Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community (https://thetfp.com/tfp/)
-   General Discussion (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/)
-   -   American TV station shows pictures of woman as she lays dying (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/53257-american-tv-station-shows-pictures-woman-she-lays-dying.html)

Strange Famous 04-22-2004 10:21 AM

American TV station shows pictures of woman as she lays dying
 
I guess this is a freedom of speech question.

CBS broadcast pictures of Diana Princess of Wales as she lay dying after a car wreck in France in 1997... I guess I just wonder, is there NO right to privacy, is there no barriers of good taste?

I dont want to be anti-US, and that isnt the point of this thread, but if the morality of America is horrifyed by a glimpse of Janet Jacksons breast, how can people at the same time accept such a grossly indecent invasion of privacy, and something so terribly hurtful to her family - to for the sake of entertainment showing pictures of someone dying?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3647849.stm

Quote:


Family's shock over Diana images


The brother of Diana, Princess of Wales says he was "shocked and sickened" by the broadcast of photographs of his dying sister on American television.
The pictures, taken moments after the Paris car crash in which she died, were shown by US network CBS in a programme looking at the accident.

Lord Spencer expressed his revulsion in a statement on behalf of the family.

Former Buckingham Palace spokesman Dicky Arbiter said it was "particularly bad taste" for CBS to run the pictures.

Tony Blair said the action was distasteful and could cause "distress to her family".

Mr Arbiter told BBC Radio 4's Today Programme: "It will be painful, painful for William and Harry.

"They're going to have to live with this sort of thing for the rest of their lives."

Clarence House, the residence of the Prince of Wales and his sons, has declined to comment on the broadcast.

Defending its decision to show the images, CBS said: "These photocopies are placed in journalistic context - an examination of the medical treatment given to Princess Diana just after the crash - and are in no way graphic or exploitative."

CBS said the images, which had not been broadcast before, were part of a 4,000-page French government report the broadcaster recently obtained.


One of the pictures taken by paparazzi photographers at the scene - included in the official crash report - showed her head in the car.

BBC Royal correspondent Peter Hunt said CBS showed the black-and-white images for just 15 seconds during the one-hour documentary.

But, he said, Diana was "instantly recognisable" from a picture of the side of her head.

British newspapers had previously decided not to publish the photographs, he added, on the grounds of taste and decency.

Mohamed Al Fayed, whose son Dodi also died in crash, accused CBS of cashing in on the deaths.

He has never accepted the finding of the official report by the French that the crash was an accident.

He said: "CBS obviously doesn't care about the appalling effect of showing images of murder victims. They simply want to cash in on the tragedy. "It is disgraceful and insensitive of them to do this. It is devastating for me and for Prince William and Prince Harry."


Mr Al Fayed has staged a lengthy legal battle against paparazzi photographers, who were following Diana and Dodi, for invasion of privacy.

The French inquiry in 1999 blamed Diana's chauffeur, Henri Paul, concluding he had taken a cocktail of drink and drugs and had been driving too fast on the trip from the Ritz Hotel to Mr Al Fayed's Paris apartment.

However, interest in the tragedy remains high, with French producers planning to make a feature film about it.

The novel by French author Laurence Close, The 31st of August 1997, is being adapted for the big screen and is due for release next year.

It is a fictionalised account about the mystery driver of a Fiat Uno which is believed to have clipped Diana's Mercedes moments before it crashed in the Pont d'Alma tunnel.



Forsaken 04-22-2004 10:39 AM

Re: American TV station shows pictures of woman as she lays dying
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Strange Famous
[B]I guess this is a freedom of speech question.

CBS broadcast pictures of Diana Princess of Wales as she lay dying after a car wreck in France in 1997... I guess I just wonder, is there NO right to privacy, is there no barriers of good taste?

I dont want to be anti-US, and that isnt the point of this thread, but if the morality of America is horrifyed by a glimpse of Janet Jacksons breast, how can people at the same time accept such a grossly indecent invasion of privacy, and something so terribly hurtful to her family - to for the sake of entertainment showing pictures of someone dying?

One word ---- MONEY

CBS will make money from showing the pictures. Plain and simple.

By the way I am an American and I think that showing the pictures is in extremely bad taste and I have not nor will I look at them.

Blackthorn 04-22-2004 12:30 PM

Re: American TV station shows pictures of woman as she lays dying
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Strange Famous
I guess this is a freedom of speech question.

CBS broadcast pictures of Diana Princess of Wales as she lay dying after a car wreck in France in 1997... I guess I just wonder, is there NO right to privacy, is there no barriers of good taste?

I dont want to be anti-US, and that isnt the point of this thread, but if the morality of America is horrifyed by a glimpse of Janet Jacksons breast, how can people at the same time accept such a grossly indecent invasion of privacy, and something so terribly hurtful to her family - to for the sake of entertainment showing pictures of someone dying?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3647849.stm

You make a fabulous point that CBS would freak out over a living nipple (star covered but a nipple none-the-less) and then display these images if a dying woman suffering from an incredible car chase and crash. Quite hypocritical in my opinion. :mad:

Cynthetiq 04-22-2004 12:33 PM

please note the CONTEXT it was shown in, they interviewed the doctor that was treating her for 48 hours a news magazine.

IMO it's very relavent.

Strange Famous 04-22-2004 12:40 PM

The context is the context, maybe it did fit in with the show, I still dont find it appropriate to show for entertainment photo's of someone dying... I believe this is a violation of the privacy of her family, I am certain it is deeply hurtful to her family, any point they wished to make could have been made without the pictures, and I feel that anyone finding satisfaction or entertainment from watching pictures of someone die is unusually ghoulish.

Kaos 04-22-2004 03:26 PM

Not appropriate. And I don't want to see anyone lying there dying in a car accident, not ever her.

sixate 04-22-2004 03:32 PM

I don't have a problem with seeing boobs or death on my TV.
I want to see it all.

Speed_Gibson 04-22-2004 03:38 PM

Quote:

and I have not nor will I look at them.
never have seen footage, and I did not care when she died and do not care about it now either. I feel more of a loss watching things on Grace Kelly's death in 1982 then I ever will about Diana. But I would look at such footage in a heartbeat; I would look at things like the Faces of Death videos (great stuff there) and rotten.com all day.

KellyC 04-22-2004 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
I don't have a problem with seeing boobs or death on my TV.
I want to see it all.

Yep. I have no problem either. If I don't like what I'm seeing, I can just change the channel or turn off the tv.

animosity 04-22-2004 05:17 PM

if you dont like something you see... dont watch it. simple as that.

StormBerlin 04-22-2004 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
I don't have a problem with seeing boobs or death on my TV.
I want to see it all.

I think you guys are missing the point. It isn't about what YOU think about her being shown right after the accident, it's about the families right to privacy and displaying what happened in poor taste. I don't think the family could give a shit about what YOU thought about it.

I personally thought it was out of line and disheartening.

Speed_Gibson 04-22-2004 08:27 PM

Quote:

it's about the families right to privacy and displaying what happened in poor taste. I don't think the family could give a shit about what YOU thought about it
very true but "good taste" is usually the first casualty now when "ratings" and "money" come into play. I do have no clue what context this was shown in though.

guthmund 04-22-2004 08:35 PM

They showed it because they knew people would watch it and it's going to make them money.

It's really that simple. Of all the people who complain about the "appropriateness" and "decency" of the photo, the vast majority are still tuning in to watch it.

We seem to have no problem with shows like CSI and Law & Order. They show mutilated dead folks all the time. Sure it's "Hollywood" violence and the people aren't really real (although you wouldn't imagine that by reading the message boards and such :) )

The only reason this is making a stink is because Princess Diana was a pretty nice and famous lady. And no matter how much America whines about it, they'll still make a point a see it.

Asuka{eve} 04-22-2004 09:05 PM

I frown on this :(

Speed_Gibson 04-22-2004 09:08 PM

<offtopic>
I happened to catch most of that episode referenced in your Avatar/title on a grave shift, guthmund and I thought that it was f'ing hilarious.
</offtopic>

Poloboy 04-22-2004 09:23 PM

It may be hypocritical of CBS to air this without hesitation, and be in outrage about the Superbowl "incident", but is it not also hypocritical to criticize censorship endlessly following Jackson's nipple display, and then cry out for stronger censorship in this case?

Also - this is not an isolated case. Dead people are aired on the news frequently. It's hard to watch the latest Iraq footage without them sneaking in a body here or there. Why are the families of these victims less important than the Princes William and Harry? Should their non-regal status comparitively demote their rights?

In no way am I defending the actions of the CBS. I was saddened by the death of Diana, and don't appreciate stations glorifying her death for marketing purposes, but I thought I'd expose some different ways of looking at the situation.

bernadette 04-22-2004 09:38 PM

sad to say it, but i'd probably watch this if i happened to have the tv on when it was airing.
i certainly wouldn't be asking to see this, but if it was there in front of my face, no, i wouldn't look away.

still... i do think it is tacky & disrespectful to any family, to broadcast their loved ones like this.

analog 04-22-2004 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strange Famous
The context is the context, maybe it did fit in with the show, I still dont find it appropriate to show for entertainment photo's of someone dying...
If you believe the context was correct, why would you then say that it was "for entertainment"? That makes no sense.

If you want to debate the issue of these pictures, I don't think bringing up janet jackson's boob will help in any way. The shock of her boob was caused by it NOT BEING APPROVED, and being generally inappropriate with regard to those who were watching it. Neither of those points have anything to do with context. These pictures were approved to be aired beforehand and are ALL about the context in which they were used.

If you blindly stamp this as "for profit", then where do you hold back that stamp on other issues?

I suppose you would put your "for profit" stamp on all the news coverage of our (America's) national tragedy on 9/11/01, in which some 3,000+ people were captured losing their lives.

Journalistic context. You seem to dismiss this notion immediately as though it were not important.

Aletheia 04-22-2004 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
I don't have a problem with seeing boobs or death on my TV.
I want to see it all.


Speed_Gibson 04-22-2004 11:03 PM

If I try to mentally place myself in the situation where I had a father/brother/son/daughter/wife/mother that was killed in such a fashion, it might very well offend me to see it on television like that. Hard to say without actually going through it, as I can be incredibly calloused emotionally. (i.e. never shed a tear or became excessively angry over 9/11 aside from the %$#&*ing bandwagon patriots but I did not know or lose anyone close to me either)
----
If it was someone like royalty/celebrity status who was closely related to me, then it would not shock or surprise me but that in no way lessens the potential emotioanl damage still.

sixate 04-23-2004 03:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by StormBerlin
I think you guys are missing the point. It isn't about what YOU think about her being shown right after the accident, it's about the families right to privacy and displaying what happened in poor taste. I don't think the family could give a shit about what YOU thought about it.

I personally thought it was out of line and disheartening.

I'm not missing the point.
If I was caught on tape being killed or whatever, so what. Show it on Prime-time for all I care. I'll be dead anyway, and won't know the difference. And I won't know what my family thinks either... Because, again, I'm dead.

But I guess I don't care because I don't believe in god/afterlife/having a soul.

tecoyah 04-23-2004 03:44 AM

CBS shows Dianna pics, everybody gets pissed. Bush wont even let people take pictures of the hundreds of flag draped coffins streaming in from Iraq, nobody gives a shit.

Priorities people.

Redjake 04-23-2004 04:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
I'm not missing the point.
If I was caught on tape being killed or whatever, so what. Show it on Prime-time for all I care. I'll be dead anyway, and won't know the difference. And I won't know what my family thinks either... Because, again, I'm dead.

But I guess I don't care because I don't believe in god/afterlife/having a soul.


no, you are definitely missing the point :) StormBerlin is saying that your family would possibly find it offensive to find your dead body on television, specifically on a big station. He said in his post he didn't care what YOU thought :) You just explained what YOU thought; that you didn't care. But it doesn't matter what you think, because you are dead. It matters what your family thinks. You missed the point.

My question is, do you think your mother or father would care? I think they would.

seretogis 04-23-2004 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tecoyah
CBS shows Dianna pics, everybody gets pissed. Bush wont even let people take pictures of the hundreds of flag draped coffins streaming in from Iraq, nobody gives a shit.

Priorities people.

Media outlets should know better than to show such footage, in either case. It's unfortunate that CBS is so money-hungry as to air this kind of disgusting material, and that some people are so deranged to want to see it. It flies in the face of any definition of civilization -- what's next, watch executions on TV? Maybe we can put two people in an arena and watch lions tear them to pieces! What great entertainment that will be! :rolleyes:

Needless to say, I won't be watching CBS.

sixate 04-23-2004 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Redjake
no, you are definitely missing the point :) StormBerlin is saying that your family would possibly find it offensive to find your dead body on television, specifically on a big station. He said in his post he didn't care what YOU thought :) You just explained what YOU thought; that you didn't care. But it doesn't matter what you think, because you are dead. It matters what your family thinks. You missed the point.

My question is, do you think your mother or father would care? I think they would.

Well, you don't know my family... Why would my family care? They aren't a bunch of pussies. For the most part they're just like me. The reason people care is because of religious crap most of the time. Nobody in my family believes in shit they can't see. So they wouldn't care what was being done with my body or who sees it. Trust me, I've had this conversation with most of them.

qtpye4u84 04-23-2004 04:31 AM

I heard something of the sort on the news, I know some ppl would want to watch for sure, like my brother. What ppl do for money these days.

Gortexfogg 04-23-2004 04:52 AM

What about photos of dead bodies in war documentaries and crime documentaries? Nobody makes a fuss over those. Showing the photograph is protected under the first amendment. I don't find anything wrong with it. Yes, it probably sucks for the family to see their loved on dying on television, but that's life.

Redjake 04-23-2004 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
Well, you don't know my family... Why would my family care? They aren't a bunch of pussies. For the most part they're just like me. The reason people care is because of religious crap most of the time. Nobody in my family believes in shit they can't see. So they wouldn't care what was being done with my body or who sees it. Trust me, I've had this conversation with most of them.
no reason to get defensive, I was just explaining how you took StormBerlin's point completely wrong. and since when did showing emotion turn someone into a pussy? I would feel rather uncomfortable and emotional and sad if I saw my dead mother or father on television. does that make me a pussy?

lighten up :) it seems you make comments just to be able to argue back when someone doesn't like it. like you are doing it on purpose or something. maybe it's just me :)

Hanxter 04-23-2004 06:06 AM

following the death of dale earnhardt, his family fought hard to keep the media from obtaining his autopsy photos... and won in court...

did the family know in advance cbs was going to air it? for i feel had they known their attorneys would most certainly have stepped in with an injunction...

i see no malice... just bad taste for the sake of sensationalism and ratings...

personally, i find the television media has gone down the shitter with what they call human interest stories... such a katie couric (sounds like a cat hawking up a hairball) interviewing a 10 year old kid whose just lost his brother in iraq asking, "how do you feel now that your brother is dead?"

who says i'm interested - get the fuck out of my house and die

*Nikki* 04-23-2004 06:09 AM

Anyone got a link to the pics??

IMHO I don't think its wrong. She was in a very public place and she has now passed on.

Her body was just a shell. Her soul is gone.

Cynthetiq 04-23-2004 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tecoyah
CBS shows Dianna pics, everybody gets pissed. Bush wont even let people take pictures of the hundreds of flag draped coffins streaming in from Iraq, nobody gives a shit.

Priorities people.

Seems that it's made the front pages since someone else files a FOIA request last year...

link

Quote:

April 23, 2004
Pentagon Ban on Pictures of Dead Troops Is Broken
By BILL CARTER

he Pentagon's ban on making images of dead soldiers' homecomings at military bases public was briefly relaxed yesterday, as hundreds of photographs of flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force Base were released on the Internet by a Web site dedicated to combating government secrecy.

The Web site, the Memory Hole (www.thememoryhole.org), had filed a Freedom of Information Act request last year, seeking any pictures of coffins arriving from Iraq at the Dover base in Delaware, the destination for most of the bodies. The Pentagon yesterday labeled the Air Force Air Mobility Command's decision to grant the request a mistake, but news organizations quickly used a selection of the 361 images taken by Defense Department photographers.

The release of the photographs came one day after a contractor working for the Pentagon fired a woman who had taken photographs of coffins being loaded onto a transport plane in Kuwait. Her husband, a co-worker, was also fired after the pictures appeared in The Seattle Times on Sunday. The contractor, Maytag Aircraft, said the woman, Tami Silicio of Seattle, and her husband, David Landry, had "violated Department of Defense and company policies."

The firing underscored the strictness with which the Pentagon and the Bush administration have pursued a policy of forbidding news organizations to showing images of the homecomings of the war dead at military bases. They have argued that the policy was put in place during the first war in Iraq, and that it is simply an effort to protect the sensitivities of military families.

Executives at news organizations, many of whom have protested the policy, said last night that they had not known that the Defense Department itself was taking photographs of the coffins arriving home, a fact that came to light only when Russ Kick, the operator of The Memory Hole, filed his request.

"We were not aware at all that these photos were being taken," said Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times.

John Banner, the executive producer of ABC's "World News Tonight," said, "We did not file a F.O.I.A. request ourselves, because this was the first we had known that the military was shooting these pictures."

The Pentagon has cited a policy, used during the first Persian Gulf war, as its reason for preventing news organizations from showing images of coffins arriving in the United States. That policy was not consistently followed, however, and President Bill Clinton took part in numerous ceremonies honoring dead servicemen. In March 2003, the Pentagon issued a directive it said was established in November 2000, saying, "There will no be arrival ceremonies of, or media coverage of, deceased military personnel returning to or departing from" air bases.

While critics have charged that the administration is seeking to keep unwelcome images of the war's human cost away from the American public, the Pentagon has said that only individual services at a gravesite give proper context to the sacrifices of soldiers and their relatives.

"The president believes that we should always honor and show respect for those who have made the ultimate sacrifice defending our freedoms," Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, said last night.

A New York Times/CBS News poll taken in December found that 62 percent of Americans said the public should be allowed to see pictures of the military honor guard receiving the coffins of soldiers killed in Iraq as they are returned to the United States. Twenty-seven percent said the public should not be.

Mr. Kick, who operates his Web site from Tucson, describes himself as "an information archaeologist." He did not respond to phone calls to his home last night. But on his Web site, he said he had filed a request for "all photographs showing caskets containing the remains of U.S. military personnel at Dover A.F.B."

After an initial rejection, Mr. Kick said, he appealed on several grounds "and to my amazement the ruling was reversed." The request was granted by the Air Mobility Command, and the pictures of coffins on planes and at funeral services for slain servicemen were made available to him.

The Pentagon said the pictures had been taken for historical purposes. Lt. Col. Jennifer Cassidy, an Air Force spokeswoman, said at a briefing yesterday that the release had violated the Pentagon's rules and that no further copies of the pictures would be distributed.

But news organizations widely took the pictures from the Web site last night, as they became one of the biggest news developments of the day. Two networks, ABC and NBC, made the availability of the pictures, along with the firing of Ms. Silicio, the lead item on their newscasts. Numerous newspapers said they planned to use one or more of the photographs on their front pages today, as The Times did.

Among the national television news organizations, only the Fox News Channel had no plans to use any of the photos or explore the issue of why they had been barred from use in the news media, a channel spokesman said.

Steve Capus, the executive producer of "NBC Nightly News," said he had already considered the firing of Ms. Silicio a major news development and had sent a correspondent to Seattle on Wednesday night. Then the new pictures turned up on Mr. Kick's Web site. He called the pictures "not in the least gory" but "poignant and responsible" and argued that using them was "a proper part of the national dialogue." "It would seem that the only reason somebody would come out against the use of these pictures is that they are worried about the political fallout," Mr. Capus said.

Jim Murphy, the executive producer of the "CBS Evening News," said: "I don't necessarily blame the military for trying to manage information in an information age. I just think when you are overzealous in trying to manage it, it serves no good to themselves or to the public."

denim 04-23-2004 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
I want to see it all.
Y'know, I just tried to add you to my "ignore" list. Unfortunately, you're a moderator so I can't. I'll just have to try my best to ignore you by hand.

stevie667 04-23-2004 07:04 AM

As a brit myself, i do take offense to the way in which the pictures have been broadcast like this. The princess touched alot of peoples lives, and to show those pictures really desecrates her memory in a way in which you can't express with words.
Yes i am biased towards the subject, but so is just about every englishman, the whole subject just isn't something you take lightly, and thats exactly what CBS is doing.

it's distasteful in every respect.

viejo gringo 04-23-2004 07:28 AM

Here in deep south Texas...or northern Mexico, as it is sometimes called. ...we have a number of TV channels that are in Mexican--not spanish...some of the news is local, and some of it is from the interior of Mexico, and other southern coutries....and it is quite graphic.....when they tell you he was shot betwwen the eyes, you know it is true because they show it.

They have even shown people dead hanging out of trucks that have been sprayed with bullets....the point is...

if you don't want to see it just turn away or close your eyes....

I don't see the difference between actual death and make-believe-death....as long as the killing is not glorified, and makes someone look tough....we have a few of those----they are waiting their turn on death row.

shalafi 04-23-2004 07:32 AM

Maybe its just me but it seems like alot of people these days are constantly on a quest to find something new to be offended by. I just dont get it.

water_boy1999 04-23-2004 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by denim
Y'know, I just tried to add you to my "ignore" list. Unfortunately, you're a moderator so I can't. I'll just have to try my best to ignore you by hand.
Try harder. He is entitled to his opinion. Let it rest please.


The media has been sensationalizing death for as long as I can remember. We don't all get our panties in a bunch when we see some dead drug dealer or bank robber on the 10 O'Clock news, but when royalty comes into play, we think it is somehow different. I agree that CBS is doing this for entertainment value and ratings, but so what? Every network station has some sort of news program that shows death on an almost daily basis. We all should be numbed by this by now and the airing of her pictures should be no surprise to anyone! But it does. Now why is that?

Personally, I am not offended by it. I would probably watch it too. I don't think it is in bad taste because I would be a hypocrite, namely because I don't think the daily news I see is in bad taste.

Yakk 04-23-2004 08:00 AM

As a completely tangental comment, I was glancing at the list of posts, and misread "dying" as "dog".

I need help.

Continue with your regulary schedualed thread.

denim 04-23-2004 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by water_boy1999
Personally, I am not offended by it. I would probably watch it too. I don't think it is in bad taste because I would be a hypocrite, namely because I don't think the daily news I see is in bad taste.
I'm not talking about this particular topic, but about his general behavoir. You'll note that I chopped out the topic-sensitive response he made, 'cause it wasn't important to me.

To me, "Diana Princess of Wales" made no real difference in the world. Compare her to Mother Theresa. OTOH, I see no problem with showing T&A on TV.

Hanxter 04-23-2004 08:08 AM

a military contractor has fired tami silicio, a kuwait-based cargo worker whose photograph of flag-draped coffins of fallen U.S. soldiers was published in sunday’s edition of the seattle times....

silicio was let go yesterday for violating U.S. government and company regulations, said william silva, president of maytag aircraft, the contractor that employed silicio at kuwait international airport along with her husband who was also fired...

her photograph, taken earlier this month, shows more than 20 flag-draped coffins in a cargo plane about to depart from kuwait. ...

since 1991, the pentagon has banned the media from taking pictures of caskets being returned to the states to protect the privacy of the families...

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_pho...ver3-front.jpg

link

but it's still being published and they still show it on tv...

who's running the show, folks???

the media

StormBerlin 04-23-2004 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixate
I'm not missing the point.
If I was caught on tape being killed or whatever, so what. Show it on Prime-time for all I care. I'll be dead anyway, and won't know the difference. And I won't know what my family thinks either... Because, again, I'm dead.

But I guess I don't care because I don't believe in god/afterlife/having a soul.

I understand what you're saying, but I still think you're missing the point. No one knows if Diana cares about her being shown that way. The point is what her family thinks... they're the ones that are still alive and get to relive her death over and over again.

Even if I do believe in God, I don't think I would care about me once I died...


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360