The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 16, 2009, 12:56 PM   #1
Brasscatcher84
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 128
Department of Homeland Security report targets veterans

I recently read a Department of Homeland Security assessment published the 7th of April, 2009, which declared that "rightwing extremist" groups may be successful in utilyzing combat veterans' training and experience to perpetrate acts of domestic terrorism. The report, titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment", states that the condition of the economy, as well as proposed legislation on immigration and gun control, are creating an environment conducive to successful recruitment of returning veterans into violent "anti-government" groups. This report alludes to similar conditions in the mid Nineties, and mentions Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Timothy McVeigh by name.

As a Veteran of OIF, a life member of the NRA, and a person of the general belief that illegal immigration is wrong, I am more than passively offended by this. I love this country, I have sacrificed for this country, and now I have been declared a potential threat to my country.

I do recognize, however, that this report effectively puts the administration on notice that certain issues could drive a wedge(a bigger wedge, that is) between veterans and the administration. I guess I could even stretch my imagination and say that this report is a warning to the president that it may not be prudent to advocate certain positions.

Let me be clear. I am a combat trained and combat experienced veteran and firearm owner. I DO NOT ADVOCATE VIOLENCE IN MY COUNTRY FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.

As a matter of fact, I would have no qualms about endangering myself to protect innocent people in this country, even if those people are my ideological opposites, and even if the people I were protecting them from proclaimed to be idealogically allied with me.

I am intrested to here comments from anyone on this topic, particularly other veterans.
Brasscatcher84 is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 01:33 PM   #2
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,621
Quote:
"anti-government" groups
Quote:
I love this country, I have sacrificed for this country, and now I have been declared a potential threat to my country.


They are worried you will start to dissassociate the government from the country, the constitution, the flag, and everything else you love. I notice you did not say "I love our government." THey are afraid veterans will start to say "It is my job to protect my country from my government." It is that whole oath you took specifically "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic... " What they are worried about is that at some point veterans will decide the government is a domestic threat. THen you have to decide what part of that oath is more important, and no one likes where this is headed.
Publishing that was pretty tactless. I am sure they have made lots of friends in the veteran community.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; April 16, 2009 at 01:51 PM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 01:46 PM   #3
comn-cents
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 18, 2008
Location: Pac.N.W.
Posts: 1,804
WOW! The same veterans that have put their lives on the line for this county. Very unbelievable to me. Don't they have enough to worry about. Maybe this is an excuse for them, when their incompetence shows its ugly head, then they can say "at least we controlled the VETERAINS". WOW!
BRASSCATCHER84 Thanks for your service and this posting.
comn-cents is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 01:59 PM   #4
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,106
I refer you :

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=351844

Bud makes the good point that this is old news. There have been qualifying statements since the original announcements. So overgeneralization to all veterans being declared as threats isn't really the case.

If we do discuss it, could we get beyond just saying we don't like this or the Administration has some evil plan or there might be a revolution. What are the risk factors that push someone over the edge - not a political rant view but to engage in domestic terrorism? Are there valid predictors?

It's legit to discuss if we stay focused on more than displeasure.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 02:05 PM   #5
sandbag
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Posts: 612
I Am

a disabled Vietnam veteran,and I recall the nonsense people said about us when I came home 40 years ago.90% of Vietnam vets were like myself-non drug addicted,law abiding,and just wanting to live our lives,raise a family,etc.
I did those things.
The new President started off badly by trying to lay off service connected disabilities on private insurance.This could put veterans' family members at risk of being uninsured if policy limits are quickly reached.I guess he drew back on that mistake,but he has to be watched closley on that issue.
This new DHS report more or less defines me as a right wing extremist and it's ridiculous.Just because I'm a war veteran(albeit from an old war),a gun rights advocate,pro life,and believe in enforcing immigration laws-why am I an extremist?I'm not at all and that is the point-this is beginning to sound like "1984" by George Orwell.
Returning veterans should be welcomed home-they didn't decide which battles to start.They just did what they were sworn to do.
I spent almost 21 years in a Federal law enforcement agency on the street.That agency is now part of DHS.I thank God I never had to take an order from Janet Napolitano.
Why is she calling a moratorium on enforcement of immigration laws in the interior of the US?Why isn't she investigating radical Islamic training camps in this country?
This administration and its cohorts in Congress mean to disarm Americans.I don't think they have the votes to do it.
An overbearing,dictatorial stance by the government is exactly what radicalizes people.
I am loyal to the Constitution of the United States,not to some political types that have power right now.
sandbag is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 02:06 PM   #6
Brasscatcher84
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 128
I don't understand the last line of your post, Johnwilliamson062. Do you mean it was tactless for me to publish the thread on this forum, or for the DHS to publish the report?

I do understand the concern they have. let me explain how I feel. it is impossible for tme to disassociate the government from the country. The Constitution is a document that outlines our government, and that explains the relationship between that government and the States, and between the government and the people. I do love our form of government, and I believe that its tenets of lineage and transfer of power, as well as checks and balances, are insoluble. If the government commits a wrong, another branch of government should address it. if another branch fails to address it, the people have the power to demand action, by peacable means(recall vote, Regular elections, Etc.)

Let me reiterate. I DO NOT ADVOCATE VIOLENCE IN MY COUNTRY FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.
Brasscatcher84 is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 02:08 PM   #7
Shorts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2004
Posts: 1,484
Brasscatcher, the assessment insulted us as well.



Can we call those "wall street fat cats" domestic terrorists too. Even if they 'really didn't mean too', they've brought down not only the US economic system, but the globe's as well out of simple greed for the dollar. Their training, education and profession has made them a threat.
Shorts is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 02:14 PM   #8
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,621
Quote:
What are the risk factors that push someone over the edge - not a political rant view but to engage in domestic terrorism?
Cause of most people acting in politically motivated violence is feeling they are subject to foreign rule and under the gaze of an occupying army. There was a pretty extensive amount of research done on this a few years back. A few thousand nterviews with primarily suicide bombers and other high risk actors.
Not much chance of that here. Closest we come is rumors indicating the Chinese required the AIG bailout b/c they were heavily invested and held all our debts over politicians heads and similar.

Quote:
I don't understand the last line of your post, Johnwilliamson062. Do you mean it was tactless for me to publish the thread on this forum, or for the DHS to publish the report?
DHS report.

Quote:
I do understand the concern they have. let me explain how I feel. it is impossible for tme to disassociate the government from the country. The Constitution is a document that outlines our government, and that explains the relationship between that government and the States, and between the government and the people. I do love our form of government, and I believe that its tenets of lineage and transfer of power, as well as checks and balances, are insoluble. If the government commits a wrong, another branch of government should address it. if another branch fails to address it, the people have the power to demand action, by peacable means(recall vote, Regular elections, Etc.)
S what if our government puts the tax rate at 100% then redistributes that money as they see fit. Are you going to pay 100% in taxes until the next election? The newly proposed tax system is projected to limit taxation to about 45% of the population. When 55% of the population is exempt from taxes what do you think will happen to spending? What percentage of the non-taxpaying population will vote against those in power? It is against their short term best interest and very few in that category think long term.

To cover our present debt, future unfunded social security obligations, future unfunded medicaid obligations, etc. the IRS needs to bring in almost twice as much money as they are now. How is that going to happen? All added up it is more than $400,000/US citizen. You usually don't see the unfunded future social welfare programs thrown into that statistic is why it is usually so much smaller. Our government is running the biggest ponzi scheme in the history of the world and we are all about to see it blow up in our face. It only worked as long as it did b/c the baby boomer generation was so much larger than the ones preceding it.

The Chinese are done buying our debt. They have made it very clear they are phasing out all long term investment in our government ASAP. How do we fund our 1.5trillion dollars in yearly over runs? Someone give me an answer.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; April 16, 2009 at 02:37 PM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old April 16, 2009, 02:35 PM   #9
orchidhunter
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 1, 2008
Posts: 320
The Homeland Security report is very clear in stating that there is currently no actual information about any rightwing terror acts that may be in the works.

Perhaps the most damning aspect of the Home Security report on right wing extremism is the definition thereof: among the usual hate groups, it specifically targets assemblies - as well as individual people - who are involved for a single cause, very specifically immigration opponents and also pro life advocates.

Another tidbit of information that has folks worried is the allusion to firearms limits and outright weapons bans. Perhaps even more questionable is the suggestion that veterans who are returning from the battle field will be easy targets for rightwing hate groups who are seeking to put muscle behind their anti government activities. The Homeland Security report cites the economic downturn, the election of the first African American president, and New World Order conspiracies as potential catalysts. orchidhunter
orchidhunter is offline  
Old April 17, 2009, 01:45 PM   #10
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 10,583
Understand this

We are all potential terrorists. We are all potential criminals.

Anyone not closely involved with those in power (and even some that are) are potential enemies.

A baby in its crib is a potential President of the USA. And a potential mass murderer.

People on the right are potential threats. People on the left are potential threats. People in the middle are fine, ok, good, wonderful, etc. But they could be potential threats too!

Anyone seeing a potential pattern here, besides me?

What matters is not what any think tank report infers, or whom they insult by doing so, no matter who puts it out. What matters is what actually gets done, or not done as a result.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old April 17, 2009, 01:48 PM   #11
LouPran
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2008
Location: Buried under record fall of "climate change"
Posts: 346
What troubles me is that, according to a news report, Civil liberties officials at the Homeland Security Department did not agree with some of the language in a controversial report on right-wing extremists, but the agency issued the report anyway.

This tells me, these were genuine concerns that were pointed out and then ignored, for which there can IMO only be one reason.

It's written the way they wanted it to be written.

A very esteemed former Supreme court Judge Andrew Napolitano (At least IMO, as I have a lot of respect for the opinions and writings of this judge) has raised numerous red flags about this report which he calls the tip of a very dangerous iceberg as this is simply a summery.

If you have any interest reading his thoughts on it, you can do so here ...

JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Six Things You Should Know About the Homeland Security Report on ‘Rightwing Extremism’

Finally some of you may enjoy this news. Though I doubt it will have much teeth to it, as is the case with most suits brought against government agencies.

A Lawsuit has been brought against Janet Napolitano regarding this report.

Below is a portion of the article and link to go to and read it all.



Napolitano is Lying to Americans About Her Department’s Rightwing Extremism Report; TMLC Files Suit

April 17, 2009

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced that yesterday evening it filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of their political beliefs. General - PDF Links Click here to read the complaint filed by the Thomas More Law Center.
__________________
Aspire to inspire before you expire - the poster formerly known as JP.
LouPran is offline  
Old April 17, 2009, 04:06 PM   #12
MedicineBow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 297
The DHS report seems unremarkable.

It just makes fairly obvious points about the conditions in which right-wing extremists seem to grow or the conditions that they try to exploit.

This unclassified version really makes no observations that any semi-aware person couldn't make in an afternoon.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis
MedicineBow is offline  
Old April 17, 2009, 04:23 PM   #13
alloy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,930
Ok, so it targets vets, it also targets alot of other groups. But since it comes out within a week of other govt admissions about wiretapping/eavesdropping...i just see it as propaganda designed to quiet opinion thru fear of being sorted out or targeted as an undesirable. If everyone is scared to talk openly...then they have the political environment they want. No dissenters communicating with people having buyers remorse.

I don't really think vets or catholics or people signing anti immigration petitions are gonna have agents knocking on thier door or there phone tapped, they don't have the manpower to chase mirages. Remember that "vast right wing conspiracy" and Hillary's snipergate? They might not care for vets or truth but most of us do.

Notice Janet said "vets deserve an apology"...but she didnt actually apologize?:barf:
__________________
Quote:
The uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done?
Angelo Codevilla

Last edited by alloy; April 17, 2009 at 04:41 PM.
alloy is offline  
Old April 18, 2009, 11:39 AM   #14
Markbb
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2008
Posts: 11
It's profiling....not cool to profile a person of Arab decent as a possiable terrorist because that's racist...but to profile all Vets as a possiable domestic terrorist is politicoly correct...served my country for well over 20yrs and now I'm according to the gov. a possiable terrorist
One more thing about the manpower thing they had enough man power to knock on my door and arrest me on a state issued misdormeaner.....so trust and believe that DHS are not and I repeat are not the publics friend..

Last edited by Markbb; April 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM.
Markbb is offline  
Old April 18, 2009, 01:39 PM   #15
jakeswensonmt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2006
Location: Western Montana
Posts: 913
I doubt that anything will actually be done via that report.

But that doesn't mean that it will have no effect. It's ammunition to be fed into the mainstream-media machine, to further brainwash the masses with the far-left agenda of the MSM and those currently in power in congress and the white house. It is intended to create a mindset which will soften the public's reaction when future offenses are committed against those who oppose the current administration's agenda.

Quote:
johnwilliamson062: How do we fund our 1.5trillion dollars in yearly over runs? Someone give me an answer.
There's no more gold standard. I think those in power intend to create money out of thin air via the fed. Welcome to the new Zimbabwe.
jakeswensonmt is offline  
Old April 18, 2009, 02:18 PM   #16
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,442
Quote:
Our government is running the biggest ponzi scheme in the history of the world and we are all about to see it blow up in our face. It only worked as long as it did b/c the baby boomer generation was so much larger than the ones preceding it.

The Chinese are done buying our debt. They have made it very clear they are phasing out all long term investment in our government ASAP. How do we fund our 1.5trillion dollars in yearly over runs? Someone give me an answer.
The solution to the population problem to support the government's "ponzi scheme" is immigration - import enough new workers to get the population pyramid back in order.

The solution to short-term deficit spending is inflation - after 10 or 20 years of moderate inflation, the debt created by the current deficit spending will effectively be repaid with pennies on the dollar.
gc70 is offline  
Old April 18, 2009, 03:32 PM   #17
Tuzo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 716
Keep going with other social groupings

Let's go a bit further with Ms Napolitano's reasoning. Include all security guards; municipal, state and federal LEOs; definitely all FBI employees; don't forget ATF; not to mention all CIA; how about USCG; engineers and technicians trained in explosives handling; fireworks show personnel; NRA members; wildlife agency officers; forest rangers; and on and on.

As a 9-year combat veteran, son of a veteran and concentration camp survivor, grandson of a veteran, nephew of a veteran, and father of a veteran son, I am quite upset over the implied accusation of my family members being potential terrorists. As veterans we do not go to war because we enjoy it, we pick up weapons because politicians have failed.

Napolitano is another small minded politician that is doing exactly what all small minded politicians do: open their mouths without thinking and without regard to consequences. And, even worse, have zero regard and respect for those who have sacrificed body and mind to the service of their country. These types of politicians do not think like we think but believe that only they know what is best for all of us. Remember what Ms Clinton said late last year when the Democratic party had all but won the country? Paraphrase: now we can have government the way is should be.
Tuzo is offline  
Old April 19, 2009, 01:31 AM   #18
grey sky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 2, 2007
Posts: 324
DHLS

Homeland security is a superfolus agency that has to justify it's continued existence. Issueing reports on who needs to be watched or restricted from travel making long lists that even they cant correct when small children with a similar name to a list name is considered a "threat" ya right.
Get on a list never get off errors are not acknowleged. Or corrected. I find it highly doubtfull we as tax payors are getting anywere neer our monies worth.
grey sky is offline  
Old April 19, 2009, 07:36 PM   #19
toybox99615
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2007
Location: Kodiak Alaska
Posts: 767
would you choose a vet who was

recently out of the army with lots of weapon and tactics training over some other guy who just has nothing to use to support your cause? I sure would want to select individuals with the same background Blackwater might find interesting. Except I might want those few with unique personalities for my cause.

The report indicates a variety of other factors like unemployed, recently lost the home in a forclosure, those who already show a dislike of the government as additional factors. Maybe those with a DD might find a place for revenge against the system that treated them badly.

Why do vets typically go bizerk when we hear about these things. Its not fiction that more than a few vets are incarcerated for all kinds of crimes. Its not fiction that vets like any other person can be unhappy with the government. The country is full of all kinds of wacko groups that a vet can easily become part of.

All vets are not nice guys who would never do anything antisocial. If there were no such problems there would be no dishonorable discharged vets. There would be no federal penitentiaries with vets lock inside them. Lets be a bit realistic and remember a lot of time and effort went into training our troops to use deadly force. Now we can not simply believe they will forget those skills and become model citizens. We all hope that is the outcome but we can not rule out the realities where some just don't fit into our world.
toybox99615 is offline  
Old April 19, 2009, 08:01 PM   #20
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,071
What the report fails to realize is there are a load of folks that do not fit in any of the "red flag" types listed. Some are as much or more a possible future extremist as any vet. Don't ask me how I know this just take my word, please...
Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old April 19, 2009, 08:10 PM   #21
divemedic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2006
Posts: 1,313
What I think is so funny is that we keep hearing about how wrong it is to profile Muslims, and then this report comes out saying:

- How "whites" are going to become terrorists because we have a black President.

- Right wingers may “recruit” combat veterans “to boost their violent capabilities.”

But, hey it is wrong to profile. Unless the person being profiled is a white conservative veteran who has spent the last few years of his life fighting terrorists for his country.
__________________
Caveat Emperor
divemedic is offline  
Old April 19, 2009, 10:09 PM   #22
Tuzo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 716
The DHS report indeed mentions unhappy right wing groups but places undue emphasis on veterans. I wonder if the past administration would have allowed such a biased document to be printed. By the way, veteran Timothy McVeigh, mentioned as an example in the document, was a troubled individual long before he served in the Army. He would probably gravitated to extremism and bombs and killing without Army training.

Each administration has a short temporal notion of history and it panics when presented with crises. Europe and Asia were suffering from mass killings and terrorism since recorded history began. We forget the domestic terrorism of the 1860's, in particular the draft riots. In the 1940's the US hysterically penned up American citizens of Japanese decent but failed to do the same with German- and Italian-Americans. The mad bomber from 1940-1950 and copy cats held the northeast with fear. Weather Underground and Symbionese Liberation Army and other like-minded groups (these were left wing groups as opposed to right wing groups mentioned in the DHS document) were very active in the 1960's to 1970's.

My point is this: any unsatisfied group, as mentioned in the report and no matter what their reason, is a potential hazard to our peace and well-being. But, as read on most pages of the report,the singling out of veterans is egregious.
Tuzo is offline  
Old April 19, 2009, 10:42 PM   #23
cjw3cma
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Location: Chiloquin, OR
Posts: 217
Not to step on any toes, so to speak, but I clearly remember media reports of gang members joining the military to gain experience to bring back to their groups. I believe that this is one of the reasons used by the DHS to justify their report (an extremely small number but give the government an inch and it becomes a mile).

The overwhelming majority of service people have their minds and hearts in the right place - otherwise we would not have this country -period.

The DHS report was another ill-conceived document that further lets us know that we do not have the brightest working for us in Washington, DC. To issue one report about Left Wing radicals in January and then to follow up with a Right Wing report in April just adds fuel to the fire. I wish our government would act for the people instead of continuing to drive a dividing line between Left and Right think citizens.

A Conservative liberal thinking gun owner.
__________________
The Constitution shall never be construed … to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. – Samuel Adams
cjw3cma is offline  
Old April 20, 2009, 09:17 AM   #24
Tuzo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 716
Very well put CJW. The more I read history the more I am convinced that career politicians are the bugaboos of democracy.
Tuzo is offline  
Old April 20, 2009, 12:02 PM   #25
TexasFats
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 130
My concern is that, while the first part of it targeted very specific leftist groups, it painted the right-wing with such a broad brush that one-third to one-half of the population could be considered a "potential terrorist." And, the timing of the report--coming out close to the time of the various Tea-Parties--seems a bit dodgy to me. I am left with a sneaking suspicion that the real purpose of this report is to stifle dissent and opposition to the current administration's agenda.

We need to realize that a number of folks on the left see conservatives as evil, stupid, or brain-damaged. Look at what Keith Obermann's guest said on his show a few days ago, when the Tea Party protests were going on. She said that the participants were racists, and that they had an _anatomical_ problem with their brains that caused their frontal lobes to press on their "too small skulls." While that may have been intended as humor, it seems to be a very vicious sort of humor, meant to dehumanize conservatives.

As for this report, the implicit threat is, "Keep your mouth shut if you don't like the current policies, or you will end up on a watch list." If that is not intended to stifle political dissent, then they sure missed a good chance.
__________________
Gun laws are designed to extend and solidify the power of an elite over a peasantry.

Sauron lives, and his orc minions are on the march.
TexasFats is offline  
Reply

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 -5. The time now is 12:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14735 seconds with 7 queries