ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags alex jones , hate speech

Reply
Old 25th April 2013, 11:00 AM   #41
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,625
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Jay, I don't see that in George Washington's 2nd Inaugural Address (text follows). What inaugural address was it in?
Apparently from some other address, perhaps a State of the Union. Let me repair my research and get back to you.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 11:17 AM   #42
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,625
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
While I understand why Germany and other European nations would want to make Holocaust-denial a crime, this is the United States and we celebrate and embrace diversity of views & opinions even if they are very insulting and offensive.
Exactly, that's the essence of the First Amendment protection. The only kind of speech that needs protection is that which is likely to be offensive or insulting. If no one is likely to object, there's no reason to affirmatively protect it. And speech against the government is considered the most hallowed of all protected speech.

However we realize that speech may cause harm, and we punish its misuse such as in the case of perjury or defamation. Incitement is that gray area. And it's good that this gray area is getting so much attention. If I were to hire (i.e., incite) someone to kill my wife, that is per se a crime even if he does not actually go through with it -- my actions would be illegal on this point.

Incitement is not cut-and-dried. If I gain your confidence and intentionally feed you lies about someone, and you cause harm to that person out of your devotion to me, to what extent would I be responsible? Would that third party have remained safe from you but for my actions? I think there's a mens rea debate swirling around these dark waters. To what extent are we responsible for the rational decisions executed by others based nevertheless on the wrong information we provide them?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 11:25 AM   #43
Courier
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,229
Incitement is only a crime when there is a direct target or clear method being discussed.

If I constantly tell you to blow up a crowd somewhere and you do it, I am liable.

If I constantly tell you to beat up or kill person A and you do it, I am liable.

However if I constantly post on a website that the govt. is evil and we will someday revolt and you decide to take it one step further and hurt a specific person that I never called for violence to be done against, I don't think I am liable.

I may be wrong, but I believe incitement becomes criminal when a specific target is discussed and/or a specific method of violence is discussed.

General calls for "revolution" and "revolt" on a website without direct contact between two individuals, is probably not criminal incitement.
Courier is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 11:31 AM   #44
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,439
Some forms of speech are prosecuted. Crimes like Inciting to Riot, Creating a Public Disturbance and Disorderly Conduct probably often involve little more than speech.

Threatening speech can also not be protected.

Quote:
In Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette Inc. v. American Coalition of Life Activists, a federal appeals court ruled that an anti-abortion web site was not protected by the First Amendment. The web site posted photos, names, addresses, and other information pertaining to Abortion providers, their family members, and others who were perceived as supporting abortion rights. Although neither the site nor the posters made explicit threats against the abortion providers, violence at clinics that provided abortions had followed poster distribution in the past....The trial judge instructed the jury that if the defendants' statements were "true threats," the First Amendment would not protect them. The jury awarded the plaintiff a multimillion-dollar verdict.
Link
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 12:01 PM   #45
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,625
In that particular case, Planned Parenthood enjoyed an enhanced expectation of peace as a medical clinic. The "threat" concluded by the jury was not against the general rights and well-being of the workers and patients, such as would be enjoyed anywhere by all, but to the special rights conveyed upon them in that specific capacity at that specific time. It passes First Amendment muster because it is limited to certain times, places, and circumstances and prohibits only certain kinds of speech (e.g., intimidation). It probably would not hold in a more general case, however it is instructive.

In other times, places, and circumstances, intimidation is protected speech as long as it does not escalate to an overt threat. In order to constitute the crime of incitement under U.S. law, it appears the inciter must specifically recommend an action, knowing that the intended perpetrator knows or believes it to be an illegal act. It is a reasonably high standard of proof, which is why I find the moral issue more fascinating. You have to go very far to incite violence and be a criminal for it.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 01:43 PM   #46
Alareth
Philosopher
 
Alareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 7,682
Alex Jones greatest hits:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Alareth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 06:06 PM   #47
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,405
The AV club gives us a perfect example of how Alex Jones should be treated:


Quote:
And with that, Alex Jones sighed and deleted an in-progress blog post he’d titled “New Girl Order,” moving on to some other equally asinine insinuation.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 06:16 PM   #48
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,940
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
I support free speech. I don't support hate speech however.
What do you think the "free" in "free speech" means?
(Hint: it's doesn't mean "zero cost".)
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 06:25 PM   #49
Courier
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,229
I love how some people feel like they have a right to live in our country and not hear offensive language.

Yes, you have a right to say mean things about Jews, blacks, Asians, gays, etc.

The day America starts outlawing non-violent rhetoric, is the day I leave this nation.
Courier is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 06:58 PM   #50
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,439
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
What do you think the "free" in "free speech" means?
(Hint: it's doesn't mean "zero cost".)
I've got a hunch the answer depends on what you think it means. Is that pretty close?
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th April 2013, 09:09 PM   #51
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 23,397
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
I don't advocate locking up Alex Jones -- though it's an interesting idea -- but I don't think the above is a very good definition of 'hate speech.' The usual definition is, advocating national, racial or religious hatred that crosses the line into inciting discrimination or violence.

Many countries around the world have laws against it, not just the US.
Is that not "incitement to violence"? I don't think incitement to discrimination is a crime. Or if it is, I think it shouldn't be.

Originally Posted by NightStar76 View Post
I support free speech. That's nothing to do with wanting Alex Jones locked in prison. He has the right to say whatever he wants to say, and I have the right to wish he'd rot in a cell.
Yes, but as long as the reason for him being in jail isn't because of a violation of his free speech.
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 03:59 AM   #52
threadworm
Graduate Poster
 
threadworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,532
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
Incitement is only a crime when there is a direct target or clear method being discussed.

If I constantly tell you to blow up a crowd somewhere and you do it, I am liable.

If I constantly tell you to beat up or kill person A and you do it, I am liable.

However if I constantly post on a website that the govt. is evil and we will someday revolt and you decide to take it one step further and hurt a specific person that I never called for violence to be done against, I don't think I am liable.

I may be wrong, but I believe incitement becomes criminal when a specific target is discussed and/or a specific method of violence is discussed.

General calls for "revolution" and "revolt" on a website without direct contact between two individuals, is probably not criminal incitement.
It's like the "will no-one rid me of this turbulent priest"* thing - is it a request for volunteers, a hint disguised as a vague aside, or just an aside.

I'm also minded to recall the original Willy Wonka's "stop, don't, come back" requests, in a voice that says distinctly the opposite.

That's where evil money-sucking leeches lawyers come in, to argue that someone never really meant for anyone to get hurt when they said "someone really should do something about [xyz]".

As far as the OP goes, Alex Jones speaks, I hate it.



*I know, it may not be actually what was said.
__________________
Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to.

**************************

Apollo Hoax Debunked
threadworm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 04:53 AM   #53
OCaptain
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,119
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
I support free speech. I don't support hate speech however.

The rise of the Internet, and the increase in the distribution of hate speech, absolutely fuels crimes like Columbine and the Boston Marathon.

Speech sometimes has consequences. Try yelling, "Fire!", in a crowded theatre.
Or yelling "bomb" in an airport.
OCaptain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 05:42 AM   #54
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Or yelling "Jew" at an Alex Jones gathering
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 08:35 AM   #55
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,625
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
I love how some people feel like they have a right to live in our country and not hear offensive language.

Yes, you have a right to say mean things about Jews, blacks, Asians, gays, etc.

The day America starts outlawing non-violent rhetoric, is the day I leave this nation.
The question is not whether one has the right to say offensive or inflammatory things. The question is whether one ought to be responsible for what one says. Too many people define "free speech" as the ability to speak with impunity. It is no such thing; it is simply the right not to be censored by those in legal authority. The First Amendment doesn't protect Alex Jones from being held accountable for what he has said. That accountability may not be in the criminal sense, but he is not immune to redress under, say, the law of torts. The victims and their families might have cause to sue Jones under some form of reckless endangerment or negligence. I doubt they would prevail, but there are means other than criminal justice for holding people accountable for what they say.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 08:40 AM   #56
Courier
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,229
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
The question is not whether one has the right to say offensive or inflammatory things. The question is whether one ought to be responsible for what one says. Too many people define "free speech" as the ability to speak with impunity. It is no such thing; it is simply the right not to be censored by those in legal authority. The First Amendment doesn't protect Alex Jones from being held accountable for what he has said. That accountability may not be in the criminal sense, but he is not immune to redress under, say, the law of torts. The victims and their families might have cause to sue Jones under some form of reckless endangerment or negligence. I doubt they would prevail, but there are means other than criminal justice for holding people accountable for what they say.
There is no evidence of AJ calling for anyone to engage in acts of violence and such statements led to acts of violence.
Courier is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 08:49 AM   #57
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,625
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
There is no evidence of AJ calling for anyone to engage in acts of violence and such statements led to acts of violence.
You think too narrowly and too literally.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 09:00 AM   #58
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,111
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
...
Look let's face it. Alex Jones' karma is horrible. Insanely bad. I do believe in karma. Or maybe it's just the law of averages.

Seriously, people like him always seem to come to a bad end.
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
... But if you live your life as a balancing act, sooner or later you'll slip and fall by accident due to some unforeseen factor. ...
It would be horrible if he stumbled off the curb while shouting through the bullhorn at Bilderberg attendees, and was tragically crushed under a black SUV with tinted windows and Henry Kissinger inside.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 09:00 AM   #59
Courier
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,229
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
You think too narrowly and too literally.
I also don't have an irrational grudge against Alex Jones.
Courier is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 09:14 AM   #60
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,625
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
I also don't have an irrational grudge against Alex Jones.
And what is your evidence that any such thing is what motivates my arguments here?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 09:46 AM   #61
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
I also don't have an irrational grudge against Alex Jones.
IMHO thinking Jones is a nut job isn't an irrational grudge; it's garnered by listening to the things he says in an unbiased, rational way. However, Jay's arguments have nothing to do with that.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

Last edited by twinstead; 26th April 2013 at 09:47 AM.
twinstead is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 10:01 AM   #62
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 4,420
Originally Posted by Courier View Post
I also don't have an irrational grudge against Alex Jones.
Maybe because the accusations that Jones makes hasn't really hit too close for home to you. I don't believe in pleading to emotion, but some of the people\families of those, who were injured or killed might not feel the same way.

What means do you have to judge the rationality of peoples disdain towards a moral black hole like jones?
__________________
"All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 01:24 PM   #63
Nick Terry
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,958
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
It would be horrible if he stumbled off the curb while shouting through the bullhorn at Bilderberg attendees, and was tragically crushed under a black SUV with tinted windows and Henry Kissinger inside.
I'd call that poetic justice myself.
__________________
Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard. A Critique of the Falsehoods of Mattogno, Graf and Kues.
(biggest ever skeptical debunking of conspiracy theorists; PDF available)

Everytime one asks you holocaust deniers for positive evidence you just put your finger in the ears, dance around and sing lalala - Kevin Silbstedt
Nick Terry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 06:48 PM   #64
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
It would be horrible if he stumbled off the curb while shouting through the bullhorn at Bilderberg attendees, and was tragically crushed under a black SUV with tinted windows and Henry Kissinger inside.
According to some 9/11 CTs, the SUV would immediately decelerate and bounce off him in pieces because he's a lot bigger.
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 06:50 PM   #65
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
IMHO thinking Jones is a nut job isn't an irrational grudge; it's garnered by listening to the things he says in an unbiased, rational way. However, Jay's arguments have nothing to do with that.
Try to think of what Jones says in the context of him being an entertainer. He just found his niche. Modern day carnies and rubes.
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2013, 07:52 PM   #66
swright777
Muse
 
swright777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 897
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
According to some 9/11 CTs, the SUV would immediately decelerate and bounce off him in pieces because he's a lot bigger.
But after that he would turn to dust.
swright777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2013, 06:01 AM   #67
OCaptain
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,119
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
Or yelling "Jew" at an Alex Jones gathering
And that one works equally well at a Jeff Rense gathering.
OCaptain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2013, 01:03 PM   #68
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Originally Posted by Scotty Ladouche View Post
Although the hateful speech on infowars (especially the comments section) is deplorable, I don't think that is the truly worrying aspect of the conversation going on over there. It is the threatening tone of the broadcasts, articles and comments (and the many actual threats in the comments) that concerns me. He not only fills the mind of his subjects with hate, but encourages them to 'fight back' against the 'new world order', ostensibly to 'protect their rights'(or something like that, you've heard the rants).

For example, when a police officer alledgedly violated someones rights in an article posted a few days ago, Alex ranted about 'standing up against these fascist pigs who are trying to take away your rights'. In the comments section, one man asked 'what would that cop look like with a .50 cal in his head', which was followed by many posters cheering on the statement, including one who 'dreams of it every night'. This kind of baiting goes on everyday there, Alex tells people to feel threatened by all kinds of boogiemen, and the people respond by baring their teeth and riling each other up.

All this crazy gathered in one place lets these people affirm their theories, and have them reinforced by others, leading to them believing there is some kind of consensus that their beliefs are correct. Those who do try to interject some sanity are quickly insulted, mocked and accused of having nefarious reasons for being there. Many believe anyone that disagrees with their narrative in the comments section is a disinformation agent sent to hinder the revealing of the 'truth'.

Also the name, Infowars. If there is a war going on for their minds, as they say, are those who disagree with them their enemy in a war?
I am perfectly happy being their enemy.
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2013, 11:51 PM   #69
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,739
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Alex Jones on trial? Imagine the total circus that would be!

I think you credit him with more popularity than he actually has.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th April 2013, 12:02 AM   #70
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,204
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Alex Jones on trial? Imagine the total circus that would be!
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
I think you credit him with more popularity than he actually has.
A small circus came our local theatre recently. The show sold out. The place was filled with 500 teens. It was pandemonium.



__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:36 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.