![]() |
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/16/2004 2:59 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter. Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist...(SNIP TO...) MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications of 1925....(SNIP TO....) During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through MARS or individual hams...(SNIP TO.....) But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time, changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the military, that of being an affiliate communications service with other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs to fulfill its mission. In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission, it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service. Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's pontificating about. 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP) Here we go again...."Back at ADA......" (UNSNIP)...and got stationed at a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what radio communications was about. No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was about. Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist". The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with AMATEUR RADIO...?!?!aphy. Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for anti-gravity... It could be the lead in your....head. Putz.. Steve, K4YZ |
Len Over 21 wrote:
Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: Mike Coslo Date: 6/17/2004 1:39 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Len Over 21 wrote: Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. It wasn't meant as a pun, Mike. He's being insulting. Again. Not to mention that the paragraph you cited was yet another utterance of ignorance, in particularly the part about ".....(radio) hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services.". He couldn't be MORE wrong....Well...Yes, he could, but it's hard to tell with him. I like the part about "Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA". First of all, they do. Regularly. Therefore Lennie's busted lying again. (I know...he makes a joke out being labelled a liar, but hey, if the shoe fits....) Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the "SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio services", then they can go to those other sources. Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? Where does this idiot (and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service, Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?! One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been issued some grade-school level common sense. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
Len Over 21 wrote: Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. Thank you. [there may be more... :-) ] I can't do too much of that in here. Rev. Jimmie's Bible Class will have me in the corner for "demonstrating childlike behavior" or something very un-serious. :-) That, too, is very PREDICTABLE. :-) Meanwhile, if I ever find out what's holding me down on the anti- gravity invention, I will rise above it all... :-) |
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: The Game's Afoot! From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/16/2004 2:59 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter. Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist...(SNIP TO...) MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications of 1925....(SNIP TO....) During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through MARS or individual hams...(SNIP TO.....) But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time, changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the military, that of being an affiliate communications service with other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs to fulfill its mission. In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission, it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service. No...MARS can and does function by itself. It is controlled by the military and therefore run by the military using government radio equipment. Getting civilians involved is only part of the task. MARS has never involved "amatuer radio," only amateur radio. For information on Army MARS, see the Fort Huachuca website and follow the links there. While Huachuca is the Military Intelligence School Hq, Army MARS is headquartered there off to one side. Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's pontificating about. Now, now. I've been to Huachuca. :-) I've controlled MARS transmissions. :-) 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP) Here we go again...."Back at ADA......" It could have been AGA (San Francisco) or AHA (Hawaii) or Seattle or Manila or Okinawa or even Anchorage. :-) What isn't realized is that the U.S. military did NOT depend on fixed-point communications via manual telegraphy, only teleprinter telegraphy (TTY on landline or RTTY by radio). Did NOT depend as far back as a half century ago. They don't even today. (UNSNIP)...and got stationed at a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what radio communications was about. No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was about. Nursie did not exist a half century ago. He isn't in any way, shape, or form able to conceptualize much of anything of that time unless spoon-fed the information from some ARRL publication. Nursie should stop trying to dictate what others said long ago or experienced long ago...or even what they say they thought long ago...when nursie didn't exist. :-) Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist". Nope. Only very specific amateurs. Principally those which hang out in here trying to make noises like they are special representatives from Newington. :-) If anyone keeps harping on obeyance-adherence to the standards and practices of the 1930s in amateuism of the 2000s, then they automatically join the "traditionalist- fundamentalist" club. If anyone uses manual telegraphy skill testing as a requirement for use of amateur HF bands then they are automatically in the "traditionalist-fundamentalist" club. Time can't be frozen but those club members all want to freeze out anyone not thinking as they do. The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with AMATEUR RADIO...?!?!aphy. Poor nursie. Never did any big-time radio communications in his military days...resents anyone who did. Poor nursie...never did any radio-electronics engineering and resents anyone who did. Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out in opposition to him. ACAN (Army Command-Administration Network) of the late 1940s through all of the 1950s and into some of the 1960s was worldwide on HF at 14 major communications centers from Karlsruhe to Asmara to Taiwan to Tokyo to the Canal Zone. The Signal Corps had plenty of royalty-free, non- copyrighted pictures and information available to anyone who cared to publish them. [by law, the U.S. government cannot copyright its own works] Even though the USAF was given responsibility of operation of the entire ADA station facilities in 1963, it never ceased its 24/7 communications function until the final 1978 U.S. military transmission from Camp Tomlinson. Nothing of that was ever printed in U.S. amateur radio publications. The Army, again, was heavy into communications work in Vietnam from 1962 on through 1970 as explained at the Army Center for Military History on signal efforts in southeast Asia. New concepts were introduced there, the first military satellite relay operations began there, and troposcatter multi-channel radio was put to the test in a war zone. I don't recall anything of that effort published even as general interest items in any U.S. amateur radio publication. Is there ever any mention in U.S. amateur publications of the U.S. government's own involvement in HF radio, through SHARES? I don't think so. FEMA gets a passing mention although FEMA is a small part of the whole of SHARES. SHARES takes in MARS as a member. For an example of the MARS-SHARES operation, read the Army Communicator for operation Grecian Firebolt 2002 held over a four-week period. Grecian Firebolt 2002 didn't involve civilian radio amateurs of MARS. Tsk, tsk, tsk...poor nursie wants to concentrate solely on amateur RADIO as if it works by different physical principles than other radio of other radio services. It doesn't. The examples useful to amateur radio are neglected in the amateur press, therefore nursie doesn't want to know anything except what is spoon-fed him through hum radio magazines. Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for anti-gravity... It could be the lead in your....head. Poor nursie...bitter and resentful to the last. I'll bet nursie loves to heckle entertainers from the audience while they are trying to entertain an audience. :-) Nursie can't lighten up. Always has to make fun of others. Not a good mental health sign. Putz.. Well, back to nursie's name-calling again. "Meaningful discourse" in the only way nursie can get along...dissing and cursing those who won't agree with him. Must be the "new" 'inherent good will of radio amateurs'... LHA / WMD |
In article , (Steve
the Grate Meaningful Communicator) writes: Subject: The Game's Afoot! From: Mike Coslo Date: 6/17/2004 1:39 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Len Over 21 wrote: Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. It wasn't meant as a pun, Mike. He's being insulting. Again. Poor nursie...can't even take some simple word-play. Note "dielectic materialism" v. "dielectric materialism." See "dialectic" as "a logical test of ideas for validity" versus "dialectric" which is a fancy word for "insulator." :-) Tsk, tsk...some are strung so tight that they are "insulated" from a little levity. :-) Not to mention that the paragraph you cited was yet another utterance of ignorance, in particularly the part about ".....(radio) hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services.". He couldn't be MORE wrong....Well...Yes, he could, but it's hard to tell with him. I like the part about "Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA". First of all, they do. Regularly. Oh? Where? When? :-) Was the SINCGARS family of radios ever mentioned? A quarter million of those radios have been produced since 1989 and are in standard small-unit communications use of the U.S. military today. Made by ITT, Fort Wayne, IN. Has the PRC-104 HF manpack radio ever been mentioned? Dates back before 1986, still in use today. The R/T module is standard in a variety of ground radios, from the manpack through vehicular to the fixed-site systems. Made by Hughes Ground Systems. Neat little antenna tuner module in the manpack version...uses the same Bruene detector first used on the USMC-contract T-195 HF transmitter back in 1955. Has the AN/FRC-93 ever been mentioned? It should. Amateurs know it as the ham version of the Collins KWM2. :-) Trouble is, the FRC-93 is the military-labeled version of the COMMERCIAL KWM2 which is supplied with a quartz crystal pack covering much more than ham bands. Ham publications have strummed HAARP and mentioned only the ham involvement in MARS...and lots of ancient stuff of old radio stations before most everyone's time. Just nothing in the last two decades. Therefore Lennie's busted lying again. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie getting all red in the face with rage again and can't pull out any information from all those "secret" military radios "he can't talk about." :-) Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the "SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio services", then they can go to those other sources. Won't be much there, either. :-) There's much more on the Internet, especially the military collector sites...but those are about as behind the times as the boatanchor and surplus sites. Or, anyone that is interested in what is done today in the military (or of two decades back) can just ask anyone in the defense electronics industry. Very little of the "radios" built for the U.S. military or government are classified or "sensitive" (for security reasons, not receiver sensitivity). Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? "Inordinate?!?" No one was asking for "inordinate." Even a minor mention might draw some interest...except for those who wish to remain insular, isolated from having to learn anything but the latest DX contest scores. :-) Where does this idiot (and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service, Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?! Must be more of this "meaningful discourse" again. :-) The "A" in APCO does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in SHARES does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in MARS does NOT refer to Amateur. Nursie needs to know his "A" from a hole in the ground. :-) One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been issued some grade-school level common sense. Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Meaningful discourse?" Poor nursie. Still resentful that someone took the time and trouble to educate himself and keep working in radio-electronics in the aerospace industry as a design engineer in radio-electronics and then retire with a comfortable income. :-) Sucks to be nursie? :-) LHA / WMD |
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/17/2004 4:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, if I ever find out what's holding me down on the anti- gravity invention, I will rise above it all. You mean walking on water wasn't enough...?!?!? Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/17/2004 4:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission, it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service. No...MARS can and does function by itself. It is controlled by the military and therefore run by the military using government radio equipment. Getting civilians involved is only part of the task. MARS is dependent upon Amateurs to do the bulk of it's traffic. It was true during Viet Nam, it's true today. MARS has never involved "amatuer radio," only amateur radio. Again your only defensible argument is that I transposed two letters. For information on Army MARS, see the Fort Huachuca website and follow the links there. While Huachuca is the Military Intelligence School Hq, Army MARS is headquartered there off to one side. I know you'll find this hard to believe, but life exists beyond websites. Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's pontificating about. Now, now. I've been to Huachuca. I am sure you've been lot's of places. An active imagination allows for that. I've controlled MARS transmissions. Uh huh. 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP) Here we go again...."Back at ADA......" It could have been AGA (San Francisco) or AHA (Hawaii) or Seattle or Manila or Okinawa or even Anchorage. Uh huh. No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was about. Nursie did not exist a half century ago. He isn't in any way, shape, or form able to conceptualize much of anything of that time unless spoon-fed the information from some ARRL publication. Regardless of my birthdate, your rhetoric and spamming of the NG exists TODAY, and it is rife with your tales of what you did five decades ago. None of it has anything to do with Amateur Radio. Nursie should stop trying to dictate what others said long ago or experienced long ago...or even what they say they thought long ago...when nursie didn't exist. "Dictating" what you said? All I have to do is quote it. I couldn't invent some of the silly stuff you come up with! Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist". Nope. Only very specific amateurs. Principally those which hang out in here trying to make noises like they are special representatives from Newington. The ONLY people who have ever presented themselves as "representitives from Newington" were Ed Hare and Jon Bloom, and even then they were quite clear in stating that thier persoanlly held opinions did not represent the ARRL. Only YOU make that assertion, and it's still a lie. If anyone keeps harping on obeyance-adherence to the standards and practices of the 1930s in amateuism of the 2000s, then they automatically join the "traditionalist- fundamentalist" club. Then I guess we get to heap you into that pile, Your Scumminess, since YOU are the ONLY one making any such assertion. No one in this forum has made any such assertion. Even those who staunchly support Morse Code testing have advocated advancement in the service. I encourge you to provide even ONE quote that supports your assertion to the contrary.... If anyone uses manual telegraphy skill testing as a requirement for use of amateur HF bands then they are automatically in the "traditionalist-fundamentalist" club. Time can't be frozen but those club members all want to freeze out anyone not thinking as they do. And again that would be you. Everyone MUST be Lennie, otherwise they are "traditionalist-fundamentalist, jack-booted Nazi thugs". The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with AMATEUR RADIO...?!?! Poor nursie. Never did any big-time radio communications in his military days...resents anyone who did. This is a forum about AMATEUR RADIO. And yes, I did "big time radio communication" in the military. Poor nursie...never did any radio-electronics engineering and resents anyone who did. I don't resent your alleged engineering career, Lennie. I know several electronics engineers, and they are fine fellows who make meaningful contributions. You are NOT a fine fellow, and there's more than a few indicators that your "contribution" to radio communications were limited to your few articles sold to Ham Radio magazine. (No doubt a last resort in "getting published" since I am sure the professional journals cut you off at the knees.) Even then I can't find a single example where any of your "work" was original, nor can I find any example of where your "contributions" were complimentary to the advancement of ANY radio communications discipline. Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out in opposition to him. I am only "bitterly resentful" of pathological liars and persons who proactively seek to cause ACAN (Army Command-Administration Network) of the late...(SNIP) has NOTHING to do with Amateur Radio, then or now. Tsk, tsk, tsk...poor nursie wants to concentrate solely on amateur RADIO as if it works by different physical principles than other radio of other radio services. It doesn't. The examples useful to amateur radio are neglected in the amateur press, therefore nursie doesn't want to know anything except what is spoon-fed him through hum radio magazines. Another lie. I have repeatedly stated it's not the physics. It's the application. And it's too bad YOU don't avail yourself of the "hum radio magazines". (Your true colors are showing, Scumbag.) Poor nursie...bitter and resentful to the last. I'll bet nursie loves to heckle entertainers from the audience while they are trying to entertain an audience. If I paid money to see someone who isn't, in my opionion, entertaining, I do one better...I get up, go the manager and get my money back on the way out the door. Nursie can't lighten up. Always has to make fun of others. Not a good mental health sign. Untrue again. I find it QUITE "enlightening" to keep an eye on you. And I don't have to make fun of you. You do it yourself. And I am still waiting for you to post your credentials to tell us what qualified you to make determinations as to what is or isn't "good mental health". Leafing through wifey's correspondence courses doesn't qulify. Putz.. Well, back to nursie's name-calling again. "Meaningful discourse" in the only way nursie can get along...dissing and cursing those who won't agree with him. It's not name calling if it's true. And you ARE a putz. Of course I could gobact through tons of YOUR "name calling" and recite it...Or is Lennie the Liar ABOVE lving up to his own rhetoric...?!?! Must be the "new" 'inherent good will of radio amateurs'... You're not an Amatuer and this forum isn't regulated by Part 97 of the FCC Rules and Regulations. Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/17/2004 5:24 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve the Grate Meaningful Communicator) writes: "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue"...Leonard H. Anderson Was the SINCGARS family of radios ever mentioned? ...(SNIPPED) There are a LOT of military radio systems and equipment NOT mentioned in Amateur media...and byt eh same token most of those systems are NOT mentions in a great many professional journals, either...! ! ! ! ! Your point? Therefore Lennie's busted lying again. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie getting all red in the face with rage again and can't pull out any information from all those "secret" military radios "he can't talk about." Only you've tried to make it "secret". Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the "SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio services", then they can go to those other sources. Won't be much there, either. Then you've not been reading any of THOSE publications either. There's much more on the Internet, especially the military collector sites...but those are about as behind the times as the boatanchor and surplus sites. Then carry your rants THERE, Lennie. I am sure your spiteful wit and willingness to be antagonistic will be as well received there as it is here. At least it will be a bit more pertinent in those forums...Not by much, but some. Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? "Inordinate?!?" No one was asking for "inordinate." Sure "they" are....Well, at least YOU are. Even a minor mention might draw some interest...except for those who wish to remain insular, isolated from having to learn anything but the latest DX contest scores. Perhaps the Amateur Radio magazines limit the scope of thier content for the same reasons you don't find a whole lot of fly fishing technique articles in "Cosmo"...?!?! Where does this idiot (and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service, Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?! Must be more of this "meaningful discourse" again. The "A" in APCO does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in SHARES does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in MARS does NOT refer to Amateur. Sure it does...to what other radio service is MARS "affiliated" with...?!?! Nursie needs to know his "A" from a hole in the ground. Too bad YOU don't realize that all those "A"'s don't represent "Army communications of ocer 50 years ago". One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been issued some grade-school level common sense. Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Meaningful discourse?" Poor nursie. Still resentful that someone took the time and trouble to educate himself and keep working in radio-electronics in the aerospace industry as a design engineer in radio-electronics and then retire with a comfortable income. Too bad there weren't some human relations courses in that 14 years of night school, Lennie. And I don't resent your efforts to be an engineer. One day you may be one. That you invested your money well was, as I have acknowleged before, one of your only positive acts in your adult life. Congratulations. My nest egg isn't quite as secure yet, but then I still have another 15-20 years to go before I think I'll be ready to stop wotking. Unlike you, I DO have the pleasure of seeing a meaningful, positive impact on my chosen profession. When I retire, I'll stop by your grave and see if all of YOUR "comfortable income" got you any farther than it does any other working person. Sucks to be nursie? If there was a "nursie" here, it might. But we KNOW it sucks to be Lennie! Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com