TSA threaten Texas flight siege. - 8th Generation Honda Civic Forum
8thCivic.com

Go Back   8th Generation Honda Civic Forum > Off Topic > On Topic

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-25-2011, 06:12 PM   #1 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
TSA threaten Texas flight siege.

Quote:
An astounding Department of Justice threat to cancel airline flights to and from Texas, in addition to underhanded lobbying by TSA representatives, has killed efforts in the state to pass HB 1937, a bill that would have made invasive pat downs by TSA agents a felony.
HB 1937, a bill that would have made it “A criminal act for security personnel to touch a person’s private areas without probable cause as a condition of travel or as a condition of entry into a public place,” was headed for an imminent Senate vote in Texas having already passed the House unanimously 138-0, before the federal government stepped in to nix the legislation.
In a letter sent to Texas lawmakers, including to Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Speaker Joe Straus, the House Clerk, and the Senate Secretary, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy threatened to cripple the airline industry in the state if legislators did not back down.
“If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute,” Murphy wrote. “Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.”
“We urge that you consider the ramifications of this bill before casting your vote,” Murphy added.
The fact that Murphy can’t even get the name of the bill correct is almost as disconcerting as the rampant mafia-like attitude of the DOJ in using de facto economic terrorism to shoot down the legislation.
Following a fiery debate in the Texas House last night, Senate sponsor Dan Patrick (R-Houston) pulled the bill, remarking that TSA representatives had been “lobbying” the Texas Senate in an effort to mothball the legislation.
“I will pull HB 1937 down, but I will stand for Liberty in the state of Texas,” Patrick said.
Patrick added that TSA officials had warned him passing the bill “could close down all the airports in Texas,” which he regarded as a ‘heavy handed threat’ by the federal government.
The staff of Rep. David Simpson said the DOJ had “thrown down the gauntlet” in using such stark language to oppose the bill.

“Either Texas backs off and continues to let government employees fondle innocent women, children and men as a condition of travel,” the staff wrote, “or the TSA [Transportation Safety Administration] has the authority to cancel flights or series of flights.”
“… 97 percent of people who go though the nation’s airports do not go through these offensive searches. And yet, a United States Attorney warns that flights to Texas could be shut down because TSA would not be able to ensure the safety of passengers and crew if agents could not touch genitals. Someone must make a stand against the atrocities of our government agents …”
In a point by point refutation of the DOJ letter, Simpson compared the battle against the TSA to the Texas revolutionary war against Mexico, writing, “Gentlemen, we find ourselves at such a watershed moment today. The federal government is attempting to deprive the citizens of Texas of their constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 9, of the Texas Constitution. If we do not stand up for our citizens in the face of this depravation of their personal rights and dignity, who will?”
The fact that the Department of Justice and the TSA have resorted to threats of economic terrorism in addition to underhanded lobbying techniques again illustrates the fact that the federal government is increasingly behaving like a criminal enterprise with total disregard for the Constitution.
The TSA’s initial response to HB 1937 was to claim that it could not become law because it violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2), a law that the TSA claimed “prevents states from regulating the federal government.”
In reality, this was a complete fabrication.
“The statement is false. Ignorance from the TSA is unlikely, so I’ll call a spade a spade. They’re lying. The supremacy clause says nothing of the sort,” reported Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center.
Here’s the full text:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
“So, in simple terms, what does the supremacy clause mean? Just what it says. The constitution is supreme. And any federal laws made in line with the constitution is supreme. Nothing more, nothing less,” writes Boldin.
As we have documented, TSA grope downs and body scans are now being rolled out on highways, street corners, public buildings, at sports events, and even at local prom nights.

Despite the fact that the federal government has resorted to thuggish intimidation tactics to kill the anti-grope down bill in Texas, this only marks the latest chapter in an epic states’ rights battle that has centered on the agenda of the TSA to become a literal occupying force in America, manning internal checkpoints that will litter the entire country.


Financial Terrorism: TSA Holds Texas Flights Hostage Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Strate L O S S is offline  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-25-2011, 06:13 PM   #2 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
The Lone Star Report - DOJ warns Texas Senate against anti-groping-bill (UPDATE: HB 1937 pulled)

The Lone Star Report - DOJ letter: 'TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight ...'

Strate L O S S is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-25-2011, 07:03 PM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 6,381
fecurtis just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 0 reviews
Quote:
Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause because it provides that the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land." It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, must prevail over any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power.

The concept of federal supremacy was developed by Chief Justice John Marshall, who led the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835. In mcculloch v. maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 4 L. Ed. 579 (1819), the Court invalidated a Maryland law that taxed all banks in the state, including a branch of the national bank located at Baltimore. Marshall held that although none of the enumerated powers of Congress explicitly authorized the incorporation of the national bank, the Necessary and Proper Clause provided the basis for Congress's action. Having established that the exercise of authority was proper, Marshall concluded that "the government of the Union, though limited in its power, is supreme within its sphere of action."

After the Civil War, the Supreme Court was more supportive of States' Rights and used the Tenth Amendment, which provides that the powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people, to justify its position. It was not until the 1930s that the Court shifted its position and invoked the Supremacy Clause to give the federal government broad national power. The federal government cannot involuntarily be subjected to the laws of any state.

The Supremacy Clause also requires state legislatures to take into account policies adopted by the federal government. Two issues arise when State Action is in apparent conflict with federal law. The first is whether the congressional action falls within the powers granted to Congress. If Congress exceeded its authority, the congressional act is invalid and, despite the Supremacy Clause, has no priority over state action. The second issue is whether Congress intended its policy to supersede state policy. Congress often acts without intent to preempt state policy making or with an intent to preempt state policy on a limited set of issues. Congress may intend state and federal policies to coexist.

Some federal legislation preempts state law, however, usually because Congress believes its law should be supreme for reasons of national uniformity. For example, the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (Wagner Act) (29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.) preempts most state law dealing with labor unions and labor-management relations.

In Pennsylvania v. Nelson, 350 U.S. 497, 76 S. Ct. 477, 100 L. Ed. 640 (1956), the Supreme Court developed criteria for assessing whether federal law preempts state action when Congress has not specifically stated its intent. These criteria include whether the scheme of federal regulations is "so pervasive as to make the inference that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it," whether the federal interest "is so dominant that the federal system [must] be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject," or whether the enforcement of a state law "presents a serious danger of conflict with the administration of the federal program."
Supremacy Clause legal definition of Supremacy Clause. Supremacy Clause synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

Not really shocked that infowars has the information wrong and in reading the actual letter (that you yourself provided), there wasn't a single thing in there the DOJ wrote that was "threatening".

You really ought to stop using that as your first source (or a source period). Infowars is nothing but a propaganda site.

Last edited by fecurtis; 05-25-2011 at 07:05 PM.
fecurtis is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-25-2011, 07:12 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
joey.walla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: 4.5K in 6th
Age: 29
Posts: 2,771
Joey
joey.walla just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 7 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by fecurtis View Post
You really ought to stop using that as your first source (or a source period). Infowars is nothing but a propaganda site.
joey.walla is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-25-2011, 07:24 PM   #5 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
I actually am following texas state rep david simpson, thats just an in depth article.

Which federal law, established by congress, gives the TSA powers to illegally search and touch travelers. And not comply with federal osha radiation laws ?

Quote:
If Congress exceeded its authority, the congressional act is invalid and, despite the Supremacy Clause, has no priority over state action.


Please, dont make this about infowars. I know its an easy scapegoat just keep it about The TSA siezing travel across the country. They even wanted to go to highschool prom to conduct searchs. Keep it on topic please.
Strate L O S S is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-25-2011, 07:37 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 6,381
fecurtis just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strate L O S S View Post
I actually am following texas state rep david simpson, thats just an in depth article.
Yeah he'd have no incentive to speak in hyperbole since the DOJ pretty much urged him to drop the bill.

Quote:
Which federal law, established by congress, gives the TSA powers to illegally search and touch travelers. And not comply with federal osha radiation laws ?
No law gives the TSA powers to illegally search travelers, however there is a law that gives TSA the power to legally search travelers:

Quote:
The effect of this bill, if enacted, would be to interfere directly with the Transportation Security Administration's ("TSA") responsibility for civil aviation security. 49 U.S.C. §114(d); 6 U.S.C. §202(1). Congress has directed the Administrator of TSA to take "necessary actions to improve domestic air transportation security," 49 U.S.C. §44904(e), and directed him to "prescribe regulations to protect passengers and property on an aircraft ... against an act of criminal violence or aircraft piracy." ID. §44903(b). Congress has directed TSA to provide for "the screening of all passengers and property ... before boarding," in order to ensure that no passenger is unlawfully carrying a dangerous weapon, explosive, or other destructive substance. Id. §44901(a), §44901(a), §114(e). If the Administrator determines that "a particular threat cannot be addressed in a way adequate to ensure ... the safety of passengers and crew of a particular flight, he "shall cancel the flight or series of flights." Id. §44905(b). HB 1937 would conflict directly with federal law. The practical import of the bill is that it would threaten criminal prosecution of Transportation Security Administration personnel who carry out the security procedures required under federal statutes and TSA regulations passed to implement those statutes. Those officials cannot be put to the choice of risking criminal prosecution or carrying out their federal duties. Under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, Texas has no authority to regulate federal agents and employees in the performance of their federal duties or to pass a statute that conflicts with federal law.

If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute. Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.
I mean, did you not even bother reading the third link you provided?

Quote:
Please, dont make this about infowars. I know its an easy scapegoat just keep it about The TSA siezing travel across the country. They even wanted to go to highschool prom to conduct searchs. Keep it on topic please.
Kinda hard not to when you insist on not only believing their propaganda but attempt to spread it.

Stick with reputable sources please. Regardless, I addressed the story itself.

Nevertheless, I think the issue is the lack of specifics when TSA was created and given its responsibilities by Congress and the Bush Administration after 9/11.

It does say that TSA has the power to search passengers and their property but as we know, by virtue of hindsight, that's pretty vague and can lead to misuse of that power. All it'd take is an amendment presented by a member of Congress to revise the powers and responsibilities...hell how hard is it to take this, "necessary actions to improve domestic air transportation security" and add the word "reasonable" after the word "necessary"?

Last edited by fecurtis; 05-25-2011 at 07:39 PM.
fecurtis is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-25-2011, 08:06 PM   #7 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
I read the links, I posted them LOL. The aricles provide details of what's going on should I somehow conceal it to only paint a picture of my liking ?

So the OSHA violating scanners = great
And TSA vipr squads scanning people on public roads = great
In the pants patdowns at airports= great
And this is all legal right ? But I didn't see any law enacted by congress authorizing them to do all this ?

Beauracratic regulation maybe, but a direct law authorizing this ? Or a ammendment canceling out our ammendment that includes the right to travel, right against search of persons without probable cause ?

Please direct me towards the truth and I'll thank you for it. Right now I'm not seeig it as anything good.
Strate L O S S is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-25-2011, 10:37 PM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 6,381
fecurtis just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strate L O S S View Post
Please direct me towards the truth and I'll thank you for it. Right now I'm not seeig it as anything good.


Quote:
In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes “noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.”

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state “[an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.”
How The TSA Legally Circumvents The Fourth Amendment - Flying With Fish

You're welcome.

Feel free to question the morality of the issue, but in terms of the legality of it, it's perfectly legal.

Last edited by fecurtis; 05-25-2011 at 10:44 PM.
fecurtis is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 09:33 AM   #9 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
Ok thanks for that link, I havent read it yet but I will. Hopefully later tonight during my lunch break I can read that, all the referenced clauses and constitutional ammendments and clauses and get back to the thread.

Whats funny about all the infowars comments people make towards me, Ive been here active since august of 08 and can count on 1 hand the amount of times ive linked to them. And I started many many threads here and posted a LOT.
Strate L O S S is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 10:17 AM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,957
ryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 1 reviews
I'm with my buddy Strate on this one. TSA and the complete FFA is a joke. TSA and the false security blanket to the union Air traffic controllers pulling in 100k a year to sleep on the Job with a sweat 20yr pension!

In retrospect a cop on a dark street at 3am with four known felons has to have some measure of suspension to do a pat down for weapons yet the TSA can rub down grandma trying to fly to her grandbabies birthday party.

My question is and always has been- a plane has 100 people are so and it is "protected" by tsa. The baggage terminal and ticket counters have several times that number and are vital to the facility operations and they have no pat downs or nude scanners. Why?
ryker is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 10:28 AM   #11 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 6,381
fecurtis just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryker View Post
I'm with my buddy Strate on this one. TSA and the complete FFA is a joke. TSA and the false security blanket to the union Air traffic controllers pulling in 100k a year to sleep on the Job with a sweat 20yr pension!

In retrospect a cop on a dark street at 3am with four known felons has to have some measure of suspension to do a pat down for weapons yet the TSA can rub down grandma trying to fly to her grandbabies birthday party.

My question is and always has been- a plane has 100 people are so and it is "protected" by tsa. The baggage terminal and ticket counters have several times that number and are vital to the facility operations and they have no pat downs or nude scanners. Why?
I actually agree with him too. As the ruling I posted states, it says “[an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.”

What constitutes "no more intrusive or intensive than necessary"? And seriously? We can elect not to fly? Was that judge on crack?

I'd say groping children and making people go through those nude scanners is crossing the line and isn't necessary. Sadly it's legal, which is the point I was debating.

I'd think if we were all debating on a moral standpoint, we'd all just agree....and that'd be boring.
fecurtis is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 11:02 AM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,957
ryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivicryker just slammed it into 6th gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 1 reviews
The world must be ending- We all agree on something!
ryker is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 02:12 PM   #13 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
Ill agree with anyone on an issue worth agreeing upon.

Im going to read more in depth on the articles and references youve provided fecurtis. As it is I see a LOT of lawyer trick speak in their. Need to sit down amd try amd comprehend all of it. May take me a few days.

Sworn peace officers can't do what the TSA is doing. Why ? Because its illegal LOL I wonder how or why the TSA can not be subject to the constitution, but I will find out.
Strate L O S S is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 02:20 PM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 6,381
fecurtis just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strate L O S S View Post
Ill agree with anyone on an issue worth agreeing upon.

Im going to read more in depth on the articles and references youve provided fecurtis. As it is I see a LOT of lawyer trick speak in their. Need to sit down amd try amd comprehend all of it. May take me a few days.

Sworn peace officers can't do what the TSA is doing. Why ? Because its illegal LOL I wonder how or why the TSA can not be subject to the constitution, but I will find out.
It's not lawyer trick speak, it's a verdict from a court case which by that standard, makes it the law of the land (exception, if hypothetically the USSC ruled differently on the matter, but the case never made it that far).

Law 101, law rulings must be consistent so if the precedent was set back in the 70's, its there to stay all else equal. Although yeah, you grope a kid I'm pretty sure that's illegal regardless and the nude scanners are up for interpretation, THAT would require the back and forth of tricky lawyer talk. You could easily argue that its more intrusive than necessary and you could easily argue that it is.

However within the context of this thread, banning TSA pat downs would give the Federal Government authority to shut down airports in Texas. A typical pat down is not more intrusive than necessary. I've been through it once in the past and while incredibly annoyed, the usual pat down isn't illegal.

I also think some of this is your knack for taking a few bad apples and making it seem that it's the norm. I believe cops who behave inappropriately should be punished just the same as TSA agents who also act inappropriately, however, speaking from my experience alone, TSA workers aren't horrible...should one touch my balls, I'll change my tune.

I did go through one of those nude scanners once too in San Fran, my biggest annoyance with that was how eff'ing long it took.
fecurtis is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 02:52 PM   #15 (permalink)
VIP Member



 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,358
Strate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivicStrate L O S S just put it into 2nd gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 64 reviews
Man its not the pat downs, they are reaching in and grabbing genetalia. The nude scanners emit SO MUCH radiation and back spatter.

Its past a pat down, ive been through normal patdown through airports. And many times havent, nor the radiation machine. Problem is that theyre doing it at places and its wrong.
Strate L O S S is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-26-2011, 02:57 PM   #16 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 6,381
fecurtis just put it into 1st gear on 8thcivic
iTrader: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strate L O S S View Post
Man its not the pat downs, they are reaching in and grabbing genetalia. The nude scanners emit SO MUCH radiation and back spatter.

Its past a pat down, ive been through normal patdown through airports. And many times havent, nor the radiation machine. Problem is that theyre doing it at places and its wrong.
At least there we agree.

I'd be cool with it though if Kiera Knightley or someone decided to become a TSA agent, I'd probably fly a lot more too.
fecurtis is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the 8th Generation Honda Civic Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Philly Police Harass, Threaten to Shoot Man Legally Carrying Gun Read more: http://w Strate L O S S On Topic 193 05-25-2011 12:51 PM
Texas-Racing.com Meet Tonight! Tyler, Texas mcook33 Texas 0 07-17-2010 02:30 PM
US Car Unions Threaten Strike and One of the Big three might loose it all! Snake-eyes Garage 23 07-31-2009 08:56 AM
Rules of Flight jerhunter Water Cooler 3 12-20-2007 04:14 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:15 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
copyright 8thcivic.com - all rights reserved