Welcome to BookBoardz.com!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

More On This Farcical Election

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
   Book Forums (Home) -> Arts RSS
Next:  The Wisdom of Harvey Penick Golf's Best Loved Tea..  
Author Message
knews4u2chew

External


Since: Oct 23, 2008
Posts: 2



(Msg. 91) Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:09 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>arts>books, others (more info?)

On Oct 22, 8:32 am, Don Lancaster wrote:
> Rob Dekker wrote:
>
> > For one, the cycle efficiency of hydrogen sucks. Electricity to hydrogen
> > back to electricity (which is what you need for a hydrogen-powered vehicles)
> > is in the range of 25%.
>
> IJHE uses a 12 percent figure, but this seems outrageously high.
>
> 2.5 percent BEFORE amortization would be more likely.
>
> Exergy GUARANTEES electricity-->hydrogen-->electricity flat out ain't
> gonna happen.
>

H2O can have one or two "free" electrons in it's orbits.
When you relieve the bond without heat (converting electrons) in a
"cold process" you have everything left over in usable unstable form.
One can collect these freed electrons for any electrical purpose until
the gases are recombined.

 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Fred Kasner

External


Since: Oct 22, 2008
Posts: 4



(Msg. 92) Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:19 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

wrote:

>>> Arindam Banerjee.
>> Sorry you limited twerp. It is clear that you along with that idiot
>> George Bush have essentially zero knowledge about science. You can't get
>> anywhere near a break-even amount of energy from hydrogen. It is not a
>> free resource on planet Earth. It is already "burned" in its most common
>> form - water.
>> FK
>
> It's most common form is "natural water" which has been
> electrostaticly charged by the earth's atmosphere consisting of
> photons, ions, lightning, gravity, et al.
> It essentially not "ash" or dead as a pure H20 molecule in stasis
> would be considered and analyzed.

Boy, a bunch of them just flew over with post!
FK

 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Don Lancaster

External


Since: Mar 07, 2006
Posts: 11



(Msg. 93) Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:54 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Fred Kasner wrote:
> wrote:
>
>>>> Arindam Banerjee.
>>> Sorry you limited twerp. It is clear that you along with that idiot
>>> George Bush have essentially zero knowledge about science. You can't get
>>> anywhere near a break-even amount of energy from hydrogen. It is not a
>>> free resource on planet Earth. It is already "burned" in its most common
>>> form - water.
>>> FK
>>
>> It's most common form is "natural water" which has been
>> electrostaticly charged by the earth's atmosphere consisting of
>> photons, ions, lightning, gravity, et al.
>> It essentially not "ash" or dead as a pure H20 molecule in stasis
>> would be considered and analyzed.
>
> Boy, a bunch of them just flew over with post!
> FK

Correct attribution should be "Boy, a whole flock of 'em flew over that
time."

By Cauliflower McPugg, of course.

Only I thought his original name was Moonshine McPugg.



--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don DeleteThis @tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Just Me

External


Since: May 13, 2008
Posts: 119



(Msg. 94) Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 2:44 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>arts>books, others (more info?)

On Oct 21, 1:04 pm, "Rod Speed" wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee wrote

> >>> From a high moral point of view, the humane mousetrap is a better mousetrap.
> >> Nope, not when you dont consider that animals matter a damn.
> > So you are a Sarah Palin devotee?
>
> Nope, I think she is a brainless bimbo with an IQ barely better than that of a . . .

Moose?

But no! This one falls for the mindless default of . . .

> moron.

In my experience, there is no word, short of "idiot" more commonly to
be found in the usage of a moron than "moron".

I, for one, am always being called "moron" or "idiot" by morons and
idiots, and not simply because for them "imbecile" is too hard to
spell. No, the one thing that truly characterizes the mind of an idiot
is that in his idiocy it is impossible to recognize what's smart. The
moron will always see the smartest thought as strictly the dumbest.

A moose, unlike the moron, if he or she is a successful, surviving
moose (and not a moron amongst the moose) might be judged 'smart' when
it comes to being good at being a moose. Sarah Palin, in the view of a
vast majority of Alaskans is good at being an Alaskan, and very good
at being good for Alaska. In the judgment of Alaskans she is "smart".

But Sarah on the scene of the lower 48 is a moose caught in the
headlights, blinded in the glare of the rest of the world. This does
not make her a "moron".

There's a lot of difference between a moose and a moron, and this
poster ought to have known that.
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com
http://jesusexegesis.blogspot.com
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Just Me

External


Since: May 13, 2008
Posts: 119



(Msg. 95) Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:09 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Oct 21, 7:17 pm, "DanB (Previously DB)" wrote:

> It does not work like that. I have been around the block with free
> energy kooks all too often. So, if some kook comes along and says I can
> run my car on water, I should give this credence. I have written
> countless times why doing so would be a waste of time.

Jack Nicholson is, for one, the sort of "kook" this person of high
mental balance is talking about.

So let us see what is so wonderfully sane about the idea of . . .

NOT using water for generation of hydroelectric power, so that you
can . . .

NOToperate a plant where hydrogen gas is produced by electrolysis of
water to the purpose that you can . . .

NOT "run your car on water"?

Show that you are . . .

NOT NUTS for taking such a nutty position against what is so obviously
workable to any sane mind.
--
JM
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Fred Kasner

External


Since: Oct 22, 2008
Posts: 4



(Msg. 96) Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 9:39 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>arts>books, others (more info?)

wrote:

> H2O can have one or two "free" electrons in it's orbits.
> When you relieve the bond without heat (converting electrons) in a
> "cold process" you have everything left over in usable unstable form.
> One can collect these freed electrons for any electrical purpose until
> the gases are recombined.

This is without doubt the most uninformed comment about the nature of
the chemical bond that I have ever read.
If an electron is in an "orbit" (no such thing exists for atoms) what
you really were trying to say was that an electron is described by an
orbital. But it is NOT FREE. If an electron has an orbital description
it is not free. A free electron is not bound and so no orbital describes
it. What in the world is a "relieve(d) ... bond"? No such description is
appropriate in the fielf of quantum mechanics. And what does the
expression mean "usable unstable form"?
The above statement is hopeless gibberish. Even a first year chemistry
student knows more about the nature of the chemical bond than the
nonsense shown above provides. And you claim to be a in the top 1% of what?

This one is truly a classic and I am going to save it and shove it in
your face repeatedly every time you essay to claim to know something
about science even in the most elementary form.

FK
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Vrag Naroda

External


Since: Aug 17, 2008
Posts: 19



(Msg. 97) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: alt>angst, others (more info?)

Obama is not socialist. A New Yorker pundit says so!

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/2008/10/that-which-is-n.html

Neither U.S. "major" party has ever nominated a socialist as its
candidate for President. FDR certainly didn't qualify; hell, even
Nader really doesn't (and Nader can't win because nobody'll vote for
him because he can't win because...).

Barack Obama is not even all that liberal; even his associations with
an ex-Weatherman and a "radical" former pastor can't redeem him. He's
a "nice," "normal," "middle-of-the-road" post-Reagan center-rightist,
whose campaign rhetoric, "platform" and policy suggestions would be
totally unremarkable *if he were ALL White*. That's why I'm unable to
support him: if you dip a pig in brown paint it's still a pig.

Wake me up when either "major" party nominates for President somebody
who's as far to the left as, say, Gerald Ford in 1976.


Verily,
TheDavid

--
"Some think it's noise, I think it's pretty."
..................................................................
(C) 2008 'TheDavid^TM' | All Rights Reserved World-Wide Always
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Marko Amnell

External


Since: Dec 19, 2007
Posts: 37



(Msg. 98) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:05 am
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Vrag Naroda wrote:

> Obama is not socialist. A New Yorker pundit says so!
>
> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/2008/10/that-which-is-n.html
>
> Neither U.S. "major" party has ever nominated a socialist as its
> candidate for President. FDR certainly didn't qualify; hell, even
> Nader really doesn't (and Nader can't win because nobody'll vote for
> him because he can't win because...).
>
> Barack Obama is not even all that liberal; even his associations with
> an ex-Weatherman and a "radical" former pastor can't redeem him. He's
> a "nice," "normal," "middle-of-the-road" post-Reagan center-rightist,
> whose campaign rhetoric, "platform" and policy suggestions would be
> totally unremarkable *if he were ALL White*. That's why I'm unable to
> support him: if you dip a pig in brown paint it's still a pig.

A pig? As in ...

"Dig it! First they killed those pigs and then they put a fork in
their
bellies. Wild!"

You even mention the Weathermen. Did you notice the
Dohrn quote posted recently to RAB?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardine_Dohrn
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Marko Amnell

External


Since: Dec 19, 2007
Posts: 37



(Msg. 99) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:42 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Vrag Naroda wrote:

[...]

> > > Barack Obama is not even all that liberal; even his associations with
> > > an ex-Weatherman and a "radical" former pastor can't redeem him. He's
> > > a "nice," "normal," "middle-of-the-road" post-Reagan center-rightist,
> > > whose campaign rhetoric, "platform" and policy suggestions would be
> > > totally unremarkable *if he were ALL White*. That's why I'm unable to
> > > support him: if you dip a pig in brown paint it's still a pig.
>
> > A pig? As in ...
>
> > "Dig it! First they killed those pigs and then they put a fork in
> > their bellies. Wild!"
>
> Are you trying to say you think the Manson Family were socialists?

Nope. Your choice of the word "pig" to designate Obama
just seemed curious coming so soon after the discussion
of the Dohrn quote. I was wondering if there was anything
more to it than mere coincidence. It seems there wasn't,
unless one wants to go digging for subconscious explanations,
Freudian slips, and so on. Freudian slips are not completely
off topic, however, as the discussion of the Dohrn quote
did involve the question of whether sacrifice might be a
Jungian archetype that crops up in the oddest places
in the modern world.

[...]

> I got the measure of your average White "progressives" at an antiwar
> demonstration during "Operation Desert Storm" 1992 I burned a paper
> simulacrum of a U.S. flag before rolling TV cameras: the people who
> were most pissed off by that, who snatched and extinguished my signal
> of protest, were "nice" White middle-class suburban kids trying to
> prove that "peace is patriotic" -- that "We're not all like THAT."
> Granted my little stunt was slightly childish, but their disavowal
> showed they were not really serious about opposing Bush I's cowardly
> dastardly attack on Iraq, that they'd drop it and walk away if it
> offended Public Opinion, as if true progressives should be ruled by
> Gallup polls and right-wing radio shows.

You're certainly politically active. I have never even voted,
although legally I have the right to vote in elections in two
countries (Finland and Canada).
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Marko Amnell

External


Since: Dec 19, 2007
Posts: 37



(Msg. 100) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:45 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Jonah Thomas wrote:

> Marko Amnell wrote:
> > Vrag Naroda wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > > > > That's why I'm unable to
> > > > > support him: if you dip a pig in brown paint it's still a pig.
> > >
> > > > A pig? As in ...
> > >
> > > > "Dig it! First they killed those pigs and then they put a fork in
> > > > their bellies. Wild!"
> > >
> > > Are you trying to say you think the Manson Family were socialists?
> >
> > Nope. Your choice of the word "pig" to designate Obama
> > just seemed curious coming so soon after the discussion
> > of the Dohrn quote.
>
> It wasn't that long ago that Obama made a "pig in lipstick" quote and
> the GOP got all upset that they thought he was talking about their
> candidate Putin. I thought he was referring to that more than to Dohrn.

Putin? I guess you mean Palin. What an odd slip, and
yet not so odd if you know some French. "Putain" is
"whore" in French. Talk about Freudian slips.

I guess the Obama line you mean is:
“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.”
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Vrag Naroda

External


Since: Aug 17, 2008
Posts: 19



(Msg. 101) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:55 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Marko Amnell wrote back:

> Vrag Naroda wrote:
[...]

> > Barack Obama is not even all that liberal; even his associations with
> > an ex-Weatherman and a "radical" former pastor can't redeem him. He's
> > a "nice," "normal," "middle-of-the-road" post-Reagan center-rightist,
> > whose campaign rhetoric, "platform" and policy suggestions would be
> > totally unremarkable *if he were ALL White*. That's why I'm unable to
> > support him: if you dip a pig in brown paint it's still a pig.

> A pig? As in ...

> "Dig it! First they killed those pigs and then they put a fork in
> their bellies. Wild!"

Are you trying to say you think the Manson Family were socialists?


> You even mention the Weathermen. Did you notice the Dohrn quote
> posted recently to RAB?

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardine_Dohrn

Who cares what Dohrn said about a crazed killer cult in 1969? As I
said in another recent post you must not have seen, that Weathermen
could get married proves they weren't really radical, that they were
bourgeois poseurs and provocateurs, "hipsters" in current parlance.

Referring to that Wikipeda entry, Dorhn was correct about the White
"radicals" in Chicago though: that they did not join the Black
militants in their justifiable wrath did show they were "pansies" --
if not racist hypocrites.

I got the measure of your average White "progressives" at an antiwar
demonstration during "Operation Desert Storm" 1992 I burned a paper
simulacrum of a U.S. flag before rolling TV cameras: the people who
were most pissed off by that, who snatched and extinguished my signal
of protest, were "nice" White middle-class suburban kids trying to
prove that "peace is patriotic" -- that "We're not all like THAT."
Granted my little stunt was slightly childish, but their disavowal
showed they were not really serious about opposing Bush I's cowardly
dastardly attack on Iraq, that they'd drop it and walk away if it
offended Public Opinion, as if true progressives should be ruled by
Gallup polls and right-wing radio shows.

So all I can really say for Dohrn and her husband, "the son of Thomas
G. Ayers, former Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison" (to quote
the Wikipedia entry on Bill Ayers), is that at least there was a time
in their lives and in American society when "radicals" were not afraid
that "nice" suburban petit bourgeois might not *like* them. It's too
bad for the Weathermen that too few of them really meant it.

Dig it!


Forkingly,
TheDavid

--
"Some think it's noise, I think it's pretty."
..................................................................
(C) 2008 'TheDavid^TM' | All Rights Reserved World-Wide Always
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Vrag Naroda

External


Since: Aug 17, 2008
Posts: 19



(Msg. 102) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:23 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In alt.angst Jonah Thomas wrote:
[...]

> There's also an election for a senator in kentucky. You have a choice
> between the incumbent republican Addison "Mitch" McConnell (who looks
> like Little Red Riding Hood's grandmother) and the democrat Bruce
> Lunsford (who looks like a cross between a gray-haired teddy bear and
> McCain). McConnell's wife is Bush's Secretary of Labor. Lunsford was 1
> point ahead in one recent poll and 6 points behind in another. If you
> vote against McConnell it might possibly make the difference.

> I don't know who's running for your House seat. One democrat got elected
> to the House from kentucky last time.

Do understand another point about voting: none of the candidates you
pointed to could possibly represent ME in MY concerns, nor are they
people I could choose to give POWER over MY life. Choosing a ruler is
choosing to be ruled, and "breeding for servility" failed in my case.

Y'all are welcome to be as servile as you can manage -- after all
"It's a free country!" I prefer however that you don't involve me in
your big BDSM scene against my will and at my expense.


Clearly,
D.

--
"Some think it's noise, I think it's pretty."
..................................................................
(C) 2008 'TheDavid^TM' | All Rights Reserved World-Wide Always
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Vrag Naroda

External


Since: Aug 17, 2008
Posts: 19



(Msg. 103) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:11 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I referred to:

> "Operation Desert Storm" 1992

Wrong: it was 1991.


Correctingly,
D.

--
"Some think it's noise, I think it's pretty."
..................................................................
(C) 2008 'TheDavid^TM' | All Rights Reserved World-Wide Always
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Jonah Thomas

External


Since: Jun 19, 2008
Posts: 7



(Msg. 104) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:48 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Marko Amnell wrote:
> Vrag Naroda wrote:

> [...]
>
> > > > That's why I'm unable to
> > > > support him: if you dip a pig in brown paint it's still a pig.
> >
> > > A pig? As in ...
> >
> > > "Dig it! First they killed those pigs and then they put a fork in
> > > their bellies. Wild!"
> >
> > Are you trying to say you think the Manson Family were socialists?
>
> Nope. Your choice of the word "pig" to designate Obama
> just seemed curious coming so soon after the discussion
> of the Dohrn quote.

It wasn't that long ago that Obama made a "pig in lipstick" quote and
the GOP got all upset that they thought he was talking about their
candidate Putin. I thought he was referring to that more than to Dohrn.
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Les Cargill

External


Since: Jul 05, 2008
Posts: 14



(Msg. 105) Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Post subject: Re: More On This Farcical Election [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>arts>books, others (more info?)

Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> "Les Cargill" wrote in message
>
<snip>
>>>
>> The founding theorem of statistics. Google for the Wiki.
>
> Lies, damned lies, are truer?
>

Truth is where you find it. That is one way. I'd be hard
pressed to give up say, thermodynamics or certain other
statistically underwritten tools.

You simply cannot study people's aggregate behavior without
statistical inference.

<snip>
>>> Were you more hated by the world then, or less?
>>>
>> 1) Who cares? 2) I don't really know. Probably not - I suspect
>> the British were at that point in time.
>
> 1. Those USAns abroad who pretend to be Canadians.

Is that even true?

> I strongly suspect that
> our very pleasant and knowledgeable train companion in the Ghan who claimed
> to be Canadian was actually a USAn.


Could be. I would consider that people draw to invalid generalization
based on where someone is from all the time.

But there are worse things than being Canadian.

> 2. The British (in India) were both loved and hated.

Agreed. And the influence has been quite mixed.

> Loved by the elite and
> the lower classes, and hated by the aspiring middle classes. They did not
> bring in debt, but brought in lots of useful things, which will be valued by
> Indians in due course.
>

Ironic in that the moral justification for Empire was to
save the rank and file from exploitation by what
descended from the Mughuls.

<snip>
>> No kidding? That's interesting.
>
> Indeed. Nehru grieves about it. He said that if only Akbar had been more
> interested in technical stuff, India could never have been conquered so
> easily.


I have to wonder, since India per se was so polyglot. My understanding
is that some "castes" welcomed British intervention more than others
( and I don't mean to imply that I know which ones, nor that this is a
well-founded belief).

India is just a stupefyingly complex place.

<snip>
>> All I can do is note that where there is *rapid* increase in the quality
>> of life ( such as we can measure it), debt is closely associated.
>
> Money comes, money goes. With equal rapidity.

But goods and services accrete, like strat on a riverbed. The railroads
were a debt bubble, but when the bubble receded, the tracks and trains
were left.

> You win a lottery, and lose
> at the sharemarket. Debt is more usually associated with unhappiness,
> anxiety, ill-health...
>

If it hurts, you're doing it wrong. The sort of debt I mean isn't the
sort we've seen for a while. The sort I mean is people financing
enterprises to make goods or services to serve other people.

We obviously have our problems with the concept as well.

Debt, to me, is the concept best suited to defeat fatalisms.
It creates leverage for people to change station. Obviously,
with all powerful tools, self-injury is a possibility.

<snip>

--
Les Cargill
 >> Stay informed about: More On This Farcical Election 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
The Last Van Gogh - For those interested is some very-informative background information concerning how and why, during the last seventy days of his life, Vincent van Gogh was able to produce over seventy incredibly-beautiful final masterpieces, the recent historical novel....

ahoy Don Tuite! - Is yr e-mail down or are you out of town?? T

Book Review - The Road to Wigan Pier (Orwell) - The Road to Wigan Pier George Orwell Penguin 1962 [1937] 204 pages A book review by Danny Yee http://dannyreviews.com/h/Wigan_Pier.html In the 1930s George Orwell set out to learn about the English working class, spending time living among the..

Algernon Charles Swinburne - These two poems by Swinburne have been overlooked in the great mass of excellent verse he penned. In the diction and style of Scots border ballads, they come from the Third Series of Poems of Ballads. The Witch-Mother "O where will ye gang to and ...

The name's Bloom... Leopold Bloom. - I haven't read any Ian Fleming since jr-high, I don't think, but a recent piece on Hawthorne in the Guardian http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/classics/story/0,6000,991538,00.html made the provocative claim that "You Only Live Twice" dra...
   Book Forums (Home) -> Arts All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Page 7 of 10

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Warning: fopen(/home/adsense_reject.txt) [function.fopen]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/autoforu/public_html/Giga/GigaFunctions.php on line 1142

Warning: fwrite(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in /home/autoforu/public_html/Giga/GigaFunctions.php on line 1143

Warning: fclose(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in /home/autoforu/public_html/Giga/GigaFunctions.php on line 1144



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]