikov rifles and ammunition on sale at a Mogadishu market in May 2011. (AP Photo)

    (CNSNews.com) – Amid energetic lobbying from both sides, the Obama administration is taking part in month-long negotiations at United Nations headquarters aimed at finalizing a conventional arms trade treaty, which supporters say will save millions of lives but opponents fear threatens to restrict Second Amendment rights at home and U.S. arms sales policies abroad.

    U.N. bureaucrats insist that the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) will have no impact on civilian gun ownership, saying that it will deal only with the arms trade across borders. They also stress that its outcome will not be imposed on any country, noting it will only be binding on countries that ratify it.

    In a letter to Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the eve of the conference, 130 Republican lawmakers outlined their concerns that the treaty being negotiated could negatively affect U.S. security, foreign policy and economic interests – as well as Americans’ constitutional rights.

    “The ATT must not accept that free democracies and totalitarian regimes have the same right to conduct arms transfers: this is a dangerous piece of moral equivalence,” the letter stated.

    “Moreover, the ATT must not impose criteria for determining the permissibility of arms transfers that are vague, easily politicized, and readily manipulated,” it continued, referring in particular to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and Israel.

    The lawmakers warned that they would oppose the appropriation or authorization of any taxpayer money to implement a “flawed” treaty.

    The Bush administration in 2006 cast the lone negative vote when 153 nations passed a U.N. General Assembly resolution that began the treaty-drafting process, which is now in its final phase in New York. President Obama reversed that position in 2009, backing the initiative but making its support conditional on consensus decision-making.
    un gun sculpture

    The “Knotted Gun” sculpture, by Swedish artist Carl Fredrik Reutersward, on display at the Visitors’ Plaza at U.N. headquarters in New York. (UN Photo by Rick Bajornas)

    Alert to the political sensitivity of the issue as the election looms, the administration says it has clear red lines that it will not allow to be crossed.

    At home, it says, the Second Amendment must be upheld: “There will be no dilution or diminishing of sovereign control over issues involving the private acquisition, ownership, or possession of firearms, which must remain matters of domestic law.”

    Abroad, the U.S. will oppose any provisions that would “unduly interfere with our ability to import, export, or transfer arms in support of our national security and foreign policy interests,” it says.

    Further, the administration pledges not to accept a treaty that covers ammunition or explosives, or one that establishes an international enforcement body.

    Some of Washington’s closest allies differ with at least some of those positions.

    For example the British, French, German and Swedish governments in a joint position published this week said, “We believe that an arms trade treaty should cover all types of conventional weapons, notably including small arms and light weapons, all types of munitions, and related technologies.”

    Britain, France and Germany are among the world’s top six arms suppliers, along with the United States – the leader by far – as well as China and Russia.

    A powerful coalition of non-governmental organizations including Amnesty International and Oxfam says the negotiated treaty must be workable and enforceable, with international reporting of sales and a mechanism for monitoring compliance.

    On the issue of consensus, the Control Arms coalition also wants the conference to follow usual U.N. practice, requiring “wide agreement” on a final text but not giving countries veto power.

    ‘Goal is clear: A robust and legally-binding arms trade treaty’

    The month-long negotiating conference got off to a slow start this week after demands by Arab states that the Palestinian Authority be allowed to participate as a voting delegate, citing the precedent set by UNESCO in admitting “Palestine” as a full member nine months ago. After reported boycott threats by the U.S. and Israel, the P.A. was seated as an observer, without voting rights.

    In his opening remarks, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said poorly-regulated international arms transfers fuel civil conflicts, destabilized regions, and empowered terrorists and criminal networks.

    “Our common goal is clear: a robust and legally-binding arms trade treaty that will have a real impact on the lives of those millions of people suffering from the consequences of armed conflict, repression and armed violence,” he said.

    One of the key issues under discussion is criteria that should be met when countries decide on selling arms. Any deal that would contribute to war crimes, human rights violations or terrorism should not be authorized, although who would make such determinations remains fuzzy.

    If left up to countries themselves, argue proponents of a strong treaty, this would allow Russia, for example, to continue selling arms to Syria since Moscow views the regime’s actions against the anti-Assad opposition as lawful.

    Arms Control Association executive director Daryl Kimball argued in a recent paper that the treaty must require countries to withhold problematic arms transfers, not merely require them to take any potential risks into account.

    On the other hand, global regulation of sales could impact the right of the U.S. to sell arms to allies that have powerful enemies in the international community, such as Israel and Taiwan.

    “Washington is the only capital that now sells weapons to Taipei, aiding its defense against Beijing’s unprecedented arms buildup,” Heritage Foundation senior fellow Peter Brookes wrote in an op-ed Tuesday. “China would love to cut off those sales.”

    Also unclear is how arms sales benefiting terrorists would be restricted, given the U.N.’s failure over many years to define terrorism – largely because Arab and Muslim states insist on exclusions for those fighting “foreign occupation.”

    Less controversial proposed criteria for arms sales include not fostering corruption or harming the economy of the country buying the weapons.

    ATT proponents and the U.N. say the initiative will not affect domestic gun ownership, but Second Amendment advocacy groups are adamantly opposed to the treaty, which Gun Owners of America calls “a backdoor attempt by the Obama administration to impose radical gun control on America citizens.”

    Addressing the Conservative Political Action Conference last February, National Rifle Association vice-president Wayne LaPierre accused Obama of working behind the scenes with the U.N. on a “treaty that could effectively ban or severely restrict civilian ownership of firearms worldwide.”

    “I've been around long enough to know that the U.N. has little regard for our Constitution and none at all for the Second Amendment,” LaPierre said. “But I never thought I’d see the day when an American White House would tolerate a proposal that would literally gut one of our most fundamental freedoms in this country.”

    Last March Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) introduced legislation prohibiting any funds for negotiating an ATT that would restrict U.S. citizens’ Second Amendment rights. The bill has 19 co-sponsors, all Republicans.

    CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like NPR. CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like PBS.

    As U.N. Finalizes Arms Trade Treaty, Opponents Warn of Global Gun Grab | CNSNews.com
    The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. Plato

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •